TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

modernbenoni Archive

View 6 posts and 697 comments by modernbenoni 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)
5

Saying that something is done all the time is a pretty weak argument for why it's acceptable.
/r/PussyPass20/11/17 12:33 PM
1

Fair enough, I do see an argument for that though I don't think that the right to anonymity should be guaranteed for convicted criminals. I don't see it as them losing human rights, just as part of them living with the consequences of their actions.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/17 06:30 PM
1

Do you think that there should always be anonymity for the accused/accuser in criminal cases? Outside of rape cases I mean, as you could always get the problem you're describing.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/17 06:00 PM
2

I think that the accuser's face should be published. Name and shame. The benefit it serves is in punishing the perpetrator and deterring others. Once somebody has been found guilty of something they lose most expectation to privacy regarding the case.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/17 05:28 PM
6

But this woman falsely accused him. Showing the picture of a false accuser isn't the same as showing the picture of any accuser.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/17 05:26 PM
2

I thought the acting was all right honestly
/r/PussyPassDenied11/11/17 03:42 PM
1

That's much better execution
/r/MGTOW11/11/17 01:31 AM
3

Nah I don't think so, look how calm she looks throughout
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/17 07:23 PM
20

Nah I think drunk would be more messy than necessarily slow. She looks so indifferent and slow motion, I'd say drugs. Maybe opiates.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/17 02:31 PM
6

Yeah, but it's fucked that it's okay to publish the name of the accused, in my opinion. It isn't done for other crimes because it can ruin an innocent person's reputation. Feminists have pushed for it to not be done in cases of sexual assault, the idea being that other victims may come forward. No doubt it does help, but to my mind the cost of ruined innocent lives outweighs the benefit.
/r/PussyPass04/11/17 05:21 PM
2

Nothing is proved yet. This is a hypothetical situation, I just think it's a likely one. I don't see how I'm a hypocrite. Why are you trying so hard to argue
/r/MensRights04/11/17 01:48 AM
4

What? Threatening to ruin people's careers if they don't sleep with you is not acceptable behaviour. That is not feminist brainwashing, that's basic human empathy.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 11:14 AM
3

Most of that comment seems unrelated to mine. I already said that what he did may not be criminal, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable behaviour.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 08:32 AM
1

You might be right that I was speaking more harshly of him there because he's a man, but I disagree that his alleged actions are acceptable.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:16 PM
1

So you think that him doing that and the accusations are unrelated?
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:02 PM
1

Your previous comment seemed (to me) to be implying that he hasn't commented at all on the allegations. I'd say that checking into a sex addiction clinic is a pretty big comment.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 04:37 PM
1

Condemned him how though? Even if the encounters were consensual, he almost certainly was pushy to the point of being sexually aggressive. He used his position of power to manipulate people into consenting to have sex with him. He's a pervert and a creep. Whether or not he's a rapist remains to be seen.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 04:36 PM
1

Are you saying that there's reasonable doubt at this point of Bill Cosby's guilt? I believe in "innocent until proven guilty" more than most. But when 70 women independently come forward, some of them well known, to allege the same thing, it's not being presumptuous to assume their guilt. Plus he settled 5 similar allegations out of court previously. Some 60-odd women have accused Bill Cosby as well, should we assume his innocence since the trial is ongoing? Why does my opinion need to have equa…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 04:33 PM
1

Idk, accusations can be pretty damning. Bill Cosby hasn't been found guilty yet, but I have no doubt that he did it and that he is a scumbag.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 03:43 PM
0

You are retarded. That comment has nothing you do with images.
/r/MGTOW02/11/17 12:22 PM
0

mfw
/r/MGTOW02/11/17 11:51 AM
-1

Is this sub for Trump supporters? I don't get the connection.
/r/MGTOW02/11/17 01:30 AM
2

Hey I mean your comment scores in this thread speak for themselves. If everywhere you go you keep running into assholes, then the common denominator is you.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 02:36 PM
2

If I was homeless I would not be going online so how would I know? Homeless people typically do go online. But even if he doesn't see it himself, it's very possible that someone who knows him would see it and contact him. This post is relevant to the sub, you don't get to decide what is and is not. In the first half of this sentence you decide that this post is relevant to the sub, and then you immediately say that only mods get to decide that. You're dumb as well as an asshole lol. Look at you …
/r/MensRights24/10/17 02:22 PM
3

Damn dude you're one salty motherfucker. You took a photo of a stranger sleeping in public and posted it to the internet. That was a dick move. If you were homeless, how would you feel if people did that shit to you? That other guy was calling you out on it, not "offering an opinion for upvotes". This post isn't even relevant to the subreddit. You're a shitty person OP.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 01:55 PM
7

Applying that here is pretty much the same as saying that homeless people can never have an expectation of privacy. It was a dick move for OP to take and post this photo, regardless of legality.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 01:54 PM
10

Wiki describes it as rape, that's good enough for me.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 08:33 AM
3

Yeah, but they don't really mean it. It's just something you say really cos the situation isn't ever likely to come up.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/10/17 09:14 PM
3

Only semi-related but there was a case where an old wealthy dude had had a will written up but didn't have his glasses with him, so took it home to sign later. Before he could sign it he died, in 1798. The case to decide what to do with his estate (Jennens vs Jennens) went on for over a century, and only ended because the estate had been used up paying for lawyers' fees.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/10/17 01:25 PM
-9

That still seems unclear to me
/r/MensRights11/10/17 09:46 PM
-23

Note that they just said "the use of fingers to penetrate" when discussing related laws. The article doesn't say, but he was no doubt wearing trousers and not penetrated. Not saying that means it isn't sexual assault. Just that your comment made it sound like he was penetrated when he was not.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 03:56 PM
3

Yes, I just mean that the only real solution for this will come from tackling the gender roles, not the wage gap directly.
/r/MensRights27/09/17 03:56 PM
1

http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html
/r/MensRights27/09/17 12:07 PM
1

I agree, those ideas are regressive. But that issue isn't a pay gap, it's based in gender roles.
/r/MensRights27/09/17 12:06 PM
12

Yeah maybe
/r/MensRights21/09/17 07:25 PM
8

I didn't comment it until I was asked. I don't know why OP posted it, that's just my best guess.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 06:58 PM
10

No, I think maybe it was posted here as a "win", not to make anybody angry.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 03:51 PM
14

I didn't say they were treated differently here, just usually. This could have been posted exactly because their sentence is unusually harsh for women. I.e. it's being posted as a "win".
/r/MensRights21/09/17 03:40 PM
11

Yes, it is so. It may not be the case here, which could be why OP posted it.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 03:39 PM
79

I would guess it was posted here because this sort of case is usually handled very differently when a man is the perpetrator than to when a woman is.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 02:40 PM
2

I expected Reddit to pick up on it if it was a repost, since it's just a direct YT link.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/09/17 04:21 PM
1

You're the one who's criticising me for not being clear about what I think the media reports on. It wasn't even a huge deal to the actual argument. You're just waving your arms and declaring yourself the victor. What am I meant to say to that?
/r/MensRights18/09/17 06:42 PM
1

Yeah you might be right. I do generally agree with you, but I think that this post isn't the best example since in this specific case we don't have any evidence for how the media would react if boys were at a 40-year high.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 06:40 PM
1

And why is it considered a 'good' headline? Oh because it makes it about women suffering No, because a 40-year high is a better headline than a 10-year increase. do you really believe they couldn't have used something along the lines of 'Teen suicides skyrocket over the last 10 years'? They really couldn't have used that, because it isn't true. Neither group has had a notable rate of change in that period.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:55 PM
1

Yeah maybe you're right, maybe I did phrase a sentence badly. If this is the case, why not accept my clarification and move on? Or, maybe, those people are just being vocal in disagreeing with me because they feel that I'm attacking MRAs by commenting saying that this post is bad. This sub can be a real echo chamber at times.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:53 PM
1

If I said "the media reports on change, among other things" then the meaning of my sentence would be lost. That's a pretty shitty "correction". If somebody says "A does B" then you should not assume "A only does B". You're just burying yourself in semantics because you misinterpreted something I said. OP's post shows a trend throughout media to ignore male issues in lieu of female ones, even if those issues are the same or related. It really doesn't though. It shows the media ignoring bad headli…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:34 PM
0

I was just pointing out the irony in criticising my phrasing while not quoting my phrasing. Thanks for chiming in though, your opinion here was greatly appreciated.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:26 PM
0

It's pretty difficult to argue with someone when they're saying stuff which I don't disagree with. The only hole in that argument was that it was unrelated to what I said. What else am I meant to do when somebody misrepresents my point of view? If I don't deny it then they will assume it to be true.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 01:54 PM
0

"reports on" =/= "only reports on" This is not semantics though. This is me saying one thing and then it being assumed that I believe the most extreme version of that view possible in order to construct a strawman.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:36 PM
0

The media exists to produce revenue, not to raise awareness to issues. Girls had a better headline. If you have any points to make then make them. Barking about me being autistic under the guise of "honestly asking" rather than the truth of "insulting me because you disagree with me and can't articulate your point of view" is pathetic.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:25 PM
0

I didn't say that the media only reports on change. You are the one who pulled that out of nowhere. Sure, maybe OP's post is an example of media not giving a shit about men. But it is not the best example, because of the reasons I've stated.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:05 PM
0

Just keep downvoting me and repeating the same reply. Then you'll look smart.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:26 AM
0

Oh, right, so it doesn't, you have just somehow found a way to put even less thought into your comments.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:23 AM
0

How does that comment embarrass me?
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:12 AM
0

Well when you say things like "I have embarrassed you" it doesn't really convey that message.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 10:57 AM
0

You think you've embarrassed me? That's embarrassing.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 10:49 AM
0

Might want to rethink your phrasing in future and maybe don't use sentences like "meh, it's not the biggest deal in the world". Who are you quoting there? You're criticising my phrasing, but then not quoting my wording. Then denying that you're constructing straw men. Lol gg wp
/r/MensRights18/09/17 10:34 AM
1

You suggest that this issue is unimportant due to the apparently low rate of death Not the most pressing issue =/= unimportant. Nor does that example mean that importance can come down to just numbers. Similarly, me thinking something isn't the most important issue does not mean I don't care about it. Basically everything you're saying at this point is a strawman. I've tagged you as hostile and dumb so I know to avoid this BS next time.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 10:19 AM
-2

Media reports on change. Female suicide statistics are changing in a more noteworthy way than male suicide statistics. Just because it's 'average' for men does not make it ok. I'm not in any way saying that it is okay. Just that it is less newsworthy. Maybe if we had a bit more equality in our focus, men wouldn't be committing suicide at four times the rate of women. If I didn't agree with that I wouldn't be here. But the media reporting on females here is not an issue in my opinion.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 10:14 AM
0

That's using your metric for importance, rate of death. How is that my "metric for importance"? Bias in reporting is what this post is about. How did I imply that we shouldn't care about male suicide statistics?
/r/MensRights18/09/17 09:46 AM
-2

Name the issues that you believe to be more important than a threefold rate of suicide among males which is completely ignored and we can get an estimate of what sort of attention this issue warrants. Well how about the fact that men are about twelve times more likely to die on the job than women? Or nine times more likely to be homeless? Or men being completely unheard in domestic abuse cases and in general treated much worse by law enforcement? I'm not saying that male suicides should be ignor…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 09:26 AM
1

Yeah, I really don't think that this is a boys vs girls thing. This is just a case of the girls producing a better headline, so they get written about. If boys were at a 40-year high, they'd be in the headlines.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 09:09 AM
-5

Which issues are more important than "boys and men continue to kill themselves three times more often than their female peers" You're right; 12 boys in every 100,000 killing themselves is the most pressing issue currently faced in the world. And the best way to address it is for media to report on it. you're suggesting that we should care about female suicide statistics despite them being paltry in comparison Why are you suggesting that we shouldn't care about female suicides? Why can't we care …
/r/MensRights18/09/17 09:06 AM
-9

Meh, I think there's bigger and more important issues. "Boys continue to kill themselves at average rate" doesn't make a good headline.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 08:53 AM
-6

I mean the headlines are all saying that female suicide is at a 40-year high. Not that too many girls are committing suicide or anything. The record high is what makes the headline. Males are presently committing suicide at a pretty average rate.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 08:14 AM
26

Yeah, but male suicide rates aren't at a 40-year high.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 11:37 PM
4

Rule #3: respect goes both ways The irony.
/r/PussyPass07/08/17 12:34 PM
1

I wasn't talking about this person though. I said that generally speaking that somebody's appearance is a bad reason to misgender them.
/r/PussyPass26/07/17 04:25 PM
1

Lol what? If you think I'm a paedophile sympathiser then you have misunderstood me. Oh well, I've tagged you as "edgy" just to remind me if I encounter you in the future.
/r/PussyPass26/07/17 02:53 PM
2

Razor sharp
/r/PussyPass26/07/17 08:24 AM
-4

I mean that's a pretty shitty reason to misgender somebody
/r/PussyPass20/07/17 02:32 PM
0

Not really... Wikipedia's a pretty big site. Linking to a specific page or section in a page is a good starting off point, but that isn't what you did.
/r/PussyPass03/07/17 04:12 PM
1

Personally I really don't take much issue with Wikipedia. If you make any edit to add information without providing a source then it's likely to be removed. Sure the source could be dodgy, but it's pretty easy to check that yourself.
/r/PussyPass03/07/17 11:51 AM
6

At least they provide sources for further research. Your source is literally "go to wikipedia and start doing some reading". You are the one making (or at least supporting) a claim; that Muslims get away with rape and other crimes in Europe. The burden of proof lies with you.
/r/PussyPass03/07/17 11:45 AM
1

Facts are proved, yet I have seen no proof.
/r/MGTOW02/06/17 10:32 AM
-1

AWALT = All Women Are Like That, right? What do you mean when you refer to me by it?
/r/MGTOW02/06/17 04:00 AM
1

I have quite close female friends who have neither tried to fuck nor use me in up to 8 years of friendship.
/r/MGTOW02/06/17 03:59 AM
2

You really have zero female friends? Are you talking about close friends or are you including acquaintances who you might text every now and then?
/r/MGTOW01/06/17 11:53 PM
-5

Fair point. Though I think that people don't make connections so logically. Plus a lot of the guys giving women attention are assholes. They probably get tired of sifting through them all.
/r/MGTOW01/06/17 11:52 PM
-13

Why do you think that all women would share such a major character flaw? That is, what do you think the cause is? Because humans are pretty complicated and I can't think of anything similar in men.
/r/MGTOW01/06/17 10:51 PM
-14

I'm sorry that you've had shitty luck! I have some lovely female friends though. They aren't all the same!
/r/MGTOW01/06/17 10:39 PM
27

Meh I mean it's perfectly plausible that the daughter genuinelt did write it of her own volition. It's a sad reflection on societal norms though.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/06/17 10:27 PM
2

Yes I think that's the one, I'll correct it.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 11:37 AM
17

Yeah I think they sign away their rights to pursue legal action. Probably like an arbitrator. They probably could dispute it in court, but losing in Judge Judy's court would work heavily against them. Also, the settlement is paid for by the show, but each party is given a "budget" of something like $10k. They keep what ever they don't pay to the other party, so there is motivation for them not just to win but also to not lose.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 11:17 AM
1

In western society*
/r/MensRights22/05/17 12:26 AM
1

Lol what, that isn't my argument at all. Did you read my comment? Meh those people aren't really feminists though. Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of equality between sexes. Calling them feminists does a disservice to actual feminists facing real issues. My definition of feminism is word-for-word from Oxford Dictionaries. If they aren't advocating equality then they are not feminists by definition. That is not an opinion, it is a fact.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:36 PM
1

Blinkers? Why must I be new here? Because I criticised something which happens often which I consider to be wrong? Isn't that what this sub is all about?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:05 PM
0

Meh those people aren't really feminists though. Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of equality between sexes. Calling them feminists does a disservice to actual feminists facing real issues.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 07:48 AM
10

Really? It just made me feel sorry for them
/r/MensRights20/05/17 08:57 PM
5

This isn't a feminist this is a female supremacist
/r/MensRights20/05/17 08:55 PM
1

Meh, disagree. I was taught all of that stuff quite effectively at university.
/r/MGTOW20/05/17 08:11 PM
1

So you actually went to college? Then why are you criticising others who do the same? The fact is without the piece of paper from a uni saying you're smart, many doors in life are closed to you. But that's not what I was talking about anyway. I went to university to learn, not to get a job. And the resources provided to you at university are greater than some YouTube lectures.
/r/MGTOW20/05/17 07:14 AM
-2

Lol what? Are you seriously hating on people who go to university? That's genuinely the dumbest thing I've heard in a while. You will not learn as much teaching yourself as you will having somebody more knowledgeable teach you.
/r/MGTOW19/05/17 11:12 PM
2

Some people have talent, others have persistence
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:24 PM
1

I can't really respond to a vague memory... Maybe some did post just once though, but that doesn't really change anything. You don't need to repeat your abuse to be a toxic user.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 01:01 PM
1

My mistake, I really thought he was in boxers. Not really a nude image though without anything special showing imo. This isn't about whether gallowboob is wholesome or mature though, it's about whether or not he's a douchebag. And in that exchange I really don't see how anyone could think he was being one.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 01:00 PM
4

But in this case the woman would have never come forward and the guy would have served out his full sentence. Sure ideally people would never lie about this, but we can't just have laws based on an ideal world.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:08 AM
2

No please do point out different occasions if there are any. If you're being a toxic user in one sub then I will not feel sorry for you getting banned from unrelated subs. You are the douchebag in that situation, not gallowboob. he a powertripping cunt who takes nudes selfies and sends them to haters Inaccurate. If you really had a good argument here then you wouldn't twist facts like that.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:59 AM
1

/u/just__cheesin seemed to imply that they regularly are douchebags though. I disagree that there's a connection.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:49 AM
1

How so?
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:47 AM
1

He sent a picture of himself in underwear to one user who was harassing him.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:47 AM
1

Gallowboob doesn't even really repost though, other than deleting something which got no attention and posting it again. But I don't get why that's such an issue; reddit's algorithm means that sometimes good content goes missed. It's very rare that I'll notice something posted by gallowboob that I've ever seen before.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:46 AM
0

You're right. Reddit would be a much better place if other people crossposted them instead and got the karma... Because... Reasons...
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:44 AM
1

Meh not really. People hate that he manipulated votes, but he never actually did too much which was douchey imo.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:43 AM
1

Most of those aren't serial posters though.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:36 AM
3

Why do you say that? Dumb-ass generalisation... Is /u/shitty_watercolour a douchebag? /u/iraniangenius? /u/Poem_for_your_sprog? Using reddit a lot does not automatically make you a douchebag, ya douchebag.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:33 AM
2

Gallowboob did ban a handful of users from some of his subs for spamming "fuck /u/Gallowboob" comments. That isn't really powertripping, nor is it "disagreeing with him". You've drunk the anti-gb kool-aid dude
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/17 08:32 AM
11

I think that's a weird thing to say in any context
/r/PussyPassDenied14/05/17 11:45 PM
25

What other serial posters are douchebags?
/r/PussyPassDenied14/05/17 11:44 PM
1

So fucking bad. This sub and /r/pussypass actually serve a purpose which is completely unrelated to /r/altright shit. Why can't they stick in their own sub rather than trying to convert others and just getting them banned.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/04/17 11:16 AM
1

All else being the same, yes.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/04/17 10:14 AM
1

That wasn't my point man
/r/MensRights20/04/17 07:26 PM
1

I'm not saying that it isn't.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/04/17 07:24 PM
1

ever
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:20 AM
1

Legally, a threat is issued when your assault touches somebody...? That doesn't sound right ;p I'm not saying that the bouncer was in the wrong legally, nor that he would have been if he'd have punched her, nor that he should be punished. I'm just saying that laying this woman out would have been unnecessary, and that I think the bouncer was right to show restraint and just slap her.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/04/17 08:20 AM
1

Yeeaah but you will always get people caring more about issues in their hometown than about those thousands of miles away.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:18 AM
8

Top comment now: I'm finding that most things aren't actually gender nor race issues... Just assholes. People are assholes in all shapes, sizes, and social status... You don't need to say men are shitty, that's like saying men drink water, so what? Everybody is shitty, we all need water to live and being shitty isn't specific to one gender. This makes me happier.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:17 AM
2

I agree with you, but adding in the word "bitch" does make a bit of a difference here
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:17 AM
1

Because it was unnecessary and would have escalated the situation. The bouncer doesn't want to deal with the inevitable fallout from knocking out a drunk woman.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/04/17 08:15 AM
0

But what is it satirising? It has nothing to do with manspreading or gender issues.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:14 AM
-1

But what does this have to do with manspreading? Feminists don't complain about manspreading because it prevents them from sitting down on a bus.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 08:13 AM
9

You ever carry a bag?
/r/MensRights20/04/17 12:30 AM
1

There's plenty
/r/MensRights20/04/17 12:11 AM
5

Me?
/r/MensRights20/04/17 12:06 AM
73

You didn't take this picture, and I don't really see why it belongs here since men do exactly this sort of stuff too. This isn't just an anti-woman subreddit...
/r/MensRights19/04/17 09:57 PM
3

If an ambulance has to come to the club you're working at then I (with absolutely no experience in the industry) would imagine that the person paying them would be aware of it. If the ambulance had to come because of the actions of a bouncer then it doesn't look good. Of course there's situations where a bouncer can't do anything to avoid serious conflict, but this was not one of them.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 03:50 PM
1

Lol yeah if that hit had have connected the bouncer would have been on his ass. It's a good job he got lucky and was able to dodge it. My comments should make it clear that I think his response was fully justified and proportional. Stop looking for an argument.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 03:44 PM
60

At what point in this video did that woman pose an actual threat to anything? Part of being a bouncer is not escalating a situation. You would not make a good bouncer.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 03:22 PM
100

An equal response is not necessarily the best response.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 02:42 PM
14

Wasn't even a punch, that was a slap.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 01:44 PM
89

It was a slap; his hand is open.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/04/17 01:43 PM
2

This guy was worth £1bn. We can't imagine the level of honeypotting he must encounter.
/r/PussyPass13/04/17 08:22 PM
1

Lol stop analysing me based on a handful of comments... I was in work. I get into arguments on reddit sometimes sure but if that's all i did on here I wouldn't be sitting on 170k boiiii
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 06:39 PM
1

/r/iamverybadass meets /r/unrelated
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 03:37 PM
1

Not really, I'm trying to convince people to want to refer to people by their preferred pronouns. There isn't any point in discussing laws either. Neither of us are going to get shit passed.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/04/17 04:39 PM
1

This is the first comment in this chain to mention any sort of law on mis-gendering people.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/04/17 03:08 PM
1

Who's saying anything about entitlement? I'm saying that it's basic human courtesy. If you want to be a twat then that will always be your own prerogative.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/04/17 07:37 AM
2

Being a tomboy isn't at all the same as identifying as male. Gender was derived from sex, but does not necessarily depend on sex. When addressing somebody their sex doesn't matter in the same way that their gender does.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 11:06 PM
2

You're right, you shouldn't face any criticism for getting it wrong. I just mean if you've been told and then continue to get it wrong. I do disagree on your second point though; I think that "Sir" and "Ma'am" are derived from gender, not sex.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 09:47 PM
2

Why is it bad advice to tell somebody to not say non-nice things? Why does it matter if you're nice to this stranger or not?
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 09:45 PM
2

You didn't actually respond to anything I said... Clearly you don't want to discuss this, whatever, so I'll leave you with this: That miniscule amount of effort will make another human being considerably happier. If you think that being asked to just call somebody what they want to be called is demanding that "the world caters to them" then you're not just unempathetic but also maybe a bit insane.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 05:33 PM
0

It's only insulting if you know that they wouldn't want to be referred to with female pronouns. Just the same as if you said "hello ma'am" to a cis male it could be insulting.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 05:28 PM
-1

It seems they believe they can dictate how others express themselves through language. The only way this works is if you're expressing your opinion on trans issues by addressing them with their assumed birth pronoun rather than preferred pronoun. In which case I refer you to the old adage: if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 03:56 PM
0

But... Why?
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 03:05 PM
2

Nope, tumblr does it sometimes too (on mobile maybe, I can't remember). Just mute/unmute. So dumb.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 12:30 PM
8

Yeah you shouldn't have to change the Windows volume for this. With this particular video I had headphones on which can't be adjusted, and Windows volume on 1, and it was too loud. There is no defence for Instagram not having a volume slider because there's no reason for them to not have a volume slider.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 12:30 PM
-4

Yeah fuck making a tiny change to your behaviour just to make other people considerably happier. Just chill out and call people what they want to be called. What's so hard about that?
/r/PussyPassDenied11/04/17 12:26 PM
3

Interesting read, a side to WW2 that I haven't heard about before. Not really sure how Jews play into it though beyond being apparently sometimes whispering in some ears. Not really much of a strong connection there.
/r/PussyPass24/03/17 01:42 PM
0

What does that have to do with anything?
/r/PussyPass23/03/17 09:03 AM
1

Preach
/r/MensRights22/03/17 11:29 PM
0

You're crazy
/r/MensRights22/03/17 11:06 PM
1

So you want to add a whole extra level to judging: not guilty, guilty, and "slam dunk"? Nice. If they starve to death then you effectively gave them a death sentence for blinding somebody. Is that okay with you?
/r/MensRights22/03/17 10:49 PM
1

What's the difference between irrefutably proving something and finding them guilty in court? Where do you draw the line? Yes, let them starve to death. Excellent and well thought out plan.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 10:34 PM
3

What if somebody is found guilty, blinded, and then later found to be innocent? It's just unnecessary. Not to mention, most "modern countries" would end up paying them disability for no longer being able to work.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 08:29 PM
2

It's a nice idea but doesn't work in practice.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 07:45 PM
2

I feel like you're not understanding it properly
/r/MensRights22/03/17 07:27 PM
0

Lol what
/r/PussyPass22/03/17 06:06 PM
2

Lol what
/r/PussyPass22/03/17 01:41 PM
3

I do know this. My comment does not imply at all that I did not know this. My point is that the rules shouldn't have changed. This subreddit is now not at all what it was created to be. Which could be fine, but the subreddit is literally called /r/PussyPass.
/r/PussyPass22/03/17 12:51 PM
2

Yeah expecting /r/PussyPass to only contain content pertaining to Pussy Passes is absurd
/r/PussyPass22/03/17 12:25 PM
2

You really think it's a good idea to give governments the authority to blind their citizens?
/r/MensRights22/03/17 10:40 AM
2

It's an expression, not literal.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 10:39 AM
-4

Either way is better, though yours is specifically making a claim which may be untrue.
/r/MGTOW20/03/17 03:12 PM
-5

some men* some women*
/r/MGTOW20/03/17 01:29 PM
15

Care to share what's misleading?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 10:25 AM
14

You think it's okay and "just what people do" for a 19 year old to have sex with a 13 year old? That's messed up man.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/03/17 10:58 AM
16

Being groomed and taken advantage of by somebody much older will still fuck you up developmentally.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/03/17 10:29 AM
42

No, being a child is about age.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/03/17 10:28 AM
1

Fuck me for not agreeing with you
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 04:20 PM
1

Not really since people started attacking him
/r/PussyPassDenied10/03/17 08:37 AM
1

its*
/r/MensRights08/03/17 08:25 PM
1

Yeah but my point is that he way escalated things. He didn't need to punch her that hard at all; it wasn't an appropriately scaled response in my opinion.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/17 06:18 PM
1

That isn't the difference between rights and privileges. Privileges can be taken away whereas rights cannot. There's more types of rights than just fundamental human rights, which are also defined by a government or other body anyway! There is no single set list of fundamental human rights. They have changed many times historically, and will continue to change as society progresses. Do you really think that lawyers and judges have been using the wrong word all this time in reference to other rig…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 06:08 PM
1

You said: Rights are something you just have, you don't have to "get" them granted. Now, you say: Either A) it's a fundamental human right that you have just because. Or B) the government grants that to you. So by your logic, the only rights which exist are fundamental human rights. You quoted your own (and only) source as saying: The fundamental rights that humans have by the fact of being human, and that are neither created nor can be abrogated by any government. Not one of the types of rights…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 04:46 PM
1

It's either a fundamental human right, or granted by the government. There really is no other option.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 04:37 PM
1

You are mistaken. There's all sorts of rights which aren't fundamental human rights. Plus, rights can be granted by the government, that doesn't make them not rights. Human rights are granted by the government even! Find below some non-human rights.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors%27_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_protection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creditor%27s_rights https…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 04:33 PM
1

True, but that doesn't change the fact that based on this video his reaction was excessive.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/17 04:22 PM
1

I don't disagree, but /u/Ajaxlancer was asking what would be an appropriate response?
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/17 04:21 PM
3

Yeah I think that this is an appropriate response. Looks like she took some real damage from that punch, whereas a slap is just more of a wake-up call without the possibility of any long lasting repercussions.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/17 04:20 PM
1

You said yourself: The fundamental rights that humans have by the fact of being human, and that are neither created nor can be abrogated by any government. You do not get parental rights by the fact of being human. I guess if you don't believe it is, and it's only a privilege granted by the government, then we'll have to disagree. Straw man.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 04:13 PM
1

But the rights are different and the requirements to receive the rights are different. Just because fathers are humans that does not mean that the two are synonymous.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 04:08 PM
1

But we're talking about fathers' rights, not human rights. It is readily apparent if you are a human, it is not readily apparent if you are a child's father. You do realise that "human rights" are not the same as "rights", and so have a different definition, right?
/r/MensRights08/03/17 03:53 PM
1

Yeah well the only support you have for your position is your own janky definition of "rights" (which no dictionary could possibly agree with; please link one otherwise), and the fact that I don't morally agree with my source's definition of something unrelated. The British definition of rape isn't wrong or intrinsically flawed. They define rape as the forced penetration of a woman by a man. That is not incorrect, I just disagree that that should be the definition of rape. Whereas you are specif…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 03:46 PM
1

You're right, I couldn't refute that entirely unrelated point because I agree that the definition of rape should be extended to include female on male rape.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:50 PM
1

This time I'm really done.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:42 PM
1

Okay well my government describes them as the "fathers' rights", so I'm going to go ahead and assume that they are right rather than you... Plus, the court doesn't really "grant" them; they can't really be taken away, the court just decides whether or not you are entitled to them. Which will always be the case with fathers' rights, since fatherhood isn't intrinsically apparent.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 10:50 PM
1

But you said they aren't rights if you have to go to court to get them... You're being inconsistent because your logic is flawed.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 09:15 PM
1

So for them to be "rights" they have to always exist... Even if you don't know who holds them... Otherwise they're privileges... And mothers shouldn't be allowed to put a baby up for adoption unless they know who the father is...? Where are you getting your janky definition of "rights" from? Seriously your mental gymnastics are insane. I'm going to link to this site again: https://www.gov.uk/child-adoption/birth-parents-your-rights The British government website refers to what I described as "ri…
/r/MensRights07/03/17 07:25 PM
1

But going to court for parental rights is just to prove that those rights belong to you. I'm sorry but I'm just repeating some pretty basic stuff now. You've clearly sunk your heels in and won't budge, so I'm done.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 06:41 PM
1

DNA tests at birth to establish the paternity of the father. What if the father isn't available at the birth? Then they won't be able to have those rights? What if the father has died/disappeared, and so are unable to provide a DNA sample? Either way, if the rights have to be earned through a DNA test then they aren't rights, they're privileges. Right? That's what you said. What is the difference between having to take a DNA test and having to go to court?
/r/MensRights07/03/17 04:59 PM
1

Yes I know, but how could they ever have parental rights?
/r/MensRights07/03/17 04:27 PM
1

So you're saying that fathers shouldn't ever have any parental rights? Only parental privileges?
/r/MensRights07/03/17 04:23 PM
1

But by that logic it would be impossible for the father to ever have any rights.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 02:46 PM
58

No because something something position of power something fuck the patriarchy
/r/MensRights07/03/17 12:46 PM
1

To be fair they didn't know that she was those things when she was speaking...
/r/MensRights07/03/17 12:25 PM
2

Ah the head mod then. Well, I think it was a bad move and I'm likely to unsubscribe if it continues like this.
/r/PussyPass07/03/17 09:48 AM
2

Trump support?
/r/PussyPass07/03/17 09:40 AM
1

That's interesting, though I did see a mod say that some high ranking mod on this sub wanted the change.
/r/PussyPass07/03/17 09:40 AM
1

You only have to apply for it if it isn't clear that you are the father. You can't just have parental rights without it being evident that you're the father. The mother has them because it's pretty apparent that she is the mother after she squeezes the kid out of herself. That's a really dumb comment. Really really dumb.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 11:12 PM
1

Yes I did, and what? It's better than the 0 links you've provided to support yours. I can't find any mention of adoption as a male reproductive right. Are you looking at the same article? Seriously though, find me a source which says that putting your child up for adoption is a reproductive right. Or, are you talking out of your arse?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 11:10 PM
9

I know that the sub has expanded its reach (which I disagree with btw), but how does this possibly fit? Just because they're black? Come on...
/r/PussyPass06/03/17 10:47 PM
1

They don't even though. Seriously, find me a link to anywhere halfway reputable which says what you're saying. From the wiki on reproductive rights: Women's reproductive rights may include some or all of the following: the right to legal and safe abortion; the right to birth control; freedom from coerced sterilization and contraception; the right to access good-quality reproductive healthcare; and the right to education and access in order to make free and informed reproductive choices.[3]Reprod…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 09:21 PM
1

Reproductive rights are a thing, but they do not cover what you are describing.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 09:18 PM
1

What's your point? If it's your kid then you can apply for parental rights. Did you click the link? The reasons for which they can deny you parental rights are pretty specific.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 09:17 PM
1

https://www.gov.uk/child-adoption/birth-parents-your-rights Fathers’ rights As the child’s father you’ll be asked to agree to the adoption - but only if you have parental responsibility. If you were never married to the child’s mother or named on the birth certificate, you can apply to the court for a Parental Responsibility Order to get parental responsibility.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:45 PM
1

What right is that? The right to sign away all responsibility for a child you produced? I must have missed that one...
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:43 PM
1

They are, but putting your child up for adoption does not fall under "reproductive rights". Unless you were alluding to something else?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:42 PM
1

This seems to be an all-or-nothing approach Like all legal proceedings... Why does it matter if the abortion window passes? The father could still sign away their parental responsibilities after the child is born. I didn't assume that an acquittal meant a false accusation. But if there isn't enough evidence to convict then the father would have to pay child support. It's unfortunate but unavoidable. It was just an idea, and is in my opinion considerably less thorny than what you're suggesting.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:41 PM
1

There is no basic human right to sign away all responsibility for your child, for either gender.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 06:40 PM
1

That isn't what you're doing though. You're being completely dismissive about the fact that many women would have their lives ruined by this legislation.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 06:39 PM
1

Well it isn't my fault if the law isn't enforced...
/r/MensRights06/03/17 06:39 PM
1

It would have to be a conviction. If the mother is acquited then she'd have to receive compensation for the false imprisonment from the state just like with any convict found to be innocent. Additionally, if the father is found to have falsely accused her then he should have to pay compensation (to whom, I am unsure), in addition to any punishment he'd receive for doing so anyway. That's just my opinion though. I'm not trying to lay out the specifics of a law, just putting out an idea for some c…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 06:38 PM
1

It's funny that you call my suggestion thorny while yours is to enable all men to just abandon a child under any circumstances!
/r/MensRights06/03/17 06:13 PM
1

If the father is unknown or out of the picture sure. But legally, if there is a man with parental responsibility for the child, they should be asked to agree to the adoption.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:49 PM
1

Since we're talking about the possibility of bringing in legislation, I think that you should use arguments which would stand up in any courtroom. Those "arguments" just made you sound like you hate women.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:46 PM
1

If giving men a right to do something does more damage to not only women but also to their children than it does benefit for the man then I am opposed to it.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:44 PM
1

The mother could not put the baby up for adoption? Not without the father's agreement.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:23 PM
1

The fact that the options may not appeal to her is not the man's problem. Her family drama does not incur a responsibility on the man. You do know that these arguments would never get a law passed, right?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:21 PM
1

well, if a woman lies about birth control then the man... fuck, he has to pay for the child for 18 years Hey... If she rapes him then... fuck... still the same. I have already said that I believe fathers should be able to sign away parental rights in the case of being raped. It's nice to have rights... wish men had as many as women. Me too, it's why I'm here. But should men have a right to make the decision to abort? I (and hopefully you) would say no. Once the baby is born though somebody needs…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:19 PM
1

The issue that a father could easily sign away parental responsibility but the mother could not. It's all well and good to say that she shouldn't have sex if she isn't certain that she wants a baby (with or without the father present), but that's not a real world solution. Plus it would result in so many babies growing up far below the poverty line.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:11 PM
1

She can abort, or put it up for adoption. Those are both a pretty big deal for you to so casually suggest as an easy fix. What if her family will disown her for either of those? What if she's pro-life? What if she changes her mind when she's pregnant and just aborts it? Your point? If she aborts it then there's no child and nobody is left financially responsible. What's your point here? I really don't see how that addresses what I said at all.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:10 PM
1

That's exactly what you do in order to disregard human rights. Deny their relevancy. Is this bait? Are you saying that all men should be able to sign away their parental rights because a tiny percentage of them were raped? Because if not then it is irrelevant. Also, you are not clairvoyant. You don't know what people will do. I made predictions based on logical reasoning. I did not claim to know what would happen. I suspect there would be fewer unwanted children, not more. I didn't say that ther…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 03:17 PM
4

I don't disagree
/r/PussyPass06/03/17 01:48 PM
5

Your submissions may include content relating to equality, conservatism, nationalism and all around right wing content. If the original purpose of this subreddit is what you crave, visit /r/pussypassdenied or /r/PussyPassNeutral to see "Pussy Pass" related posts.
/r/PussyPass06/03/17 01:45 PM
1

Your dismissal of cases of rape is quit telling however. As the law stands currently in most jurisdictions, men are compelled by force of law to support children they didn't consent to father resulting from "sex" (rape) they didn't consent to have. This is a problem we must not casually disregard. I'm not disregarding the issue, it just isn't relevant. Let's give men that right and see how things proceed. Great attitude to law-making. What will happen is that more children will be raised without…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 01:35 PM
1

I ask again, what if the woman is pro-life? You're completely oversimplifying by just saying "oh well she can get an abortion". For many women that would result in their entire family disowning them. But fuck those women right? They shouldn't have sex in the first place I'm sure you'll cry. Well, that isn't a solution to the problem at all. And the scenario where she lies about birth control? Where he does not consent to sex without her being on bc and she lies? Where he does not even consent to…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 11:23 AM
1

What about cases where she was on birth control and still got pregnant? What about if a young girl gets pregnant and wasn't even aware of birth control? You're just completely shifting the responsibility of the child to the woman, but it takes two to make a baby. Not to mention this proposed solution doesn't seem to care about the well-being of the child at all. What if a man and a woman have sex intending to conceive knowing that together they can afford to raise the baby, but then the guy chan…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 11:00 AM
3

Lol you really are a fight picker aren't you? /r/MensRights is meant to be about bettering the rights of men, not lessening the rights of women. Go to /r/OneY or /r/MGTOW with that shit.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 10:08 AM
0

Great solution, good luck getting that through Congress
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:30 AM
1

Do you see why that doesn't actually address the issue at all though?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:29 AM
4

Okay but that doesn't really address the problem...
/r/MensRights05/03/17 08:49 PM
1

Something like that yeah
/r/MensRights05/03/17 05:24 PM
1

Also, all that a man has to do to be rid of a child is sign some paper. But the process would be much harder for a woman, and possibly not allowed by their religion.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 04:19 PM
1

What if the mother doesn't know until after 23 weeks?
/r/MensRights05/03/17 04:18 PM
3

That was /u/ThanosisKing's second point though, I'm responding to the first
/r/MensRights05/03/17 03:10 PM
-4

What do you mean provided the father has a say in the matter? Do you mean that the father should be able to prevent the mother from having an abortion? Edit: fuck me for asking for clarification
/r/MensRights05/03/17 10:43 AM
1

Excuse me, are you saying meow?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/17 12:05 AM
1

That's a really sad story. Honestly I don't think that prison was right for her, but it's a tricky one. She is not a normal criminal, but prison would turn her into one. I'm surprised she wasn't sectioned though.
/r/PussyPass04/02/17 12:38 AM
9

What? Women lose weight all the time
/r/MGTOW20/01/17 06:17 PM
97

The victim of the most serious charge dropped it and didn't testify, because his name was made public during the arrest. Why was his (and the other victim's) name made public? This is never done for female victims.
/r/PussyPass13/01/17 03:55 PM
26

Why would jailing her be good for nobody? It would prevent her from re-offending, provide justice to the victims, and would deter others from repeating her crimes.
/r/PussyPass13/01/17 03:52 PM
39

Just to note, she won't actually be sentenced until 17th May. The judge just deferred her sentence to see how she gets on with repaying it (it's mostly paid back), though he did strongly imply that she will be getting a suspended sentence for this.
/r/PussyPass10/01/17 03:05 PM
23

Well it wouldn't be fair to their child if he didn't get to be raised by this reckless, irresponsible, and remorseless woman.
/r/PussyPass09/01/17 04:46 PM
43

Plus she intentionally ran a guy over at 40mph! How she didn't get charged with attempted murder I do not know.
/r/PussyPass09/01/17 04:45 PM
8

The closest I can find is this, which says he was going to take them to court. No word on what happened though.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/01/17 10:02 AM
1

No. There are several good reasons for punishment, and punishment for punishment's sake is not one of them.
/r/PussyPass31/12/16 02:04 AM
1

But what if she had a longer sentence? What are you trying to achieve with that punishment?
/r/PussyPass31/12/16 01:40 AM
1

Now we fine people based on whether they have the money to pay?! Yes. This is quite common and has been going on for a long time. There is a lower limit on how much money people can have/earn and how much you can fine them without causing undue stress. Why do you think that she should should have to pay though? Isn't prison punishment enough?
/r/PussyPass30/12/16 09:15 AM
13

They fined her £1 because she had no money to pay back otherwise. She also got 3 years in prison.
/r/PussyPass29/12/16 11:45 AM
1

This seems fake
/r/MGTOW14/12/16 04:05 PM
2

I got a paywall the first time, but then I closed the tab and when I re-opened it there wasn't one.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 12:02 PM
2

Yeah, so not pussy pass denied at all really. Just her doing something stupid which will have real consequences for herself. RZA is a well respected producer, she's unlikely to get a better deal now.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/10/16 12:58 PM
16

Yeah this teaches women early on that they are less privileged than men, and teaches men that they are more privileged than women. Even if it's done under the guise of teaching them how to act in a way that gets rid of "privilege", it simultaneously sends a message which only strengthens any ideas of privilege.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 05:35 PM
1

Your privilege is not welcome here Read: I do not want your privilege here.
/r/MensRights14/10/16 01:46 PM
8

I agree that it seems fake, just because it ticks so many boxes. They're almost talking in clichés, and people don't talk like that in real life.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/10/16 09:02 PM
8

It looks like she gets all of her inspiration from reddit... You're right, this is not a journalist.
/r/MGTOW27/09/16 07:43 PM
6

It could be because the UK has pretty shitty rape laws, with "rape" being defined specifically only for a man raping a woman.
/r/PussyPass27/09/16 10:53 AM
2

Yeah and the article stated what the standard sentence would be. They were complaining that it was too low.
/r/PussyPass15/09/16 01:45 PM
1

To add to what others have said, you're also meant to call police if the road is blocked (even partially) and you can't safely clear it yourselves.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/08/16 03:31 PM
2

Putting their hand up never helps them either though. Judy lets them talk when it suits her, not when it suits them.
/r/PussyPassDenied04/08/16 09:57 AM
2

Fair enough, it happens. Yeah I completely agree that it sounds like she lied, but it's a big step to say for sure that she did. In my opinion the whole "guilty until proven innocent" view of rape accusations is messed up, and I equally wouldn't apply it myself to a woman for a suspected false accusation.
/r/MensRights30/07/16 12:43 AM
1

they then used those texts to confirm she was lying about being raped. Do you have a source on that? I don't think that you're lying, just I've not heard about that before. I never realised there was a concerted effort by police to actually prove that she lied.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 03:43 PM
1

I remember being outraged by her story a good few times, but when was she found to be lying? The accused was found to be not guilty, but that's decidedly different.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 03:11 PM
0

Well I'm just saying that the article doesn't say that they weren't allowed to. It seems odd that they'd try PE shorts before short trousers.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 12:36 PM
-1

Not a random pair of shorts. Short trousers. Just the short version of the trousers which they normally wear. Like what many schools in the UK allow boys to wear as uniform.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 09:19 AM
-1

But the boys weren't not allowed to wear skirts. Plus we don't know whether or not the boys were allowed to wear shorts since the article doesn't say.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 09:15 AM
-3

Well the PE shorts aren't in their uniform either. If they'd have tried wearing short trousers and told they weren't allowed to, then why didn't the article mention that?
/r/MensRights23/07/16 12:48 AM
-3

I know, but PE kit is not uniform. The girls probably aren't allowed to wear their PE kit as uniform either.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 12:47 AM
-1

Is it a double standard though? They weren't allowed to wear PE shorts. It doesn't mention short trousers. ETA: I'm largely just playing devil's advocate here. I mean, it's likely that they'd try wearing short trousers as well, but the article doesn't actually say that they did. For things like this and men's rights in general I tend to try to take the view which offends me the least. Doing that, this doesn't offend me at all. I don't see discrimination since they were allowed to wear skirts.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:18 PM
5

The leaked emails showed them discussing the possibility of threatening legal action. There is no evidence that they actually did it.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 05:21 PM
42

It had something to do with the fact that he owned part of the franchise I think
/r/MensRights13/07/16 05:20 PM
5

Activism doesn't need to be some great big effort. It is literally just doing something to actively support a cause. Signing a petition is taking an action for a cause.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 02:52 PM
1

Assuming the author of the article knows grammar, she got 12 months for each count (of which there were six): Rachel Lehnardt, 36, of Evans, Georgia, was handed 12 months of probation and a $100 fine for each count of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, WJBF reports. And maybe they would have found other charges to go after a guy with were the genders reversed, but what would have actually stuck? What other laws did she break?
/r/PussyPass04/07/16 10:59 PM
2

No really though, what should she have been charged with?
/r/PussyPass04/07/16 07:40 PM
-10

Plus 6 years of probation. She was charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, but what else should she have been charged with? I don't see the pussy pass here to be honest. Edit: Feel free to downvote, but what else should she have been charged with?
/r/PussyPass04/07/16 03:38 PM
13

Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away though
/r/MensRights01/07/16 11:20 AM
5

This is why I only hire women, it's the most equal way.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 06:01 AM
2

"You going to jail now!" Begs to differ
/r/PussyPassDenied25/05/16 10:41 PM
7

It doesn't in the UK.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/16 11:35 PM
5

Don't worry, I saved it for later :D
/r/PussyPassDenied16/05/16 03:06 PM
18

I had to watch without sound because I'm in work but I 100% knew what she was yelling.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/05/16 10:31 AM
51

This is what some of us Dads go through. This is exactly what the dads are going through in the 50/50 custody being described. Most of the time it's much worse.
/r/MensRights11/05/16 12:10 PM
1

That isn't really pandering to SJWs though that's pandering to feminists. I realise the two go hand in hand, but from the context I inferred a different type of SJW.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 07:31 PM
-3

Why do you say Bernie panders to SJWs? Sure a lot of them support him but I've not seen pandering.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:00 PM
1

Yeah I agree, I wasn't entirely unconvinced that she may have been treated appropriately until I read that she had 12 weeks prior jail time. It'd be interesting to know what that was for.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 09:26 PM
4

Well if the really wanted equality then they wouldn't be called feminists.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 02:24 PM
-6

They didn't push open a door though from what I read. All that it says on the matter is: He answered the door at about 1am and was confronted by the foursome.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:36 PM
-8

That isn't the legal definition of breaking and entering though. You need to actually use some sort of force to enter the building, even if that is just opening the door. What they did was trespassing, also burglary since they intended to harm the occupier once inside. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/breaking+and+entering Additionally though, this happened in the UK, so there is no "breaking and entering" law here. But even in the US this wouldn't be that.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:19 PM
1

If you think that your comments have been disagreeing with my point then you do not get what I am saying.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:58 PM
1

You still really aren't getting what I'm saying... I give up.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:55 PM
1

Correct but they generate more revenue by working longer. I understand this. I do not need you to spell it out. I am not dumb. I repeat: I was disagreeing with the argument that men should be paid more because they're "working more" by playing more sets. They deserve more for playing longer since they can generate more ad revenue. But not because they are working harder by playing more sets.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:40 PM
1

I was disagreeing with the argument that men should be paid more because they're "working more" by playing more sets. It isn't about how much they are working, it's about how much revenue they generate. You've taken it upon yourself to reply to many of my comments, and in each reply you have fundamentally misunderstood what I am saying. I am not saying that men shouldn't be paid more at all, so calm down.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:35 PM
1

You're right, how could anybody possibly compare running 400 meters with running 5 kilometres? The two are just so vastly different.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:32 PM
1

directly
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:32 PM
1

What question? I agree that men should be paid more, but disagree that they should be paid more just for playing longer matches.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:31 PM
1

The length of the game makes little difference, they should be paid more only because they bring in more revenue.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 09:48 AM
1

I'm not saying that male tennis players shouldn't be paid the same as female tennis players. Just that the length of their games shouldn't really directly effect the prize fund.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:07 AM
1

(Y)
/r/MensRights21/03/16 09:30 PM
1

You aren't getting what I'm saying if that is your counter.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 09:30 PM
1

Anyone can sprint, not everyone can finish a marathon. I disagree that this matters, but if Ragen can finish a marathon then anybody can.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 08:48 PM
1

I guess if you're looking to misunderstand something then yeah
/r/MensRights21/03/16 08:46 PM
1

Professional tennis players practice. I am saying that salary should depend on how many people watch, not on the length of the match.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 07:59 PM
1

My point is exactly that the skill of the player should determine their pay, through bringing in more revenue. The length of time for which it lasts is largely inconsequential and shouldn't be considered when discussing their pay.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 07:57 PM
1

You're just being pedantic.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 06:48 PM
0

There are differences yes but they are both running and nothing more. Do you have a better analogy to argue to the contrary?
/r/MensRights21/03/16 06:47 PM
-4

Well what if fewer people watched them? Or if people were less likely to watch the whole match? Or if people wouldn't pay the same amount for a ticket? The actual length of the match doesn't matter, all that matters is how well they can monetise that time. In another comment I compared it to Mo Farah's 10k vs Usain Bolt's 100m. One taking longer than the other shouldn't mean anything about how much they are paid. They should be paid based on how much revenue they can bring in. The fact that Mo h…
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:01 PM
-1

If the athletes were performing at a higher level.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 04:58 PM
-3

Yes, it's an analogy.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 02:56 PM
1

Well that's up to the consumer. If the tennis was better then yes I might pay more to see shorter games.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 02:56 PM
7

Yes I agree with that.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:52 PM
-25

How is it a bad comparison? Bolt doesn't run as far and so should earn less money! Except he shouldn't, because he has to train just as hard to stay at the top. Just like top men and women tennis players. But Usain Bolt certainly doesn't work as hard in competition as Mo does, since he runs for a significantly shorter amount of time. Prize money should depend only on how much revenue they generate. As it happens Bolt generates a lot of money and so gets paid more. The same should be true of male…
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:46 PM
-34

Are you telling me that Mo Farah trains significantly harder than Usain Bolt just because he runs longer distances? Should Mo earn 50x as much as Bolt because he's running 50x as far? Do you see why this logic falls apart...?
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:40 PM
17

No, because the market isn't allowed to make these decisions due to people fighting for "equality" in pay. Men aren't paid less though, they're paid the same (in prize money at least).
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:23 PM
-73

Just because they have a shorter test that doesn't mean that they don't work as hard in preparation. The whole "fewer sets less pay" argument is just really flawed. They earn their money in training just as much as they do in competition. Plus, the length of the match doesn't really matter. All that matters is the revenue that the player generates through ticket sales.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:22 PM
21

The number of sets played in competition doesn't matter at all. What matters is how much money they bring in through ticket sales etc.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:20 PM
4

Well that bit doesn't really matter since they do much more work to get good than the few sets which we watch in competition. It should be about who is generating how much money from spectators and nothing else.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 01:19 PM
1

Do you have much luck with that strategy?
/r/MGTOW21/03/16 09:36 AM
11

Link?
/r/PussyPassDenied20/03/16 11:39 PM
3

You mean if they mention your height or just always?
/r/MGTOW20/03/16 08:12 PM
2

Lol preach
/r/PussyPass19/03/16 01:12 PM
2

Was she intoxicated? Article said she fell asleep/closed her eyes. A search of Birkle's phone found text messages made while she was driving concerning a lack of sleep and drinking, although investigators were not able to confirm she was texting at the time of the crash. She probably was drinking, but if they didn't breathalyse or otherwise test her at the time then it's essentially unprovable. I don't know, I really don't think there's enough in this article to say that she was drinking. That s…
/r/PussyPass17/03/16 12:14 PM
5

She drugged and raped at least 4 underage boys for whom she had a duty of care and a position of power over. But did not get a sexual charge, just normal assault. How is it possibly not sexual? What's the reasoning here? I'd say that there must be more to this case but this is hardly the first instance of a judge refusing to believe that a woman could be a sexual predator.
/r/PussyPass14/03/16 06:21 PM
-3

I'm not saying that it's not possible for a woman to text her ex boyfriend begging him to take her back. I am saying that people do not talk in that way in real life. This just sounds made up.
/r/MGTOW14/03/16 09:02 AM
-1

That really doesn't read like a real conversation.
/r/MGTOW14/03/16 12:22 AM
0

Careful, Americans are waking up soon and your valid criticisms will be downvoted for "attacking America".
/r/MensRights11/03/16 12:49 PM
0

Really we don't know for sure what their intentions were since you didn't go up. Personally I'd have gone and said hey and if they were trying for anything more than just a chat and I wasn't into that then I'd leave. Has she done anything like this before?
/r/MGTOW06/03/16 01:45 PM
1

I was just answering that guy's question: why are they expelling men when the accuser wasn't even a student?
/r/MensRights02/03/16 06:15 PM
3

While I don't agree with it I suppose it could be argued that by letting him stay they would be endangering other students in the future.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:34 AM
3

What? I'm an MRA I'm just not so dumb as to say that every single feminist is fighting for superiority. Your type of people are the worst thing about this sub.
/r/MGTOW01/03/16 09:54 AM
1

I agree, but they often still get labelled as "feminists". They are feminists though, but they are also masculists and all other sorts of -ists. they clearly fight for being better than me This I disagree with though; it's a huge presumption.
/r/MGTOW01/03/16 09:48 AM
1

That's true of most stuff that you read about feminists doing nowadays, but there's plenty of feminists who really do fight for equality.
/r/MGTOW29/02/16 08:28 PM
5

Feminism can be a good thing when it's fighting for equality, but she just chooses all the wrong battles. Like this; pornography is an industry in which women earn more than men, and many many women make a good living doing it. Sure there's problems in the industry, but getting rid of porn all together would just put those women out of work.
/r/MGTOW29/02/16 12:47 PM
1

80% of divorces are initiated by women, and I'm sure plenty of their husbands trusted them.
/r/MGTOW26/02/16 10:42 AM
63

What video?
/r/MensRights26/02/16 10:33 AM
3

The Wrexham Leader
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:01 PM
1

Belong where? Going by circulation I agree that the top 4 (Sun, Mail, Mirror, Star) are trash, but those are easily dismissable tabloids. NI wouldn't even hold them up for comparison as being newspapers personally, they're more like pseudo-magazines. Sure, going by circulation the majority of British papers are a bit of a disgrace to journalism. But without weighting for circulation I'd say that most national British papers aren't.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 04:30 PM
8

Why do you say that about most British newspapers? There's plenty of good ones.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 04:10 PM
2

Maybe, but all political content is banned on /r/videos so it isn't like they're only allowing stuff fitting their agenda.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 07:03 AM
0

To be fair, the feminists complaining about gendered words aren't necessarily the same ones who use terms like "mansplaining".
/r/MensRights12/02/16 07:02 AM
2

Yeah, plus that charge of assaulting a cop isn't ever going away.
/r/PussyPass11/02/16 08:57 PM
7

But it's a word that is used! You cannot be offended by a word if it is used by some people sometimes.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/02/16 08:52 PM
-11

Lol what? You just want a super submissive traditional woman then? I didn't think that was what this sub is.
/r/MGTOW02/02/16 07:20 PM
6

Well no that depends entirely on the couple. It's quite possible to find somebody who has similar interests.
/r/MGTOW01/02/16 04:57 PM
1

That's a good point. I completely forgot that you could be convicted of false accusing or perverting the course of justice. In those cases they should absolutely be named. I guess the onus is on the guy to press those charges.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 12:12 AM
-1

You mean when the charges were first brought forward? Possibly, I didn't see that. Still though, unless this website shared that name it isn't a reason for them to share her name now. (Not that I think it would be anyway.)
/r/MensRights24/01/16 08:32 PM
5

Yes, but if you can't prove beyond all reasonable doubt that somebody is innocent, then you cannot prove beyond all reasonable doubt that their accuser is lying. So, punishing the accuser by naming them is wrong in my opinion.
/r/MensRights24/01/16 08:31 PM
7

But then there's more pressure to convict despite uncertainty, since a "not-guilty" verdict is essentially calling the victim a liar. (Note: there's a difference between saying somebody could be not telling the truth, and that they are straight up lying). Plus that just leads to more feminist outrage, which leads to laws harsher on men and worse on the rights of those accused.
/r/MensRights24/01/16 07:57 PM
13

Yup, but I'd bet many on campus know her name as well. But neither of those facts are a reason for this news website to disclose either of their names.
/r/MensRights24/01/16 07:47 PM
16

As far as I can see they didn't name him either. Plus without all the details here I'm not sure that they should name her. He was found not guilty, but that isn't quite the same as saying that he definitely didn't do it (at least, it shouldn't be).
/r/MensRights24/01/16 06:28 PM
13

Yeah like he was just shouting and being a dick. I like Bill Hicks but never really thought anything here was a good retort
/r/PussyPassDenied19/01/16 07:03 PM
5

There is no winning a gun fight, you just get shot less than the other person. Coming from a nuke nut.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 05:58 PM
2

Actually that would make sense, you're probably right.
/r/PussyPass12/01/16 02:17 PM
1

It does, but not directly: Moore was involved in the fatal car crash on Range Line Street and Elleta Boulevard in October, 2014. She was 18 years old at the time. Moore turned herself into police in March, 2015. It's weird that everywhere seems to be ignoring the fact that this was a hit and run. She killed two people and just drove off and pretended it never happened for 5 months. Why would she do that if she was sincerely trying to avoid a collision with an oncoming vehicle?
/r/PussyPass12/01/16 11:48 AM
2

She lucked out by not being under the influence and just being a shitty driver She only turned herself in 5 months later, it's very possible that she was under the influence at the time of the crash. Edit: She probably only turned herself in after an investigation, ignore this.
/r/PussyPass12/01/16 09:58 AM
1

Well by that logic, making laws like this won't help either since it will continue to happen either way.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 11:33 AM
1

Do you mean because people will apply them in a sexist way? Because the solution to that is to punish those who do that, not to make more sexist laws.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 11:10 AM
1

I am a British citizen but will not be signing this, because laws with specific genders are never the step towards equality that they could be.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 12:13 AM
26

No! Women don't enter politics because people don't baby them enough! What we need to do is to treat women like over-sensitive children, it is the only way to achieve equality! She is also a woman and a mother which is apparently always relevant!
/r/PussyPassDenied06/01/16 11:55 AM
0

if the skimmer/thief was a male do you actually believe charges would have been dropped? Yes, I do choose to believe that. Because being so cynical will sour you.
/r/PussyPass06/01/16 12:37 AM
0

What part of the article are you getting that from exactly? She said she didn't press charges because she felt that the video going viral was enough punishment, and the girl lost her job. Seriously, quote to me where her gender came into it.
/r/PussyPass05/01/16 07:30 PM
8

Yeah but it still isn't pussy pass. She didn't use her gender to get away with it. This is just a woman deciding not to press charges against a reasonably young girl who did something stupid and was clearly remorseful about it. Maybe her being a girl did play a factor, but we have no evidence of that.
/r/PussyPass05/01/16 09:51 AM
2

Who would think that pointing out that shroomery is not a credible source is being magnanimous? I do not think that word means what you think it means.
/r/PussyPass30/12/15 12:59 PM
2

Shroomery isn't much of a source. That's like using a reddit comment as a source.
/r/PussyPass30/12/15 09:19 AM
5

Asking for sources is not demanding to be spoonfed. If it's so easy then just link a source. This also allows people to properly reply to you since they understand the context in which you made your point.
/r/PussyPass30/12/15 01:40 AM
1

It's a pretty big decision to make, and often people don't give it as much consideration as they perhaps should. Women can be traumatised by it and scarred later in life by the thought of what might have been. Making sure that they are sure is not a bad thing. It is (or at least should be) done for them.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 07:13 PM
3

Well if there is a patriarchy, men can perpetuate it just as much as women can. Men acting towards something which seems anti-male does not act as evidence for or against a patriarchy at all.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 07:10 PM
1

He's not doing that at all though. He is just saying that your single anecdote does not prove the existence of a patriarchy. Which it doesn't. Because it is an anecdote.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 07:06 PM
10

Why is this relevant to men's rights? I don't get if you agree or disagree with this.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:14 PM
1

No. That was specific to rape culture, since the rape culture is normally defined as being the institutionalised normalisation of rape and blaming of victims. Those points are specific to rape culture, not sexism or racism in general.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 02:43 PM
32

Well, if we're using the term strictly then "inverse rape culture" would mean either society blaming the perpetrators, or the de-normalisation of rape in society's eyes. I was talking about the attitudes surrounding rape in modern society though.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 09:43 AM
19

I'd have interpreted that to mean that it was looking at the other side of sexual assault on campus in general, not of one particular case.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 08:54 AM
164

Her case actually is a prime example of modern rape culture though. A woman accusing an innocent man and continuing to incite harassment towards him, while not only facing no negative repercussions herself but being rewarded and praised for it. That's rape culture right there.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 08:53 AM
1

We showcase how pedophiles, abusers and other human garbage are given special treatment as if being female were some sort of mental handicap. Definitely the wrong place. Belongs in /r/pussypassdenied, where it's already been posted.
/r/PussyPass27/11/15 04:15 PM
11

I'm sure you're probably a troll, but: what is the difference between the mother and the feather after the birth? They both created this child and are each equally a parent of the child. If the mother doesn't want the child then that's okay, but that doesn't mean that she should be able to prevent the father from having his child.
/r/PussyPass23/11/15 04:43 PM
18

Yes but that can easily be overturned by another judge in the future, particularly since it would be under the veil of "what's best for the child". There have been similar cases in the past where people have agreed contractually to not have any child support paid, but it has been overturned by a judge. I can't find any right now though, kind of hard to google for... The point is though that there's nothing that could be done to stop the woman from coming after her ex-husband for money in the fut…
/r/PussyPassDenied19/11/15 02:05 PM
25

I've been told in job interviews and even through uni applications that female applicants were favoured, there were just fewer of them. There are fewer applicants because fewer females want to work in STEM fields. That is not a problem, it is just a fact. Why is it never discussed that men are less likely to go into language studies or education? Why is that any less of a problem than fewer women going into STEM?
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/15 02:30 PM
1

A name suppression hearing isn't really "bizarre" in New Zealand, though I can't find anything on whether or not blokes are less likely to get one for similar crimes. From what I understand though anybody could go for it, though they might not get a hearing, at least it wasn't granted to her...
/r/MensRights12/11/15 07:35 PM
2

That makes sense, thanks for the explanation.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 07:02 PM
3

Not saying that it is necessarily, but I don't see how it is not manslaughter? The doctor performed an action which led directly to the child's death.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 05:20 PM
-1

Do you have any evidence that they've not hired somebody who advocates men's rights in sexual assault hearings? I don't see a double standard. The articles are written by different people. If Frisky were to block either one from being published because of the view it held then it would be a biased media outlet. All they care about is the quality of writing and whether or not people will read it. I just feel like you're getting all wound up with the wrong people.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:45 PM
-1

Do they not let those articles be published, or do they not have any writers who want to write about that? The issue with web based media outlets is that they have very different processes to print media or such, so it's hard to hold them to the same standard.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:42 PM
1

Can they not hire writers who hold differing opinions on things?
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:13 PM
1

Should be pointed out that they're different authors writing for a pretty big website.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 03:12 PM
1

Okay
/r/PussyPass03/10/15 06:26 PM
2

Okay
/r/PussyPass03/10/15 05:51 PM
2

I'm not having this argument again in these comments. Congratulations on making a stand for what you believe in, you're so brave and forward-thinking.
/r/PussyPass03/10/15 05:42 PM
2

Yep. I'm talking generally about transgendered women here though. I don't like Caitlyn Jenner, but that has nothing to do with her gender.
/r/PussyPass03/10/15 04:19 PM
0

And you can subjectively be an asshole for that.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 08:37 PM
0

You aren't being asked to make them think that it's normal, and nor are they deluded as to what their gender is. They chose to make a change, and for many that is the only viable effective treatment for gender dysphoria. But there will always be people who refuse to call them by their preferred pronouns. That's fine, people will always be like that. But you aren't making some meaningful stand against them and those who accept them by refusing to use preferred pronouns. You're just doing somethin…
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 08:36 PM
0

2 deep for me
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 08:26 PM
0

"Done by society" vs being a product of society is semantics. You obviously knew what I meant, and the semantics changed nothing in the actual point.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:34 PM
0

How does it hurt the rest of the world?
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:08 PM
0

Screw this. I think that you are a genuinely bad person, I don't care what you think.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:08 PM
1

Lol yes let's turn this into an argument about semantics.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:05 PM
-1

If I could make a tiny low-effort change to make an anorexic person feel seriously better about themselves then yes I would do. I was attacking the idea, and saying that you're dumb for thinking it. Like you with your "refuse to accept reality" shit. Do you not see how that is ad hominem?
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:04 PM
0

If you refuse to make a tiny adjustment to the way you speak to somebody to make them happy and feel accepted, you're the asshole.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 05:02 PM
0

That "toning down" was done by society though. And it was far more than just "toning down"; it was many different huge reformations over thousands of years. modern roles are based on life in caves. I'm not sure you have any idea what you're talking about...
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:50 PM
-1

Yes but I'm not suggesting that transgenderism be a default or a majority. Smh if you think that hypotheticals are completely worthless as a tool in discussion then you're just really really dumb. Genuinely, really dumb. "Reality" doesn't frustrate me, you frustrate me.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:47 PM
0

Gender roles are not hunting and gathering though. They haven't been for thousands of years. I'm talking about modern gender roles here, obviously.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:44 PM
1

Do you understand what ad hominem is? It is, effectively, trying to argue your point by insulting the other person. I am just arguing my point while occasionally insulting you a bit on the side. "Shaming language" lol How am I doing it to avoid reality though? You're only saying that because to you your opinion on this is the only "reality". I'm not avoiding reality, I just have a different reality to you. What that I said was hypocritical though? I haven't criticised you for ad hominem attacks,…
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:42 PM
1

If the huge step of using somebody's preferred pronouns is too much "special treatment" for you to handle then you just might be an asshole.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:34 PM
1

It's a hypothetical question asked to provoke thought. You're just dismissing it because you don't have a better response to it. I can't say I'm shocked that somebody making a transphobic argument would be close-minded.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:32 PM
-1

I think that the roles developed as a result of differences in average physical and mental characteristics between men and women. However there are still plenty of men who would match better the average woman's physical and mental characteristics, and vice-versa. Gender roles have developed over thousands of years. They are a result of minor differences between genders, yes, but also a result of thousands of years worth of events and influential individuals. Do you really think that if that deve…
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:30 PM
0

Gender roles have been formed over thousands of years. They are complex and are not simply a result of "instincts". I'm not suggesting that some group got together and chose the roles. The roles did develop as a result of biological differences. But the biological differences are just so minor, and often women will have a more "manly" physique and personality than most men, and vice-versa. You're trying to put humans into two distinct groups based on gender and suggesting that they have complete…
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:24 PM
1

When you meet somebody, do you examine their chromosomes before judging their gender? Or do you do it based on their appearance and actions? If DNA had never been discovered then how would you judge gender?
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:19 PM
-2

Gender dysphoria is more than just "I feel like a man". It isn't "entertaining their delusions", it's helping in their treatment. Nobody's asking you to be nice to them or care about them, just don't be an asshole. Maybe they do play a part in entrenching gender roles, but at best a pretty tiny one. They deserve equality too. You yourself are acting against equality by commenting these outdated and uninformed views of yours.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:18 PM
-1

What? Your personality is a result of your upbringing. If you're actually talking about the organ that is the brain then yes it's not been changed much in the last few thousand years. But societal roles are not defined by your organs, they are defined by society, funnily enough.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:06 PM
-4

This may blow your mind, but in modern society the mindset is reproduced more by society than by biological instincts. We aren't cavemen anymore.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 03:00 PM
-14

Does it? Again, most of the time that it's used it is referring more to a role than actual biological gender.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 02:51 PM
-17

Gender is about more than chromosomes though. Perceived gender makes far more difference in everyday interactions than actual genealogical gender. What do you care what somebody's chromosomes are? If somebody wants to live as a woman or as a man then why do you care about that? You're just a backwards-ass transphobic piece of shit. This isn't even about being PC, it's about not being an asshole.
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 02:41 PM
-2

Edgy
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 01:24 PM
-13

Not being gay doesn't mean you're straight
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 01:02 PM
-11

If she didn't have a penis then would she be a woman?
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 12:44 PM
-15

her*, she *...
/r/PussyPass01/10/15 12:16 PM
2

No dude you got it wrong he has a smokin hot 9.5/10 girlfriend who he fucks in the ass a dozen times a week. You're obviously just jealous of his mad game bro
/r/MensRights01/10/15 08:49 AM
6

No I think that it is sexual contact, which is why it would be flagged by that test. I do not however think that it is sexual abuse. In the same way that the studies spawning the 1 in 4 statistic classed any sex where you're drunk or that you later regret as being rape. That is just twisting the truth. Sexual abuse is a serious issue, but intentionally misleading statistics do not help the cause.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 11:14 PM
1

So, it includes somebody grabbing your ass? I had a look on their site to see their sources but couldn't see anything but a video and lots of opportunities to buy things off them (on mobile). It's a misleading statistic being used to sell a product.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 10:52 PM
4

Livestrong was just a bunch of yellow bands but it raised $500m
/r/MensRights30/09/15 10:51 PM
-5

I was simplifying. Stop trying to disagree with me just for the sake of disagreement.
/r/PussyPass22/09/15 03:46 PM
-7

No, but when I originally said "proportionate" I was, in context, essentially saying the same as "equal". His reaction was not equal to her action in terms of severity, not even close.
/r/PussyPass21/09/15 09:54 PM
-10

She slapped him, he swung two punches before getting tackled. "Absolutely appropriate".
/r/PussyPass21/09/15 07:38 AM
-6

Oh I'm on board with that. I wouldn't be here if I wasn't. But if he hadn't have been tackled he looked fully prepared to rain down punches until somebody else pulled him off. That is not an equal reaction.
/r/PussyPass21/09/15 07:36 AM
-9

She swung something between a punch and a slap. He completely lost it and swung two way harder punches before getting tackled. If you truly believe that's proportionate then I don't know what else to say
/r/PussyPass21/09/15 07:33 AM
10

Cool spongebob reaction images friend!
/r/PussyPass20/09/15 06:35 PM
-16

To be fair, his reaction was disproportionate. They both should have been arrested. You can still use excessive force, even if it is in self defence.
/r/PussyPass20/09/15 06:34 PM
0

I completely disagree with you. It isn't that the user base here has gone softer on the matter, it's that the quality of content making the front page here has gone down. I would say that this video is an attempt at a pussy pass, but that the pussy pass was not denied. Though often stuff gets posted here that is absolutely nothing more than a bad thing happening to a woman, and that stuff doesn't belong here.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/09/15 07:11 PM
1

You don't know that he enjoyed it, and you don't know the circumstances under which he went back. Even if he was willing at the time, he will grow up knowing he was too young to give consent. That breach of trust from an authority figure in your life can cause irreparable damage to a person. But no, it's totally cool because this 13 year old got his rocks off. You're sick.
/r/PussyPass31/08/15 11:38 AM
3

Women open the bathroom door and then proceed to back into the bathroom using their rear-end to locate the toilet. Wow
/r/PussyPassDenied27/08/15 12:36 PM
2

Well then it's too bad that you didn't get raped. Because that's what this is; rape.
/r/PussyPass26/08/15 11:22 PM
3

I honestly still have absolutely no idea how people justify this line of reasoning. Genuinely, please, if anybody could at all explain to me how a woman having sexual intercourse with an unwilling male is possibly not rape, please go ahead.
/r/MensRights23/08/15 10:11 PM
2

I considered that, but all other text seems central.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 12:53 PM
12

I'd say spelling since "themselve" isn't a word
/r/MensRights20/08/15 08:40 AM
2

Fat trannys pls
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 12:17 PM
2

And I'm the one who needs to get over themselves?
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 12:00 PM
2

Neither of us are adding anything at all to this conversation.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 11:54 AM
2

This comment brought to you from 2013
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 11:50 AM
-8

Oh fuck off
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 11:43 AM
-6

I know, I was more responding to the thread. I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with /u/professorbooty25
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 11:43 AM
-11

This is not an anti-woman sub. Down vote her if you dislike her sentiment, not her gender.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/15 10:58 AM
6

He presented his case very poorly to be fair. They probably made him though, this show is ridiculously contrived.
/r/PussyPass20/07/15 08:18 PM
2

You can make a decision to exact some revenge on somebody without losing control of your emotions. Seriously though you sound super neckbeardy whiteknightey autistic...
/r/PussyPassDenied20/07/15 12:19 PM
22

How did he lose any dignity?
/r/PussyPassDenied20/07/15 10:27 AM
3

Confirmed troll... Guess u got me
/r/MensRights14/07/15 08:25 AM
3

I don't see how that relates to my comment here.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:30 PM
3

I mean even if we ignore the rest of your argument, this comment is just so wrong. Not being able to argue a point well does not mean that you are wrong.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 02:48 PM
4

The outrage here is caused by the fact that if a man did that to a woman then they would likely be charged with sexual assault. But these women repeatedly do it and face no punishment, and it is instead the guys who must change their behaviour.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 02:47 PM
2

Absolutely not, and these women should have received the same punishment.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 02:46 PM
2

Retro
/r/MensRights08/07/15 08:05 AM
1

Those guys normally handle themselves and the situation better to be fair. The guy whose foot got run over put a sticker on as soon as he could (which is understandable I suppose). Normally they ask you to back up etc. first. That escalated the situation more than was needed
/r/PussyPassDenied07/07/15 04:53 PM
2

Why would I subscribe to /r/PussyPass if I were a man hating feminist? Shit I've submitted here before, and /r/MensRights and all, but just because I don't hate women I must hate men? That's a toxic way of thinking. Why are you even replying to me? Just cruising some week old mid-rated threads?
/r/PussyPass07/07/15 04:47 PM
-2

You have no idea how far from my beliefs you are with that contrived attempt to explain my reasoning.
/r/PussyPass03/07/15 08:17 PM
-5

It's not a matter of them being paid more per set, it's a matter of them being paid the same per match.
/r/PussyPass03/07/15 07:07 PM
-7

Oh you want to continue the straw man okay then
/r/PussyPass03/07/15 06:04 PM
1

I don't think I understand?
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 06:51 PM
-1

They're paid for performing well in the skill though not for the ability to do it for a long time.
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 05:52 PM
0

How well they do in that match isn't dependant on how long the match is, though.
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 04:40 PM
-2

Why do you think that that comment would make me want to continue the discussion? Just because you don't understand my point that doesn't make it wrong.
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 08:29 AM
-9

Nice straw man thanks
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 08:26 AM
-1

They aren't being paid for how much tennis they've played in their lives, or the work they've put in beforehand, they're being paid for how they perform during those 3 or 5 sets. Ideally yes, realistically no.
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 01:20 AM
-2

Honestly you're being condescending like it's going to make your point better, but your entire argument is just so shallow. Pay should be based on the revenue that the athletes generate in any case, they aren't "paid by the hour" like normal employees. If you commission two artists to each paint your portrait, then would you pay them based on the quality of their work or based on how long they took...?
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 01:19 AM
-7

Perhaps, but "fuel" for the body is a small portion of most people's budgets. Also, women have other costs elsewhere, you couldn't really feasibly calculate the pay difference. Kind of a super weak argument on your part tbh.
/r/PussyPass02/07/15 01:16 AM
-4

You make it sound like the tournament games represent the only effort that the athletes put in to earn that money. Male tennis players would not have done less to earn the money if they played fewer sets in tournament games. How much less do you think that women tennis players should be paid?
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 04:39 PM
-6

Do you really believe that male tennis players deserve to earn more money by playing two extra sets? Both male and female tennis players play so much tennis in their lives, it isn't like the men are putting in more work and so deserve more money. They're just having their skill tested differently.
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 03:52 PM
-7

The point I'm making is that neither are being paid for just that though, there's a lot more work done behind the scenes. It isn't like the women only play three sets of tennis to get to winning Wimbledon, just as it isn't like those footballers only play 90 minutes of football to get their pay.
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 03:50 PM
-9

A similar issue is people who complain that football players get paid ridiculous amounts for "90 minutes work a week". But of course, there's much more work done that we don't see.
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 03:38 PM
-1

How did I not admit any handicap? I said that they are not as physically capable of handling exercise. For example, women are factually worse at math and science, as well as finance, medicine, and law, but you'll never admit this undeniable fact. Link peer reviewed papers showing this "fact" and maybe I'll agree with it. You're just some 15 year old misogynist who rants about how women are shit and then bitches about how you can't get a gf...
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 02:27 PM
-6

Perhaps to external heat sources because they have a higher bf%, but I don't think it's true when they themselves are the source of heat. Women aren't allowed to take part in the Tour de France because the distance is greater than that allowed for women's races due to the fact that their bodies couldn't handle it. Plus, there's more limiting your body than just overheating!
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 02:17 PM
-13

They're paid for the skill which they have, which they gained through the training and demonstrate during the tournament.
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 01:57 PM
-9

How did you arrive at each of those conclusions?
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 01:39 PM
-25

They are paid for the skill which they have, which they gained through years of intensive training and dedication. They are not as individuals paid millions of pounds for the fact that they play a few sets of tennis.
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 01:13 PM
-24

That statement has always pissed me off because the logic just does not work. They aren't being paid for the time that they spend playing the game. They are being paid for the years of training and dedication and sacrifices that they put in to get to be good. Their pay should only be different for the fact that they draw different numbers of spectators, and thus do not generate the same kind of revenue. As for fewer sets and more breaks, that's because women need them. They are not physically as…
/r/PussyPass01/07/15 01:10 PM
1

Every day yes, how did you know?
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 01:58 PM
1

Smh you can't understand reddit comments how do you get through the day?
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 01:54 PM
1

I'm done repeating myself for you to not read me and just keep saying the same stupid ass shit. Fuck you man, you're gonna be a real high-flyer in life, I can just tell.
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 01:40 PM
1

No because Apple set this ball rolling when they started producing iPods, since everybody that plays any sort of role in any crime is guilty of that crime now. Holy fuck you're dumb if you think that a legal system could actually work like that. Genuinely, really really dumb.
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 01:20 PM
1

So she should be charged with kidnapping, assault, and rape, because she told her friend that she was raped instead of telling the police?
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 12:54 PM
1

She looked on Facebook to find out who the iPod belonged to. That doesn't change anything here.
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 12:38 PM
1

In this case you have no evidence that she "hired the murderer". The most that you can assume is that she aired a grievance with a friend. The situation also wouldn't have happened if the guy hadn't have left his iPod there. Or if their parents hadn't conceived them. How far back are you willing to go in assigning blame to people who may have not actually done anything wrong?
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 12:03 PM
1

Then youre necessarily taking the stance that she isn't guilty! If "innocent until proven guilty" is so damn important to you then why are you defending the actions of someone who took the law into her own hands? Your hypocrisy is disturbing. It would be hypocritical to throw out the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" just because she did not exercise the same mantra. It is absolutely not hypocritical to consistently apply "innocent until proven guilty", regardless of who we are discussing…
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 11:09 AM
1

They all participated in one form of another and they should bear the weight equally. Okay well I guess that a disagreement on this is what this boils down to. As it happens, I'm the one supported by how the law actually works in most first world countries, the US included. Except that doesn't map to what the article said. Nothing that you quoted disagrees with the possibility that she told one friend in confidence who then blew it up. If youre going to claim they called a suspected rapist to a …
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 09:44 AM
1

Im assuming guilt after guilt has been established by a court system. Enough guilt was established to sentence her to 9 months. If you are protesting that sentence than you can't really use the court's findings to support your argument. Yes she is guilty, I'm not objecting to that, but you do not know what she is guilty of. The article does not actually say what she was found guilty of specifically, just "for her role played" in it. the person who instigated this Again, you don't know what she c…
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 08:55 AM
1

If youre going to be calling my knowledge onto question i demand you provide me with some counter evidence "Innocent until proven guilty" is more than just a fun expression; you cannot assume guilt based on circumstantial evidence. Then she is culpable in the same way everyone who might have participated in this attack. They are not all equally guilty. They all each played a different role in this, and one person doing something does not equate to them all doing it. Its a huge assumption to thin…
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 08:14 AM
0

I mean you don't know that she is guilty of the things you are saying she is. I am not proposing that she is without fault. If she was afraid of the people she was with then she probably would not text for help. There's so many valid reasons for her not to, and you are just making huge assumptions.
/r/PussyPass30/06/15 07:20 AM
-7

You don't know that she had any power to stop it. You're making all sorts of presumptions that you have no place making. I'm not saying she's innocent of anything, just pointing out that you don't know that she's guilty.
/r/PussyPass29/06/15 07:18 PM
-4

Same. Without knowing what happened to them you can't really call "pussy pass" on this.
/r/PussyPass29/06/15 04:29 PM
-11

Okay, but there is no kidnapping in this case, and she didn't forcibly sodomise anybody. Do you think that she should receive the same punishment as the guy who actually digitally sodomised him, just because she was party to the crime?
/r/PussyPass29/06/15 04:28 PM
-13

We don't know how the witch hunt started. She could have mentioned it to a friend and the friend ran with it. Yes she was complicit in it, and yes she was an accessory, but would you really expect more than 9 months for that for a minor with no priors?
/r/PussyPass29/06/15 02:15 PM
-24

She was 15, and this article doesn't really say that much about how big a role she played in any of this. She didn't take part in the sexual assault of one of the guys, all that it says is that she hit one guy on the head twice with a frying pan. Pretty bad, but she could have easily truly been persuaded into it by the group she was with. To me, there isn't enough to say that 9 months is insufficient.
/r/PussyPass29/06/15 12:05 PM
33

There's an edit; he kicked them out. What more dya want?
/r/PussyPassDenied28/06/15 06:49 PM
7

She wasn't begging for their life, she just said not to shoot because she was pregnant. How do you know that she wasn't a threat to his life when she said that? If somebody is capable of breaking into your home and attacking you, then they are capable of saying they're pregnant to distract you then attack you again.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/06/15 01:55 PM
6

Well I mean, a court ruled that it wasn't manslaughter, but you're probably right after reading this article.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/06/15 11:37 AM
16

The punishment for burglary is not execution They broke his collar bone. Also, you have a right to protect your home. He did not know their intentions, and many home invasions lead to the home owner being killed. You cannot simply say that all they were doing was burglarising and so should be punished as such. Also, burglary is just illegally entering a building with intent to commit a crime. They did much more than that.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/06/15 10:54 AM
7

You have no idea how far they ran (presumably not far since the guy is 80), or how long a time period events happened in. It could well have been in the heat of the moment.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/06/15 10:53 AM
1

Care to expand on that...?
/r/MensRights20/06/15 10:14 AM
6

I think that for this to belong here, you should provide some context yourself. How do you link this to men's rights?
/r/MensRights19/06/15 01:07 PM
1

I don't get that?
/r/MensRights19/06/15 01:02 PM
2

She also said that she has the cash to pay for it. Smh
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/15 11:46 PM
5

It isn't her first offence, from the article: she was breaching a youth rehabilitation order that was imposed on March 8 for GBH and witness intimidation. She didn't just punch him anyway. A punch lasts about half a second, but the video is 2 minutes long. Yes, it's probably partially the result of bad parenting, but I don't see how the nanny state comes into it. Besides, when bad parenting fucks somebody up does that mean that they shouldn't be punished when they do wrong? She will be rehabilit…
/r/PussyPassDenied22/05/15 11:11 AM
3

Chacarron Macarron
/r/PussyPassDenied21/05/15 08:09 AM
16

No no no because men are in a position of power and so cannot be wronged because the patriarchy
/r/PussyPassDenied20/05/15 09:20 PM
23

It is. That isn't the girl who posted the status though in case that's unclear.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/05/15 09:19 PM
5

Okay first of all how dare you
/r/PussyPassDenied20/05/15 09:18 PM
55

Share it to their wall
/r/PussyPassDenied20/05/15 09:17 PM
8

Maroon 5 are okay
/r/PussyPassDenied20/05/15 09:17 PM
1

Understandable, I assumed it was US first as well. Always nice to see my country on my front page.......
/r/MensRights18/05/15 04:38 PM
3

OP's article is about an incident in the UK, where zero tolerance isn't a policy, and there is a significantly reduced risk of them being sued.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 03:39 PM
2

Yeah, it isn't really much of a men's rights issue, it's just posted here because it is tied in as a result of a feminist movement. Rape by deception is an interesting one though. Yes, it's classified as being illegal and is no doubt what he will be tried with, but to me it should not be grouped together with normal rape since consent was given at the time, even if it were fraudulently gained.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 10:29 AM
1

That's a good point. But, I don't think that the analogy holds up. Let's say the charity in question is to support the homeless. Now, the goal of giving money is to help the homeless. In this case that goal isn't achieved, so you did your part of giving the money, but the other person did not do their part of using the money to help the homeless. Now, if we go back to the topic at hand: the goal of having sex here was to get the pleasure of having sex. If this wasn't being fulfilled, then the wo…
/r/MensRights05/05/15 09:08 AM
5

Yeah this is no doubt a difficult case though. It is morally wrong, whether or not it is legally wrong. Lying to get sex is never okay, but I mean surely people do that all the time and if the person being lied to believes it, then I don't think that they are being raped.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 11:21 PM
33

I don't think that he was missing that point. I think he was pointing out that women do work together fine when not in an environment which encourages those types of women to join.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 11:07 AM
3

Yeah I thought Liverpool, looks like it too, but I've never been to northern Ireland so didn't want to rule it out.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/04/15 05:41 AM
6

Yeah I agree, could be either tbh.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/04/15 09:58 PM
19

Why you gotta turn this into one of those things?
/r/PussyPassDenied23/04/15 09:58 PM
8

I'm pretty sure it's satirising quotas for equal gender representation. This would be silly to enforce, as are really any quota like that.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 04:52 AM
6

Am I the only one who has this very popular opinion in this sub?
/r/MensRights22/04/15 04:51 AM
7

Men's rights isn't just about reverting what feminism has done which went too far... Also, feminism has done a lot of good.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 07:19 PM
3

It's the difference between men's rights activists and women haters... Feminism and equality are not mutually exclusive, just many branches of feminism go too far beyond equality. That doesn't make it okay for MRAs to do the same. This sub is not about anti-feminism. That does not change with who you ask.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 02:29 PM
5

Some parts of men's rights do sure. But the goal is not anti-feminism.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 10:13 AM
3

Men's rights aren't about anti-feminism.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 07:27 PM
4

They possibly had every legal right to publish it. The bad part is that they wanted to.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 02:22 AM
3

In the UK it's illegal to incite hate. Yes freedom of the press is important, but should this be protected? I don't know what I think of it myself. Just playing devil's advocate I suppose.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 02:20 AM
3

It was drain cleaner
/r/PussyPass27/03/15 07:34 PM
5

It's pretty standard. Can buy it at biggish Spars or Co-ops, and of course anything bigger.
/r/PussyPass27/03/15 07:32 PM
2

She would receive treatment either way. UK prisons are good for that.
/r/PussyPass27/03/15 07:29 PM
12

But she definitely won't be
/r/PussyPass27/03/15 03:15 PM
1

Was this actually done in consideration of trans people? Watch the South Park episode Cissy (S18 E3) if you haven't already. It is shockingly on topic and presents the downsides of this in a way far better than I could explain.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 09:01 PM
6

That's what I'd have done in high school. Dirty protest.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 08:58 PM
4

Stewart-Kanigan said that the SSMU had been trying to broker a compromise, but that the university shut down negotiations. What possible compromise can there be for this other than the same type of segregation that the university has said they won't allow?
/r/MensRights22/03/15 12:52 PM
1

If only I could though
/r/PussyPassDenied19/03/15 11:57 PM
-1

And the blacks! And the whites and the arabics and the hispanics and the orientals and the god damn polynesians.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/03/15 11:47 PM
0

I don't know, I didn't really read either of your comments sorry
/r/MensRights19/03/15 06:26 PM
0

Mate I aint got time for these novels, can I get some bullet points?
/r/MensRights19/03/15 06:01 PM
1

You mention studies yes. Those are not anywhere near evidence that this teacher gave these students different grades for the same answers because of their genders. Those may be evidence that it is plausible, but nothing more.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 08:08 AM
1

Or maybe she was just rushing to mark them and didn't realise her inconsistency. I choose to not always assume the worst in people. You have literally no evidence to the contrary, just speculation.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 08:16 AM
5

No, he stopped, got out, and held her arm while he lectured her.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 02:07 PM
2

Yeah really I have no reason to believe that this was done because he's a guy.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 01:59 PM
6

Fortunately this guy actually has the means to fight it, and maybe even the public on his side. He could set a standard, if this is handled properly.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 09:23 PM
4

Strong denial
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/15 02:37 AM
19

James gotta cut and run
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/15 02:37 AM
13

I think that was just shitty punching technique, you can see at times she isn't holding anything.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/15 04:19 PM
1

I know, it sucks
/r/PussyPassDenied06/03/15 12:31 AM
7

To where?
/r/PussyPassDenied05/03/15 10:37 PM
5

It shows that you take it seriously and are less likely to re-offend. In ruling a court should be blind to those things, but in sentencing not so. If I were a judge and I really believed that somebody was sincerely sorry and would not re-offend then shit yes I would give them a softer sentence.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/03/15 10:35 PM
1

Still talking smack from the floor
/r/PussyPassDenied04/03/15 08:10 AM
3

Somebody's edited it out now. You're doing god's work Haminoon
/r/MensRights28/02/15 11:44 AM
11

Also because violence against men is being considered for deletion. Thread about it
/r/MensRights28/02/15 11:44 AM
2

And if I'm wrong, so be it. It isn't your decision to make though. He is the one who has to live with the consequences. And if something were to go wrong, you just figure "so be it"? You sound like a horrible father dude. Without getting into the abortion argument, that is irrelevant. To compare: is somebody who commits murder worse than somebody who commits robbery? Yes, of course. Does that mean that it is okay to commit robbery? No.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 03:13 PM
2

Yeah guys are probably way more likely to commit a wide variety of crimes, but those are arrest & conviction statistics. There's a bit of a difference
/r/PussyPassDenied25/02/15 04:01 PM
60

if the police don't observe any blatant marks/bruises on the woman then there's nothing they can really do. That is very much so not true. Domestic violence is a very serious crime and reports of it are handled with a serious response, however that response is typically directed towards the man, regardless of whether or not he has done anything.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 10:28 AM
10

I thought that at first too. But if the woman alleged that he'd hit her in the stomach, which is a significantly more serious accusation, then the police probably had little choice but to arrest him. I don't know what the full police report says, but imo they both should have been arrested.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/02/15 12:42 PM
15

Masculism is the masculine equivalent (lexically) of feminism. Meninism is a parody of feminism.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 12:17 AM
1

Yeah I suppose we were
/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:28 PM
1

I guess we'll have to just disagree on this one
/r/MensRights07/02/15 10:30 AM
7

Sounding breathless was just an effect of nerves, and is definitely not the worst part of their presentation.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/15 12:31 AM
1

A confession from a mentally handicapped guy being patchy is nowhere near enough alone to convince me beyond all reasonable doubt that the guy is innocent. If indeed that were the only piece of evidence then the judge should have dismissed the case. I mean the guy confessed, what prosecutor would refuse to try somebody who confessed to the crime? The guy shouldn't have been found guilty, but that isn't the fault of the prosecutor.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 10:41 PM
0

What evidence was there that did not rely on personal interpretation? How did the prosecutor possibly know this case to be false? Yes I know that their jobs differ significantly, it was just drawing a comparison.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 04:04 PM
0

Yes and that's the prosecutor's job; the prosecutor is tasked with presenting a case against a defendant. Once they start picking and choosing cases based on their own personal beliefs as to whether or not a person is innocent they are acting as a judge. It is up to the judge to see that the defendant is innocent, not the prosecutor. Have you read To Kill A Mocking Bird? It kind of looks at it from the other side; defending a man who everybody believes to be guilty. You still have a duty to prot…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 03:17 PM
1

What did the prosecutor do wrong?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 02:13 PM
1

By appealing to a smaller group you make members of that group more likely to buy into the idea, as they feel more special. Selective advertising is okay imo, so long as it isn't actually negative about either gender.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 12:12 AM
7

Plus it likely wasn't the case that they were charged of identical crimes. It's possible that she had a more passive role in things. This is 99% likely pussypass, but without the article actually saying more details it is unfair to assume.
/r/PussyPass04/02/15 11:13 AM
16

Damage control? I'm not the original poster btw. "In all honesty" doesn't mean that something is completely honest or serious. Like people who use "literally" to exaggerate for comic effect.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/01/15 10:48 AM
23

Exaggeration for comic effect is done all over reddit/the internet/the world. I don't think that anybody here is actually suggesting that if they met or were around somebody with a voice that annoying then they would drop them.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/01/15 06:56 PM
53

She has an annoying voice. That isn't sexist, just stating a fact
/r/PussyPassDenied30/01/15 12:41 PM
13

She sticks her arms out to stop herself hitting the floor. She ain't out
/r/PussyPassDenied27/01/15 08:19 PM
1

Yeah, it's very possible that that is what happened. But it isn't really fair to assume that that's the case. Never give up the fight!
/r/PussyPass15/01/15 01:24 PM
1

Well I mean it's overall decent advice but not good advice. Though yeah, doing the "bad" things don't make you abusive.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 09:15 AM
1

There is absolutely no need to single out males in this - it's all decent relationship advice, they just need to replace "man" with "partner" and similar.
/r/MensRights08/01/15 11:03 PM
2

How would you react to somebody saying the same thing about female MRAs?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:57 PM
2

How do you get 3:2 ratio, given: You will notice that the lifetime number of people is much smaller for "made to penetrate" (5,451,000 vs. 21,840,000 women raped), but even then it's "just" a quarter. Not 1% or something like that. Sounds like even if all "made to penetrate" rapes were perpetrated by women then the ratio would be at most ~4:1. Unless if some of those women were raped by other females? Great work though, nice to have a (well presented) source on this sort of information to stop b…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 02:12 AM
3

Rapists are roughly 60% male, 40% female. Can I get a source on that? That's an interesting statistic.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:08 AM
9

Reading this he seems like a lot of other feminists who are just a bit mental, I don't think his gender has anything to do with it.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:07 AM
8

What's this got to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights25/12/14 03:17 PM
1

Prison is for a lot of things, I think that the reasons most applicable here are deterrence and retribution. People need to know just how not-okay it is to stop in the fast lane of a highway for ducks, hence deterrence. As for retribution, if I were the mother/wife of the two who died then I would not be happy with that sentence at all, and would want her to spend at least a good few years behind bars.
/r/PussyPass19/12/14 01:39 PM
1

What she did is abhorrent and she is clearly mentally unstable and I don't believe that 5 years in jail (max) will leave her mentally stable at the end. But the fact that it was reattached is very relevant, both in the general context and in reference to /u/yogibo's comment. In the general context it is the same as the difference between attempted murder and murder. In reference to /u/yogibo's comment it is the difference between (non-literally) taking a man's life, and leaving him with a scar (…
/r/MensRights18/12/14 09:29 AM
2

Your link messed up due to the closing parenthesis! Put a backslash before the close brackets in the URL to make it work, like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheTalk(TV_series\)
/r/MensRights17/12/14 10:16 PM
6

Yeah, but it was reattached Unfortunately, the knife was quite blunt and the cut wasn’t clean so although we reattached the boy’s penis, it wasn’t ideal and he had to have further treatment. However, he has now had three surgeries all of which have been successful and we are confident that his penis will be perfectly OK again in three months
/r/MensRights17/12/14 10:14 PM
9

If her point was that we shouldn't be blaming any group of people so large for the actions of a few individuals, then it would be quite a well made point. But that isn't the point that she was making. The point she was making is just sexist and fucked up
/r/MensRights16/12/14 03:51 PM
4

This is why we need body cams on all cops. They should also automatically upload all videos to YouTube.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/12/14 06:01 PM
8

These girls harassed him for years, and when he attacked they were following him around harassing him. That obviously doesn't make it okay to stab one of them, but imo the prison term should be shorter. He needs lessons on how to deal with his anger, not to be placed in jail which will turn this otherwise innocent guy who was pushed to his limit and snapped into a hardened criminal desensitised to violence.
/r/PussyPass04/12/14 01:24 PM
1

Wow feminist enforced affirmative action has just completely taken it too far from what the suffragettes would have ever wanted in fighting to get women the vote.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:32 PM
38

Like what is she gonna do, tailor his clothes for him? She asked for a number, he asked for a number.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 01:30 AM
2

He is and was referring to the Trayvon Martin case, which /u/BJaacmoens was probably referring to.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/14 07:45 PM
5

She's kind of just assumed that every male opinion on a topic is an MRA opinion, and than is stunned that not every male thinks the exact same thing about everything ever.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 12:56 PM
0

Yeah but every case will at some point just be an accusation. There's not really away around that other than letting any accused party go free until the trial, sadly.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/11/14 08:58 AM
47

No, it isn't enough. And yeah he will still face huge problems because of it, even though he was found innocent. But it's something! Edit: holy shit he spent 60 days in jail too? Yeah she definitely should have got a lot more. That's messed up.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/11/14 11:54 AM
13

And the way she plays it off like the victim at the end, stricken by horrible addiction. Just silly.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/09/14 04:52 PM
8

I feel that if I were a cop (or what ever force these people are with, TSA?) in a situation where the person were actually breaking the law in a fairly arrestable way, and were filming that situation, that I for one would be way more likely to arrest them. If they aren't arrested then they will post that video online, which makes the cops look soft and makes others think that they can rightfully do the same thing. And you just know this woman would kick off if she were being arrested, and I'd ta…
/r/PussyPass21/09/14 10:55 PM
1

That's a valid point, but doesn't really explain your "as it should be" comment as it doesn't explain why her name is withheld.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 12:24 PM
1

I didn't say that whether or not he goes forward with a complaint affects whether or not it was a sexual assault. Sexuality is perceived. Touching somebody's ass isn't automatically sexual 100% of the time. I'm not trying to debate that girls touched his ass, at all. That's pretty obvious. Did you read what I said?
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:11 PM
1

It is a sexual assault only if the victim feels sexually assaulted. OP referred to this as sexual harassment, which is pretty different. Yes, it is unacceptable, but there's different levels of how unacceptable a thing can be, and appropriate responses accordingly. This is pretty low on the scale, so I'd have to say /u/TheDemonicAttorney's response is more suitable.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 01:49 PM
2

Oh absolutely, I agree with neither party here at all.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 04:10 PM
6

I disagree with this guy though? He's implying that all women should think exactly the same, and because some women don't agree with what other women say, that women "don't know what they want". But all groups will have some differing opinions, that doesn't mean that no members of the group know what they want.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 11:52 AM
2

Puusypass wasn't denied though, she wasn't punished
/r/PussyPassDenied07/09/14 04:24 PM
15

The fine is for interrupting the game. Sports are a business, and by interrupting them you cost them money. Also it's a deterrent.
/r/PussyPass07/09/14 04:19 PM
-1

roflmao xD
/r/PussyPass06/09/14 11:48 PM
1

The word "custody" here doesn't refer to her getting custody of her children, it refers to her being placed in custody. However, the custody she is placed under is limited by her need to see her children (which is bullshit).
/r/PussyPass06/09/14 12:13 PM
11

Apparently he sent unsolicited dick pics, which is pretty different from having your nudes hacked. Favre allegedly sent her, he's masturbating — while wearing a pair of Crocs. This is the real crime right here
/r/PussyPass04/09/14 10:25 PM
6

Yeah I was thinking of him, but I thought that he'd accidentally linked the image on his twitter rather than it being leaked out. I just googled and I was mistaken though. Was he really called a pervert over that? Everybody has sexual urges sometimes, that doesn't make them a pervert...
/r/PussyPass04/09/14 08:10 PM
7

Whose dick pics were leaked that resulted in him being called a pervert?
/r/PussyPass04/09/14 08:02 PM
1

I don't like what /u/Unempathetic is saying, but his comments aren't mostly "ad hominem fallacies". An ad hominem fallacy would be saying something along the lines of: "you are wrong because you are a dick", rather than just something like "you are a dick". An insult is not an ad hominem fallacy.
/r/PussyPass15/08/14 10:56 PM
3

Yeah Barack says it in the context of a joke. But he shouldn't make jokes which bear a pretty politically weighted message if he doesn't believe that message. He is the president, this speech was written for/with/by him, and every word in it is carefully selected. However it was meant, to me it just seems like saying stuff to get votes regardless of beliefs or morals or anything.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 12:17 AM
23

It's a completely shitty situation, but she should at the very least have her other children taken from her care. She is clearly not fit to be a mother...
/r/PussyPass04/08/14 06:25 PM
1

So even if the father has full custody, the mother can always give consent but the father sometimes can't? That's just silly. The rules make sense, but need to be applied to the mother as well.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 11:05 PM
0

There is no "or" in the penultimate point (as there is in the list above it), so I'd say they all have to apply
/r/MensRights02/08/14 11:04 PM
6

Got a solid laugh out of this - such an accurate observation. Sometimes the best way to make a point understood is through humourous parody
/r/MensRights25/07/14 11:38 PM
3

I clicked that link expecting to rage at /r/feminism, but really it was the only thing that was ever going to happen. Linking /r/PussyPass does nothing for getting yourself taken seriously in a feminist sub
/r/PussyPass20/07/14 11:16 PM
1

She should be punished at the very least for every day that he spent in prison after she turned 18. Though I don't think that the prosecutor should be punished, as they were just doing their job. If they were held accountable for this sort of fuck up then they could be afraid of representing people in certain cases, and everybody has a right to an attorney. Edit: I missed the part that the prosecutor doesn't think she should be punished for this. Also describing this as "simply a case of a perso…
/r/MensRights14/07/14 10:51 PM
74

“D” suffers from ADHD. He allegedly touched his 5 year-old female companion inappropriately. She is the daughter of a well-known political figure in Grant County, Wisconsin. Although, the political figure’s 5 year-old son (present with his 5 year-old sister), allegedly committed a similar act, the son was not charged. (From here.) This whole thing is just fucked up. Obviously neither one of the boys should be charged, but how can one be and the other not be? Just because he's the son of a politi…
/r/MensRights11/07/14 11:14 PM
51

Two weeks after leveling her initial charges, Riniker filed a follow-up petition accusing the 6-year-old of groping two teenage babysitters. Seriously how does Lisa Riniker sleep at night?
/r/MensRights11/07/14 11:09 PM
2

Oh don't get me wrong I 100% believe she should have gone down for attempted murder. But, if they bought her argument of "not wanting to hurt him, just to scare him" then there is no intent to kill and thus no attempted murder. (As far as I know at least, I dont claim to fully understand the US laws surrounding this matter)
/r/PussyPass11/06/14 09:56 PM
29

Well I guess they'd have to convict whatever man was nearby during the incident
/r/PussyPass11/06/14 02:40 PM
3

Skip to 07:50 for action
/r/PussyPass11/06/14 02:37 PM
6

I get the not guilty verdict for attempted murder, I mean I would definitely oppose it but I get where it could have come from. Even though she cut his neck "near his jugular"... But seriously, she got found not guilty of "attempted aggravated assault with serious bodily injury". This woman is a danger to society and should be in jail.
/r/PussyPass11/06/14 02:35 PM
1

There is probably more tying him to the country than can be broken by having to pay spousal support...
/r/MensRights24/05/14 05:17 PM
0

Fair enough. They are a business though and gotta go with whatever sells
/r/MensRights17/05/14 11:56 AM
8

Rape isn't a "fake crisis" though... It's a very serious thing, it's just treated shittily by feminists.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 01:37 AM
6

For real. I'm sure that this Charlie fellow would have been a good father, but it doesn't change the fact that any baby would have been born unwanted. Both Jenny and Charlie will probably each find somebody that they are happy with and who wants the same things that they do. OP did the right thing
/r/MensRights05/05/14 04:37 AM
16

Dress codes exist for a whole host of reasons though. This presumably 16-18 year old girl wanted to go out showing bra strap, belly button and wearing a short skirt... People don't turn up to work like that, what's different about being in school?
/r/MensRights30/04/14 02:11 AM
11

Those aren't "feminists", they're girls who hate men but want to seem political and forward thinking for it
/r/MensRights29/04/14 11:54 AM
10

Poon pled guilty to manslaughter. Poon stabbed her husband once in the chest with a kitchen knife, between the second and third rib, striking a blood vessel near his heart. Killing somebody by stabbing somebody in the chest with a kitchen knife is manslaughter? What would she have to have done to him for it to be classed as murder? It's mad that this woman will have spent <3 years in prison for this when she gets out, she's clearly a danger to others.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 05:15 PM
2

It's not enough to be right, you must present your argument in such a way that others believe it too, or you might as well not bother. Sure there's comparisons that could be make but to say that men are the new blacks in terms of discrimination, because that is simply not true.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 12:27 PM
2

Holy cow how can she see that video and think that she is an innocent victim of "women abuse" in this? She entered a fight and she got #rekt, if you don't want that to happen then don't get in a fight with a guy who's clearly much larger and stronger than you. Nice to see the article says his rugby club is assuming innocence until he's proven guilty though.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 12:19 PM
1

A couple of points about the article that angered me: It rests on a simple question: Do you believe him? No article about a female potential rape victim would be so callous and insensitive as to straight up imply she may well just be making it up. The deputy seemed to doubt him but said he would follow up. He never did and neither did Kris. Kris sought help and the police just what, couldn't be bothered to follow up on it? Even if you don't believe somebody to be telling the truth, when that som…
/r/MensRights22/04/14 03:42 PM
3

What about it sucks?
/r/MensRights20/04/14 12:21 AM
16

I feel you should explain such statements
/r/MensRights19/04/14 05:35 PM
-2

My mistake then. But serious illness doesn't necessarily mean death, and none of them died... I don't know though, the decision to employ the death penalty needs to be one made by people far greater than I
/r/PussyPass18/04/14 10:14 AM
-1

It doesn't say in the article (that I can see) what she poisoned them with or what her intent was. Slipping somebody some laxative is technically "poisoning" them...
/r/PussyPass18/04/14 09:48 AM
2

Perhaps, but I'd read more than a news article before condemning somebody to death...
/r/PussyPass17/04/14 11:48 PM
7

Holy cow that's messed up. She doesn't need prison, she needs to be institutionalised.
/r/PussyPass17/04/14 07:54 PM
8

It's a dick move though...
/r/PussyPass16/04/14 12:58 AM
11

Sure it sucks if your SO is keeping those sorts of things secrets from you, but is it the place of the government to prevent them from doing so?
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:58 PM
2

"White atheist 17-20yo strongly conservative males who are pro cannabi legalisation" is a small demographic though... Though I do agree that the "privilege" argument is almost invariably dumb
/r/MensRights15/04/14 12:46 PM
2

such sentiments as "they only complain about what they experienced" I didn't express that sentiment at all though. What I said is that if what Wheaton posted were true then it would mean /r/MensRights is mainly made up of people of the same demographic, which does imply that that demographic is the one mainly affected, (if you ignore sample bias resulting from the fact that reddit isn't used by a good representative of the whole population).
/r/MensRights15/04/14 12:32 PM
8

To be fair, if it were true then it would make it look like the issues discussed here are pretty much only experienced by a certain (and small) demographic. It doesn't change the issues, it just changes their scope I guess
/r/MensRights15/04/14 11:33 AM
2

No, they would have lost one bigotted customer. I'd be more likely to pull my child out of a daycare because of that woman being a parent there than for any other reason
/r/MensRights07/04/14 01:57 PM
2

It's just completely absurd that it isn't in the definition already really. Why would it be the case from any sane legal point of view that there should be a difference. I've seen a fair amount on this kind of stuff but it just still really bugs me.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 03:09 AM
11

The predatory sexual assault on a child charge carries a minimum sentence of 10 years to life in prison, and a maximum of 25 years to life upon conviction. Then two lines later: Franklin was charged with one count of first-degree course of sexual conduct against a child, and two counts of second-degree rape What's even the point of having a minimum sentence if they give significantly less than it?
/r/PussyPass26/03/14 07:40 PM
2

No, maybe it doesn't belong here, but it's still discrimination against a group which too often gets it. That, plus the fact that it's a rape case which are always pretty prominent in mens rights discussions mean it isn't too far out of place here, in my opinion.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 10:41 PM
46

But the fact that the victim was born male shouldn't make any difference. He still tried to rape a person, and should be tried as such.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 12:43 PM
6

They would never should the interview tape to the alleged perpetrator, I call shenanigans.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:10 PM
2

If only that were a valid enough argument in the eyes of the law
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:09 PM
-5

I don't like this kind of reply, even if said jokingly. We shouldn't criticise them when they try to do right, but we should in this instance definitely criticise for their soft handedness.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:08 AM
6

She was charged with drug delivery resulting in death (slightly different), plus in the OP he overdosed too and it doesn't say that he administered the drug to her. Fair enough though, I guess it does happen to an extent.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 06:33 PM
1

Yeah turns out he does, fair enough. I think that calling this "an affair" is potentially fair enough (if he hypothetically didn't have special need), though only if they would refer to it the same way if the genders were reversed, which they almost certainly wouldn't.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 12:18 AM
11

Where does it say the boy had special needs?
/r/MensRights22/01/14 02:16 PM
9

Holy fuck that last one is way more brutal than anything I'd imagined. Now I can see why people might think to make female circumcision illegal and not male circumcision, even if I don't agree with it.
/r/MensRights13/01/14 12:48 AM
6

The feminist perception of men-on-women violence and harassment has lead to infringement upon men's rights in many cases. This is just a bit of an interesting article on the other side of it all. It may not be directly related but oh well, it is of interest to people who sub to /r/MensRights imo.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 07:16 PM
18

I think it's unfair to say that any group of people "always" does something. /r/MensRights isn't for criticising women, it's for discussing "men's rights and the ways said rights are infringed upon" (Sidebar). When we criticise women like this we are no better than the women/feminisits who say similar things about men, and lord knows that this subreddit hates that.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 05:04 PM
1

I've read that 80% of unreciprocated abuse in a relationship is from women, but don't have a source sorry. I'm looking now. Edit: This says 49.7% of DV is mutual. 70.7% of non-mutual DV is from women.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 01:48 PM
2

True, I meant specifically he won't convince the female friend he spoke about, as some people simply don't want to be convinced. A debating club is definitely a good environment for making people seriously consider another opinion though, as the people who tend to go to them are (in my experience) a lot more receptive to other people's opinions.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 12:37 AM
15

You likely won't ever win the argument; some people just refuse to see a point you're making and there's no point arguing with them. As for examples, see Wiki.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 03:39 PM
1

I don't disagree.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 08:44 PM
2

If all kids showed up dressed as they would for bed then it reflects poorly on the school; many parents don't want to send their kids to a school that they believe lacks discipline, among other things.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 12:53 PM
1

Posting that sort of shit on fb isn't helping anybody
/r/MensRights12/12/13 03:04 PM
15

I'm thrilled if some girl approaches me, even if I weren't attracted to them. It's just a confidence booster if nothing else, and with that attitude you can let somebody down a lot easier than if you just call them creepy.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 04:36 AM
1

They cease to be "wrongs" when they're both present though. I imagine there's a market for both, and there's no discrimination in the treating of either gender.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:27 PM
2

This isn't an MRA
/r/MensRights03/11/13 08:20 PM
1

Personally I'd call them exactly that, quotation marks included.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 02:33 PM
15

How are you expecting people to support you when you're being so hostile towards them?
/r/MensRights11/09/13 11:02 AM
2

Tbf this would solve the whole issue for OP...
/r/MensRights11/09/13 11:01 AM
7

And it's less lazy to refuse to add paragraphs?
/r/MensRights11/09/13 11:01 AM
9

If you want to make a change then you need support. I'd probably 100% agree with you, but there's no way that as you're just some guy on reddit I'm going to read your block of text. No, it isn't English class, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't make your posts readable?
/r/MensRights11/09/13 10:59 AM
1

okay
/r/MensRights05/09/13 10:46 PM
0

Eh, teacher's an asshole, kids do fairly often listen to teachers on such matters if the teacher is any good. That said, I do believe this story to be exaggerated.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 09:42 PM
1

Okay no need to get hostile. Citing a book is dumb; I can't confirm that it's true until I've acquired and read the book which would likely take at least a week. And even then the book isn't a source in its own right; I'm sure Warren Farrell gave some source for his knowledge of the fact.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 09:07 PM
0

[citation needed]
/r/MensRights05/09/13 08:47 PM
0

Yes, and it's still a shitty sample size. Your shitty sample size doesn't prove that workers can normally do things which prevent their own deaths on the job. Perhaps female workers would have refused to work in conditions after they complained and management ignored them, anyway.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 08:05 PM
1

That's 11 deaths out of thousands.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 10:03 AM
1

If an oil rig blows up then something went wrong, ie it could have (probably) been prevented by the workers. Deaths don't happen purely randomly, pure chance related deaths make up such a tiny amount of workplace deaths.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 01:08 AM
1

I agree with your conclusion but not your logic to reach it. They may just be better at doing the jobs safely/carefully. I don't think this at all by the way, I know that they don't do remotely the same work, but it's just a pretty big hole in your argument.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 03:21 PM
4

Statistically even if there were an exact 50/50 split of men and women (randomly distributed) overall in board rooms there would be loads of them with over 60% men, and equally of women. I don't see how they can possibly implement this without also implementing a 40% minimum for males in board rooms. If there's already such a skew in favour of men then what is there to lose?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 02:41 PM
6

Not sure why somebody would have downvoted you... That's a harsher false accusation sentence than I'm used to seeing, which is good. Shame they couldn't get her for the murders, though. It always seems that less evidence is needed to find a man guilty of such crimes, as people just assume a woman would never do such a thing. Not sure if that's the case here, but I darn well suspect it...
/r/MensRights30/08/13 01:10 AM
1

I don't know how to feel about this; I like that you posted a link supporting OP, but hate that what OP said is true...
/r/MensRights30/08/13 01:08 AM
1

How on earth did they even come up with that sentence?
/r/MensRights30/08/13 12:43 AM
3

I don't disagree that this is the case, but these two aren't even from the same site, let alone the same author. It could well be the case that if the genders were reversed they would have each used the same word.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 12:09 AM
2

So common to see as well, I fucking hate it.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 11:45 PM
5

Well, has a man ever gotten pregnant while using a condom? Men: 0, Women: 1
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:02 PM
1

7.9 per cent of papers taken by boys were awarded the top grade, compared to 7.4 per cent for girls, meaning that the gap in question is a mere half per cent. Such shitty logic. If 1% of boys' papers had have gotten As compared to 0.5% for girls that would still be a "mere half per cent", but boys would have gotten two times as many As as girls. 0.5% when discussing numbers around 7% is a lot. Not saying that boys are smarter than girls or anything remotely like that; there's a lot of possible c…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:14 PM
60

You're saying female privilege exists? Woman-hating patriachy-endorsing rape-apologising bastard!
/r/MensRights18/08/13 05:24 PM
1

No don't worry, didn't come off as too aggressive at all. I often worry that I come off too aggressive but editing myself just to sound a little less forward can be a bit too much effort for my liking... What you say makes perfect sense, I guess I've never really given it much thought before, but have rather said I'd be happy as either a girl or a boy. But thinking about it now, if I were a girl with my current personality (allowing for normal adaptions due to environment and all) I'd still be a…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 12:48 AM
0

I agree that it probably (almost certainly) is a medical phenomenon, but I fully understand how people can not believe that themselves. I'm cis-gendered myself and find it pretty hard to wrap my mind around some aspects of the argument for gender dysphoria being a legitimate medical phenomenon as I have never experienced it first hand. That said, it's hardly like I've studied the subject or anything; I'm just some idiot on the internet.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 12:11 AM
1

But I didn't say it, I just implied it!
/r/MensRights07/08/13 11:53 PM
14

Sorry, by "Fuck /r/bestof" I did actually mean just the mod(s) who blocked it, probably bad wording on my part.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 07:05 PM
45

I'm not sure, but I did see a post on this subreddit not long ago about it. They don't block /r/feminism, though.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 06:33 PM
92

Fuck /r/bestof. If their users didn't want to see MensRights stuff then that's fair enough, it isn't for everybody. But then they should just downvote it, to block the entire subreddit makes it a whole political thing against what this subreddit is ultimately in favour of; equality. Edit: I just read both posts though. Some great posts made, good read.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 06:23 PM
9

His hand was nowhere near her breast; at best his elbow was. And she walked into his arm! Had she have taken a step back the "problem" would have been resolved. An $80 fine is nowhere near adequate. Had this have been a man pushing a woman over there he would be in jail.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 02:54 PM
2

I would lean more towards changing the law regarding minimum penalty personally.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:35 AM
46

Same. Also her point that the jury didn't know the sentence is irrelevant; a crime being harshly punishable shouldn't make them find the defendant not guilty.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:10 PM
1

Yes, but it quite clearly causes confusion since "sex" is used far less in this way than "gender".
/r/MensRights28/06/13 11:21 AM
26

I don't get why there's any need to be comparing the jobs at all. If it were the case that males doing the same job as them were getting more money or better benefits then yes, that would be unfair and something should be done about it. But that isn't the case. If these people want the benefits of doing a job involving manual labour, then do some damn manual labour.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:39 PM
1

No, it isn't about sex though... Sure sex plays a role in it but there's so so much more to it than that.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:40 PM
5

I don't really think that transsexual is offensive, but generally transgender is preferred. Possibly because it removes the idea that it's something to do with sexuality, and sexuality normally only plays a small role in it.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:18 PM
33

Refer to your friend by her preferred pronoun, I can imagine she hates being referred to as "he". (Understandably.)
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:14 PM
3

This looks like it was written by a child. Why do these people decide to try their hand at journalism?
/r/MensRights18/06/13 05:49 PM
2

This just makes me mad. Yes, rape of women is a bad thing and I'm not saying that talking about it is bad, but all that saying say that 1 in 4 women are raped when it is so far from the truth does is to make women faster to feel like they've been raped. Ahh I'm too mad to even finish making the point that I started. This subreddit does that to me a lot.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:05 PM
1

You know I think I might agree with you actually. I was only considering the actual damage done to the guy in terms of his reputation and the fact that during the process his life would have been very shitty, and not giving much thought to what could have happened to him. Not to mention that if the courts were tougher on her and others like her then maybe other girls considering doing the same thing would think twice.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 12:10 PM
2

Not too relevant here though as the woman didn't commit the same crime. I thought the amount of time she was given was pretty appropriate, so long as she actually serves that long of course.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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