TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

kinyutaka Archive

View 5 posts and 1,022 comments by kinyutaka on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,022 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

This is being shoved down your throat as much as Breitbart is being shoved down mine. It's a thing, it's out there, and someone pointed it out.
/r/MensRights05/03/18 08:04 PM
-2

Is her tattoo killing anyone?
/r/MensRights05/03/18 07:02 PM
5

I think people are making way too big of a deal about this. All she really has to do is go back to the parlor and get them to draw an extra line.
/r/MensRights05/03/18 06:53 PM
5

Isn't it funny that this board is unsolicited and patronizing explaining without advice, as it calls out unsolicited and patronizing explanations?
/r/MensRights01/03/18 06:22 PM
1

I think this one is more of a bad thing for women than men. It's "training" women on how to "deserve" the "hottest guy out there"
/r/MensRights28/02/18 11:12 PM
5

Usually, it's because of a mental issue, either temporary or permanent. Someone wrongs someone else, and the victim thinks on it a bit too much, it festers into hate, and they lash out. That leads to another difference between men and women. On average, women will focus their anger on discrete actors. The parent who beats them, the jock that dumped them, their friend who spread vicious rumors. They target and hone in on that person, and most of the remaining damage is borne onto themselves. They…
/r/MensRights28/02/18 01:37 PM
9

Well, it just stands to reason that most people who target a school are going to be close to school age. And the vast majority of college students (and all of the high schoolers) are under 30. As for why men, it just seems that men prefer to kill in widespread methods, like using a gun, compared to poisoning or with a knife, and women do the opposite. There will be some women who use guns to kill, but most would rather use the more personal methods.
/r/MensRights28/02/18 01:21 PM
9

Well, maybe he shouldn't have sent sexually explicit pictures to his female bandmate. I mean, there is a lot guys can do to avoid this kind of bullshit.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 02:47 PM
1

One of the YouTube videos.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 03:26 PM
1

In general, if you don't like your teacher, you're less likely to learn. Even if what they are saying is an absolute truth. And in a field like psychology, the only absolute truth is "there are no absolute truths"
/r/MensRights12/02/18 03:18 PM
1

Haven't you ever just not liked someone?
/r/MensRights12/02/18 02:44 PM
1

I'm not that bored. The guy rubs me the wrong way.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 02:34 PM
3

I dunno. I guess we're both equally bored. But all things for serious, I don't like Jordan. I'd insult him even if no one heard it.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 01:12 PM
-1

And yet, you still reply.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 12:59 PM
38

The article implies it, but can we confirm the boy is also 16? Edit: NBC 4 is saying the boy is 16 as well, but didn't release the name
/r/MensRights12/02/18 12:44 PM
1

Because he uses religion for his shit. And worse, he might just use religion.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 12:13 AM
-2

https://youtu.be/dfvVu7__vy0 According to this video, he is either a believer or a liar. And frankly, calling him a God freak is the best thing I could call him.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 12:09 AM
-10

If I was worried about the downvotes, I would have deleted the comments. My whole point of repeating the insult was the very fact that you guys are getting all offended by it. Even to the point of telling me to get off the internet. Because my being nice about a person that I don't respect is just as bad as trying to be politically correct.
/r/MensRights11/02/18 11:57 PM
0

Because I don't drink this guy's Flavor-ade?
/r/MensRights11/02/18 11:36 PM
-6

just making sure.
/r/MensRights11/02/18 10:13 PM
-21

Like I said. Crazy God freak. And he should be the first one to advocate for my right to call him a crazy God freak, because he regularly argues against political correctness.
/r/MensRights11/02/18 09:18 PM
-24

Isn't he the crazy God freak? Edit: looking into the information, it seems that his book in on the Most Read list for Amazon because it's available for free as an audiobook.
/r/MensRights11/02/18 08:39 PM
1

Highly anecdotal.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 11:40 AM
1

If you include amateur basketball teams, like schools and universities, I think you could get some pretty high numbers of players of both genders.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 11:39 AM
-2

They go up on stage. They make jokes. We laugh. Edit: dude. You are taking my comment the wrong way. I'm saying that if there is an evolutionary need for comedy, then most people would be kinda funny.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 09:43 PM
-1

You did not say there were no funny women. But the question Burr was asked was "Can women be funny?" And even if you are the single most woman-hating man on the planet, who thinks that genetically women are unfunny, all you'd need to do is point out one comedianne to disprove it. It's a stupid question. That's my point.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 09:42 PM
-9

Then why aren't more men funny? There should be an insane number of awesome comedians... Like hundreds of thousands... If men are more evolved to make comedy. Also, even if men were more evolved toward comedy, all it takes is a single outlying funny woman to prove that women are capable of being funny.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 09:17 PM
7

Sure they can, why wouldn't they?
/r/MensRights25/01/18 04:45 PM
16

The reason why we have a problem with female genital mutilation is because women's rights groups wouldn't let people call it a "female circumcision". We need to do the same.
/r/MensRights18/01/18 08:11 PM
18

Because they still call it circumcision.
/r/MensRights18/01/18 07:10 PM
1

I think it's kind of sad that we have to say that Men's Rights doesn't include "the right to rape people"
/r/MensRights18/01/18 04:11 PM
1

I'd still like to have the hard numbers. Like 500 men, 600 women. That kind of thing.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 07:47 PM
5

I wish it would actually explain what they mean by "gender parity index" I get that it relates to the ratio of men to women, but how? Is a high number "good" or "bad"?
/r/MensRights28/12/17 04:40 PM
1

And yet, there are a lot of guys that would say that waking up to a sexual act is a good thing. How many of them would tell the CDC that it was "Forced Penetration" instead of "awesome"?
/r/MensRights14/12/17 05:35 PM
1

1 year stats are a great reference. But the numbers given by this survey are not actually statistics. They're estimates. By no means am I saying rape isn't a problem, but I severely doubt any suggestion that there are millions of rapes in the United States in the year.
/r/MensRights14/12/17 06:26 AM
1

False Memory Syndrome is a real thing, though it is not categorized as an illness or condition. People can have memories accidentally implanted via many ways, including mass hysteria (for example "seeing" the 9/11 attacks as a missile, instead of a plane) or memory recovery therapy (hypnosis to "recover" hidden memories) On top of that, survey questions can be weighted, by accident or on purpose, to lead to desired results, such as asking leading questions. As for the time frame, it's not like t…
/r/MensRights14/12/17 06:07 AM
2

Anything longer than a few days is long-term memory. I'm just not sure how accurate those number are.
/r/MensRights11/12/17 10:19 PM
1

Theft. I didn't get to do more than skim the 2011 report, but it says many times that the numbers within the 12 month period are smaller, in some cases too small to get a baseline. Plus, these are self-reported, anonymous studies, and may be wrong due to people looking back on a previous interaction differently. A guy remembers how his girlfriend fooled around with him until he was horny. A girl remembers how they fought right before a sexual encounter. They both remember how they were a bit dru…
/r/MensRights11/12/17 08:45 PM
1

Going with that definition, we shouldn't worry about female rape at all, as men are 3-6x more likely to be raped than women. Unless the female numbers are off, too, at which point, who hasn't been raped?
/r/MensRights11/12/17 08:28 PM
1

1 million men raped each year? Source? Rainn says that the total rapes a year is about 325,000, and men account for about 1/10 of that value. That's still a lot of men, but let's not do what other groups do and lie about the figures.
/r/MensRights11/12/17 08:17 PM
1

Well, most workplace injuries aren't enough to put a person out of commission. That includes slip-and-fall injuries, broken arms, etc., that require trips to the hospital, but don't necessarily mean you need "care"
/r/MensRights11/12/17 08:16 PM
23

Love how they don't put the comparisons for the numbers of men and women who encounter physical or sexual violence. Also, I make about 18% more than my female coworker because she keeps taking days off and they keep calling me in to cover for her. Just saying.
/r/MensRights11/12/17 02:43 AM
2

If women earned 52% of the degrees in most fields, I'd call that pretty well equal. You're never going to get an exact 50/50 split, so don't try to. I get that there is more to this article, but that statistic being viewed as a negative bugged me.
/r/MensRights06/12/17 05:29 AM
1

I get that. But really, you should just leave them to their toxicity.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:31 AM
1

I'm just saying that if you post that question on a sub, there is a high chance they're going to be offended. And GenderCritical is the type to ban for being offended.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:25 AM
1

When you phrase a question "How is this not a hate group?", you are stating that you believe it is is a hate group, and you want someone to convince you otherwise.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:20 AM
1

how is this not a hate sub?
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:16 AM
0

And yet, you still insisted on going in there and chucking a rock. Of course they banned you.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:12 AM
1

Let's be honest here. /r/GenderCritical is a sub for transphobic, man-haters, who paradoxically think that it's okay for a man to "act like a girl", but not okay for a man to believe he is one. From their own sidebar... Gender Critical is a radical feminist subreddit to discuss gender from a critical perspective. We are a woman-centered community. We do not believe 'woman' is a feeling. We do not condone the erasure of females and female-only spaces, the silencing of critical thinking, the denia…
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:10 AM
1

He means "trans activists"
/r/MensRights25/11/17 05:37 PM
27

But... Why would the trans activists do that, when they want MTF transgenders to be accepted as female?
/r/MensRights25/11/17 03:58 PM
1

INB4: Men are capable of protecting themselves, and women aren't.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 11:57 PM
10

Well, I'm right-leaning, but really more center than anything else. And I'm decidedly not religious. It should be noted that I'm not particularly active in this sub, and mostly comment. I just think that men and women should be held as equals as much as possible. And that means don't mutilate a baby boy's penis "because it is easier for the mother" or don't force a man to pay for 18 years because his girlfriend slept around.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 09:32 PM
5

A 3% margin of error is fairly standard. That means that regardless of the circumcision method, there is a 1 in 12 chance of getting complications.
/r/MensRights29/08/17 04:04 PM
1

I prefer a list, too. Just as a quick way to make sure that people don't cut in front of the neurotic guy who waits to be called.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 06:19 PM
5

men and women who are or have lived together. See, my interpretation of that is that it doesn't even matter if you are romantically involved or not. If you live together, like a pair of roommates, you are household members, and potentially entitled to a restraining order when the other person starts threatening to beat you up if you don't pay his portion of the rent (for example)
/r/MensRights26/07/17 05:31 PM
1

I don't know if choking him out is "appropriate", but I'm going to generally side with the woman on this one. We aren't talking about calling her "sweetie", or leering at her, or even simply invading her personal space. If he grabbed her in an unwanted sexual manner, then it's perfectly acceptable to fight back. (Obviously assuming that he actually took a hold of her ass and squeezed, because you didn't even try to claim it was an accidental brushing or something.) If we want respect from women,…
/r/MensRights07/07/17 06:28 PM
20

I'm sorry, but if she gets sexually aroused at the idea of killing people with a corrosive gas, I don't think she'd become a healer outside of male influence. Wonder Woman spared her life because she (WW) didn't want to do what Ares told her to do.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 12:48 PM
2

Some do. Some don't. It's not like we don't have nails.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 05:36 PM
15

Two can play this game. If fatherhood is not determined by biology, then I don't have to pay child support if I knock up a girl.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 05:09 PM
1

There wasn't any other DC character in that movie. Except Zod, and Lois, and Perry, and Martha, and Jonathan, and Jor-El, and Emil, and Pete, and Lana, and Whitney... No, they didn't show Batman in Man of Steel, but they did include WayneTech as an established brand to help set up Bruce in BvS.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:27 PM
2

When you consider how many of these shared universe film series are failing, it could be that Marvel is a fluke. It could also be that Geoff Johns, the showrunner for the DCCU and Chief Creative Officer for DC Comics, is trying too hard to make these movies fit in a larger universe, cramming in references and cameos as if waving at the audience, "Hey, come see this next movie!" Meanwhile Kevin Feige, president of Marvel Studios and showrunner for the MCU, is making his films seem more episodic. …
/r/MensRights21/06/17 03:01 PM
0

To be fair, and put things in perspective. Wolf of Wall Street wasn't a tentpole Summer Blockbuster. Wolf of Wall Street doesn't have the name recognition from comics, TV, and animated movies that Wonder Woman had. Jonah Hill wasn't the top-billed star of the film, Leonardo DiCaprio was. Wolf of Wall Street made only $100M in its entire run, Wonder Woman is pushing $300M already.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 02:39 PM
1

There were a lot of people in Fast and Furious that I don't know. She didn't exactly get top billing above Michelle Rodriguez and The Rock. Wonder Woman was her first major starring role, and it came hand-in-hand with the featured cameo in BvS and the co-starring role in Justice League, so all four movies were negotiated together. I can tell you 100% that there will be a Wonder Woman 2 (in fact, they announced it just recently), and she'll be able to ask for more of a bonus from it.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 02:34 PM
1

Yes. It was the first movie to feature this new group of actors portraying these characters. That's all a reboot is. It doesn't have to be good. Fant4stic was a reboot. It sucked.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 02:27 PM
2

The "low budget" stuff has more time to work in plot points. Even if you take the whole of the DCCU as a single television series, each movie would only be worth 2-3 episodes of a show. To fill one 13-episode season, they need to make 4-7 films. Now, they could have done it that way, and it could have worked out. Man of Steel plays out right before BvS, Wonder Woman works as (a set of) flashback episodes.... Suicide Squad, ironically, would be left as a stand-alone film, and not part of the "sho…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 02:26 PM
1

Suffice it to say, she can lift.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 02:10 PM
3

It was fairly well recognized, but after the third weekend, it slipped behind other films. Specifically, Despicable Me 2 and The Lone Ranger. Plus strong entries that it contended with, but people started going to after seeing Man of Steel, including Monsters University (on its 3rd week), World War Z (on its 3rd week), and White House Down (on its 2nd week) Comparing Wonder Woman, we have a few big movies in play now that might steal thunder. Cars 3, which beat it this last week already, The Mum…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 08:40 PM
10

Wonder Woman's 17 day total (ending Sunday, They don't count Thursday Preview as a day) was $275M Man of Steel's 17 day total (June 13-30) was $248M. If Wonder Woman drops its revenue similar to Man of Steel, then she will end up about $325M Domestic, compared to MoS's $291M. And unless she gets blown completely away by new films coming out this weekend, she'll probably make the $16M to bridge the gap.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:27 PM
22

Hawkgirl
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:21 PM
24

Especially since her contract is $300k per movie. She's been in 2 movies so far, guaranteed to be in 2 more, for a total of $1.2M... plus, the salary is probably low because it includes Profit Participation, which means she'll be getting a chunk of money from the billion dollar box office takes of BvS, WW, and Justice League 1 and 2, standard practice for a first headlining role.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:24 PM
27

Likely, the man laughing off comments about his sex life while the woman freaks out over being looked at.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 07:11 PM
34

"So true", when I only call in to work when I'm throwing up.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 06:28 PM
6

I call it the Zoo Maxim: If you put up a sign saying "Don't Feed the Animals", some people will feed them more.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 03:03 PM
1

The difference really comes down to belief vs faith. I'd believe you if you told me you ate beef stroganoff last night. But if we talked about it and you said you went to a Mongolian place, I'd question what you told me. And if you said they slaughtered the cow right at the table, I'd say you were lying. Similarly, if a woman tells me she was raped, I'm going to generally believe that she was raped. I'm not going to start with a question like "Are you sure it was rape, and you didn't just change…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 04:37 PM
2

acting as if That means he asks questions on the assumption that she was raped. "Do you know him? What does he look like? Where did it happen? Were you intoxicated at the time?" Questions that would lead them to a suspect, arrest, and conviction. When they get to the suspect, they then ask questions with the understanding that the victim may be wrong about her claim. Trust but verify.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 01:54 AM
3

Under the current system where the guy is paraded around like a convicted felon before they even formally press charges, you're right. I am talking about how it should and could be.
/r/MensRights14/05/17 11:22 PM
0

Specifically, the cop taking the report should be acting as if the claim is true. And on the flip side, the cops questioning the suspect should ask the questions with an open mind to his guilt. There should be no perceptible difference between how they handle the hookers who cry rape vs the pretty cheerleader. No combative questioning and rolling of the eyes when they claim that the star quarterback or rich business mogul is the perp. The phrasing is a little off. "They have the right to be take…
/r/MensRights14/05/17 06:50 PM
5

I'm not the one that responded to a serious discussion with emoji. If you think I am wrong, you can respond with a real comment.
/r/MensRights14/05/17 06:34 PM
5

We are talking about a perfect world where both the accuser and accused are initially believed. In that world, there would be no real harm done, because the police wouldn't be loudly arresting you for rape, the news media wouldn't be posting your picture with the headline "Rapist?" That kind of thing.
/r/MensRights14/05/17 05:29 PM
5

Yes, you can. You treat the accused with respect, even if you have to pick him up and/or arrest him. You ask your questions, perform your examinations, gather evidence one way or another. The accuser should be treated as if she is not lying. Again, questions, examination, evidence. If the evidence doesn't support her story, then you let the guy go, no harm done. From a legal standpoint, the police have to investigate the crimes on the initial assumption that the victim is telling the truth, and …
/r/MensRights14/05/17 05:18 PM
18

Women have the right to be believed when they claim they are raped. But belief should always be backed up with evidence.
/r/MensRights14/05/17 04:00 PM
10

A lot of times, it's a decision made between the doctor and the couple during the pregnancy, but before the birth. However, a doctor might suggest a tubal during labor if a woman has already had successful pregnancies and are exhibiting signs of issues, like premature labor. Health risks to both mother and child grow with age and number of pregancies, and a tubal is a cheap and effective way of preventing them, especially if they are already in there.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 02:10 PM
47

In fairness, the vast majority of tubal ligation is done at the same time as a C-Section.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 01:33 PM
1

She was stupid enough to bring her own witness against her.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 09:18 PM
1

I would have come right back, "You are the one justifying domestic abuse."
/r/MensRights16/04/17 02:43 AM
1

Don't mind him, he's having a stoke.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 10:08 PM
7

It is possible that Laci is just hated that much. Frankly, I don't give a damn.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 03:46 PM
27

I don't have a team. Politics has become Mets fans yelling about Yankee fans, and vice versa, leaving a lot of us to say "Fuck New York".
/r/MensRights06/04/17 03:39 PM
5

Agreed. We need to be better than this. If you simply want to be hateful, call her a bitch and be done with it.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 03:05 PM
1

That is the more common use of the word.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 03:04 PM
2

Food for animals. He is saying that she should be chopped up and served to pigs for dinner.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 02:52 PM
109

Because we can't be United unless my team wins.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 12:40 PM
1

Wait, you mean you can't tell how privileged he is going to be based on his gender? Imagine that.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 12:04 AM
43

Has she thought that maybe he doesn't want two infants at the same time, and would rather wait until the first child is a little older before having a second? This woman is so into her baby fever, what happens when she gets pregnant again? Will she try to bully a third child out of him, even though they agreed on 2?
/r/MensRights25/03/17 12:28 PM
9

My moral compass is my penis. It might not always point me in the right direction, but at least it points somewhere.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 08:13 PM
9

He was criticized, not punished. And it was for the right reason, for telling half of a whole elementary school that women should be quiet and soft spoken. For encouraging boys while putting down girls, even if that wasn't his intent. We should be encouraging both boys and girls to be strong.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 07:13 PM
1

I mean, yeah. It sucks that she died, but is this the best place for this article?
/r/MensRights22/02/17 02:19 PM
131

Yeah, pretty much. Boys shouldn't have circumcision forced on them, men should have the right to give up parental rights, etc.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:48 PM
12

A group of bullies at the school participates in a vicious 2 year prolonged rape festival, and there is only one victim? Makes sense.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 08:31 PM
2

A lot of this is just alarmism. I don't think any woman with power would suggest a concentration camp or chemical castration for men in general. The ones that do think of such things are doing it in the same way guys think about having a harem. It sounds like a great idea, then all their periods line up, and the only thing you'll be rocking in the casbah is an ice pack.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 01:39 PM
15

Well, let's examine... If you have a kid, and end up splitting up, the courts are more willing to give her custody of the child than you. If you don't work, it's a sign you won't have the money to be a good parent. If you do work, it's a sign that you will be inattentive. Men are less likely to get alimony from wives than women from their husbands. Gay men are hidden in media and usually are shown as comic relief. Lesbians get to have an orgasm on prime time network television. https://youtu.be/…
/r/MensRights23/01/17 09:36 PM
1

True Men's Rights have nothing to do with race. But a supremist can be about both race and gender.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 02:53 PM
3

Saying "Ben Franklin was a great inventor" is a statement of fact. Saying "white people are great inventors" is racial. Saying "blacks are going to enslave the few remaining whites" is racist.
/r/MensRights19/01/17 07:53 PM
2

He specifically gave a timeframe of like 150 years where there would be like 3 white people left in a basement dungeon for exploitation by the ruling class. They guy was basically insane. As for a race promoting itself as "inherently good and worth preserving"? I don't think any race has the right to be preserved over any other. If a black guy wants to get with a white girl, the child will be mixed race. And that's okay. But if a black guy wants a black girl or a white girl wants a white guy, th…
/r/MensRights19/01/17 07:27 PM
1

Yeah, that it was the obsession with which race is better is the reason why we had things like slavery.
/r/MensRights19/01/17 07:15 PM
10

They pop up from time to time. I called out one guy a few days ago (he deleted the offending post, so I can't show you). Suffice it to say, he was ranting about how women and black people don't contribute to society the way white people do, and how white people were being bred out of the human race by the more sexually active black and mixed-race people.
/r/MensRights19/01/17 06:52 PM
21

It doesn't help when someone comes out and starts talking about how men are better than women, or other completely bigoted nonsense. But for many hardcore feminists, disagreement is a form of hatred and oppression.
/r/MensRights19/01/17 06:40 PM
1

The fact is that every race and gender have made contributions to society, and we shouldn't be preoccupied over which race is "better". It is that kind of thinking that got us slavery in the first place. I'm not saying that white men (like myself) should be kicked to the curb of history, but we are not inherently better or worse overall than any other.
/r/MensRights16/01/17 09:06 PM
1

Honestly, it was veering off into a very racist statement about white people being smarter than other races.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 08:27 PM
1

Jeez, dude. That was a lot of writing for zero payoff.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 07:19 PM
1

You can't fix stupid.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 05:33 PM
11

/r/Feminism can and will ban you for the horrible crime of sympathizing with straight men. And if they had the courage to talk about it, they would allow discussions about egalitarianism as an alternative to feminist-centric points of view, instead of instantly banning people... Examples of reasons people have been banned from /r/feminism... Posting favorably in /r/MensRights or other subs they perceive as anti-feminist Posting questions or concerns about negative repercussions against men in /r…
/r/MensRights08/01/17 09:52 PM
1

Seeing as MoveOn.org was sponsored by liberals to promote liberal agendas, and not to provide open discourse, is this a surprise?
/r/MensRights29/12/16 03:58 PM
0

Well, specifically, we have a right to feel physically safe. We shouldn't have to worry about being kidnapped, raped, or murdered. That is not the same as the right to not be wolfwhistled on the street or the right not to be called sugartits.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 12:26 PM
2

Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects non-supervisory employees who are covered by the Act from employer retaliation when they discuss their wages or working conditions with their colleagues as part of a concerted activity to improve them, even if there is no union or other formal organization involved in the effort. These employee rights are enforced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Nevertheless, the NLRA does not address all situations where employers prohi…
/r/MensRights12/12/16 11:55 AM
1

The issue is the earnings/wage gaps between men and women. The inequity of family law is tangential to that. On the women's side, they only ask about the hours worked, and not the cost of raising the children or whether they received child support. The only real question is "Does this female math teacher make the same as this male math teacher?"
/r/MensRights12/12/16 05:05 AM
16

just "ban" sharing your salary with others to prevent ill-will Note: This is illegal in most states.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 05:01 AM
8

Some people are just bad at explaining things. Don't disparage him for wanting to better himself.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 04:58 AM
4

Why is the hamster asking about your wages?
/r/MensRights12/12/16 04:54 AM
8

The statistics you will be looking for are going to be the number of arrests of men vs women, number of convictions, length of incarceration, percentages of each gender in higher security prisons, and ease of getting parole in certain key crimes (pick at least one category with 1 year prison sentences, one category with 5 years, and one category with 20 years, at least) For family court, try to get details on alimony, especially giving examples (if you can find any) where a woman who has her own…
/r/MensRights08/12/16 05:19 PM
1

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that OP is taking a sleep aid himself. Many rape victims find it hard to sleep without help.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 07:26 PM
1

You trusted people. That isn't a negative thing. Don't beat yourself up over it. If it is a crime of opportunity, then locking the doors and windows may be enough to end this, however you will want to set up the cameras anyway. Do not be afraid to call the police, especially if you have proof of what is happening and who is doing it.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 06:37 PM
2

Well, going forward... you should lock your doors. I would include a camera showing you, just in case you are doing it to yourself in your sleep. Stranger things have happened, after all. But if someone is coming into your home at night and raping you, having video evidence will make a trial a lock. It may not be the same person who victimized you before, however. The only way to face it is to remember that you are more than just a victim. You have to believe in your own strength.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 05:51 PM
10

Okay, if you are sure you have been raped, I would assume you have been drugged to keep yourself from waking during the act. Call the police. Do not shower until they have had a chance to examine you. If you are not sure, you should without telling anyone what you are doing set up video cameras in your room for evidence. Has this been happening regularly or infrequently? Do you live with others? Do not let them have to power. Do not be afraid.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 05:02 PM
3

I wish it were that easy for us.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 01:06 PM
32

Basically. MRAs don't hate the idea of treating women well, living and working with them, paying the same level for the same jobs, etc. We just think that men should also be treated well.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 07:12 PM
46

Because both MRAs and misogynists are anti-feminist. Just to different degrees. Feminists don't care about degrees. You are either with them or against them.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 06:47 PM
10

Well, I'm taking my grievance to @andothertweets directly. When the New York Times Bestseller list universally has women in every category, how can they claim there is bias against women in publishing? When names like J.K. Rowling and Stephanie Meyer (her books are crap, but they are popular crap) are household names, and sold more copies than the bible, how can we say that men are dominant? And is there any major publisher, anywhere, that would refuse a manuscript simply for being written by a …
/r/MensRights31/10/16 12:34 PM
1

There would be a lot of complex work in determining the appropriate amount for an individual family. And the individual states would cry foul if the federal government were to step too far into the issue. But imposing a limit to the maximum amount of the support can be construed as within the federal grounds, by calling higher amounts an unreasonable seizure by a government agency. States would probably bring it to the Supreme Court for a ruling, but (worst case scenario) the law is struck down …
/r/MensRights30/10/16 01:14 PM
1

Sadly, you're probably right there.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 01:40 AM
1

It is mostly outmoded, but there are still controlling husbands out there that keep their wives from working, studying, or being independent in any way. We should make sure that a system to help in those cases is available, even if it is not used as much.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 11:41 PM
5

The reason I would combine them is not because I consider them the same. It is because the guy earning money has expenses, too.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 09:11 PM
1

spends less than 5% of my income on my child If you make less than $336,000 a year, then there is another thread you need to chime in on.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 09:10 PM
2

Make it too low, and you might as well not have alimony or child support at all. Make it too high, and the supporter might as well not work.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 09:06 PM
1

According to the US Department of Agriculture, a child born in 2013 can expect to "cost" the parents $245k between birth and high school graduation. (And I think that includes things like having to have a larger house to fit the children) Even at that estimate, it's only $1100, not 1400. Plus the fact that there are some people who make $18-20/hr, like mechanics, which puts them in the $3000 range.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 09:05 PM
23

Well, yes. If OP is making $6k a month, and $3k is going combined to the children and ex wife, then OP just needs to fix his budget to use the one paycheck that he gets to keep so he can ignore the one that is being fleeced. And/or he needs to talk to the people handling the garnishment to make sure it is taken out more evenly. But it does no good for him to lie about how much he makes to us. If he misleading us with his "only $3000" figure, then the advice we give is worthless.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 06:52 PM
9

$1400 is the equivalent of a $10/hr, full-time job. If it cost that much to raise one child, then nobody but rich people would have children.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 06:35 PM
3

The more money you have, the less of a percentage of your check goes toward the child. Plus, a lot of the things alimony is meant for are included in what child support of meant for (keeping the roof over your head, for example) But if the supporter, the husband/father usually, can't keep his $3000/mth job due to living in a storage shed and not having a car, then who benefits? If he ends up without a job, that wife and those kids get $0. So, you impose a common sense limit to how much alimony a…
/r/MensRights29/10/16 06:23 PM
261

I know what I always say about "there should be a law", but there should be a federal law in place limiting spousal + child support to 50% of the paycheck
/r/MensRights29/10/16 02:48 PM
680

Absolutely get it adjusted. And don't wait on it. You can't possibly be expected to live on $75 a month.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 01:34 PM
2229

I would consult an attorney. It seems incredibly messed up to give her so much money, then end up living on government cheese. How many children do you have with her? And is any of that payment alimony, or is it all child support?
/r/MensRights29/10/16 01:28 PM
10

The police. They ultimately didn't pursue a case, but they were looking at him like he was the abuser, when he was the one with burns on his hands.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 07:31 PM
15

The "contrary" is female rapists and male victims.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 06:48 PM
6

Read Atomic's commentary. He talks specifically about participation.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 05:41 PM
763

My younger brother got in trouble for holding his girlfriend down in a fight. She was swinging a hot-off-the-stove pan at him.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 04:37 PM
476

That's the world we live in. Men are nothing but rapists in training and women are nothing but victims. Even when we have proof of the contrary.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 03:33 PM
5

INB4 - all the other days of the year are days of the male child
/r/MensRights10/10/16 04:39 PM
1

Maybe, but if I refuse to consider death in general, it isn't fair to consider it for him. Because there are times when an innocent man is convicted, we should not execute criminals.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 02:46 PM
1

Again, death is irrevocable. Imprisonment is not. If it turns out that we are wrong to execute, for whatever reason, we can not take it back.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 02:34 PM
1

I don't think the state should execute anyone. Should they be charged for manslaughter or murder (depending on the exact nature of the situation) and dealt a harsh punishment for falsely accusing someone of rape and that person subsequently killing himself? Yes. Should "death" be one of those available punishments? No. For clarity, I would reserve a full murder charge for the kind of woman who harasses the accused after the trial until actively driving him to suicide, and manslaughter for the ki…
/r/MensRights10/10/16 02:31 PM
1

The issue is not the people whose actions fill us with such hatred that their death would be welcomed. The issue is with those people who are falsely or erroneously accused, convicted, and sentenced to die. In the United States, one of our highest maxims is that it is better for a hundred guilty men go free than to imprison a single innocent man. A simple imprisonment can be atoned for directly, with compensation and counseling. You can not unexecute an innocent person. But because we must be fa…
/r/MensRights10/10/16 02:20 PM
2

I have a problem with the death penalty in general. We should not kill criminals (if it can be helped) because we might be wrong. Should they be charged with the death of an individual whose life they ruined with a false allegation? Yes. Absolutely.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:59 PM
1

But a guy who believes he should have been a woman asking to be called "she" isn't really a Men's Rights issue.
/r/MensRights02/10/16 06:10 PM
1

It really isn't that simple. It isn't always a mental issue that causes a man to think of himself as a woman. There could be hormonal differences, genetic abnormalities (for lack of a better term) that causes feelings of being uncomfortable in your body, even being gay can cause confusion. Therapy isn't always the answer. I think we are getting a little silly when we talk about the difference between a transgender and a transsexual and a genderqueer, but the human body is analog, and exists in m…
/r/MensRights02/10/16 04:24 PM
15

The headline is a bit of a WTF thing, but they make reasonable points. She worked to have excellent credit, so picking up a guy with a sub-600 score is only going to hurt her financially. She isn't interested (seemingly) in bagging a rich dude. She wants someone who is as well-managed with their budgets as she is.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 07:24 PM
4

Basically, this image is saying there are only two acceptable dress lengths for a woman.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:03 PM
15

Serious answer... Every crime, everywhere, against everyone, should be approached with the possibility that the crime did not happen as stated. The police should investigate crimes, gathering evidence for and against a particular suspect, and process that evidence even if it may point fingers toward the victim. The prosecution should be willing to drop a case if they think they can not prove guilt. And we, the people, should withhold our judgement until such time that evidence comes to light aga…
/r/MensRights22/08/16 01:50 PM
1

Insert A-Team joke here.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 01:10 PM
1

I liked the original.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 10:35 PM
2

It doesn't have to be. But only time will tell.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 05:06 PM
2

Exactly. If Paul Feig gets anywhere near this project, it'll suck.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 05:06 PM
8

If initial reports are to be believed, it is a sequel with a new Rocketeer trying to rescue the original and stop the Nazis from making evil Rocketeers. In that case, I am okay with a female lead.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 04:20 PM
1

Even then, you run some serious risks. Some of these fake-victims are actual victims of someone else, and lied out of fear. I just don't think it's a good idea to start a Liar's Registry.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 08:58 PM
-1

The problem with such a system is the fact that women who fake rape allegations are rare, and are rarely prosecuted afterward. If you post someone's name and photo as a "rape-faker", they can sue you for libel, unless you can prove it in a court.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 08:53 PM
1

So, is there a way to correct for such biased voting?
/r/MensRights19/07/16 03:34 AM
2

I'll work on the editing, as well as update with the latest info, when I get home... and maybe take a nap.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 07:16 PM
-2

I figured that is was just that women are more likely to be obsessed with emojis than men.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 06:48 PM
1

Sorry. I'm new at writing articles.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 06:35 PM
1

To be fair, the same can be said of Mad Max. Feig himself said that he was shooting for a $600M mark... Summer Blockbuster levels of earnings. That is not likely to happen. Maybe if Star Trek bombs...
/r/MensRights17/07/16 06:02 PM
14

That is a fair argument. The difference is that Mad Max was competing at the time with Avengers: Age of Ultron (which was in week 3, and still pulled $39M). Ghostbusters big competition hasn't been released yet... Star Trek Beyond comes out the end of this week.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 01:43 PM
22

Well, actually... the $45M includes 3D and IMAX tickets and estimated showings on Saturday and Sunday The count for Friday was $17.2M It opened in 3963 theaters, meaning and average take of $4340 per theater. In my medium-sized town, we have 11 showings per theater, or $395 a showing... meaning an average of 55 regular tickets at $7, or 40 3D tickets at $10, or 28 IMAX tickets at $15.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 01:38 PM
13

The budget for this movie is over $140M... a $45M opening weekend, which will likely be crushed the week after, for a beloved and long-awaited franchise? That's a failure. I did a writeup on the film, comparing it to the number one Comedy Remake on boxofficemojo.com (The Longest Yard starring Adam Sandler) http://reedir.info/ghostbusters-friday-night-estimates/
/r/MensRights17/07/16 01:26 PM
1

On the bright side, at least you don't have to worry about that one asshole who decided to sit in front of you wearing a huge Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man head.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 01:17 PM
1

Worse, she'd change her mind and start talking about how all muslims are terrorists.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 07:25 PM
2

That second one on the left looks like an Auschwitz survivor.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 03:14 PM
30

The sad part is that most dogs do chase. Feminazis will take that exact comic and say "Just like dogs have to be taught to stop chasing, men have to be taught to stop raping."
/r/MensRights12/07/16 03:01 PM
38

Someone should repeat her words back to her... You're implying that all men rape, which is 100% bs. In case you didn't know.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 02:58 PM
8

More importantly, the children of famous movie stars have greater chance of becoming famous in their own right than the average person. Because Martin Sheen was a famous movie star, Charlie Sheen and Emilio Estevez had the connections required to become famous movie stars. Because Will Smith and Jada Pinkett were famous stars, Jaden and Willow were brought into the limelight. The Baldwins, the Aldas (4 generations of actors), the Anistons, the Osbournes, the Arkins, the Arquettes, the Astins, th…
/r/MensRights11/07/16 01:20 AM
6

Okay... so, basically... If I say I'm a nice guy, then I'm a piece of shit. Does that mean I should say I'm a piece of shit, so they think I'm a good guym
/r/MensRights27/06/16 07:17 PM
2

Or Southern California. You'd get to throw in some "biting the hand that feeds you" jokes about how movie execs are trying to destroy the world.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 03:21 PM
2

Seriously. Have a scene where one of them is talking to Ray about setting up a Ghostbusters group in Detroit (got to be a lot of negative energy there) and have them bust some ghosts there. And don't have your black character play the race card in the film.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 02:56 PM
8

I'm sure there are other superficial similarities, but I'd be more accepting if this was a sequel where these women inherited the mantle of Ghostbusters, instead of a remake that still uses language to make it look like a sequel.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 03:57 PM
22

Except Egon would never have done anything so crass as lick the end of his dual-wielded proton pistols. And neither would anyone smart enough to create such a weapon. That's a crazy, villain move.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 03:44 PM
12

I love that response. There are some Asians way in the back, kept together... ...like they apparently should be?
/r/MensRights26/06/16 01:38 PM
57

Okay. My problems with the all-female cast of the new movie. 1) It's supposed to be a remake, but these characters share very little similarity to the original cast members (outside of one of them being black) 2) I didn't like the comedy stylings of Melissa McCarthy to begin with, and the others I couldn't care less about. 3) The very idea of switching it to be a female-only group is basically saying "Fuck you, men. it's Lady Time now!" And I don't think that is the attitude you want to go with …
/r/MensRights26/06/16 01:05 PM
0

I would say that there is a certain difference between a statutory rape, especially in a case where the victim is obviously okay with the situation, and an forcible rape, where a person takes away a person's ability to consent through use of a weapon, drug, or threat. In this case, the teacher and student were in a relationship, and were pretty open about it with family and friends (probably the most disturbing part of all this) And that difference is whether she should get 15 years instead of 2…
/r/MensRights04/06/16 09:26 PM
4

I'm fairly sure the guys complaining about custody have gotten laid at some point.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 10:38 PM
2

Well, yeah. If you lie and say you are a PhD-holding genius neuroscientist when you are really a drug-using schizophrenic, then you open yourself up to a lawsuit.
/r/MensRights20/04/16 03:04 PM
2

This has nothing to do with why we avoid women who are promiscuous. It only shows that men look for the easy score (which is why the woman get "yes" much more often than "no" for an answer) and that women feel a guy walking up to them and asking to have sex is desperate. And desperate isn't sexy. The biggest reason that men want women with less "experience" is a biological drive for diversity. Even with an extremely attractive woman, it isn't desirable for one woman to have a large number of chi…
/r/MensRights17/04/16 10:51 AM
1

Fixed That For You Your grammar is not pretty.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:53 PM
1

he wouldn't have had to waste his time explaining from the start. FTFY
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:34 PM
7

I may be speaking for myself, but I don't hate women at all. I think that men and women should be held as equal as possible, accounting for biology of course, and that feminism is counter to equality. Feminists want power for women, just as Klansmen want power for whites and Panthers want power for blacks. But if we want to be an enlightened society, we need to treat everyone with a tiny amount of respect.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 03:22 PM
3

The fucked up part? The admins went back over his history and found an old ban from a garbage sub (offmychest will ban you for posting in any sub they don't like), and found that his same IP had accessed an offmychest post (from /r/all), so they banned him completely. This is the reason people are going over to Voat in the first place.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 03:05 PM
19

Okay. We'll have you fired for three mistakes.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 02:13 PM
5

The feminist argument is that we live in a patriarchy, where men are paid more, appreciated more, remembered more, and given more, and women constantly get the short stick. They, of course, forget that men are the ones sent off to the front lines to die protecting them. They ignore the fact that women who work side-by-side with men get the same pay. That men, as part of the sexist codes of chivalry, put themselves in the service of women, holding open doors and fighting for their honor. If we we…
/r/MensRights08/03/16 05:59 PM
3

I assume he sold the rights to pay off some of his debts. If so, it would be a very valid reason to request a lowering of the child support (how the hell does she need $55k a month to raise two children?)
/r/MensRights06/03/16 01:25 PM
1

Much more manly of you.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 04:49 AM
-2

And that's why I reported you. If the title is that far away from the article's intent, then it is clickbait, and the article can go fuck itself anyway.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 09:12 PM
-2

A defense for polygamy in modern times is a waste of time. That's all I need to know. Guess what. I can comment how I like.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 09:06 PM
-2

When you come up with something that stupid, I'm not going to read the whole thing. Thanks for going through the effort to make a new username just for my benefit, though.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:48 PM
-1

I agree with you that people are forgoing monogamous relationships in favor of sleeping around, but I don't agree that it should be that way.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 05:05 PM
-1

The example in the article has 37% of the males starve to death, 37% only exist as workers (since they don't get any women), and 25% of the men getting all the sex.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 05:04 PM
0

I don't agree with the article because polygamy is not desirable for our current state of development.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 02:16 PM
-2

The logic in the article is based on what would be a nightmare scenario of genetics, where only 8 men and 8 women exist and we only have enough food for 13 people. (Let's forget that such a short supply of food would be wrecked when those 8 women get pregnant.) In that situation, polygamy is desirable. In fact, it would be desirable for the women to sleep around as well, to increase genetic diversity. In today's world, the nuclear family is more desirable, because factors like child mortality ar…
/r/MensRights15/02/16 02:14 PM
-2

How many of those women were Hef's wife? You're right that some people would be quite happy sharing their husband in exchange for financial security, and most men would love to have a different woman for every day of the week, but that doesn't make it right. My biggest argument against polygamy, however, is not moral at all. It's the fact that polygamy generally results in an increase is birth rates. And we don't need to increase the birth rate on this planet.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 01:58 PM
-2

No. I don't agree with the article.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 01:54 PM
3

If it were legal, it opens the doors to religious groups (read "people like Jim Jones and David Koresh") to have their followers' children married to their prophet... Only this time with the blessing of the US government. Depending on the state, that can include allowing him to have sex with underage girls. The young men in such societies? Generally expelled, enslaved, or killed. Polygamy is fine... If we were in a post-apocalyptic world were we needed to rebuild the population from a handful of…
/r/MensRights15/02/16 01:30 PM
–

I'm far from a feminist, but polygamy in modern cultures is really only seen in those who seek to subjugate women, like cults. We don't live in a society where 16 people live, but we only have the food for 13, as was hypothesized in the article. We live in a society where there is ample food for everyone (in the First World). Even an excess of food. To follow the example in the article, we would have to kidnap women from sub-saharan Africa or the streets of Calcutta, and force them into sexual s…
/r/MensRights15/02/16 01:22 PM
1

What is KPMG? For all we know, they'll be taken into a room with a black leather couch one at a time.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 11:08 PM
1

Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe he lives in Flint.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:00 PM
1

Meh
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:55 PM
1

Okay. That one was funny. But still, get out.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:46 PM
1

Yes. Your butt must be hurting already.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:44 PM
2

Assuming you aren't banned, of course.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:40 PM
2

At this rate, you'll be in the Negative Century Club in no time.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:39 PM
1

Yeah. I know. I just want you to keep talking, so I can downvote you more.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:36 PM
1

That was a dismissal, not an insult. But I'm not sure you are intelligent enough to understand the difference.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:33 PM
1

Based on his comment history, he lives to insult people with questions like this.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:26 PM
2

Get the fuck out of here with this question. Seriously. Find the door, don't let it hit you on the way out.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:04 PM
6

Why is circumcision being talked about alongside the Oscars race controversy anyway?
/r/MensRights01/02/16 10:14 PM
1

How do they prove that they said "no" now? I'm not trying to imply that women in general would cry rape, but they easily could, and we'd have the same unconstitutionally uphill climb to prove that we didn't commit a crime.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 06:28 AM
1

They can always say that you drugged them or threatened them into the BJ
/r/MensRights28/01/16 05:34 AM
3

I agree. It was disgusting. And I hope that I am right about their reasoning, that it was meant to be disgusting. So we can talk about it.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 12:16 AM
3

I'm going to say something controversial... Maybe this outrage is exactly what Lorne and SNL were hoping for. Just like when South Park did the same jokes.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 12:07 AM
1

I'll agree on that one. Professional cosplayers are trying to make money, and horny guys will pay for skimpy pics.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 09:04 PM
3

Because many female characters wear skimpy clothing. But I have also seen female cosplayers in non-revealing attire. There are some that dress as male characters, like Roy Mustang from FMA, Link from Legend of Zelda, and some very cute Marios. On the female side, they'll dress as princesses, such as Peach or Zelda, or fighters like Videl from Dragonball or Lightning from FFXIII... It's just that a lot of the best female characters... Show off their assets.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 08:41 PM
2

Yeah, if I was on the toilet for more than 30 minutes, I get people trying to beat the door down to see if I'm okay. A week? There is something wrong, no matter what.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 01:51 AM
2

He was the one doing the infantilization by enabling her. Now, we don't know how hard he tried to get her to come out, but if your loved one is killing themselves, isn't there a moral obligation to do something about it? Maybe he wouldn't have been able to do anything, maybe his concerns would be laughed off if he said anything two years ago, but the fact is that he didn't call for help until it reached the point that the seat grew into her ass. I'd expect the same investigation if the genders w…
/r/MensRights04/01/16 10:16 PM
3

But an investigation is warranted.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 10:01 PM
4

The boyfriend is probably being investigated because he didn't call for help longer ago. Being on the toilet for that long, she would have shown physical signs of distress long before her legs atrophied and her skin grew into the seat. Not only did he fail to report an obvious mental or physical problem with his girlfriend, but he enabled her by feeding her in the bathroom. Why didn't he call a therapist after the first week or so? A doctor after the first month? Now, I don't think this is his f…
/r/MensRights04/01/16 09:57 PM
5

It could simply be that men are better at offing themselves... It could also be that men want to get the same attention from a suicide attempt, but feel ashamed to ask for that help, even indirectly.
/r/MensRights01/01/16 07:03 PM
4

I just got up... I thought it said "inmate violations"
/r/MensRights20/12/15 04:41 PM
1

Because people have gotten into the mentality that if you are in prison, you deserve anything that happens to you. Even though most people in prison didn't commit a crime that even equates to rape. Drug use, drug dealing, theft, assault, tax evasion... But even if they raped or murdered someone, themselves, we shouldn't be wishing that kind of evil on anybody. But... we're human. And we don't always listen to our conscience. So, even the best of us might look at a guy that we particularly hate (…
/r/MensRights20/12/15 04:10 PM
1

Grown man sticking his tongue down the throat of a 15 year old is pretty skeazy.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 03:56 PM
2

The sad part is that they could expand the Humanities to be inclusive without excluding these great works. They could examine the current artistic and linguistic achievements, including rap, rock, pop, movies, cartoons, anime, books, poems, and whatever else, and trace their influences back to antiquity, through (in the case of rock) church choirs to slavery to tribal Africa while still comparing the works of Samuel Beckett with the works of Shakespeare. We don't have to pick and choose. But ign…
/r/MensRights05/11/15 05:23 PM
1

I've got the blue eyes, that should at least get me $100, right?
/r/MensRights22/10/15 10:12 PM
1

Maybe if they offered more money for donations...
/r/MensRights22/10/15 08:59 PM
1

I'd let him keep the laser, even. edit: Look! Look!
/r/MensRights17/10/15 10:37 PM
2

starts reading I want a Pintsize for myself.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 10:32 PM
3

Believe what you want. My first thought on seeing the unedited strip was "she has a penis"
/r/MensRights17/10/15 10:06 PM
1

male-to-female transgenders like being called girls.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:31 PM
2

Maybe I'm just more perceptive of you, but look at the situation. You have an attractive woman, who the guy is clearly into, and has no need for outside validation... because look at her. She stops her lover and reveals her body, with the moment of awkwardness being when she removes her panties. This tells me that what she is most self-conscious about is between her legs. Therefore, either she has something there that doesn't belong on a girl (penis or tentacles, take your pick) or there is a di…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:29 PM
7

This is the first time I've seen this comic, and that's what I took from it. Either she has a penis, or she has a hideous disfiguration that she's self-conscious about. Both would end up with the same response from a man who loves the girl enough, but only one is more likely. Edit: The altered version is much different because the different sequence of events leads to a different characterization. The girl is not happily getting naked for her boyfriend and showing him her penis, she is putting h…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 12:55 PM
2

At which point you counter, "then we agree that fathers should get better consideration than they do in regard to custody cases"
/r/MensRights11/10/15 04:15 PM
10

It is... But because it was an in-school disciplinary hearing, and not a government proceeding, it's okay... Which is bullshit.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 12:55 PM
12

Okay. So they heard the case, cleared him of wrongdoing, then retried him with an unconstitutional burden of proof? I hope he sues, and gets millions.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 12:40 PM
-1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYt0WbDjJ4E
/r/MensRights05/10/15 10:33 PM
26

Weeeeeeeeell... Actually, thanks to Romeo and Juliet laws, if the kid was "mature for his age", and considered 14, and she was "immature for her age", and considered 17, she would be young enough to have sex with this "virtual 14 year old" and still old enough to have sex with the father... Of course, that whole sentence reeks of bullshit...
/r/MensRights05/10/15 10:31 PM
3

Financial domination? Sounds to me like a man trying that would be called an abuser.
/r/MensRights04/10/15 03:48 PM
4

Funny... The "she enjoyed it" defense never works for male rapists.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 07:53 PM
3

I sincerely wish beyond wish and hope beyond hope that I never, ever, have to utter the phrase "my baby mamma" in reference to another person. I would sooner die.
/r/MensRights22/09/15 05:33 PM
3

Important part... The judge vacated the sentence and ordered a new hearing, he still has the guilty plea.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 07:24 PM
3

The clocks, the towels, the pillowcases, the pillows, the refrigerators, the microwaves, the headboards, the mattresses, the boxsprings, the bedframe, the dressers, and the light fixtures. They left one of the beds, because it was broken, and the TVs, because they were old CRT TVs and no one wants those fucking things. Here is the original post about it.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:59 AM
1

You laugh, but if there is a way to steal shit fom a hotel, a guest will figure out how to do it... Source: I had a guest steal everything from two rooms one night.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:51 AM
1

It will if the AI is strong enough. You don't know, man!
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:50 AM
1

Well at $15/hr minimum for 25hr week, a robot would need to work 5 years to make up the cost of a single worker. And while a robot worker can be available all day, a good portion of the time it will be sitting idle (especially in the offseason)
/r/MensRights16/09/15 07:02 PM
1

It's all just guesswork, but the managers of businesses will be looking into replacement costs before investing into something like that. The more realistic the robot, the less likely it will be modular, though. But a life-model humanoid robot wouldn't need to be. Instead of giving it a vacuum cleaner attachment, it could hold a vacuum cleaner. But if the owners can not easily repair their robots, they may have to replace them regularly.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 05:28 PM
1

Paying for, not paying to, but with only a 2 year warranty, you can bet the greedy bastards won't give an operational lifespan too far beyond.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 05:16 PM
2

Having 5 $100,000 robots would cost my hotel (not surprisingly) $500,000. In the two year period between Jan 2013 and Dec 2014, we took in a total of $2,091,906. Meaning 24% of all revenue would go to paying for the robot maids. With the only bright side being that we can rent a single room more than once a day if people check out in the afternoon. That doesn't factor in the desk workers, the added specialty maintenance crew to fix damaged robots, or the possibility of robots being hacked by gue…
/r/MensRights16/09/15 05:11 PM
3

I guess it would depend on how cheap the fembot is. If we are talking about "Chobits"-style AI robots that everyone seems to have, then it wouldn't be too daunting. If we are talking about a rare thing, coating thousands of dollars to make, and ultimately the purchase price of a luxury car? Then no.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 03:58 PM
2

I think you are missing part of your headline...
/r/MensRights13/09/15 01:46 PM
3

At least dye the hair.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 11:56 AM
32

I would argue that actors and actresses were always objectified. Every actor that was ever referred to as a sex symbol, from Sinatra and Estair to Connery and Hemsworth. The only difference between male and female objectification is whether the average subject likes the attention.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 11:57 AM
2

I'm sorry. I don't speak Political Correctness.
/r/MensRights30/08/15 04:51 AM
4

The method of proving that would be based on the actual situation. I can not tell you how to give proof on an undefined situation. But, at least in America, our method of justice is supposed to embody the theory that it is better 100 guilty men go free than it is for 1 innocent man to be imprisoned.
/r/MensRights30/08/15 12:27 AM
14

Yes, of course. And you have to prove she was lying.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 07:22 PM
69

The way it should work? She should have to prove that you engaged in unwanted sex acts. If she doesn't, you go free. But, unless you can prove she was lying, you can't sue or file charges.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 05:26 PM
0

The "normalized" graph may be wrong. Based on the second set of charts, women had 320 workplace accidents, accounting for 20% of workplace deaths. A total of 1605. Men had 4264 WA, for a total of 10,660 deaths. That means that women account for a total of 13% of all workplace related deaths, about double the number of male workplace murders.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 08:06 PM
1

Agreed. I don't rightly know if there will ever be a "fair" solution, but we can do better than what we have now.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 01:31 PM
1

At least he would have his child, right?
/r/MensRights28/08/15 01:30 PM
1

Babies should only be brought into the world by two people who want them. I mostly agree with that (Though a single person who is financially capable is okay, too.) You want it but she doesn't? Tough, find another woman who does if it's that important to you. That is where the unfairness lies. You and she had a good relationship, leading to the creation of a life that is partially your own, but you can't keep it if she doesn't want you to keep it. Again, I have no way, outside of science fiction…
/r/MensRights28/08/15 04:25 AM
2

Honestly, does it matter why he wants the child? It doesn't matter for the girl. But, like I said, it's a situation that we can't rectify completely, unless we reach the point where a fetus can be transplanted into a man's body.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 03:52 AM
11

That is part of the reason it isn't an easy answer. While it may be a vast improvement over the current system of "the man is forced to financially support a child than might not even be his", it is not perfect.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 02:44 AM
5

Sadly there is the problem of what happens when the man wants the child, and the woman doesn't If we add in a paternal waiver, you have 4 outcomes. Both want the child, and it is kept. Both don't want the child, and it is aborted. The man doesn't want the child, but the woman does. The child is kept, the woman gets the benefits of motherhood, and the man gets his freedom. The woman doesn't want the child, but the man does. The child is aborted, the woman gets her freedom, and the man just gets r…
/r/MensRights28/08/15 02:17 AM
71

Bingo. They only care about "her body, her right" and the man is just an invader.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 01:33 AM
15

And I've heard of women stalking men, too.
/r/MensRights25/08/15 09:07 PM
2

No... It took me 6 hours to see your comment. I work during the day.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 03:59 AM
3

The word you were looking for was "does", present-tense "to do". The word you used was "dose", a verb meaning to add something to a drink. You said "A real man drugs whatever he wants."
/r/MensRights14/08/15 03:20 AM
2

A real man dose whatever the fuck he wants. Okay, Bill Cosby.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 12:29 AM
6

As a very awkward guy... I'd probably chicken out, but brag later about having a girl hit on me.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 12:28 AM
-4

I took that to mean "It is more of a privilege than a right" That is to say that being a woman isn't something granted to you by decree. There is also the fact that she, being a woman naturally, doesn't have to work to be that gender, but she does have to try to be a man. I think it's just complicated.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 12:27 AM
1

Thanks, that makes much more sense. This is probably the best way to do it, with the court and the jury using a common sense approach to determine if you reasonably could have mistaken her for an adult.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 08:18 PM
-7

Proper grammar and courtroom decorum helps, as well.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 06:17 PM
11

I'm reading up about the C-case. http://www.thelifeinstitute.net/history/the-c-case/ This is about abortion and the government forcing a teenager to abort the product of a brutal rape. I don't think it is on point for this discussion.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:32 PM
20

Simple. It should be an affirmative defense that you believed the victim be above age. If you meet her at the bar, and the bartender is serving her drinks, then maybe you shouldn't get your life ruined if you get it wrong. On the other hand, if you have a history of picking up women that said they were 18, but were really 15, then that should be used against you. (If you've given that defense twice already, then maybe you are looking for them to be young.)
/r/MensRights01/08/15 12:30 PM
91

Even the teenager's mother testified on his behalf.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 12:24 PM
7

Always lording over those shirts, too
/r/MensRights30/07/15 10:41 PM
1

Rape is bad, m'kay.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 04:01 AM
1

http://www.corpus-delicti.com/typologies.html In 1979, A. Nicholas Groth, an American clinical psychologist working with both victims and offender populations, published a study of over 500 rapists. In his study, he found that rape, like other crimes that satisfy emotional needs, is complex and multi-determined. That is to say, that the act of rape itself serves a number of psychological needs and purposes (motives) for the offender. The purpose of his work was clinical, to understand the motiva…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 03:59 AM
0

Nicholas Groth has described several different types of rape. Anger rape The goal of this rapist is to humiliate, debase and hurt their victim; they express their contempt for their victim through physical violence and profane language. For these rapists, sex is a weapon to defile and degrade the victim, rape constitutes the ultimate expression of their anger. This rapist considers rape the ultimate offense they can commit against the victim. Anger rape is characterized by physical brutality, mu…
/r/MensRights29/07/15 07:26 PM
-1

Giving someone a date rape drug tends to indicate that you knew they couldn't consent. But, most rape is not "about" sex. Sex is a tool. Anger, hatred, revenge, jealously, control... these are the big reasons why. Your parents taught you that women are whores, you seek to humiliate Jews, you want to keep your wife in line, you think your husband is cheating on you... The sexual acts performed are not because you want to have sex. It's just the most degrading thing you can think to do. Yes, somet…
/r/MensRights29/07/15 06:09 PM
0

I'm sorry, but if you make it so they can not consent, it is the same as if you ignored their consent. See court rulings about unconscious, paralyzed, or comatose individuals.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 05:48 PM
1

Yeah... he gave interviews about how it was his thing to drug women, did a standup bit about Spanish Fly, and had an episode of the Cosby Show that featured an unknown barbecue sause that turns women from shrill, combative harpies to complacent, affectionate lovers. The fact that it hasn't been proven in court is why he isnt in jail, that's all.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 01:53 PM
2

Most rapists don't do it as part of a misconception like you say. It's usually about power. And they know that it is socially unacceptable (they hide their involvement, after all), but do it out of some compulsion to punish or destroy. Some do it because of an insanity, that makes the rapist think that the victim should be theirs (either romantically or worse). And rarely, you have the issue of a rapist who doesn't realize he did not get consent. Cosby (for example) knowingly gave drugs to dozen…
/r/MensRights29/07/15 12:39 PM
3

There actually is a Trope for that. It used to be called "Rape is Funny When It is Female on Male"... but people got offended by the title.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 12:31 PM
1

The worst part is that they are knowingly admitting that it is rape.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 12:28 PM
2

Yes, it does. But because the narrative toward girls is that they have to work harder to catch up to boys (whether it is true or not), they tend to study harder and follow directions more closely.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 03:40 AM
1

From the abstract on this study... "Gender and Ethnicity Differences in Freshmen Engineering Student Attitudes: A Cross-Institutional Study" Definite gender differences were found on the pre-survey for five of the attitude measures. For all but one of these measures, female engineering students' initial attitudes were more negative than those of male students. Across the sample of institutions, female students consistently began their engineering studies with a lower confidence in background kno…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 01:15 AM
2

Though, I'd be wanting to give a kid more tutoring if his answer was 123 "because Maleketh, the Destroyer of Worlds, deemed it so."
/r/MensRights12/07/15 10:52 PM
2

Ultimately, some of the techniques used are valid, and some of them are not. Some are only better in certain situations (addition of strings of larger or more complex numbers, like your example, is one where that isn't bad thing). But some people just have a knack for numbers, and they don't need to completely separate the tens place from the ones place when they do their subtraction. Our classes need to cater to the student's learning.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 08:09 PM
3

If I run through a mental shortcut for that problem, I'll do (37-20+1), which yes, is part of the basis for common core math, but not really the same thing. It was just a shortcut. We used to basically memorize simple number interaction. 17-9=8. Not 17-9=8 because 9 is 1 less than 10, so 17-10+1.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 06:08 PM
2

It was just one of the first articles I found on a search for "common core math" The point is there was nothing wrong with "adding" and "subtracting", there was nothing wrong with "borrowing" and "carrying over" a ten... there was nothing wrong with the old math. But they needed to justify new text books, and here we are.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 06:03 PM
1

Who is Abby?
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:44 PM
1

Yes. That's a thing. And it is stupid
/r/MensRights12/07/15 04:53 PM
3

Worse is this common core nonsense where you have to run through hoops for simple subtraction. (37-19, so 30-20=10 and 7+1=8, so 18.)
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:46 PM
5

You aren't wrong there, but teachers use it as an excuse.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 02:31 PM
93

It's more basic than that. Women and girls increasingly are held to be in more need of help than men and boys, so in subjects where girls already outclass boys, the boys are held to the higher standard and fail for it. Even some Math and Science classes grade on a curve, and use rules like showing your work as an excuse to mark boys down a little more. Boys, after all, are more likely to cut corners, and girls are more likely to follow direction better.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:40 PM
13

Seriously, if you want more exposure for your music, segregate it from the toxic exposure to this account. If people are down voting you because you are you, then you need to start fresh. Keep the J2501 account for MR, and keep MR off the new music account (which you should name after the band)
/r/MensRights09/07/15 08:31 PM
6

It's a pretty common turn of phrase. It means to be pierced, usually through the torso, by a bladed instrument, in such a manner that the blade has run all the way through the body.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 09:19 PM
26

Okay, what I see is a drawing of an extremely dysfunctional couple, holding knives on each other. The woman holds the knife demurely, the man holds the knife with strength. In both cases, if they pull away unexpectedly, they will die. On one hand, it is a misguided sign of trust, they do not think that the other will harm them, and so they do not push away the other knife. On the other hand, it is a sign of control. Each of them goes behind the back of the other and prevents them from leaving. T…
/r/MensRights04/07/15 09:15 PM
1

All I'm saying is that bodybuilders don't eat as healthy as you think.
/r/MensRights02/07/15 11:11 PM
1

With the exception of the whey powder (because they sell the stuff), they don't really mention a lot of specific foods. It's all about the numbers. But, regardless of the individual's food choices, it isn't as simple as having "a hamburger or some fries" a day. It is so much more.
/r/MensRights02/07/15 10:47 PM
0

a couple of fries per day That implies a restraint on eating that bodybuilders don't generally have. This article on bodybuilding.com shows the "recommended" diet for a bodybuilder who wants huge muscles... For the 180 lb person in the example, they suggest a 3500 Calorie daily diet, including 180g of protein, 450g of carbohydrates, and 120g of fat. Compare that to the standard weight-maintenance diet for a 180 lb person, 2000 Calories with no more than 300g of carbs and 65g of fat. Protein does…
/r/MensRights02/07/15 10:15 PM
6

Steroid users actually ingest a large amount of calories, because they burn through it at the gym. And that includes fatty, high energy, high calorie foods like hamburgers and fries.
/r/MensRights02/07/15 12:29 PM
4

I get what you are saying, but at least this group was trying to address that body image is a problem for both genders. And the statistics are not wrong, many men with body image problems turn to weightlifting. Why? Because we have to contend with amazingly large people! Arnold, Stallone, Lundgren, Farrigno, Tyson... the pressure isn't usually to get smaller, it is go get ripped. When they work hard at the gym, and buy all the suppliments, and end up with only modest (realistic) gains, they turn…
/r/MensRights02/07/15 12:26 PM
4

Nazi Germany...
/r/MensRights01/07/15 04:52 PM
3

Children were definitely first. They had parental blocks and retarded filters to keep kids safe long before 9/11. As a teen, I printed a copy of the Necronomicon in full color on the school computers, and we were going onto sexually explicit MUCKs during class... But we couldn't use the library computers to do research on Essex for history class (because it has the word "sex" in it)
/r/MensRights01/07/15 04:52 PM
1

At the same time, if I call a woman a "pussy", I'll have a bad time no matter how I meant it.
/r/MensRights25/06/15 05:27 PM
0

And let's not forget Jeff.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 10:33 AM
6

I can just imagine the shitstorm in the media if we all brigaded Hillary Clinton's twitter.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 10:32 AM
-4

Look. In context, he was making a self-deprecating joke about how his wife works/worked with him in the lab. But it is still saying that men and women working in labs together will become attached to each other, and then when the man has to criticize the woman, she cries to get out of it. It's the kind of joke that would be appropriate at the Gentleman's Club, but not anywhere else. The only thing that would have been more sexist is "If you're going to pick a female assistant, make sure she can …
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:58 PM
-4

I read the article, actually. But the context is unimportant here. Such a joke is fine among close friends, who all know the details of what you mean. But the very fact that you have to go looking for context makes it something he should have thought twice about.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:27 PM
-3

I'd be pretty angry at anyone who implies that men will be over-controlling to women in the workplace, just because they are men. (The closest equivalent to the guy's comment I could come up with.) Hell, just the implication that a woman in the workplace will automatically lead to a romantic relationship is enough to creep some people out.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:24 PM
-5

But the answer is not to lose all respect for women in general. Disrespect that bitch who said to kill men. But respect women in general the same way you wish to be respected. Again, it is based on how you want to be treated, not by how you are actually treated. If everyone were to do that, we'd be in a happier place.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:41 PM
-10

The difference is that cats don't belong in the lab, unless they are the experiment. If the best defense you can give is to equate female scientists with housecats, then you don't have much to stand on.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:36 PM
-14

Maybe, but what does it say of your maturity if you make sexist jokes to the applicants?
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:21 PM
-3

I think an apology is in order, and maybe being told not to do public speaking for a short time to blow over, but no, not a resignation. It isn't like he said that women need to sit down and shut up, or that women should be shot on sight. We have a responsibility to show women the same respect we want to receive from them.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:13 PM
-13

Maybe, but it comes off really bad.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 12:59 PM
-9

All the more reason you don't say shit like this. Come on, man.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 12:50 PM
22

The double standard does exist in this case, where that "diversity officer" (the whole position is a joke to begin with) should have been told to pound feet as well, but... I agree that this person's comment was highly inappropriate. He said that women in science cause problems because you might fall in love with them, and then you get stuck not being able to criticize their work. It isn't "as bad as blaming a rape victim", as the article suggested, but it was a horrible thing to say to women tr…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 10:58 AM
21

gets five years less than a month in jail.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:22 AM
2

It's sad that the most enlightened comment is "How do you rape a man?"
/r/MensRights08/06/15 02:34 AM
3

He did support his child, as far as we know, but he was behind on payments. Granted, that is generally his fault, but he wasn't exactly paying nothing. The agency was hounding him worse than many bill collectors, and he had already stated that he thought about suicide. And the £11,000 was more than they had ever asked before. No one is claiming this is a saint, but when you say "maybe he shouldn't have been a deadbeat", you are saying that you have little sympathy for a man, like your mother, wh…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 08:45 PM
1

You see, I get the feeling that she is talking about how people are treated as individuals, not as a society. And that is an important view to have, but she might not have been properly exposed to the inequities in society for men against women.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:03 PM
16

Oh, but you don't understand! Even if the cishet scum didn't rape this person, chances are he is a rapist and deserves it anyway! /idiotictumblrinaresponce
/r/MensRights02/06/15 06:51 PM
1

Wow. Just wow.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 08:21 PM
0

Some things require a more serious response.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 08:15 PM
2

It is illegal to claim the Holocaust is a lie. But to be fair, it's only actionable if it is an official situation.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 07:52 PM
10

More specifically, feminists would simply argue that hate speech is something women can not do to men. Since she is an ethnic minority woman, who may or not be gay (I didn't see it in the article, anyway), she basically can't be racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted... because only whites, cisgenders, and straight men can be bigoted. I almost wish that a talking dog would apply to the college, so it can accuse her of being speciesist.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 07:51 PM
1

And if a dog were to graduate high school, pass the entrance exam, pay tuition, and actively try out for the basketball team (without "help" from his owner), then nothing is technically stopping him. And, in fact, if he were to be denied for being a dog, he could take it up with the courts to be officially granted citizenship rights. But, we are talking about something far more realistic.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 07:45 PM
3

1) governments are lobbied by all groups. Of course, that includes feminists. 2) Nazis were not the only ones that engaged in genocide, that doesn't make it right. 3) I can't argue against that, it's very true. 4) Yes, there are good feminists out there, too. Fighting for true equality. 5) That is what I took away when you posted the first time, that you don't really believe in being shitty to men, just because other men were shitty to women.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 02:43 PM
2

But that is discrimination, leading to lawsuits.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 02:25 PM
5

I can't stop my neighbor from being a rapist, that is an impossibility. But, one can usually not treat half of the population of the planet as is they are evil. Edit - Mind you, men have to work for gender equality, too. I'm not saying, "go ahead and leer." I'm saying that just because a guy is leering doesn't mean he is planning on rape. Treat your fellow man and your fellow woman as human fucking beings.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 01:16 PM
15

The best way to create an atmosphere of equitable relations where everyone feels safe is to not worry about it so much. If women don't act jumpy around literally every man, then men won't get pissed off about women thinking they are all plotting to rape and murder them. If men treat women like human beings, and not feminist mouthpieces, then women have less reason to be angry at men in general. If a woman was raped in the past, the fear is a little understandable. If she knew the rapist, she'll …
/r/MensRights20/05/15 12:18 PM
29

Not if they are healthy individuals. I'm a 5'11" pudgy guy with bad knees. If you think I'm capable of raping anyone without the aid of pharmaceuticals, which can turn the tables on any strength difference, than you are delusional. And if you think that I want to, just because I'm a guy, then you are a sexist.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 11:41 AM
37

If a woman's first thought when seeing a man is "I hope he doesn't rape me" then she is either a post - traumatic rape victim or an extreme paranoiac.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 11:32 AM
26

I don't know if you are serious, but women can and do rape men, too. Men are not always bigger, stronger, or more assertive than women, and "big" does not always denote "strong". It is weird to stare at women in the gym. But it is also weird to randomly take pictures of people and post on Facebook how much you want to fuck them.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 11:16 AM
2

Did I say something funny? I just picked a higher level math at random.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 06:59 PM
6

Honeslty, women aren't paid all that differently from men. The biggest difference that leads to income disparity is hiring preferences, both by employers and the employees themselves. Even when comparing the same fields, elementary teachers make less than college professors. Women are more likely to be elementary teachers. Why? Women are more likely to wish to be involved with young children. Should we be paying the 2nd grade math teacher the same as a university Calculus professor? Probably not…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 03:16 PM
5

You have to remember that SJWs tend to think that rape is something only a man can do, because the man is penetrating the woman. Usually, they will begrudgingly accept a man being raped by a woman only if she used a foreign object on him.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:16 AM
9

It is exactly the same. Voting for someone because they are black or white, male or female, is retarded.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 08:24 PM
11

My GM dodges overdue bills... Sadly, he is also the owner, and my boss.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 01:10 PM
0

A realistic reason for this is because women prefer working with smaller children than men.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 01:08 PM
1

500k is great... if you are running a small store over the internet. It's less than nothing if you have more than a dozen people.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 01:05 PM
2

Really? So, when you found out that cardinals and popes were hiding pedophile priests, you didn't put that as a black mark against the church? For the organization, specifically, the standard is when the members do things that are abhorrent, and the organization either does nothing or attempts to cover it up. But, at the same time, I am not saying that one should hold an organization accountable for every crime committed by its members. I am saying that Feminists can not use the argument of "you…
/r/MensRights25/04/15 03:49 AM
1

Sorry. I thought my comment was dripping with the sarcasm. The point was that you should in fact be judging people and groups based on their actions, not on what the dictionary defines.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 02:57 AM
10

Oh... So we shouldn't hold pedophile priests and the cardinals and popes that hide them accountable, because the dictionary definition of "Catholicism" doesn't include "fucks children". We shouldn't hold politicians accountable for lying in a campaign, because the dictionary definition of "politician" doesn't include "liar". And we shouldn't hold men accountable for rape, because the dictionary definition of "male" doesn't include "rapist".
/r/MensRights24/04/15 10:41 PM
38

thatsthejoke.jpg
/r/MensRights24/04/15 10:35 PM
4

See, shitlord! You're hogging all the fun stuff like combat, and saddling us with the kids!
/r/MensRights19/04/15 08:30 PM
4

She told a story that was proven to be inaccurate, and falsely advised a person of paying her unfairly. Her apology was to say that she shouldn't have used his name... No! She shouldn't have told the story! Not only that, but she then proactively accuses anyone who dares look at her with suspicion as a "maniac". If this group has any legitimacy, they need to drop her like a bad penny
/r/MensRights16/04/15 06:14 PM
9

It sounds reasonable, except for the fact that if this was a case where she honestly thought she was being paid 1/6th of a man's pay for the same exact work, she would have screamed it from the heavens. Instead, she "misremembers" why she was at the club in the first place, including why she was paid so little, and calls the man and his club out on a national advocacy campaign. It was hardly an honest mistake. But let's assume that it was an honest mistake... her "apology" was "I shouldn't have …
/r/MensRights16/04/15 04:07 PM
0

That is why I said "if" And then afterwards said that she did in fact consent
/r/MensRights14/04/15 10:59 AM
6

Well. That game seems a little bit gay.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 05:53 PM
6

Imagine if they made it a party game... last one to do it has to clean up.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 02:43 PM
–

Well, to be fair... if she was too drunk to consent properly, then the more guys on the train the more compliant she'll end up. But even the girl is saying that she wanted it.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 02:42 PM
69

By number 25, they're thinking, okay. This is gonna be like throwing a hot dog down a hallway, but I'm invested in this now.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 02:40 PM
–

At the very least, Girl 4 believes that he raped people.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 01:41 PM
–

Well, it's a good thing for them to admit that it is wrong to lie about rape. It is common ground between women's rights and men's rights, and we can not be afraid to accept that. Who knows, if we can find enough common ground, the differences between us won't seem so far apart.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 01:37 PM
1

Girl 4 seems to at least believe that he is actually a rapist, based on what she says.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 01:32 PM
-4

The context of their comments indicates that he did, in fact, rape them, and the girls at the very worst might be taking too much pleasure in punishing him.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 01:31 PM
11

The question was "what if you get a counter-offer?" That means you have a choice to make. Work for the company who values their employees enough to pay above what others are asking, or the company that calls you sexist for considering a counter-offer?
/r/MensRights06/04/15 06:21 PM
69

And that is when you reply "I will go with the better offer, thank you for your time."
/r/MensRights06/04/15 02:46 PM
1

By actually questioning problems and pointing them out? Okay, buddy.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 03:50 PM
2

"Cathartic" as in "a release of feelings of anger that make the patient feel better" It isn't necessarily a good or healthy thing.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:47 PM
3

Good to know, if you work with super glue.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:45 PM
5

And then you realize that there are women who would push people into an oncoming train, causing them to explode like a big bag of meat.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:44 PM
2

For that one, it's the principle of the thing.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:43 PM
0

I'll defend that word here. It is a spectacle. In that train wreck sort of way. Other "seemingly positive" terms that can apply? "Astounding", "great", "amazing", "awe-inspiring", "mesmerizing"...
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:42 PM
2

It is. Specifically, it is a release of the woman's anger. And that is appropriate to call what the women here are doing. It's just an unhealthy catharsis. Selling the sports car for £1, that's okay. You aren't hurting anyone. The penis is off fucking limits.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:39 PM
3

To be fair, most men in that situation would either hit the woman or call her a bitch. Only a few would get "creative" about it, like sewing fish into their furniture or supergluing their genitals.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:36 PM
3

I am the one that is providing substance with the comments. You said it was irrelevant, but refuse to clarify. You are the one coming here to shit on men's rights.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 08:17 PM
2

No, you see. You can't just say it's irrelevant. You have to say why you think it is irrelevant. That's how you contribute to a conversation. If you don't want to do that, then don't let the door hit you on the way out.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 07:39 PM
6

That does make it worse, yes.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 07:30 PM
3

Doing my due diligence, I looked up "judge grants custody to rapist" in Google. Not surprisingly, there were outlying cases where this happened... But the usual scenario for this is because the judge was siding with the biological father over a non-parental custodian, such as an uncle, friend, or grandfather. It is very rare to have a case where the rapist "father" is granted custody against the victim-mother.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 04:53 PM
8

No. It is relevant. Just because technically it could be used by a male rapist to control their female victim doesn't mean judges will actually side that way. If I were to go to a judge and say I was a better parent than my 15 year old rape victim (note this is just an example), and demand custody and child support for the baby, I would at least be blasted by any judge with a conscience as a monster for attempting it, if not arrested for admitting in open court that I raped a teenager.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 03:51 PM
20

Can you name an example of this?
/r/MensRights04/04/15 02:33 PM
24

Excuse me, but we are talking about a situation where a woman raped a male, and then successfully sued him for child support. The fact that this happens, with the judge using the fact that the boy didn't go to his parents (one of the classic symptoms of being raped is to not tell people, specifically when the perp is someone you trust) to justify granting child support, is proof that in some areas the scales have tipped too far into the woman's favor. Does it mean that women are oppressors in ge…
/r/MensRights04/04/15 02:31 PM
20

An interesting point in that article... She [Helen Greico] went on to state that while she believed the US needed a men's rights movement, she didn't think Sacks should be the one doing it, calling him a "women-bashing, backlash shock-jock radio host." It's a start.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 10:46 PM
58

It should be noted that the author of "Boys Are Stupid, Throw Rocks At Them" (a man) also wrote "Girls Are Weird, But Smell Pretty"
/r/MensRights23/03/15 04:15 PM
1

I was talking about their sidebar.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:37 AM
1

As I feared, that sub is a little... klany... for my taste. Lots of links to pure hate.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 04:22 PM
3

Thank you for wasting everyone's time with an answer that does more damage to our own cause by marginalizing the sentiment. As far as "looking for people complaining about...", I'm already on this sub, but don't know an appropriate one for what I was looking for... Hence, my asking.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 10:58 PM
2

No... I mean a sub, like this one, where we point out the hypocrisy of one group discriminating on another while they cry for an end to discrimination. Only about race, instead of gender.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 10:58 PM
1

I'm not trolling. I want to know if there is a group similar to MRA for white people.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:53 PM
3

My local CBS affiliate runs a weekly story on stores and restaurants doing things they shouldn't be. Find the local news source that does the same.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:18 PM
0

Good point. The fact is, some people do kill others because of gender hatred.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 05:22 PM
8

To be fair, what they do to women tends to be classified as hatred, too.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 02:50 PM
1

I don't know. Many serial killers only kill women.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 02:46 PM
3

Check your frat boy privilege, shitlord.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:56 PM
1

Projection implies that the author is, herself, interested in randomly slapping the ass of a woman, and so sees the actions of the select few gay males that do that with a friend with jealousy. It's funny that she ignores misandry, and treats "dapper" as a bad thing when talking about dressing how you want. Shouldn't we all be able to choose how we want to dress? If I, as a straight man, and she, as a gay woman, end up wearing the same three piece suit (okay, not the exact same suit, just the sa…
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:55 PM
4

Yeah, they probably banned you just for having MRA in your name.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:36 PM
3

That's a favorite. "My body, my choice" but "you should get a vasectomy so I don't have to have my tubes tied"
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:35 PM
-1

Simple explanation? You hit it on the head with the title. Male is a privilege. Female is a right. White is a privilege. Black is a right. Cis is a privilege. Trans is a right. It's just that stupid.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:33 PM
3

If you want to cut your own penis off as a grown up, that's your problem. But since we are talking about a child here, then we aren't talking about the boy's decision.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 11:16 AM
6

Okay. If you get your infant a nose job because they can't breath through their nose, you're fine. If you get your infant a nose job because they maybe wouldn't be able to breath a decade from now, you're riding a line. If you get your infant a nose job so they look like Taylor Swift, you're a monster. Context is important.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 04:22 AM
4

The general legal standard is that if you break the law in the defense of the greater good, and that break ended with less harm then the action they are defending against, then it is an affirmative defense to prosecution. In layman's terms, if you see someone being shot, and you rush to give aid, then you won't be fined for trespassing on their land. What she would have to prove is 1) that her child would have been harmed by staying (circumcision is one of those grey area things, honestly, and s…
/r/MensRights11/03/15 12:38 AM
7

That is why I translated it the second time around.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 07:01 PM
13

Quod est necessarium est licitum. That which is necessary is lawful. If she was acting in the interest of the child, by ensuring he is not subject to genital mutilation, then she has a valid defense. It is an uphill battle for a jury to accept it, but it is valid.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 06:39 PM
11

Quod est necessarium est licitum. She was protecting her child from being mutilated.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 06:20 PM
25

A sexy sports drink. - Zapp Branigan.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 05:54 PM
12

How is it even something she can be jailed for? Is it a crime in Florida to be uncircumcised? Because I broke the law when I traveled there.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 05:52 PM
3

I am leaning toward this being a real case, but I am accepting of the fact that others are skeptical without verification of basic info like which school it was, and a statement from the school about the case. It is possible that the vagueness of the article (which gives no school name, no student names, and no timeframe) indicates that the story is embellished. It is also possible that she can not say any more due to court order. Out of the three basic criteria of proof that I came up with on a…
/r/MensRights10/03/15 11:23 AM
2

How else would you say that people started talking about it? Even if the story is false, it came out after the article in the Law Review.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 12:25 AM
-1

Just the one, then. The story came out due to the article in the Law Review.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 08:06 PM
12

Verification that is actually happened? You mean the lawyer for the guy saying that it happened? The administrative order that the guy was barred from public housing, even after being cleared, because he looks like a rapist? The school records that indicate that he was investigated for sexual misconduct, including a number of people who were questioned in regard to that?
/r/MensRights09/03/15 07:10 PM
22

But if it is only gay people on Mars, it won't last very long.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 07:07 PM
7

Because being a patent clerk was so simple, he had the time to think about other things.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 07:06 PM
7

For me, it would depend on a lot of factors. Guy is jerking it while buried in the stacks, mostly unseen by anyone? Get the fuck out. Guy is in the middle of the computer area (the most heavily used area of even the sleepiest of libraries), pants hanging from the side, on camera where the world can see someone was masturbating in my cubicle? Call the cops. and the same goes for a woman doing that.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 02:44 PM
7

Well grab me a moose and tell me you're sorry, eh? I want to move to Canada.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 02:40 PM
10

Wouldn't it fall under "public indecency", since she is stripping, masturbating, and presumably more in a public location? It isn't like she had her breasts out simply to breastfeed, or on accident while she adjusted her bra. She was filming herself for a porn site.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 02:38 PM
1

Statistical proof is one of the easiest ways to determine a bias, but it must be backed up using the data from the actual hiring battery (pre-application interaction, application details, interview) and not simply by-the-numbers. If you go into a hotel to work front desk, and you are dressed like a gangster, with a pot leaf hat and a dozen gold chains, you can't claim discrimination (or rather, you shouldn't be able to). If your job experience is limited to stocking groceries (with no money hand…
/r/MensRights03/03/15 10:06 PM
3

You miss my point. Neither gender "has power" over the other directly. All of those female CEOs are balanced by male CEOs. (There are more men, but it isn't because of discrimination.) Women are capable to getting practically any public office. We came very close to a female Vice President over the past few elections, and we are still expecting Hilary to be a serious contender for the presidency. (I don't even like her, but I admit she has a shot) The women's groups in college that I mentioned a…
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:36 PM
3

Racist doesn't just mean "hating based on race", it also means "discriminating based on race". Yes, the law can be racist, if it was crafted and enforced for the purpose of racism. Now, many laws are used for racism, but are not racist, such as anti-drug laws, which do not indicate any difference in the perpetrators' races, yet more blacks are prosecuted than whites for the crimes. The law is fine, it just is being used improperly. (Either we need to be more lenient to more people, or we need to…
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:24 PM
1

All that I am saying is that the laws need to be fixed to simply discourage discrimination of any kind (mind you that similar laws and policies are actually referred to as "positive discrimination" in other countries), instead of targeting a certain group. If you are passed over because you are black, it is wrong. If I am passed over because I am white, it is wrong. If my niece is passed over because she is a woman, it is wrong. That's all.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:16 PM
6

It really fits more in the "institutional" side of racism in most companies, honestly. However, it is a requirement for federal contractors Edit: "women" are a protected class, just like African-Americans, so it is not surprising to see Affirmative Action applied in that manner. But, in regard to other companies, if you know you were passed over for a job because you were black, then you can sue for discrimination in any sector.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 03:40 PM
6

These lists are by no means all inclusive. They are simply some of the most well known. We have reached a point where women can not be discriminated against, but men can be.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 03:35 PM
10

Affirmative Action. They make it so a person who is white must have higher qualifications than a black applicant to avoid the company being accused of racism.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 03:18 PM
13

Let's not kid ourselves. The laws that said blacks and whites could not attend school together were made by racists. Thus, the law is racist. What they don't understand is that now the law favors blacks in favor of whites, and those laws are racist, too.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 02:04 PM
13

Women do not hold any political power: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Hilary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, and Elena Kegan wouldn't have been in their offices, then. Women do not hold any economic power: Tell that to Mary Barra of GM, Meg Whitman of HP, Virginia Rometty of IBM... Women do not have any institutional power: Harvard College Women's Center, AAUW, Maricopa CC Women's Leadership Group...
/r/MensRights03/03/15 02:01 PM
5

You laugh, but my mother actually got pissed off at the idea that, in order to be equal, everyone closes the toilet seat and lid after every use. She shouldn't have to watch what she is doing, and have to lift the lid to go to the bathroom, but we should watch what we are doing, so we don't piss on the seat. Mind you, she doesn't even call herself a feminist. But i never said women like this were the normal, just that they are there.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 08:06 PM
18

Well, like all philosophies, there are extremists who believe in radical or even contradictory viewpoints. There are women out there that want "equality" with men, but don't want to go to the front lines in battle (because only women can have babies), or pay alimony (because men can easily get a job, even if they stayed at home), or give up custody (because women are better at raising children), or should have to worry about the state of the toilet seat (but men are expected to watch what they a…
/r/MensRights23/02/15 05:26 PM
7

Good point. But i don't know a lot of 12 year olds who like reading the news and feel so strongly about feminism that they don't understand that an 8 year old boy can't consent to sex with a high schooler.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 02:08 PM
22

If this was a 12 year old and an 8 year old, you could argue experimentation and not malice. How old was the woman in this story? Found it. She was 16 when she started. 21 when sentenced. The hypothetical 12 year old could have met the 8 year old at her own school. There may be encouragement to socialize, coupled with both of them getting into sexuality. Weird, wrong, but understandable. A 16 year old would be going to a completely different school. She would have had to seek out a child, groom …
/r/MensRights18/02/15 01:38 PM
1

Yeah, that was Thora's topless scene. Mena was 20 at the time.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 10:14 PM
2

I already addressed that. If they are allowed to have sex, and they are sending the picture for personal use and not public distribution, then it should not be illegal (even though it currently is)
/r/MensRights17/02/15 10:13 PM
1

Oh, her? She was 20.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 10:01 PM
1

The takeaway here is that maybe that (sexual performance by a minor) should have been made illegal (it is, actually, but money does funny things), and not make sexting to children 100% legal.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 09:21 PM
1

Actually according to imdb... Since Thora Birch was barely 17 at the time she made the film, and thus classified as a minor in the United States, her parents had to approve her brief topless scene in the movie and they and child labor representatives were on the set for the shooting of it. She may have been overage at the time of release, unless we are talking about a different scene.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 09:16 PM
1

It is where I am from, which is why I chose those two ages specifically because it is the smallest age range that would be illegal here with the oldest "younger partner". If your area's age of consent is 15, with a 2 year Romeo and Juliet period, then it would be 17/14 as illegal, which ironically would be legal here.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 05:17 PM
1

16 is not of legal age in most states, but you can use 19 and 15, if you prefer. Inherent danger would be things like if she got brain damage or died because you choked her too hard and didn't release her. If she really wants breath play, that's one thing. If you kill her during it, be prepared to defend yourself in court. I mean senior and freshman in high school. Both underage, when concerning pornography, and the younger party very much underage for consent. Many states use the three year rul…
/r/MensRights17/02/15 05:11 PM
1

Most teens don't have access to good lawyers, plus you would have a hard time convincing a juror that the picture of a girl to her boyfriend was for a clinical or artistic reason, as opposed to sexual, when the words surrounding that picture are likely sexual. Context, and all that. There was one french film that got shown at my high school that had two little boys running around naked playing in the sprinklers. It was clearly non-sexual, so it was allowable.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 03:53 PM
1

And if those precautions are not taken, then there is a crime committed. The same way as if your skydiving instructor "accidentally" packed your parachute with a torn canvas.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 03:45 PM
1

Fair enough, in Texas it is 17, unless you are 3 years or less older than the partner, leading to my general statement. Some states don't have a Romeo and Juliet law at all, and rare states allow 16 as an age of consent, though ironically, it is still illegal to sext. Go figure that she can have a gangbang with the entire varsity lacrosse team, but she can't send her nipple by email to her boyfriend.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 03:40 PM
0

Well, not really "the rarest of cases". 20 year old guy + 16 year old girl = crime. Rape = crime Inherently unsafe activity that results in death (choking) = crime. (I'm sorry, but even if she consents to freaky stuff, you have the responsibility to ensure her reasonable safety) Unforseeable accidents (didn't know she had a latex allergy) = not a crime Highschool Sweetheart situation (normally called the Romeo and Juliet laws, meant to protect a high school senior who dates a freshman) = not a c…
/r/MensRights17/02/15 03:10 PM
3

Breaking up with someone is not a crime, and it is not a reasonable expectation from a petty crime like robbery. If you rob someone and they die as a direct result, you do have a murder charge on your hands (say, you pull a gun, they run away, and get hit by a car). If you ruin someone's life, it is reasonable to think they may kill themselves. If you imprison someone with hardened criminals, it is reasonable to think they may be killed. Therefore, if your false rape allegations lead to the vict…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 03:53 PM
0

Which is worse? Forcing yourself sexually on another person, or lying about someone doing that to you so they will be arrested? It's a tough question.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 11:58 AM
2

I'm guessing that one is a troll.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:11 AM
1

All of the punishments are completely arbitrary, and are decided based on which crimes are worse than the others. Sometimes they get that wrong, and if that is the case we can change the laws.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:10 AM
4

No one expects a false rape allegation to lead to a one-night stint in the lockup with no further action. It is malicious intent, pure and simple, to accuse an innocent person for the purpose of annoying someone or making their life difficult. The cases where malicious intent is not present are cases where the girl was raped, but names a different person out of fear.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:07 AM
2

This is true, but at the same time, filing a false rape report is more of an attempt at locking the man up for 25 years than it is a success. (If it was a success, we generally wouldn't know she was lying.) Plus, the fact that the crimes are vastly different, with the rape victim being physically attacked and traumatized. I would say that any crimes that occurred in regard to the false rape allegation, then the accuser should be charged with those crimes as well. Victim get killed in prison or k…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:02 AM
7

Fool me ten times, shame on me...
/r/MensRights09/02/15 04:54 AM
6

Yeah, but "wear red for women"? Do you think they'd ever try a campaign for "wear teal for men" because men get breast cancer, too?
/r/MensRights04/02/15 09:56 PM
1

Have you ever been scared senseless? Just because he laughed doesn't mean he found it funny. And the witness could be lying.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 05:55 AM
1

I would much rather people think that most guns will fire. It follows with the rules of gun use. "Do not point the gun at something you do not wish to shoot." Most guns have a safety. But what happens if that safety fails? People have even died when the gun wasn't loaded with real bullets! We should simply be teaching kids to respect guns.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:12 PM
0

The problem is that the gun-hating left wing will use that as an excuse. They would argue that all guns should have this feature because "the guy wouldn't have died if it weren't for that". Then lawyers would argue that she should get a lesser sentence because the gun should have had better safety features, in case a crazy pregnant woman tries to frighten her boyfriend by firing a gun point blank into his brains.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 07:25 PM
0

Don't make excuses for the idiot girl. This is not the gun's fault for being able to be fired without a clip. It's the girl's fault for firing it.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 07:16 PM
8

First, she is 17. For felony charges, especially something like this, any male defendant would face adult charges. It isn't like she was a 10 year old, and there was any question about whether this belongs in Family Court. Second, the heinous nature of the act, terrorizing her victim with a gun that he believed to be loaded (and, as it turns out, he was right), then staging a suicide before getting caught in the lie.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:49 PM
1

The Second Amendment is a very short passage. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That wording is unfortunate due to the adding of clauses that make little sense, but we can decipher the meaning. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, shall not be infringed. Thus, guaranteeing that our Army will not be shut down. The right of the people to keep and bea…
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:46 PM
1

There is certain levels of registration for handguns, because they are the ones most likely used in street crime. The problem is that we allowed that registration, and crime didn't go down. It went up.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:38 PM
2

I highly doubt this was an accident. She wanted to kill him, and only half-assed the removal of the bullets. Shit, we could probably make a montage of 100 scenes from movies and TV shows where they specifically show that removing the clip leaves a bullet in the chamber. The ones that come immediately to mind are American Dad, when Haley and Jeff are held hostage by the principal, Law and Order: SVU, multiple episodes where Stabler is disarmed and empties the chamber after removing the clip, and …
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:34 PM
3

That's the thing. We are so willing to force stupid shit like God and patriotism and football teams, but for some stupid reason, we don't teach our kids about guns. That's what we need to indoctrinate into kids! "The gun is always loaded."
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:28 PM
1

She should be tried as an adult.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:20 PM
0

trying to scare him You know what. Pointing a gun at someone and threatening to shoot them, even as a goof, is a felony. He died in the commission of that felony. She easily could be charged with Murder One.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:19 PM
2

They would just argue that replacing "men" with "Jews" is disingenuous because Jews have been persecuted, like women, for centuries. She would then retweet her own shit with "Nazis" replacing "Men" to prove her point.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 12:44 PM
0

For subs like this, posting to the source is inviting doxxing.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:39 AM
2

It appears they forgot that one. So... This insane list of women who killed or tried to kill their husbands over stupid shit (like cheating at Monopoly or saying a celebrity was hot) isn't even complete.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:35 AM
3

In both cases, they are judgementally calling people out for not being feminist enough. In the first (the New York Magazine article), they were offended that these housewives wanted to call themselves feminists. In the second (the Kaley Cucuo interview) , they were offended that she didn't want to call herself a feminist. The common thread? They both were portrayed as housewives. The fact that the two "attacks" are from different people only bolsters my claim. If they were the same author, it co…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:34 PM
2

The other point being "how do I know that feminists are angry that she likes to play housewife?" Jezebel had a scathing piece about the New York Magazine's article on women who claimed to be feminist while being stay at home mothers. The author claims that she is okay with women who make that choice, but then goes on and on about how the women featured in the article are not real feminists (and they only interviewed two of them, so it is obviously an out of proportion article.) Like all idealogi…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 05:52 PM
0

That depends on the coersion. For the agent to be equivalent to an employee, it would be as if I were running a shop, and my only salesperson, who I hired because my face scares children and he can sell an icebox to an Eskimo, tells me that he won't get me any sales if I don't apologize publically for not selling Easy-bake Ovens.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 05:04 PM
3

Except /r/whiterights is an obvious hate group, featuring articles such as "Azkanazi Jews Are Not White" and links to antisemitic sites. To compare MRAs to these people, you obviously don't want to think well of us in the first place.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:59 PM
2

Yes, and if you are propositioned by your boss in exchange for a raise, you can quit and move to a different job. That doesn't change the fact that you were coerced.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:36 PM
2

Why do you say it is not unreasonable? Kaley said that she is hesitant to call herself a feminist. Why? Because she does things differently than people expect of feminists. She likes to cook and serve food to her husband, even refers to it as "serving her husband" (which, frankly, is the real reason the feminists are angry). It is like when you fully support the ideals of the civil rights movement, but you wouldn't call yourself a "civil rights activist" because you basically never talk about it…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:35 PM
4

She doesn't have to, but it is still being forced out of her with an implied threat of not working.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:23 PM
2

Okay. An agent is there to get you work. If you say or do something stupid, it is generally your agent who tells you to apologize for it, though sometimes it is the producer or your show or a studio executive. I chose agent because it is a point of contact that every actor has who might tell them to do this. If you, as an actor, say so,etching really bad like "Hitler was right about the Jews," it could mean the end of your career, and loss of money to the agent. So, yes. If your agent tells you …
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:57 PM
2

I am assuming you are not stupid here. The tweet in question implies that Kaley thought of feminism as something bad. She did not.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:49 PM
2

He works for her, to get her work. Part of an agent's job is PR for the client.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:41 PM
5

Yes. Kaley never said Feminism was a dirty word. She said that it might not be needed in this day and age, and applauded the efforts of women that paved her path.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:40 PM
2

Far from it. I admire her resolve to be able and willing to do things like cook after a long day of shooting. But, as a working woman, she is by definition not a housewife. She is playing the role of a housewife, probably to contrast her usual role as straight woman to the sexual harassment of Amy Farrah Fowler in front of millions.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:38 PM
6

to pretend to be a housewife after working her demanding and lucrative job
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:58 PM
6

Among other things, one blatantly lies, saying she treated feminism as a dirty word. Just because they didn't call her a bitch doesn't mean they didn't attack her.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:56 PM
10

And if her agent said "you should apologize, even if you aren't sorry, because this can hurt your career", then she was forced into it.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:55 PM
1

This is sad. Kaley treats not being a feminist as potentially offensive, saying "Is it a bad thing that I am not?", and they take that to mean she called feminism a dirty word.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:53 PM
1

You do know what it means to be understandable, right? It simply means that you can get why it happens. Fear is a very big motivator, and fear of reprisal from someone who just attacked you can make you do stupid things. And that isn't even getting into the possibility of a woman who thinks she is telling the truth, but is wrong. When you have questions like "should we stop referring to them as 'wrongly' accused?", you turn all victims into suspects, and that is exactly as wrong as treating all …
/r/MensRights27/12/14 09:56 PM
1

For instances like the bartender, who presumably is dosing people to facilitate easy sex, the "false" allegation against the friend can lead investigators to the real criminal. We simply can not demonize women, just like they should not be demonizing us.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:34 PM
1

I never said it was acceptable, but it is understandable.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:29 PM
1

Exactly, part of being fair is to understand the other side of the situation. If the girl gets caught saying "I'll just say you raped me.", then she is an evil bitch who deserves ire. But barring that, we should not issue a blanket accusation that the girl is lying for the sake of harm.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:27 PM
2

A wrongful, but not false, accusation is also possible if the victim misidentified her attacker based on a misunderstanding or incorrect memory. For example, a girl who is drugged at a bar by the bartender may accuse her friend, or a cross-race rape victim doesn't notice the difference between the rapist and the person she accused. My biggest point is that we should not be quick to judge someone who may not be thinking clearly as being evil.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:25 PM
5

While we, as the accused, should enjoy the virtue of innocence until proven guilty, so the potential victim should be assumed to be innocent. That means investigate her reported crime as if she was raped, and until you prove that she acted maliciously indicated the accused as "wrongfully accused". Remember that some wrongful accusations are caused by women who were raped, but didn't plan on reporting it out of fear. Someone else realizes she was raped, and she names someone uninvolved to avoid r…
/r/MensRights27/12/14 12:20 PM
3

Now you're thinking like an SJW.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 08:10 PM
1

The whole "enlightened" portion of that is "acting with a conscience" It means thinking about your interests first without forgetting about the interests of others. For example, leveraging to buy a profitable company for a cheap price, but making sure that the price is still fair for them. Think about the Thomas Crown Affair, with Pierce Bronson. He is in a meeting taking over another business. He takes the offer for twice what the owner wanted for it, lets them gloat about pulling one over on t…
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:41 PM
2

Well, there is only one danger. That he files in a court for custody of the son, at which point the scheme is revealed. If he just asks for pictures, you can Google "2 year old boy playing in a sandbox" (use safesearch, just in case) and get a thousand stock photos to send over. He'll never know the difference.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:32 PM
4

She didn't lie to the court. She worked it out directly with the man, hence the mail fraud charge, but no perjury charges. If they want to throw the book at her, she could be hit for grand larceny (theft of $100k) and forgery (false birth certificate)
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:28 PM
2

Plus, the woman could simply claim he is an unfit father on top of it, and demand he not be allowed to see the child.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:25 PM
0

No, no. She needed the sex change, so even though she was biologically a woman, she is still a man.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:02 PM
0

Husband... Right... These 7 children had 5 different fathers.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 01:01 PM
7

That is not really true. At least one woman asked about the US position in the North Korea/Sony situation. That is a worthwhile question.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 12:50 PM
2

Sorry, but if you voted for him because of "equality", you are just as bad. Vote for someone based on their ideas, not their race or gender.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 12:47 PM
1

They probably secretly think she is a slut, seeing as there are three daddies in the picture.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:37 PM
5

Well... yes and no. She can not request alimony, but she can sue for extra child support if you start making more money regularly. Because everything you get in child support goes specifically for the children... /s
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:35 PM
0

mentioned for media attention but never actually reported to the police That is one type. But also the real rapes where the women do not report it. If you are going to crunch numbers, you have to include include them all.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 08:09 PM
0

It does matter. If 33% of reported rapes are false, but only 50% of actual rapes are reported, then we have two problems that work against each other. Every time a woman is shown to have lied, the SJWs go out and scream about "rape victims" being criticized, so real rape victims stay quiet. When it comes to understanding the actual numbers on rape, it is important to consider every angle.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 07:59 PM
-1

Did that factor in the cases where rape went unreported?
/r/MensRights07/12/14 01:21 PM
1

The default position is to investigate as if she was raped. That means doing a rape kit, talking to potential witnesses and the suspect, gathering evidence, etc. All too often, I see that police skip a lot of that, and make for a speedy arrest of the suspect on low profile cases, only doing the due diligence on the high profile. If the police had a video tape of a man's encounter with a woman, and it showed no threats, no violence, no weapon, and no fear on behalf of the woman, the police should…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 01:00 PM
2

I wouldn't call it 50%. Part of the problem is confirmation bias. We don't see news reports of every rape case, but we do see news reports of most proven false rape cases, especially the high profile ones.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 12:48 PM
1

No, you don't get it, man. In the author's eyes, the victim is "innocent until proven guilty", and the man is just a dirty rapist. And how dare you try to prove a victim is guilty of anything... Yeah.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 12:45 PM
1

Because porn requires a release waiver.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 12:16 PM
-3

Not when it comes to pornography
/r/MensRights03/12/14 11:45 PM
0

You simply can not expect respect without giving it. Enjoy your anger in the meantime.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 11:44 PM
1

The jailed ex boyfriend in the post was probably sent the pictures by his girlfriend. The slut-shaming website "winbystate" generally stole the images from people's accounts or received them from boyfriends.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 10:04 PM
-2

Okay. Posting the nudes to GW without her permission is against the ToS, and against the law, because she did not consent to the distribution. Posting on /r/ExGirlfriendsGoneWild (I hope that is a fake sub, seriously) is most definitely slut-shaming. As is posting in any way in a negative context, like "this is my bitch ex girlfriend, what a slut" But you are putting words in my mouth. I am saying that if you, regardless of who you are or your gender, are given a nude picture of your significant…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 09:08 PM
0

She does if she is the photographer.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 09:00 PM
-2

With regard to maliciously posting your ex girlfriend's nude pictures on a slut-shaming website, you're damn right you need a consent form. For most cases, women don't send you the picture of their vagina so you can post it on GW. They send it to you because they want you to see it. No one else. You should specifically ask "is it okay for me to post this online?" before you do so. Every time. For example, Jenna Jameson did porn. That doesn't mean she wants you to climb over her hedges and sneak …
/r/MensRights03/12/14 06:54 PM
1

What it is is a legal precedent to be used to bolster a case, as well as a "bad act" which can be used to discredit the defense of "I thought it was okay."
/r/MensRights03/12/14 06:11 PM
-6

Consent to film is not consent to distribute. Now, if the girl says "Hello, YouPorn people," that can be implied consent.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:57 PM
2

Agreed. The only exception I find to that would be if the images were incriminating in some way. If you were videotaped having sex with a 14 year old, you can't argue "revenge porn" to get out of it.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:55 PM
-2

That is where it gets murky. intent is a major part, as is "fair use" If you post a picture of your girlfriend's painting, with the attribution "This is my girlfriend's painting", you are not claiming it to be your own work, and you are not duplicating the original, nor are you taking money for it. You are giving a fair use of the work with credit to the artist. If you made a copy of her work for sale without her permission, you are breaking the law. If you try to pass the work off as your own, …
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:52 PM
0

Media does not need a signed license to be protected. Show me any time that I signed an agreement that I wouldn't pirate Disney's Frozen. Assuming she took the photo of herself and sent it to him, she is the copyright holder. Assuming he took the photo of her, then she needs to give a signed release before he can legally distribute the pornography. Either way, there are legal reasons not to allow him to distribute the photos.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:43 PM
-1

True. It's a murky subject.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:10 PM
-2

Under most circumstances, revenge porn includes pics your partner sends to you, as opposed to you taking the pictures. The reason for the new law is that gray area between pornography and invasion of privacy.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 04:50 PM
-5

Legally, there would be the invasion of privacy issue and the copyright issue. Invasion of privacy can be fought by arguing that by giving out her picture in an easily shareable format, she is forgoing any right to privacy. But they can still hit with copyright infringement.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 04:47 PM
0

Most of these revenge porn cases are where the girl takes a picture of herself and sends it to him, though sometimes it is where the guy is filming them while in bed. (Then there may be consent to film issues.)
/r/MensRights03/12/14 04:44 PM
5

Think of it this way. She holds the copyright on her digital work (her nude picture). She gives you, the boyfriend the license to use that image on his phone and PC, but not the rights to distribute the image publicly.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:34 PM
2

Revenge porn goes beyond mere slander into "invasion of privacy". It is one step before taking pictures without your knowledge, in my mind. If my girlfriend were to send me a picture of herself naked, and I show it to my friends and post it on the net... I'm an asshole.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:32 PM
4

Okay. In the case of the woman uploading nude pictures of herself in a form of "revenge revenge porn", the defendant (the husband) can trace the IP of the pictures where they were originally posted, go to the coffee shop, and request the security video. In a criminal proceeding, the prosecutor and police would likely had this done, as no one wants to go to trial without evidence. I don't know anyone that would ask for less on this, unless they are lying or jumping on a bandwagon.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:29 PM
21

At least if you assault someone yourself, you are doing your own dirty work.
/r/MensRights02/12/14 02:51 PM
2

You are the only one being unnecessarily cunty, friend.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:51 PM
1

I was talking about the string of comments like "What is SJW?" Yours was the third one I found. But, if you don't want an answer to your question, all try to remember you.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:32 PM
2

Unless you are talking about children, then female sexuality bad, male sexuality good.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:15 PM
1

Wow... lot of terms people don't know. Squick is that feeling you get when you see something truly disgusting. It can also be used to describe the thing that disgusts you. Synonyms include "turn-off"
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:14 PM
1

Social Justice Warrior Yeah...
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:09 PM
1

Shit Reddit Says
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:08 PM
1

Holy shit. A reasonable post on 2XC?
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:08 PM
1

Wait... Shia LaBeouf was raped?
/r/MensRights29/11/14 01:07 PM
3

If that was the case, the policy should (and probably would) have read "Due to budgetary concerns and lower attendance, X dorm will be used for Y purpose this semester. Male ESL students, who historically would have used this dorm, will be supplied alternative off-site housing at the university's expense."
/r/MensRights27/11/14 02:04 AM
-3

I meant the pretentiousness of calling one's self "commander"
/r/MensRights27/11/14 02:01 AM
2

On the other hand, it is an indication that there may be one crazy leader who hasn't wrote her Mein Kampf yet.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 10:43 PM
6

PC commander?
/r/MensRights26/11/14 10:39 PM
15

Possibly, but what if they get a glut of male students next year? A blanket policy saying males are not allowed to use on campus housing is, at the very least, insensitive.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 10:37 PM
3

No, i agree. We have to walk the line between making it too easy to file false claims and making it too hard to file true ones. If we make women and men unwilling to come forward, it is a bad thing for justice. If we make it so all you need for conviction is a decade's old accusation with no physical evidence, that is even worse.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 02:24 PM
3

Important note. In New York State, there is no statute of limitations on first degree sexual assault, which includes sexual conduct with a person you have drugged.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 07:25 PM
6

men can not vote for a representative Discrimination
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:35 PM
1

Oh, right. Yes, they are.
/r/MensRights12/11/14 10:36 PM
2

The terminology is religious, but it is still an important thing for those of use that don't believe in gods. To strip the religious from the statement, "Some of the greatest harm comes about from those who think they are helping."
/r/MensRights11/11/14 03:46 AM
3

Oh, I agree, but at the same time, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions". Very few people who advocate circumcision are evil people, just misinformed or misinterpreting.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 09:44 PM
4

Pure, concentrated gluten. The best there is.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 07:52 PM
8

It does sound ridiculous... I am uncut, and my penis has yet to grow horns or fall off, so...
/r/MensRights10/11/14 07:30 PM
4

Would you prefer "excision"?
/r/MensRights10/11/14 07:24 PM
5

The argument probably is that an uncircumcised penis is more likely to contract HPV because the bodily fluids can pool near the urethral opening and are harder to clean out. Of course, that's still an exceedingly rare situation, but still...
/r/MensRights10/11/14 07:19 PM
5

They just don't like your girlfriend, who I assume is /u/MintFrosting.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 11:17 PM
3

They feel that because men get away with hitting wives, wives should be able to get away with hitting their husbands... But, they want to come down hard on men who hit their wives. The answer, of course, is simple. Punish either spouse who abuses the other. Without exception or reasoning based on gender.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:01 PM
9

They can make it more equal by including as part of the Draft non - combat roles. Women can (rather "should") be drafted into service in administrative and support positions to free up men for combat. But if men can be punished for refusing to sign up, why are women allowed to do the same. If we ever got into a war that requires the Draft, women do not currently have to help the effort at all.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 02:57 PM
1

Even if it isn't criminal law, you can still attempt to fight it on constitutional grounds. But, please, if you are going to be that guy, don't actually be the father. I'd rather the test case be an example of a man who was not the father, so the news can't crucify him later.
/r/PussyPass28/10/14 06:01 PM
2

For a start, we can support more domestic-violence funding. The more money shelters have, the more they'll be able to spend on victims, including those that aren't in quite as much danger but need help nonetheless. This is at least a reasonable course of action.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 09:10 PM
3

I've never heard of it.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 04:30 PM
6

While the article admits that men do it, too, they focus only on the female tourists and male prostitutes and the impact that it has on their lives.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 02:40 PM
8

One thing about the article that should be pointed out. The author almost exclusively refers to it as "romance tourism" (including the quotation marks), showing how the people are referring to it that they interviewed as well as indicating that they are not buying the fact that it isn't prostitution.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 02:37 PM
3

I'll make it a supreme court case. I am innocent until proven guilty, therefore I can not be held liable for a child that is not proven to be mine. I am not saying outright that I will not pay. Just that I will not pay unless the child were proven mine.
/r/PussyPass14/10/14 02:45 PM
0

Well, it isn't quite that simple...
/r/MensRights12/10/14 08:51 PM
3

They are also rare.
/r/MensRights12/10/14 03:13 PM
10

Strangely enough, almost no single employer does pay men and women differently. The pay gap is only seen when you look at the nation as a whole. Why? Because women tend to go to lower paying jobs, for whatever reason. Edit for better accuracy
/r/MensRights12/10/14 12:48 PM
4

Okay. The reason there is a gap between average earnings by men and average earnings by women is the fact that women and men enter different fields of work on average. Women tend to work desk jobs, like secretaries, customer service, home care providers, day care, retail sales and other lower paying easily churned jobs. Men tend to go into hands on fields or educated fields, like doctors, police, fire fighters, CEOs, professors... If I were to complain that my job (front desk agent at a hotel) d…
/r/MensRights12/10/14 12:44 PM
7

He was 14. He was not able to give consent.
/r/PussyPass12/10/14 12:15 PM
-5

Not as bad as the penalty for threatening a judge in an open forum, Sweetie Belle.
/r/PussyPass12/10/14 12:13 PM
1

Actually, if you are looking at his testicles from the front, his left testicle would be on your right.
/r/PussyPass12/10/14 12:12 PM
7

Well, assuming the woman doesn't tell anyone she was raped until it was too late, she is saddled with the actual child. Fortunately for them, they have the option of taking a morning after pill, if they catch it early enough, having an abortion, or giving it up for adoption. Hell, they don't even need to do paperwork, they can simply drop the baby off at a fire station or hospital and absolve themselves of all responsibility. Even if they weren't raped. But men and boys have no choice in the mat…
/r/PussyPass12/10/14 12:09 PM
5

I'm sorry, but if someone is claiming I am the father of their child, I won't pay a dime without a test.
/r/PussyPass12/10/14 11:55 AM
5

Hmm... I guess I would just say that I hope this picture wasn't what put him on the registry.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 02:54 PM
5

Yes, partially because people have stigmatized the penis into this weird area. Big ones are obscene, small ones are funny. Your mother and her friend are laughing about your baby penis.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 02:51 PM
1

Compared to the alternative? Self-medication with alcohol? I get that sometimes psychiatrists are not perfect, and that many times it is guesswork, but it is better to try than to do nothing.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 10:32 AM
2

One thing we can do is to stop saying "be a real man", even as a joke.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 02:47 AM
4

In many cases, men do not have the ability to ask for it. If a man is moping around and sleeping too much, he's lazy. If he drinks too much, he's an alcoholic. If he takes drugs, he's an addict. Even when they seek help, it's for the outward symptom, and not the underlying cause of the problem. For the addict and the alcoholic who suffers from depression, the 12 Steps method used by AA and other groups can even backfire by making them believe they have no control in their lives, leading to suici…
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:31 PM
-2

Doing the SAME THING the second time, if you were really serious about killing yourself, after it didn't work the first time, is clearly a cry for attention Well, there is the old adage... If you do something over and over again expecting different results, that is the definition of insanity. And I think we all can agree that having a mental health problem that causes you to try to kill yourself is a little insane.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:26 PM
7

Yes, but it wouldn't be reported. Yes, but it wouldn't be noticed until it was too late. Maybe, depending on the "stupid risk". Freerunning in extreme locations would be reported as a "accident" and not a "suicide". No, it would be reported as pulling a stupid stunt.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:23 PM
-9

It's not so much that they choose "effective" methods, but they choose personal methods. Men tend to shoot or stab themselves or jump from buildings for actual suicide attempts, along with Suicide By Cop. They then go to extremes for the cries for help, like the hose in the tailpipe method. Women tend to cut themselves (less damaging), take pills, drive cars in the river, and things like that. The difference between their "actual suicide attempts" and "a cry for help" is the likelyhood they will…
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:19 PM
1

While you may require a referral, it wouldn't hurt to ask, right? Tell him that you think there may be something wrong mentally, and see what they say. If they say "get a referral", then at least you aren't worse off.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:13 PM
3

I think the problem is in trying to put all of the myriad of problems that can lead ultimately to suicide into the single bottle "despression". It's like how they say autism rates grow because they get to call more things autism. If you are sleeping too much because of your depression, maybe there needs to be a different treatment than those who are not sleeping enough.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:09 PM
1

social, political and personal empowerment More headway was given for female empowerment than male empowerment, contributing to different changes. Among other things, men are expected to "man up" more and women are expected to get and offer help.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:06 PM
4

Oh, that makes it better, then. /s
/r/MensRights08/10/14 04:57 AM
8

Because Snickers isn't saying you will turn homicidal.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 03:21 AM
22

Tide commercials? "My kids clothes are dirty, which soap is better" Snickers "You're not you when you're hungry" Vacuums (take your pick) "our vacuum is light, small and compact" Most television show adverts.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 02:17 AM
2

No, it isn't appropriate or relevant to accuse someone of being autistic because you don't agree with them.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 01:36 AM
4

That was merely a comment on how quickly you lost your temper and resorted to personal attacks to try and prove your point.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 01:12 AM
4

Wow. Zero to autistic in record time?
/r/MensRights08/10/14 01:09 AM
1

You can't justify the "humor" because there is no justification.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:59 AM
8

It's a lighthearted joke (meaning the creator didn't mean to offend people), but there is no payoff for the joke. It's simply not funny. What sense does it make at all? Saying this woman is so mentally unbalanced that she'd blow her husband's brains out in his sleep unless she gets her hair styled?
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:24 AM
7

This basterd doesnt sound sory at all.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:21 AM
1

I don't know if we have an advertising board. The Federal Trade Administration handles false advertising (like advertising $5 haircuts, but charging $10 minimum), and the FCC can handle offensive television or radio ads, but something in print like this? Plus, they can argue that they are saying "Don't shoot your husband, get your hair styled"... or simply that they are being hyperbolic and didn't mean it literally.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:20 AM
71

How does that even make sense? My hair is acting up, I'd better kill my husband!
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:08 AM
5

I've even heard of the man being beaten and bloody, and the woman without a scratch on her, but she stays free to run havoc on the house and he is locked up.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 04:22 AM
7

Well, let's just say that she was the problem, but she is working on it.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 04:20 AM
5

I'll be willing to bet some people will call the police on someone they had a fight with, and say they did something like call her "sugartits" in the hope they get fined or jailed.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 08:37 PM
5

Makes me almost want to flood their social media with nasty comments.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 08:35 PM
1

No, they honestly believe that even in countries like Somalia, which are not only completely run by blacks but predominately black, only the white people can be racist. Similarly, we could have a female president, a 100% female Congress and Senate, 100% female Supreme Court, and every governor, council member and mayor as females, passing laws that benefit only women, and they wouldn't believe it is sexism. Case in point, a feminist blogger that calls herself "Femitheist Divine".
/r/MensRights29/09/14 02:29 PM
-1

It wasn't a double negative. Double negative only applies when the two negative terms cancel each other out, such as "ain't got no money" (should be "ain't got money" or "don't have any money"). Sentences can have two negative phrases and be correct, if the meaning is not seemingly conserved by switching the two terms. For example... Even though no lives were lost, the judge didn't grant any leniency. They never told us to bring a map, so we didn't bring one. "where" in my original comment was a…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 05:24 AM
5

That was covered in "no crashes", actually. My point is that my cab drivers have never gotten into a crash, regardless of fault, while driving me.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:12 PM
2

I have had female cab drivers (randomly) for years. I have had no problems with them. No crashes, no swerving, not even an accident where it wasn't their fault.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 02:10 PM
8

This is exactly like racial segregation. During segregation, white businesses would cater to white customers. If a black person were to come in, they would either be served in a substandard manner, told to go to a different establishment, or just told to "go away". Why? Because white people are more comfortable around white people than black people at the time. Of course, feminists would argue that it isn't the same because women aren't the ruling class, but that tired line is bullshit. If this …
/r/MensRights28/09/14 02:06 PM
3

Maybe I would feel safer with a male driver because he won't accuse me of sexually harassing him or worse.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 01:57 PM
2

Well, the headline is "couple gave boy, 15, drugs and pressured him into sex" The top portion of the article is what listed the husband first, but that is a question of depravity. A woman rapes a teenager, and that is bad. The husband helps her and watches her do it? That is utter depravity. The sentence was not to bury the woman's actions, but to highlight just how sick these two are.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 02:33 PM
1

Actually, I am referring to the fact that a migration of intelligence from those jobs means the ones that are left are less so, and uninhibited.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 04:44 AM
1

Not sure where to put this, so I'll place it here. I had a scary thought. Women tend not to go into intensive fields, for whatever reason. This puts them disproportionately in jobs where they can take time off for pregnancy. Food service or other shift work has churn anyway and are used to hiring new workers, office jobs can hire temps, call centers can simply reschedule existing workers. I'm not going to speculate why women seem to be drawn to these fields, but I wonder if the push for women in…
/r/MensRights23/09/14 04:08 AM
1

I would say a combination of 2 and 3. The first one is just an excuse for them to trot out when people call them on their bullshit.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 03:56 AM
2

Even worse, all of the governing bodies that oversee whether workplaces are equal opportunity are headed by either women or rare pro-feminist men, so the "ruling class" is slowly turning into women, and not men.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 03:54 AM
1

There are certainly ways around it, as country clubs figured out. The fact is, you would be stupid to deny service to blacks or gays, but if such a thing were allowable, there would be too few places for them to go where they would be welcome. Not immediately, but hotel owners would be able to say "You're a nigger, I don't want you in my rooms.", restaurant owners would be able to say, "I don't serve fags.", and that attitude would bleed out into the general populace. Racists would flock to your…
/r/MensRights16/09/14 04:24 PM
1

Believe it or not, you still have the right to discriminate. The laws in place are for things like public services, such as bus systems, which are required by law not to discriminate. But they can sue your ass, and they'd probably win. If you want to do that, you make sure you are willing to give settlement money to them.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 04:01 PM
0

So, what you are saying is that (numbers made up here for simplification) men are 10% likely to get into an accident and women are 20% likely. So, two men in an accident-ready situation will get into an accident 19% of the time (1.0-(0.90x0.90)), a man and a woman will get into an accident 28% of the time (1.0-(0.9x0.8)), and two women will get into an accident 36% of the time (1.0-(0.8x0.8)). The way the term overrepresented is used, though, it sounds like they are saying 2-women accidents coun…
/r/MensRights16/09/14 03:41 PM
2

When you have a major accident, police are called. It wouldn't be hard to have them, as a matter of course, check the odometer. Other options would be to have you enter your mileage into the gas pump every time you fill up, but that would require the credit card companies to work with them, so it isn't ideal. If they wanted to use that data, there are ways to do it. (what do you think Progressive's Snapshot device is about?)
/r/MensRights16/09/14 03:34 PM
9

The reason why anti-discrimination was codified into the law was because when it was legal to discriminate against gays and blacks, everybody discriminated against gays and blacks. There were very few restaurants that an openly gay man or a black person could just sit down and order food. There was no going to the competition, because the next place was going to deny them, too. It's one of the reasons the homosexual community hid themselves, until they got tired of it.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 03:28 PM
1

My point is when you don't separate men and women on the tests, and test human intelligence as opposed to female intelligence, women still tend to be near the average mark. They just don't have as many standouts in the upper and lower edge. Edit to check facts before continuing - The original comment was that by definition, women have the same intelligence, with the implications that the men's 100 IQ is the same as the women's 100 IQ, when that is false. As I said, if you made a genius - only IQ…
/r/MensRights06/09/14 07:06 PM
1

That would be like separating out math whizzes and brain damaged for their own tests, then saying they are the same because they both have an average. By definition a 100 IQ is average. But that is not saying they are equal.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 06:58 PM
2

By definition women have the same IQ Source? IQ only has the same connotations for the averages, based on the whole of the population. That is, the average tester is given 100 points on a bell curve. Gender has nothing to do with the scoring of the test. The interesting thing to note is that women are more likely to fall in the average categories, with men being more of the geniuses and idiots.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 02:10 PM
3

Huh? I don't think "why" we disagree is any more or less important than the fact that we disagree. It would be like a vegetarian getting angry because someone else adopts a vegetarian diet over the taste of meat, as opposed to the meat industry.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 02:06 PM
1

How about we go through an article about a girl who was raped by her male teacher, but change the genders around. Post the edited article without cute taglines, like "why is this acceptable", for a week or so until we get some comments, then show what people think based on those comments?
/r/MensRights06/09/14 02:03 PM
3

So, let's all call Curves Gyms, and other women's only businesses and make appointments in protest there.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:58 PM
2

Of course. But the gender lines are about the gender of the victim, in this case.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 03:53 PM
12

I'm sorry, but this is a gender lines issue. She was binge drinking and chain smoking because she thought it was a boy. She quit because she found out it was a girl. I get that she wanted a girl, that's fine, but just from the small period of time that she was drinking, that child could end up with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. She was willing to risk having a developmentally challenged child when it was a boy, because she thinks boys are throwaway children.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 05:25 AM
0

We can only hope.
/r/MensRights31/08/14 02:00 AM
16

reasonable comment has a waist that isn't smaller than mine and acts like an Israeli bodyguard. If she wants to talk about unreasonable expectations, she shouldn't have her own.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 06:40 PM
3

The quote was from OP's post. My comment was sarcasm.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 06:27 AM
23

I love that part. A sexualized man is a sexualized man, but a sexualized woman is an object. Because we have never had portrayals of men as vapid pretty boys who are only good for sex.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 03:46 AM
4

I apologize.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 05:47 PM
8

1/57001
/r/MensRights26/08/14 05:06 PM
2

Clearly, it was your fault for being a good and loving father. /s
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:00 PM
1

I think that is where the difference really comes out. This guy, and Mrs Mann, referenced in other threads, did what is natural for a photographer/parent. Take pictures of their children in interesting poses and situations. When you go out to the world and say "Everybody! Look at pictures of my naked children!" (Metaphorically), you are inviting the potential for scorn, because some will immediately see something wrong with it, and others will jump on the bandwagon.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 05:57 PM
0

Does anyone have one of the "offending" images?
/r/MensRights24/08/14 05:48 PM
4

Okay. Let's really parse this out. He went on a trip where he took dozens of photos of his naked daughter, then posted them onto a social media network for everyone to see, probably without the context of things like "her favorite dress gets messed up if she wears it in the car, so she insists on removing it" The picture of her jumping on the bed was clearly not obscene in any way, as she was facing the side, but a small amount of context changes the photo from "my daughter thinks this is gettin…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 05:43 PM
42

Well... Fuck Washington. It's one thing to not arrest the woman, it's another to just blatantly arrest the man, even when he is the only one with injuries.
/r/MensRights23/08/14 05:14 PM
3

By calling it "withdrawing consent after the fact" you are giving the benefit of the doubt that she is at least sincere in her feelings of being violated, and is not just trying to ruin a guy's life. It isn't always accurate at all, and should never be considered in a court.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 07:28 PM
1

An excellent point. It is what is supremely aggravating about "trigger warnings". It isn't saying "I have a problem with X", it's "X is going to piss you off, so I give you permission to fly off the handle." The person who can not hold or view a gun (Shion from the new Sword Art Online series, as a media example) is a rare person. You can not predict who will react that way. A similar child, under similar circumstances, could end up with a fear of banks, or loud noises, or blood, or men. Using a…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:33 PM
4

Giving them breast cancer is a little harsh.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:19 PM
1

For PTSD, specifically, it is because the trigger they receive is based on the trauma they endured. A person who watched a friend die from stepping on a mine might have no problem around guns, and a person who survived torture might have no problem swimming. But a person who was caught in a nasty firefight could fear guns, and a person who drowns would have trouble swimming. There is no single PTSD trigger because there is no single trauma.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:17 PM
2

Okay. When humanoid robots and puppets are first formed, they were outwardly nonhuman. You could tell them easily as an "other" and so any anthropomorphic features, like eyes, were endearing. But we kept going, making them look more and more lifelike. Eventually, you reach the Uncanny Valley, where they look very human, but your mind recognizes them as "other", either by a problem with the look (Children of the Corn) or a problem with how they act (Data and Lore from TNG). This increases the une…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 01:35 AM
4

Women are smarter than men? So, why is Barack the president?
/r/MensRights06/08/14 11:04 PM
2

Not just that kind of non combat role. They can be used for military training, as doctors or nurses, command positions, and recruiting, all with minimal safety risks. Doing so would appease the people who think that women should be kept out of harm's way while still creating an equality of service between men and women.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 12:02 PM
6

If you have already been disqualified for military service, or have disabilities that would disqualify you if you tried, you are exempted from the Draft. Also, I'd you ate over a certain age, 26 if I recall correctly.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 11:58 AM
9

That's just stupid. We would sacrifice to Mars.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 11:54 AM
2

Denied military enlistment EPTE. Sick it, Draft
/r/MensRights05/08/14 11:51 AM
23

I would have gone ridiculous. "As soon as a woman becomes funny, she grows a penis. It's a scientific fact."
/r/MensRights28/07/14 05:00 PM
1

You generally give permission to share the photos when you allow someone else to take them. For the "girlfriend nude" example, these are a special case where the girlfriend gives permission to the boyfriend to view them, but generally doesn't give permission to share them. A 3 year old can not give permission.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 12:51 PM
2

But not without permission.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 12:11 PM
2

We shouldn't prosecute false 911 calls at all, actually.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 03:52 AM
1

I hope to fuck that the state is at least smart enough to wait for the (likely) inevitable Supreme Court case that will come from this... And that the boy's lawyer is smart enough to bring it up.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 07:18 PM
1

That... had better be $1.50 for the cake, and not $150.00
/r/MensRights06/07/14 06:10 PM
5

No one had a problem when Chibi-Usa was turned into Black Lady during Sailor Moon.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 11:01 PM
1

I love that women can claim to be raped because someone leered at them.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 08:58 PM
1

If this boss had any brains, he would treat it the same.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 03:16 PM
5

Same thing happens with women's maternity leave. I would be counseling this guy to sue if he not only goes to jail for months, then gets out to have no job waiting for him.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 05:22 AM
3

That would only make firing him worse.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 05:04 AM
21

I think in this case, because the error was because of his employer, his job will be safe. I wouldn't want to be the boss that fired my employee because he went to jail over something I did.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 01:49 AM
1

The sad part being that even with the supposed low number of convictions in the feminist blog's math, there are an alarming number of false convictions.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 05:42 PM
10

I'm sure this is where you are going, but it needs to be said. When we are told not to protest for ourselves, because we are men, it is tired weights to our feet. When we are told that we can not question feminist points of view, however politely, then we are gagged. The only difference is that we as men are not even being asked "why" we think things are unfair.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 05:29 PM
6

She actually thinks we are playing devil's advocate when we say Rodgers was a whack job? That right there turned me on her.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 05:23 PM
8

Same thing happened to me. "All top-level comments must express a feminist point of view."
/r/MensRights12/06/14 04:34 AM
3

Hell, men make jokes like that partly to make fun of the misogyny that did exist in previous generations. A prime example is the scene from Futurama where the crew is stuck in the past and Leela asks to buy microwave. The salesman then shows off his top-of-the-line oven with a foot soaking tub, "because, as a woman, you'll be standing behind it so much."
/r/MensRights12/06/14 04:31 AM
3

"Shit Reddit Says" It is supposed to be about pointing out horrible comments that somehow got praise, but really it's just a circlejerk. Even more than /r/circlejerk
/r/MensRights12/06/14 04:25 AM
2

Hey, isn't that Val, from the Groovy Gang?
/r/MensRights09/06/14 10:38 PM
3

So... How pissed off are gay people at these guys? I mean, it's a huge part of the problem, getting people to admit homosexuality is not a choice, and these people at least are pretending to be gay as a choice?
/r/MensRights09/06/14 10:36 PM
6

Especially years after the fact.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 10:12 PM
10

What does that have to do with this? Is sending innocent men to jail for rape going to teach boys to respect women? No. It will teach them to fear and hate women. And when you fear and hate women, then you're more likely to become a rapist.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 10:10 PM
1

Maybe the fact that my brother is a liberal douchebag made it easy for me to still be okay with a person even if we don't hold the same mindset.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 09:44 PM
1

Wil Wheaton claimed that Elliot Rodger killed a whole bunch of people because of male patriarchy before this? Or did you mean "not exactly" the same thing?
/r/MensRights31/05/14 09:17 PM
1

You don't just stop loving someone because they are wrong. Normally, he is a fun and charming person. This time, he came off like an idiot. Maybe, just maybe, he'll learn why he is wrong.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 09:07 PM
1

Should probably read my whole comment.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 08:40 PM
18

If I find the cure for AIDS, and lie and say that I had AIDS but cured it, then my "cure" is rather untrustworthy. I can only prove my cure works by actually curing AIDS. People gave her money because she claimed she was a victim of sexual slavery, when she wasn't. Yes, some of that money went to actually help people, but how much of it went directly to her?
/r/MensRights29/05/14 01:33 PM
1

I linked to his name this time in the hopes that he read that.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 11:01 AM
15

/u/wil I love you. I love your work. But you are so wrong when you say that we are misogynists. We, as a group, don't hate women. We don't feel entitled to sleep with women. We don't think we are better than women. We are fighting for true equality of the genders, pure and simple. We think that two coworkers of the same skill should be paid the same amount for the same amount of work, regardless of gender or race or orientation or any other discriminatory aspect. We see institutional oppression …
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:55 PM
1

It is supposed to be.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 11:04 PM
1

Except, we are not attacking the woman. We are attacking the judge and saying the woman is getting off far too lightly.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 11:38 AM
1

This is exactly the one to scream about because it is so blatant. It isn't just that the judge is being nice because she is a woman. He is telling us that he is being nice because she is a woman.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 02:42 AM
2

Justice does not necessarily equate to jail time. This woman had the mental faculties to know that an inebriated child will consent to sexual activity, as well as procure those drugs for that use. If she was such a person that has too low of an IQ, then she would have a Guardian to prevent her from doing this. Again, maybe she isn't a pedophile as much as she was infatuated with this one person, but we can't just assume that. The judge specifically mentioned activity that for any man would be us…
/r/MensRights24/05/14 08:29 PM
2

learned to type your countries fucked Way to go on proving your superior intellect. But insults aside, I can see the probability of reoffending being a case for leniency. Though, I disagree with your assessment of her as "special needs". Neither of us have any proof that this woman was retarded, and my 33 year old self still finds myself drawn to pastimes associated with younger people, like video games and trading cards. I am adult enough to know that I shouldn't have sex with a kid that lives …
/r/MensRights24/05/14 07:24 PM
4

Okay. Let's try this a little differently. Which specific circumstances do you believe warranted allowing this woman to not receive jail time? The fact that she has kids? Some of them were made with the victim. The opinion that she had no malice? Many convicted pedophiles claim they love their victims. What did you personally see that begged leniency?
/r/MensRights24/05/14 06:31 PM
1

Oh, but that's because she genuinely loved him... If I loved someone, I wouldn't feel the need to get them drunk and high to have sex.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 06:25 PM
4

This probably wasn't meant to be a scientific study, but a demonstration of statistical data. Most women who get physical with their husbands in public get cheered on. Most men who get physical with their wives in public have someone step up and intervene.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 12:52 PM
2

I think the blonde sitting behind them was there both times.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 12:49 PM
3

This particular guy was a schizophrenic who was compelled to act out sexually.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 04:00 PM
2

You know, I wouldn't be too mad at the guy. He knew you as an inmate, but was trying to strike up a friendly conversation with you anyway. He knew you were not a "bad person" and was reaching out to you. Maybe he thought the term "ex-con" was too offensive.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 03:57 PM
1

He assaulted a clerk, then left New York in violation of his parole.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 03:50 PM
3

Then I would have sued the airline, the air marshal, and the stewardess herself.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 12:13 AM
5

See, what I don't get is if their policy is to place a child next to an empty seat, or next to a woman, why can't their computer system just assign the child to a "valid" seat in the first place?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 11:51 PM
1

Honestly, I'd be happy to settle for a discount.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 08:00 PM
5

You insensitive bastard, my dog was murdered by shitlords.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 01:07 PM
5

Which is funny, because If rape really was a trigger for you, you would hate people who use rape in a glib manner.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 12:01 PM
6

Why do you assume David is a man? Maybe her parents named her that for a reason?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 12:00 PM
239

I would have told the stewardess that if I am being inconvenienced by being forced to move, then I should be moved to First Class. Otherwise, I would demand a refund.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 11:50 AM
1

Damn, I thought it was okay to masturbate on the bus.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 06:11 PM
11

I do want to point out that part of the commentary of Chicago was in the fate of the foreign girl, the only one actually executed by the state, who was innocent of the crime. The story was about the corruption of the legal system at the time, the fact that a sympathetic woman could get away with murder, the crass attitude of the lawyer to basically have his client raped in order to get her pregnant... It would have been seen as horrifying if the genders were swapped, but as a period piece and an…
/r/MensRights12/05/14 08:33 PM
2

The Italian Job
/r/MensRights12/05/14 08:26 PM
5

these kids can still be saved. If we went in last month, these girls could have been saved before this occurred. If we went in 3 months ago, at least some of the boys would have lived. But, then again, who cares about the boys? They're dead anyway, right?
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:13 AM
3

You can try to bring the killers to justice.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:11 AM
3

No. It is a form of protest against pay inequality and affirmative action.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:58 AM
5

The point of this is to show how unfair it is to charge people differently, and thus pay people differently, because of their race, creed, gender, or other invalid factors. Note the hashtag, "I am worth more", meaning they don't believe that women should be charged less. The problem with this kind of protest is that it will only target the white men as 'unfair', and women and minorities who don't already disapprove of such inequalities won't change their minds. A better form of protest would be …
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:55 AM
5

I'm queer because I act inappropriately at times for a laugh.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:48 AM
11

I'm sorry, but sexism is hating or mistreating a person based on gender. Power has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 07:06 PM
5

Voilence - using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 11:03 PM
5

Yes it can. But I am objecting to calling it "violence" not whether it is right or wrong.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 09:43 PM
1

Better categorization is good.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 09:29 PM
4

I do believe this category is referring to the proverbial construction workers' catcalling.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 09:19 PM
3

for a man to be forcibly raped he has to be penetrated... Let's explore that claim, shall we? If a woman is considered raped when she is coerced into sex, then coercion to force a man into a sex act is also rape. Men are capable of getting a physical arousal response (that is, an erection) during times of fear and anger. Therefore, the fact that he was hard is not permission to have sex, any more than a woman getting wet. Strength is not always a factor in rape. Female rapists, who as a rule are…
/r/MensRights30/04/14 09:00 PM
8

If I could change one thing, it would be stopping people from calling "unwanted sexual attention with no physical contact" violence. I don't rightly care if someone called you the dirtiest things in the book, it isn't violence.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 08:45 PM
1

Exactly. The differing circumstances between different kinds of rape mean that we must treat individual rape cases differently. The guy that got drunk and didn't stop when his girlfriend said "no", maybe doesn't deserve jail time, but if he does is should be maybe as high as 5 years. The guy that breaks into a stranger's house and rapes the guy there with a broken beer bottle? I'd give 20 minimum plus the time for Breaking & Entering and Attempted Murder
/r/MensRights26/04/14 02:44 PM
7

Okay. I can understand where she is coming from. There are different degrees of rape. For example, the person who rapes women who are sleeping versus the person who kidnaps a girl and ties her up in a windowless van and rapes her repeatedly over the course of a week. To punish the latter crime more severely is not to lessen the impact of the former, but to show that the latter is more heinous of a crime. Whether or not the woman is physically harmed, whether she was aware of the crime as it happ…
/r/MensRights25/04/14 06:10 PM
2

Or is it that the jail/combat/custody thing is making more single mothers. Obviously this. Husbands are sent off into war zones even today, it doesn't need to be World War 3. And no individual woman complains about getting custody of their child, but they do complain as a group of the high instances of single mothers, which include these cases.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 02:40 PM
2

Okay. Men are sent to jail, fight in combat, and have children taken from them more often then women, then women complain about having to be working single mothers. One follows the other. If we didn't have the inequality in combat, in judicial sentencing, and in custody cases, women would be statistically more likely to not be burdened as a single working parent.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:24 PM
0

What we need to be showing is that there are injustices against each gender in the world. If we can show some complimentary inequalities that can be fixed with a single change, that may be best.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 11:30 AM
3

Well, that's because succeeding is positive.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 10:35 AM
3

I agree. Sleeping Beauty was easily one of the best films out there. I would have left out the boob window on Male-leficent's outfit, though.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 05:39 PM
1

Very creative, but can you explain to me why they would have bold-typed that one word, except to emphasize that they meant that only women could avail themselves of the program? And because only women can request a stop, it would be up to the bus driver to determine if you are a woman, and thus eligible to use the program. If you are a man identifying as a woman, and the driver thinks you are a man, you can be denied. If you are a woman and the driver thinks you look like a crossdressing man, yo…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 11:00 AM
14

Why else would they have bold-typed that one word? No other word on the poster was printed in that manner, saying that they put deliberate focus onto the fact that women, and no other group, were the focus of the program. But what about Post-Op Transexuals? Men who underwent surgery to become women? Many of them are still noticeably men, even though they are legally women. What about Pre-Op Transexuals? Men who are in the process of transitioning into becoming women? Legally, they are still men,…
/r/MensRights13/04/14 03:29 PM
117

They even bold-typed the word "women" on the poster as if it were a deliberate fuck you to men in the area.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 06:19 AM
2

That's impossible!
/r/MensRights10/04/14 04:11 PM
1

Your comment is unpopular, and yet it remains visible.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 03:15 PM
4

Those chicken fries are good, though.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 02:38 PM
6

A great woman once said, "Well, you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't."
/r/MensRights06/04/14 05:50 PM
5

And that is a true shame.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 08:34 PM
3

You misunderstand. They use them because they are seen as weaker. They go through their lives as the "weaker sex" and so they subconsciously believe they need the weapon to do any damage. You are right that women who abuse want to do damage. My kid brother was repeatedly hit with a frying pan by his very abusive girlfriend (he was good at dodging, she mainly hit his hand), but men don't do it "just to blow off steam". When a man attacks a woman, he subconsciously wishes to not be caught doing it…
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:44 PM
4

I don't object. Feel... me any time /u/YetAnotherCommenter
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:27 PM
13

How about BARE, the Brotherhood for Advancement of Rights and Equality?
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:23 PM
5

Many women who attack their husband or boyfriend use tools like frying pans, kitchen knives, or other weapons, primarily because they are seen as weaker in society. Men generally abuse women with fists, at least at first when the woman has a chance to leave. But there are few domestic violence shelters that will even take in a teenage boy, let alone a full grown man, regardless of the situations.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:21 PM
4

White pride is not inherently negative. You can be proud of your white heritage, and the achievements of white men and women, as long as you are not belittling the achievements of other races.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:17 PM
1

I'll feed you legal advice to resell to others for $8 a month.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 01:39 PM
1

But that's the thing, an actual child wouldn't tell a strange man he just met on the internet to meet him and bring condoms and candy.
/r/MensRights27/03/14 12:00 AM
1

Right, but attempted rape is separate from assault, even if assault occurs during the attempt.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 03:09 PM
1

Well, attempting rape is a worse crime than simple assault. Assault includes something as stupid as me hitting you over an argument. If I use a beer bottle in that fight, it's assault with a deadly weapon, even if there was no intent to kill. If I hold you down and rip your clothes off, thinking you are a woman and I'm gonna have sex with you whether you want it or not, that is attempted rape.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 01:43 PM
2

It depends on the jurisdiction. In most states, the attempt to commit a crime is still a crime, generally with a lesser punishment then if you successfully commit the same crime. In Sweden, who knows.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 01:08 PM
1

That's why they use third-party companies to do the luring, like Dateline. Since they are not agents of the police, it isn't legally entrapment. Basically, if you are doing anything that would be considered illegal in real life, and your partner asks to meet you, you should say no.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 01:05 PM
1

To be fair to Chris Hansen and the idiots at NBC, if you talk to someone who says they are 12, and show up at their house with wine coolers and condoms, and don't immediately see the young person at the door and say, "Hey, I thought you were pretending"... Then yes, your attractions are such that they might be prosecutable. The question is how many of them would have would have acted out their desires if confronted by an actual child?
/r/MensRights26/03/14 12:56 PM
2

Yeah, but the guy in the OP did intend to rape someone.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 12:24 PM
2

Which is really funny, when you consider this post is sexist against women as much as it is sexist against men. For the men, it's the old horny or hungry argument. For the women, it's "Women are baby factories" or "make me a sandwich, woman"
/r/MensRights22/03/14 04:05 PM
4

Also, that willingness to negotiate may be a huge portion of why men seem to be paid more than women. An employer will be able to get away with a lower wage every time if you don't negotiate.
/r/MensRights21/03/14 03:47 PM
5

That's just it. If this was just a joke, it isn't shocking enough to cross the line a second time. If this was done in the style of a 5 year old, saying that "mommy told me this before she smashed my grapes", then you can argue that they were going for dark humor.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 03:32 PM
9

I exist because my parents had sex. But that has nothing to do with this conversation. And I know what they believe because I can read. People like things on Facebook for three reasons. First, is that they are lazy idiots that click like on anything their friends and family like. Second, is visibility, and those likes are generally followed by comments or followup posts about how much they dislike the status. Third, is because they like and agree with the status itself. As for who gives a shit, …
/r/MensRights18/03/14 01:04 PM
5

It was either a feminist or someone who was trying to make a post to appeal to feminists in an attempt to spur conversation about radical feminism. If it was the first, then my logic holds 100%, as it would be wrong to post this. If it was the second, then the logic still holds because the MRA argument that it is wrong to post such a thing is still part of the discussion that results. The message itself is abhorrent, and without visual or contextual clues that it was made in jest, one must assum…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:55 PM
9

I do believe that you are the one dealing with ad hominem attacks. But you claim that feminists are not guilty of a toxic culture, but that is precisely what the original post is an example of. Just like it would be wrong to degrade women, it is wrong to degrade men.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:38 PM
2

If it is not okay to make my post, why is it okay to make the original?
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:16 PM
9

The difference being that comedians generally don't believe the shit they spew out. 99% of the people that like this post for reasons other than visibility think that "their man"had to be molded.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:07 PM
24

Okay. Would you be okay if we posted "Women are like wheat, they have to be ground into dirt, beaten and left in the kitchen for hours before you can enjoy breakfast with them."?
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:03 PM
2

I basically had to go there, when he repeated accused me of having asperger's...
/r/MensRights16/03/14 01:52 AM
4

That's a god damned lie. Vinyl Scratch is Best Pony.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 08:53 PM
6

Seriously, that is the way you expect to win a debate? Edit - This is how I am seeing you right now
/r/MensRights15/03/14 08:11 PM
6

You just don't get that it isn't the victim's responsibility. It is the bullies'.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 07:55 PM
8

So, basically, you are one of the people who bullies others, and you are not speaking out this way because of any perceived disruption in the class, but because you think the kid is a "little weirdo"
/r/MensRights15/03/14 07:39 PM
5

Dude. I'm trying to be patient here, but you are making it really hard. You are the only one suggesting that I mean taking time out of the class to teach about the cartoon. I am talking about using classroom decoration, something all teachers have to do anyway, to teach a lesson in respecting your fellow students. Not with a lecture, or with word problems or tests, or sitting down and watching the show during class. It would "waste" about a minute of time, because no elementary school bully is g…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 07:18 PM
4

That is why you don't tell them not to bully the kid. You show them it is all right to enjoy the cartoon. If you treat him with respect, and show that the behavior he exhibits (carrying a backpack with a cartoon character on it) is normal, then the rest of the class will pick up on that. If you ostracise the kid, you'll just give him a complex. And don't get me wrong, I am saying that telling him that it is his own fault for liking ponies is ostracism. Who knows, maybe by showing a little unders…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:52 PM
5

Aspie You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Again, I point out "failure to react appropriately" as a major symptom you seem to be displaying. Seriously, get help. But you misunderstand my meaning when I say "embrace them", I mean do little things, like place a pony toy on your desk, or a wall calender, or some other easier seen but unobtrusive object, as a teacher who wants to work on this. During class, you do your normal work with the kids. I don't mean to …
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:31 PM
9

You are the one showing a lack of empathy, long winded speeches, not recognizing the feelings of others, and reacting inappropriately, and I have asperger's? Someone is projecting a little bit. And my point of using those examples was to show how wrong it is to blame the victim. The kid in this story was a victim. Period. You can make the argument that cartoon character book bags should not be allowed in general because any of them could be seen as an excuse to bully others. But so does having a…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 05:56 PM
11

You seem to be purposefully misunderstanding what I am saying. I am saying that by telling a child that he is not allowed to bring a My Little Pony bookbag, when everyone else gets to bring bags of their favorite shows or games, you are saying that it is inappropriate to have a boy like a girl's show. To a kid, it can be traumatizing to be told, "You shouldn't like this, you'll get picked on. Why don't you like Ninja Turtles like the other boys?" You forget that the school is singling him out as…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 04:48 PM
14

I did read the article, but I do not agree with this Bully Trigger nonsense. The only way for a kid to prevent getting bullied is by being a bully. And yes, I was bullied as a child, because I wore glasses and didn't do well in sports. Would you Institute a ban on glasses and excelling in school because those trigger bullying? And yes, I do enjoy the current My Little Pony show. But i am sure that you understand that it is okay to like a female protagonist in a show. Now, he may not have been bu…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 03:57 PM
24

I am sorry you feel that way, Clint. But a bully is a bully. And if this kid wasn't carrying MLP around, they'd have just bullied him over his shoes, or his shirt, or his physique, or his nose, or some other perceived flaw. Unless the school is going to ban GIJoe, Transformers, or other cartoon characters, including girls' apparel, then this ban is stupid.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 01:35 PM
2

I agree. My point was not to say "teach children not to rape" but "if you teach them right, they won't rape" The same goes for your daughters. Basically, be a good parent and these idiots have no ammunition to use against you.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 10:25 PM
2

You teach your son better by teaching him to respect himself and to give respect the same as he expects.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 04:16 PM
2

To put it simply, it is like... Do not think about elephants. Don't think about their rough gray skin, or their long trunks, or tusks. Don't think about the way they trumpet, or their floppy ears or the small tail. Don't think about them in a circus, balancing on a large ball. I guarantee you, that person will be thinking about elephants.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 02:38 PM
2

I would have had problems reading that sign, if it weren't for 3 years of high school French and a lot of independent language study.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 08:42 PM
1

Sounds like a chance for a class-action lawsuit.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 08:40 PM
3

This attitude should work
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:11 PM
2

Cut him some slack, he's not good in English.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:06 PM
14

So, when is International Men's Day? If they say "every other day of the year", do I get to ride the bus for free?
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:04 PM
2

I linked the wikipedia page in a different thread.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 04:47 PM
2

That we are too interested in stopping one form of violent crime over another.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 04:23 PM
2

This will provide a good reason to doubt even the 1 in 5 statistic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
/r/MensRights02/03/14 03:51 PM
1

Perhaps it is because there is less stigma against death compared to rape that "kill" is used more colloquially than "rape"
/r/MensRights02/03/14 03:46 PM
15

Isn't the 1 in 4 stat including situations where the girl consents while drunk or where the girl consents and changes her mind during or after the fact?
/r/MensRights02/03/14 03:44 PM
1

Looking over your comment history, you seem to have the idiotic idea that the term 'dick' is not a sexist slur while 'cunt' is. Both of these terms are vulgar (meaning colloquial) terms for their gender's private anatomy. At the very least, the term 'dick' is used like the term 'faggot', in reference to perceived negative aspects of the group in which it is applied. So, I ask you, why do you insist on using such terms in your official duties as a moderator for a subreddit about speaking freely?
/r/MensRights16/02/14 08:21 PM
9

He was questioned without his attorney present? How many Amendments are they gonna break on this one case alone?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 03:13 AM
0

It would finally worth it to find a wife.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 06:22 PM
21

Or the words 'she believes'
/r/MensRights12/02/14 06:16 PM
1

I highly doubt there are many companies that pay differently for women and men directly, but that apparent discrepancy is likely caused by typically women's professions requiring less time than men's professions. To give an example, teaching which generally only has 35 hour weeks, with the work done at home not considered.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:57 AM
7

I think it deserves more study.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:53 AM
14

Important note from the first article as a tl; dr Women who work between 30-39 hours a week tend to earn more than male counterparts.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:51 AM
8

He likely doesn't watch it, but gets the impression that the show features the Family Guy method of workplace relations. Namely a firm, open palm slap on the behind.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:46 AM
5

Of course not, but there is no evidence to the contrary, either.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:42 AM
5

Agreed. If the father chooses to opt out, he loses all parental rights.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 02:25 PM
3

Appropriate - describing an absurd situation between fictional characters (picture porky pig raping elmer fudd) or impossible situations with a real person (yeah, wouldn't it be great if Tom Cruise got bent over by the Statue of Liberty and raped with his own dick?). The shocking nature of such jokes works with the absurdity to make it okay. Inappropriate - telling a rape joke to someone who was raped
/r/MensRights24/01/14 01:26 AM
3

Okay. Problem I am seeing with the story. The news showed a medical article regarding undescended testicles. Doctors did not give any direct details, all was given from the mother.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 04:31 AM
2

Okay. If women attempt suicide more than men, but men outnumber successful attempts 3 to 1, then the obvious point is that women suck at killing themselves. Or they aren't really trying to do so.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 06:11 AM
3

To be fair to the Idiot-in-Chief, the country was doing this long before he came on the scene.
/r/MensRights24/12/13 07:48 PM
4

A year later? And they acted on it without proof? This is why colleges shouldn't handle criminal actions, and should have referred her to the police. No DA is going to attempt a trial when there is no evidence.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 03:13 AM
10

Important part of that article. She wanted to produce a 3-dimensional plastic "paper doll" with an adult body and a wardrobe of fabric clothing, but her husband and Mr. Matson thought parents would not buy their children a doll with a voluptuous figure. Meaning his input was to make it less sexually appealing.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:38 PM
4

A gynecologist working on an anal cancer study is basically as good/legal an anal-qualified doctor working on the same study. Yes. That is absolutely true. The muscle tissues of the anus are exactly the same between men and women, and similar enough to cervical tissue that the effects from HPV are similar. The Board, however, was threatening to pull her specialization if she didn't pull out of the study and stop treating men.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 12:49 AM
1

that is always enough. Except for here.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 12:45 AM
1

If the preventative nature of the testing and treatment were so minimal, why would she have over 100 male patients, as opposed to them going to the local proctologist? The OB/GYN board offers no other reason for denying this, except that they are supposed to only treat women.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 12:43 AM
2

The reason these doctors are electing to treat these men is because they are uniquely equipped to handle HPV-caused cancer screening and treatments on cervical (surrounding an oriface) muscle tissue (such as the well-known female cervix and male and female anuses)
/r/MensRights24/11/13 12:41 AM
12

Every time I see one of these, I must point out that most of them are protests designed to show the unfair treatment of men compared to women in college acceptance. Many times they will splinter it off and have different pricing for Asians, Natives, Hispanics, and Blacks. It is, in those cases, a positive thing. You will only know by talking to them why they are doing this.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 03:53 AM
1

No, It is like saying the man who kicks a girl in the stomach didn't intend to rupture her spleen and kill her. It is still a deliberate act. It still causes violent injury. But it is a slightly lesser crime because he didn't intend to kill.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 08:36 PM
1

Whoosh
/r/MensRights26/10/13 03:37 PM
1

the 68% figure that you are giving, is that based on local, state, or federal trial rates, or a combination of them all? I would assume that the FBI and the US Attorneys are not going to just let this one drop.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:19 PM
0

Okay. I'm starting to get a little angry that you guys are not understanding what I am meaning. I am saying that she meant to grab him, probably even in that manner. I am also saying that she probably did not intend to do bodily harm when doing so. The damage was an accident, as evidenced by the lame and awkward attempt at repairing it. The action that caused the damage was deliberate, which makes it still a crime. But, someone suggested that it would be just as if a man had cut the ovaries out …
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:16 PM
0

I am entertaining the possibility that she meant to grab him, But did not intend to nearly castrate him. Things are not always black and White.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 03:07 AM
-2

I would refer to you, in many ways, as number 2.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 12:37 AM
-2

You and I seem to differ greatly in our definitions of the word idiot.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 12:12 AM
-2

stifle conversations stop doing it You don't even see the irony in this, do you?
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:42 PM
0

Well, she might not have, I do not know... though super glue... But anyway, getting to a girl's ovaries requires more trauma, as they are safely protected within the body. A person, either gender, doing this to a boy is monstrous. A person cutting out a little girl's ovaries is a completely different level of evil.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:26 PM
-1

I don't think that a sexual assault charge would be warranted, plus it would be harder to prove that she intended to commit a sexual act. If a prosecutor does not believe he can win a case, He won't prosecute on it. Plus, they haven't even done the bail hearing, they may add more charges anyway.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:17 PM
0

Going with that logic, I should post Transformers on /r/mylittlepony because they're both Hasbro.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:14 PM
0

It says she was angry with him, but does not say why. Perhaps the kid was out of control and she simply grabbed the first thing she could get a hold of. I don't know those facts, but unless the boy accuses her of actual sexual abuse, the FBI and US Attorneys are going to fight the cases they can proof beyond doubt. Specifically that this monster-mom grabbed the child hard enough to do major damage, then used a chemical substance that was never meant for use on the skin to fix it, and sent him to…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:11 PM
0

It says in the article that she was angry with the son, not the father. If that was a lie, surely someone would have said something before.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:03 PM
-1

A laceration is not surgery at all. But, let's get back to the topic at hand, is this case directly related to men's rights? The answer is no. This woman had the child taken away without the normal red tape associated with CPS. The child was given into the custody of hos father without question. The mother is in county lockup awaiting bail, which will likely not be granted. This woman is getting no special treatment.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:58 PM
-1

If you are getting glossy-eyed at the difference between a laceration and amateur surgery, maybe I'm talking to the wrong audience. I thought we had intelligent people here.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:37 PM
4

Directed anger is fine, if directed at the right party. This woman is one that deserves ire. But all the original commenter asked was why this is a men's rights issue, and was immediately greeted with obscenities. It isn't conducive to conversation, and certainly won't convince the commenter that you are right (i.e. that it is an MRM)
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:34 PM
-2

Note that in this story, father was immediately given custody of the son. I will grant you this acts as a perfect example of why women aren't always the better parent, but we shouldn't be about more than posting things that are going to cause misogyny. Women are not our enemies.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:24 PM
0

Even sexual assault can be referred to as "assault" in media. This is normal, as it is a type of assault. But when you say "sexual assault" It generally means molestation. As for the sentencing possibilities, you are going on pure speculation that she will somehow get away with this. Could she potentially get out in 2 because they need to make room for more inmates? Maybe. But they do that for men all the time, too. Why are you assuming she has a sexual deviancy? She grabs the kid's scrotum. Thi…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 08:41 PM
2

All I am saying is that this woman was not intending to commit a sexual crime. The only reason this is being brought up as an MRM is because of a perception that a similar crime (it is hard to say what a similar situation would be in this case) perpetrated by a man would be prosecuted as a sex offense. One analogy that was given would be a man removing the ovaries of a little girl, but that could never be considered an accident, and likely would be prosecuted as attempted murder. Why? Because to…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 08:24 PM
1

Minir differences in placement? You need to cut into a woman, perform surgery if you will, to get at ovaries. There is absolutely no way to accidentally do that, unless you were doing something else that was horrible. And yes, that is what she did. I am not defending her actions, but it is not the same as cutting a girl's ovaries out.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 08:06 PM
-2

Honestly, that probably deserves more because there are physiological differences between the girl's ovaries and the boy's scrotum. The woman in this case genuinely seems to have done this on accident, as evidenced by the ill-thought method of repair. A man can not accidentally remove a girl's ovaries. Intent is important. A more accurate analogy were to be if a father spanked his daughter so hard that she was bleeding, so he plugs the would with duct tape.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 07:58 PM
2

What is wrong with you guys today? Have to cuss about everything? I get it, you are mad at this woman. But this woman abused a child. This is not systematic (like circumcision), this is not discriminatory (she didn't go off on the kid because he was a boy, it was because he was misbehaving). The government took immediate action against her, including seeking to deny bail. Calling this a men's rights issue only marginalizes other cases of abuse. This is a child abuse issue, not an MRM.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 07:28 PM
0

The problem is, this guy has a point. It is not a men's rights issue. The woman involved was not under investigation, was immediately arrested and they are going to throw the book at her. The father has been given custody of the victim. There is no special treatment for the woman being given at all. This simply isn't an MRM issue. It does need to be seen, and plastered onto /r/WTF /r/news /r/sanantonio and /r/texas , but it shouldn't be here. And frankly, I don't think that people like "fuku" is…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 06:59 PM
1

Maybe e-lynchmobbed. They went online and hung his avatar.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 08:23 AM
1

I have seen some Homestuckers get really pissy when asked what their costume is from... But most of them are not professionals. Cara (Power Girl) is a professional, and knows better than to get exasperated if someone doesn't know the character.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 11:25 PM
0

You are delusional.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 01:04 PM
1

Check again. Most of your posts are negative. +4 is more than -9
/r/MensRights20/10/13 08:21 PM
1

Think what you want. Voting shows more agree with my position than yours, but also that everyone else has lost interest in this thread, and frankly so have I.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 07:29 PM
1

No, you totally ignored everything I had to say.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 07:11 PM
1

4chan Well, there's your problem right there.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 06:08 PM
1

Okay. You are now going out of your way to not listen. Enjoy yourself, I won't let you ruin my day.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 03:19 PM
1

I already did explain the difference between them. Among other things, models using the definitions available online, are either a person who job it is to show how clothing looks when worn (runway model) or acts as the artistic basis for a painter or photographer. A professional cosplayer, on the other hand, dresses up as different characters as part of his or her own performance. It is for the crowd that they dress up, and for the fans that they take photos. Modeling is a but a small part of th…
/r/MensRights20/10/13 02:23 PM
1

It isn't because or in spite of any perceived ad hominem attack. You truly are being close-minded when you say that a cosplayer is nothing more than a model, with your only concession being that they might do more, but they're still just models. I am not trying to be rude when I say you aren't opening your mind to a new idea, that is that a cosplayer is not exactly a model. I'm trying to get you to understand the difference. Maybe they are picking up on that. Maybe they don't like the fact that …
/r/MensRights20/10/13 02:03 PM
1

I wouldn't give reparations to blacks, either. Free handouts, whether it be from undeserved promotion in jobs and education or simply giving money, doesn't make responsible people. All you are really doing is punishing the white children for being white, as they are the only ones to lose points in the system.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 01:00 PM
1

It isn't just in Uni that they get Affirmative Action, it is in standardized testing all through a school career.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 12:46 PM
0

Asians have a higher likelihood of succeeding in school, due to the parents pushing them harder than white children, but Affirmative Action still gives them extra points on tests because they are not white.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 10:39 AM
1

Sorry, dude, but more people are agreeing with me than you.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 09:27 AM
6

That doesn't make it better, guy. My experience with them is quite positive.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 04:36 PM
3

PG really sold herself to me at the RealmsCon convention this year. I was just looking for my brother and his GF after the display contest, and amid the throng of people trying to pile out of the room, she passes by me, sees my My Little Kaiju t-shirt, and comments on it. If she was just a shill, she would never have done this, as I likely wouldn't have noticed her on the way out.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 03:13 PM
2

I am sorry that you aren't open-minded enough to see the difference in two similar professions.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 02:12 PM
3

I never said she was an actress. She is a performance artist, if you don't like the term cosplayer. The fact is, she is more than just a model.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:44 PM
0

6 : a person or thing that serves as a pattern for an artist ; especially : one who poses for an artist 9 : one who is employed to display clothes or other merchandise While she does serve as a photographer's model, the merchandise that she is displaying is herself. Meaning her brand, of course. She is most decidedly not for sale. The difference being that she is a performer, with her modelling work as a method of promoting her performance. If she were to be only dressing up like Power Girl to s…
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:11 PM
5

Cosplaying is more than modelling, though. It borders on acting, in the fact that a good cosplayer not only looks the part, but takes on mannerisms of the character they are portraying. Yes, cosplay is a type of modelling, but it would be like saying a Humvee is the same as a Camaro, because they are both cars.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 12:56 PM
4

Because I know of her from the convention scene more than anything else. I mean... She's Power Girl.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 11:49 AM
9

Specifically, the more Facebook likes on the comment in question, the more likely that legislators will see that it is an important issue. She is planning on speaking to the AZ legislature regarding this matter.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 11:48 AM
31

She is far from the histrionic bitch you are imagining. Seriously, over the past two weeks, she's earned mad respect from me, not just for this, but for how she interacts with her fans.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 04:42 AM
28

I know! And she really cares about all her fans.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 02:34 AM
0

So, no one has a problem with tangible recreating Abbey Road, or My Little Pony doing it, or any of the innumerable times it was used for pure marketing bullshit, but a band who already enjoys a similar level of popularity to the Beatles paying homage to the band that paved the way for their career isn't allowed? Edit: I don't even like the Beatles. But I can see that the use of the Abbey Road cover in this manner is an homage and not trying to be a replacement.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 06:50 PM
6

To be fair... they were quoting Liam and how he felt regarding the incident. The quotations around vulnerable is proper. It just makes it able to be seen as "he said he was vulnerable, but he probably liked it".
/r/MensRights14/10/13 06:47 PM
1

Bazinga.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:42 PM
7

Scorch and salt that earth. Get vindictive on her, and make sure everyone knows what she really wants.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:24 PM
3

I feel for you. Though I am sure that shows like "Say Yes to the Dress" are deliberately put on to play close to when most people get home from work, to boost marriages.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:05 PM
1

Frankly, if you even think that a prenuptial agreement is necessary, don't marry her.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:02 PM
1

Exactly. We don't have both sides of the story, so we should hold our overall judgement.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 01:33 AM
1

It would require rather specific circumstances, for sure, but I will not venture to make any sort of sweeping generalization in that regard.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 12:37 AM
0

Oh, of course. I am not trying to show women as weak by that, but I was bringing the drinking analogy to a head. If you pressure someone to drink, there is little problem, because having something to drink is not, in general, a problem. It only becomes a problem if they hurt someone while drunk. But when you pressure someone to have sex, it is different. I mean, seriously, if you ask a girl 20 times for sex, and you keep asking over and over again, then do you really think that she wants to have…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 12:34 AM
2

You know, I will agree that we can not know the whole story if we only get one point of view.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:42 PM
1

You know what, call me progressive here, but if you are hounding a girl for sex and she only says yes to shut you up, then you probably should feel bad about it. Really, this case is more along the lines of you not wanting to drink, but then, completely unbroken by your friend, you throw back some tequila.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:39 PM
-3

But hopefully not too many that we can say the sex offender registry is filled with innocent people.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:34 PM
1

I hope you learned quickly on her.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:32 PM
3

No. He is not forgiven just because he's drunk. I find it disgusting that s/He even jokingly advocated for mandatory systematic male birth control.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 11:16 PM
2

But that's the problem, the government has no way to prevent sex from occurring, unless they go full Big Brother and watch us in every interaction with other people.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 11:12 PM
7

Not all of them, Texas allows a 3 year are difference regardless of the older person's age. Basically it allows HS Seniors to be with Freshmen without worry. Edit- we had that rule for a long time now.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 11:08 PM
7

No, I meant this one, which they try to pass off as a joke, but obviously is not.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 09:11 PM
13

To be fair, men are rarely bombers as well. Most people have never bombed a single thing in their lives.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 08:53 PM
20

Any news on the group "Castrate and Decapitate the Misogynist Pigs"?
/r/MensRights25/09/13 08:51 PM
24

How the Hell is a call to mutilate and murder (in that order) men not considered gender-based hate speech?
/r/MensRights24/09/13 12:52 PM
1

Can't find the clip, but here is the episode
/r/MensRights22/09/13 02:34 PM
11

They all agree that a man can rape a man. They just don't agree that a woman can rape a man.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 01:56 PM
2

It implies a long-term, closeted, homosexual relationship between two men, one of whom is being supremely pressured to continue it by a psychopath. Think Peter Griffin and that bull from Family Guy...
/r/MensRights21/09/13 01:55 PM
-1

You don't cry out, "what did I do to deserve this" when you are doing anything willingly.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 01:45 PM
6

Not just men. It is used in any case that "who" should be used in that context People that like X Women that see X Children that do X It has nothing to do with men. Now if the same artist uses "women who read" instead of "women that read", then you would have a point.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 01:48 PM
6

No. She said that stuff and the men that love it While it is more grammatically correct to say men who love it, "that" is colloquially used in many areas without any slight intended. No, the problem with this image is the idea of stereotyping men as only wanting Barbie doll girls, based on images of women in comics. Not a single one of them complains about harlequin novels.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 01:23 PM
34

Just like all lobbyists.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 09:15 PM
6

Basically, it's not the greatest song in the world. It's just a tribute.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 07:05 PM
18

I'm not even a Who fan, but I like that reaction. It's quite truthful and gives hope to all those out there playing the guitar with their friends. That with the right creativity, and a bit of practice, you can be a musician.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 07:03 PM
1

Does this mean we can call attempted murder when someone kicks us in the nuts?
/r/MensRights01/08/13 10:07 AM
5

H...how? How in the hell did he die from having his testicles compressed? Just how long were they being squeezed, and why wasn't anyone doing anything about it? There is just so many questions about this...
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:44 PM
2

I never said it was a good reason, just that it might be the reason.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 03:52 AM
1

Well, considering the bad attitude people on reddit have toward Men's Rights, the only ones to put something from here onto /r/bestof are one of us. It also means the ones most likely to see the post on /r/bestof but not from here don't like us. The crossposting to SRS works the other way, because that place encourages the brigades.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 12:36 AM
5

I have an alternate theory. Perhaps they are blocking our posts from /r/bestof to prevent downvote brigades to our reddit?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 08:06 PM
1

How about we compromise as say "the baby has a penis" is that neutral enough for you bastards?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 04:15 PM
2

Yes and no. It's a matter of perception. You need to have a high-profile death scene. But if you want an 'important' death in the movie, go with Columbus's neighbor who died in the beginning.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:59 PM
9

Bill Murray
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:13 PM
3

A zombie movie/game with nobody dying is a boring movie/game
/r/MensRights06/07/13 09:54 PM
3

Forced Motherhood is violence. Forced Fatherhood is Grand Larceny.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:14 PM
1

So... Casey Anthony is a man now?
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:14 PM
1

I just didn't want to say assume to prevent butt related humor threads.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 02:15 AM
1

I would as... er... I believe so.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 06:02 PM
2

It's a lesser crime, like manslaughter instead of murder. Having degrees to a crime doesn't mean that you support the actions in the lower crime.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:17 PM
1

There are degrees in every crime. Again, Icy/Hot in the jock would be sexual assault.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:09 PM
2

Just saying, I understand that pain.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:48 PM
0

Funny, I thought SRS was a place to point out stupid and unpopular views held on Reddit. If that comment made SRS, wouldn't it be a good thing?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:46 PM
1

Having felt icy/hot on my junk, it isn't pleasant. And I did it to myself because I pulled a muscle too close to there. (Never will I do that again), but that's a 'gag' that's been around for decades. It isn't quite the same as being sodomized with a flagpole. That is, it's sexual assault, not rape there.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:44 PM
3

What other side of the table is there? The boy was raped by his teammates as a hazing ritual and the parent, teachers, and school board are siding with the rapists and their coach/father because a) he's the coach of the wrestling team and b) he's the most powerful man in town. If this were a cheerleader victim raped by the wrestling team, there'd have been more punishment because it was a female victim. If it was a science teacher or the math club doing the rape, they'd be calling for these kids…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:36 PM
2

The fact is they both should be felonies. If a girl is passed out, she can not consent to sex, and you can not expect her to consent. It's like having sex with a coma patient. But it is 'less' of a crime because the victim in that case was not humiliated during the act ( she was asleep, he was awake ). You could make the argument that bad judgment caused the perp to think he was okay. Mind you, he's still stupid and a rapist, but there are degrees here. In the boy's case, the act was clearly wor…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:30 PM
1

Who the fuck thinks it's normal to hold down a younger boy and shove a piece of rebar up his ass? (Separate incident mentioned in article)
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:07 PM
1

Yes. It is dumb. I will concur with that. But no one said that you must be smart to be a political activist.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:16 PM
1

I wasn't being sarcastic. I was describing how feminazis view consent. According to them, a guy is implied to always want sex, to the point that they are abusing their wife/girlfriend if they don't want to have sex.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 01:04 PM
1

Don't know why you're being down voted, they literally mean that if the girl says 'no' at any point in the sexual act, including at the moment of climax, the man is required to stop.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:48 PM
-1

And now I want to be "raped"
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:45 PM
1

Continual means she doesn't change her mind mid-coitus. And always she, by the way. A girl can use sex as a weapon, get a guy dead drunk, assume that his physical arousal mean consent, have him tied up and not listen if he ever says to stop, and she's "empowered"
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:44 PM
5

Ultimately, they think regret is rape...
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:40 PM
1

It's not just enthusiasm. You also have to be sober (not just 'not drunk' according to this), specifically voice the desire (not just start going at it), never have second thoughts, and not be offered anything in return.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:05 PM
4

Sounds like my ex girlfriend. "Don't talk to me about being tired until you've had a period."
/r/MensRights18/06/13 07:30 PM
1

Aw... the damnation made it so much more epic. I haven't been on twitter in a while, myself.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 06:57 PM
1

There's a guy that posts as "The God-Damned Batman"
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:58 PM
3

We can start our own Facebook, with blackjack and TJ Hooker.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:52 PM
9

I didn't know what it means.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:46 PM
2

You the same one as on Twitter? But seriously, for this to be a legitimate study, they'd need to check with a wider range of locations. Even going with 3 colleges, make them one in Pittsburgh, one in Austin, and one in New York.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:42 PM
3

To play Devil's Advocate, the statistics AVFM used was the number of reported rapes, and does not include potentially many incidents that are not reported to police. That said, the only way they'd be able to justify a 1 in 4 rape stat is if they include most sex as rape (which some radical feminists actually believe).
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:37 PM
2

I don't even know what to say... I would suggest next time you go to a normal doctor that isn't associated with them. Yes, you'll need to pay for treatment, but they won't be given the very false impression that you're the enemy. But why would Planned Parenthood think of a man as an enemy? Did you walk in with a smug attitude, complaining about abortions? It doesn't seem that way. I was under the impression that PP was there for STD testing, prenatal care, contraception, and abortion services. M…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:16 PM
1

One of her protégés said something closer to the OP's quote, too.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:59 PM
1

Not quite. It was a troll repost. The quote is a real one from a radical feminist.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:55 PM
3

Googling the quote got me to an obituary/tribute page for a radical feminist who died a few years ago (Andrea Dworkin), and the original speaker of that quote (Catherine MacKinnon) who was influenced by her.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:52 PM
-1

What A Cunt. I'm sorry to any strong independent women who read that and are offended. I'm not talking to the ones who wish to be equals with men. I'm talking to the idiots that think like this.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:24 PM
1

Except that it doesn't show things like how much a man makes working the same hours. If, for example, the average working man makes $15,000 and the average working woman makes $12,000, that might explain the bias toward more working women than working men. But without that information, we can't tell for sure whether this town has an 'unfair inequality against men' like the linked article implies.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 04:13 AM
1

That seems intentionally misleading.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 03:06 AM
1

How does not a single man have a job there?
/r/MensRights13/05/13 02:59 PM
9

Best use of a screen name ever.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 04:02 PM
1

I'd say you are. By embracing your male self, you are accepting not just the rights, but also the responsibilities, of every 'natural' male here. Plus, and I hope I speak for everyone here, we aren't simply fighting for more rights for men at the expense of women's rights. Rather we are fighting for truly equal rights for all.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:58 PM
1

It's still ridyculous.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:29 PM
1

It's a butchering of language.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:09 PM
3

And that makes them look like imbyciles,
/r/MensRights29/03/13 03:39 PM
8

I never understood the whole womyn thing... they hate men so badly, they won't write down something that has the word "man" in it? Probably only the positive words get that treatment. Not that "woman" is any more or less positive than "man". What about mandible? The names Amanda or Mandy? Mandrill, Mandarin, Demand, Manhandle, Manhole, Gerrymandering?
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:55 PM
13

The defense attorneys in SVU tend to be the type to get under the detectives' skin, especially when the case involves an anvilicious message, like gay rights or something. The defense will bring out some horrible, but legal-sounding premise, which normally works only enough to be used in court, then shrugs it off at the end with "someone has to defend these people."
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:47 PM
1

Sounds like a fine plan to me.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:15 AM
1

I think the ultimate crime for good games that women can like is that men like them, too.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:43 PM
3

Instead of "feminist-friendly" why not make appealing games in general? Look at Tales of Graces f, with an ensemble cast that includes three strong women whose goals are about friendship. Or Phantom Brave, Final Fantasy 6, Rhapsody? Neutral games like Big Sky Infinity, Ecolibrium, or DJMax? If you make a game to cater to a certain sociopolitical viewpoint, as opposed to higher quality, you're doing it wrong. Make a great game, show or movie and with luck everyone will want it.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:41 PM
3

I more agree with you. I've been gaming since the BASIC era, but I've just never got into the whole competitive thing.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:47 PM
8

How about we just get off the "girl gamer" kick, since a lot of the ones that make it on TV aren't even real gamers? Hell, I might not even be considered a real gamer, despite my extensive knowledge and library of games, since I don't play a lot of ranked games. I prefer single player RPGs.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:29 PM
47

If they want to be seen in places like that, maybe they should, I dunno, make games?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:24 PM
39

Funny, if I make love to an unconscious woman, they tend to frown on that.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:46 AM
4

Wow... a novelty account for trolling a specific troll?
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:45 AM
3

I think the posted article counts.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:43 AM
1

That's because joone wants to offend a feminist.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 01:48 PM
1

Kickstarter is not a governmental agency. Fraud is still fraud.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 05:05 AM
2

Actually, what she did may be against the law. By accepting donations, she either would have to be part of a charitable organization, at which point she'd be obligated to deliver the promised work, or the money is income for a promised service, at which point she'd be required to deliver the work Either way, she would be guilty of Felony Fraud.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 12:46 AM
1

Imagine that...
/r/MensRights29/01/13 12:41 AM
2

If you are basing your decision to help based on race, gender, or creed, you are doing it wrong.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 12:32 AM
0

You are wrong. The perpetrator's intent is generally important in rape cases. Many guys have gotten off in rape cases because they proved that they believed they had consent. Unfortunately, the he said/she said nature of the crime does seem to make it so the man is guilty until proven innocent, which is where your anger seems to come in. It is one reason that I will refuse to indulge in "rape fantasy" or rough sex, because it would be hard to prove consent or tell if she changes her mind. The ac…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:19 AM
0

Excuse me, but you are the one being illogical by saying that women who are raped were just having rough sex. But re-read my comment, and you'll see that I was calling feminists idiots. Attentive one
/r/MensRights25/01/13 03:55 AM
0

You are (hopefully portraying) exactly the kind of person the idiot femasses accuse us all of being.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 11:49 PM
1

You trollin' bro? It wouldn't matter what level of stupidity they exhibit, you don't have the right to steal the money. Similarly, it doesn't matter if a girl is running down the street naked with a tattoo that reads "I want to fuck you" while juggling condoms, if you hold her down against her will and fuck her then you are a rapist.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 11:22 PM
1

No, if you stole $10,000 from a bank they'd come after you for Grand Theft, no matter how stupid it makes the clerk look.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 07:47 PM
2

We've got a Scholar Nazi here.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:29 PM
1

As a Texan, I find this good news.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:28 PM
1

Yes, and no. Grammar is technically more about the rules of sentence structure, but capitalization isn't a large enough field of study to make its own section of the textbooks.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:02 PM
5

Many couples decide together to have the normal family dynamic of the working husband and stay-at-home wife. And that is okay. Being a homemaker is hard work, too, and I won't begrudge people who make that choice. But that isn't the same as accepting the idea of 10 years of alimony because the lazy shit hasn't tried to get a job, like the fembot quoted above.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:00 PM
1

What can I say? I'm a grammar Nazi.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 06:41 PM
1

Of course.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 06:14 PM
1

It's a Heil Mary.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:54 PM
2

I say limit alimony for 3 years. Long enough to get a 2 year college certificate and find a job.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:53 PM
2

I missed the part where Jesus actually made any laws for any country. He wasn't ever a ruler in Israel.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:50 PM
8

No, even from a men's rights standpoint, a woman who spends her life as a housewife before the marriage breaks up might deserve a small stipend for a couple years to get them into school or a job. She should lose that option if the marriage breaks up because she schtupped the milkman, however.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:47 PM
1

Call me a nazi Nazi FTFY
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:44 PM
1

Correct. Or if you are having a rational discussion about evil, hatred, racism, or genocide.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:42 PM
3

Funny, I was always told that if you resort to calling people Nazis, you have probably already lost the argument.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:13 PM
3

My response to her... I'm glad to see that your views on equality are so enlightened. You seem to think that just because us guys don't want to be at a disadvantage compared to women that we want to enslave them or something. Well, you're wrong. I seriously considered making horrible insults back to you in response to the PM sent to one of our members, but I realize that it doesn't matter what is said, you'll take it as an insult anyway. You are clearly the reason we have to keep arguing, becaus…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 07:40 AM
0

No, it's about encouraging a circle jerk.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 11:10 AM
3

Bonjour...
/r/MensRights06/01/13 01:36 PM
0

Religion in general is based on that need, individual religions are based on people believing that persons or things are divine.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 08:20 PM
13

... Christianity.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 07:02 PM
2

Despite your seemingly trollish comment, I'll give you an answer. Short skirts and bare midriff shirts are not the equivalent of wearing a sock over your genitals. For one thing, that's not where you wear socks. Most civilized countries have certain reasonable limits to what is acceptable for wear in public, normally involving non-sexual gear. But you can not use "well, we don't allow nipple clamps" as an excuse to ban mini-skirts. If they were passing this law because they felt the mini-skirt w…
/r/MensRights28/12/12 11:03 PM
6

Shouldn't yesterday be Christmas Adam? Because Adam came before Eve.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 06:21 PM
2

That depends on the law itself. If it is something like allowing low-stringency DNA analysis as circumstantial evidence at trial, then yes. If it is something formalizing that whatever the woman says would be seen as truth, then no. Due process is the key.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 06:16 PM
1

And that is exactly why a true rape victim should not be worried about reporting a rape. If they are not lying, they don't need to fear prosecution. To prevent that fear, we make it exceedingly clear that women like this are cold, vindictive women who turn rape into a game to be played against men.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 05:38 PM
2

If you are reporting a murder, you generally will be called as a witness.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 04:51 PM
3

I will say that if a woman is forced to stay in the home during the marriage, and has no job or money of her own, then alimony is acceptable. This individual woman harmed five men, in many ways irreparably. As for whether my terms represent an excessive monetary judgement, while she is in jail, she gets free room, board, food, clothing, cable TV, and gym membership. She just wouldn't be able to buy snacks and cigarettes, like other prisoners.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 02:56 PM
3

The jail time for the false report, the lawsuit for the pain and anguish. It's justice, mate.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 02:28 PM
2

Good point. But still... the story is unbelievable, and I hope they throw the book at her... then file a class action suit to get what little pittance she earns from the prison work program.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 02:11 PM
5

It is implied the girl in the story is the OP's ex.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 02:00 PM
19

Nah, just the equivalent time. OP faced 25? She should get 25.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 01:21 PM
7

Why not take that to its extreme? Why report murder charges, when you might be arrested for perjury? Why report fraud, or assault, or any crime?
/r/MensRights24/12/12 01:19 PM
11

Okay, her story was that you punched her in the face repeatedly, dragged her to your van, raped her, let her go, then she went out for drinks, worked out, sat in the sauna, and casually mentioned she was raped to her husband? And they initially believed her?
/r/MensRights24/12/12 01:15 PM
2

Regarding number 9, I will totally flare up when the woman tells me to turn right when I know for a fact it's left. (Ex-girlfriend was directionally challenged)
/r/MensRights22/12/12 04:22 PM
4

And meanwhile a girl gets on a Wheaties box just for playing against boys.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:13 AM
-3

If she was so bad, then she wasn't "dominating" the boys she was playing against, was she? Or were they just bad?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:51 AM
5

Sadly, any "male-only" gym would be looked at by the media and by feminists as a "gay hangout"
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:31 AM
3

Hang on... is competitive breast cancer awareness runs really a thing?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:27 AM
2

Hate to be "that guy" but if she was good enough to make the team ( and didn't get in because her parents threatened to sue for discrimination or something), she should be played in the game. Similarly, if the boy in the Original Post has no "boys' team" then he should be given some why of being allowed to play a game he likes to play.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:24 AM
1

Report it, then sue if they laugh at you.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 09:01 PM
2

No, it is saying unequivocally that Men's Rights are not compatible with Women's Rights.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 02:16 PM
2

Not that Jezebel is reading this, but the whole point of Men's Rights is to be on equal footing with women. There is a bias in the courts, that would rather put children with a drug addicted mother than a clean father, using the excuse that the father spends all his time at work. There is a bias in the law, that in some cases won't even admit that a man can be raped by a woman. There is a bias among women, who think that they deserve to be pampered and cared for and protected as the weaker sex, …
/r/MensRights14/12/12 02:11 PM
1

fair enough, she could have not known the identity or details of the person.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 11:38 AM
1

It's all part of people's perception of other people. We tend to defer respect to those in further power. It is one of the reasons that teachers, priests, and other authority figures get away with sexual impropriety. When a teenager says 'some chick', it is far more likely they are referring to someone at or below their age level. A teacher would be referred to as such, and a simply older woman would be 'some woman' She'd be even more likely to be descriptive of how old the person was, to try an…
/r/MensRights13/12/12 02:30 AM
1

most people don't refer to pestering as molestation, though.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 12:00 AM
1

Most people wouldn't reference a teacher as 'some chick'
/r/MensRights12/12/12 11:59 PM
1

My point being, if he was "molesting" as many girls as he said, and he was as handsome as he says, they were likely willing participants.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:49 PM
0

The other possibility is that he is a full on rapist that randomly pulls girls into the bathroom, at which point he would be in prison.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:42 PM
9

Note to self, when I die be reincarnated as a black lesbian.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:23 PM
0

Seriously, is it molestation if you take a willing girl out to the bleachers, or some other stereotypical make out point, and get sexual with her? Sure, it is if you are 25, but I am assuming that he was referring to himself in high school. Then again, if he played football, then it might not be that no girl complained, it might be that the teachers didn't believe the girls. Because that is the one place where men have more rights, when they can throw a football.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:18 PM
2

To point out that it hasn't changed yet.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:14 PM
2

Careful with that one... women don't have to actually say No, so why should we?
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:13 PM
1

The chick that did the molesting was probably 13-17, in that case.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:10 PM
4

Yeah, she might have meant that the chick walked up to her brother and rubbed his face with her hand (technically a molestation), but let's face it, most people only use the term to reference inappropriate prolonged sexual contact (not including quick gropes) when used colloquially, and any inappropriate sexual contact (including quick gropes) when used legally. Since this girl is obviously not a lawyer, we can assume that the chick was trying to get pretty heavy with the brother.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:08 PM
6

But the courts will still go for a black woman over a white man, so gender is more important than race to them.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:03 PM
1

Ain't that the truth.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 07:40 PM
2

Counter sue for alimony?
/r/MensRights08/12/12 07:21 PM
0

In Texas, that would have been legal anyway, if the younger one was 17.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 02:00 PM
1

Technically, fetuses are parasites. But I used the term as a way of lightening the mood.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 11:25 AM
1

How about we be better about it, and just set up a Men's Rights board on 4chan?
/r/MensRights30/11/12 04:06 PM
1

I have been called attractive despite my weight. But that may be them being nice.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:18 PM
2

You know, my mother admitted to me what women want, though she will never use the concise phrase I will at the end. They want a man who pays all the bills. They want my money to be 'our' money, but her money to be 'her' money. They want to go out to fancy dinners and plays. They want a man to enjoy the things they enjoy. They want a man to give up what they don't enjoy. They want lavish jewelry and a new car. They want a huge diamond ring to be given to them exactly when they want it, and not wh…
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:16 PM
1

What if the cute girl was 10? He never said sexually attractive girl.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:07 PM
2

Because you are assuming that women, who withstand 9 months of a parasite inside them, are incapable to standing up for 15-20 minutes.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:04 PM
1

r/beadsprites is pretty sane.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:01 PM
3

doesn't reddiquette demand marking crossposts?
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:01 PM
10

Does anyone else read this thread like Charlie Brown talking to a teacher?
/r/MensRights30/11/12 01:58 PM
0

I'd scoot over, let the cute girl sit next to me. Our buses have two seats on each side.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 01:56 PM
1

Hmmm, maybe PMS is just feminist code for bitchiness.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 04:13 PM
1

I believe he means in this case, spread so thin it covers everything. Though, regardless of how thin that water gets, it is still not drinkable. To be fair to feminists, rape originally never included anything a husband does to his wife, among other things, and so a small amount of expansion was good, but in the name of Women's Rights, it was pushed to far beyond equal. We as Men's Rights Advocates need to be mindful not to make the same mistakes, and limit it too much. In any other situation, w…
/r/MensRights22/11/12 04:00 PM
1

Well, I would think rapists are pro-rape.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 03:48 PM
2

I know! How dare you require them to prove their story! It's like you think men are people. </sarcasm>
/r/MensRights22/11/12 03:47 PM
1

Not after the fact. If she signs while sober that consent to drunken sex is consent, then she can still tell me not to do it, but she can't say the next morning hat she didn't mean to. At the very least, it is a form of proof for me that she was considering a possibility of sexual relation before getting drunk, and that I would have a reasonable expectation that the sex was consented. It becomes her word vs her word, and not her word vs my word. I would at least have a chance to defend myself, a…
/r/MensRights19/11/12 04:19 PM
3

That tears it, I'm making any girl I'm with sign a contract before we do any drinking.
/r/MensRights17/11/12 10:35 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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