TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

marswithrings Archive

View 5 posts and 441 comments by marswithrings 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)
2

Only if the emphasis remains on proven false, though. The alleged victim losing the case does not necessitate the claim was false, only that there was insufficient evidence to prove it true. Beyond reasonable doubt should go both ways there.
/r/MensRights26/11/17 03:59 AM
10

The US. I had to take one class directly on sexual assault and one class on alcohol abuse in relation to sexual assault (basically how any amount of alcohol invalidates consent) just to take one actual class, I wasn't even matriculated
/r/MensRights26/12/16 10:14 PM
3

This is somewhat true, but that's because feminism is actively hindering our ability to create an equal society with harmful narratives like the one people are attacking in this thread. It would be constructive if the sub could be more of its own thing and not always in anti-feminist mode, I agree, but the anti-feminism at least makes sense. it's not like it's just jaded neckbeardisms or something
/r/MensRights26/12/16 07:20 PM
28

Colleges are now having students go through mandatory sexual assault training (basically living out the feminist 'teach men not to rape' narrative). Many men find it insulting and ridiculous for a variety of reasons, including that it implies only men can be rapists, that men by default will rape unless taught otherwise, etc
/r/MensRights26/12/16 07:12 PM
7

the "us vs. them" mentality is, IMO, exactly what decimated the integrity of feminism. it is exactly why it became what it is today, and it makes me a little sad every time somebody posts something like this because i wonder if the MRM will go the same way. if you think about it, both movements by their very nature have a habit of attracting the disenfranchised. people who have been fucked over by the system, or watched those close to them get fucked over by the system. those people are by no me…
/r/MensRights14/01/16 03:58 PM
4

if you feel it's necessary to share a site like this, please use an archive link or something similar rather than sending their shithole of a site more traffic
/r/MensRights13/01/16 10:30 PM
1

yea i don't think this should be problematic, at least not as presented. if we were instead shown a link to some feminist icon tweeting "men are such pigs, and this is why!" or something, sure, that's a problem. but this seems to look at gender relations in the same way that karen straughan has in the past - in terms of "why is this a thing?" showing that there is some sort of scientific reason that explains why some aspect of gender relations are the way they are means that it's not some big fu…
/r/MensRights13/01/16 10:22 PM
1

i personally think it's a little bit of a clickbait thing too, though i'm sure she wouldn't admit that. let's face it, to people who think of "TRP" as the MRM's version of feminazis, it's a very... curiosity-inducing title. i'm not 100% sold on the "why let radicals redefine something you made up" argument because i think that ship may have already sailed, but i also think as a title it will certainly be effective at grabbing attention, if nothing else.
/r/MensRights02/12/15 02:38 PM
2

i agree, actually, and that's why i made that suggestion. see from a factual standpoint, both tactics are equivalent. pointing out that the original source is garbage is factually accurate. offering a better study is factually accurate. but offering a more "up-to-date" study gives the feminist the option of rationalizing the old study as simply that (outdated), instead of having to swallow their pride and admit it's a bad study. i suppose that doesn't help them deal with the narrative falling ap…
/r/MensRights15/11/15 10:11 AM
3

i wonder if more luck might have been had by showing the very recent DOJ study that revealed extremely different numbers, with the pretext of focusing on the recency, rather than trying to take down the integrity of the study the other person provided. they've obviously already been sold on the study but the recency route allows for the possibility that the original study was accurate, and the situation has merely improved, as opposed to forcing the person to change their mind about a study they…
/r/MensRights15/11/15 05:09 AM
-3

well, not to everyone, some people are into that, and that's their right. but it's equally your right to view it as undesirable, and the people running around thinking they have the right to tell you what you can or cannot consider attractive are some of the most deluded i've yet seen from that side of the fence.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 07:56 PM
-1

it's not a "true statement," it's a story. it's anecdotal evidence at best, but frankly we haven't even been given any reason to believe it's the author's personal story - as far as we can tell from the context provided, this is just a glorified rage comic. now, that doesn't mean there is no truth to the story told here - but it doesn't give us any facts. any statistics. there's nothing tangible here. there is nothing that i can bring forth if i debate in favor of men's issues. there is no actio…
/r/MensRights13/11/15 09:01 AM
2

this is /r/mensrants content, quite frankly
/r/MensRights13/11/15 08:13 AM
3

this kills the logic
/r/MensRights01/11/15 04:56 PM
1

eh yea but this also has over 1k points right now. this could potentially show up on /all in spite of the comments mostly being critical of it
/r/MensRights23/10/15 08:18 AM
4

Why would they bring attention to things that hurt the male population when, by definition, they strive for women's right in priority. if they were open about that, honestly, feminism might be the butt-end of a few less jokes around here. but they have repeatedly insisted they're all about equality, and decried movements like this one because mens rights is unnecessary when we already have feminism to take care of everything! half the battle people fight here is just getting others to realize th…
/r/MensRights23/10/15 08:16 AM
1

that's just the next-level commentary provided by this little graphic. the experience of a SJW on the internet is actually cyclical, they are constantly either dismissing someone's opinion as irrelevant or realizing they're offended by something. there is no "start" point because SJWs just pick up the graph and find the point they're currently at
/r/MensRights23/10/15 06:25 AM
1

well in your hypothetical situation if i fail to fight in defense of the nation it won't exist much longer, so i don't think i would particularly care if it wanted to kick me out
/r/MensRights20/10/15 01:58 AM
1

Should a country just allow itself to be conquered? my comment is even more true when a defensive war is being fought on the nation's own soil. if you can't even inspire your people to defend their own homes then they really must not think highly of their government. if it the situation was that bad, i think a draft would fail as well, people would just dodge it or go to prison and wait for the new government to take over. i'd be pretty surprised if the new government kept people in jail for ref…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 01:23 AM
2

so you're arguing that we need to have a draft so we can force obnoxious feminists into service? are you trying to imply the cultural burden/expectation placed on men to be the warriors means without a draft the military will still be almost exclusively men and you want a draft to level that out? that sounds suspiciously like a quota or affirmative action... if that's where you're trying to go with this, i would call that oversteering. i don't believe we fix any of these inequality issues by inf…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:43 PM
1

in theory, that should be hard to do in a republic. IMO if you can't get enough bodies together to fight a war, your people don't want to fight that war. they just cast their vote and they told you to fuck off, now go find some other way to get whatever it is you wanted out of that would-be war
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:37 PM
6

or we could just... not have a draft in the first place?
/r/MensRights19/10/15 07:17 AM
4

my post never said anything about people revoking consent after the fact well, perhaps not explicitly, but you said "consent can be revoked at any time" in a thread that is specifically about people revoking consent after the fact, so i think the confusion was understandable. i'm glad to hear you're not defending that idea, though. I can plan ahead and get a designated driver and take measures to ensure I don't hurt others. There's no one I can call to make sure that my booty call doesn't come o…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 10:53 PM
1

"tricks" are not coercion. look at the definition i included in the previous comment, coercion means there must be force or threats. somebody pulling a page out of barney stinson's playbook is arguably immoral, but they have not used coercion. coercion does negate consent, you're just defining it wrong.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 10:23 PM
7

Consent can be revoked at any time and that includes being in the act. but it does not include after the fact. and if you think the exception might be, as an example - yourself, as a child - the problem is as a child you could not legally consent in the first place. so i would argue that's not a retroactive revocation of consent, there just never was any consent. honestly the rest of the paragraph following that sentence, i think everyone here agrees with. the one stipulation is that this revoca…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 07:36 PM
3

i mean, if all you need for the job you want is "a degree" then psych will do it. but outside of the fact that you meet the basic "have a degree" requirement, bachelor's in psych doesn't get you much other than into a grad program. i know a shrink who sorta accidentally majored in psychology. advisor called him in to say "so uh, you kinda didn't take any of your engineering classes, and you're technically still an engineering major. we'll need to switch you to psych since that's what you took cl…
/r/MensRights15/10/15 07:32 AM
1

raising kids is usually (at least should be) a choice made by the couple, together. it's not supposed to be where the wife goes "fuck you i hate working, i'm staying home with the kids go make me money" any more than it's supposed to be the husband going "fuck you get in the kitchen" it's supposed to be a division of the labor required to maintain the household that both husband and wife find agreeable. whoever stays at home with the kids for 30 years sacrifices their career; employers these day…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 05:59 AM
3

i think its moreso implied by being someone who thinks "privilege" is a valid and constructive approach to critiquing the current state of society
/r/MensRights14/10/15 04:54 AM
1

well yea maybe, but you don't think another "somewhat hot dude" could replace any of her higher-paid co-stars?
/r/MensRights14/10/15 02:52 AM
3

onlyasith.jpg
/r/MensRights08/10/15 08:12 AM
11

even if that was the definition of feminism, that logical leap is still fallacious. feminism certainly can not and certainly does not have a monopoly on the concept of equality, so you can believe in equality without identifying as a feminist. it's completely unfair to assume someone who is not a feminist is opposed to equality, thats some cult-level "us vs. them" mentality going on there. someone truly fighting for equality should care more about equality itself and less about what label you us…
/r/MensRights19/09/15 03:03 AM
2

street harassment is a different beast entirely. i stopped checking your articles about when you linked to buzzfeed, but all the ones i looked at were specifically about street harassment; about guys approaching random women with a "smile, baby!" kind of pickup line. sure, that's shitty. and i might even be inclined to agree that specific problem is something women experience more than men. but i really don't think that's a fair comparison to what happened here. the setting is entirely different…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 04:19 PM
3

unless something was wrong and something was, she was tired and wanted to be in bed sleeping, not answering interview questions. the reporter's voices are significantly quieter than hers and i don't feel i can hear them quite well enough to properly ascertain his tone, but i would strongly disagree that the difference in phrasing here is exclusively semantics. which is an expectation that women receive a lot more than men. citation badly needed.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 03:11 PM
30

he didn't actually tell her to smile, based on what i'm seeing here. he said normally you're smiling, what's wrong? no part of that is asking her to smile, let alone is any of that an instruction that she should or needs to be smiling
/r/MensRights14/09/15 05:12 AM
2

but many women don't, because (see the second half of my original comment), and/or because he's not gunna make much money if you get him put in jail... but again, we're kinda on a moot point here. what's primarily important in reference to the OP, is that the only way a man can even somewhat legally "walk away" from a child is if the mother lets him. she has choices and legal rights to keep him at least financially invested, if nothing else.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 03:37 AM
2

i'm not aware of anywhere that men are technically allowed to back out, but there are certainly cases where they get away with it. the guy might work under the table, for example, so the government can't get to his wages to garnish them for child support. or, he may be just such a pain in the ass that the mother doesn't think the child support check is worth putting up with him and would rather miss out on the money, if it means he stays out of her/the kid's life. 'course the point here is these…
/r/MensRights28/08/15 03:26 AM
4

i think the girl's behavior was piss-poor, but with stuff like this i always wonder what the point is. are we suggesting this is a cultural problem? are we suggesting many women push their male SO's toward suicide – like as a normal part of our culture, too, not just because this particular woman was mentally unstable or something? if we're not identifying a trend that needs to be addressed on a legal or cultural level i'm not sure where we're going with this, and based just on the information p…
/r/MensRights27/08/15 09:06 AM
3

but two wrongs don't make a right. black text is making curt and cutting comments, claiming to be on the high horse of logic and reason without really actually making many points from them – just accusing the other people of not using them. the arguments that are made can be made sense of by a lot of people with shared background knowledge (a lot of people on this sub, for example), but they're explained poorly. anybody who doesn't spend a lot of time on this side of the fence is probably lost t…
/r/MensRights27/08/15 09:00 AM
1

i don't think i've ever actually used the label myself. i've addressed it when others have brought it up, but never gone into a conversation with guns blazing like "AS AN MRA I THINK (etc)". all it does is make an already uphill battle even harder as most people i've dealt with immediately assume everything you say is hateful, privileged garbage as soon as you're so much as associated with the MRM. to a point i think all such labels have the shared problem of attracting the disenchanted. of attr…
/r/MensRights25/08/15 08:16 AM
1

definitions do mean nothing if the way a word has been used is repeatedly changed. language is not set in stone, it evolves over time. the dictionary usually lags behind colloquial speech, but will eventually catch up. the issue is not people here disregarding a definition, the issue is you failing to recognize the definition has evolved. have you not seen what happened to the word literally? the original definition: in a literal manner or sense; exactly. but fairly recently added as an alternat…
/r/MensRights15/08/15 09:14 PM
3

There's no point in you replying to this. well at least I can appreciate you admitting you've stuck your head in the sand and will not change your mind regardless of how many different ways you are proven wrong
/r/MensRights14/08/15 07:47 PM
1

that's not addressing the counterpoints, that's a restatement of you position.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 07:45 PM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
/r/MensRights14/08/15 03:38 PM
5

you're hung up on a dictionary definition ignoring the fact that it's irrelevant. if i repeatedly swore to you how i'm a nice person and every time you saw me i sucker punched you in the jaw, you would protest the idea that i'm a nice person don't you think? actions speak louder than words, and we are what we repeatedly do.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 07:32 AM
2

"Gay" meaning "happy" and "homosexual" are simply different things. gay as a synonym for "happy" is archaic at best though. it is rarely used that way anymore and you know it, you're just splitting hairs.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 07:20 AM
0

The problem isn't that people like those in this subreddit are sticking that label on people who do not identify as feminists. The problem is that misandrists are identifying themselves as feminists. Over and over and over again, people who identify themselves as feminist have shown the kind of misandry we're talking about. You've incorrectly placed the blame in this situation. This guy explains it at length complete with tons of sources to help illustrate this sort of thing, but honestly it's o…
/r/MensRights14/08/15 07:16 AM
1

Even if that were true (it isn't, but let's pretend for a second), would it matter? Are the issues faced by males today really any less important because other people who happened to have the same genitals made decisions leading to those issues generations ago? Feminists like your friend generally try to use that argument to dismiss male issues; to sweep them under the rug. And in my opinion, they fall back on this type of argument because they don't have a good excuse for ignoring men's issues.…
/r/MensRights14/08/15 06:55 AM
1

i was simply trying to recognize the validity of opinions differing from mine in regards to how attractive the face used in the comic is. my opinion that the guy is definitively average, but clearly at least some people disagree.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 06:57 AM
3

what's interesting is the advice worded differently (namely, by removing the dog analogy, but some additional tweaks are required as well) it actually doesn't have terrible suggestions. like look at the one where it says what to do if you want 'your man' to hang out with the in-laws. it suggests cooking his favorite meal. in essence, the tip the author is offering could be written as "if you want to take in the relationship, you must give as well" i definitely think it was worded offensively as …
/r/MensRights10/08/15 02:41 AM
1

if MGTOW focused more on the laws that can make things difficult for men, i might be slightly less opposed to it. but what i tend to see is stuff like this comic – notice how, although it described a situation in which the guy got screwed over partially/largrely because of the way divorce court works, it didn't actually mention divorce court itself in any way? there's no panel with our "protagonist" in front of a judge, or in any part of the family court system. there's not a footnote with refer…
/r/MensRights09/08/15 06:13 PM
2

Is important to the story that he is a attractive guy no it isn't. the only thing that can possibly accomplish is making people feel some sympathy for the cheating wife. it shouldn't, but it will lend some level of legitimacy to her side of the story and it undermines the whole point of the comic. how the heck do you figure the story of a cheating wife is improved by specifying that her lover was attractive? besides, the guy being attractive is by no means necessary for the divorce scenario the …
/r/MensRights09/08/15 11:55 AM
-6

I read all of the responses. You're still being racist. no. there is no good reason for using that face. think the face is just supposed to show the guy she cheated with was attractive? that adds nothing good to the comic, if anything it adds some sense of sympathy for the cheating wife. it shouldn't, but many people will interpret it as some degree of legitimacy to her cheating, so it basically undermines the whole comic. think the face is just there to differentiate that stick figure from the …
/r/MensRights09/08/15 09:20 AM
3

when i first started getting beat over the head with gender equality shit and didn't really know what was going on i pretty quickly determined something was wrong with feminism. they so often argued with feelings even when the facts contradicted them, for example. i found this sub and slowly got more and more involved with it as, at the time, i saw content that had substance. statistics to illustrate how the problems the movement sought to address actually existed. rationale on why those statist…
/r/MensRights09/08/15 09:10 AM
1

well, i don't think i'm really playing what-if here, but at least we agreed on something haha
/r/MensRights09/08/15 06:05 AM
5

it is a little weird. last time this was submitted the post did pretty poorly – poorly enough that the poster deleted it, check the link in my original comment. and i do wish the mods would weigh in on why this was allowed. it seems to be a pretty clear violation of the first rule on the mod policy and nobody has really offered me reasons why it isn't. people are disagreeing over whether the post is racist or whether the guy the wife cheated with actually did anything wrong, but nobody is actual…
/r/MensRights09/08/15 04:58 AM
3

do you seriously think there's no moral issues with sexually pursuing somebody you know is in a relationship? let alone actually having sex with that person?
/r/MensRights09/08/15 04:55 AM
-4

i am not a frequent submitter, but i have submitted content to this sub before. i frequently vote, and did so here. beyond that – your logic applies equally to yourself. if you think i should keep my mouth shut, downvote, and move on, then why did you not do the same? if i'm out of line for calling this post bullshit, are you not also an offender for calling my comment bullshit? edit: you guys are really full of shit today, you know that? downvoting me without explanation for calling out a post …
/r/MensRights09/08/15 04:53 AM
1

i don't think any non-SJW would try to inject race if the stick figures were black and gray, especially since gray isn't a race. furthermore, the stick figures being colored black has a variety of reasons outside of race – that's not remotely the same thing as using an actual picture of a black man to illustrate only one of the people in the comic and leaving the rest racially ambiguous. however, if you're still concerned that the colors indicate race, make them colors that can't be construed to…
/r/MensRights09/08/15 04:48 AM
-2

If somebody wanted to edit this, I might suggest giving the new man a square head instead if a round one or just make the stick figure gray.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 09:05 PM
-2

that doesn't add anything to the comic. if the guy was actually good-looking, all that does is add what some readers will see as even the smallest bit of legitimacy to the wife's decision to cheat. it undermines the point of the comic at best. and there's also a problem with that where attractiveness is subjective. the face attached doesn't stand out as attractive to me, and on the internet you're never the "only one", so it stands to reason it's likely that point will simply be lost on many rea…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 08:57 PM
1

as extensively discussed elsewhere in the thread, i don't believe there is any good reason to have that face in the comic. it doesn't add any value or substance to the comic. it's not an assumption, it's a conclusion.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 08:27 PM
-3

it just looks like an average guy to me. i'm not sexually attracted to males so perhaps i am not the best judge, but he doesn't stand out as overtly attractive or smooth to me. you're certainly free to disagree but attractiveness is highly subjective – adding that face brings extremely low (if any) potential benefit to the comic, but brings what i consider to be a great deal of risk that it is misinterpreted-at-best. every possible rationalization i've seen so far to excuse the use of that face …
/r/MensRights08/08/15 08:25 PM
9

a stick figure's color isn't typically considered representative of his/her race. this is probably partially because they're usually on a white background and you couldn't have easily visible white stick figures, partially because stick figures started being drawn on paper and were black by default as that's usually the color of pens and close to the color of pencils, and partially because stick figures are often whatever color people felt like making them – red, orange, green, blue, etc. differ…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 07:13 PM
-10

so let's make posts about those laws so we have something tangible to discuss, rather than what's essentially a rage comic with no factual content for us to examine?
/r/MensRights08/08/15 07:10 PM
0

to point 1, you're splitting hairs. the color of a stick figure doesn't signify race. stick figures are often blue, red, green, etc. to point 2, if you had read through this thread, you'd see i pointed out i said bad guy for a reason – there's only one bad guy. there are obviously multiple bad people.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 07:05 PM
-11

the very first rule on this sub's moderation policy: No advice animals or other low-effort image or text posts. the 21st century divorce is absolutely worth discussing, but this is basically a rage comic. this isn't an actual news article about a man getting screwed over, or statistics on how often men get the shit-end of a divorce. there's nothing of substance, this comic is a complaint and a rant. and i understand the need for that, but that's literally exactly what /r/MensRants is for. if thi…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 07:02 PM
1

it gives a motive for the villain's actions exactly my point, a motive only offers some sense of legitimacy to the villain's actions – not to mention that a motive was already provided in pointing out the wife felt like she didn't get enough attention because the husband was always busy working... the comic gains nothing from adding that face.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:39 PM
5

it takes two to tango. if he were ignorant of her marriage status i would understand your argument, but as the comic clearly states he knew she was married and pursued her anyway. he specifically asked to come over while the husband was away. i shouldn't have to explain to you that that's bad. i really don't care if you think the woman was worse because she's the one who made vows, that's not relevant. both clearly did bad things.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:23 PM
2

why bother with that? why even imply that the guy she cheated with is attractive; wouldn't the comic be more poignant if it was possible she didn't even cheat on him for an attractive man? i'm not saying that i personally think cheating is more ok if the person you cheat with is attractive, but if that's the purpose of adding a face here it almost does seem like to many readers it could add a small degree of sympathy to the cheater's side. we could disagree on how likely that actually is, but wh…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:20 PM
-8

i said bad guy on purpose. there are clearly two bad people in the comic.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:13 PM
-3

first of all, this is a repost from less than a week ago second of all, this is intellectually vapid and contributes nothing of value; it's just a complaint. this really belongs in /r/MensRants, not here. edit: somebody needs to explain to me how this isn't a violation of the first rule in the sidebar No advice animals or other low-effort image or text posts.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:04 PM
-13

literally every other character in the comic is a racially ambiguous stick figure. you do have to wonder why the bad guy in the comic was specifically shown to be black. edit: i'm somewhat amused this comment is being downvoted but most of my counterpoints below are being upvoted. can i ask that you guys read through the rest of this thread for more clarification on the point i'm making here? it looks like most of you agree once you get past the cheap laugh of the guy who responded calling me a …
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:02 PM
4

unless you're deliberately confusing the mrm with the redpill movement to be fair, they are. it's pretty obvious that people who are against this sub don't differentiate it from TRP. i mean fuck, the TL;DR of the post even makes a reference to swallowing the red pill
/r/MensRights02/08/15 10:13 PM
2

what discussion can there be on outright lies? You can't admit women are raped frequently, because that means your inability to get laid and your frustration with your inability to connect with the objects- and I mean objects- of your desire is not the calamity that demands real attention. It means by inaction or (god forbid) action you might be the bad guy in your own alpha sex fantasy. like this, what the fuck? the entire premise of the argument is built on the stereotype of the neckearded bet…
/r/MensRights02/08/15 10:11 PM
3

/r/MensRants
/r/MensRights02/08/15 10:03 PM
2

i know several psychologists very well and every time one of these has happened i've asked for their thoughts – inevitably, the shooter is pretty much a textbook, open-and-shut case of crazy. admittedly that's based on what we're able to find out about them on the news, but since the media is unfortunately infatuated with spreading their manifestos all over the place (which inspires more of these people to do the same) i think they have a fair amount of information to base that diagnosis on.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 08:57 PM
9

The myth of senseless mass killings, thus, functions like the specter of “mental illness,” a red herring that distracts from the real discussion we should be having. As Arthur Chu points out in Salon, it’s a “goddamn cop-out.” Chu writes, “We … have statistics showing that the vast majority of people who commit acts of violence do not have a diagnosis of mental illness and, conversely, people who have mental illness are far more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators.” the gu…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 06:11 PM
3

i'm on the list for observing that if the US had a republican president appoint the 2 SCOTUS justices Obama was able to appoint, we likely would not have just ruled in favor of gay marriage. i referred to that as a "screw up" as well, making the comment at least implicitly pro-homosexual. so, basically, i'm on the list for supporting a SJW cause.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 05:45 PM
6

...You think Romney or McCain would have appointed moderates? And at that, are you sure it would have passed? The vote was 5-4 as is, a single justice would have swung that the other way.
/r/MensRights25/07/15 07:23 AM
8

They would have screwed things up in very different ways. For example, Obama was able to appoint at least one (maybe two? memory fails) SCOTUS justices. Chances are extremely high if Romney or McCain were president for that appointment, the SCOTUS would not have ruled in favor of gay marriage.
/r/MensRights25/07/15 06:57 AM
2

right, and i understand that. but that's not what anybody here is saying. haha
/r/MensRights23/07/15 01:02 AM
2

i never said acting logically points to rape, and technically, i didn't say acting illogically does either. i said it's plausible. i wouldn't necessarily consider acting in either manner proof of anything, which was kinda the point. we shouldn't assume illogical actions disprove a rape case any more than we should assume they prove it true
/r/MensRights22/07/15 03:08 PM
5

there may be individuals who identify as feminist that still do both mean well and do good, but the movement at large deserves the reputation it gets here.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 05:54 AM
27

feminists definitely abuse that as an excuse for false accusers. but rape is a traumatic event and trauma victims tend not to act rationally, especially right after the trauma – that's not "feminist logic", that's just a fact of life.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 02:58 AM
17

her consensual sex with another man is completely irrelevant to whether or not she consented to sex with john doe. but the fact that she acknowledges how drunk he was just backs up that he was, by feminist standards, unable to consent. for him to get convicted of rape in that state makes no sense, unless you doublethink pretty hard
/r/MensRights22/07/15 02:48 AM
69

the text messages themselves i don't find terribly important. she states she didn't yet want to accept it was rape so she basically pretended it wasn't at first – thats a dumb thing to do, and nobody should ever do that, but actual rape victims tend not to act very logically, so that's a plausible story. the alcohol, however, makes this ridiculous to me. the guy they expelled was blackout drunk? if she was blackout drunk, it would have been considered rape, hands-down, no questions asked. no one…
/r/MensRights22/07/15 12:33 AM
3

why did he not correct her on the whole "women can't rape men without giving them viagra" thing? i mean there's a thousand and one things wrong with everything she says here, but that's an easy factual one that she based a lot of the rest of her logic off of. she has to reexamine the whole damn thing if he just points out that isn't how it works.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 08:32 PM
1

if you can write a single comment that doesn't fight strawmen i may respond again. but i'm not going to keep wasting time trying to explain to you for the thousandth time why just about every single thing you're basing your argument off of is completely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 12:42 AM
1

it DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER if you think it's a feminist definition of rape because ITS THE LEGAL ONE. men have been and will continue to be charged and labeled based on that definition. if a girl isn't sure she's comfortable but she rolls with it, feminists convince her the day after to retroactively cry rape. by my "narrative", the girl would have been encouraged to think about what she wants before the situation and would have known that it was her job to communicate with her partner if she is …
/r/MensRights15/07/15 03:16 PM
1

again, conflating "don't bully people you don't know" with the fat acceptance movement. i can be somewhere in between here, man
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:14 AM
1

fuck's sake you are STILL fighting strawmen. you're still on and on about coercion. you take a point i'm trying to make, and you flip it on it's head and turn it into completely the wrong fucking thing, and then you try to debunk that imaginary point; that strawman, that you just built out of thin air. like when you talk about communication problems, you act like i'm putting all the blame on the men for failure to interpret, for being "bad at reading responses," when in reality it's the opposite…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 12:43 AM
1

You believe a guy can accidentally rape due to reading false signals. That, came from feminist camp. I do not believe in that b.s. I believe men are harmless, and do care for women's well being during sex. you want to call that type of rape a feminist definition of rape, then fine, you can do that and i'm not gunna take that fight. but it's also the legal definition, so i'm not being a feminist by using it here, i'm just being realistic. i am concerned for the men who might be labeled rapists du…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 03:03 PM
1

Did someone taught them what is "miscommunication of consent"? Seriously you need to write better english, and you need to stop sending me different comments that all make the same points i have addressed a thousand times against the same strawmen i have a thousand times over declared are not part of my argument. you still can't separate innocent guys from violent and intentional rapists in your scenarios. every example you cook up to try and disprove me is irrelevant; uses an actual rapist and …
/r/MensRights14/07/15 02:57 PM
1

i'm not saying it's impossible for them to work, but those strategies can also be harmful, so if they must be used, they need to come from people who actually know the overweight person well enough to judge the impact. not from strangers who know nothing about their lives
/r/MensRights14/07/15 02:49 PM
2

the study doesn't just talk about self-defense, though. it also talks about working with women to help them discover and establish their sexual boundaries, so they know in advance what they are/not OK with. this knowledge and confidence helps them avoid awkward situations other women sometimes end up in where they just go with the flow because they haven't really made up their mind and/or they feel guilted/pressure. it's not just about identifying and avoiding potential rapists, it's about knowi…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 07:20 AM
1

right, rather than try to actually communicate let's fall back on unfounded personal insults and accuse a guy who hasn't said literally anything pro-feminist of subscribing to feminist theories, all of which will contribute literally nothing to the conversation. good plan
/r/MensRights14/07/15 07:10 AM
2

I said, he was a rapist to begin with, and some women avoiding him like a plague, will not change him. He would just seek out other victims. if you're talking about somebody who was a rapist in the first place, then you are not talking about the same kind of person i have been, and that point is irrelevant. i have repeatedly stated open communication will not stop intentional/violent rape, since my very first comment on this thread. but not to a point where you partner felt like she's being frea…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 06:15 AM
2

You are the one who can not read dude you seriously can't write. it's not my fault you don't speak proper english. is this not your first language or something? your comments are so atrociously worded and i don't even see the point in trying to discuss this with you anymore; i too frequently find myself unable to understand what on earth you're trying to say. figure out how to put your points into coherent english or i can't do this.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 06:05 AM
2

I am calling this narrative b.s. Because if that guy behaves that way, he knew full well he just raped a woman, as evident by ALL the responses here, keep in mind what group we are in. There was no "miscommunication of consent". He knew once he get it going, he can use his physical power to control and rape her. And he probably do this all the time to other women. you have provided absolutely zero evidence to back up this claim. i have offered both a study and am speaking from a plethora of stor…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 05:55 AM
3

If a woman felt she had been raped after voluntarily wanting to have sex with that guy, chances are, she was with a rapist who had raped other women before and was fully aware he raped her too by your omission that's not automatically what happened. what is the alternative in your mind? can't it possibly have anything to do with the woman failing to communicate that she is no longer comfortable and wishes to stop?
/r/MensRights14/07/15 05:40 AM
2

for fuck's sake, for the last time, i am not talking about people that are well aware somebody does not want to continue and keep going anyway. but by feminists definition, is "victim blaming" because we should be teaching men "what consent is" instead so are you arguing in favor of feminist definitions? you're in the wrong sub for that And here is my point, if that rapists coerced a woman and she rejected to keep herself safe, that rapist is not going to learn what sex is and what consent is, h…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 05:33 AM
6

have you never interacted with people before? not everyone is good at communicating. especially when feminism is force-feeding them this idea that communication isn't their responsibility.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:56 AM
6

i'm glad somebody else gets the point i was making. it was starting to feel like i was talking to a brick wall.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:51 AM
3

EVERYONE agrees that if a guy start doing something the woman does not like, it is rape well that's an oversimplification of what people are saying, but i'm not saying otherwise. i'm saying in many cases it's easily preventable through communication, as backed up by the study i referred to. not every situation is as simple as you paint it. maybe both parties are drunk – to a feminist the male has automatically raped the woman in that scenario regardless of, well, anything else, but to most peopl…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:38 AM
2

SOME rape is essentially a miscommunication. when one party fails to communicate they no longer wish to continue with the sexual act, and the other party continues because they have no indication or communication telling them they should stop, that's technically rape. but it's not a violent or intentional rape, it's basically a miscommunication. the study i referred to backs this up; the people i'm referring to are not consciously deciding "i'm going to rape this person," they just think they're…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 03:50 AM
4

then it damages potentially true claims that consent was withdrawn but sex was not aborted. the app probably wouldn't actually hold much legal ground. for exactly those reasons. what it does do, however, is force both parties to take a second to think about what they're about to do. there was a study posted here not long ago that showed the rate of rape decreases when women are taught to say no. literally, just say no. they put some women through classes where they taught them to think about wha…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 02:42 AM
1

I think you, like many others in these comments, have conflated my 'don't bully people' stance with the fat acceptance movement. obesity is unhealthy. I am not trying to pretend otherwise. I do not support a person choosing to be unhealthy, personally, I just believe it is their choice to make. our solution is to stop covering self-inflicted-obesity related health issues with public funds, and to better educate people on how to live healthy. as I think I said already, I see tess holiday as proof…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 12:05 AM
1

I enjoy people like you. You make vague, baseless assumptions about your opponent's argument and then fabricate an entire counterclaim off these illusory premises. that's hilarious because that's what people like you keep doing to me. and that's exactly what your promoting we do to fat people. instead of linking to a page full of fallacies how about you explain exactly how you aren't actually being a complete hypocrite supporting the bullying of people based on their weight regardless of why the…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 07:54 PM
1

i know all this stuff about eating healthy, but the point is many (if not most) fat people don't, and what reason do they have to trust you about it? as opposed to the dozens of conflicting voices telling them other things work? weight loss is an industry in the US but the problem is if everybody got thin the industry would disappear. so we get companies shoveling misinformation and shit products that don't work properly and even if people manage to lose the pounds with the diet they put it all …
/r/MensRights13/07/15 03:29 PM
1

you're making tons of assumptions about fat people and much of your argument is based on them. you assume they don't care if they're right or wrong? that they're all spreading misinformation and are basically a cancer to society? maybe the "fat acceptance" people like tess are, and because they are outspoken you do have information to make that judgement. but you're conflating all fat people with the fat acceptance movement, and thats the kind of problem i am speaking out against. you've also co…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 03:23 PM
1

your argument against obesity is that it is harmful to society. alcohol is by several easily measurable orders of magnitude far more harmful to society than obesity. if that is your reasoning against fat people you have to apply it elsewhere and basically every recreational drug has to go. and alcohol, unlike food, is not a necessity, so we can just make it illegal to help nanny people away from getting drunk. which is exactly your logic, again, you want to control other people's lives.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 02:53 PM
2

i still do not promote bullying/shaming tactics, regardless of the chances. that's something you're just not going to change my mind on. it's not a fact-based thing where you can prove me wrong, it's a moral issue. you should always strive not to judge people based on your assumptions. doing so is the cause of so many of our problems as a society, and we already make so many smaller subconscious judgements about people. i refuse to rationalize harshly and consciously judging somebody to be deser…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 07:52 AM
1

so logically it follows that you're a prohibitionist? we should make alcohol illegal again?
/r/MensRights13/07/15 02:30 AM
2

oh but you missed the part where he's not going to plateau! that's why he's getting that book on how to lift and talking to the regulars at his gym. he's going to learn from other's mistakes. That's what puts me above most: a willingness to learn and put things into practice.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:29 PM
1

You don't have to bully them over it but at the same time it's harmful and irresponsible to validate their delusions just to avoid hurting their feelings. To be clear, I'm not advocating shaming, I'm just advocating against allowing peoples delusions to hamstring them and prevent them from being healthy. i actually don't think we really disagree. it sounds to me like you know a little more about health and fitness than me, so you're picking apart some of my examples that weren't perfect, but the…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:24 PM
2

good to know, but that all still assumes a good diet is easily doable. as i pointed out in another comment, the middle class is disappearing and we have an increasing number of people who are eating on a budget. and the thing about budget food is you really have to know what you're doing to make it healthy. what the average person will eat on a budget is pretty much terrible for you i think that has more to do with our culture and how we educate people than these people being lazy. especially wh…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:16 PM
1

good grief, you people and assuming anyone who thinks "hey, maybe we shouldn't bully people based on assumptions we're making about their lives" must himself be fat. is empathy really that hard for you to understand, that you cannot fathom somebody defending a group of people they have no vested interest in?
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:10 PM
5

on the one hand your brother is a pretty good example of why im advocating that we temper our judgement of overweight people. it just comes easy for some people and they don't appreciate the advantage they have over other people who really have to really work for it on the other hand, i do have to recommend exercise in your case – i know it sucks when you have no energy and depression really sucks the energy out of you, but it's kind of a vicious cycle. exercising can do a lot to help your depre…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 04:13 AM
3

i'm having a good time watching somebody else have a very similar conversation with this guy and coming to the exact same conclusion – that he's a kid with very little real life or lifting experience speaking out of naivety. he confessed in my conversation with him that he has been lifting for only 2 months and this is his first time getting into lifting. he's on a gym high... gains are easy for him right now, so it's easy to stay motivated. he hasn't been lifting long enough nor is he old enoug…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 04:03 AM
1

That's what puts me above most: a willingness to learn and put things into practice. that's your problem. you think you're above most. you think you're the exception to the rule, you think "that can't happen here". maybe you are kid, but i'm not going to take your word for it, you've gotta prove it. if you keep that same level of dedication up for a whole year come back and tell me about it. 2 months is insignificant and your promise of dedication is the same one that most people are making 2 mo…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 02:46 AM
0

children are a valid point but adults are responsible for themselves. i'm not going to nanny them and i certainly don't think the government should. as to the children, do you really think creating a culture of shame solves the problem? in many/most cases the parents will exert more influence over the children than such a culture would. i don't think bullying/shaming people will help.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:50 AM
2

first off, early gains are easy. honestly man, i'm glad you're sticking with it so far, but my point is if you've only been doing it 2 months, it's hard to say you're serious about it. that's an insufficient period of time to prove that you're going to stick with it in the long run. i'm not gunna be the dick that shits on your progress because you're new to lifting, and at least you're trying. but 2 months is not an impressive run and most people will fall off, probably within the year but defin…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:46 AM
0

true. and we should probably respond with better education and stop shoveling so much garbage food out to people. especially as the middle class is disappearing, more and more people are eating on a budget and unless you're educated on what to look for – which most people aren't, because you have to learn that on your own – budget food is unhealthy as fuck. but we shouldn't respond by bullying and shaming strangers based off of assumptions we make about their lives. especially people who are jus…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:12 AM
2

No, an ad hominem is when I ignore your point and instead make an assertion of your character, you idiot. that's exactly what you're doing. you keep ignoring my points and pretending that you can ignore them because it's safe to assume i'm fat Well, fuck! Do you have 4 working limbs or not!? you're missing the point, as usual. the point is that you can't make any of the assumptions you have been making about me. you have nothing to back any of those assumptions up and you're dismissing my argume…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 12:57 AM
2

no not everyone is a quadriplegic, but the point is that some people don't have the amount of control over their weight that you assume everyone does. if you want to keep going to extremes and finding people like the girl you just linked, you have to recognize quadriplegics as a valid example as well. by bringing somebody like her up you are using the same tactic – you're pointing to an extreme example to try to make it easier for the other person to understand your position. i'll let you pick, …
/r/MensRights12/07/15 12:35 AM
4

you can try to convince me that everyone has the time, energy, and resources to look like a supermodel until you're blue in the face. but what you still have not addressed is why you think you have the right to dictate to other people how they should live their lives. and you really can't address that, because you do not and you should not have that right. the fact that you clearly think you actually have the authority to judge other people like that is what makes you the asshole in this exchang…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 11:36 PM
3

feminists are stripping women of their agency with the idea that being remotely drunk makes a woman incapable of consenting to sexual acts. i mean i think we all agree there's a point somewhere around when you pass out where you legitimately are too drunk to consent, but as you've proven in your story – where you were drunk and turned down somebody else's sexual advances – being drunk doesn't automatically relieve you of the ability to say "no"
/r/MensRights11/07/15 10:32 PM
8

But then, a miracle happened: one day, a few months later, Rogers was suddenly able to move her feet and legs again. There’s less than a one percent chance of someone who is paralyzed to be able to regain mobility and Rogers turned out to be that one percent. that woman is no longer paralyzed, man! she recovered the use of her limbs, and that part came through luck, not through her hard work. that doesn't address the point i was making in any way. One hour a day, 3 times a week. How often do you…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 10:06 PM
9

that's still assuming an awful lot. sure, you got a guy with one leg who's ripped. what about a quadriplegic? what about disorders that fuck up your metabolism? and on top of that, you need time to get ripped. you really wanna shame and bully that single dad who works two jobs to support his three kids because he doesn't have rippling abs? i fully support being healthy, personally. but at the end of the day, i favor letting people do whatever the fuck they want with themselves. it's kinda like f…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 09:17 PM
1

to play devil's advocate not everyone is overweight at their own fault. some people have disorders regarding the way their body processes food that really screws up their metabolism, and some people just have naturally lower metabolisms. some people have health complications that make it difficult or impossible for them to exercise properly. we absolutely should encourage people to be as healthy as possible and i don't entirely agree with promoting acceptance of obesity. but i think we should al…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 05:53 PM
19

yea not happening. trying to wrap my head around the woman over there who is arguing that if you're married, men signed up to pay for a kid anyway and it essentially doesn't matter if it's theirs because they're legally bound to it regardless as if that's not a fucking problem is giving me a headache. it's all part of the contract to her. how you can approach marriage almost like a business, from such a legal/contractual point of view, and then turn right around and talk about how grievously wou…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 07:22 AM
2

Women have to deal with the loss of their husbands/brothers/sons and also suffer the consequences if they are captured but you're forgetting the context – this is an american politician. you know the last time a war was fought on american soil? where american women were actually in danger of getting captured and/or raped etc? (excluding the small percentage of women who served the military in some capacity that actually did put them in danger, but they aren't exactly who we are discussing here) …
/r/MensRights11/07/15 01:59 AM
2

no, normal people who realize that the nature of movements like the mrm and feminism is that they attract the disillusioned. they attract people who've been fucked over by the system, and sometimes they are bitter (arguably rightly so). bitter people sometimes speak out of anger and allow themselves to be guided by their emotions instead of the facts and logic. feminism allowed those people to control the movement, hence it became what it is today. we can't do the same
/r/MensRights09/07/15 03:07 PM
3

they literally made manspreading illegal in new york in response to the feminist shaming campaign related to it Bad news, tall men with a poor sense of boundaries: the NYPD have had enough of your nonsense. Yes, after op–eds in the New York Times (£), a popular crowdshaming Tumblr campaign and a series of public service ads from the Metropolitan Transport Authority, 'manspreading', or 'sitting with your legs slightly too far apart', as it used to be known, has apparently become a criminal offenc…
/r/MensRights09/07/15 03:04 PM
5

thank you for providing a perfect demonstration of why some of us have a problem with TRP
/r/MensRights09/07/15 07:25 AM
2

my problem is when people bleed over to this sub and start spewing theories about how "non violent" rape doesnt actually do any more harm than a handshake and women only hate it because it "adds sex to the market" and "decreases OTHER women's sexual value" garbage like that always seems to be coming from TRP. it's a little hard to tell for sure because they don't always bluntly/openly identify as TRP but it's quite clearly not normal MRA logic and i'm not making this shit up. this one went so fa…
/r/MensRights09/07/15 07:14 AM
11

yea this is actually a huge part of why i'm involved with this sub despite my heavy criticisms of the current feminist movement. feminism has power. it affects change in our world, laws are being passed, standards are being set, and so forth, based off some of the worst rhetoric from some of the most "extreme" feminists. they outlawed "manspreading" for fuck's sake, anybody who tries to write those people off as a vocal internet-bound minority is full of shit. and MRAs are where? nowhere compare…
/r/MensRights09/07/15 01:51 AM
5

yes, but most recently it was debunked by the DOJ which is probably what /u/salacio was referring to
/r/MensRights06/07/15 06:49 AM
1

i had one who just snapped. i really don't think it was even like the conversation got out of hand or anything, i guess she just got tired of people not circlejerking along with her feminist posts, because it was legitimately an amiable exchange primarily between me and one of her other friends, but with a couple other people putting in here and there. she wasn't even taking part - i'm pretty sure she was afk... but when she got back to facebook she just kept nuking the comment thread and callin…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 07:14 AM
0

They could have instead moved to the North, if they felt that slavery wasn't something they believed in or if it wasn't a philosophical hill worth dying on. OK, but again, there were other reasons. i'm not bothering to challenge what the high rollers and politicians cared most about, so i'm not sure why you keep restating it as if i don't understand. what i'm challenging is the order of importance to the common man. you seem to think it was black and white to them too - if they supported slavery…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 04:28 AM
1

I hope you will agree that only one or two people, aside from yourself, engaged me intelligently or politely, and ask yourself what it might mean, beyond "Well we're sick of male feminists!", that that is the climate here. i think what it means is that as often as they are at odds, feminism and the MRM suffer from the same problem. more or less by definition, the movements both attract the disillusioned. they attract people who've been screwed over by the system, by sexism, what have you. and th…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 04:16 AM
-1

i'm not twisting it, i'm making two points. one, that slavery is not the end of the list. there's more to it, and people like OP a few comments up don't seem to understand that. they like it black and white so they can just instantly judge anybody who sees value in the flag. two, i don't believe you've shown evidence that the average southerner held slavery just as high on the list as the people whose way of life actually did depend on it. the average southerner was too poor to own slaves. i don…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 03:54 AM
-1

so, because it was on the list, that means it's OK to pretend it was the only thing on the list? furthermore, the "formal" lists like the ones you are referring to would certainly put that high on the list as politicians then (as now) are the people with power and money. in the south, this probably meant plantation owners. but what of the working man? you know, the people who made up the vast majority of the population and the soldiers who made fighting the war possible? i'm sure the high roller…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 03:42 AM
0

it's a flag that represents a bloody civil war and sedition. It's a symbol of secession, treason and traitorous intent. especially given the striking similarities between the civil and revolutionary wars, that statement arguably applies just as much to america's own flag. that argument just doesn't, and won't, hold any water with me. i'm not sure what your point is in naming the different flags here anyway, unless you're trying to bolster your argument about it being a bloody/violent symbol beca…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 02:51 AM
22

you might be getting downvoted because thats not what that flag stood for. you've got a very one-sided view of the history it is relevant to. look, if you think it's offensive, whatever. i don't care too much on arguing the conclusion you come to. but what bugs me is people like you acting like it's so cut-and-dried simple and like the flag is so completely fucking terrible and how anyone who flies it is a racist and a bigot. what the fuck? there's a crazy number of similarities between the rebe…
/r/MensRights29/06/15 06:10 AM
13

i'll point out i don't agree with the name-calling here, but feminism has shown time and time and time and time again that it does not only does not care for men, but that it often actively seek to act as a blocker to any progress on men's issues (for example, we've seen feminism campaign against father's rights). the thing is that it doesn't matter if the people in this video aren't representative of "your" feminism. they are still representative of feminism. you can't reasonably ask that femin…
/r/MensRights28/06/15 05:31 PM
1

they are only the loudest because men are too afraid to speak up for fear of being considered sexist. so the fuck what? it still means your assumption that women are not interested in helping men is actually sexist. and not the "everything is sexist" nonsense, you're actually making an assumption about someone you know nothing about based exclusively on their gender, and categorically refusing to offer them any sort of assistance based on that assumption that, frequently, isn't even accurate.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:44 PM
2

if I see a man begging on one corner and a woman begging on another, I'm giving money to the dude. then you do that, but that's not remotely comparable to what happened here. I honestly don't think women are interested in helping men. making a broad-sweeping judgement like that based on gender alone is fucked up dude. that's true regardless of how badly feminists have mangled the meaning of the word "sexist," that's just not justifiable. you realize that some of the loudest voices for male issue…
/r/MensRights27/06/15 07:18 AM
0

that's just sexist. that's the kind of shit that people link to when they're trying to prove this sub is just full of misogyny, man. and your argument doesn't make sense even if you don't think it's sexist. yea, women get more benefits/support/whatever. so what exactly does that have to do with helping a stranger out? especially in a situation like this it's not a zero-sum game. OP was waiting for food. it's not like he had a choice between helping a man and helping a woman – he had a choice bet…
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:37 AM
3

the change in tone that OP picked up on implies otherwise, especially considering it was after a case of staircase wit that he came to the conclusion he reached in his post, so that would not have biased his interpretation of her tone at the time. it does, however, remain a possibility.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:28 AM
-1

maybe it wasn't necessary or accurate to label that comment MGTOW, but the comment he was calling out really is shitty and really does offer nothing of value to the conversation.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:26 AM
4

which always seemed off to me. being gay doesn't make you a chopstick instead of a fork, even metaphorically speaking. if a fork is a man, a gay man is still a fork, right? so isn't it more like asking a pair of forks which one is the spoon? /splitting hairs
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:16 AM
6

The university settled for $32,000. The guy in the video got $6k and the rest went to his lawyer. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/02/ohio_university_settles_free_s.html
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:14 AM
3

it might be, but i wouldn't put too much stock in it regardless. i think it's a different culture than the western countries we are (usually) discussing. a possibly-maybe manifestation of the empathy gap in thailand isn't the best thing to bring up if you're discussing the empathy gap in the US or europe, IMO
/r/MensRights27/06/15 12:24 AM
1

would you expect anybody to be able to explain what is offensive about any offensive language though? i mean, generic profanity of course. there's some terms with a history like racial slurs that have actual explanations. but what if it was "fuck" instead of "cunt," would you expect any better of an explanation?
/r/MensRights26/06/15 12:47 AM
14

dunno what kind of games you're playing but outside of gaming "cunt" is considered one of the most offensive terms you can use, especially when directed at a woman. i know a handful of people, mostly women, who will swear like sailors but as soon as somebody says "cunt" people freak out. i don't really have a strong opinion on if that's how it should be or not here, just relating my experience with americans and the word.
/r/MensRights25/06/15 02:48 PM
2

i only partially agree... even then, it's not really a problem as long as it's a single fun comment. it's when the same person repeatedly targets you with those kind of comments and we start to get stalker-esque behavior that stuff starts to get creepy.
/r/MensRights25/06/15 06:26 AM
2

I would contact the authorities just to start a paper trail. Even if you can't prove anything well enough for the cops to take action now, she sounds like the kind of person who might continue to antagonize you and may even try to get you on the wrong side of a police report. having your side of the story on file could help down the road even if it feels like it doesn't accomplish anything right now
/r/MensRights24/06/15 06:42 AM
2

They are having kids because they are stupid and irresponsible my point partially being in the US that may not entirely be their fault, due to the way we handle sex education
/r/MensRights18/06/15 03:40 AM
1

is it possible that has more to do with the US's whole abstinence-only sex-ed style and repressive sexual culture than it has to do with people who actually think they can afford it?
/r/MensRights18/06/15 01:00 AM
1

people with kids become legally responsible for other human beings and shoulder a huge burden both financially and metaphorically. minors don't have full legal rights and in a manner of speaking they're more or less a part of their parent's person. so, i don't really look at it as we're treating individuals differently, we're treating an individual (person without a child) differently than a group (at least one parent + at least one child). yea sure at some point there's going to be a "too far".…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 12:56 AM
1

thats actually part of why i posted this. i needed to find a shred of sanity in there somewhere or i was going to lose my faith in humanity. not that i had much to begin with, but you know what i mean haha
/r/MensRights18/06/15 12:40 AM
3

i somewhat agree but i've also seen feminists generally fighting against father's rights in spite of the fact that logically it would make sense for them to support it. IMO if they want more women in the workplace an obvious way to help that would be to make it so their husbands can just as easily take care of the kids at home by eliminating preferential treatment of mothers as the caretakers of children (such as, in this example, maternity leave but no paternity leave). as another commenter sai…
/r/MensRights17/06/15 02:11 PM
32

"men are welcome to exclusively talk about quietly support female issues"
/r/MensRights16/06/15 03:34 PM
2

BFOQs
/r/MensRights16/06/15 03:29 PM
1

it's ironic. a lot of feminists do make issues out of racism but every statistic i've ever seen that "proves" racism is such a systematic and widespread problem is also true of men. "most of the prisoners are black even though they're a small portion of the population" gets thrown out all the time but "black people kinda do commit more crime per capita" is racism. which you could argue is true; however, "the overwhelming majority of prisoners are male" is met with "men kinda do commit the majori…
/r/MensRights16/06/15 07:33 AM
7

i believe this is the context as i understand it basically she's talking about how she felt when she first started digging into her feminism stuff and realizing how deep the roots of sexist/racist/homophobic "systems of oppression" run. she started to see it everywhere, hence leading into the snippet in the previous video and to her credit, she admits that at the time she was "the most obnoxious person" i just think she doesn't realize she never stopped being that person
/r/MensRights16/06/15 02:00 AM
7

i'll just leave this here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA0aKjY8K50
/r/MensRights16/06/15 12:51 AM
1

No,because most did not want it.And because most of them actively opposed it. but not all women did. your logic is that because some women didn't want to vote, all women were to blame for their inability to vote at the time. again i repeat, that's the same logic feminists use to dismiss virtually every male issue these days. watch: the inequality exists because of a conscious choice on one side. most did not want to stop it, most actively opposed stopping it. with one slight edit to make those s…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 11:04 PM
1

Not really.The inequality was more due to women not wanting the vote who is to blame for the inequality is completely irrelevant. that's like when feminists say it doesn't matter that half of domestic violence victims are male since the majority of DV attackers are still men, so what? it's still a problem that needs/needed to be addressed. women not wanting to go into STEM is different, that's a personal choice each individual woman gets to make and that choice is her right. voting is generally …
/r/MensRights11/06/15 10:39 PM
5

i think you're half-right. suffragettes had identified a real inequality that needed to be addressed. but they failed, as feminism has repeatedly throughout history, to address the male side of the issue. the right to vote was given exclusively to men because of the draft. men were the ones that had to go to war; who really paid the price for the consequences of political decisions that impacted international relations. this was stupid, yes, but in the sense that we shouldn't have a draft (or al…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 08:31 PM
8

both sides have extremists. but a big part of the difference in my eyes is that the feminist extremists are running the show. our extremists have no real power
/r/MensRights11/06/15 08:23 PM
1

I guess I would say I handle it because I consider modern feminism a failure on almost all fronts. it has been a long time since I've seen feminism make real progress and it has increasingly lost the respect of the general populace as it has become increasingly misandric. why would I expect this movement, which is already behind feminism in popularity and power, to fare any better using the same tactics? feminism suffers from similar accusations as the MRA. they are just less impactful because i…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:44 PM
5

actually quite to the contrary, i believe this movement to be better than feminism because people like /r/blacknorangez call out bullshit when they see it. i have never seen a feminist say something like he just did and it's people like that, that kept me coming back to this sub after i first found it. because something was different about this movement, because people actually cared about issues and facts and not arguing with feelings. we can't lose that. i would say we can't become TRP, but i'…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 10:31 AM
1

As a general rule, I disagree with the accusations as representative of the movement as a whole. I agree with other comments saying it's necessary for opponents to maintain their narrative, and it makes it easier to discredit the MRM if they just can attack the cartoonish neckbearded basement dweller instead of addressing the actual issues. However, clearly we have our own extremists like the feminists have "feminazis" (and ours almost always seem to be TRP). Example: I saw one guy around here w…
/r/MensRights09/06/15 04:50 PM
25

I think if you watch the video the various sections they pull out of the police report do suggest Solo is the one lying. One of the standouts for me was the officer noting that while the mother and son were both visibly battered, Solo showed no signs of injury other than complaining that her head hurt, and she "adamantly" refused to let police take a look at it. She was also the one who exhibited violent behavior as she had to be forced to the ground by police and, according to the video, shoute…
/r/MensRights08/06/15 06:10 PM
2

shouldn't blue pillers be targeting - i dunno, the red pill subs?
/r/MensRights22/05/15 10:22 AM
2

uh, i don't think that's really relevant to the question at hand, tbh. the question was whether or not women's opinions on rape and false accusations would change when/if it was their son (or other close male relation) on the wrong end of a false accusation. i think, more often than not, they would change. i'm not sure your idea of a female privilege culture is really relevant to that point
/r/MensRights21/05/15 09:20 PM
10

do you have examples of women who identified as an active feminist, and had a husband/brother/son falsely accused, and remained devoutly feminist? i think the issue is just that the men falsely accused don't usually have women who are proudly and actively feminist close to them, especially considering such women are actually a fairly small minority of all women
/r/MensRights21/05/15 08:38 PM
48

there was actually a post not too long ago about a woman who used to call herself a feminist giving up on the title because the false accusation happened to her husband and she realized juts how impossible it is to deal with that. it happens
/r/MensRights21/05/15 07:20 PM
3

i'm worried voat will face many of the same issues as it grows, though. i've barely posted anything to voat compared to my reddit history and i've already been honored over at /shitvoaterssay! but at the same time, the comment that ticked em off was the top comment in the thread i posted it in. if i had said on reddit what i said on voat, especially in a broad community like askreddit instead of a more specialized sub like this one, i'd probably have been smashed in downvotes. so though i am war…
/r/MensRights21/05/15 06:05 AM
13

i personally don't really understand why the divide is always men, and then women + anything in between or otherwise non-"binary", though. why is it men or literally everything else? isn't that "binary" as well?
/r/MensRights20/05/15 05:49 PM
10

i'd never called myself an MRA, but speaking out against bullshit posts like this one (and worse) got feminists calling me one anyway, so i guess i don't really have a choice in the matter anymore. ¯\ _ (ツ) _ /¯
/r/MensRights20/05/15 04:07 AM
111

the total average income of women is less than the total average income than men. this is extremely and wholly different from women getting paid less for the same work than men
/r/MensRights19/05/15 06:36 AM
67

so... tinder shows you pictures of people and a little profile information so that you can try to select a suitable person for your dates, correct? if so putting on a fat suit like this would be very misleading. she literally landed these dates based on a lie. i don't know, to me that seems like a very unfair scenario to put these guys in... you would know, based on the first 10 seconds of meeting this person, that they will lie to you. about pretty major things as well. i wouldn't want to start…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:28 PM
2

this looks incredibly up-to-date to me. that said, i would also like to see the source. there's no context here, just a screenshot zoomed in so far i don't even know what it's from.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:05 PM
0

Reading the race[8] section you'd think she was a saint to black people has the wikipedia page been edited since this was posted? a cursory glance at the page shows that statement is not entirely true. one of the first sentences in that section currently reads: Sanger's writings echoed ideas about inferiority and loose morals of particular races that were widespread in the contemporary United States.[85] In one "What Every Girl Should Know" commentary, she references popular opinion that Aborigi…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:09 AM
3

i did see some criticism, actually, but nobody was calling for a boycott. what i read was that the main character was shoved aside to make room for supporting characters - who were women. that combined with eve and something about the way rape was used in the story (didn't quite follow that part of the complaint, sorry) made some people feel that the movie was being used to pander to the crowd that wants to see more equality and justice in women's roles it should also be noted, this was viewed a…
/r/MensRights16/05/15 12:50 AM
7

not on them. but it works on people who are on the fence and not committed to the insanity that is SJWs people who haven't really picked a side get a chance to see and judge both sides for the way they hold themselves and the way they treat the other side. an incredibly well-written and eloquent response like OPs smashes the cheap-laugh, below-the-belt style straw man his friend posted, and i guarantee you he scored a point with most of their mutual friends who haven't downed the kool-aid we don…
/r/MensRights16/05/15 12:45 AM
24

she regrets that she "deprived the subject of the context it deserves" which literally just means "if i had more than 140 characters to back up my statement you'd see that i'm right"
/r/MensRights14/05/15 03:34 PM
0

I am not generalizing either. you are though, you're saying that you'll probably never get married because thus far women have behaved in a way that makes them incompatible with you, right? assuming that other women will act the same because of that is a generalization. you're commenting on what you perceive as trends in the behavior of women – how is that not a generalization (regardless of if it is accurate or not)? i'm not telling you to settle for somebody who's not loyal, by any means. but …
/r/MensRights12/05/15 07:07 AM
1

how's this Using time-diary data from 25 countries, we demonstrate that there is a negative relationship between real GDP per capita and the female-male difference in total work time per day -- the sum of work for pay and work at home. In rich northern countries on four continents, including the United States, there is no difference -- men and women do the same amount of total work. This latter fact has been presented before by several sociologists for a few rich countries; but our survey result…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 10:03 PM
0

but you're still assuming that your sample size is large enough to claim it's universal. you say "so many" but how many is it really in comparison to the population? there's some 7 billion people on the planet, i really think it's unjust to generalize about 3.5 billion of them because you've had a certain experience with, what, a dozen or so? there are plenty of alternative explanations to women looking for something "more exciting" as well... heck man, maybe you're boring, or maybe you pick get…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 09:13 PM
-3

sure, there are plenty of women like that, but they certainly don't account for all of them. that may be a problem you've come across that's why you're not married yet but i think that's a poor reason to say you'll probably never get married. with that mindset, it almost sounds to me like your doing what other commenters are accusing women of doing - wanting "the full package" and being unable to find an appropriate mate because their standards are too high. you've got what you even semi-admitte…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 07:48 PM
1

I don't know about the specific findings referenced in this article but in previous studies finding young women to be making more than young men they specifically looked at single young people. young men who are well off are also the best candidates to many women. not all of course, but the stereotypical gender roles put men as the provider so they are more likely to be judged by for eligibility as a partner by their ability to provide. and those that succeed in that area are more likely to be a…
/r/MensRights03/05/15 04:36 AM
2

k but seriously though, where the hell did she go when this happened? did she watch some guy save her, get stabbed in the process, and just walk away? without contacting the police?
/r/MensRights01/05/15 01:13 AM
1

i don't know exactly how many employees they have but i got the impression it was like the 10-15 range
/r/MensRights01/05/15 12:55 AM
2

It's in real estate
/r/MensRights01/05/15 12:30 AM
1

There are more candidates to be interviewed and I, as of this moment, have neither been offered nor denied the job
/r/MensRights01/05/15 12:29 AM
6

Sure, warning is fair. I thought there were far better ways to communicate it as a warning (perhaps something like "If you were to work at our company, you would be the only male in the group, would you be okay with this?"), so I was not sure I really bought that potential explanation. But, it is good to know if that was the intent of the comment, that you would not be offended by it. Thanks for your input
/r/MensRights30/04/15 07:51 PM
1

ah. alright, fair play then, apologies for not being able to catch the sarcasm through plain text haha
/r/MensRights29/04/15 09:49 PM
5

it's like you got through the first sentence of my comment and then stopped reading to throw up the biggest strawman you could think of edit: nevermind, is joke
/r/MensRights29/04/15 09:45 PM
26

workplace deaths are seen as an unavoidable fact of some professions they are, but that doesn't excuse the death gap. the issue is that men are the ones expected to take on those jobs due to "traditional gender roles" this is exactly the argument feminists fall back on when somebody points out the "wage gap" is due to women taking on lower-paying positions like social work. it is precisely because of how inherently risky those jobs are that they pay better than nearly all jobs you can get with a…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 09:29 PM
66

why'd you leave out workplace deaths? that's a big one imo. especially since feminists keep pushing this "let's solve the wage gap". i mean the wage gap doesn't exist but if it did, why are we extremely concerned about women getting paid less and completely unconcerned about men dying?
/r/MensRights29/04/15 07:31 PM
1

claiming a whole bunch of things are "widely known" is hardly evidence at all, let alone empirical evidence. were you simply trying to say "the system allows and encourages very poor behavior by women such as (any of your examples), and it won't protect you at all. so it's best to be careful until you're really confident you can trust someone these days," then you should have said it that way. that has an extremely different connotation than "women are the manipulative, deceitful, vindictive sex…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 12:35 AM
1

sure, the system allows women to behave that way. but how much empirical evidence do you have to support the claim that women are more manipulative, deceitful, and vindictive than men? and even if that were true, what's the point in bringing it up? what do you accomplish? clearly the problem that needs to be addressed is the system that allows, perhaps even encourages that behavior. we couldn't conclude that's something inherent to women without first removing the system itself as that's clearly…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 12:12 AM
1

they sort of come and go in waves. they're on a peak right now but they always subside and when they wash away you can see who's really here because they earnestly care about the cause instead of who's just an angsty and jaded; doing exactly what the tubmlristas are doing and using the name of "equality" as an excuse for being idiots usually when somebody gets that far across the line though, somebody else has already called him out by the time i show up to the thread. if you're seeing a lot mor…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 12:08 AM
2

its usually not. the sub is often hostile towards feminism because it often stands in direct opposition to men's rights but usually comments that are just anti-women are told to go back to TRP and downvoted. this sub has a great amount of respect for women like Karen Straughn and Dr. Sommers - in most cases it's what you believe and the cause you fight for that matters, not your gender. in this case I think a line was clearly crossed but I disagree that it's the norm around here.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 06:08 PM
14

let's not be them, shall we? I don't take too kindly to the yes all women movement trying to paint men as the violent, uncultured sex. The court systems certainly enable women who choose to behave in such a way but let's not conflate that with women in general inherently being manipulative, deceitful, etc. Keep the focus on the problems with the system here, not on generalizing people.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 09:08 PM
2

and people will read into it too much too. what he was trying to say was just that work isn't a priority for nearly as many women as it is for men. women tend to gravitate towards jobs that fit around their lives, and the simple fact is more often than not mothers focus more on their families than their careers. at the end of the day i'd wager any parent, mother or father, would consider parenthood a duty
/r/MensRights27/04/15 07:26 AM
9

how was that within the law? i don't know where you live but in the states making hiring/promotion decisions based exclusively on gender is not legal
/r/MensRights27/04/15 07:08 AM
4

yea man i don't think it really matters if you personally felt offended by that teacher's response, it's completely unequivocally unacceptable and i really think you need to hold her accountable for it. i mean don't be a pompous asshole about it, but hold her accountable. y'know? just be careful you maintain the moral high ground as best you can
/r/MensRights27/04/15 06:58 AM
5

they literally believe that you can't be racist/sexist against the group in "power" and they believe white cis males are the epitome of that group i will disagree with that logic to the ends of the earth and back but it is the rationalization used by any of them i have met in the wild, including a former high school teacher of mine
/r/MensRights25/04/15 08:50 AM
9

it was supposed to be like a performance art called "carry that weight." it was a physical manifestation and symbol of the weight she carries with her as a rape survivor, especially as one whose rapist walks freely around on campus. well that was the premise anyway, it obviously looks like she made up the story so it apparently doesn't really mean anything. but that was the idea
/r/MensRights24/04/15 07:36 AM
3

Stop stressing about the label and pay attention to her convictions. that's what he's doing, though. sommers clearly has unique convictions compared to virtually every other mainstream/popular feminist. he's looking to her convictions first, and determining based on those that the "feminist" label doesn't fit her very well. she can call herself whatever she wants, but i don't know if we can really fault people for thinking she's not "really" a feminist
/r/MensRights24/04/15 07:24 AM
2

she's middle eastern judging by her name, in spite of her pale-as-white skin i'm sure she does not identify as white still ironic as the appearance of being white will, according to people like her anyway, cause people who meet her to treat her better, so she won't suffer like people who are and appear to belong to a minority. further ironic considering the massive influx of middle easterners into europe lately, so though i'm sure she's still technically a minority it's not like she's reasonably…
/r/MensRights23/04/15 04:53 PM
1

we should all be proud and stop this fucking nonsense argument the bottom line is that everyone should be able to make that choice for themselves. you can debate if people - perhaps ironically, such as those pictured in the OP - put forward their arguments in less than ideal ways. i don't really care if that's your angle. but this isn't about body-shaming or pride or whatever. it's just about not making irreversible decisions about another human being's body before they're old enough to consent …
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:58 AM
4

yea when i saw the comments i wasn't sure if i should downvote the thread because that really shouldn't be a joking matter, or upvote it so more people could wander into the comments section and read about how it isn't
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:47 AM
3

i'm not saying it's good execution, it just isn't funny. if somebody makes a really lame attempt at bringing serious attention to a serious problem, it just isn't funny to me. especially one like circumcision that a lot of people don't take seriously, now they've undermined attempts to bring it to the public eye and given them more reason to view it as a joke. humor is at least somewhat subjective, not finding one cringetastic protest funny doesn't mean i lack a sense of humor. passing such a ju…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:41 AM
6

neither is making a joke out of the pain and suffering of others, mate
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:31 AM
9

they're going over the top but it still isn't funny to me. i find their tactics a little cringe-inducing in multiple ways, tbh, but laughter is not among my reactions
/r/MensRights21/04/15 04:33 AM
3

show me that happening anywhere. or anything remotely close to that happening, even - but more importantly, show me it being pursued as consistently as the girls in the story are pursuing the OP; show me it not getting shut down immediately. men don't speak out like that because we get serious social backlash if we try that kind of shit. it's not universally acceptable, but there are a lot of people who believe it should be acceptable for feminists to behave in that manner. a large portion of th…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 04:30 AM
10

i think nobody would believe it because men don't/can't go around lecturing women about their privilege and asking them to drop classes to make room for "more deserving" men you can debate whether or not you think women are actually doing this as the story tells, but there's just not really any historical precedence for this to be a gender-flopped version of the truth.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 11:17 PM
2

"men made the rules" is just about the worst argument for anything related to the "patriarchy" i've ever heard. when i meet a feminist who feels she would be well-represented if michelle bachman or sarah palin was elected president of the united states, i might reconsider that stance. but i think sharing a gender with government leaders does absolutely nothing to imply that a citizen agrees with or consents to any of the laws made by their governing body.
/r/MensRights19/04/15 11:18 PM
34

last time i brought up combat deaths the feminists said "well duh women aren't allowed on the front lines" ...so are you saying because you know the cause, it isn't a problem, then? next time you bring up the wage gap can i just say "well duh, women pick careers in less lucrative fields" and end the argument? of course not, they wouldn't accept that as a fair dismissal of the wage gap problem. which is especially ironic considering their wage gap statistic is false in the first place and their o…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 06:18 PM
7

honestly allison was about as calm and level-headed as you can get when you have two diametrically opposed viewpoints arguing. i don't hear any heated name-calling or insults, nothing that clearly crossed any lines or anything like that. if that conversation was so inappropriate that it warranted banning not just allison from that con, but every other canadian con and all the rest of the badgers with her, then those conversations are apparently just fundamentally inappropriate and the people who…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 03:29 AM
7

in the audio from the event you can hear allison ask "would you like us to field that question?" and the resounding "yes!" that she received in response. i don't have all the details on whether or not they were in the crowd or part of the panel but it didn't seem out of line to me
/r/MensRights19/04/15 12:41 AM
0

if i may play devil's advocate for a minute, the hashtags were at least somewhat questionable. you're absolutely right that if that photo by itself is offensive, then being in public in that outfit should be offensive as well. but buble didn't post just the photo by itself
/r/MensRights18/04/15 06:53 AM
1

these days promoting this agenda is in the self-interest of a public figure. especially for a crass comedian like silverman, any press is good press, even having this backfire on her probably isn't all that bad for her
/r/MensRights18/04/15 02:54 AM
1

this is probably the reference more info
/r/MensRights16/04/15 09:16 PM
1

i don't think the sub is really accepting her apology, i think your comment just doesn't contribute anything. all you've done is insult silverman, there's literally no other content in the comment. until you edited your comment anyway, then you added a handful of comments just directed at this sub in general and made your comment even less constructive. TL;DR: you're being downvoted because reddiquette, not because sheeple
/r/MensRights16/04/15 09:12 PM
5

which is all well and dandy, but she wants to pretend this is not in any way, shape, or form, a reflection of the actual status of this "wage gap" problem. the more valid you consider the excuses you've given for her here, the more concretely relevant this situation is as representative of the "wage gap" problem. how many other times have people reported women making less because of faulty memories? because of a situation where they don't remember all the details, or because they didn't have all…
/r/MensRights16/04/15 09:07 PM
1

there's a joke about an old man... a policeman comes knocking on his door and tells him the area is going to flood, and he needs to evacuate. the old man says "no, i'm a christian and i will pray; i believe my Lord will save me, i'm fine" another policeman comes back later and says "sir, the water is rising this may be your last chance to leave safely, you need to evacuate," and still, the old man refuses. the water continues to rise. the first floor is completely underwater now, so a rescue boa…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:37 PM
1

fair enough i guess, it just struck me because of how insane the other subs he's compared us to are
/r/MensRights12/04/15 01:35 AM
3

Although some studies have noted that mothers commit filicide more often than fathers, other research has shown that paternal filicide is as common or more common than maternal filicide. so "other research disagrees" is a valid argument here, yet earlier in her article she says despite women’s overall better health and despite receiving 23% less income then men that 23% wage gap might be one of the most vigorously debunked feminist claims ever. if "other research disagrees" is a sufficient argum…
/r/MensRights11/04/15 07:39 PM
1

but that's still the point at which it became an independent and sovereign power. that's a definitive point at which it became a country, as opposed to trying to draw an inevitably subjective and somewhat arbitrary line where the government became similar enough to the current government that you would call it the "same" country
/r/MensRights10/04/15 06:45 AM
1

or, you know, you could just say the US came into existence after the revolutionary war like it factually did.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 06:12 AM
6

/u/dionidium is right, this is primarily a holdover from when people wrote a lot of checks. see when you write someone a check instead of just paying with a credit/debit card or with cash, they don't necessarily cash that check right away. so even if the bank's calculations are done by computer, the bank has no idea that you just wrote a check, nor does it know for how much. so your bank account won't reflect that until the check is cashed. people without a lot of money to play with would want t…
/r/MensRights03/04/15 11:29 PM
3

I maintain that the case for an unintentionally false accusation of rape is difficult to make. ah this looks like your edit. i think you may have interpreted my original comment as concerned with whether the accusation was intentionally false or not. i actually hadn't really considered that, though i agree with your comment that "well, it wasn't intentionally false!" is a fairly weak defense that would be difficult to make. what i actually had in mind was simply whether the accusation was false …
/r/MensRights03/04/15 12:26 AM
1

i'm still not sure if i'm being asked a question :3 but if i'm following you correctly, i don't think that we are in disagreement on anything here
/r/MensRights02/04/15 10:18 PM
2

i'm not sure i understand what you are asking. can you clarify
/r/MensRights02/04/15 09:04 PM
100

you should have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the claim was falsified. just like you should have to prove the claim is true beyond reasonable doubt to get somebody convicted...
/r/MensRights02/04/15 05:32 PM
2

i would add that the gut in particular being large (there's not quite enough chins to keep up with the gut, imo) seems to imply a beer belly. in other words, a bad drinking habit
/r/MensRights31/03/15 08:43 AM
2

To speak on your suggestion that some feminists may not know what feminism is, I challenge you with the definition that Websters Dictionary offers the problem is language is alive, definitions change over time even if that was once true. "gay" used to mean "happy," but i'd be really interested in seeing how many people think you're calling them happy if you just walk up to them on the street and say "you're looking rather gay today!" furthermore, changing the definition of feminism would be a po…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 08:33 AM
3

none of those things are extremism, though. solanas, i disagree that she's extremist, as another commenter has already explained, but i can at least understand why you think she would be. those other things though, those are things everyday feminists are doing. those are things people i know personally have defended on facebook. average girls have tried to explaint to me why things like #killallmen and male tears mugs are OK. shit's not extremism man, if you think it is you either haven't had mu…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 08:24 AM
10

minority or not, the feminists that do this tend to be the ones with power.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 03:08 AM
32

she is the interim CEO. presumably this means she's just holding the position until they find somebody... else? better? i'm not entirely sure to be honest haha
/r/MensRights31/03/15 03:05 AM
9

to be fair though, they are also scared of not hiring them. if they can't provide objective proof that any male they hired was a better choice than the woman they didn't they could still end up with a mess like this one on their hands and it's a little sketchy these days even with proof
/r/MensRights31/03/15 03:02 AM
8

the unfortunate truth is that white people are in many ways going the same way as men and their issues are frequently crossing paths. especially when the road blocker for mens rights is so often feminists who love to vilify men/manhood – they've been starting to do the same thing for white people. "white male" has pretty much become an insult in their eyes. when those who oppose us so frequently group the two together, we need to realize we're probably going to continue to be put in positions wh…
/r/MensRights25/03/15 03:04 AM
6

the thread you are commenting on is in /r/mensrights but if you click the link OP posted it leads to /r/todayilearned
/r/MensRights23/03/15 03:10 AM
1

the prison population is included in that statistic, yes
/r/MensRights22/03/15 08:05 PM
3

no the down votes are for bringing uninformed and unsupported TRP theories to an MRA sub. theories that belittle rape survivors (who are actually primarily men). and for acting like a martyr when people tell him to provide some proof instead of just bullshit theories
/r/MensRights22/03/15 06:11 PM
2

you can claim to be the voice of reason when you bring proof to the table. you want to say shit that is that crazy, then the burden of proof is on you. don't radically challenge what people universally regard as a truth without offering any scientific evidence and then cry they haven't proven their side. There's a difference between men's rights and trp, if you want to spew these unsupported theories try your luck there. I honestly think you might be off the deep end even for them but you will c…
/r/MensRights22/03/15 05:41 PM
7

again, what the fuck? do you actually believe this garbage you're spewing or are you just trolling? i'm legitimately unsure if you're like some overzealous TRPer or if you're one of those people who show up and say stupid shit to try and make this sub look bad. show me any sort of scientific consensus on rape only being traumatic because society teaches us it should be. hell, give me even a single study that concludes that. when you realize you can't, realize you're wrong and either stop spewing…
/r/MensRights22/03/15 09:07 AM
11

The psychological harm from rape actually comes from other women telling the victim they have been damaged. what the fuck? don't get me wrong i'm sure that makes it worse, but actually being raped would be pretty traumatic regardless of whether or not people told you it was supposed to be...
/r/MensRights22/03/15 06:59 AM
7

i think my problem is that when people try to come up with places women are still disadvantaged they almost invariably fall back on an anecdote about a woman who was passed up for a promotion (or something similar) first, it's a single incident. assuming it happened at all, this isn't proof that women on the whole suffer from this issue. but secondly, it's an anecdote. i don't know that i can trust the narrator, since i don't know any of the details or have any solid proof regarding the story. y…
/r/MensRights20/03/15 07:32 PM
1

... generally, that's the sort of response you give when somebody is just trolling you / not constructively contributing to reasonable discourse. i legitimately do not understand your line of thinking and have been non-insultingly inquiring to try and understand the point you're trying to make... but whatever, if you don't want to discuss this further that's your prerogative. i just think this had been a reasonable/rational conversation and that response was a bit of an overreaction
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:43 PM
0

I'm not sure how you think anybody is trying to fight against what we stand behind. OP primarily wants to fight against the fact that we were labeled misogynist here, and a secondary goal might be to fight against the fact that the center was labeled feminism. but nobody is trying to undermine themselves here, I'm not sure what you think people are planning to do in response here
/r/MensRights19/03/15 03:15 PM
1

sorry I'm not sure what you mean by that distinction. can you expound on what's meant by fighting 'to change the perception of' instead of 'against'? these sound like the same thing to me
/r/MensRights19/03/15 02:51 PM
3

whedon has had his moments where he's gone a little over the SJW deep end but overall i think he's alright. my favorite example: (Interviewer): So, why do you write these strong female characters? (Whedon): Because you're still asking me that question. imo a full-blown SJW would have got up and taken the opportunity to soapbox. but whedon had a very blunt and realistic response; this shouldn't matter so i'll keep doing it until it doesn't. guy has certainly said things i don't agree with but tha…
/r/MensRights19/03/15 09:09 AM
6

i certainly don't think it's fair to label the misogyny side of the diagram as the MRA side; i'd even argue MRAs are pretty middle of the road. the movement is actually about equality... unless you've got a counterexample in mind where MRAs promoted something else? it's not uncommon to see people show up around here commenting something like "hey i'm a feminist but i believe in equal parental and reproductive rights, is that a problem?" and people here just go "nope" we tend to be anti-feminist …
/r/MensRights19/03/15 08:57 AM
3

I wish you weren't being down voted. you were perhaps a bit blunt, but I mean OP is complaining they're using '5 year old quotes' from his blog to make him look like a woman hating rapist. note his focus - not on quotes being taken out of context or distorted, just that they're a few years old. to me, that's a red flag... I'd have to see what he means but I don't think the quotes being a few years old excuses them being misogynistic. you're asking for a little proof before we start up a witch hu…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 03:25 PM
1

no. if you're going to let feminists represent all women for you, then they win.
/r/MensRights15/03/15 09:34 PM
2

but they're specifically targeting white males; presumably a book written by a white female is fine. i think his comment makes sense with that in mind
/r/MensRights15/03/15 06:30 PM
1

if i can ammend the other guy's comment, what i don't see is them blaming women as a group. only the "lost" or "misguided" individual women who have "fallen victim to the patriarchy's brainwashing" get blamed for anything
/r/MensRights12/03/15 03:30 PM
3

thanks. is there a subreddit or something for this? i'm interested in finding out what has been happening with this whole thing
/r/MensRights09/03/15 06:27 PM
2

The anti-GG proponents who have lost their jobs and are begging for handouts because nobody will hire them anymore would beg to differ. sounds like fun reading. got links? So you don't know what you're talking about and you think you can assess how well it has been doing? when literally everyone i've talked to about it is staunchly insistent that GG is factually wrong/sexist/misogynistic? i think i've seen enough to know it might not be doing quite as well as you seem to be suggesting. So what? …
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:11 AM
17

i believe it partially, maybe even largely, because the kid is obviously very timid and passive. he apologized to the girl when she got angry instead of trying to correct her, he tried to calm her down instead of defending himself. while he thinks he's doing the right thing there, taking that shortcut instead of standing your ground will look like an admission of guilt to most bystanders. that alone probably could sway the general class opinion against him; lose him the benefit of the doubt. and…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 04:04 AM
4

i'm not even sure gamergate has been doing as well as you think. it came up in a conversation with some coworkers the other day and one of them got quite upset with me for suggesting that it was a very messy situation and that it was difficult to tell who was telling the truth. i didn't even take sides, as i've not been closely following gamergate and didn't feel i had the knowledge on the subject to discuss it at length with someone who felt as strongly as he clearly did. i simply suggested the…
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:30 PM
4

yea i ended up deciding not to finish the survey because too many of the questions were excessively ambiguous and i felt like they were trying to trick me into saying something that could be misconstrued as sexist or racist. i understand that to a point you want to be vague with these surveys so you don't lead the person and bias their answers, but this was too often too much.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 10:25 AM
8

i wouldn't report someone for wearing a bracelet that said, for example "feminist" or "women's rights" or something like that. there's a line to cross and a point at which your sentiment rings true. but i think a bracelet with a word that, by definition, promotes hatred and bigotry, does deserve the be reported. in this case i think the line was crossed, and OP did the right thing
/r/MensRights08/03/15 10:03 AM
2

I actually did email Michael Albert and he has made his stance quite clear on the matter
/r/MensRights08/03/15 06:49 AM
6

it's especially funny to me because a lot of the time TRPs dont get along too well with MRAs. they're not entirely mutually exclusive, i guess, but for the most part i tend to see them speaking ill of each other.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 01:56 AM
1

honestly even if it wasn't included in the original image if the author had included a list of sources for all this it would be so much more usable. right now it's a good laugh for us who have seen feminism do all these things but anybody who needs to see proof that feminists do this kind of shit will find this useless. to them, these are all straw men, it only "works" on us because we've seen the proof at one point or another
/r/MensRights05/03/15 07:48 AM
2

these roles are no longer necessary because technology has pushed (most of) humanity past the point where these natures were relevant, but gender roles were born out of natural forces. consider the following: males on average are bigger and stronger than females. there's a video around somewhere on youtube of the "world's strongest woman" arm wrestling 3 average joes in a bar and losing to 2 of them. furthermore, the number of healthy women available for child-bearing is the limiting factor on a…
/r/MensRights20/02/15 11:12 PM
14

For instance, it is unlikely that a man will be asked what he was wearing during an assault, probably. but first off, this has been something we've beaten society over the head with for at least the past half a decade. especially after seeing how society reacts with all these "we need to believe women who claim to be victims of rape by default without any proof" posts (UVA, etc), i'm just not willing to believe this particular issue is as pervasive as she's making it sound without further eviden…
/r/MensRights20/02/15 10:56 PM
1

right, which is why i used past-tense. i understand you've clarified that was not your intention :)
/r/MensRights18/02/15 09:14 PM
1

I'm not necessarily challenging your opinion on abortion itself, more the idea that being pro-life is fair grounds to assume a group is extremist and incapable of having an actual debate. If you have additional information about this christian group that you're factoring in to your assessment of them I am not privy to that information - it looks like you've been saying pro-life = fundamentalist. I don't think thats a fair assumption.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 04:22 PM
1

Define extremist. They want to use the legal system to take away people's reproductive rights and control of their own bodies, because their personal ideas about religion say that abortion is wrong. you're begging the question and making emotional appeals; this is exactly the sort of stuff you accused these extremist groups of doing. i'm not interested in actually debating abortion with you, as that really isn't relevant to the point at hand, but you're definitively not giving fair representatio…
/r/MensRights18/02/15 09:11 AM
2

TBH i agree with you, i was just pointing out there's more than one cultural issue that we need to get around to addressing at some point here
/r/MensRights18/02/15 03:47 AM
1

It's also pointless to have a debate with people who think that facts and logic are less important than feelings. but this description is at least as apt, if not more apt, when directed at the type of feminist organization that turned down the debate offer here. furthermore, i don't know if you know more about the background of the christian group in question here that's not stated in the article – i just have this article to go off of – but i don't see anything here that indicates this group is…
/r/MensRights18/02/15 03:45 AM
83

well that or, you know, stop making sex a crime.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 10:22 AM
1

There are those who identify as feminists with pure hearts and pure intentions. I think, from what I have seen, that there are very few MRAs who deny this. The problem most of us have is that such feminists are becoming increasingly rare, and almost no feminist of any public importance or power is among them. Those with any significant influence on public opinion and/or policy are almost always the kind of feminist that - well, in simple terms, the kind that we do have a problem with. I could be…
/r/MensRights13/02/15 02:32 AM
5

in the US i think we push most of our workers too hard, be they officially "overworkers" as defined in the study discussed here or not. we give next to no paid vacation & sick time compared to pretty much the entire rest of the developed world... there are many things i prefer about the US to compared to the rest of the world but that is not one of them
/r/MensRights10/02/15 09:23 AM
131

and OP please follow-up when you do, i'd really like to hear how they defend this against title IX...
/r/MensRights10/02/15 04:35 AM
9

perhaps for reasonable purposes? like the male-only barbershop that got some buzz around here a while back? for the most part general services should be available to everyone regardless of gender but private companies might be trying to create fe/male-only spaces and i don't think there's anything wrong with that. i mean heck man this sub has done its share of complaining about how women don't allow any male-only spaces anymore, let's not pretend there's no use for private companies having the r…
/r/MensRights10/02/15 04:33 AM
3

the budget cuts pretty much fuck everybody that so? Rape Prevention (+$5.6 million) The FY 2016 budget request includes an increase of $5.6 million for CDC’s Rape Prevention and Education (RPE) program to fund up to seven academic or research institutions to help CDC’s rape prevention grantees collect data and scientifically evaluate their programs to build the evidence base in sexual violence prevention and scale up evidence-based efforts throughout the RPE program. i mean, i guess if you want …
/r/MensRights10/02/15 04:21 AM
3

it is extremely unfortunate but we should realize that there is no way we will ever craft a perfect system. the fact of the matter is that sometimes the guilty will go free and sometimes the innocent will not. that said, innocent until proven guilty has always been a cornerstone of justice in free countries. heck, it even has some biblical roots if you read up a little on it. so we need to err on the side of caution. we need to accept that sometimes the guilty will get away; lest we risk the fou…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 07:40 AM
5

i was definitely taken aback at first because i'm not familiar with many celebrities and didn't realize the person who said it is a comedian whose entire schtick is pretty much to offend as many people as possible as frequently as possible knowing that it was supposed to be an offensive joke kinda takes the steam out of it IMO you're right feminists would blow up over the reverse but that is an example of "things i wish feminists wouldn't do"
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:51 PM
4

eh. squares and rectangles; i can see how you think it's unfair to imply all liberals are radfems, because that certainly isn't true. but basically all radfems are liberal, so i can see where the other guy is coming from here too
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:41 PM
3

there does appear, however, to be some complications in getting them to understand they cannot have both
/r/MensRights07/02/15 06:15 AM
6

and when I do, it seems like they are friends and the woman laughs and possibly enjoys it on this point i'll play devil's advocate and point out that a girl who doesn't want to be "a bitch" has really no other response to unwanted advances than to laugh. but not having seen the situations you're describing for myself i can't know what other things you saw that suggested the girl had a pre-existing relationship with the guy I see it more as a guy finding common ground in hopes of becoming friendl…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 08:31 PM
7

i'm not sure what argument you can make that's compelling to your opponent, but i honestly don't believe that claim can be taken at face value. it's probably not true at all, with the possible exception of if she lives in a really shitty area. i'm sure she gets harassed from time to time, but literally every single walk to the grocery store? i'm sorry, but i call exaggeration on that. i've walked all over downtown in a major US city and i'm walking past women all the time. if cat-calling and suc…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:56 PM
8

sadly it's almost impossible to provide you with statistics on that sort of thing, especially because it's not something any studies are looking to pinpoint for us right now. but even dr. sommers has noted it – in one of her videos she brought up the fact that some feminists took pictures of themselves burning her book, "the war against boys". i'd link sommers' video but unfortunately i don't remember which of her many videos she mentioned this in i wonder if you could point me to other prominen…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:44 PM
19

you did indeed read that. here's the source for ya bud More men are raped in the US than women, figures on prison assaults reveal
/r/MensRights31/01/15 09:34 PM
2

this might help
/r/MensRights29/01/15 07:56 AM
1

the principle of the matter troubles me deeply and i'm tempted to say you should use the original name. but you may end up denied many opportunities to speak to people about mens' issues and raise awareness if you use a name that, unjustly or not, is a sore spot with so many people. they will approach you with a bias you might not be able to conquer in spite of how well-prepared you may be. at the end of the day it is far more important that these issues be brought to light and begin to enter th…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 07:11 AM
2

intel recently announced support for her and she won some sort of award for being influential in video games where one of the guys who wrote... i think it was "the last of us" talked about how big of an impact she had on him while he was writing for the game people like her are alarmingly loud even if the action isn't happening exactly where you're looking
/r/MensRights26/01/15 12:51 AM
1

this is true but it's still a perfectly valid point to bring up. because the logic applies to both wage gaps, if obama/his administration/anybody else trying to argue with you defends the white house wage gap with that logic, then you have succeeded in disproving the national wage gap.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 09:06 AM
1

Women should absolutely get paid the same if they are doing the exact same job with all the same requirements and responsibilities. right. and nobody is arguing that, but we've had a law on the books to do exactly that for over half a century the fact that he acts like he's got some great idea and making such amazing progress for women by asking for a law that even our arguably racist and sexist predecessors were able to pass (the Equal Pay Act predates the Civil Rights Act of 1964!) comes acros…
/r/MensRights22/01/15 09:03 AM
14

do you have a source that traces this stuff back to that study? sounds really interesting to look into but i'll be blunt i'm way too lazy to try and trace all that shit myself. haha
/r/MensRights16/01/15 02:36 AM
2

painfully so. i got in a conversation over one of those articles slamming scott aaronson and ended up trying to explain some men's issues. i was constantly shot down with reasons women's issues were more important. oh, violence is a women's problem. but men are the primary victims of violence. yea, but that's not because of sexism. besides, men perpetrate most violence against men and when women get violent against men it's not like it's for a BAD reason. the best part was when i got handed the …
/r/MensRights15/01/15 09:00 AM
3

man 2 minutes after you comment you've got upvotes in a sub that pretty much universally hates you, it must be hard working logging in and out of all those accounts!
/r/MensRights12/01/15 06:17 PM
1

perhaps not in a reasonable sense, but we're dealing with people who are quite obviously not reasonable. if the population was 49% female and 51% male i wouldn't be at all surprised to find the author claiming that made women a minority group that needed the sort of protection from hate speech that's being advocated here. you can think it as inane as you like and i don't necessarily disagree, but i think it's worth noting because it completely destroys the potential claim that women are a minori…
/r/MensRights11/01/15 08:12 PM
1

i'm not really versed on the global demographics you're referring to, but this article is specifically about the United States and there are, in fact, more women than men in the US.
/r/MensRights11/01/15 06:24 PM
1

OK, we'll call it a fair question, but it's one that's difficult to answer because there are so many reasons. in simplest terms, she at best willfully misrepresents video games in her videos and we have reason to believe she's only in it for the money. there's plenty of information out there if you want to look for it though, tons of videos methodically tearing apart her content and such. i can start you with this article which you may favor as it tries to take an academic take on it and is less…
/r/MensRights10/01/15 09:53 PM
2

Protecting vulnerable minorities from hate speech is one of the most basic and fundamental of human rights obligations well look at that, she has eliminated feminism from her own list. seeing as women actually make up a majority of the population they certainly don't qualify for this sort of protection she's promoting
/r/MensRights10/01/15 09:41 PM
4

Here is the post I'm referring to in the title. It's #1 on this sub as of this post but just in case somebody hasn't seen it, there ya go. This stuck out to me because I thought we might actually get a little dialog about men facing unrealistic standards and, nope, we're just going to make fun of the guy for having a "small" penis (which quite frankly I don't think is fair, I think the photoshop version is far above average and he's pretty normal in the real photo, but I digress). I can't imagin…
/r/MensRights10/01/15 02:06 AM
3

the guy i was responding to is the one who originally brought up celebrities in the first place. if you don't think that's relevant to the original thread here, again, fine, i don't care to argue over that - but again, i'm on track as far as the comment i was responding to. as far as your point about men having to work while women can be just "born beautiful", i mean, sure that's another argument that you could make but... so what? now my comment is irrelevant because i didn't make every argumen…
/r/MensRights09/01/15 11:52 PM
1

if it's not relevant then the guy before me shouldn't have brought it up, no? i mean maybe you took everything i said away from the comment before me and didn't need to read mine, maybe for you all my comment did was provide an "explain it like i'm 5" version. fine. but that's far from irrelevant, and it's very far from soapboxing about a completely unrelated issue. haha
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:38 PM
2

well specifically for males, it backs up the claim that musclebound men is an unrealistic body standard. many women seem to think that because muscles come from exercise, the body image issues men complain about isn't as important or serious. they think if men were just a little more committed they could achieve this body; it's not unrealistic in their minds. so i think it actually becomes very important to remind people that those beach-ready bodies take a lot more time, energy, and money than …
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:33 PM
5

let me put it this way then; same reason they made his bulge bigger
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:10 PM
8

you know what they say about guys with big hands
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:07 PM
-2

i don't think it's an entirely different issue, i'm responding directly to his comments about people like craig and jackman. besides, i think you're interpreting my disclaimer as "i have no clue what you're trying to say, but let me talk about this," when it was more of "if you're saying what i think you're saying, this is important to keep in mind (but i may be misinterpreting you)"
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:03 PM
2

i'm not sure i follow the point you're trying to make but to be fair, the rich have it far easier when it comes to getting the body types idolized by the media. the working man or woman doesn't have the time to workout as much as these stars have to for the bodies they end up with, and they usually can't afford the personal trainers the rich use or the diets the rich go on either. i mean don't get me wrong a lot of folks could do better even in their current circumstance but just because craig a…
/r/MensRights09/01/15 08:19 PM
1

It's logically possible that every single case of made to penetrate is penetrating a male. i might give you technically possible, but not logically possible. logically possible implies it's likely, perhaps even a fair and just assumption. without numbers to actually support that claim i think assuming every single case is male-on-male is reaching far over the bounds of logical. even so, if it were true - does that make the male victims any less victims because their perpetrators were also male? …
/r/MensRights09/01/15 08:14 PM
15

fucks sake it's like the DOJ study never even came out with these people The full study, which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000
/r/MensRights09/01/15 06:42 PM
2

well sure, but if a woman was forcibly penetrated in the anus or mouth that would count as rape for her. why does it not count when a man is forced to penetrate?
/r/MensRights09/01/15 06:30 PM
1

they say that later in the article but the first time they use the word it is exactly as it appears a couple comments ago she was angry the men at the party were too incompetent to help her.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 06:31 AM
2

it's not in quotes. She had made the story up after her ATV broke down and she was angry the men at the party were too incompetent to help her.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 06:22 AM
1

incompetent is still far from the correct term to describe someone who is "unwilling to help," even if that was what had happened. that said, that definitively is not what happened here - the men at the party clearly tried to help her, they simply were unable to do so After a short visit, they left, but Papp’s girlfriend had to stay behind because of a problem with her ATV. Two men from the bonfire party tried to help her.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 12:34 AM
16

i like how they insist on using the word incompetent here, implying that fixing a random ATV is something all men should know how to do. instead of saying something like "unable," these men were "too incompetent" fuck's sake
/r/MensRights01/01/15 07:12 PM
1

yea http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2nf7k7/alexandra_brodsky_of_feministing_tries_to_debunk/
/r/MensRights30/12/14 08:48 PM
2

and to be fair, seems like we all generally agree that we shouldn't hold people responsible for the sins of their fathers unless their father's sins included being white and/or male.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 08:05 PM
1

i'm told so many, many times that i'm not allowed to have an opinion on how privileged i am as a white male because i simply cannot understand what it's like to live as a woman or as a racial minority how on earth do you think you can understand what it's like to live with male genitalia?
/r/MensRights25/12/14 01:10 AM
4

no feminist defines feminism that way, though. don't get me wrong that's a fair definition (i believe that's what google provides) but feminists never let facts like that get in their way (hah). they literally claim feminism means equality between the sexes. this won't get you anywhere with anybody whose mind needs to be changed
/r/MensRights25/12/14 01:02 AM
1

yea but there's something in between calling one foot "good enough" and shunning somebody for only putting one foot over the line. haha
/r/MensRights24/12/14 09:51 PM
1

yea, but it still speaks to men's role as disposable soldiers, which occurs in every war. i don't think that specific example being from a different war detracts from the fact that war is a male obligation – an example of chivalry killing
/r/MensRights24/12/14 02:15 AM
1

you need to be sure you are communicating with her, i'm not entirely sure you're both on the same level here. then you probably, as others have suggested, need to seek counseling. this is not a simple problem and the solution won't be simple. and long-term, your best protection will be to make sure you and your wife are still on the same team.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 08:09 PM
1

perhaps the movement should not, but don't forget what a vast number of our members are ex-feminists. there may be individuals who can be "saved," if you will. they will not come because we drew a hard line in the sand and shunned anyone who failed to cross it with both feet
/r/MensRights23/12/14 07:39 PM
1

yea but we didn't use the word "taliban," we used the word "religion". they're not going to assume you're talking about extremists unless you give some indication of that. as another commenter pointed out i think scientology is a very apt substitute
/r/MensRights23/12/14 07:37 PM
1

soldiers are chivalry in action, regardless of the war. they are the epitome of male disposability, especially when feminists have been known to run around handing out white feathers to shame men who are not participating in the war.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 07:36 PM
3

The fact that it's attempting to be a rival religion makes it more threatening to them. i think that's wishful thinking, i know a lot of conservative religious folk and not a single one of them would interpret it that way. you're comparing something you think is a movement full of loonies to their religion, nobody misinterprets that as "competing" for people's souls, nobody is stupid enough to think feminism is literally trying to get people to believe in a different god. well, maybe i shouldn't…
/r/MensRights23/12/14 07:07 AM
0

probably, but just because they're crazy doesn't give us an excuse to be. i like to think that the MRA refuse to stoop to the level of the feminists we so often complain about.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 02:29 AM
1

sure, fair enough. haha
/r/MensRights23/12/14 02:27 AM
0

if you never give them any credit they'll just assume we're crazies that can't be pleased and stop trying
/r/MensRights23/12/14 02:26 AM
4

that would probably work well so long as you don't accuse their church of being a cult in the next paragraph cough saddleback lol
/r/MensRights23/12/14 02:25 AM
0

nobody's asking you to celebrate and i agree that she's still not on-target, which i made clear multiple times, but she does blame women for a handful of things. it's a tiny snippet out of a huge list but it is something i'm not looking at it as an excuse to throw a party i'm looking at it as a brief gasp of oxygen while the larger movement is trying to choke us out
/r/MensRights23/12/14 01:22 AM
3

how do you figure? i think people still feel somewhat connected to WWII between the recency and how glorified it is by our various media. WWI was a century ago, i think people are a little disconnected from it
/r/MensRights23/12/14 12:49 AM
7

i would be wary how much we make that analogy. true as you may think it is, you're likely to alienate religious folk from the movement with those kind of analogies. and especially in the US, that's a very large portion of the population you're potentially pushing away from the movement. i don't want to get caught up in a slippery slope where we end up overly concerned with political correctness or anything but i don't think we gain nearly as much from such an analogy as we stand to lose. surely …
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:52 PM
63

how's this for the graphic?
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:43 PM
0

i think it's halfway IMO. certainly some of what you said but it's not entirely doing the "let's blame the patriarchy" thing. she definitely still thinks feminism is the answer throughout but she also doesn't shirk away from blaming women for at least some of the things on her list Women rape. Women beat their husbands. Women cat call men. Women harass and assault. don't get me wrong overall i agree with you, but credit where it's due. like OP said, a step in the right direction
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:20 PM
3

i could be wrong but i believe "earnings" would refer to just how much a person makes over the course of a career or a life. "pay" or "wages," on the other hand, would refer to how much they get paid hourly/salary to do the job they are doing so women taking an extended leave from the workplace for children would obviously have a significantly lower earnings than men that didn't, even if both worked the same job and had the same hourly/salary pay
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:03 PM
1

i'm not saying that isn't racist, because it is, but at the same time i think they were just intended as jokes. that distinction is important in this context only because i don't think you can honestly conclude they legitimately thought he couldn't win the presidency simply because of his race. i think they just (wrongly) thought they were funny
/r/MensRights22/12/14 08:00 PM
1

i'm pretty sure this has been on the front page of this sub for at least the past 3 days but supposedly this post in 5 hours old, how many times has this been reposted? haha and just because i realize this specific article is only a couple hours older than this post i'm going to point out the original article was posted on december 20th. at least original as far as i'm aware, wouldn't surprise me if somebody came up with an older one.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 07:35 PM
1

according to this, an unarmed man is 21 times more likely to be shot by officers than an unarmed woman. link is another redditor who extrapolated that information based on a data table available in the OP he was commenting on
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:44 AM
3

i'm not sure your second survey should be single-choice, there's definitely two of those choices that contributed significantly to my decision to reject the label
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:22 PM
1

i tried to do the same with another survey just yesterday, none of the women's subs seem to allow surveys. they want you to go to /r/samplesize where nobody responds... i sort of get that for 2x, but i tried to go to "askwomen" and got shutdown. and i mean, really? you'd think a sub entirely dedicated to asking women for their opinions would allow godamn surveys...
/r/MensRights21/12/14 06:30 AM
9

this one has been really pissing me off. of course i fucking have. i was told i'm privileged as a male because i "don't carry my keys between my knuckles when walking through a parking garage at night" my first thought in response to that was recalling how my father taught me to do exactly that as a young boy. we walked past a sketchy looking group late one night in a parking garage – nothing happened, but after they passed he showed me his clenched fist and how he had positioned his car key to …
/r/MensRights19/12/14 09:51 PM
1

didn't we just see an article the other day about beyonce refusing to actually use the word feminism anymore? or am i misremembering
/r/MensRights19/12/14 09:33 PM
5

i don't know that i'd automatically call this prejudice either but if the president had called on exclusively male reporters the feminists certainly would have cried sexism. there's a double standard here even if obama's not discriminating and picking women, which i'd actually believe he may be doing for political reasons.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 09:20 PM
1

poe's law.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:47 AM
3

egalitarian doesn't even work for me. for the people i know who are into feminism, it's feminism or you're sexist. i mean literally... i could be simply "not feminist," i could say i reject labels, and i'd still get slammed for it.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:21 AM
2

doesn't really matter what you say to him – he'll post some insulting image that spam advertises his website, probably while calling you a variety of names. he's fairly frequent here, always making new accounts so they can't ban him and using all those accounts to upvote his own posts so they don't get immediately shit on by the voting system. just click report instead of reply, it's the only thing you can really do with 'em
/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:07 AM
1

one of the top posts on this sub right now is complaining about a woman who, in part, is defending the "killallmen" hashtag and related "jokes" let's not go blackening the pot on that one, shall we?
/r/MensRights17/12/14 07:38 AM
11

We won’t beat men into unconsciousness and then say it’s their fault. allow me to respond to this with another line from your own article – The answer, of course, is: You do.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 07:28 AM
4

minus the IV shootings, yes.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 07:27 AM
-1

i would contend many of the people who end up as the offenders here haven't gone far enough. quite often there is context people don't dig for and then they throw around verses without actually understanding them. as an example, you're referring to women being treated poorly in christianity, many will refer to a bible verse that states women should be silent during church services. what isn't clear until you dig deeper is that church services – at the time that verse was written – were conducted…
/r/MensRights16/12/14 09:59 AM
2

SJW's aren't ready for metalheads. lmao
/r/MensRights14/12/14 10:29 AM
2

which might be OK with me if i could imagine them doing the opposite. but i just can't figure out how they'd get away with a "fuel your misogyny" playlist nobody would take that as a joke. why is it funny this way?
/r/MensRights14/12/14 10:20 AM
3

I don't understand how most feminists disagree with that statement. That's my primary problem with 'rape culture'. this is how. that appeared on my newsfeed today, posted by a feminist with the caption "the accuracy makes me want to cry" and quite frankly it is ridiculous. i don't know how they believe it... i sat and thought about it and realized she accused first an entire school, and then an entire criminal justice class (who are conveniently ENTIRELY male, except for her) of believing men ar…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 06:42 AM
2

i don't know a whole lot about Quinn TBH, that was too much of a mess and I didn't have time to sort through it all, but Sarkeesian is a flat out liar. she intentionally manipulates and misrepresents the games she talks about to the point at which many of her claims are factually wrong. Then she goes and tries to make a sort of "concept video" for a game that's "done right" and breaks literally every single one of her own rules... she's not bad at masking her "points" under the guise of intellig…
/r/MensRights10/12/14 08:43 AM
1

everything other than the fact that the story as told in the stone is false is conjecture at this point. i believe that's what /u/MrAmidio was trying to say in the first place.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 04:27 AM
7

nicely put, just a little icing on the cake - an unarmed black person is 4.2 times more likely to be shot by police than an unarmed white person. an unarmed man is 21 times more likely to be shot by police than an unarmed woman. (this guy calculated that)
/r/MensRights10/12/14 03:54 AM
1

i think it's rather likely /u/MrAmidio's point is true, and the story begun to get warped in jackie's head just over time and the stress of dealing with it, but when erdely came in... erdely had an agenda and a story in her mind that she had already written. she just needed to find somebody willing to tell it. if jackie was actually raped, i believe it's very likely that erderly twisted her vulnerable mind around into making that story what it was. erderly heard what she wanted to hear and told …
/r/MensRights10/12/14 03:05 AM
2

hm. while i understand where you're coming from, i think the mindset behind it is perhaps a bit idealistic. the sad truth of it is that many of the ideas we are fighting against have roots that run far deeper than the feminist movement. i think it is something like a quarter of the population that actually identifies as feminist, a fairly large group but a minority nonetheless. however, the vast majority of people are new to the idea of mens' rights – many haven't been shown why it needs to exis…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 04:13 AM
2

i seem to remember there being a bit of a shitstorm when M5 came out with that video... plus, i'm not quite sure we can say he drugged and raped her (and he definitely didn't kill her, as you mentioned). it's a little ambiguous about what actually happens, to be fair. but she's awake whenever they're actually getting it on, and it appears consensual. there doesn't seem to be any implication that he drugged her either, especially considering, as previously mentioned, that she's awake during the a…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:34 PM
11

i would have told her about the little boy they scared away with that chant. i think it would have brought a hefty level of reality to your complaint. as it is, i wouldn't be surprised if they went home to make jokes about it over drinks in their "male tears" mugs
/r/MensRights07/12/14 08:55 PM
4

you're both making good points, but i think the whole point of him arguing against looking into intensity vs frequency is so that it doesn't become a "who has it worse" competition
/r/MensRights07/12/14 08:35 PM
24

taylor swift is mainstream popular, that's hardly comparable to metal bands. that video has over 150 million views... can you really find me a satanic metal video with numbers close to that? and even if you can, i'd bet good money many of the feminists that complain about violence directed at women listen to taylor swift and not black/death metal. if they're listening to it and supporting that message i'd argue it's fair game even if it didn't have 150+ million views. i think the prevalence of s…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 07:17 PM
1

no not psychologically, but physically. men and women alike may experience orgasms while being raped, certainly nobody with a brain would argue that meant consent – but can you really say that occurred without the body experiencing involuntary physical arousal? i think there's a difference between physical/psychological arousal
/r/MensRights07/12/14 07:07 PM
1

can the admins do anything about it? he's breaking site-wide reddit rules, not just rules specific to this sub
/r/MensRights07/12/14 11:44 AM
2

splitting hairs here but i think it technically it does mean arousal. the important distinction is that arousal is a biological and involuntary response to stimuli, and does not signify consent.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:43 AM
2

i'm fairly certain he's utilizing vote manipulation as well, i've seen several of his posts – images which contain basically nothing other than offensive language and insults – gather several upvotes mere minutes after they were posted, before being caught and deleted by you guys.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 07:37 AM
4

i wish you weren't getting downvoted for that, i think you have a point. with as much as this sub and this movement fights against feminism, we cannot justify our choices and actions by saying "feminists do it too" i don't think the president had much of a choice here. a reporter with a political agenda brought the president nationwide attention and pressure to take serious action, lest she be labeled as a "rape apologist" herself. it's possible she didn't want the choice, i suppose it's possibl…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 02:27 AM
54

But false accusations are exceedingly rare even if that were true (it arguably is NOT), does nobody think that establishing a standard of always believing, to a fault, the accuser, would encourage the number of false reports to increase? feminists complain poor treatment and skepticism will discourage true victims from coming forward. why is the reverse not true? why does blind faith not encourage false victims to come forward?
/r/MensRights07/12/14 12:30 AM
1

im fairly centered by US standards trend a bit to the right but on some select issues got a foot in the left door
/r/MensRights06/12/14 10:10 AM
2

tight yes (within reason) dry no
/r/MensRights06/12/14 10:07 AM
3

maybe OP meant to post in /r/mildlyinteresting? i mean both subs do start with an "m"
/r/MensRights06/12/14 09:30 AM
1

you should use different colors to differentiate users on FB, i'm having a little difficulty separating out who left what comment when they're all identity-protected in the same color. though that may just be because i'm staying up too late, it would still make it an easier read even if it were during the day
/r/MensRights06/12/14 08:54 AM
2

for what it's worth: i know it may seem annoying to have to deal with comments like the one you were responding to in nearly every thread. but the fact that they are dealt with so well is why i keep coming back to this sub, and it's why i got involved here in the first place. i was never a fan of feminism but i was skeptical of the needs for a men's movement; i viewed it as unnecessarily adversarial for a while. but being able to come to the comments and consistently observe multiple points of v…
/r/MensRights06/12/14 08:52 AM
2

i think it goes a step beyond that, i think he's calling women as a group something a little worse than "less than perfect angels". to me, it sounds like he's basically calling women abusive. it's a broad-brush IMO, i wouldn't appreciate a similar sentiment directed at men.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 11:27 PM
0

There is no reward not entirely. it gives people a scapegoat. somebody to blame, so that they don't have to own their personal failures and shortcomings. when they get arrested, it's not because they were doing something illegal, it's because the cops are just damn racist/sexist/etc. playing the victim is a classic method of relieving oneself of responsibility. i had a prof back in college who liked to say there are two kinds of people in the world, "victims and prospectors". victims always blam…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 11:15 PM
2

happen to know the source for that study? i'd be interested in seeing how they calculated that, especially given your (accurate) observation that it isn't something we can really figure
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:43 PM
3

i'm not justifying criminal police behavior but it is a tough job where people are frequently given a matter of seconds to make complex decisions with very serious ramifications, and we as the public are very quick to assume their behavior was not merely criminal, but more importantly, malicious. people jump the gun and start protesting before the dust has even settled, based on a bunch of he-said-she-saids. and that, at the very least, i would think you could have some empathy for. essentially,…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 03:38 AM
1

police are human beings with families they also have to go home to. when in danger they can and should defend themselves. we pay them for risky work but we don't pay them to be suicidally reckless for the sake of criminals. that said, the point i was making in my previous comment was that the cops clearly were not in danger while arresting garner. i don't think they acted appropriately in this case. i'm not sure what you're upset about, if you're trying to prove the cops crossed the line with ga…
/r/MensRights04/12/14 08:55 AM
0

i think there's a fine line here but in this case i think it was crossed. people will say the cops can't trust a guy saying he can't breathe because he might just be trying to get you to loosen enough for him to escape. but the thing is, that guy was massively outnumbered, clearly not going to outrun any of the cops even if he somehow escaped their hold, and exhibited no violent intentions towards the cops at any point. especially after they had already got him on the ground, they had all the ti…
/r/MensRights04/12/14 05:40 AM
2

Well, this has interesting implications for Barney Stinson
/r/MensRights30/11/14 08:48 PM
4

because to the kind of person that enjoys abusing the word "sexist", the gender-reversed version of that picture would be very much sexist
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:42 AM
4

i think you meant GPA, not graphics card
/r/MensRights29/11/14 11:34 PM
2

ain't saying i plan on installing it on my phone anytime soon, i just think it really helps to drive home exactly how far feminists are taking the "you must receive an explicit 'yes' for consent to be given" theory
/r/MensRights28/11/14 09:24 AM
8

depends who you're asking really, feminists having been pushing for a "yes means yes" type of consent like /u/BoughtBrokenKeyboard mentioned elsewhere in this thread. there even an app for it now we can debate whether or not that should be a thing, but the fact is that, well, it is a thing. so by the feminist definition of rape, he was raped.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 08:12 AM
2

i think you may have misread that – i interpreted the author as accusing "straw feminists" of misrepresenting MacKinnon/Dworkin, which is quite different from claiming MacKinnon/Dworkin themselves are straw feminists here's the relevant line again for ease of re-reading: Misogynists love playing straw feminist, and one of their most successful campaigns has been falsely attributing the quote that “all sex is rape” to Catharine MacKinnon and/or Andrea Dworkin.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 09:11 AM
2

"just saying" is just like "no offense" it's a phrase people think they can use to excuse themselves from saying whatever the fuck they want, even though it doesn't actually mean anything
/r/MensRights26/11/14 07:33 AM
2

while you have legitimate points, that might not actually answer this individual's question. the thing with people i normally see ask questions like this, is there is a far-more-common-than-you-would-think misconception about erections where people think they are 100% controlled and voluntary. i know that might sound crazy but i've had to explain how that's not how it works on more than one occasion.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 07:29 AM
2

this has been true for over half a decade at least In 2008, women ages 22 to 30 with no children and no spouse earned a higher median income than comparable men in 39 of the 50 largest U.S. cities source don't get me wrong, it's always nice to have more links to throw out that support this – people still routinely refuse to believe this because they've swallowed so much of the wage gap rhetoric it's unfathomable to them. i welcome the extra volley of links i can use to chip away at those brick w…
/r/MensRights24/11/14 09:36 AM
6

even if it's not their job to handle the report directly, surely it's their job and ethical obligation to ensure the matter is escalated to someone who can handle the report?
/r/MensRights23/11/14 06:12 PM
1

what in the law actually allows that, though? from the coverage of the new law i've seen i don't understand how you arrive at that conclusion. for someone to be convicted it will still need to be proven that they committed the crime. the definition of the crime is redefined, honestly rather superficially, but how is that redefining the entire legal process?
/r/MensRights01/10/14 01:30 AM
3

OK, someone explain the actual legalese of this for me, does it actually shift the entire legal process for rape accusations such that the accused is guilty until proven innocent? everyone's acting like this law forsakes the fundamental "innocent until proven guilty" aspect of our legal system but i'm not seeing how it's actually going to do that. somebody help me out here?
/r/MensRights30/09/14 06:59 PM
1

i think it's an important stance to have publicized, actually. i know there's potential for it to be abused here, so we'll so how it plays out, but i actually got caught up in a discussion in another sub where people legitimately thought it was impossible for rape to be committed without the use of physical force. apparently a lot of people think you need to either beat someone into submission or have a gun pointed at their head, else it isn't rape. for example in their eyes, if you have sex wit…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 10:23 PM
2

If you are circumcised, you did nothing wrong and should have no reason to take offense. but to be fair, it can cause some serious cognitive dissonance in people that were't really aware of this issue before coming here. although while very uncomfortable, it's not necessarily a bad thing, and i wouldn't say it's "alienating"
/r/MensRights04/08/14 06:56 PM
4

you're trying to prove that human rights are arbitrary, but you are wrong. your fetus thought experiment doesn't prove that human rights themselves are arbitrary, merely that when something is considered human is a subject of debate. you're misinterpreting the weight of your own thought experiment and because of that you're not understanding that it is completely irrelevant. irrelevance is a legitimate reason recognized by the general rules of reddit to downvote a comment, so regardless of what …
/r/MensRights04/08/14 06:54 PM
6

I love how everyone gets to define MRAs however they want, but if I ever try to define feminism based off extremists I get a menagerie of "no true scotsman" fallacies thrown back at me. (Not that I'm usually trying to make that argument – it never helps make a point – but I've seen it play out enough to know how it goes down). It's especially ironic because I would be pointing to people who actually identified themselves as feminists, whereas they'll be pointing to people like the IV shooter who…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:10 PM
20

I'm amazed by the number of women who are suddenly experts on masculinity. Who are suddenly experts on what the media is telling me on how to be a man, and are suddenly experts on how I'm reacting to and interpreting that media. Not surprisingly, these are the same women that tell me I'll "just never get it," when it comes to the issues that they face, and dismiss any opinions I have about their problems off-hand. And I keep seeing this complaint that men are making it all about themselves with …
/r/MensRights28/05/14 05:19 AM
1

Think of them as an extra ingredient you've earned. You should reconsider that approach. Because it makes you lose credibility. When you insult people repeatedly, it doesn't make them want to read all of your points. It doesn't make them want to carefully consider where you're coming from, and your point of view. It makes them think you're an arrogant asshole, and they begin to consider simply ignoring you. I'm sure you said something awesome in that wall of text somewhere. But I didn't make it …
/r/MensRights27/10/12 07:25 PM
1

sighs You're missing the point. OK, maybe you're right - let's say you are - maybe I lack full comprehension about what that particular fallacy means. But regardless of if I'm terming these correctly, your insults are still unnecessary and contribute nothing constructive. And you splitting hairs over whether or not I'm using the right names for these fallacies? That's a fallacy. Maybe I don't know the right name for it, but I know it is one. I'll guess red herring, but since you're apparently an…
/r/MensRights27/10/12 08:22 AM
1

"Personal attacks" redirects here. An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent, instead of against the opponent's argument. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy, more precisely an informal fallacy and an irrelevance.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 10:39 PM
1

My responses are often based on the implications of things you say. If you believe there is a discrepancy between what I'm responding to and what you intended to convey, either there is something lost in translation due to the nature of our medium of communication, or you should reexamine your word choice. And again, with the ad hominem. "Dude you really are weak"
/r/MensRights26/10/12 10:20 PM
1

I agree. If I said something that made you think otherwise please let me know, and I'll reconsider my choice of diction.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 10:16 PM
1

ad hominem is a personal attack. don't start throwing around terms like "short-sighted," "hopelessly confused," and "one-dimensional," and then try to tell me it's not a personal attack.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 10:12 PM
0

You're now making a fallacy in assuming because my statement may be interpreted as fallacious that it cannot contain truth. Watch the video. It is painfully obvious this man knew exactly what the reaction would be to his actions, and he continued to flaunt himself with a grin on his face the entire time. Tell me how he wasn't asking for the attention and reaction he got. Tell me how that big grin on his face didn't indicate he was happy with the reaction he got.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:28 PM
0

Again, find the actual fallacy Fine. you are either hopelessly confused or an opponent of MR. you're just throwing mud. Probably just more of your creative interpreting messing with the truth. It's your short sighted one-dimensional interpretation More of your interpreting failing
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:24 PM
0

A protest is not inherently immature. Specifically the manner in which this man protested - if you're sure it was a protest at all, which I am not convinced of - is immature.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:19 PM
1

In that case, it's more than a bit ironic that they're attacking him. Agreed. But I have to say, I have low expectations for any large group of people due to mob mentality.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:18 PM
1

Who said anything about this guy representing you? If MR defends him, and makes him a matyr of our cause, he represents us. Who is waging war against women here? Did you read this thread? Those cunts are awfully upset and violent over the display of a beautiful cock. I know I shouldn't be, but I am sorta proud of that guy. They really have a bad case of penis envy. Yea, some people are probably trying to make jokes, but IMO, it's not funny. So, what, you think that all men should be ashamed of t…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:42 PM
1

Just calling something a logical fallacy doesn't make it one. (Tell that to the masses of people who believe men are the enemy.) You justified something by saying someone else does or had done it. By your logic, it's ok to attempt genocide. If you want specifics, I believe this falls under the two wrongs fallacy. If you want to say something isn't a fallacy, perhaps you should have a better understanding of what fallacies are, lest you be throwing around useless rhetoric. Speaking of fallacies, …
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:37 PM
1

While you might say that that's completely different than showing one's genitals, men don't really have an analogous option. I considered this, and I agree. But there's not really much that can be done about that; not that I can see. Unless you want to go out and get implants? Not that I'm saying what he did was right, just that it's unreasonable to conclude that this was clearly an aggressive display rather than a poorly thought out "I can do that too!"-type action. Perhaps you're right, insofa…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:25 PM
0

How is that a fallacy? Trying to say something is ok simply because somebody else does it is a fallacy. Is attempting genocide ok because Hitler tried it first? Do you also feel that a woman getting attacked for protesting a rally was "asking for it" too? I say this man was asking for it because he was. It has nothing to do with his gender. If you can watch this video and honestly tell me you don't think he was purposefully antagonizing the crowd and all but enjoying the attention and reaction h…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:15 PM
3

Grown men and women, and in a mob. Mob mentality can be far, far worse than what we saw here. I think we disagree here in that you're chalking the behavior of this group up to crazy women, since it was a feminine cause they were marching for in the first place - but I place the blame for overreactions of this crowd mostly on the simple fact we are dealing with a mob. I expect no better from any mob, no matter the gender composition.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:09 AM
0

as trivial as whipping out his dick ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights26/10/12 07:37 AM
8

It did not appear to me that any of the women completely barred their genitals, but if that occurred and did not also end in arrest, I agree that is unjust. I think you're missing a nuance in the use of the term 'provocative' here though. The women are marching to allow sexually suggestive clothing, not blatant sexual exposure or nudity. This guy wasn't fighting for a right to wear skimpier clothing, he was just trying to piss people off - not to provoke them sexually; but to provoke their anger…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 07:36 AM
3

That's just your subjective interpretation. So if you were alone on the subway and some guy came up to you barring his naked dick, you would feel completely unthreatened? I wouldn't. If you want to argue there's a problem with societal standards that makes that automatically threatening, fine, I won't argue that point. But it's not a subjective interpretation, it's a pretty well-accepted cultural interpretation. The problem is that he got assaulted by a crowd for it. That makes it an MR problem.…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 07:23 AM
22

I guess I'll have to be the first to say it (as I start typing this, no one else has), I'm not down with this. First off, this isn't a feminist rally. This is a slut walk. These people - note, there are men and women at the rally - are protesting nonconsensual sexual acts. They are protesting the idea that women can avoid rape by "dressing less provocatively" and, truth be told, there are too many people who think that. They're protesting a legitimate problem, is what I'm saying here. Revealing …
/r/MensRights26/10/12 04:31 AM
1

not legally binding, no. it sounds like you're assuming that's the only kind of contract that exists. religious beliefs often mean that marriage is not simply bound before the government, but also before an even higher power. most religious people i know would disagree with you, that church ceremony is not only binding to them, but many would actually consider it even more binding than the legal procedures involved. so yes, many people believe they have a moral obligation to marry.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 04:53 PM
0

i understand this is supposed to be a joke as well, but it's just not funny.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 06:11 AM
1

So, basically, you're saying generalizations without sources are generally seen as bigotry, right?
/r/MensRights26/09/12 06:08 AM
3

winning doesn't necessarily mean you will be able to collect, anyway. unfortunately, the battle to get the money you've rightfully won in a lawsuit is sometimes as or more difficult (and expensive) than the damned lawsuit was in the first place.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:51 AM
1

Then it sounds like you've just had some bad experiences with doctors. And I'm sorry for that, but can we not assume that everyone who references the fact they have a doctorate is an asshole? Sometimes, life is easier when you give people the benefit of the doubt.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 03:12 AM
1

and tell me, how does the jury take to you when you act this condescending to witnesses in the court room?
/r/MensRights30/04/12 12:09 AM
1

"Beneath" is a harsh word here, but surely you don't think a student deserves respect equivalent to that owed a doctor? What's the point in that doctorate if it does nothing to separate the holder from the masses of students who may or may not graduate? You attitude toward the dear Dr. here tells me that you probably know little of just how much work it takes to become a doctor. Hell, where I grew up, it was disrespectful to refer to an adult who was a Dr. without using "Dr" as their title, inst…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 12:07 AM
6

women can't serve as front-line infantry. Also can't get drafted.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 08:11 PM
1

if she aborts the pregnancy it could potentially remain a secret. if she carries it to term, he will almost certainly find out she got pregnant, but it is feasible (albeit unlikely) that he would remain ignorant of the fact that he is, or at least might be, the father. IMO she should let him know regardless of if she keeps the baby or not. some men might not be too happy about being informed simply that they have a child but it will be aborted, but i think this is a sort of 'better safe than sor…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 09:24 AM
1

mostly agreed, different men will probably have different opinions on if they would like to know in the event the woman is aborting the pregnancy. but i don't think any decent man would want to remain ignorant of his living offspring... and, as mentioned, what are you gunna tell the kid? it's not like the kid won't ever ask about his/her father, and how do you think they'll react if you tell them, "well, yea, about that, i just didn't really want to tell your dad i was pregnant because he was ki…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 09:20 AM
1

the kind of message we can take from this image is ambiguous, but this eric kid has gone full retard.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 06:06 PM
1

I actually learned this from school, not the web (for once in my life), so I don't have a link handy. A few minutes of searching yielded this - it's not as detailed as my previous comment, but does support what I said. I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to find more if you're interested in the subject, but I don't have time to do an extensive search myself. xD According to Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, Israeli so…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 04:50 PM
1

what did you excpect? youcan'ttake(him)serious(ly)
/r/MensRights08/02/12 05:21 PM
6

The assumed male physical superiority is probably the origin of the tradition that war is fought by men, but we could trace that back to the beginning of recorded history. I think the physical differences caused gender roles to be defined the way they currently are, and I think the current definitions are what caused the problems I described in my previous comment. So in a way, I agree with you, I've just been told that the 'official' reason the draft only picks up men is because of what happene…
/r/MensRights08/02/12 10:17 AM
24

Actually, woman aren't allowed in direct combat because a country (I believe Israel) once tried allowing it, and found that male soldiers frequently endeavored in over-heroics in the presence of female soldiers. By this I mean, they were jumping in front of the women to take bullets, or jumping on top of grenades, etc - which is not independently bad, but it was done to the extent that many of them were prioritizing protecting the women over of the primary mission objective. Additionally, men wh…
/r/MensRights08/02/12 06:40 AM
3

wtf are you - (reads name) ... dammit.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 07:51 AM
1

I'm startin' to think bucky doesn't know what sarcasm is, based on other comments on this topic...
/r/MensRights12/09/11 07:48 AM
5

Chill pill broseph, he wasn't saying he seriously believes all women are bitches who deserve to have their tits chopped off and then raped to death, he suggesting the use of that statement as a rhetorical device - as it is the mirror image of what the woman in the original FB thread said about men. It's supposed to point out how ridiculous her statement is, that's all.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 07:46 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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