TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

kuma75 Archive

View 2 posts and 112 comments by kuma75 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

No he didn't-because legally he was incapable of consent.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 05:27 PM
1

You're thinking of the 5th Amendment-and this is non-testimonial evidence, therefore, it wouldn't apply. The 4th Amendment would, which is why the alleged application for a search warrant for the evidence. I can't even fathom an officer thinking this would be a good idea, nor can I imagine why a judge would have reviewed this warrant and though-nope, nothing unreasonable here-go for it.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 02:13 AM
3

Oh, so after criticism you decide the superior color is WHITE? Nice job, cis-white-supremacist racist shitlord.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 05:04 PM
1

Sorry, but it's incredibly disingenous to assert that 'Reddit is not owned by Conde Nast' and to leave out the fact that it is owned by Conde Nast's parent company, Advance Publications. Also, straight from the Advance Publications Wikipedia page, 'As of November 2012, it was ranked as the 52nd largest private company in the United States according to Forbes.' Do we have to debate about whether or not that company is likely to maintain some liability insurance against 1st Amendment claims, or de…
/r/MensRights09/09/13 10:34 PM
2

These incidents become news stories because of the discussions people have regarding them on the internet-you know, like the discussion the mods censored.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 08:05 PM
2

ROFL-'stop oppressing me, faggots'. Awesome. **Edited to add that the original comment included a reference to all MRA's as 'faggots' from the social justice warrior whose feels are all inflamed.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 08:04 PM
4

Doesn't look like these comments will help in that regard, lol.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 08:04 PM
5

First, Reddit is owned by Conde Nast-does the parent corporation not have some indemnity or carry the insurance you've mentioned since they are a freaking news organization? Second, this video is clearly material in the public interest, about public servants in the actual performance of their duties. What liability does Reddit think they're exposing themselves to exactly? Seems to me that without a suggestion that someone harm the subjects of the video, or without some kind of opinion offered by…
/r/MensRights09/09/13 08:02 PM
1

The Courts like civil rights suits against the police a lot better than they like them involving CPS or CSE.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 07:18 PM
2

She got temporary sole custody by making what appears to be a false allegation of child abuse. The restraining order, no doubt granted ex parte, would have made temporary sole custody a requirement. You really don't have a truth-telling style, do you?
/r/MensRights08/09/13 03:37 AM
3

Yeah, when you're a parent you absolutely have the right to override a doctor's opinion, or to get another one. This was the medical profession's answer to morning sickness. I'll bet the kids born with defects as a reult wish someone had 'overriden' the doc's advice... But I'm sure they know what's best in this case, right? Straight from the manufacturer's label: 'Geodon is not approved for use in children or adolescents.' And the experts don't always agree when it comes to psychotropics in chil…
/r/MensRights08/09/13 03:35 AM
5

He complained that his daughter was found wandering around unsupervised outside mom's locked apartment. The CPS response is to investigate HIM for not knowing what medication his daughter is on and trying to find out. They suggest a 'parenting class' for him b/c he is concerned about the girl's drastic weight gain while she's in her mother's care, and b/c he gets her 0 calorie decaf sodas. Go away troll. This is insitutionalized bias in action. And it is most definitely a men's rights issue. SRS…
/r/MensRights08/09/13 03:29 AM
1

He seems to be attempting a 1983 suit: http://garytrieste.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/full-federal-lawsuit-12-31-2012.pdf Dads as a protected class? Pssh. Remember, counsellor to be, that the rational basis test is the only one that applies in the family court...de facto discrimination based on gender in these courts has been ruled to be just fine. Even the universal right to a public defender doesn't mean shit in family court. Child support obligors facing criminal contempt sanctions don't even…
/r/MensRights07/09/13 10:10 PM
7

Once the legal system has decided to intervene on behalf of one gender, almost without exception, over another. This interview doesn't seem fair and balanced because it wasn't, and that was by design. The interviewers were collecting information to be used by the other parent in subsequent court proceedings under color of authority and on the taxpayer's dime.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 09:34 PM
12

And keep in mind the original complaint, which HE made, was that his kiddo was wandering outside a locked apartment unsupervised. They seemed to have absolutely no concern over that.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 09:28 PM
8

And if you read the notes on the case, he's no longer even allowed to babysit. He's apparently been awarded partial custody by the courts, and his ex has simply decided to disregard the order. Bet he's still paying his child support, though...
/r/MensRights07/09/13 09:26 PM
3

I would suggest that you read the governmental immunity act-agents and the agency for which they work are completely indemnified from any action that 'sounds in tort'. There are some exceptions for highway maintenance, but generally they are 100% immune from suit in Colorado state courts. The Federal courts are a different story, but there again, since he's not a member of a protected class what do you recon his chances are there?
/r/MensRights07/09/13 04:25 PM
8

Sued? Not likely. In more than a few states, Jabba the dietary expert and her sidekick would be completely indemnified from suit by governmental immunity statutes. Here's some information regarding the law in Colorado, for example. This law does not bar action under 42 USC 1983 (US Civil Rights Law), but since dad isn't a protected class, the Feds won't do shite for him either.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 03:21 PM
3

Poe's law, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:34 PM
1

In what jurisdiction? I am also a father who also went through the family court system by myself (pro se) and was fortunate to get primary custody of my daughter from her mother, who was actively using methamphetamine at the time. Mom had a lawyer, so I got no child support and she still got 2 months in the summer, as well as 50% of major holidays and school breaks. Of course, if I were an attorney, I probably could have gotten a better deal. As it was, 'mom' ran off with all liquid assets and l…
/r/MensRights24/08/13 04:14 AM
22

Of course it is, there's nothing to it. Just march right in to an American family court as the noncustodial father and demand custody because mom is unfit. Should be fine. Oh, and in case you missed it, '/s'.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 05:50 PM
8

'Look at my crazy assertions, which support my latest round of crazy assertions'.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 12:17 PM
13

More. They want more.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 12:16 PM
3

I agree with all the others who have posted how unkind it is to continue to deride someone who is clearly mentally ill. Lets don't become what we hate, eh? IMO this is a dead issue at this point.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:30 PM
2

Quite so. Either the law is the law for everyone or it is quite simply illegitimate.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:01 AM
4

It seemed like that? That was precisely the argument. She referred to the 'most egregious sex crime another WOMAN had committed' in Florida...who gives a single wet fuck what other WOMEN are sentenced to for the same offense? She's making an 8th Amendment argument-that the sentence is, in part, unusual. It appears that the absurd sentence is the state's mandatory minimum-so at least in Nevada, it's in no way unusual. On the other hand, the sentence does appear to be cruel-that point was well mad…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:57 AM
6

But, bro-unpossible. Women don't violence-everyone know that. Smash the patriarchy, bro.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 06:39 PM
1

Of course they did. I participated in a social movement a few years ago which was EXTREMELY enlightening as to Oppression Culture. I was unaware of the 'matrix of oppression', 'intersectionality', and the rest of the tripe which allows certain members of our society to claim permanent victim status. The leaders of the Oppression Olympics were the anarchists, who managed to completely derail that movement. Never in my life have I encountered such a uniformly daft group of 40 year old adolescents.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:24 PM
2

*Affirmative. Also, English please. I can see that this is an attempt to troll, but beyond that I have NO IDEA what you're trying to say here.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 06:43 PM
1

Of course! I never dispense a downboat w/o a comment-just lazy to do otherwise!
/r/MensRights17/04/13 02:26 AM
6

Hi there. I'm a very firmly committed MRA, and I'm married to a lovely white woman of Irish descent. She is my partner and my best friend and my life would be much less full if I didn't know her. Your statement, in my opinion, is racist, sexist and abysmally narrow-minded. Have a downboat.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 01:13 AM
1

Possibly. Nonetheless, to me, this has some echoes of the tired old 'patriarchy says that women are weaker and therefore when they commit violence without consequence, it's because of patriarchy'. They get away with it due to systemic, institutionalized discrimination in the criminal justice system against men.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 06:42 PM
5

This sounds an awful lot like women hit because patriarchy. No thanks. Women hit because they want to hit, and it gets them what they want-just like everyone else who uses violence. There's a payoff. It's not some magical supersociological theory.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:23 AM
2

Anything that is in plain sight and contraband on its face or clearly the fruits of a crime is fair game. I wouldn't want to be the cop in a suppression hearing based on the seizure of a phone-without any other factual basis to believe it had evidentiary value or was contraband-nor would I want to be part of a civil rights case based on the warrantless seizure thereof...
/r/MensRights12/04/13 04:42 AM
3

On a suspected kid sex case, I'd bet the warrant called out electronic storage media located within the residence, likely irrespective of asserted ownership.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 04:40 AM
4

'Talk to my lawyer' does not seem to meet the burden USSC placed on suspects. It's easy enough to say "I WANT A LAWYER', isn't it? BTW, IANAL.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 04:39 AM
1

Yep. My kiddo loves to go swimming at our local rec center, but there is NO family changing room available. Was told I could have one of the female staff members change her out, or change her in the kitchen...
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:51 PM
9

I always had the impression that men were the problem and women needed protection from them. And while there is a great deal of truth to that statement How about the idea that people need protection from violent, exploitative individuals? That's gender-neutral and more accurately reflects reality.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:07 PM
6

Why is it a race issue? Because the dominant paradigm recognizes race-based claims as legitimate, whereas a man's gender-based discrimination claim is not similarly recognized. We're comfortable talking about race-based discrimination, but 'misandry doesn't real', is why.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 07:03 PM
6

I would disagree with you. SPEECH that promotes violence is still speech. I believe, personally, that an almost absolute right to free speech is one of America's founding ideals and one of the things that used to make our nation pretty special.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 06:19 PM
4

Exactly right-the remedy for 'bad' speech is more speech. Plus, nothing promotes the MRM cause like the trash SRS posts.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 06:17 PM
3

Absolutely. It serve no one to claim that gender-based oppression doesn't exist anywhere on the planet. In what we consider the developing world, it goes both ways and rather brutally. One of my chief complaints with feminism is that it denies fact and replaces it with feels. We shouldn't adopt the same flawed methodology.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 11:08 PM
2

Again, in what way is this significant? Let's assume, for a moment, that the divorce between mom and dad was contentious and mom is doing the PAS shuffle-telling kiddo that dad used to beat her, is a serial adulterer, and doesn't really love kiddo. Wouldn't it make sense that kiddo would want to run as soon as he got to dad's? Would it help to know that dad has cooperated with law enforcement the entire time?
/r/MensRights27/01/13 04:06 AM
4

In what way? If genders were reversed would it seem as significant?
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:13 AM
-1

But none of the top comments or initial replies can come from that perspective, according to their forum rules? How egalitarian and open minded of them.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:51 PM
2

You may see this as 'pissing and whining'. I do not. The claim I keep hearing from feminists is that feminism addresses all the issues the MRM addresses, therefore making the MRM unnecessary. If an online community that ostensibly addresses men's issues with such efficacy as to render our community irrelevant specifically prohibits addressing those issues, then it's something we should discuss here.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 09:44 PM
5

Fact is, feminism seems to be at once completely at odds with the MRM, and also claims to make it unnecessary. What feminists assert with regard to the MRM is a Men's Rights issue, and absolutely belongs here.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 07:58 PM
2

I could not agree more with the assertions the author makes. We have collaborated to produce a profoundly sick society, and then behave as if the profoundly sick individuals it produces are an aberration.
/r/MensRights12/01/13 06:35 PM
2

I think the real question is, is OP psychologically stable? Taking his meds? Does he need a hug?
/r/MensRights29/12/12 04:49 PM
7

Couldn't agree more-'according to her' and 'she says' need to leave your lexicon right fucking now. Document EVERYTHING. I'm not kidding. Everything. If you're talking to CPS on the phone and you live in a single party consent state, RECORD THE CALLS. Same goes for the calls to the 'wife'. If you need to have any physical contact with the 'wife', arrange to have it at a police department. NEVER meet with her at her attorney's office (and trust me, it sounds like she either has one already or wil…
/r/MensRights03/06/12 06:11 PM
5

Worse than that, I'm afraid. All she needs to do is claim DV, at the bond hearing for the defendant a mandatory order of protection is automatically entered barring him from the residence for at least 45 days, even if she decides to petition the court later to lift it.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 01:01 AM
5

Good-this is definitely a thread where rightsbot belongs.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 01:35 PM
7

The truth is your account is newly minted and the very first thing you chose to post was this. SRS is that way, troll. Trolololololooool.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:38 PM
2

Obvious troll is obvious. Trololololoooool.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:36 PM
6

No they sure aren't. I'm tempted not to feed obvious troll, who is obvious-but the fact that you've tried to besmirch our social movement with your nonsense requires a response. Seek help if you're not trolling, if you are, feel free to fuck yourself.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:07 PM
3

***UPDATE-and quite a shock it is! Apparently, asking quite civilly why the author of the article chose to ignore the assault charge, and pointing out that it is difficult to be a credible and effective activist standing in opposition to violence while simultaneously committing acts of violence were somehow inappropriate. Lulz.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:16 PM
6

This is disgusting, hypocritical, and gives all MRA's a bad name. Shame on this man for writing it, hopefully it was a misguided attempt at satire-though that seems to be impossible to discern.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 05:31 PM
2

Comment posted, but awaiting moderation. Wonder how that will go?
/r/MensRights11/04/12 05:28 PM
1

You betcha!
/r/MensRights04/02/12 05:57 PM
3

Done.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 06:07 AM
3

Yep. In my state, there are legal prohibitions against public defenders and DA's practicing law on the side. Look into it!
/r/MensRights04/02/12 01:03 AM
2

You mean it should be unlawful to compel a person to work in a field of the government's choosing? Why, friend, do you hate freedom and women? Renounce your privilege immediately, and save your soul.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:24 PM
6

If the DA is practicing law on the side on a pro bono basis for his office buddies, that might just be an issue that the State Bar might take an interest in. You might suggest that your friend give them a ring.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:22 PM
6

Good question. It almost makes a person think that there must be some bias in the family court system, doesn't it?
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:21 PM
3

Imputed income.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 07:37 AM
2

Well, if it's not AS likely, then I suppose this is just fine. /sarcasm
/r/MensRights03/02/12 12:16 AM
1

My kid was stolen in exactly this way by her Japanese mother, who then also sued for-AND WAS AWARDED-child support by the U.S. Courts. Oh, and of course, the U.S. Courts claim that they have no jurisdiction over the matter of custody, JUST support. If this interests you, here's a link to more details. Bottom line, our courts work for foreign women against male citizens and the kids suffer as a result. I have no ability to see my daughter, no legal remedy, and my Senators, Representatives, and ot…
/r/MensRights21/01/12 10:55 PM
2

Nope, I have my own-hard-won in Political Science with an International Affairs concentration and...are you ready...a minor in WOMEN'S STUDIES. I happen to be an MRA in addition to being a libertarian socialist, and believe me, there were times that I was encouraged to shut the fuck up and swallow whatever bullshit was being shoveled at the students that week. Here's the thing about that: higher ed is a collaborative effort. I know, for example, that 'domestic violence is a crime that men commit…
/r/MensRights21/01/12 07:15 PM
1

If he would be expelled for intellectual honesty, what sort of an education is he getting? If we sell ourselves for some piece of paper instead of demanding an education, what's the point?
/r/MensRights21/01/12 03:46 AM
3

Bullshit. Intellectual cowardice is no way to further ANY cause, and you should be ashamed for suggesting it.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 01:11 AM
0

Nope, I'm sure not all anarchists are nutters-but the ones involved in OD sure were. They are a collection of half-educated white kids from suburbia who all clamor for the opportunity to renounce their economic, racial and gender 'privilege' by telling everyone else in a group how fucked they all are. Kind of ironic that the ANARCHISTS tried to create a PC hierarchy...
/r/MensRights17/01/12 01:48 AM
2

I'm afraid that the nutters were in charge from the get-go. They just didn't bother to tell anyone else about it in advance. They went to great lengths to make the movement appear to be spontaneous and democratic, but it was designed by anarchists with the intent to further the anarchist cause from the start.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 10:05 AM
11

Exactly right. I participated in Occupy Denver at one time, and the anarcho-feminist PC Nazis were all about this one. Anty time you showed them how absurd their ideology was, the immediate response was 'check your privilege'. No reason, no logic, just a heavy handed attempt at gender and race shaming to stifle dissent. I kind of knew I'd won the debate when I heard this one.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 03:12 AM
7

NON-freaking-SENSE. It's not an issue of jurisdiction, the UCR's are the most commonly used and most readily available source for statistical data on crime. The issue is that those who make public policy use the UCR data to support their positions. This is long overdue.
/r/MensRights07/01/12 02:14 AM
2

If you object to this, GO TO ONE OF THE PROTESTS AND LET THAT BE KNOWN. This is as close to a truly democratic movement as we're gonna get right now. Go to an assembly and LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS WRONG. That's my plan for the afternoon.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 05:00 PM
8

No it's not. The remedy for abhorrent speech is more speech, not censorship. Let's not take a page from the feminist playbook and attempt to silence opposing viewpoints. Instead, I think we should ask for an apology and equal time to discuss domestic violence perpetrated by women against men.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 11:25 PM
1

felt the lighthearted discussion concerning the genital mutilation of a male domestic violence victim was abhorrent. All of the hosts involved, with the exception of Ms. Gilbert, should be ashamed of themselves-as should the producers, for allowing such tripe to be aired on your network. Though I am a vigorous proponent of free speech, we must be accountable for what we say. I'm sure I'll be able to watch a full apology and thoughtful discussion about the plight of male domestic violence victims…
/r/MensRights17/07/11 10:17 PM
4

That's why they also revoke your passport for arrears and refuse to issue you a new one...no fleeing the country for 'deadbeats'.
/r/MensRights26/06/11 04:09 AM
1

Absolutely. Prison rape and life sentences for illicit gardening are also pretty fucking barbaric, but accepted as a part of the punishment in the US.
/r/MensRights21/05/11 09:22 PM
0

So? They throw rocks at people until they die and cut limbs off, too. It's a barbaric little corner of the globe. Not seeing the connection to men's rights, here. No one in this subreddit is claiming that men have a legitimate right to kill women for choosing their own mate. Swing and a miss, ideologue.
/r/MensRights10/05/11 10:14 PM
1

Indeed. In a circumstance like this one, I can tell you, I carry a firearm and would have used it-but the law supports that in my state. If you're talking about boxing with your SO when you have an opportunity to retreat and call police, then I'd have to say I think that's counterproductive. YMMV.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 05:34 PM
2

That's easy to say, but I disagree for several reasons. First, violence has no place in an intimate relationship. Period. Self defense is one thing, but retailiation in kind is unacceptable im my opinion. Second, YOU can feel morally justified all day long in retailiating, but understand several large, well-armed police officers are going to show up to kick your ass and cart you off to jail. You plan on using violence against them as well? Finally, by retaliating violently, you are inviting the …
/r/MensRights20/04/11 05:15 PM
2

My point exactly. As a penis owner, you are automatically suspect, and a man getting anything remotely resembling due process and equal treatment in a family court is about as rare as a free lunch, lulz.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 04:56 PM
2

No, they're not. But that's an awfully big gamble to make. You're betting whatever wealth you've managed to accumulate, your reputation and your civil liberties on the fact that she's not a fucking nutbar.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 04:51 PM
1

No, excuse is not the same as motive, as you can see by the definitions below: Definition of MOTIVE 1: something (as a need or desire) that causes a person to act 2: a recurrent phrase or figure that is developed through the course of a musical composition VERSUS: Definition of EXCUSE 1: the act of excusing 2a : something offered as justification or as grounds for being excused b plural : an expression of regret for failure to do something c : a note of explanation of an absence Words mean thing…
/r/MensRights20/04/11 04:12 PM
0

Citation?
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:37 PM
5

So she stole his house, and ran him over with a car when he wouldn't cooperate in helping her refi the thing, and it's all beacuse she was pissed over cell phone ownership and infidelity? THAT'S an affirmative defense? Awesome. Some animals are apparently more equal than others. Any man who gets married or cohabitates with a woman at this point needs his head examined.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:36 PM
4

Try joining the 'equal-opportunity' armed forces if you really want to see this in action... Guy: Well, we have a long ruck ahead of us. Grab your pack and your weapon and let's get to it! Female trooper: But-it's too heavy. I'm going to report you to social actions for sexual harrasment if you don't carry my load for me. Guy: Awesome, I'd love to carry your load as well as my own, so glad you're here to improve unit cohesion and morale! On a side note, I'm astounded that your 'gender-normed' PT…
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:29 PM
2

It surely is. In fact, it's JUST like that. Equality only provides the foundation for success, but it doesn't guarantee outcome. That's precisely the issue 'feminists' seem to have with equality. Equal treatment isn't what their after-a position of superiority is what feminists really want, and they're getting it.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:22 PM
2

Have an orangered. I LOL'd.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 08:04 AM
0

What I was going for was condescension. Looks like I missed the mark. But I am, admittedly, an asshole, so that's much more accurate than hippy. You may now declare yourself the winner of this argument, and return to whatever it is you normally do when not trolling.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 07:47 AM
0

ROFL. Hippy. Dead on, man, dead on. I'm trying to point out that you seem just a touch worked up, and that you might want to count to 10, take a breath, or bite your big fuzzy Hello Kitty pillow-whatever works.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 07:38 AM
-4

It IS a widely held view-but based on mistaken impressions and stereotypes. Try reading the clarification I posted earlier. Admittedly, I could have been clearer-and I'm pretty sure that I said as much. I really think you might need a hug. Let it go. Open a window and peek outside. Smell some fresh air.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 07:28 AM
-4

Studies have shown that male officers are involved in deadly force incidents more often than female officers Yes, that certainly disproves my assertion that female officers use deadly force less often than their male couterparts. And feel free to downvote, I haven't integrated my Reddit karma into my self image, so I think I'll live. Do you want a hug?
/r/MensRights21/02/11 07:21 AM
-8

Really? Isn't the first Google search result a link to the DoJ study I just discussed? And, 'asshat'? Really? Such language in a fine establishment like this! Tsk, tsk.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 06:58 AM
-17

here you are.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 06:46 AM
5

Mine too. All that's required is that the entry is unlawful and that I believe the person in question intends to use ANY degree of force against any other occupant of the residence.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 06:44 AM
5

Yep, afte re-reading my comment, I was pretty much unintelligable. The important thing is that I knew exactly what I meant! Data from the Department of Justice, along with studies done by non-governmental agencies, seem to indicate that female police officers don't use force any more frequently than their male counterparts. I was suprised when I learned this several years ago, because I had been so enculturated to believe the 'weak female' sterotype I just assumed that females would be more, not…
/r/MensRights21/02/11 06:34 AM
18

This larger lady pipes up, "Well can't I just shoot the man because well, I'm a woman?" Look into the frequency of use of deadly force by male vs. female police officers. You'd be in for a suprise. Your classmate's position is widely held, and frequently reinforced by courts.
/r/MensRights21/02/11 01:05 AM
2

This well thought out comment reminds me of the Reddit I orginally subscribed to-a place for honest discourse about important contemporary issues. Thank you very much for the comment, and have an upvote!
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:20 PM
17

I know I shouldn;t hit women While I agree that one shouldn't go about hitting PEOPLE, I don't think that gender makes any difference whatsoever. She hit you, and was hit back in return. Stupid hurts.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 01:53 AM
2

I don't think this falls under feminism. In TX for example, there are more 'men' than women in the state legislature. If it was feminism, how would these laws get passed? Well-funded lobbyists.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 11:47 PM
1

Undo the IV-D and CSE system. It doesn't work.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 11:46 PM
3

I know that this occurs-I'm still paying support on a child concieved under these circumstances.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 11:45 PM
-1

Equality is fine with most women, IMO, until it has some consequence-at that point all bets are off and chivalry is once again a WONDERFUL concept.
/r/MensRights10/10/10 03:19 AM
7

Document, document, document. As others have said, sae the phonereords. Check on the wiretapping and video recording laws in your state-if it's lawful to do so, record the phone calls and early morning Maglite visits. Call the police every time she harasses you-EVERY time. Insist that the police generate a case number, and get the responding officer's business card. Start a file in a secure location-parent's hous, or a bank safe deposit box.
/r/MensRights15/01/10 07:30 PM
28

Child support is the new alimony, pre-nup or not. If I were a multi-millionaire, the LAST place I'd get married or divorced would be the U.S. Welcome to the new world order, and the criminalization of the male gender.
/r/MensRights22/12/09 06:38 PM
5

I would agree with you, however, our current political system allows bitter, male-hating women to wield inordinate political power against men, who suffer as a result. There is no concomitant power wielded by bitter, angry men toward women-our politically correct society wouldn't allow it.
/r/MensRights21/12/09 10:58 PM
1

Maybe she's just hungry and as a result, in a bad mood. Hey sweetie, why don't you get yourself a sammich-and make me one too, while you're at it.
/r/MensRights19/12/09 06:14 PM
16

What?!??! All those UNREPORTED, UNINVESTIGATED rapes go unsolved? Where are the police with their ESP to detect and solve unreported crimes??? Another example of the male-o-centric maleocracy. I hate my penis-it's inherently evil, you know-as they all are.
/r/MensRights18/12/09 10:07 PM
1

As long as it's a private club, there should be no law against the establishment of a club whose members choose to discriminate on the basis of gender, race or any other factor. Is it morally right? No, I think it's morally reprehensible-but that's a question of morality, not legality, and my morals shouldn't be imposed by force of law on anyone else.
/r/MensRights18/12/09 09:36 PM
6

Family 'courts' need to have their authority stripped from them until they learn to use it appropriately. This, to me, is the main issue. As to grandparents' rights, sure, why not? If both mom and dad are unable to care for the kids, and granparents step up to the plate, they should have some 'rights' to the children. I feel that the more fundamental problem here is that family courts seem to behave as if they're mediating a property dispute, and very rarely seem to have the actual best interest…
/r/MensRights18/12/09 06:35 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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