~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | When stumbling across feminist posts like these on Tumblr and Facebook, I wonder how some people can't see how people might get offended or feel silenced. I re-worded it to hopefully emphasize how these statements can come across as silencing.so what this all boils down to, what it comes down to in the end, is that men who object to the original posts, are, "men who would not get to this level and coerce women to have sex with them". Rapists. What you are saying is that to object to this, you must be a rapist. Thank-you, thank-you thank-you. | /r/MensRights | 22/10/13 04:05 PM |
| 1 | When stumbling across feminist posts like these on Tumblr and Facebook, I wonder how some people can't see how people might get offended or feel silenced. I re-worded it to hopefully emphasize how these statements can come across as silencing.Your constantly shifting definitions of what you are saying make arguing with pointless. You are not interested in honest debate or saying what you mean, merely constantly shifting the goal posts in order score dubious points. Throughout this argument you imply people can not understand what is going on because they are not smart enough, or lack the skills necessary to understand what is being said. For example "The conversation is rather metaphorical, so a working argument should probably be do… | /r/MensRights | 22/10/13 03:55 PM |
| 1 | When stumbling across feminist posts like these on Tumblr and Facebook, I wonder how some people can't see how people might get offended or feel silenced. I re-worded it to hopefully emphasize how these statements can come across as silencing.Just to add, it’s interesting that you assume the writer to be reasonable whilst assuming that the male mentioned in the passage is lying in order to trick a woman into bed. It is also strange that you argue that feminists do not get to decide what men are saying when the text in questions contains three “you’re sayings” and one “you’re replying”, none of which are sourced quotes. I think the most telling point is that you can not even be consistent within your own writing. “I will always assume… | /r/MensRights | 22/10/13 02:19 PM |
| 1 | When stumbling across feminist posts like these on Tumblr and Facebook, I wonder how some people can't see how people might get offended or feel silenced. I re-worded it to hopefully emphasize how these statements can come across as silencing.Good arguments are easy to understand, that is what makes them good. This is of course different to being correct. If I make an argument which many people find offensive and then argue they only find it offensive because they do not understand my meaning, it is not a "good" argument. If my agreement is so obtuse that the only way most people can understand it is by having some one explains it, at length, then it is not a good argument. It may be correct, but I have not expressed it well. Reread … | /r/MensRights | 22/10/13 02:03 PM |
| 1 | When stumbling across feminist posts like these on Tumblr and Facebook, I wonder how some people can't see how people might get offended or feel silenced. I re-worded it to hopefully emphasize how these statements can come across as silencing.1) If what you write requires an additional paragraph to explain what it means, you fail at English. 2) Anything can be made to seem reasonable, if you assume the intent of the author was to be reasonable. You are ignoring the obvious implications of what has been written to reinterpret it with the assumption that the author means well and wants what is best for men and women, yet this assumption exists entirely in you own head. 3) Why do feminists get to decide what men mean? If I say, "I am of… | /r/MensRights | 22/10/13 12:04 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter