TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

mrmcdude Archive

View 0 posts and 235 comments by mrmcdude on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

“When 900 years old, you reach… Look as good, you will not.”"
/r/MensRights03/08/24 11:39 AM
90

Reasonably attractive blonde white woman? I wouldn't get your hopes up just yet. Maybe a conviction, maybe, but it will be like 1 year probation or something.
/r/MensRights02/08/24 09:27 AM
1

/r/wowthanksimcured I think you meant to post over here
/r/MensRights16/02/24 05:00 AM
1

Show me a Republican who opposes birth control lol. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Done.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 05:01 AM
0

Republicans believe in such individual rights such as birth control and health care? Where do I sign up? The Democratic party never switched its slavery position after the Civil War, over 150 years ago? Wow this is all new information that I need to digest.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 02:05 AM
1

Blame the law that prevents her from being convicted of rape, not the newspaper. If a news source says she raped someone, and she hasn't been convicted of rape, they are potentially in for a world of hurt in civil court.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 10:47 PM
1

Blame the law that prevents her from being convicted of rape, not the newspaper. If a news source says she raped someone, and she hasn't been convicted of rape, they are in for a world of hurt in civil court. Especially in the UK, where truth is not neccassarilly a defense against libel.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 10:45 PM
1

They're charging her with murder, and they're still in pre-trial. Not really fitting for this subreddit as of yet.
/r/MensRights31/10/23 02:59 AM
18

This has to be bait
/r/MensRights24/09/23 11:26 PM
5

That's what we call a false dilemma. By doing protecting Ukraine, we are protecting all western democracies. I am dubious that letting Russia continuously carve out pieces of their neighbors will lead to peace in our time. Maybe it's lesson that some people have to learn every generation.
/r/MensRights21/09/23 04:29 AM
-1

What does "speaking against the Ukraine war" mean in this case? I think pretty much everyone outside Russia and Belarus is against or at least ambivalent about the war. Is he one of the "useful idiots" against supporting the invaded country in favor of an expansionist and genocidal dictatorship? That's disappointing if true.
/r/MensRights21/09/23 01:45 AM
233

While in hospital, Konrad had his legs amputated, endured multiple infections, a tracheotomy, skin grafts and kidney dialysis, reports The Oakland Press. Imirowicz has continuously denied that she was responsible for the death of her dad Burned and tortured him to death because he was a drunk alcoholic that wouldn't drive her to the salon. Complete lack of remorse. Really sounds like the jury and judge decided that his life was no big loss. Sickening. I'm sure the guy was no picnic to live with,…
/r/MensRights27/07/23 11:30 AM
22

Would you want to leave custody of your grandchild with a child molester?
/r/MensRights20/05/23 12:09 AM
1

Okay, maybe we are in the same boat then. I am happy that he isn't charged with something that he probably didn't do, and I am happy that he is being shit on for being a scumbag.
/r/MensRights23/03/23 03:37 AM
1

Eh, he shouldn't face jail time for being a fucking weirdo. Did he do a crime or not? Apparently not.
/r/MensRights23/03/23 03:28 AM
1

I don't think so. But if they are, their legislatures are certainly not.
/r/MensRights15/02/23 11:08 PM
1

To take the words out of your mouth, I was thinking more along the lines of reinvesting into the lower and middle class, and infrastructure. You know, since that's what you actually brought up, and I was answering.
/r/MensRights15/02/23 10:59 PM
6

No state is controlled by a social democrat government at the moment. It's not surprising that their policies aren't being implemented.
/r/MensRights15/02/23 10:54 PM
4

Means of production refers to owning land, labor, and capital. In a social democracy, these remain in the hands of private citizens, although the capital is taxed at a high rate. Under communism, the government controls the means of production. There has been a lot written about taxation, but to sum it up, without taxation there is no functional government. Without government, in the words of Thomas Hobbes Hereby it is manifest that during the time men live without a common Power to keep them al…
/r/MensRights15/02/23 10:24 PM
7

Nah. Social democrats still work within a capitalistic framework. The power to tax and regulate is basic to being able to run any government, not the means of production. Certainly not in the way that Marx meant it.
/r/MensRights15/02/23 10:08 PM
14

Communists want to abolish the state, money, social class, and private property. Social democrats want to maintain private property and money, but tax the wealthy relatively more to spend money to support a sufficient safety net for its citizens. Also, Social Democrats are much more likely to support democracy rather than an "any means possible" approach. Social democrats want to reform capitalism to make it less harsh to the people on the low end, whereas communists want to destroy the entire s…
/r/MensRights15/02/23 10:03 PM
1

Yeah. You wouldn't try to deny it either given the shit that can happen in the Russian penal system to those they deem uncooperative.
/r/MensRights09/12/22 03:10 AM
1

I mean it was proven that she broke the law Depending on how much you believe Russian authorities when they have everything to gain by lying. I'm kind of 50/50 on whether she broke the law.
/r/MensRights08/12/22 09:15 PM
1

former marine who was court-martialed and given a bad-conduct discharge for larceny. Not that that means he deserves what is happening to him, but he doesn't get to hide behind "former marine" considering how things went down.
/r/MensRights08/12/22 08:15 PM
9

Their logo – printed on an array of merchandise, including baseball caps, wristbands and keyrings – is a hand making the “OK” sign. In b4 banned as hate group. /s I think? Good article though, very worth the read.
/r/MensRights18/12/20 08:34 PM
38

Ah I meant actual malice as a legal term in America, sorry for not being clear. Defined as “knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
/r/MensRights27/10/20 02:41 PM
173

A couple of years ago, The Sun published an article titled ""Gone Potty: How can JK Rowling be 'genuinely happy' casting wife beater Johnny Depp in the new Fantastic Beasts film?"". Depp is suing them for libel for calling him a wife beater, when he has never been convicted of such a crime. Because of the way UK libel laws work, if The Sun can't prove their claim that he is a wife-beater and Depp can show that he lost reputation and money over it, then they will lose. Their media does not enjoy …
/r/MensRights27/10/20 01:55 PM
8

It's not hard to understand the rage. 9 out of 10 times your average Joe hears the phrase, it's on social media and being used as a character attack. In a way, the phrase "toxic masculinity" has become toxic through its usage.
/r/MensRights24/09/20 10:01 PM
9

It seems very similar to when people say "defund the police." It sounds needlessly hostile; you always end up having to explain that it doesn't mean what it sounds like it means. The term itself is misleading, and "toxic" is a loaded word. It's really just a phrase that shouldn't have been used outside of limited academic circles. But unfortunately, it's found its way to social media. When people tell you that they see "toxic masculinity" as an attack on men, you can't "well actually..." it asid…
/r/MensRights24/09/20 09:41 PM
23

and the father threatened the judge who oversaw their case. He was acquitted of that charge, after a 26 minute deliberation by the jury, and rightfully so. After being stuck in prison for over a month because the idiot judge in question set his bail at $500k out of spite. Stop spreading misinformation.
/r/MensRights11/06/20 10:44 PM
15

The Connecticut law for 2nd degree sexual assault says: A person commits sexual assault in the second degree when such person engages in sexual intercourse with another person and: Several conditions are listed underneath, one of which is... The actor is a school employee and the victim is a student enrolled in a school in which the actor works or a school under in the jurisdiction of the local or regional board of education which employs the actor So it's not legal, and if she was convicted it'…
/r/MensRights30/04/20 07:09 AM
16

but what is your source that today is IMD? Where did he say it was? He is pointing out that one event was important enough for a doodle and the other wasn't. Of course, if you can show that they already made a doodle for IMD, just on a different date, then you've got a good point. But if they didn't bother to make one at all, and by your own words the slot was empty on 11/19, what does that tell you?
/r/MensRights06/12/19 12:17 AM
19

/r/AmItheAsshole It's a subreddit where people post a situation and then ask if they are the asshole in the situation, or not. Then they vote on it in the comments. That's why it is upvoted. An upvote there isn't a "like", it's upvoted if it's a good topic for discussion. You can have an upvoted topic where 90% wind up voting that the OP is the asshole, although I don't know how it turned out for this one.
/r/MensRights14/07/19 04:51 PM
12

If your only point is that in some circumstances winter conditions can lead to more people getting sick, sure I guess. If you think that anything in that link applies to someone that's chilly because a room is 70 degrees instead of 76 degrees, that's a reach.
/r/MensRights09/07/19 04:32 AM
15

For about 99 percent of the world's population, beating your wife is NBD. I'm glad that I don't live on the same planet that you do, it sounds horrible.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 03:57 PM
9

Going off of context, he was probably using the definition "to no extent or degree" of never, and not trying to say at no point in history and in no culture could it happen. Deliberately misinterpreting someone's words, if that's what you were doing, isn't an argument, it's an annoyance.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 03:36 PM
74

Of course men are much more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than women. And the crimes that women are more likely to be the victims of are usually committed by an acquaintance, which a parking spot wouldn't help with. But there's no need to let that get in the way of some good pandering and fear-mongering. It's good that people like this guy exist, to challenge dumb shit when there is so much social pressure to let it slide.
/r/MensRights28/01/19 09:28 AM
24

The problem is that the advertising firms and corporate execs often live in such bubbles that they can't even imagine that anyone would take this kind of smug grandstanding as an insult.
/r/MensRights26/01/19 09:04 AM
9

I didn't mean to imply that they were well-intentioned. I just like seeing self-important assholes that like to abuse people run into people better-educated and more powerful than them.
/r/MensRights01/01/19 04:25 AM
21

That's true, but when even the courts get it wrong sometimes, with all the safeguards there are there, it should tell you how well some joke university panel will do. Even if they try to be fair, which isn't a given.
/r/MensRights01/01/19 03:57 AM
242

This is what happens when untrained people playing at being detectives and judges run into actual detectives and judges.
/r/MensRights01/01/19 01:25 AM
-1

Sorry reverend. Surely they will burn in hell for their sins.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 12:21 PM
-1

"Degeneracy" hahahahaha Try to make your points without sounding like a parody of a 17th century puritan.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 12:13 PM
12

You can't just ignore a judge's order because you don't like it. Yeah he can just ask Gawker about how that works out. Well, if they still existed.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 04:22 AM
5

I think the law in Connecticut is that you can be involuntarily committed for up to the maximum sentence of the crime, or until the review board determines that you are no longer a threat to yourself and others. If she really has a brain injury as claimed in the article, it seems unlikely that she would be cured, but I'm not a doctor so what do I know.
/r/MensRights27/10/18 09:23 PM
3

During the investigation, police found that she has been diagnosed as bi-polar and sustained a serious brain injury about six years ago during a car accident, the warrant said. Seems like just a standard investigation. You need to know if the person you are charging is sane or not, after all.
/r/MensRights27/10/18 09:20 PM
2

The law in Louisiana is that 1st degree murder is only for specific things. Murdering while in the act of committing certain other felonies, killing a cop/fireman in the line of duty, killing multiple people, getting paid for the killing, killing someone who has a restraining order already on you from violence, killing a witness, and a few other circumstances. I would guess none of those aggravating circumstances applied in that case and so that's why they are going with 2nd degree.
/r/MensRights11/09/18 06:37 PM
29

Danny Shaha (below), then-senior director of the Office of Student Conduct, investigated allegations by “Jane Roe” under a Title IX policy that was not in effect in August 2014, when the disputed sexual incident took place. Good grief. Not only did they not allow him to confront his accuser, they also tried him under rules not in effect when his "crime" was committed. I hope the judge buries them. Also, before the inevitable "blah blah they're not the government so rules don't matter" crowd chim…
/r/MensRights10/09/18 02:13 PM
5

I am responding to you completely changing the premise of an argument which would completely change the point of the argument. Which you are doing again. That's a bad habit, you should work on that.
/r/MensRights09/09/18 04:40 AM
2

Yeah and what if he single-handedly committed the Holocaust? Your comment is bad and you should feel bad.
/r/MensRights09/09/18 03:19 AM
39

c'mon, don't put the 15 year old on trial here for his lack of taste.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 02:28 AM
212

It's sad, but true. Ugly women get punished basically the same as men, attractive women are treated as leniently as possible.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 02:27 AM
63

So for this, for which she pleaded no-contest: Extortion, Florida: Second degree felony Up to 15 years in prison Up to 15 years of probation. Up to $10,000 fine She got 7 years of probation and still gets to collect alimony. That is amazing.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 06:17 AM
14

Female Hypoagency/ Male Hyperagency is a real thing. People tend to think that women are a product of their circumstances, for better or worse. And people also think that men are a product of their own choices and deserve whatever they got, for better or worse. Successful women don't get enough credit, and unsuccessful men get shit on. Successful men are treated fairly, and unsuccessful women are treated with charity. It works both ways.
/r/MensRights30/08/18 01:30 PM
11

It should be noted that this is the U.K. Supreme Court, as many people here will assume by default that it happened in America.
/r/MensRights31/07/18 02:04 AM
45

Well, you saw the picture of her crying in court. What was the judge supposed to do? Hold her responsible?
/r/MensRights17/07/18 06:40 PM
5

Age of consent for sex is set by individual state, in this case 16. Consent for being in pornigraphic pics/films is set by federal law at 18. Thus, you run into ridiculous situations where having sex with someone is completely legal but a nude pic is a federal crime.
/r/MensRights06/07/18 12:42 PM
3

I know what I said was a bit flippant, but it was to make a point. Men who commit crimes are rarely well-adjusted people with a good upbringing either. They still go to prison. It's an odd point for a headline. You don't see a lot of "Vulnerable Men are Routinely Prosecuted - And Imprisoned - For Robbery and Assault Claims" in headlines.
/r/MensRights30/06/18 04:42 PM
34

Vulnerable Women Are Routinely Prosecuted – And Imprisoned – For False Rape Claims In The UK How are they defining "vulnerable women" here? Women who have lied about being raped, and are therefore vulnerable to being prosecuted for lying to the police?
/r/MensRights30/06/18 03:29 AM
38

Read an article about this on BBC PC Ben McNamara, of West Yorkshire Police, told the court he was the first officer to arrive at the house at about 12:30 and saw Jordan's body in the living room. "It's the worst I've seen in 10 years as a police officer, the state he was in was shocking - he was extremely thin, emaciated." When asked what was the first thing Dawn Cranston, 45, had said to him, the police officer replied: "How much does a funeral cost". "I was surprised by everyone's lack of emo…
/r/MensRights09/06/18 06:44 PM
5

Do you drink/use drugs to excess? Yes = receive treatment for that specific thing and forfeit any pain medication or potentially addictive drug that could drastically improve your quality of life in perpetuity No = status quo but no help Hell of a system we have set up
/r/MensRights08/06/18 10:58 PM
1

A teacher can't throw you in jail or anything true. When you are talking about teachers, they are acting "in loco parentis" (in place of parent). That's why it is considered such an abuse of authority It's just too easy for them to influence 16 year-olds in their school.
/r/MensRights28/04/18 11:03 PM
4

She's not a pedophile. She did abuse her position of trust and authority to have sex with a minor. No, she shouldn't get a life sentence, she shouldn't get probation either. But she is young and attractive, so we all know what will probably happen.
/r/MensRights28/04/18 09:39 PM
2

I don't agree with you in general, but I understand where you're coming from. The only thing I really object to is calling somebody a victim before it is established whether or not a crime happened. Once it is proven then you can say it.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:38 AM
1

You should always believe victims of rape. 100% true The problem is assuming that people just don't give a shit about rape. What's really happening is that people are trying to sort out whether she is a victim or not before blindly believing her. Dan Arel was using that quote to say that you should assume guilt on all rape accusations. When I said "your man" I was talking about Dan Arel btw, not the girl who blew him up.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:10 AM
1

What I am saying is calling an accuser a rape victim is assuming guilt. We shouldn't assume they are lying or telling the truth, but investigate and see if we can find out what happened. But until it is a proven that they were raped, don't call them rape victims. If you say "believe rape victims" as a blanket statement, the unintended interpretation is "anybody accused of rape is guilty"
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:03 AM
3

Your man got owned, you really wanna fight the point?
/r/MensRights12/03/18 03:12 AM
1

if you need help, please feel free to ask. I will try to guess... If you assume that every rape accuser is a rape victim, then of course you should believe every one of them. But you are presupposing that every accuser is a victim.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 03:07 AM
1

rape victims To beg the question is to assume the truth of the conclusion of an argument in the premises in order for the conclusion to follow.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 01:07 PM
5

I don't think you know what trolling is. What she did was to show the flaw in his way of thinking (i.e. there are people accused of crimes who didn't actually commit the crime, so believing someone's accusation with no proof is a bad idea), and she did so very efficiently.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 01:04 PM
17

"the real victims" ™
/r/MensRights22/01/18 12:16 AM
5

You're half right. Defamation is indeed not a freedom. But "hate speech" is an arbitrary term that has no place in a free society.
/r/MensRights22/01/18 12:15 AM
10

No doubt it would be labeled misogynistic without a hint of irony.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 02:45 PM
12

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/thot http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/begone-thot
/r/MensRights02/01/18 07:34 PM
1

If he would only stick to topics he understands he is great =/ But he is much too willing to buy into bullshit if it sounds right
/r/MensRights17/12/17 09:48 PM
4

John Oliver has done so many good bits about a lot of important things (see his piece on asset forfeiture for starters). This is fucking embarrassing.
/r/MensRights17/12/17 06:28 AM
5

Yeah that is the level of crime that community service/probation is appropriate. Not for stabbing a mentally ill guy in the arm and forcing him to drink toilet water for your amusement. I’m not sure if I did that you’d be coming out any better. I mean, at what point does the victim get to have justice? This isn't only about the accused and what's best for her. Oh well, enough, the whole thing is too damned depressing.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 02:46 AM
38

Having your income garnished to pay off your rapist... way to go court system
/r/MensRights09/12/17 02:32 PM
12

This is why nobody takes MRAs seriously anymore. sure, that's why.
/r/MensRights09/12/17 02:29 PM
18

He said what he said because it’s the truth. The American department of corrections is a for profit inhuman organisation with no interest in rehabilitation. That's true, and it sucks for victimless crimes like drug possession. But when there is a real victim there has to be real punishment, and this isn't it.
/r/MensRights09/12/17 02:27 PM
15

Calling the incident “horrific,” so far so good Cook County Circuit Judge William Hooks banned Covington from social media over the four years, prohibited her from contact with two of her co-defendants and ordered her to do 200 hours of community service. wtf? Did you convict her of jaywalking? They beat up and stabbed a mentally ill man, while taunting him about how they were going to kill him... and she's not going to jail even though nobody is disputing that she did it... Whoever this Judge W…
/r/MensRights09/12/17 02:20 PM
27

His father's eulogy to him is worth reading. (His mother didn't attend the funeral.) Mental illness has a large genetic component. His mother manifests the symptoms in her own way, his manifested as untreatable long term depression. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/cosmo-landesmans-eulogy-for-his-son-farewell-my-dear-jack-10403041.html
/r/MensRights02/12/17 11:23 AM
4

I don't have much of a problem with our penalties for violent crimes. The draconian penalties for non-violent offenders is what needs to change if we want to break this cycle.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 09:55 PM
6

The problems that welfare cause with illegitimate homes is dwarfed by what the justice system does. Look there if you want to make a real difference.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 07:23 PM
1

40 year old Jenny mccarthy and 18 year old Justin Bieber a few years back. She's not actually ugly though, that is a bad picture. But she is crazy, and was one of the biggest anti-vax Advocates.
/r/MensRights05/11/17 01:21 AM
6

Of course it was Jenny McCarthy' s crazy ass. This happened in 2012, which some googling says makes her 40 and him 18.
/r/MensRights04/11/17 02:37 PM
340

Internalized misogyny
/r/MensRights03/11/17 11:05 PM
13

I realize you are trolling, but for anyone else that reads this, Serena Williams is significantly wealthier and more famous than Alexis. Google says $9 million versus $150 million. So if she married him for his money, that would be ridiculous.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 06:08 PM
458

A publication ban protects the identity of the woman in the case. Even after a civil court found her responsible for lying, they still protect her.
/r/MensRights02/10/17 06:23 PM
7

This happened in Louisiana, which has a somewhat different legal code thanks to its French background, so it looks like yes he could sue: The defamation statutes enacted by Louisiana give plaintiffs the latitude to file a defamation per se complaint against a defendant. Defamation per se is any statement that is, by itself, defamatory. Statements falsely accusing a plaintiff of sexual immorality, false accusations of criminal behavior, or false statements about having a contagious disease, such …
/r/MensRights16/09/17 01:15 AM
14

This is why certain feminist groups try everything that they can to keep their nonsense out of real courts. You have to actually follow the rules instead of just making shit up as you go.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 07:54 PM
1

Thanks, seems like a legit newspaper. Reading the interview (through Google translate) is so weird. The interview goes like: reasonable statement, reasonable statement, "And as a result of the cars spreading out in the city hall, men undermine women from the city hall, according to the Environment Minister. Shrinking the space for cars is an issue of gender equality. "The car is largely driven by men. By giving the car a lot of space, we also give men space - at the expense of women, says Karoli…
/r/MensRights10/07/17 03:26 PM
22

Spent some time googling, and I can't find a legit source for this story anywhere. Only Breitbart and infowars cited as original sources, and then bounced around and amplified by right wing blogs. Has anyone else had better luck finding a legit source for this?
/r/MensRights10/07/17 04:10 AM
4

Well, she is being charged for the 5 murders so there isn't an issue so far. The psychologist trying to excuse it is pretty disgusting, of course. Definitely worth keeping an eye on.
/r/MensRights08/07/17 03:54 PM
64

And I would imagine a pretty damn high percentage of male pedos were abused as children as well. Strange that it never shows up in those articles. Let alone in the first sentence.
/r/MensRights05/07/17 03:34 PM
1

Because one activity is a lot more common than the other.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 11:43 AM
4

The colloquial use and the legal uses are different. A lot of states had sodomy laws until they were declared unconstitutional and unenforceable. But there are still references to it in other laws, like in this case Sodomy 3rd degree. Looks to me like it would be this part: Being a person in a position of authority or position of special trust, as defined in KRS 532.045, he or she engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a minor less than eighteen (18) years old with whom he or she comes into …
/r/MensRights25/06/17 10:58 PM
141

Just as a clarification for anyone confused, in Kentucky sodomy includes oral sex. It's defined as "deviant sexual intercourse"
/r/MensRights25/06/17 03:20 PM
1

Let's snipe anyone the feds ever accuse of a horrible crime, what could possibly go wrong?
/r/MensRights22/06/17 12:44 AM
2

Usually fraud invalidates contracts like that though. In this case, it would put the government on the hook for $$$ to care for the child when they could stick it on a random man, so it doesn't.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 12:41 AM
1

What argument am I making? Please do tell. You seem to be making the argument that even you are confused by your own argument to the extent that you need someone else to explain it to you.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 05:01 AM
1

I can't have this argument anymore man. You are too far behind for me to catch you up in a simple internet essay. But yeah, children require feedback as they age for their brains to develop properly... you seem to think this is some mystery you have discovered. It's pretty well-worn ground really.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 04:23 AM
0

Let's just end this argument, it's not going to go anywhere. I think your argument is ridiculous, too ridiculous to merit an effort-post. You are so transparently and obviously wrong that this is just not worth the time. This is like trying to explain that fire is hot to somebody who has never seen it. If you really believe what you are saying, take some classes, read some books. If you are trolling, you are really good and I salute you.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 03:31 AM
1

It seems to me that your argument "adults and children are just different" relies on passive acceptance of claims which rely on presupposed premises. Backed by both common sense, and a basic understanding of childhood development. Look, you can believe whatever weird BS you want, just realize you would be laughed out of any childhood development class, childhood education class, or psychiatry department. I am gonna listen to the science on this one, and not some crackpot on reddit.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 02:13 AM
-1

Well, sometimes Reddit really surprises me. When I first made my comment I really didn't expect to end up arguing with somebody that doesn't understand that children and adults are different. And yet here we are.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 01:32 AM
-5

What makes you think children are special? Because children, by definition, are immature. We do not hold them fully responsible for their actions because we understand that children lack the full understanding of what they are doing. 14 year olds are old enough to be held responsible to an extent, but not as much as an adult. Everyone does dumb shit without realizing the impact, else they would not do it. When you are an adult you expected to understand how your actions can have an effect on oth…
/r/MensRights19/05/17 01:09 AM
5

This 14 year old is accusing me of rape, might as well rape her? dude...
/r/MensRights18/05/17 10:50 PM
-7

In general I would agree with you, but what do you do when it is a child? Children do dumb shit sometimes without realizing the impact their actions could have. I think you have to find a middle ground in that situation and find a consequence that has teeth, but I don't think jailing a 14 year old for 20 years is an answer.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 09:22 PM
2

I would say the best way to get rid of bad, selectively enforced rules is to apply them to everybody.So long as a rule can specifically target an unpopular group, nobody will care eg. if you want to be rid of the draft, make women sign up for it. If you want to get rid of stupid censorship rules, start censoring people with influence.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 01:40 PM
2

Yeah, now it is accurate.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 01:37 PM
1

unfortunately fighting fire with fire is the only argument the censorship brigade understands. Make them realise that their rules are going to be turned around and used against them, not just people that they don't like.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:11 AM
1

It's dumb, but using it against the pro - censorship crowd is the only argument that they can understand. That once established these rules will be applied to them too.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:08 AM
3

AT&T is a private company, but I would bet if they made a program to cut off telephone service to people who said certain phrases you wouldn't be making this argument.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:06 AM
1

I see this argument on Reddit so often that it's pretty much a meme now. And it's completely inaccurate. From Wikipedia: Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information that may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:02 AM
1

I would hope that them having the right to do it isn't enough to convince you that it puts them above criticism. You have the right to rip a fart in a crowded elevator, but if you do it you're still an asshole.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 09:57 AM
1

Not this again. According to Google Freedom of Speech: the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint. It is perfectly acceptable to use the term when talking about a social media site censoring material, so long as nobody is claiming they are acting illegally or violating the first amendment somehow.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 09:54 AM
8

An 'extraordinary' Oxford University student who stabbed her Tinder lover with a bread-knife could be spared jail after a judge said a custodial sentence would damage her future career as a heart surgeon. Prison time does generally hurt inmates' future job prospects. But when it is a young, attractive, white woman, suddenly it overrides every other concern including justice for the victim. Well, we wouldn't want a future surgeon of all people to learn that her actions have consequences. Hopefull…
/r/MensRights16/05/17 05:57 PM
2

Listen and believe if it is a friend or family member coming to you for help. If you are a police officer, a judge, a jury member, or even just a random person not involved, wait for all the facts and assume nothing.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 04:24 AM
4

Interesting, didn't know that. I do still think there is value in boy-only and girl-only spaces, especially during tween and early teen years,
/r/MensRights12/04/17 02:14 AM
28

Girl scouts are already a thing. A lot of boys are going to learn better and be more comfortable in a single-sex environment, where they are not worried about showing off for or offending the girls. There was no reason to change it except to inject adults' socio-political nonsense in to it.
/r/MensRights11/04/17 11:39 PM
0

Okay, so you're not the brightest guy around. Any other uninformed comments you would like to make?
/r/MensRights08/04/17 08:48 PM
3

"You've got no right to do that to any woman. I am the one with the power now, buddy." I wonder if she is even aware of what she did to Timothy Cole, and how badly she violated him with her "power" She seems totally oblivious and self-centered, hopefully this is not the full story.
/r/MensRights08/04/17 07:17 PM
11

Okay, but if we are going to start making dads prove parenthood to take their daughter with them on trips, do we need to start using id cards for kids to carry around now or what? Does dad need to carry a birth certificate with him? And why should men be presumed to be deviants at all? It isn't the execution, it's the poisonous assumption of society that any man with a kid that doesn't have female supervision is a predator.
/r/MensRights08/04/17 03:27 PM
22

The hotel clerk told him he couldn't stay unless he could prove he wasn't a pedo by letting him dig through his social media accounts. He's lucky he didn't get his ass kicked, because he surely deserved it. Really dude put yourself in this guy's shoes, he is a single dad travelling with his daughter, and somebody basically accuses him of taking her up to a room to fuck her. I am impressed reacted the way he did.
/r/MensRights08/04/17 01:24 PM
1

The manager said it was "company policy" for Mr Darwell to go on Facebook and show the messages he had sent to his daughter in the past. Who in the fuck does this jackass think he is? He's lucky the dad had the restraint to not break his jaw.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 12:36 PM
2

Quote from NASA's climate website on the matter The 10 warmest years in the 136-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the exception of 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record. (Source: NASA/GISS). This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Are they lying too? If so, why? You should instead look at the people trying to protect their money, they have the motive.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 10:16 PM
3

What do you think it's more likely? A: global warming is a hoax, and the vast majority of scientists who have studied the subject are in on the conspiracy, for apparently no other reason than to screw with us B: global warming is real, and people who stand to lose profits if environmentalist policies are put in place spend boatloads of money to convince rubes that it's a conspiracy
/r/MensRights31/03/17 12:28 PM
5

3 years prison, 5 years probation, 10 years sex offender registry. For an attractive blonde woman, it's amazing she got that much.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 04:44 PM
151

In law enforcement it's the Duluth model. In university it is title 9. In classrooms it is patriarchy. All 3 words mean "It's the man's fault, no exceptions"
/r/MensRights27/02/17 12:48 AM
22

Holy hell: The sentence Curcillo imposed was set under a plea deal Garner reached with prosecutors in June 2015. When Garner didn't appear for her August 2015 sentencing hearing a warrant was issued for her arrest, Chief Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Gettle said. Gettle said Tuesday that when she was apprehended in late 2016, Garner explained her absence by claiming she had gotten lost in the woods. She hid as a fugitive for a year and a half after her conviction, was caught hiding in the wo…
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 03:22 AM
25

Good to see actual courts enforcing some basic rules of fairness on to the kangaroo court system.
/r/MensRights16/02/17 10:58 PM
8

Why can't they just let them in and "accidentally" botch the haircut? I know I wouldn't want someone to cut my hair that I had to force.
/r/MensRights12/02/17 10:39 PM
3

Nah I can't really help you there. Was just making a joke. I hope things work out for you guys.
/r/MensRights12/02/17 05:42 PM
139

Women outnumber men in university by a significant margin in the Anglosphere, but many feminists still say they are a minority that needs special scholarships. I wish more of them were math majors.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 11:33 PM
16

Wow, this is basically forcing the ex-husband to subsidize her gambling habit. She lost big, and for some reason he has to reimburse her.
/r/PussyPass08/02/17 03:33 AM
4

At the point where it becomes an accusation against the individual, at that point it would stop being anonymous in that case, would it not?
/r/MensRights01/02/17 10:35 PM
5

And what about when a kid accuses a family member? What about it?
/r/MensRights01/02/17 09:48 PM
1

Murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide are different charges not different sentences. By analogy, you're arguing that we should convict for a homicide and then sort out how bad it was in sentencing. Not what I meant. I was referring to the reason why their penalties are different, and why the penalty for what this woman did should be higher. It may not be possible under current law, but I would hope it could be fixed. As for how it needs to be worded specifically, you need somebody with legal …
/r/MensRights01/02/17 09:15 PM
13

No. I think police will show up to question your family and coworkers though, and create a cloud of suspicion over you that might not ever go away. When somebody is accountable if the story turns out to be made up, it's less likely to be abused to harass someone.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 09:05 PM
1

Consider damages and intent when coming up with the punishments, not in the courtroom. It's why murder > manslaughter> negligent homicide for example. Something like this where you are trying to ruin somebody's life and it was clearly your intent to do so warrants a greater punishment than probation and community service.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 09:00 PM
1

That's why you factor intent. Somebody in a traffic accident did not intend to hurt anybody.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 08:40 PM
14

Of course. But with full anonymity there is no way for the accused to defend himself, and no way to evaluate the credibility of the complaint.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 08:06 PM
11

Ok, maybe saying you look dumb isn't namecalling, open to interpretation. To answer your question as best as I can, providing anonymous counseling is a tremendously valuable service. Anonymous accusations of individuals however, is a good way to get witch hunts or people settling scores.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 07:35 PM
25

lol
/r/MensRights01/02/17 07:13 PM
12

11 weeks in jail, not months. Suspended for 2 years, after which she will not have to serve any time at all unless she gets in to trouble again during that time. So really a fine, community service, and probation.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 07:11 PM
7

Nah, it's basically how much time you will have to serve if you violate your probation.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 07:09 PM
15

11 weeks, not months. None of which she actually has to serve unless she gets in trouble again.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 07:01 PM
44

Yeah, I don't think a fine and community service and 11 weeks she doesn't have to actually serve is enough. You keep showing those strawmen who's boss though
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:59 PM
24

Paragraph 1: accusation of ignorance Paragraph 2: namecalling Well chief you made a good case, how do I even dispute it?
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:45 PM
4

I didn't say it was as bad as child rape though. I said considering the possible consequences her punishment is not enough to be just. She shouldn't be given a life sentence any more than she should be given a fine and community service.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:42 PM
8

Yeah in general your punishment should be proportionate to the damage you could cause and your intent. In this case, her intent was 100% malicious. The damages could have been this guy getting arrested, but more likely losing his job, not being allowed around children (possibly his own if he has any), and losing his reputation. The lady didn't even have anything to gain by this, it was 100% spite.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:29 PM
10

Yeah, she basically got a fine and community service. Now think about what would have happened to her victim had she succeeded? Does it seem proportionate?
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:20 PM
16

They were lucky they caught the woman in this case. Also, from the article: Last week Boll, of Woodstock Road, Forest Gate, East London admitted malicious communication and was sentenced to 11 weeks prison suspended for two years. So she got 11 weeks, not 2 years. And since the sentence is suspended if she behaves for the next 2 years (the length of the suspended part of the sentence) she will not serve a day.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:12 PM
13

I heard /u/greengrasser11 is a pedo so I'm going to anonymously report you. Enjoy the police showing up at your workplace, interviewing your coworkers, and interviewing your family, And what happens if you happen to have children in your house? You probably won't see them until the investigation is over.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 05:34 PM
79

The right to face your accuser is there for a reason. It is exceedingly hard to defend yourself if you don't know who is accusing you. Anonymous accusations are loaded with the potential for abuse. Someone can call your anonymous line, and now there are police showing up at your workplace and your house asking questions about your behavior around kids. And God forbid you have children of your own, I can't imagine they would let you around them if you are under investigation. So now your coworker…
/r/MensRights01/02/17 05:31 PM
219

The sentence is barely even a slap on the wrist given the severity of her crime. edit: your post seems to have confused a lot of people. The woman's sentence is 11 weeks not 11 months. It is suspended for 2 years, and if she doesn't get in to trouble in that span she will very likely serve no time
/r/MensRights01/02/17 03:51 PM
780

I found out that an anonymous call had been made to Childline naming me as a paedophile, in that I had groped the breast of a student. Hmm... let's set up a system where you can accuse somebody of a serious crime completely anonymously. What could go wrong?
/r/MensRights01/02/17 03:49 PM
92

So he isn't allowed to fairly defend himself because he can't compel her to testify or give over possible exculpatory evidence. It's almost like forcing amateurs with no legal experience or legal authority (outside of the school) to make rulings on sexual assault is a horrifically bad idea.
/r/PussyPass01/02/17 12:51 AM
17

That's the thing, he should have the option. Putting money into a trust fund or college fund for the kid would be a great thing to do. Visitation or shared custody would be great. But under no circumstance should the victim be forced to pay money directly to the person who defrauded him.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 06:30 PM
13

Oh you were serious? Sorry, I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm sorry for whatever has happened in your life to make you behave like this. Last reply to you, because whether you are trolling or just deranged, I think you get off on the attention.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 08:55 AM
42

If you are going to troll, you need to make your statements coherent enough to bait people into arguing with you. If you are clearly just batshit crazy from the get-go, people will be more inclined to laugh and then ignore you.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 08:38 AM
4

Calling that bullying stretches the term beyond meaning. It was an unfunny joke; given that she works for SNL I can't think of anything more appropriate.
/r/PussyPass22/01/17 05:25 PM
107

Well, the college did eventually apologize. As opposed to the gawker method of openly defying a court order and going out of their way to be gigantic assholes during their trial. It turns out pissing off the judge and making the jury hate you is not a winning strategy.
/r/MensRights16/01/17 05:30 PM
9

He came out and supported his team in the boycott, then when the players backed down it left him hung out to dry. Now the administration gets to settle the score with him. It just goes to show that when you threaten a strike, you better be ready to back it up or everyone involved is at risk.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 09:02 AM
1

Some people are genuinely clueless. But when it comes to hyper-charged social issues, if it smells like bait it usually is.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 03:21 PM
1

It's not that using a throwaway automatically means he is lying. It's just that when somebody anonymously writes something like "I have a right to privacy in public" you have to suspect trolling.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 01:14 AM
4

I told him that he needed to stop recording me in public like this because I have a right to privacy in public Posted by a throwaway account... odds that this actually happened and isn't just a caricature of what they imagine an MRA to be?
/r/MensRights03/01/17 01:05 AM
3

Please be satire, please be satire..... fuck
/r/MensRights20/12/16 04:56 PM
8

The team has already backed down. link
/r/MensRights17/12/16 05:52 PM
4

You could make anonymity a right that the defendant could waive. It protects him from the shame of the accusation before conviction, and if he feels he is being "disappeared" he could waive his right and go to the media.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 12:14 AM
17

And what about the greater than 99.99% of men in college who aren't on a football scholarship? Screw those guys too right?
/r/PussyPass02/09/16 03:49 PM
187

If only we had some kind of system for determining guilt or innocence of crimes. Maybe with some kind of neutral arbiter with the power to compel witnesses and subpoena relevant evidence. Maybe some kind of official force to investigate crimes and enforce laws. Oh well, until such a thing exists I guess we need to rely on universities to do it for us.
/r/PussyPass02/09/16 02:07 PM
14

Percentages and dumb people, never a good mix
/r/MensRights18/07/16 05:02 PM
18

12 weeks is fine for wasting police time, but justice for the victim should take in to account the danger she deliberately put him in. Not saying that the justice system got it wrong in this case, just that the laws are bad. Lying about somebody stealing $50 from you and lying about somebody sexually assaulting you should not carry the same flat penalty.
/r/PussyPass24/05/16 12:42 PM
1

The judge made the right ruling, and for once did not even have the silliest looking hair in the courtroom. Over all a good day for him.
/r/MensRights10/05/16 05:26 AM
-3

This is good advise, just want to add in most states his dad would not be able to immediately throw him out of the house (legally). He would need to get an eviction notice and wait something like thirty days. So if he can find a place to live witHin a few weeks it could be worth consideration.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 03:48 PM
48

It's so weird that being an attractive woman, for all intents and purposes, counts as a mitigating factor for sentencing in statutory rape cases. I mean this lady was twice his age and in an authority position over him.... and nothing.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 05:16 PM
4

Women do not give a shit about men, most women aren't bright enough to anticipate the consequences of their actions, and few women will ever admit they deserve consequences for their actions. /r/theredpill pls go That shit is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 06:14 PM
2

I did some googling and it looks like the relevant laws in Missouri are these: 566.034 - Statutory rape in the second degree: sexual intercourse between a person 21 or older with a victim less than 17 years old (i.e. 14, 15, or 16 year olds) - See more at: http://statelaws.findlaw.com/missouri-law/missouri-rape-and-sexual-assault-laws.html#sthash.l5eHd1sZ.dpuf 566.064 - Statutory sodomy in the second degree: "deviate sexual intercourse" with a person less than 17 (i.e. 14, 15, or 16 year olds) w…
/r/MensRights22/09/15 03:25 PM
7

"My opinion will definitely be downvoted but here we go." Oh lord here we go. <world's smallest violin> "A baby cannot decide for himself, so why not let the parents decide?" Because performing irreversible cosmetic surgery on a newborn is a bad idea. "You can't tell me a parent would knowingly do something to their newborn without his best interest at heart." You can't imagine social/cultural/religious pressure cornering people into doing something? You lack imagination. "I'm living in ignorant…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 02:21 AM
18

"I am now moving on," she wrote in an op-ed on the tech site Re/Code. "My experience shows how difficult it is to address discrimination through the court system." Yeah it is rough when you have to back up your claim with evidence.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 09:13 AM
-4

I sort of see what you are saying, but Fox News has a very long track record so it is not exactly like judging off of a few bad articles.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 04:17 PM
22

Consider while watching this that South Africa has one of the highest hiv rates in the world. For fucks sake, just wrong.
/r/MensRights06/06/15 05:35 PM
4

And that wasn't the only shitty top level answer in the harmful myth replies. The whole thing is basically Strawman: The Comment Section
/r/MensRights02/06/15 12:21 PM
21

This phenomenon in action once again.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 12:28 PM
15

According to the article, the couple is going through a divorce and she had just gone to the cops to report him for having weed. Seems like she was really trying to get him thrown in jail. Whether that is because he is violent or because she is just mad at him, who knows? So far the evidence against him is weed that she supposedly found in his toolbox, and a knifed watermelon that she supposedly found in their house. I don't know how this is enough evidence to arrest someone, but such is the sta…
/r/MensRights17/07/14 12:55 PM
0

They were falsely accused, they spent years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. I still don't see where anyone accused the victim of lying in this case.
/r/MensRights21/06/14 01:47 PM
1

Nowhere in either the article or headline does it say that the woman falsely accused anyone.
/r/MensRights21/06/14 11:41 AM
2

What do they think is going to happen? Do they think that the child is going to be molested in front of dozens of witnesses, or do they think that perhaps the man will grab the kids and parachute out of the plane mid-flight?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 04:56 PM
1

The guy is right. However, the random dig at "greens," as he calls them, was distracting and silly.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 01:26 PM
14

It's a civil trial. The point isn't specifically to punish the girls, but to compensate the teacher for the financial damages he suffered at their hands. The jury determined how much damage he suffered, and then the money comes from the people who damaged him.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 12:07 AM
4

Clay Travis used to be a decent writer a few years back, before he figured out that being a professional troll pays better and gets a bigger audience.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 05:30 PM
6

Regardless of how you feel about statutory rape, don't forget that she was also in a position of authority over him as a teacher.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:27 PM
9

Missing 1 dinner of his own volition isn't going to hurt the kid at all in the long run, and will teach a valuable lesson.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 07:57 PM
64

Getting rid of debtor's prisons was a great accomplishment in western society, sucks that we decided to bring them back.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 12:31 PM
1

The goal of satire is not necessarily to convince your most adamant opponents, but to highlight the dumbest parts of their arguments to the larger audience. It doesn't matter what a hardcore feminist would make of it, just that an average person would laugh at it and see the connection.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:55 PM
1

Oh for sure. I didn't mean the word mansplaining is never used, just that this new term was only for showing how silly it is. Not sinking to their level, just making a joke out of their BS terminology.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:46 PM
1

I think the purpose of this was to satirize the tendency of hardcore feminist groups to invent words for imagined problems, not to use it seriously.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:25 PM
1

You "disagree" with a dictionary definition of a word, reassign it the meaning you thing it should have, and then argue that the guy used it wrong. Good job.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 03:33 AM
2

You said "You cannot, by definition, censor a private forum." I provided a definition that proved otherwise. I don't know what else you want here. I am not saying that 1st amendment rights apply on private sites, nor am I saying that all censorship is bad.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 03:27 AM
2

His statement is still accurate according to the dictionary definition I provided. Just because you can find a different definition that includes a government body being involved doesn't make what he said wrong, it just means that you are intentionally misinterpreting him.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 03:08 AM
1

While you are right that facebook is a private forum, you are wrong that it can't "by definition" be censored. []http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor Full Definition of CENSOR : to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>
/r/MensRights11/10/13 02:27 AM
36

Don't you think it would be better to just not treat men so disproportionately harsh in the first place?> Of course, it's just not possible to do in the current political climate. As long as the victims of it are seen as creepy men nobody will care. Enforcing the law against everyone equally is the only way to rally support for changing it.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 02:51 PM
60

The reason we want equal sentencing for equal crimes here is not because we necessarily agree with the sentence itself. The idea is that if the laws are applied equally regardless of gender, then the laws and the sentences might be considered more carefully because a woman getting a ridiculous sentence garners a lot more sympathy and attention.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 02:29 PM
1

Sounds like a good law. The article was about America though, and we unfortunately have no such law.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 02:21 PM
3

Men already do pay more, especially men under 25.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 11:43 AM
0

TL;DR - "grow up" "be a man" "insert phrase intended to dismiss any problem suffered by a man instead of a woman here"
/r/MensRights23/08/13 03:03 PM
18

I, too believe that sperm and wombs are logically equivalent. The fuck? Upscrotes for all! Oh, an SRS troll, good job. Your stupidity briefly made my head hurt, consider your mission accomplished.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:20 PM
7

Overall a nice article. One thing I am confused about though. He says that less than 15% of teachers are black, but I looked at the US census website and the American black population is 13%, so how is that an unexpected or unfair thing? Am I just reading it wrong?
/r/MensRights20/07/13 03:09 AM
39

Fuck this shit I'm eating out. Pick up the check - SEXIST Let her pay for herself - ASSHOLE
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:17 PM
0

Unfortunately having unfair laws apply to everyone, rich and poor, black and white, male and female, is the quickest way to get them changed. Sucks for this woman though, and I hope her sentence gets commuted to something more reasonable after the law is fixed.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:32 AM
2

I am pretty sure that's not what I, or anybody else, said. The only person that mentioned rape was the guy I replied to, and he was engaging in ridiculous hyperbole. I only said that yelling obscenities at strangers was likely to start fights. Stop making strawman arguments.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:06 PM
1

Common sense is to just give a simple "sorry man I don't smoke" and keep walking. Unless they keep following or trying to stop you, then everything is good.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:52 PM
1

Since you seem to be having a bit of trouble, maybe I can help you. Asking for a cigarette is a normal, nonthreatening interaction. Yelling obsceneties at strangers for no reason is not, and it is likely to start a fight. Simple as that, hope I have helped.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:49 PM
2

A woman that he at some point presumably loved not only intentionally tortured and maimed him, but went out of her way to make sure he could never be made whole again. I think that qualifies as being just as life-ruining as being raped, and probably worse.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:56 PM
5

It's seriously as though some feminists can't tell the difference between fucking a passed-out drunk girl and going home from the bar with a girl after a couple beers.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:08 PM
148

I am not sure of the law in New Zealand, but if it is like most western countries then the rapist can begin collecting child support from the victim as soon as he turns 18.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:40 AM
7

The cultural attitude in America that men are automatically perverts and possibly rapists until proven otherwise is one of the things that needs to be fixed. This girl assumed that because he has his dog as a profile pic, he was trying to attract young girls with a cute picture. If you need any further help understanding this, feel free to ask.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 10:38 PM
4

I wonder if a man convicted of statutory rape would have such an easy time regaining custody of a child. And would the government be so quick to extort money from the rape victim if it was a woman?
/r/MensRights20/06/13 02:17 PM
1

It doesn't presume ineptitude, it addresses reality. That reality is that somebody with a years-long gap in their employment history, or who has worked only part-time to care for children, will have much lower job prospects than somebody who worked the whole time. The person will need a period of time to work their way back up the job ladder to have a decent paying job.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 08:14 PM
1

If neither party sacrifices career options, and child care is done mutually or with day care, than nobody needs alimony. And it doesn't take a few years to get back into the workforce unless you're really picky. > I am not sure you have kept up with economic news in the US, but getting a decent job is not easy for someone who has been out of the workforce for a long time. Of course, a woman in that situation could probably go flip burgers or something, but would barely make a profit on it unless…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 08:11 PM
5

Permanent and excessive alimony is pretty much what you describe. But within reason it is not about anyone being inept, just that if somebody is out of the job market for a long time, presumably to raise the couple's children, then it will be harder to find a decent job.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 03:54 AM
6

Externally-imposed alimony and child support are never justified.> Hypothetical situation, a man and a woman are married with 3 kids and faithful to each other. One day, the man decides to hell with his wife and fucks a bunch of women and bails on his wife. She suddenly has no income but is still taking care of their children and stuck with bills she suddenly can't afford? Since you bolded "never", can you argue that child support wouldn't be justified even in this situation? (not that I am sayi…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:06 AM
-6

Somebody's gotta take care of the kids, and the fact is when that person tries to get back in to the job market after a several year long hiatus they will be at a disadvantage. I don't see a problem with helping her out for a couple of years until she can catch up. What if a court ordered you to pay all of your child's expenses until you died because he was accustomed to the lifestyle in which you raised him and didn't want to get a job.> I just said in my previous comment that it should be temp…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:02 AM
8

Alimony is warranted in cases where one party has sacrificed their career options in order to raise kids or keep house.The problems are that it should be a temporary measure, and the rate should be set at a reasonable level, not at whatever standard of living the woman is "accustomed to."
/r/MensRights11/06/13 12:18 AM
6

I think almost any expectation you could have of a Jezebel writer would be too high.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 02:29 AM
5

I watched the video, and for about the first half even though I agreed more with Norton's position I thought it was a pretty even debate. But wow, Ms. West's argument got destroyed in the last few minutes.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 02:25 AM
-2

Err... except if she gets hit for saying no that is already a crime. And if the guy fucks her after she says no then he is guilty of rape. The problem that many of us have with her sign is its vagueness, and it could just as easily imply that men should have to be mind-readers.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 12:03 AM
3

That is a special kind of crazy.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 11:06 PM
10

So is the solution for nerds to stop being socially awkward, or for women to not see awkwardness as dangerous? Or is there no solution and you are just offering an observation?
/r/MensRights07/04/13 05:48 PM
1

You are right, questioning anybody or anything doesn't make you butthurt. That is only if the ones doing the questioning resort to sexist ideology. Real research is always welcome.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 02:59 PM
5

You make a great point, but prepare yourself for a lot of feminist butthurt.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 10:29 PM
3

All I want to say is that you are an excellent writer
/r/MensRights02/04/13 10:19 PM
-1

You covered it pretty much, just add in the self-congratulatory tone of the teacher's story, and the likelihood that she probably exaggerated several of the students reactions or simply saw what she wanted to see.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 09:08 PM
-4

The stupid... it burns. And then there are the comments
/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:12 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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