TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

minkcoat Archive

View 0 posts and 196 comments by minkcoat on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

"generalizing" means saying something like "all men are violent pigs". This clearly would not be a constructive thing to say, and should be strongly discouraged.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 09:36 PM
11

That's literally what I said ;)
/r/MensRights25/11/14 05:54 PM
-15

You can get that it's a joke, but not like the joke. Even think the joke crosses a line into hate speech.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 01:13 AM
1

I'm soooooo bored by how you argue. You argue like a taco. Are you a taco?
/r/MensRights25/11/14 01:02 AM
-14

I disagree. I'd say it says a lot about her sense of humor
/r/MensRights25/11/14 12:58 AM
-17

Those actions do not mean that her username can't be satirical as well. But to address those specific "hateful person" facts: blocklist: crowd sourcing a block list of people who's views oppose your own is hardly an act of hate. Not everybody wants to interact with people across the aisle from them. doxxing: it wasn't "just for disagreeing with her". She apologized. She hasn't done it since. I don't know this person, but I do know you can be angry and jokey at the same time.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 12:57 AM
0

I don't have a beef with this. Ask a male nurse if they have beef with this idea. There is ample evidence of brain differences between men and women, you just have your head in the sand about them. Oh, there are definitely differences. I've done no head-sanding about that. It's just I don't believe those differences are what accounts for the massive gender gap in STEM. I believe it's primarily cultural. It's possible that, cultural effects aside, there might always be a gender gap in certain fie…
/r/MensRights25/11/14 12:43 AM
-12

It's a satire of how she perceives her critics see her. Not a send up of radical feminism, but a satirical caricature of how feminists feel they are viewed by anti-feminists. This is definitely a joke, as are the male tears mugs. You can get that it's a joke, but not like the joke. Even think the joke crosses a line into hate speech. A joke can be hate speech, can it not? I'm pretty sure I could come up with a joke that fit most people's definition of hate speech.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 12:29 AM
0

If you read the actual research, the reasons women aren't in STEM are cultural. If society tells you you're going to suck at something, you're just not going to do it. This "they don't have the brains for it" business is just sexism disguised as fact, the same way "black's brains are less evolved, it's just facts!" used to be. By the same logic you just used men are bad at nursing and teaching, because they are women dominated fields. "Men just don't have the brains for it!". I'm pretty sure a l…
/r/MensRights25/11/14 12:22 AM
-1

No, I think Dr Matt Taylor inadvertently did something that promoted the idea of STEM as a boys club, and that fits some definitions of the term misogyny. Just like some MRAs would argue that saying something like "men are dumb brutes, but we love 'em" doesn't mean you hate men but could be considered misandrist anyway.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:48 PM
-29

I suspect it's satire, actually. Can be hard to defend because humor is in the ear of the behearer, but as they say "/r/MensRights strongly supports principles of free speech."
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:44 PM
-2

cc'ing Randi Harper, who's been working on sysinstall lately (and to whom I still owe some mail about related matters) http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2010-January/211482.html
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:40 PM
0

If you're only replying to the last comment I've made, do you even know what we're arguing about? Go read the whole thread and then talk to me.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:33 PM
0

I promise you, the people that complained where not being excluded, they're just looking for offences to be offended over. To some extent I'm sure you're right. The people who complained were mostly bloggers and social critics. They weren't young girls being further discouraged from pursuing a career in STEM. That doesn't actually undermine the point. You can complain on behalf of someone else. I'm sure many people in /r/mensrights have never had a child custody battle go badly for them for unfa…
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:27 PM
0

My favorite part of this is that you've decided that I'm a woman so everything I say is invalid.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 10:49 PM
0

Oh! OH! Oh wow, in that case I'll just shut up now. Seriously, though? I agree with that woman you linked to: too big of a deal has been made over this shirt. No reason it can't be misogynist AND trivial.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 10:11 PM
0

Cheers for the open minded discussion! Hope to do it again some time.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 09:59 PM
0

Point is if the "some" we are talking about are the people who are being excluded, then yeah, it matters if they are offended. The scientist has apologized. I don't think this thing merits anything beyond the initial "hey that shirt kinda sends the wrong message" "oh, sorry my bad". Everything else is a waste of time and energy for something that didn't matter a whole lot.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 09:21 PM
0

He's been photographed wearing a variety of wacky shirts. It's kinda his thing. Nobody had beef with wacky shirts. Just sexual wacky shirts. or they would have told him, to his face. Not true. I have issues with coworkers (not with what they are wearing, but other issues) that I don't bring up because it's not worth the stress. An outsider can bring it up without any downside because they don't have to work with them every day.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 09:17 PM
0

The word "misogyny" is often used in a way that is inclusive of discrimination, right? Like how homophobia is used to describe things other than being afraid of homosexuality. A shirt like that, in that context, was seen by some as indicating the kind of "frat house" environment where women aren't welcome or are only welcome as sex objects. That in turn means that wearing a shirt like that in a context like he did, is furthering the exclusion of women from STEM. Exclusion > discrimination > miso…
/r/MensRights24/11/14 10:13 AM
0

... do you deny that wearing a bathing suit to the beach is different from wearing one to a boardroom? Context is super important to everything anyone does. You can call that a "female" perspective but it's really not.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 10:04 AM
0

Honestly. I'm not going to try to convince some rando on a subreddit that I am one gender or another. My gender should not matter, unless you happen to have a strong prejudice against or toward listening to people of one gender. So if you want some more rope to hang yourself, I'm happy to provide.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 05:24 AM
0

would you like some more rope?
/r/MensRights24/11/14 05:14 AM
0

They can be both bro. context is a big deal in this world.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 04:48 AM
-1

I'm pretty sure there is a case that yes the shirt is misogynist, but I didn't use that word so I'm not going to make that case.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 02:07 AM
0

Context is everything. Nobody's blinking at a shirt like that on a weekend, at the bar, etc. A woman made it for those contexts. But if you put it on a male engineer working in a male dominated field going on TV for a massive scientific achievement, all of a sudden yeah I think it is a bit inappropriate. Anything sexually charged is inappropriate in that context. If the genders were swapped (down to it being a female dominated field) then it would also have been inappropriate for her to wear a s…
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:20 PM
-1

Wearing a shirt covered in sexy muscle dudes would have been inappropriate. Why is wearing a shirt with sexy bikini babes now inappropriate? You're going on TV for a massive scientific achievement. Wearing anything even remotely sexually charged would have been inappropriate.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:17 PM
0

When your pawns cross to the other end of the board, instead of promoting them to ANY denomination, I thought you could only promote them to kings. Not as interesting as it probably sounded. Obviously I was never very into chess, and haven't played for a good decade at least... So I've got that in my defense.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 07:19 PM
3

Nevermind, apparently I've been playing chess wrong my whole life.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 10:03 PM
1

Yeah but she's irreplaceable. You can get new kings.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:07 PM
1

Unless we're playing chess.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 05:21 AM
1

If OPs comment on a message board is 100% accurate, then I would agree that it strongly contradicts the premise that she was too intoxicated to consent. But I do not entirely trust a rando in a message board who says he "saw the whole thing" or whatever. Could be, could be not. I'd wait for testimony under oath before I was willing to dismiss this as a drunk-regret scenario. The whole story is not apparent from OPs links.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:48 AM
1

I think you'd find a large percentage of your sex partners would be disturbed to find you were filming them, and having a policy of informing them before sex would result in you getting laid a lot less. Personally, that's too high a bar to clear. I'd rather be cautious of who I sleep with, than sleep with people I didn't trust and film it without their knowledge and consent in the off chance they turned out to be crazy.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:42 AM
1

Why is that relevant to the legal culpability of the guy? My point is it's not relevant to the legal culpability, it's only relevant to the cultural culpability. If they really wanted to press charges for the stolen gas they should and could probably do it. But culture is going to look and them and say "what a weener!".
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:40 AM
1

I wonder if you would feel comfortable if you found out your last sex partner had a security camera in her bedroom? I mean, she's just as justified... it's at least as likely that you would turn out to be a rapist and she wouldn't be able to prove it.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:31 AM
1

I've never felt it to be necessary. But then, I don't own a gun, have a home security alarm, retain the services of a solicitor, or carry a switchblade.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:25 AM
1

What town do you live in where owners are giving away gas regularly? Frankly if you show up and the counter of your local gas station to pay and the owner is trashed beyond belief and says "'sfree, buddy, take th' gas". and you take the gas, you just took gas from someone who couldn't consent to you taking gas from their store. Owner or otherwise. Because it's gas not sex, we would say that the owner was an alcoholic and they brought that theft on themselves... but it's not gas it's sex, which c…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:10 AM
1

Hidden Camera Laws The laws of 13 states expressly prohibit the unauthorized installation or use of cameras in private places. A private place is one where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from unauthorized surveillance, locker rooms, restrooms etc. Several states have laws prohibiting the use of hidden cameras in only certain circumstances, such as in locker rooms or restrooms, or for the purpose of viewing a person in a state of partial or full nudity. That last line is the one of not…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:04 AM
0

Why were you alienated by this? Did you: send dick pics unsolicited only follow feminists who are physically attractive to you idk the louis ck bit is a bit weak. no comment. consider male feminists more valuable voices than female voices want to insert your opinion into every discussion tell women you don't know to smile ?? also a weak criticism look at leaked nudes without guilt I mean, look, I'm not cheering on this graphic, but there are some valid criticisms in it. There are many people who…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 05:24 AM
1

Well they should probably deal with their drinking problem, and nobody would fault their boss for firing them. But none of that makes the theft any less of a theft.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 05:13 AM
3

The point is you will never ever stop false accusations from happening. Of any crime. Even murder (missing person, no body found). Once an accusation is made, it falls into the justice system, and that can result in questionable verdicts. This person was convicted almost entirely on the word of one person. So was Adnan Syed. That is the similarity.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:55 AM
2

Filming someone without their permission/knowledge is a crime in some places. Hence signs like "SMILE YOU ARE ON CAMERA".
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:52 AM
2

There are levels of drunk. Without knowing the details of this case, I do know it's possible for all parties to be drunk, but some parties to be drunk beyond the ability to consent. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:43 AM
2

FYI in some places that will be a crime. Check your local lisitngs for details.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:42 AM
1

How about "The gas station attendant was drunk, your honor, so I just took all the gas I wanted, they didn't mind!". Better analogy.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:41 AM
3

If someone is following you on the street, repeatedly interacting with you in an undesirable way, that is called harassment. Catcalling and harassment are only degrees of persistence apart.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:36 AM
3

Have you listened to / heard about Serial (a podcast). Justice is complicated as fuck.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 04:21 AM
1

If a KKK member had sex with a woman that was 1/8th black, and he finds this out afterwards, was he raped? Did he think that the woman was his wife but she was not? Should she have reasonably known that he wasn't aware of her identity? There is a huge difference between not knowing a fact about someone, and not knowing WHO someone is. Setting aside "rape". Sexual assault is any sex act you didn't consent to. You can insist that she consented to sex, but I am of the opinion that if you come acros…
/r/MensRights12/11/14 09:47 PM
1

There is a huge difference from "repressed childhood memories recovered under hypnosis" and "this happened to me, but I didn't come forward because I figured nobody would believe me". More problems with the satanic ritual abuse stuff that doesn't parallel the cosby / ghomeshi / r kelly rape accusations: The stories presented by victims are generally lacking in detail. The only details of rituals provided are often what can be found in books or in horror movies. and When multiple victims are alle…
/r/MensRights12/11/14 09:35 PM
2

There are definitely some states where recording (audio, video, etc) someone else without their permission is illegal. Other places the law only comes into effect if you distribute the recording (e.g. you need consent forms to use footage of someone in a movie, revenge porn laws, etc.)
/r/MensRights11/11/14 09:04 PM
1

Rape is forcing the act on someone, against their will. it's really more of a case of mistaken identity. That depends on if you define "the act" that you are consenting to as "having sex" or if you define it as "having sex with person a". She is saying she consented to "having sex with person a" but found out it was person b... hence non-consentual. I think it makes sense to include the who in the definition. As someone else in the thread said: if you were lying in bed with your head under your …
/r/MensRights11/11/14 09:02 PM
2

Hmm.. the accusations are pretty damning. Four women have publically accused him, all with very similar stories and as many as 13 have accused him as Jane Doe's. He settled a sexual assault lawsuit out of court. I know nothing short of a criminal conviction will do for many people on here, but as with the Jian Ghomeshi thing, I have a hard time believing that many women would be crazy and have an "axe to grind" or something.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 08:50 PM
-1

As I mentioned: it's from a prank site, so their is no expectation of voracity. I find the acting to be apparent in the sequence with the girl asking for his number The guy who turns his girlfriend around doesn't look to see what she's checking out before getting mad. These are all just speculation, but hey! It's the Internet :)
/r/MensRights07/11/14 05:17 AM
-2

I spotted what I think is a fake and I called it out. Sorry if I came across as a dick.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 02:30 AM
1

I'm not familiar enough with the campeigns to argue why it went one way or the other, but I'm of the opinion that the people (men and women) of texas and colorado are worse off for the way it did go. Abortion access benefits everyone.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 12:41 AM
-1

Yes. Advocating for mens issues and working towards equality is a good thing. Attacking feminism is dumb. Where feminism harms men, more ground is gained by dealing with the harm than anything else. Frankly, the anti-feminst streak of MRM is what makes it so unpalatable to most. "fucking feminsts think all men are rapists" vs "rape is an understandably emotional issue, but we need to not lose sight of due process and accountablity"
/r/MensRights07/11/14 12:07 AM
11

De Freitas reported to police on 4 January 2013 that she had been allegedly drugged and raped by a male associate shortly before Christmas in 2012. The police investigated the case, interviewed De Freitas and arrested the alleged perpetrator. But the police eventually told De Freitas they could not proceed further as there was not a realistic chance of a successful conviction, partly due to the fact she had reported the alleged rape some time after the event and as such no forensic evidence had …
/r/MensRights07/11/14 12:05 AM
-9

evidence: the last guy, who flips his girlfriend forward because she's leering, doesn't even look at what she is looking at before turning her. evidence: the video is made by a PRANK video maker.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 11:50 PM
-5

No, I mean people in the video were acting.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 11:43 PM
-11

evidence: bad acting
/r/MensRights06/11/14 11:11 PM
-33

This video is faaaaaake. The girl in the green shirt who follows him? Fake fake fake. edit: downvotes because you disagree, or because it being fake disagrees with your view of the world? I'd bet money this video was at least partially faked. edit2: I can tell it's faked because of the pixels, and from having seen many fakes before.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 09:51 PM
1

All I ask is that you think twice before you cast doubt on someone's claim. Is the discussion made better by my questioning it publicly? Your private skepticism is, of course, your own business. In this kind of situation I believe all you do is back up the idea that all mra's are rape denialists. That's just one person on the internet's opinion, so do with it what you will.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 09:48 PM
4

This sounds like a statistical anomaly more than anything. Classic stats 101, schools with very few students tend to be both the top performers and the bottom performers. This is because the odds of a class of 5 being all super smart kids or super dumb kids is much higher than in a class of 35. With a small population and only a handful of serial killers over a century, getting a weird stat isn't entirely unexpected. There could be something else interesting going on here, but without knowing mu…
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:43 PM
0

You're not being a hero, you're just being an asshole. When someone says something bad happened to them, giving them the benefit of believing them is the least we can do. Are you skeptically calling out every /r/mensrights divorce settlement sob story? I bet more than one have been made up or exaggerated... but I'll grant them the basic respect of believing them unless there is a good reason not to. We can argue about how much we want to take someone's word alone when it comes to criminal procee…
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:24 PM
1

Well, this article is from Canada, so they aren't out anything.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:59 AM
0

http://np.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/2lcnno/how_should_i_tell_my_boyfriend_i_was_raped/ "The first time I was drunk, this time I was sober" Honestly... you know so little about her situation, yet you judged her so harshly. Have a little fucking compassion. She's not asking if she should go to the police, she's asking how to handle it in her own relationship. So fucking cold, bro.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:56 AM
1

Of course it upset her, her friend was raped. Seriously, if your friend told you he or she had been raped, would you disbelieve them? Don't deny her being upset about it. It's not helpful to anyone's cause. My friend's house got robbed on halloween, and I'm upset that it happened to them. They might be lying about it... they didn't go to the police or anything, but I'm going to go ahead and believe them because they are my friend and I trust them.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:51 AM
0

As I pointed out in another comment the thread's stats are wrong, but the difference at undergrad is even less. Masters degree (2011): 55% female, 45% male Bachelors degree (2011): 52% female, 48% male source: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2013/tables.html
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:44 AM
-1

These numbers are wrong. In 2011 it was 55% female and 45% male. source: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2013/tables.html direct link to data: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2013/Table%201-01.csv This is likely a result of men not seeking masters degrees as a result of either the inability to afford them (either in time or in money), or having opportunities that don't require a masters degree. For instance, many tech jobs do not require a masters toda…
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:40 AM
0

... And we will see further erosion of reproductive rights in texas, thus leading to more men who don't want to be fathers made to be fathers and support children they don't have custody of. How is this a good thing?
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:26 AM
10

This. I do this for anyone. Man, woman, or child. At night, on a quiet street, everybody has their hackles up and nobody likes someone walking too close behind them 'n shit.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:22 AM
2

Movember is a moustache only. Very visible. People will ask what it's about. Great way to promote men's health + raise money.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 08:47 PM
1

Sure, but do you act on about every injustice you see? We can't fight every fight there is. We all pick our battles. Are you in /r/sleepingsickness helping raise money for sleeping sickness aid and research? Nah. But you've given blood in the past five years? Well then you're acquiescing to western cultural biases against diseases that mostly effect Africans. She's vaguely participating in a cause that is helping people. You don't need to shit on that to think that she and her company should als…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 08:31 PM
2

If you can, depending on your job, you should start a movember team with a coworker or two and rock movember 'staches. It's such a visible thing, it could easily catch on at your work.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 06:29 PM
2

Supporting a day/week/month for women's health in no way contradicts thinking there should be a similar day/week/month for men's health. In fact shame on you if you only support one.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 06:28 PM
4

Uhh, age of consent laws in Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Canada Age of consent is 16, under that age there are close-in-age exceptions (15yr old and 19 yr old having sex is ok), and until you're 18 there are restrictions on sex with "persons of trust" e.g. bosses, teachers, etc. and the government carved out some room for punishing online predators or something. Also buttsex is illegal until you're 18.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 08:28 PM
4

Claims made in private to the CBC were what lead to the destruction of his livelihood. The CBC hasn't said what information they have that we don't. He was the one who personally brought his sex life into the story when he published that fb post. The Star only published their story (detailing the anonymous claims) AFTER he brought his sex life into the public eye. Jian said in his fb post that he had been approached a while ago by a canadian newspaper (presumably the star) but nothing had been p…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 08:08 PM
1

You said people were fleeing Canada not Canadian urban centers. Demographics for Canada match demographics for the US. All I'm taking issue with is the idea that "men are fleeing canada". Would the stats for all of Canada not reflect that? If you're saying "men are fleeing canadian cities" that's a different issue with a different explanation. I've googled but I can't find stats on Canadian urban centers, so I can't comment directly (again, please provide if you know where to get them. I'm genui…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 07:59 PM
4

People are fired all the time for infractions that don't involve criminal charges. How many jobs do drug testing? How many people are fired for alcoholism? If he had been fired for a drinking problem it could have gone down largely the same way. Fired for unnamed reasons. PR blast from him saying he drinks in his private time and it never interferes with work. Journalist gets anonymous people to describe how destructive his drinking is. Former coworker filed complaint about him being drunk at wo…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 06:37 PM
1

Canada is bigger than Ontario, and pay scales vary from Provence to Provence. Also the number of teacher who make it to 10 years experience will be less than those who make it to 5yrs. The numbers I linked to can still be right, even if a 10 year experience teacher makes 80-94k.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 06:07 PM
2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada at birth: 1.06 male(s)/female under 15 years: 1.05 male(s)/female 15 – 24 years: 1.06 male(s)/female 25 - 54 years: 1.03 male(s)/female 55 - 64 years: 0.98 male(s)/female 65 years and over: 0.79 male(s)/female total population: 0.99 male(s)/female (2013 est.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Sex_ratios at birth: 1.048 male(s)/female under 15 years: 1.04 male(s)/female 15–64 years: 1 male(s)/female 65 years and ov…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:52 AM
2

Men aren't fleeing Canada.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:15 AM
3

Because 57 to 43 is in one area, not across the board.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:14 AM
3

http://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Elementary_School_Teacher/Salary Median pay is 50k, not 94k. 90% of teachers earn 82k or less.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:12 AM
1

I thought this was a safe space for men?!
/r/MensRights29/10/14 04:10 AM
1

sigh
/r/MensRights29/10/14 03:32 AM
1

Aaaaand now you're implying that the only way I would be criticizing you is if I'm a woman?
/r/MensRights29/10/14 03:24 AM
1

So you hate gay people, too?
/r/MensRights29/10/14 03:17 AM
1

Male shaming? You're the one shaming the thousands of men who've jerked it to Shortbus.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 02:39 AM
1

You realize other people have different taste than you, right? You may love BBW porn, but that doesn't mean you need to impose your desires on the rest of us. Supes sex negative, bud.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 02:37 AM
2

So you hate porn?
/r/MensRights29/10/14 02:30 AM
2

I'm not attracted to SYL, nor am I a fan of her work, but christ should she be fired for making a movie (not a porno) that had real not simulated sex? If she should, then clearly jian should be fired for having kinky sex, as the infraction is "people knowing about the sex you have". (... She should be fired for being a terrible radio host, but that's just my opinion.)
/r/MensRights29/10/14 02:20 AM
6

But if she was hot it'd be ok? Come on, dude. If he was fired for being kinky, then yeah fuck the CBC. But so far the dust hasn't settled on this. We don't know what informtion the CBC was looking at. Everybody making a judgement about what's happening is making a judgement without enough information.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 02:10 AM
2

In the early minutes of this story when all we had was his facebook post, the "feminazis and white knights" were rallying around him... it seemed like a story of someone fired for being kinky. Then the star article dropped and the story got more complex... right now most of what I'm seeing is "this is fucked up but let's reserve judgement until we know more"...
/r/MensRights29/10/14 01:53 AM
9

Did you read the star article? Over the past year three women have accused him of striking them with closed fists, and one former cbc employee filed a formal complaint against him for harassment at work. They won't go public for fear of a public reprisal (gamergate, thy seeds are sown). One crazy ex I believe. Three crazy exes and a crazy ex co-worker... you're starting to stretch credibility. Still way to early to draw a conclusion, but it's deeper than his story of a scorned ex on a mission.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 01:50 AM
1

This article isn't about seedy fetish porn, this is how she feels about ALL make/female sex. I know that's what the article is about. Sex positive feminism has beef with ideas like "all sex is rape" and "all porn is for men" because they deny the reality that women enjoy sex and porn. The only denial being made here is that opinions like this are a PART of mainstream feminism. There is no question that is has been a part of feminism, and continues to exist on the fringes.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 10:01 PM
2

Past of studying a movement is learning about it's history and the things it got right and wrong. Andrea Dworkin was part of the anti-pornography element of feminism, that has since largely been discredited in favor of sex positive feminism. To put it plainly: Dworkin was a preacher of hate. http://reason.com/archives/2005/04/19/womans-hating
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:17 PM
1

Not defending this at all but there is a massive rift in feminism over sex and porn. Sex positive feminists, would have serious beef with this. If they are ignoring it it is because it's crazy and poorly written and not worth responding to by anyone.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:11 PM
1

Just the inverse of ideas from tantric sex: cumming is draining your life force so you should avoid it and channel the energy into more fucking.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:06 PM
2

No, it's still not invalid, but I congratulate your valiant efforts to ignore reality.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 07:49 PM
-1

If the draft is anti-men then adding women to it is anti-women. The idea that you would be forced into military service is a violation of personal freedom.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:03 PM
0

Watch out. You just implied that men are more frequently violent than women. The majority of domestic violence incidents don't involve a stabbing or shooting, after all.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:01 PM
0

Nah, I'm good.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 10:00 AM
1

Sorry, that wasn't my point. My point was the nature of the violence tends to be different, not the severity. I was suggesting it because women tend to be socialized differently and it results in different types of violence.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:53 AM
-1

Wow, shocker, a women focused organization prioritized women's issues. Just like how MRA usually spend 70-80% of their time lobbying for women's issues, right?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:51 AM
-2

Some makes are stronger than some females, some females are stronger than some males. Also, why are you asking me? Do I look like a medical statistician or something?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:13 AM
0

I don't think you understand the concept of a human right.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:03 AM
0

This post is blatantly misogynist. You could have just said "because sometimes, in a great emergency conscription is required, and registration serves that end". I'm under the impression that registration serves an antiquated need to have a registry of all service-age males. Databases and computer records have made that need largely obsolete. You can still politick out of the draft if your number comes up (see: alice's restaurant).
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:01 AM
0

So what have you done lately for women's causes? You support equality, don't you? Unless you're a male supremacist you must support women's rights... have you actively pursued women's causes recently? I'd be willing to bet feminists have historically done more that you have benefited from than any men's advocacy group ever.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:47 AM
0

Which human rights are "they" taking away?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:38 AM
0

The term hysteria when applied to women has implications of female hysteria. You didn't mean it the offensive way but it was still offensive. rape kits, blood tests and signs of struggle cannot prove many of the types of sexual assault that are highly prevalent in campus rape cases. Show me a rape kit that can prove they were passed out at the time. Still, I would agree with you that it's not good enough for criminal liability. Except that this standard is not used to determine criminal sexual a…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:36 AM
0

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2jmtgm/antifeminist_lawyer_plans_lawsuit_to_force_women/cldeoiy see also the comments to this article on /r/politics http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/2jlq0o/at_age_18_every_american_man_gets_a_card_in_the/
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:45 AM
-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria Affermative consent is not anti male. The current california law recognizes "envelopment" as sexual assault and applies equally to situations where men and women are the victim. Calling it anti-male is implying that men are always the aggressors in sexually ambiguous situations. Your allegation that the law is anti-male is in itself anti-male.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:43 AM
-1

Feminists support the abolishment of the draft almost entirely.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:38 AM
20

Some history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rostker_v._Goldberg tl;dr: Someone sued the draft board saying that since women aren't required to register, it's a sexist policy. The supreme court ruled that basically they're allowed to only register men, because women aren't allowed in combat and the draft is intended to get soldiers for combat duty. Incidentally, feminists have long been actively pursuing the right to active combat (e.g. http://thefeministwire.com/2013/01/9820/). Since the lawsuit,…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:37 AM
7

What hypocrisy? Feminists are generally against the draft http://now.org/about/history/highlights/ 1980 NOW announces opposition to the draft, but states that if there is a draft, NOW supports the inclusion of women on the same basis as men. Just one example from a mainstream feminist organization.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:21 AM
1

"hysteria" itself is a highly offensive term.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:19 AM
-4

http://now.org/about/history/highlights/ 1980 NOW announces opposition to the draft, but states that if there is a draft, NOW supports the inclusion of women on the same basis as men. NOW is a decidedly mainstream feminist organization (500,000 contributing members).
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:18 AM
1

The comments on this story over at /r/politics are interesting. Almost unanimous agreement from men, women, feminists, etc. that the draft sucks but if it's gotta exist it should be equal.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 03:15 AM
0

Feminists are with you on sharing military service obligations, should they be required. National Organization for Women: BE IT RESOLVED, that NOW opposes the reinstatement of registration and draft for both men and women. NOW's primary focus on this issue is on opposition to registration and draft. However, if we cannot stop the return to registration and draft, we also cannot choose between sisters and brothers. We oppose any registration or draft that excludes women as an unconstitutional den…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:42 AM
0

Yes, human rights are often predicated on your gender. It's right there in the universal declaration of human rights that the UN published. Right after the bit about human rights only applying to asians.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:20 AM
-1

Been tried in the past, failed on grounds that are quickly evaporating: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2jmtgm/antifeminist_lawyer_plans_lawsuit_to_force_women/clde0xj
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:16 AM
2

Since that ruling was based on the idea that women are not allowed in combat roles, and the draft is about getting people to fill combat roles, the fact that women will be put into combat roles by 2016 would undermine that. Making the fact that men are required to register for the draft sexist again. Well, it was always sexist, because it was based on the sexist notion that women aren't allowed into combat. Interestingly, while reading about Rostker v. Goldberg: The main point of those who favor…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:15 AM
5

This means that far from being oppressed, these women are having their preferred lifestyle subsidized by their husbands when they marry up to men who are able to do so--and by doing so these men are consequently unable to quit work or work part time in order spend more time with their kids even if they want to. They weren't asked on what terms they would accept that luxury. For some women, marrying into money or limiting their partners time with the kids is an acceptable arrangement. Others woul…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:00 AM
-1

So you spend a lot of time reading feminist literature? ...or are you just referring to tumblr circlejerks posted to reddit?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:50 AM
-2

As I've said in other comments: how about a lawsuit that disputes registering for the draft on the grounds that it is sexist? The only way to reconcile that is to abolish the draft or to make women register. It has a better best outcome than this lawsuit.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:42 AM
0

Easily explained by confirmation bias and sampling bias. Confirmation bias: you believe it to be so, so whenever you see a confirmation of it your belief is re-enforced, while things that disagree with your belief are ignored or counted less. Sampling bias: you haven't met 64 million people. Your sample is skewed by the groups you run with, and the media you consume.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:38 AM
7

Biggest difference is the lapel cam. In the past, officers who were accused of impropriety were protected by the system because shit like this is too easy an out for people (be it sexual allegations or brutality allegations). Now only the cops who actually do something inappropriate will suffer.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:28 AM
1

No difference from this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEsZkTTgydc
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:27 AM
-6

Privileged, entitled males. They're raised their whole life being taught that violent outbursts are part of being a man. Not gonna argue stats here, but you cannot deny that some men are physically violent with their partners. People they are supposed to love. Sure it wouldn't be scratches all over her body, it'd be a black eye or a broken jaw... principle is the same: domestic violence is awful.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:22 AM
1

As I said in another comment: why not plan a lawsuit to abolish the draft on the grounds that women aren't forced to register so it's sexist. The worst case outcome of that is that women are forced to register and the best case is abolishment.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:16 AM
6

Yes, and most of them would say it should not be applied to anyone.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:11 AM
19

The lawyer is anti-feminist. Nobody said the lawsuit was anti-feminist. That said, I think the lawsuit is anti-women, and the draft is anti-men. If men and women are forced to register for the draft, then it's equally anti-human.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:10 AM
0

Actually, you could take the opposite stance and argue that men being forced to register for the draft is discrimination and it should be abolished for men as it is for women as that would make it equal.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:09 AM
3

How about instead of forcing women to register for the draft, we get rid of the draft entirely?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:07 AM
1

Men who aren't evil are removed from the story, only evil men are left in it. I don't see that happening the way you do, but who am I to deny your truth. Maybe it is happening, and in that case it's probably because that's where the beef lies. Most men aren't evil misogynist fuckwads, so there is a focus on the male fuckwads, because that is the fundamental problem with men being mostly in charge... the fuckwads are always male. If there was equal representation, equality in government, business…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:03 AM
1

Secondly its not so much that men are victims of sexual assault at the same rate, its that the method of calculating rape victims is seen as absurd once you apply that method to men. If you do apply the same methodology then suddenly people think the idea that men are being raped this much is ridiculous and say the methodology is stupid. Ahh, here we go. Here is the crux of it. You believe that the standard by which we judge if a woman has been sexually assaulted is getting all these false posit…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 12:51 AM
1

"The Patriarchy" isn't "men are evil", it's "men are mostly in charge". Many of the issues /r/mensrights has with society today is backed up by the patriarchy. Male disposability, for example. Just because it's men that are in charge, doesn't mean they can't be dicks to other men, or treat women paternalistically.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 12:25 AM
1

I've written my thoughts about people who use the dictionary definition of feminism here: TL;DR: judge groups by their actions and not by their dictionary definition. 1/5 people in the USA identifies as a feminist. Judge people by their actions. Of the ~64 million feminists in the USA, how many act and support feminism as a movement towards equality. Your strawman "feminist" is just a caricature. e.g. legit feminism as practiced by the mainstream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7ZzQbSiGA
/r/MensRights19/10/14 12:20 AM
0

How does that even relate? Yes large numbers of people can be wrong about things. No shit. I wasn't saying feminists are right because they are a lot of them.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 06:02 PM
1

Dismantling the patriarchy means changing the rule of government and society from one largely male dominated to one that represents men and women equally. You can feel threatened by it if you want, but it's not aimed at dominating men. Outside of satirical or extremists musings, establishing a "matriarchy" isn't anyone's goal.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 05:58 PM
1

Statistics can sometimes be re-calculated from their source data to reflect changing definitions. Like how sexual assault statistics have changed to include men where they didn't in the past. Did you read the law? It's not long. If you truly believe that men are victims of sexual assault (or rape, we can call it that if you must) at similar rates to women, then don't you want a law to protect them? This law does that. Those men can go to the school and report their sexual assault. But what I thi…
/r/MensRights18/10/14 05:53 PM
1

1/5 people in the USA identifies as a feminist. Judge people by their actions.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 05:44 AM
0

Except there is, and always has been a large breadth of viewpoints represented by the term "feminist". All you need to believe to call yourself a feminist is to believe that men and women should be equal.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 03:23 AM
3

11 "when you like a person, do nice things for them, don't expect anything in return" 22 recognize the ways in which you are privileged. 20 Don't let society tell you which roles you're good at. Men make good parents too.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 02:44 AM
3

I hesitated to post it because of it's obvious agenda, but if you grab the pdfs linked each incident has a detailed citation.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 01:58 AM
3

http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm While it's true that people with concealed carry licenses are less likely to commit a crime, they are not so unlikely that they haven't killed hundreds since 2007. Including 29 mass shootings. You believe she would be safer, but she believed she would not be safer. Your belief is no more based in fact than her belief.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 01:48 AM
3

I'm not from Utah, so I was surprised to learn that a specific event can't ban concealed carry in that state. Not trying to bring on a bunch of rhetoric (though I have some if you'd like), I was under the impression the school chose not to ban, rather than was unable to ban without challenging the law. It makes it much more understandable, from their perspective.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:56 AM
3

[citation needed] [example of reverse precedent in another state: http://www.wral.com/judge-upholds-ban-on-concealed-weapons-at-state-fair/14074420/]
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:45 AM
3

... After death threats had been made, specifically threats of a shooting. State laws can allow concealed carry, without a specific place or event allowing it.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:34 AM
3

If it's anything like every other talk I've heard of or attended at a school, it was paid for by a group or department within the school and free to attend.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:30 AM
1

Most people in those positions don't enact cultural change, they enforce the status quo. That said, off the top of my head here of some ways they COULD, and sometimes do, change culture: Educators can teach students about other perspectives. Church officials can influence views on morality in sermons and by welcoming and shunning various groups. Politicians can pass laws that change how we view people and actions. Community leaders can organize events and programmes that help oppressed groups. P…
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:14 AM
2

Or maybe it's not about "sides", but rather critiquing society when it's full of shit and speaking up for equality where there is inequality?
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:05 AM
1

What was your post? I can't see it in your history.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:01 AM
1

How many of your beliefs and cultural mores did you specifically consent to. Have you weighted the pros and cons of every thing you hold dear? When you did evaluate specific values, where did you get your information from? Who or what prompted you to evaluate your position, and how did they frame the question? The kind of consent given is usually unconscious. Like when you consented to being advertised to on nearly every website you visit. There was maybe a moment when they got to the point wher…
/r/MensRights17/10/14 11:56 PM
1

I'm afraid inconsistencies aren't gone at all, since it means you weren't defending this policy on RAPE after all. Actually, no. You're wrong. I was using the word "rape", but the California campus "yes means yes" law we were dancing around only uses the word "rape" once, to refer to "rape crisis centers". Everything else is referred to as "sexual assault" It also never brings gender or penetration into the mix, a quick search for terms like "male", "men", "women", "female", and "penetration" in…
/r/MensRights17/10/14 11:27 PM
1

If you want to easily reconcile my previous comments with these, you can just substitute "sexual assault" where I had previously used "rape". Bam, inconsistencies gone. You are right, my absolutist statement was based on a definition of rape that would include forced envelopment. Again, I've never said I oppose that, just that I believe there is room for all types of sexual assault to be taken seriously without having to label all of them "rape". We can call everything rape, or we can break it i…
/r/MensRights17/10/14 06:54 PM
1

I know just the other day a young man knocked on my door to say that he had just moved into the neighborhood and was legally required to inform me that he had been expelled from Berkeley City College 8 years ago. Needless to say, we won't be bringing the kids around to his pool party next weekend.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 05:31 PM
1

We were discussing historical involvement in the change of the definition to include men, not current involvement around forced envelopment. Frankly I think there is a strong argument to be made that forced penetration and forced envelopment should be maintained, as they are now, as different crimes. That said, if I were king of naming things I would separate rape and the stuff we generally call "date rape" into two separate terms. That is not an argument for treating one of those less severely,…
/r/MensRights17/10/14 05:23 PM
1

Community leaders, educators, church officials, politicians, public servants, city officials, police, judges, permit clerks, business owners, public personalities, journalists, newscasters, entertainers, etc. Anyone who plays a role in defining culture. They are handed out like most roles are handed out, by the previous people who held that role, or by the people who control that position.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 02:08 AM
1

No, I say it like I think it makes it a very different thing and you are conflating them.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 02:04 AM
1

Still the difference between kicked out of school and time in jail and a lifetime on a sex offender registry. So, a big difference.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 12:19 AM
1

That's not the law, that's a school policy.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 05:19 PM
0

I'm expressing empathy for men raped during the long period where it was not legally acknowledged as a possibility, and asking for more info about something you said... That feminists ignored this problem for over a decade while mrm was pulling for it.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 03:24 AM
1

Change is slow :( Was male rape an issue being actively pursued by the MRM? At what point did it become an issue? I can't find anything online on MRM's involvement or advocacy for legal recognition of male rape... serious question. If this is the case, it should be gotten on record somewhere.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 11:00 PM
-2

And that undermines the point how exactly? There are generally different cultural forces pulling and pushing men. If rape is now, or is becoming as loaded with danger for men as it has been historically for women, that is a move towards equality... sharing the risk between both the parties involved. Similar to how child support shifts the result of a reckless sexual encounter from the woman to both parties. The bad outcomes are different (violence, social shaming / social shaming, legal action),…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:45 PM
-2

Rape was redefined to be inclusive of both genders (kinda). Give credit where credit is due, this definition was changed as a result of the work of feminists.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:39 PM
2

women are continually being forced out of the games and tech industries by sexism and harassment. And the suspicion I noted above does this how? I didn't even say I believe it was a woman. So how are you connecting this to sexism? Both threats like the ones received by AS, and doubts like the ones expressed in this thread, are part of the harassment that pushes women out of tech and games. I have another question for you: do you think a man could have done what Sarkeesian has done? I mean all el…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:13 PM
1

NEWS FLASH: LITERALLY ANY SEX CAN BE RAPE. Rape is literally a sexual act without consent. If you are getting ridden by your girlfriend and all of a sudden you want to stop because you're totally over with this relationship and it's done. If you do not stop it promptly, you just got raped. Congrats! Legally, however, the rape-ee needs to have communicated a lack of consent in some way. That is on them. There is no way to be certain that someone is "definitely into it" Which is why we should all …
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:00 PM
-3

Two comments: "Typical" The article refers to him as an extremist. You can't be an extremist and a "typical" member of a group that encompasses 1/5 of americans (~63 million people). And: "Drivers need to feel a cold spike of fear when they step behind the wheel." I don't agree with Ezra Klein's cold spike statement, a climate of fear is not a good end goal. But I sure as hell think that shifting responsibility onto men to make sure they aren't in an ambiguous sexual encounter is a good idea. It…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 09:39 PM
1

Yes. It's a good thing they don't want to pay you to work in their shithouse, because they couldn't pay you enough to work in their shithouse.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 09:13 PM
3

Ooo, now you're outraged at my lack of empathy. Look... I'm not here to argue about false rape accusations. I have some thoughts on the subject, but I'd rather not get into them at the moment. You are right, the scale is a little bit different. Spurious rumours online vs. actual accusations made in public. I'm not withdrawing my comment, but I agree they are on a different scale. That doesn't mean your logic is not faulty in assuming she's guilty because "WHO STANDS TO BENEFIT!? HUH!?". This won…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 09:04 PM
1

As I said, it's a good thing they don't want to pay you.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:22 PM
1

High pay and good benefits?
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:19 PM
5

This is literally the kind of shit /r/mensrights is constantly on about with rape accusations. You have a claim with only very rough "evidence" and you're saying "good enough for me!" and then someone says "i said no and he kept going" and you're like "well there's no proof you said no! also why didn't you kick and scream?! faaaake." Pick one, innocent until proven guilty, or "she had a good reason too fake those threats: guilty". You don't get both. edit: sorry, there was no way I could finish …
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:19 PM
1

The thing you are missing is that I'm not trying to define what is and isn't rape. Rape happens when one party consents and the other does not, but since you could theoretically withdraw consent mid-sex and not do anything to signal that, the legal definition of rape will include language about communicating that lack of consent. Legally defining rape is unfortunately messy, due to the nuances of human communication. What I am trying to say is if you follow the rule of only fucking people who de…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:12 PM
0

Well looky here it's just two people guessing things on the internet with no information between them.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:42 PM
0

Lucky for you Apple doesn't want to pay to keep you around.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:40 PM
0

Again, I am not saying it made sense in this specific case you bring up. I am saying you cannot dismiss a claim simply on the grounds that they have no bruises due to being "paralyzed with fear". That's a real thing that happens to people. That's all I'm saying. You should agree with me now, unless you think, as I took from your original comment, that "paralyzed by fear" is a laughable idea.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:38 PM
0

Except because these "pointers" are being cited repeatedly, to the point where many believe they are cold hard facts. People who doubt the authenticity are doing so with a very incomplete picture. They are basing their doubts on a few tweets, a blog post by someone who phoned a police department, and a death threat written by someone with a weak grasp on reality. The FBI have been contacted and nobody doubts that. If these are "false flag"s they will be caught eventually (they seem to be escalat…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:25 PM
-1

You don't need to hold someone paralyzed by fear down. Again, I'm not defending this specific claim but you were scoffing at the idea that she could have been paralyzed with fear
/r/MensRights15/10/14 06:58 PM
0

Yes. That is what I am assuming. It turns out that if you tend to fuck people who aren't that into it, some of them will be feeling totally not into it and others with be feeling just a little not into it. That's why the only way to avoid non-consensual sex is to avoid sex with people who aren't that into it or who don't demonstrate an abundance of ability to make their desires know in sexualized situations.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 03:01 PM
0

You're thinking you're catching me up on wording, but actually just blurring my words with straw man "feminists say" words and misreading. It's pretty simple... If one person wants to fuck and another person doesn't, if fucking happens that's rape. Everything else we are talking about is just ways to prevent that from happening by accident. Ways like: No always means no. Don't fuck someone saying no, no matter what their body language is saying. It's not worth the risk of misunderstanding (the r…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 02:21 PM
1

If you're messing around with someone and they freeze up, you need to check in with them asap. Fucking someone who's gone catatonic is pretty rapey
/r/MensRights15/10/14 01:25 PM
0

Yes freezing makes you weak willed if there is no other reason for you to be fearful of expressing your true feelings about the situation. Does all of culture training you that being demure and unassertive is the right way to be a woman count as a reason? Because it's the reason, and I don't consider it good but I do consider it a good reason. Then you acknowledge that saying "yes" is actually irrelevant. Sure. Yeah. It's not irrelevant in situations where there isn't other forms of coercion, bu…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 01:08 PM
-1

Are you serious? Freezing makes you "weak willed"?! The best of us have frozen in a weird situation. An awkward moment, a cup about to fall off a table, etc. That's not weak willed, it's just being human. We don't always know what to do, and sometimes fear or uncertainty gets the better of us. Yes means yes is not actually fucking literal, so it's not rape if you point a gun at someone's head and make them say yes. The idea of yes means yes is better stated as "enthusiastic consent". Don't only …
/r/MensRights15/10/14 12:17 PM
1

I disagree. Not that men are often the bag men, that's almost definitely generally true. Countries where acid attacks happen tend to be extremely patriarchal. Women are not given roles where they can enact changes to cultural norms. So yes, women can be holding up the societal norms, but if they are never given an opportunity to change them, they can hardly be held responsible for them. Just like how I am not given political power to change laws, and thus cannot be ultimately held personally acc…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 11:28 AM
2

I would be willing to bet everything of value that I own, that the exact scenario that you won't believe has happened. People freeze up, people don't act like they think they would act. If there are other inconsistencies in her story, they can undermine it on their own. Your lack of belief that someone might freeze up when a sexual situation gets out of control is not something that should be taken into consideration.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:54 AM
0

I wasn't there at the hearing, so I can't argue as to the woman's story making sense or not. But I can tell you that if you think people aren't paralyzed with fear when a situation gets out of their control and they don't know how to cope, you are severely mistaken.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:50 AM
-1

Women are socialized to be meek and un assertive. Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that a women's response to a sexual situation getting out of control might be freezing up? If you don't think this is plausible you are seriously out of touch.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:47 AM
0

Others in this thread are asserting that most attacks are perpetrated by women. F that's the case, whatever point you are making seems to not hold here.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:39 AM
21

Are we sure it's not a false flag false flag? It could have been written by a misogynist to make us believe she's faking it! Think that's implausible? It's just as fucking plausible as a false flag. You can pat yourself on the back for being skeptical all you want, but unless the FBI links it to her you are just making up stories in your head to make her seem shittier.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:24 AM
-1

In this case it's companies like Apple thinking "how can we get women to stick around the company in their late 30s?" and one proposed answer is this benefit. Your statement is nothing but misogynist. If you truly believe in equality for men, you must also believe in equality for women. 1 cannot equal 1 if one of those 1s is less than the other. Re-evaluate your hatred of women, it's hurting you more than anyone.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:17 AM
2

Can't find info on google but I'd be willing to bet freezing sperm is covered by the executive health plan at a company like Apple.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:14 AM
2

Hire. Not higher.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:13 AM
-4

She's not asking for help she's fighting harassment the only way you can: calling it out. Damsel in distress is a storytelling motif, not a real thing. It can only be applied if the narrative is "woman in danger needs man to save her".
/r/MensRights15/10/14 10:03 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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