TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

msleeduon Archive

View 10 posts and 1,102 comments by msleeduon on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,102 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Thanks. It's a drag name. For what it's worth I don't have to look hard to find women who share my opinions, though. The grammar of the question doesn't sit well with me. I don't think either gender is intrinsically morally superior and I don't believe collective responsibility (or blame) can be assigned to an entire gender. There are problems that both genders face more than the other, but that doesn't mean that gender is the cause or the solution to that problem. Take toxic masculinity. Mascul…
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:16 AM
0

I question your claim that any of them are "female-only" organizations. Homelessness as it relates to domestic violence is a much greater problem for women than men. We can acknowledge the statistical reality of that without suggesting that it's any less bad when men are the victims of it. Men experience plenty of domestic violence, but they aren't as likely to lose their housing because of it.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:29 AM
4

It's also the bias that people have beforehand; there's probably more shame (internal and external) preventing men from reporting that they are victims of this and seeking appropriate help.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:15 AM
-6

Claiming women are undervalued isn't automatically a devaluation of men. One could make the argument that men are overvalued, but she isn't. Her argument itself, while reasonable, makes some assumptions that one could very reasonably criticize. But criticize it for what it is saying, not what it isn't.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:05 AM
1

It isn't calculated just by factoring in things that are more expensive to women. The most common number cited is that it is, on average, about 7% more expensive to be a woman, which adds up over time. This includes factoring in things that are more expensive to men.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:03 AM
1

Was it largesse when white people extended the franchise to black people, or simply the correction of a galling historical error? And yes, by all means, let's abolish the draft or extend it to women; there's virtually no rational basis for it being gendered. But it wasn't just some sense of self-sacrificial devotion to women that they were spared even the option of serving in the military, let alone participating in the draft. It was an extension of the belief that there was no proper place for …
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:49 PM
2

I'd think the author would go so far as to google the term before publishing an article about it proving he doesn't get the case for the opposition.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:40 PM
3

The whole thing is phenomenally condescending to men.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:29 PM
1

...que? For one, it's not clear that the sources you are citing are feminists. Refusing to do something sexually that your partner won't do for you isn't rape under any definition of it. Feminist opposition to porn tends to center on how the workers in the industry are treated. Personally I think porn is a good thing for the most part and we should support the people who work to make it. The person who keeps calling their disinterested ex just lacks boundaries. Feminists are right on this one: h…
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:27 PM
2

Can you find a credible source to the contrary? Because a casual google search on the pink tax will show you plenty of articles in support of it. The ones I've seen arguing against it as a concept aren't fighting the numbers, but rather what they think drives those numbers.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:11 PM
1

Yup! Sexism cuts both ways.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 10:46 PM
2

I'm not that interested in distinguishing the concept of essentials from non-essentials. You don't need makeup or hair product to live, but you do need them to look presentable relative to what men need to look equally presentable and may face social and career consequences by not using them.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 11:17 AM
2

Men tend to be granted custody less often because they request it less often. Are you satisfied with the notion that this is because their priorities are just different?
/r/MensRights12/08/18 10:53 AM
1

I'm not sure what you're arguing, here. It's not controversial that it is, on the whole, a little more expensive to be a woman than a man. Beauty and make-up items are the other big example of the class of things women are much more likely to own than men, in some cases nearly to the point of exclusivity.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 10:05 AM
0

It's demonstrably, statistically true in a number of ways.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 07:29 AM
1

Have a good night. Message me if you want to continue the conversation.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 06:53 AM
1

I don't think there's any scientific controversy over the priming effect being real; much like the placebo effect it often presents a hazard to studies (and research polling) that make the need for careful research design important. Talking about these issues shouldn't be "forbidden," but it needs to be done with an understanding of how it can negatively impact the lives of others if done inappropriately. You've probably heard of the studies done where people were asked to evaluate resumes, and …
/r/MensRights12/08/18 06:14 AM
2

This covers the basics, if you're interested.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 05:55 AM
3

Pink taxes aren't literally about the color pink, and you can bet sure as hell plenty of men would pay extra for a razor that wasn't pink.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 05:48 AM
0

It's the higher price women pay on average for goods and services. Things marketed to women are usually more expensive than equivalent items marketed towards men, like clothing. Women also have more unique expenses than men (like tampons). There have also been policy issues around things like Viagra being covered by insurance as medical necessities while things like IUDs were not.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 05:46 AM
2

If someone is primed to think Joe is tall, they're more likely to see Joe as taller than they would otherwise. If someone is primed to think black people have lower IQs, they're more likely to perceive the black people around them as less intelligent. Likewise, prime people to see women as neurotic or less assertive (and by implication less suited for the work at Google), that perception will have an impact on how people see their female coworkers. They become more likely to have to deal with st…
/r/MensRights12/08/18 05:27 AM
2

Well, a few things. Exhibitionism as a disorder is more common in males than females. (This isn't a knock on men; it's just a statistical reality). I think people miss the point with Damore. It's one thing to have those opinions or bring them up in a respectful way through the right avenues, but basically making them available to the whole company risks creating an unfairly hostile work environment for his female coworkers by undermining their ability or credibility. having an opinion is fine; c…
/r/MensRights12/08/18 04:36 AM
1

I can think of a few other explanations. Sometimes we don't realize how fucked up a situation actually was until later when we've had time to process it and put the pieces together differently, such as often happens in abusive relationships. Sometimes in the wake of a fucked up situation we go numb and on auto-pilot, like setting up a date with someone who hit you because that's what you were already otherwise going to do and you're going through the motions of normality, or possibly hoping that…
/r/MensRights12/08/18 04:17 AM
2

A point we happen to agree on.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:54 AM
1

Pick five of the points you care the most about and I'll respond in some detail.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:40 AM
1

The people worth interacting with won't fall for that trap. Congratulations (sincerely) on being a part of that group.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:27 AM
2

I laughed and rolled my eyes at the same time.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:25 AM
1

I assume she didn't forget, but rather she omitted that information because she thought it would kill her credibility. I have to admit I still don't understand your objection. Is it that you think someone in that particular person's position wouldn't send a text saying, "Let's do that again!" or is it that she wasn't honest about it afterwards?
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:24 AM
2

I have a rule of thumb around partisanship: debate ideas, never personalities. You'll never convince a conservative to like Obama or a liberal to like Trump; you may find some agreement on healthcare policy or immigration reform. Same thing for this debate; I just don't see it as useful to talk about people, but we can talk about ideas productively.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 02:05 AM
1

Hm, let's think of this a different way. If you did interpret the way I do and she did (as a condescending and entitled troll), would you begrudge her responding the way she did?
/r/MensRights12/08/18 01:56 AM
1

I'm not sure what you mean by "forget getting over this sort of thing." People regress all the time; if we're lucky it's a temporary thing. I'm also a little unclear what the significance of the difference between partial and full agency is for you; forgive me, it's a bit late and I'm not at my sharpest. But again, what I was certain would devolve into an unproductive act of mutual disregard has become a much more interesting, thoughtful conversation and I appreciate that. This has been a pleasa…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 08:51 AM
1

Gosh, what an insightful wall of text!
/r/MensRights11/08/18 08:17 AM
2

I think (and I submit this as a respectful disagreement) that framing it in terms of "benefit" misunderstands the logic of trauma. It isn't about what is practically sustainable, but rather what's about psychologically sustainable. It's typically a choice between the lesser of two evils. For instance, you meet your hero; a celebrity or politician or whoever. You put them on a pedestal. They show interest in you. You agree to meet them alone. They force themselves on you. Do you sacrifice hero as…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 08:14 AM
2

I find debating what the "majority" of feminists think is a fool's errand. There's too few stats and too much opportunity for confirmation bias on both sides. I grew up around feminists, mostly have feminist friends and what I understand of feminism is absolutely nothing like what people on here think it is. Did I grow up in a bubble? Maybe. But I kind of think people on here mostly cherry pick bad examples and interpret examples they might otherwise agree with in their least sympathetic way. So…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:59 AM
1

Huh. Sounds like you don't know what their critiques are. Kind of like you didn't bother to look into the other side's viewpoints at all. Why should I bother to present them when you're actively invested in not listening to them even when they agree with you? This isn't about the truth, this is about your ego. But hey, I'm a feminist who doesn't believe all men should be killed. Am I lying? Not a "real" feminist? An outlier who isn't representative of the majority of feminists who believe all me…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:53 AM
17

Uh, we all agree this is wrong, yeah? I object on feminist grounds. If you're a guy whose wife cheats on you, your issue isn't with the guy she cheated on. It's with her. This operates on the presumption she's an object that got purloined rather than an agent who made her own choices. It's condescending to her. And it gives entitled assholes of all genders the green light to treat divorce as a game of revenge rather than separating by virtue of not being in a healthy relationship.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:49 AM
1

The people who created Duluth have themselves leveled some pretty reasonable critiques of it. Are their objections not reasonable enough? Because I agree with them. VAWA has problems. It's not a perfect law. But my objections to it probably aren't your precise objections to it, and if I don't hate it in precisely the same way you do I'm a feminist man-hating monster, so why fight it? Grr. Arg. Because I could say, "I like apple pie" and so long as I'm a feminist, you'll accuse me of anti-cherry …
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:37 AM
1

...so, there's no reason to believe me because I'm an anonymous person online, but I do happen to have a day job as a therapist who specializes in trauma. There's kind of a million reasons why people want to be with someone who has traumatized them. I mean, hell, for most of us the first people we can't quite who traumatized us were named "mom" and "dad." After you go through a traumatic experience, lots of people face a choice: I can admit I was totally powerless and at the mercy of someone who…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:32 AM
0

Huh. What precisely is my opinion on VAWA again? What are my reservations about it? What are my opinions on the relative validity (and invalidity) of the argument for court bias against men? You don't have a damn clue what I think, because you're too keen to assume you know before you bother to...I dunno, ask. Like an intellectually honest person, for instance.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:25 AM
1

Your crushing male logic has defeated me. I am vanquished.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:23 AM
2

Oh dear, my self-confidence is crushed. I realize I've been on the side of evil this whole time. Let me take a kerosene bath and light a match to atone for my sins against men.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:23 AM
1

He absolutely did not prove his innocence. His lawyer successfully challenged the credibility of his witnesses to the point that the benefit of a doubt remained for him. It's "not guilty" rather than "innocent" for a reason.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:21 AM
3

You want me to admit that r/feminism is badly moderated and some feminists are assholes (because assholes exist in all ideologies)? Wish granted. I agree.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:19 AM
1

I do too, but not because I hate men. There's a good faith argument against it. IMO it's the sort of thing that sounds good/obvious on the surface but falls apart under scrutiny.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:16 AM
2

Well, I disagree but I also appreciate how we've come around to a civil tone and also in particular how you cited your sources and admitted the limits of your claim, which is generally an invitation for the other person to be a douchebag if they're so inclined. I'm not; I respect the intellectual honesty.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:15 AM
1

Domestic violence isn't gender neutral either, but then if you're like the typical member of this sub you heard a statistic about women being roughly 50% of the instigators of violence and stopped asking questions because that better fit your worldview. Or learned everything they know about the Duluth Model from this subreddit or Redpill or Paul Elam. But tell me again how I'm detached from reality. Because I actually understand your arguments; you haven't even begun to bother trying to understa…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 06:12 AM
2

And you'll clearly invent reasons to do so if I don't provide you with them.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 06:06 AM
1

"But maybe if she just fed the trolls they'd suddenly start being fair to her..." Suuuuure.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 06:05 AM
-1

What he did was trolling and entitled in a way your other examples aren't. But yes, if someone offered to pay the president $10,000 dollars to debate them as opposed to debates being only between opponents, yes, that would be disgraceful and disrespectful. You're focused on the part where people can and should question their political leaders, which is fine, but this is more like paying someone to have a spousal argument with you rather than their spouse, and then when they inevitably turn you d…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 04:15 AM
6

Thank you for saying that with a level of restraint I wasn't able to muster.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 04:10 AM
5

The problem is you've fallen for some very dumb ideas of what words mean.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 04:09 AM
3

I can only justify my own position as a feminist, not the ones of those I don't agree with.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 04:07 AM
1

(That's nolo contendere, oh intellectually smug one).
/r/MensRights11/08/18 04:06 AM
-3

I believe her words were "cat-calling," and I still think it's an apt metaphor because like with cat-calling it's not a sincere offer; it's an attempt to puff yourself up at the expense of someone else by putting them in an impossible situation. If she politely declined she's dignifying the offer. He's a talking schmuck, not her opponent; its not appropriate for him to publicly try to goad her into debating him. Engaging him at all would be a no-win situation. "Maybe if I'm polite enough to this…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:56 AM
1

Yeah, that's the problem. You can usually rip anyone to shreds if you go after all the details of their sexual history. Which means either you subject yourself to public humiliation in having to recount that, obfuscate the more embarassing bits and take the risk that you'll be caught in a lie, or don't bring the charges up at all. I didn't. There's wasn't a snowballs chance in hell I was ever going to admit in public half the things I did leading up to being assaulted because I was young and stu…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:51 AM
1

Well, I don't think the intention is to make it easier to put innocent men behind bars for rape charges. A case can be made that this goes too far or even that these laws are wrong-headed in the first place, but they aren't malicious.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:45 AM
1

Well, your argument is about equally valid against all shield laws; anything which might limit evidence for the purpose of guarding against prejudicial arguments that obscure the truth and/or cause harm to the witness could theoretically prevent evidence an innocent person might use to recuse themselves. If this is over the line, what law wouldn't be? When should evidence not be permitted?
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:43 AM
3

Yeah, it sounds like you're defining "valid" as anything that makes men seem like the victims and/or women as the bad guys. Good luck with that.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:40 AM
1

A good creep can usually make it virtually impossible to say no without having to resort to a knife. Blocking someone's exits, pushing things super fast, bribery, shame, manipulativeness, etc. One of the problems I think tends to exist with discussions of consent is the empathy gap; most guys aren't creeps, so they can't imagine acting like that but they can imagine being misinterpreted in that way and so they tend to extent too much good faith to guys who actually are creeps. You're average het…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 01:10 AM
2

That people should be treated with equal consideration without regard for their gender. That differences in gender are differences in the average and spread of two distribution curves and not histograms where all men are X and all women are Y. That culture heavily influences our experience of gender, and that even differences that seem naturally obvious like physical strength can be strongly influenced by culture and expression. That men and women tend to take different approaches to problem sol…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:56 AM
2

Okay. That was a great answer.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:44 AM
1

I'm still a little confused by your objection here. What affirmative consent guards against that "no means no" laws tend not to are situations in which someone is put under duress to have sex and therefore doesn't put up a physical fight. For instance, a boss who strongly hints that if an employee doesn't put out they'll be fired or a partner who comes on so strong that they don't give you a chance to say no or make you afraid to do so. Rape is often about putting someone in a position where the…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:37 AM
1

It didn't answer the question. I'm curious if you think there's any merit to shield laws in the first place. We're obviously speaking past each other here, so just to be clear I'm not trolling you. What you've done is outlined the case for how these laws might unfairly limit the defense of someone who is falsely accused. Shield laws are meant to prevent the opposite problem; the witness' life being ruined if they want to seek justice for being raped. I'm trying to get the sense of whether you op…
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:13 AM
2

Having read the speeches for the law rather than the text itself, I have to assume you understand it more correctly. I'd pose the same question to you that you thought was a distraction: do you see any merit to shield laws in the first place?
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:06 AM
1

I'm sorry, not necessary for what to be the case?
/r/MensRights11/08/18 12:01 AM
2

I'm not accusing you of bad faith. I think paying the bill is one of many, many games people play while dating and there's ego on both sides as well as other motivations. Both people are testing each other. Letting her split the check may fail the test for some people, but it's generally far from the worst mistake to make for a guy in that situation. Treating it like a down payment or like you're insulted that a woman would dare offer to pay for you rather than the other way around are worse. So…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:59 PM
1

My thoughts are that you've defined feminism as evil, so anything we agreed on would be me not being feminist and anything we disagreed on would be me being evil. Kind of don't see the point.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:49 PM
2

This is an extension of shield laws. The point of them is to protect witnesses from having their lives/reputations ruined if they make an allegation of rape. They are not, in theory at least, the ones on trial. That's the purpose of this. I'm asking you if you think there's any merit to that purpose.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:47 PM
1

I rather prefer to operate under the assumption that someone has to be sure to have my permission every time they want to be inside me.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:44 PM
-3

The correct response to Shapiro's offer is the same correct response to cat-calling: there isn't one. Ignore him and you're either scared of him or stuck up. Humor him and you're a tease. Give him shit back and you're a bitch. Take him up on it and you're a whore. Shapiro isn't her opponent. Offering her money to appear on his show (as opposed to trying to book things through normal channels via producers) was basically him calling her a whore and making an opening offer. It's an entitled, shitt…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:38 PM
2

If there are men committing suicide because the choice between a non-monogamous relationship with a beautiful woman or a monogamous relationship with an average-looking one is too much for them to cope I wish them a happy departure from the gene pool.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:06 PM
1

The parts that are trans-exclusive and the parts that treat gender as a zero-sum game the way second-wave feminism (and current MRA thinking) does. But maybe those aren't the things you're looking for. Something about VAWA or the Duluth Model, perhaps?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 11:03 PM
1

That's an uninventive way of dodging the question.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:59 PM
1

A history of consenting BDSM shouldn't be relevant. Whether she was trying it for the first or tenth time, it was either consenting that time or it wasn't. If she decided to lie about being raped to ruin her boyfriend's life, if anything being able to demonstrate a history of enjoyable BDSM encounters should bolster her credibility by showing a history of being able to distinguish between consent and nonconsent in that situation. Why is that she would say she didn't like it in the past?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:57 PM
2

I wonder what the random selection of men would choose in that situation.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:46 PM
1

I got banned from that sub to for defending an MRA-type guy who I thought was a lot better intentioned than the mods did. That mod is sort of a known jerk. So...bad Reddit moderation, for starters? I think TERFs are so stupid I wonder if anti-feminists invented them to make the rest of the world look bad. Second-wave feminism was the ugly adolescent phase of feminism (most of the time when people complain about "third-wave feminism" they're citing second-wave feminism). I agree with the goals of…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:42 PM
1

Why poach a mate when you can have him over easy? As for sharing a stud, I didn't know those came with a time share option. Implying that they are "shared" operates under the assumption that him getting a sidepiece is my idea.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:30 PM
1

I'm asking if you think there's any merit to the opposing viewpoint. I understand your reservations about someone not being able to defend themselves; should a witness ever be entitled to not have evidence presented if it might lead essentially to their character assassination?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:23 PM
1

You're right. Maybe if I just spoke to more feminists I'd realize we're actually all terrible people.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:18 PM
0

Okay. Do you ever think it's important to withhold evidence on the basis that it might prejudice the jury and/or cause unfair character assassination of a witness, or does the accused's rights to a defense always come first? Or is the primary problem procedural?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 10:12 PM
1

All I can say is that I've been trying to keep the tone friendly and you went hard aggro fast. Yeah, it's a little tedious to hear feminism described as this monstrous caricature that isn't at all what feminism usually is, but I'm not forcing you to account for every shitty fantasy about raping a woman and throwing acid in her face that an MRA somewhere has said. Making this about each other's tribe shuts us down to what the other person is actually saying.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:55 PM
1

That's not how VAWA actually works.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:52 PM
-2

I think it is relevant. For one, I doubt that evidence wouldn't have been admitted, even if the defense had needed to make a special request to include it, and I'm not sure they would have, but I am operating on a Wikipedia-level knowledge of the case. But for another, this is like the Sadnan Ayed case. Did he do it? He'd hav to have been the unluckiest guy in the world if he didn't. The stars would have had to align for someone to have that much circumstantial evidence against them and not be g…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:52 PM
0

Those aren't technically mutually exclusive. It can be about the man's ego too. Look, if she's the kind of person treating it like a trap, then congratulations! The one who has fallen in is her, because you know not to go out on a date with her again. Someone playing those kinds of mind games isn't worth your time.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:40 PM
1

You're being kind of silly. Incidentally, I'm not being aggro here or trying to lecture you. It's more like when someone tries to explain your own religious beliefs to you; those aren't actually my beliefs and I'm not much invested in defending them just because the church next door teaches them.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:38 PM
2

Because she says she's talking to her trolls, for one...
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:35 PM
1

I just don't agree with how you're interpreting it. A person's sexual history shouldn't be relevant to their credibility as a witness; if that evidence proves they've been dishonest in some relevant way then it should be considered. This law seems fair to me.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:34 PM
1

It's more that I do MRAs the courtesy of not operating under the presumption that they're all woman-haters and ask for the same consideration as a feminist.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:27 PM
1

Um...I only read the link but that doesn't sound like anything he's advocating. I don't even know what you're citing in terms of it's underpinnings.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:26 PM
-1

My understanding is that subsequent exchanges isn't what's being talked about, it's evidence of prior consent to sex. I have a lot of issues with that case. I sincerely doubt he was completely innocent of all four charges, but also understand and don't necessarily disagree with him being found not guilty. He's not someone I would hold up as a good example of being martyred on false rape charges.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:25 PM
1

I'm not okay with her draining my dating pool.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:13 PM
1

I also haven't fixed all the problems in the gay community, the democratic party or America yet. Then again, it's before 5pm and I haven't had my red bull yet. The day is young. Suffice to say I don't think the crazies are nearly as prominent as you do.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:12 PM
2

It's blaring sarcasm. She's trolling her trolls.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:10 PM
1

He's not talking about wiping out all humans, though. You're focusing on his word choice rather than his meaning, which he does make clear. He's describing a jump into something post-human, not killing people.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:09 PM
2

I'm more pointing out that we're not a monolith. There are plenty of reasonable, thoughtful ones among us. Man-hating is not the price of admission.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:07 PM
2

'kay. So...you think she really wants to kill all men?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:03 PM
1

Calling it "the end of humanity" is sensationalizing it. It's basically saying we'll all become cyborgs and therefore not technically human anymore, which we're already half-way towards. Framing it in apocalyptic language is probably a good way to get clicks, but it's misleading as to what he's actually saying. What do you think the proper response to Jeong is?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 09:01 PM
-2

Then you're hanging out with the wrong feminists. Seriously, virtually every offline feminist I know is an entirely reasonable person who actually takes equality seriously and isn't anti-male. I get there's a fringe presence but we/they are not usually the bogeyman MRAs think we are.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:57 PM
2

Outrageous quotes proving that "all feminists believe ______" because some person said so usually come from two places: second wave feminists who haven't been prominent for decades and were considered fringy even at the time, or some asshole whose influence is almost entirely on Twitter. I believe Julie Bindle falls into the first category.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:55 PM
1

It's fundamentally an appeal to the genetic fallacy; if he/she said yes before how can we trust them when they said "no" now? It's not that uncommon that sexual assault is committed by a past or current partner. Having said "yes" previously isn't valid evidence that sexual assault didn't happen subsequently. Yeah, affirmative consent does need to be there. You can't fuck someone when they're passed out, even if they are your spouse. That it's usually tacit rather than a formally worded verbal co…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:50 PM
2

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is, contempt prior to examination." -Herbert Spencer
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:36 PM
2

It seems to me that we're missing the point by talking about these as calls to genocide; they're dismissive and arguably racist/sexist but not actual calls to violence. They're not funny in the way rape jokes are pretty much never funny; "making light of you being grievously harmed gives me the giggles" is a pretty assholish joke to make under any circumstance. I also think I get where her sentiment is coming from; whether or not this subreddit likes to think so the world still tends to cater mo…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:35 PM
3

I normally avoid problems of definition because I'd rather debate ideas than semantics, but hypergamy is marrying above one's class. She's talking about being attracted to men who act stereotypically manly. Those just definitionally aren't the same thing.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:19 PM
1

Agreement on the internet. We're throwing off the natural balance.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:11 PM
3

It pains me that you think what you just said was free of any subjectivity. Nobody lacks subjectivity. People who think they do aren't better at being objective, they're less good at being self-aware.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 08:08 PM
-4

I believe it is targeting one or two foreign universities, so it's not remotely clear how much Hungarian taxpayers are footing the bill. And censorship is rarely the right response to wrong ideas.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:59 PM
2

It's PragerU. What it's trying to prove is how life was perfect back in the days when everyone was Catholic. It wasn't, and nearly all her fact claims are wrong. This doesn't get extra credit for effort with me. It's not in good faith.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:57 PM
0

A history of lying about previous sexual encounters? I have that. "It was good for me too." "I would, but I have a headache." "You like exactly like the picture in your profile." These things don't prove someone else didn't commit sexual assault.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:55 PM
2

I feel about that much the same way as I do about Milo Y.; being a provocateur for it's own sake isn't funny or interesting. It's boring. It's not even interesting enough to be offensive. And again, this isn't coming from Angela Merkel or Oprah or a top CEO. She is, so far as I can tell, a C-List comedienne.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:47 PM
3

She uses the phrase "looking up to" as am I. Hypergamy is a different thing. Admiration for your partner and their relative strengths or virtues is not the same thing as marrying above one's class; arguably they're even a little antithetical. Men don't care if women are "less" than them and seek to "bring them up to their level"? Needy, pathetic women are not generally considered the most attractive, and using relationships as a means to change the other person is pretty much the definition of c…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:44 PM
1

I agree: there's precisely one human being in existence who successfully pulled off this strain of satire and it was Jonathan Swift. Show me the person in an actual position of power honestly advocating for killing men or pursuing policy to that effect. Really unsure what you're trying to say with Jeong or another prediction about the impending singularity.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:33 PM
2

That I would need to Google them is a pretty good indicator of their relative importance. Ford made an extremely poor joke but she's not actually advocating killing men. Not familiar with McCombs.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:29 PM
1

I don't mean to falsely characterize you; what did you like about it other than not being feminist?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:27 PM
1

I find that likely as well, which is incidentally my general objection to affirmative action policies: they don't bother me in principle but in practice they tend to benefit the relatively affluent from their target subgroups without doing much for those with the greatest actual need.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:19 PM
2

So you're okay with it being anti-male so long as it isn't feminist?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:17 PM
0

No serious person is advocating for the killing of all men.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:17 PM
2

If you're pleasantly surprised you're probably missing all the ways in which this is deeply sexist to men.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:08 PM
1

That seems like a very moderate sum for private donations to me, especially for an organization that large, but like I say I don't know the details and wish the O.P. would cite specifically where they get that number. I would agree that this shouldn't be publicly funded, but then there are a lot of things that are that bother me more than this.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:05 PM
2

Looking up to your partner isn't a feminine trait, it's a healthy human trait. Is it masculine to look down on one's partner? No...at least not a healthy masculinity. The thing she gets right seemingly in spite of herself is that more masculinity doesn't necessarily mean more toxic masculinity. Again, no shit. More toxic masculinity means more toxic masculinity. Masculinity usually gets toxic when being a "man" is predicated on not showing anything that might be considered feminine. Ironically, …
/r/MensRights10/08/18 07:02 PM
6

It's satirizing the demonization of feminism, not feminism. The joke is, "look at how crazy some of these people are who spout conspiracy theories about feminism" rather than "aren't people who think we shouldn't kill all men silly."
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:55 PM
0

It's not clear to me if the $40 million is referring specifically to public funding or not. As a matter of legality I'm guessing it's probably technically in compliance with the requisite laws. The issue is whether we think it's a good thing in the first place or not.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:53 PM
-1

I see your point, but my question is: what is the valid use of evidence on the behalf of the defense for evidence related to their prior (presumably consenting) sexual encounters? What does this demonstrate? Like hearsay, it's intrinsically prejudicial. It appeals to the idea that "if he/she said yes in the past, they must have wanted it or at least been okay with it now." In most of these cases I imagine that if a prior consenting sexual relationship existed that will probably be pretty obvious…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:50 PM
4

I disagree with most of what you say but I think you nail the problem with this video: it's operating under the assumption of what they think masculinity is/should be. If a guy happens to be good at nurturing and plays to his strengths by being a stay-at-home dad, why is he any less manly than one who works a 9-5? I particularly hate her snide, "every woman I know wants a man she can look up to," bit. Lesbians aside, this is a "no shit, Sherlock" moment. But looking up to one's partner is, to he…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:44 PM
-5

This is nothing more or less than an attack on free speech by a conservative government by meddling in what academia is allowed to teach. If you hate gender studies, this is the exact wrong fucking way to win that fight. "I'm just going to ban you" is what weak people say to cover for, "I can't debate you."
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:28 PM
1

Are you against any evidence ever being inadmissable, or are there circumstances (like, for instance, hearsay) where you agree it should be excluded except possibly under special circumstances?
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:23 PM
-5

I'm unfamiliar with the Canadian legal system, but it's certainly not the only crime for which evidence can be inadmissable in the U.S. I agree that communications about prior sexual encounters with the accused should be inadmissable; that consent has been offered in the past doesn't tell us whether the incident itself was consenting. If someone is assaulted because they, for instance, try to break up with a person and that person reacts violently, the fact that they've willingly had sex in the …
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:19 PM
7

I am profoundly hoping you get that this is not the actual point of the satire.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:07 PM
1

Here's a revelation: what if we just didn't bodyshame anyone? I mean, the dude is objectively attractive. On one hand it's a little hard to listen to someone who looks like that whine about body standards. On the other hand, if even he gets that crap it sort of puts in persepctive the extent to which the rest of us merely averagely attractive mortals have to contend with this.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 06:01 PM
-4

Have what information? Information on previous sexual encounters isn't relevant. I don't see how this creates any more room for dishonesty than already exists.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:56 PM
3

Well, we here on Team Gay are always looking to recruit! /s Seriously though, one of the reasons I don't take most of the battle of the sexes shit seriously is because you see all the same shit whichever gender you date. Nobody has a monopoly on shitty dating behavior.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:55 PM
-6

I think de facto male-only spaces are still a hell of a lot more common and more impactful, so on a matter of scale it's a little hard for me to see this as too threatening. It is, however, an issue of power: these sorts of things are relatively benign on the small scale and malignant on the large scale. Generally speaking I agree that I prefer non-exlusionary spaces for networking, but unless it's doing someone some serious harm I don't care all that much. My understanding is that non-profits a…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:52 PM
2

I go along with Christmas in spite of being an atheist, too. Sure, I'd vaguely prefer it if we all said "Happy Holidays" just like I'm happy that splitting the check is becoming more and more normal, but it's kind of a hard thing to be too hung up on. It's also a little tricky because a lot of guys get pretty offended if you want to split the check. It's usually a fairly benign way of showing off, and in a lot of cases it's easier and kinder to just go along with it even if you'd prefer to split…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:47 PM
5

...if the date was good, yeah...
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:36 PM
-2

As I understand it that would be admissable because it would be in reference to the specific incident in question. What wouldn't be admissable is if she sent a text the week before saying the sex was great as evidence that there was a history of consent leading up to the incident.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:35 PM
-5

This appears to be a private club. Those can still discriminate more or less however they want to; Augusta was formally male only until recently and is de facto male-only now. This is why you technically have to buy a "membership" to go into certain spas and bathhouses that cater exclusively to one gender. I don't super care about this level of exclusionariness unless it has some demonstrable negative impact on the lives of outsiders. If all the leaders of a particular industry were women and be…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:31 PM
-7

From the speech made by the proponents: that the rape shield provisions never allow an accused to adduce evidence of a complainant's prior sexual activity to support any of the rape myths; and that for the purposes of the rape shield provisions, prior sexual activity includes communications made for a sexual purpose or whose content is of a sexual nature, which would include emails or text messages that involve sexualized texts or images, often referred to as “sexting”. As I understand this, evi…
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:20 PM
0

Because sexism. Because raising kids isn't seen as "manly" as earning a higher wage.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 05:11 PM
-3

Right. Because sexual assault is like witches. A feminist myth.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:28 AM
4

In most cases that hasn’t happened. The big ugly New York ones – Weinstein, who conveniently looks like the archetype sweaty sex-pest and Eric Schneiderman, the ghoulish attorney general – are thrown overboard. The younger, prettier ones have basically got away with it. Bullshit. The ones guilty of less worse offenses have had their careers survive. The ones guilty of out and out rape or assault have had their careers and/or lives ruined. Morgan Freeman and Dustin Hoffman seem to be doing just a…
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:27 AM
1

Without a link to the story it's hard to tell, but sounds like he doxxed her. I'd fire someone for that kind of behavior.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:22 AM
6

Men and women both suck at controlling emotions. We're a species with too small a forebrain and too large a midbrain.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:19 AM
7

Trudeau is going to be just fine.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:16 AM
-5

It is absolutely fucking stupid to say her cheating triggered it. Someone cheats on you? Break up with them. Bourdain had a long struggle with substance abuse and mental health issues. Let the dead rest.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 04:10 AM
1

Yes they are. Yes I am.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 06:58 PM
3

My impression was that it just kind of flipped the script on the first film; I ended the movie with more sympathy with Mr. Incredible just by virtue of having to deal with Jack Jack than I did the first movie with Mrs. Incredible by virtue of having to be a house-wife.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 01:36 AM
2

"Hey, guys/girls! I know what you're getting at when you make jokes at mens' expense, but it actually kind of makes me feel the way women feel when people do the opposite. And that's probably the point. And I get it. But I like you guys! And feeling kind of excluded from you sucks. So, I get what we're going for, but can we not make those jokes among us? Thank you! Be well. (Your name here)."
/r/MensRights18/06/18 01:31 AM
2

Well played, sir. Well played. I'm saying this part unironically: I think being a reasonable moderator here is doing more good for feminism than being an unironic editor at Ms. Magazine, which probably hasn't done any good for feminism ever.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 01:26 AM
1

I'm not presuming to speak for all MRAs. I can't speak for all feminists. Forcing someone to speak for everyone on their side is a way of ensuring unproductive discourse.
/r/MensRights17/06/18 08:19 PM
0

Who am I forcing you to disavow?
/r/MensRights16/06/18 10:30 PM
0

Safe spaces are rarely formally enforced.
/r/MensRights16/06/18 10:29 PM
1

I approve.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 01:16 AM
0

"Your side." There we are.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 01:14 AM
0

I was starting to name things and realized that depending on your politics, what you consider of benefit to men may not be what I consider of benefit to men. Women leadership is, generally, more opposed to war which tends to kill more male troops, so there is that. Whose to say they aren't "hiding their true beliefs long enough to get elected and do ____" is a very fast slide towards crazytown, no matter what your politics are.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:59 AM
2

I mean, I believe that she was in a psychotic state. This isn't how someone in their right mind would plan a murder. And if she never had a history of psychosis before, and there was a clear progression of symptoms leading up to this, then maybe it makes sense that she be released under the orders that she have to check in with a mental health professional for the rest of her life to prevent this from happening again. But then, that's providing her with a world of good faith that most other peop…
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:52 AM
0

Until proven otherwise, all women in power have the goal of killing or at least ruining the lives of men. That's condescending. I'm pointing out the absurdity of it.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:38 AM
0

Oh no. You've discovered our master plan. Release Le Grand Depart!
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:32 AM
3

Redefined from what? A safe space is an insular culture where people can generally be sure that other people will agree with them, support them and take their side of the story for granted. How would you define it?
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:28 AM
0

...(breathes deeply, rubs temples, tries again)... It's not bad that is a safe space. What I'm trying to point out is that the ridicule of safe spaces is kind of dumb, because actually everyone has their version of that. I'm not kicked out of here, but then rarely do safe spaces formally kick people out. They just make them unpleasant for outsiders. A la me saying I stuck up for an MRA and you responding as you did. I got nothing nothing but respect for the mods here. They actually recognize tro…
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:22 AM
1

Aaaaaaand this is why people don't bother. Even if they do, and even if someone actually bothers to notice that they do, it's never enough. Why don't ____s ever denounce radical _____s is always a statement that coems from someone who would never be satisfied no matter how much that wish were fulfilled.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 12:15 AM
1

Cool. Peace.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 09:42 PM
1

You're going to have to tolerate that I disagree with you in good faith on some issues. I take multiple issues with your link, which aren't worth getting into here. Fro what I see of the bulk of the evidence, rape is a bigger problem for women in the general public but male rape is an absolute epidemic in prisons and the military. There's data to suggest those numbers even out, as a whole; this may well be true. I think it's too early to say for certain yet. I also don't care; we need to deal wi…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 09:40 PM
1

Okay, but that's not who you're interacting with. I can't speak for things I'm not saying.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 09:32 PM
1

This. You just proved my exact point. I literally said it was an example of how if I hypothetically said, "men commit more rape than women do," what I don't mean is only men are rapists or only females are victims. And in spite of me saying my point was that this is how people would incorrectly interpret me, you did exactly what I predicted.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 09:03 PM
1

At this point I'm honestly at a loss. There's only one way to ensure false rape accusations never happen, and that's to eliminate rape as a crime. Even with "lack of no means yes," the woman can lie. And as long as the woman might be lying, he has the benefit of the doubt.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 08:39 PM
1

With affirmative consent, his counter argument for lack of consent would to prove she said yes Man, you seem reasonable and decent, but this is crazy making to me. You keep repeating this, and it keeps not being true. A defendant only ever has to show reasonable doubt. A prosecution has to show beyond reasonable doubt. The burden of proof always rests on the prosecution. Always. He's as fucked or not in this situation with whichever standard of consent, because if he can't remember and she can, …
/r/MensRights13/06/18 07:37 PM
0

I was, ironically, banned for sending a note to the mods sticking up for an MRA.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 07:12 PM
1

If he's too drunk to remember she could be lying either way.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 07:11 PM
1

Okay. Thanks for the education.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 07:10 PM
1

Okay. Well, not being able to remember sort of makes it her story against his in any event.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:55 PM
1

Swoll comeback.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:35 PM
1

Mea culpa. What else ISN'T on my CV?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:30 PM
1

Okay. So...the author is saying people were genetically born without foreskins?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:29 PM
1

No, I'm asking you specifically in a situation where someone invokes the fifth after being asked, "did she provide consent," under what possible circumstance is an innocent man doing that?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:28 PM
1

Oh. What else is on my CV?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:24 PM
-1

No, you just have the satisfaction of watching contrary opinions get dogpiled. I would label all of those synonyms, personally. And I'm not that dismissive of the concept; everyone wants a "Cheers" to retreat to occasionally. It's when you get a look into other people's version of that that people tend to get dismissive.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:23 PM
1

What circumstance would you be afraid of where this could be abused?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:07 PM
3

You're right. I missed the part in psych class where they talked about how everyone who isn't missing a part of their bodies feels whole all the time.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:07 PM
1

Sure. The author thinks foreskins are a myth.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:03 PM
4

Guys, spoiler alert: This forum is a "safe space." It's a place where you can go where most people think like you, where you can vent about shit even if it's not totally true or fair, and where you can get other people to agree with you and generally be supportive of your side of the story.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:53 PM
1

Oh, take a joke.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:49 PM
1

Indeed. The frustrating thing about this is that if we cut through the languaging issues, I doubt we actually disagree over much of anything other than intent here. I'm on the same side as everyone else here on circumcision.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:40 PM
1

Yes. People who have been circumcised used to have foreskins and now don't. Roger.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:32 PM
2

I agree. They like to see themselves as going deep, and they often do. They also often miss what's in front of their noses.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:31 PM
-1

Have you ever had the experience of someone in your area of relative expertise who you think is kind of an idiot being quoted by someone outside that area of expertise in a ridiculing way, and you think, "No, but...yes, he's an idiot, but you're wrong about how he's being an idiot." That's me reading people's reactions to this. And actually in this instance the point I'm almost certain he's trying to make isn't in itself a bad point, meaning specifically the idea that circumcision resonates with…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:29 PM
1

It's an analytic convention. They're talking about this within the very narrow range of their interest, which is a running gripe many people (myself included) have with that community.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:20 PM
1

I've been trying. People like the one above are getting so activated by this topic they aren't listening to what I'm actually saying and instead treating me as if I'm defending what they think the author is saying. What he's saying is that as analysts, they talk about people pursuing a sense of lost wholeness all the time. It's a form of damage everyone has. Incidentally, it's not actually necessarily all that bad a thing. Trying to fill the void often drives us to achieve things. For some peopl…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:18 PM
1

As I said on another comment, this is like walking in at the very end of a long conversation, hearing the last sentence and judging it by that. And I'm not a big fan of most of the conversation they are having, but the point they are trying to make and the point people are hearing are not the same thing. Personally, I agree with basically everything you said. In this instance, I also agree with the basic point they're making. Circumcision is a basically indefensible practice and violation of ind…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:04 PM
1

Yeah. Mostly that.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:46 PM
0

Again, it's not that the pain isn't real, it's that it hits a deeper nerve and gets amplified for some people.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:45 PM
3

From their theoretical perspective, everyone longs for a wholeness they never had. He's talking about the subset of people for whom circumcision hits that nerve. When you hit a nerve, the initial pain of bumping your elbow is still real and still there, it just gets amplified. Christ, I hate defending fucking psychoanalysts. But the way you guys are complaining about his is like walking in at the end of a very, very long conversation, hearing the last sentence and judging based on that. What it …
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:44 PM
1

All I'm trying to do is point out that the hateable statement people think they're making is not what they are saying. They're saying a different thing, which you can hate or not.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:37 PM
3

Okay. Ready for it? Andrea Dworkin said dumb, sexist shit. The only value she ever added to anything is how much she pisses misogynists off, which is kind of funny to watch, but nobody I've ever met takes her seriously and she's rightfully relegated to the dustbin of history with Walter Mondale and Taco. Also, anti-male sexism is stupid and people who hate men because of misogyny are repeating the same mistake they complain about. Does that help?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:32 PM
3

It is psychobabble. I speak psychobabble. That's why I'm saying this; you can hate it, and they are approaching the subject a bit as if they're approaching new life on Mars, but hate it more for what it actually is. What it's not doing is saying "these people are crazy" or "it's unreasonable to have feelings about this."
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:22 PM
4

Straight people have discovered drag. I'm divided between finding this awesome and being happy for them and wanting to murder them all to preserve our secrets.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 07:24 AM
0

Because it's not an argument, it's an accusation. You're not listening to my argument because you're too caught up in your damn feelings. From the perspective of these writers, life sucks and then you die. Basically you just keep accumulating wounds and losses until they overwhelm you. Psychotherapy is there brand of mitigating that damage. So when you go through life slowly dying from a series of long, slow cuts, sometimes you hit cut number 4,285 and that's the one that you lose your shit over…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:51 AM
0

No, not at all. What they're describing would fall into the level of "neuroses," which means something slightly differently than that word usually does: problems of the basically well functioning mind. I get why, particularly with the language, it seems like it's a negation, but it really isn't. It's more like a blow that hits a particular nerve that sends pain throughout your entire system, so that you're dealing not just with the original pain.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:43 AM
-3

You think your reaction is logical and not emotional?
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:39 AM
-4

If you need me to be the bad guy here, fine. I'm not actually that bad guy, but I can pretend to be if that makes you feel better.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 06:10 AM
2

Oh, the title had me gleefully sharpening my rhetorical knives, but as I read you I got the sense of someone who really was trying to be fair-minded about things rather than look for any excuse to talk about how feminists are ell evil, mean and stupid. So thanks for that.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:54 AM
2

Yeah, I would say I agree with her analysis when it comes to the make-up of feminism. The reaction to it, though, seems like a very common way of being irrational. You see this all the time in politics: one person from party A says one thing, another person from party A says the opposite thing, therefore all members of party A are hypocrites or all members of party A have to get together and agree to be on one side of it. This is a thing I try not to do with MRAs, although it can be hard (especi…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:50 AM
2

No. That's not what I'm saying, nor what they're saying.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:17 AM
-11

All I would say is that it's not an attempt to deligitimize how victims of circumcision feel. It jut tries to look at why thoe sorts of feelings come out on this issue as opposed to any of the dozens of other kinds of issue they might come out on.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 05:16 AM
-18

Yes, but the feeling they're talking about is the sense of emptiness and incompleteness that we all get emotionally from time to time. It's more of an existential issue, but people usually deal with it by projecting it onto something, like if I only had this girl or that car. Or, if I only had this part of my body.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 04:18 AM
-21

Put the language aside and it's not that weird an idea. Most people at some point have the fantasy that "If only I had ______ my life would feel complete." A missing part of your body is a pretty natural thing to have that feeling over.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 03:57 AM
1

The law states it should be held neither for nor against them, but in this case it's hard to imagine why anyone would plead the fifth to the question, "did she give consent" unless she didn't give consent. At that point it's her word against nothing. I don't see why this is at issue at all; it's not a false allegation of rape if the guy actually committed rape. G'night.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 03:02 AM
1

The shouldn't perjure themselves. If they want to plead the fifth when asked if the woman (or victim) obtained consent, they're free to do so. Meanwhile that's operating under the assumption they did in fact rape the person, so boohoo for them.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 02:54 AM
1

But that force them to lie about concrete details that happened. How did he get a yes? What did he say? What exactly did she say? Lies like these tend to fall apart, particularly on cross-examination. It doesn't make it impossible to get away with, but it does make it harder. With your standard, he only has to claim plausible deniability that he thought she wanted it.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 02:46 AM
1

Sure it is. Under affirmative consent your example encounter would look slightly different. Forcing someone to obtain consent makes committing sexual assault with plausible deniability harder, and also makes it harder for false accusers to successfully press charges because if they do in fact give consent they need to lie about concrete details, which is harder to sustain especially on cross-examination. Your standard protects false accusation victims less. I don't understand the grammar of your…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 02:40 AM
1

Rapists have more than one tactic. Yes, of course. That's not even addressing my point. You said there's usually time before penetration happens. I'm saying there are ways in which someone who is motivated can make it hard for someone to say, "no" in that time and gave an example. And as with any trial, the burden of proof isn't on the defendant, it's on the prosecution. He doesn't have to "prove" she said yes; he has to provide reasonable doubt that she plausibly may have said yes. In a situati…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 02:22 AM
1

Well, for Dr. Who it was overdue IMO. I was thinking of the BBC Sherlock, but in general save for the one remake the character is famously a guy. Anyway, you get the idea. And that's not even getting into the old timey heroes like It's a Wonderful Life or Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Or hell, even Stargate.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 02:16 AM
1

If he were to stop and ask her, "Can I keep going," she'd probably continue to say "I'd like to leave." It's easier to interrupt someone saying no than getting someone to say yes. The point of this tactic is to treat early, polite refusals as playing hard to get and escalate things so quickly that by the time the person wants to scream "No!" they are scared enough to go along out of a fear of what else he might do. But of course, with affirmative consent if he did manage to pressure her into a "…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 01:53 AM
-2

Hating feminism and young earth creationist logic. Two great tastes that go great together. Like malort and...more malort.
/r/MensRights13/06/18 01:12 AM
1

Let's take an example. A guy is alone with a girl in his apartment after their date. They start making out. He reaches up her skirt. She tells him they should slow down. He backs off a little, they keep making out, he reaches for her skirt again. She pushes his hand away. He moves on top of her. She's uncomfortable but doesn't say anything. He pulls out his dick. She says, "I don't really think I want..." but he's already pulling her mouth to his dick. She gives a half-hearted blow job. He start…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 12:23 AM
1

I might narrow the definition down to: heroes for whom violence is their last resort. I don't think that's super true of Star Wars, but I'm not up on the new stuff. Sherlock and Dr. Who save the day by being clever. Captain Picard saves the day by going by the book; Robin Hood does it by finding ways to break the law in order to preserve the spirit of the law. Adam West's batman was primarily a detective (and a comedian). I kind of came to this conclusion when I heard about the "Bronie" (or male…
/r/MensRights13/06/18 12:06 AM
2

I'm not trying to concern troll. It's like if you hate Trump and hang out on r/politics a lot, you can drive yourself crazy with all the clickbait examples of new reasons to hate him without ever really getting more informed. I kind of think that's how you're approaching this. This conversation has clarified something for me I may post on. Thanks.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 11:52 PM
2

I'm thinking more in terms of you as an observer of events, not as a hypothetical omnipotent hand of criminal justice reform. You will be able to find anecdotal examples of men getting off light relative to women always, even if the system were completely fair. I'm saying for you, personally, to keep your sanity (and to make the best compelling case for your point), you have to focus on how individual cases are light or heavy relative to criminal sentencing standards, not light or heavy in compa…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 11:10 PM
2

At the risk of repeating myself, I'm extremely impressed with the moderation of this sub. You guys have the seemingly rare talent of being able to tell the difference between someone like him, who arguably is more sympathetic to your arguments but is a troll, and me, who disagrees like hell on a whole bunch of things but tries not to be a troll about it.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 11:06 PM
1

Legally, it will be handled like any other criminal case: the burden of proof remains on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that consent wasn't offered. Again, this is like someone being found not guilty of theft because the other person left their wallet out, with the defense being, "but did you explicitly say you didn't want your wallet stolen? If you didn't want them to take your wallet, why did you leave it out?" Who knows, maybe they were being dumb and careless. But unless th…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 10:56 PM
3

Hard to know where to start. Okay: The second type you mention mostly doesn't exist except at the far fringes. Notice almost everyone you mentioned were second-wave feminists who were prominent maybe 40ish years ago. The exception was Valenti, and I disagree with your interpretation of her (although I haven't followed her in years). It's probably not worth getting into the weeds as to why. However, the Andrea Dworkin stereotype lingers, and it causes people to read the things your typical, centr…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 10:26 PM
1

I think you're approaching this the wrong way. If you want true fairness here, you have to state what you think the reasonable punishment actually ought to be and point out when that standard isn't met. Otherwise you can produce endless anecdotal examples of women getting off lighter than men, and someone else can generate a list of examples of the opposite, and we lose the point in the process: why are we punishing people for this in the first place? In other words, I think you need to find a w…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 09:03 PM
1

Let me reframe this for a second: what do you think is the right penalty for this, gender not-withstanding? Are women getting off too easy or men getting off too hard?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 08:48 PM
2

Fair point. Your comment mimicked so many anti-trans comments I've read that I got it confused. Mea culpa. That said, the kind of abuse you're talking about doesn't happen even where it nominally could because abusive behavior is actionable regardless of the gender of the person. The closes we see is some pinhead occasionally walking into a woman's bathroom dressed fully as a man to make a point about trans people in bathrooms. The kind of Mrs. Doubtfire opportunism you're suggesting isn't reall…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 08:27 PM
2

I appreciate that you're aiming for empathy, here. If you'd like a feminists' take on this, let me know.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:49 PM
1

I primarily view race, gender, sexual orientation as lenses through which we view the world. Sometimes they make things a lot clearer, sometimes they don't.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:45 PM
1

Hey, if we can agree that gender can be a burden to both men and women, that's awesome.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:34 PM
2

...we don't let women get away with it. Women who do this are also charged and penalized, we just tend to get less morally outraged about it (and I assume the pattern of lower conviction/sentencing rates holds true for this as with other crimes). I see no evidence to think there are more female pedophiles than male ones. I also find your comments about trans people both crass and ignorant.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:32 PM
1

I appreciate both the compliment and the conversation.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:28 PM
4

This made me curious enough to look it up, and while the sources weren't the best there were enough of them to convince me that some men really do have a certain kind of genetic combination that heavily biases their sperm to be mostly Y or mostly X.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:22 PM
1

In this thought experiment the only option provided is which sex you will be. Everything else is randomized.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:15 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:04 PM
1

I do too. As I said in response to another comment, I think penetration is a major conflating variable here. I don't know that a woman who penetrates the anus or vagina of a child would be taken much less seriously than a man. For some it may evoke more horror.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:03 PM
1

There is another conflating variable here, which is penetration. Men are assumed to engage in sexual penetration whereas women are assumed to attempt to stimulate children in ways that are, if embarrassing, not physically or deeply mentally damaging. Of course most of that is nonsense, and it can't be overestimated how mentally damaging sexual contact with minors can be. I do think penetrative intercourse (gender of the perpetrator notwithstanding) probably is much more likely to be severely tra…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:01 PM
1

Articles about this come up from time to time. After a quick Google search I couldn't find the name of any specific organizations but there is a growing movement within the mental health community to destigmatize the idea that some people are beset by this and can, with treatment, reign in that desire. I am inclined to agree with your broader point, by the way. I don't think all people who molest children have an in-born attraction but it seems likely that some do, and I would consider those who…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:58 PM
1

I'm not operating under the presumption of blame; lobbying doesn't have to be bad or corrupt. I would just need a lot more specifics to buy this.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:50 PM
1

It's easy to blame "the corporate world," sort of like blaming "politics" or "deep state." For this to take on serious credibility, you have to get into the weeds about which corporations or lobbying efforts are having what effort. They aren't a monolith.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:03 PM
1

One of the absolute worst things you can do for yourself as an MRA is take an issue like pedophilia and make it about how things are unfair to men. Kids are the victim here.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:00 PM
6

Advocacy for people with unwanted attraction to kids exists. Go get involved. It may benefit men's rights in the long run, but I wouldn't approach it from that angle.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 05:54 PM
1

To me it boils down to Franklin's insight: we hang together or else be hanged separately. If I'm not there for them, I can't expect them to be there for me. It's by engaging that we change minds, anyway.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 05:34 PM
1

I know. He's the odd spammer who admits to it. That makes me vaguely fascinated. Thanks for the heads up :-)
/r/MensRights12/06/18 05:25 PM
1

Then I would offer this perspective: it's almost always more tempting to attribute social changes to some sort of top-down, intentional shift than on ground up changes in norms and demographics. The idea that rich people somewhere are controlling people (especially for the sake of something we don't like) is compelling because it gives us a "head of the beast" to theoretically target. I do'nt think these changes are that. I think they're more ground-up.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 05:23 PM
1

Meaning the odds that a single couple with fourteen kids would by chance have all those kids be male.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 05:20 PM
1

The funny thing is I interacted with someone on here yesterday who was talking about how fickle and disloyal women are. Once you convince a woman you are on their side they put up with more shit. That is a super-complicated issue, but I agree enough not to get into the weeds on it. Suffice to say I think women are more likely to err on the side of social cohesiveness at the risk of being taken advantage of while men are more likely to err on the side of assertiveness at the risk of burning bridg…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 04:38 PM
1

I'm happy to hear that, actually. It's not outside the range of what someone might say on here seriously.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 04:27 PM
1

I mean, I feel like cis white dudes (myself being in that group) are overrepresented. I consider it a matter of manners to promote people who aren't. That doesn't mean I won't speak up if I really care about something, but otherwise I'm all for giving people who have had less of a say more of a voice.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 04:26 PM
2

Men don't generally want to wear earrings either; I'm saying if we believe in a gender neutral dress code then we have to stand by that principle. (Yes, shorts should be allowed too but apparently that's not "formal" enough for them. The problem isn't that boys can wear skirts, it's that British people have a stick up their ass about preperatory attire).
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:55 PM
0

If there's one thing I like fucking less than girls, it's virgins. Your comment was seriously nonsense. People going back to relationships that by definition are disempowering as an effort to consolidate power is incoherent. I think you were trying to express something and words got in the way.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:52 PM
0

It's word salad.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:23 PM
0

Taking back an abuser...is about women...consolidating power...because they are easily controlled.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:16 PM
1

I'm a gay dude. What do you think are the pressing MRA issues for our demo?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:38 PM
1

Well, if it isn't already obvious I guess I should disclose that you're talking to one. The funny thing is that I got banned from r/feminism for what was IMO the stupidest shit imaginable (messaging the mods about someone who had been banned and saying I thought they were being misunderstood). Now if r/mensrights banned me, I wouldn't agree because I personally try fairly hard to respect the line between holding a dissenting viewpoint and being a troll. But I would definitely understand how I co…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:26 PM
1

I'm aware of the working understanding (which I buy) that offenders are few in number but tend to repeat. The idea that rapists are trying to find something they otherwise can't get suggests that it's a traumatic reenactment thing, and while I'm sure that's sometimes true I don't think it's usually the case. Sadism and sexualized aggression are undoubtedly somewhat socialized, but they're also a fairly common aspect of the human condition. I think some people can't fully experience pleasure unle…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:07 PM
1

Well, I know the research on parenting pretty much all points to the notion that the gender of the parent doesn't really make all that much difference to the outcome of the child. Kids do about as well in single-father and single-mother households, and kids raised in same-sex parent households do about as well as heterosexual ones. My operating theory is that we are not only best served by having multiple role models, but that in particular we need a strong role model who fits our personality. S…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 01:40 PM
0

Any group that goes by an initialism where one of the initials stands for "family" usually spends the bulk of its efforts shitting on gay people and women at the behest of a cultural (usually Christian) conservative agenda. IFS is not the exception. There's no "paradox" here. It just tells us what we already know: differences in gender advancement are primarily a function of having kids slowing down the careers of women more than men, and that if maternal leave is too long it can slow down a wom…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 01:20 PM
3

I'm all for gender neutral dress codes, but that also means not getting too worked up when a boy can wear a skirt to school.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:52 PM
2

...I want the dad to be studied by science. I saw nothing to indicate that they didn't have all the kids themselves via normal intercourse; the odds of all of them being boys would be over 1/16,000. That almost certainly can't be chance; I've never heard of guys who only or vastly disproportionately produce Y-chromosome sperm, but that would appear to be his mutant superpower.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:51 PM
1

I think I would take issue with the notion that, as a white male, he's not able to leverage discrimination issues that are typically meant to protect minority groups. Also, the things that have caused blatant historical discrimination against white men aren't dead. That privilege still exists, if in a lessened state. Even this forum shows there is a nontrivial presence of people who are sympathetic to those whom they perceive as being unfairly caught up in #metoo. I don't know how far it went, b…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:41 PM
1

Brief google search returned nothing; I'm familiar with a number of rape incidents and I that's neither a thing I've heard nor a thing I've read in anything I've studied on the subject. I confess I'm skeptical, but also deeply curious and would love your source for it.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:30 PM
0

? Basically the opposite. Third-wave feminism would be the one uncomfortable predicating any sort of right to self-defense on gender.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:28 PM
1

Would you say, you not-withstanding, that your son has a lack of positive male role models in his life? I come at this from the perspective that our tribal brains require many different sort of archetypal examples of role model representing various different types of strength, so it's not in any way intended as an indictment on you or anyone for not being the omni-role model. I'm just curious if you think he has an adequate variety in terms of the different kinds of people, particularly men, to …
/r/MensRights12/06/18 12:27 PM
1

Like campfire ghost tales When one says they have a boo Please do not be scared.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:38 AM
7

Welcome to third wave feminism. We saved you a seat.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:26 AM
2

I could, but then you already have an explanation you want to believe, and far be it for me to come between someone and their confirmation bias. Do talk of the science when you actually read some that isn't pseudoscientific garbage. I won't reply again. Have the last word if your ego demands it.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:20 AM
2

I am somewhat curious; do you hold the same level of suspicion over men who claim to have been raped?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:18 AM
0

Lol.... It's irrelevant what you have to say, the fact of the matter is females ary lying about rape far more than they are telling the truth. He/she said, ready to back up this claim with empirical evidence. Its not my problem if women are put off reporting becsue most men assume they are lying "Most men," huh? Citation needed. One the number of false reports drops below 1%,then i might give a shit. Oh, sorry. I guess less than 10% just doesn't make the mark. I'm not up for punishing innocent m…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 07:03 AM
2

A lawyer means he can be building a case for wrongful discipline and/or termination, the mere threat of which will likely have the company thinking and thinking again about pressing a case for serious reprimand. So...you think white males are uniquely the victim of this process, yeah?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:58 AM
1

More so than girls? It would be interesting if this were true. It would suggest to me a combination of rewarding people both for playing to gender stereotype while also rewarding them for proactive class participation. My perception from having a lot of teacher friends is that 90% of the job is crowd control, so my guiding suspicion (and I claim no hard knowledge or certainty here) would be that teachers favor kids who make that easier. So perhaps the "sullen" kids (which I would assume mean the…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:55 AM
-1

I'd rather listen to someone talk about chemtrails or how hot jet fuel burns. Do yourself the favor of looking into some real science on transgenderism. There is more than enough evidence to demonstrate it's a biologically mediated condition set from a very early age, probably the womb. At the very fucking least learn the difference between transgender and traansvestite (they're not at all the same thing). Look mate, I'm a clinical psychologist with some relative expertise in these things. Feel …
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:46 AM
2

Prove to me this remarkable power you claim to have, that you know what being someone else is like better than they do or that they are making a "lifestyle choice" when that is not their experience of it at all.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:23 AM
2

I'm a guy. It's a drag name, cuz jokes. And what we're disagreeing on isn't facts. The facts are that what you are proposing wouldn't actually prove rape most of the times it happens and would make it virtually impossible to prove most of the times it actually does. My facts don't care about your feelings love. If u want to say a man raped you, prove it The sneering contempt that is the hallmark of people who think they are immune to personal sentiment and operate purely from logic.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 06:06 AM
1

I think there are actual good reasons to oppose it.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 04:48 AM
1

You can't prove she was. You can only make the case for why you had every reason to believe that she was (not showing signs of intoxication, drinking an amount that would not indicate intoxication, etc.) It's not clear to me why someone would do this unless they sincerely thought you were somehow taking advantage. Perhaps she thought you slipped her something. I don't see a lot of ulterior gain from making the charge. But as she no longer works there, that actually gives your employers every inc…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:40 AM
4

Well, you did say you entered it to be silly. A woman winning a dad-bod contest is about the silliest of all possible outcomes. I think I get your sentiment. I've had things that I felt like were sort of "taken" from me that I didn't really want (or particularly want to be in the running for), but that sense of someone interloping trips something primal and territorial in our brains, regardless of the thing itself. Honestly though, the best way to handle this is with grace. Point of fact, being …
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:31 AM
1

I have a thought, but just one more question (if you feel like it): what would her hypothetical attorney say in response to all that?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:24 AM
2

One of the things that is kind of intrinsically shitty about being propositioned by a superior is that you often can't really be sure if there is an implicit threat. It's often not clear if no is an option. Now given the way Weinstein responded with threats to some of his victims, it is pretty clear he was trying to take "no" off the table. He's about a clear a case as any. But in a lot of more ambiguous situations you can be stuck thinking, "Do I risk my entire career by saying no? Will I fuck …
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:22 AM
1

He used coercion to the extent that he, according to testimony, threatened to destroy people's careers. Want to lessen the charge from first degree rape to something else? Okay. I'm not debating that. He is almost certainly guilty of some form of sexual assault.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:14 AM
1

Well, if you already have a lawyer then our advice is for shit, but I'm curious why you're so certain a judge would throw the case out? What's the knock-out argument in your defense from the perspective of an unbiased observer?
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:10 AM
3

Thanks! Yes, there's a theoretical chance he's innocent. I would say the best possible argument in his defense would be to find someone in his past who hated him who can be plausibly accused of having started a rumor in Hollywood social circles about him so that when reporters came calling, people could provide similar stories based on what they had heard. That's one in a million to me for several reasons, but it's not theoretically impossible.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:07 AM
0

This is a community of people with highly motivated reasoning.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:01 AM
6

During the initial reporting Weinstein had twelve independent accusers come forward (meaning the reporters from two papers vetted their stories and released them at the same time, precluding a bandwagon effect). More have since come forward. Moreover, the methods he used were reasonably consistent across accounts. He selected women who were vulnerable to his influence, used false pretenses to get women alone, false promises to induce them to be sexual with him and threats if they tried to turn h…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 03:00 AM
2

You are, of course, completely right. He's not going to agree with you because he can't.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:48 AM
1

I should specify that I mean specifically in the sorts of fiction young men tend to watch. More and different types of heroines is, IMO, completely positive. I don't think there are fewer numbers of male hero figures in media, I just think there are fewer types of hero.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:42 AM
1

An affirmative consent legal standard would mean that jurors and judges would be instructed to place the burden of proof on the defendant But that's the point I'm trying to make. Affirmative consent doesn't shift the burden of proof, just the standard of behavior. Forgive me if you've stated this, but what notion of consent would you prefer? And would it protect people who aren't capable of granting consent? Who assumes random people are consenting to sex? "They acted like they wanted it" is a f…
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:39 AM
1

The issue is that people who are put in a position where they can't say no, like if they are passed out or held at knifepoint, also need some form of redress. The situation I suspect you're imagining is one in which the woman is shy, the guy pushes because he wants to get laid, she's ambivalent, they do it, and then she decides it's not consent. The thing is, actually proving it wasn't consent under those circumstances is basically impossible. If you have to prove this in a court of law, the bur…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 11:43 PM
1

I ask if you had to pick knowing nothing about what family, class or region you would wind up in, which you might pick?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:18 PM
1

This operates on the assumption of either intent or implicit bias on the part of teachers (and I don't think any study reported this result by gender of teacher, although open to being shown otherwise). I think the more compelling explanation is that teachers are biased towards more placid behavior, which is higher in girls of school age. I'm not hostile to the theory of implicit bias against boys from teachers; I could ways that could exist. But implicit bias usually runs along the lines of glo…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:17 PM
1

I think the sense of revulsion we have in that scenario is accurate. This is a fucking gross meme.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:06 PM
3

I mean, I invite you to consider how you'd feel if asked to wear a butt plug as a deterrent all the time. Like I say, this doesn't solve the problem of how most rapes go down.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:05 PM
2

That's really a disgusting viewpoint.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:04 PM
1

I'd still rather be a man there. Women just don't have, on average, as much autonomy.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:04 PM
-1

Marx was referring to financial class. You're not talking about class at all, really. You're talking about a negative set of stereotypes.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 07:00 PM
1

Mom holding the son's daughter in her sniper scope? Hell, not only do I not think that would muster much of a reaction, I think that may have been the plot of "Serial Mom."
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:59 PM
-1

If you deny the possibility that sex can be coerced between adults, then have a great day.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:56 PM
3

What kind of rape would this prevent? For the most part, it would prevent random assault from a stranger (or possibly a date) in situations where a woman anticipates the risk of rape is high enough to put up with the discomfort of having to wear one of these. Most rapes are someone you know, it's often (I'd say mostly but I don't know the statistics) unexpected and frequently coercive as opposed to violently assaultive. Something like this might make some women feel more safe going to, say, a co…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:55 PM
0

That would make most actual rape impossible to convict.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:49 PM
-1

Raping someone is a sex offense. Making false accusations (of any sort) and libel/slander are different crimes. Aside from the problems treating false rape allegations as sex crimes would cause, they're even harder to prove beyond a reasonable doubt than rape is. I don't think this would be an effective deterrent.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:40 PM
1

With the possible exceptions of neckbeard and soiboy, I don't think any of those invoke class distinction so much as just being negative stereotypes. When you talk about classism what I think you are referring to isn't financial class so much as social class. The funny thing about social class and masculinity, though, is that the higher your class the less masculine you are typically perceived to be. The typical stereotype of a misogynist is the guy in the trailer park wearing a wifebeater (clot…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:32 PM
1

Do you understand the practical arguments against it?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:08 PM
1

In what way, do you think? And why is the discrimination so international in scope? (I'm actually not knocking the idea; I have a few theories myself, mostly relying on boys not fitting as easily into traditional school models).
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:07 PM
1

We have age of consent laws and rules around workplace boundaries for the same reason: to prevent exploitation. If we can agree on at least that much, a further conversation is possible. If you're arguing for freedom as freedo to exploit, there's no further agreement we could have.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 05:58 PM
1

I've always and only ever heard sapphic to refer to this, but looking it up it does appear that yonic is more correct.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 05:56 PM
-1

So why is it not the default standard? (The previous and I believe still prevalent standard, incidentally, was not to automatically award custody to the mom).
/r/MensRights11/06/18 10:13 AM
4

Personally I think the solution to this is the solution to most problems that are exacerbated by the insularity of the internet: offline community. People (many of whom will be deeply introverted and socially aversive) need safe connections to other people in real life to desensitize them to their social anxiety. A lot of problems solve themselves from there.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 10:09 AM
0

My opposition to it isn't on feminist (or gendered) grounds. I like the ideal; kids should spend time with both parents if they divorce, ideally. I just think the policy creates more problems than it solves. I also don't think it would fix the systemic issue, which is why both men and women tend to cede custody more to women.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:58 AM
5

Kudos on principle for anyone on the internet ever saying the words, "I could be wrong." The last time I did any dive into this research (which was four or five years ago), it showed that while two parents generally have better outcomes for the kids for obvious reasons, highly motivated single-parents could overcome this effect largely by seeking out and fostering the right mentor relationships for their kids (I thought that was nice). I happen to be of the opinion that one of the problems facin…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:26 AM
2

You're neither smart enough to be worth debating nor witty enough to be worth bantering with. You're too pathetic to hate but too contemptuous to be worth my sympathy.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:12 AM
-1

With rare exceptions, most moms can control their kids without any appeal to weight class. Most moms have an arguably disconcerting amount of control over their 30-year-old kids, let alone their 13-year-old ones. Research on single-parent families (as well as LGBT ones) suggest that the gender of the parent(s) raising them isn't really much of an indicator of their success or adjustment in life.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:11 AM
2

I did that particular entry the courtesy of not making fun of it earlier. Poetry, no matter how shitty, tends to reflect on someone's actual vulnerability. Being human sometimes means passing up the opportunity for some easy jokes in order not to be gratuitously mean to someone who has an actual offline existence somewhere else in the world.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:07 AM
2

I'd rather be me, who has one, than you. Who is one.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:53 AM
3

Fear of losing control and being vulnerable won't build a lasting relationship. Take another dude's dick up your ass and then we'll talk about what it means for a guy to let go of his preconceived ideas of control, vulnerability and the capacity to see through the preprogrammed shit men contend with.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:52 AM
1

Fear of losing control and being vulnerable won't build a lasting relationship. Take another dude's dick up your ass and then we'll talk about what it means for a guy to let go of his preconceived ideas of control, vulnerability and the capacity to see through the preprogrammed shit men contend with.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:52 AM
6

Let's cut through some of the jargon here, if for no other reason than to hate the papers for what they say rather than how they are said: Bonnigal-Katz: Masculinity in boys can be grounded in rebelling against their mom and defining themselves by being the opposite of what she is. But moms, being moms, can usually cut young boys down to size if the rebellion gets out of hand. This can cause some issues for them. Nobus: (Pet irritation: the opposite of phallic isn't "uterine," it's "sapphic"). P…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:48 AM
1

Okay. BTW, I'm a dude.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:31 AM
3

I'm sorry. My not requiring a relationship to be monogamous but expecting him to wear a condom is me being controlling? What universe do you live in where you don't expect things from the partner you're dating? Are you even old enough to date?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 08:21 AM
2

I find nothing in her statement objectionable at all. She's still not negating her responsibility. A president and an intern is such a power differential that we should question consent for similar reasons as we do adults and teenagers below the age of consent. Her case is about as complicated as the question of consent ever gets. And even in this case, I don't think it's that hard: he didn't (to my knowledge) try to coerce her. It was an abuse of power to do what he did, but not assault.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 07:32 AM
1

I'm taking you in good faith that it was an effort to "spike" your drink, whether to cop a feel or to get a laugh at your expense. Either way she should have been fired immediately. That shit isn't not funny.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 07:15 AM
5

It's tempting to propose some MRA typologies here, but in this case what's frustrating is that while I think there are plenty of examples of Type I out in the world, I don't really think Whedon fits that description. Fucking women without their consent would make him a bad feminist. Being a dishonest philanderer just makes him a shitty partner. I've never much cared if my partner wants to fuck other people so long as he's still committed to me in certain other ways. If you get the itch and want …
/r/MensRights11/06/18 07:13 AM
1

Generally speaking, pro-Ana/Mia forums. The forms of competitiveness women can take in office environments, in my experience in particular in supervisory relationships. Taking the traditionally female caretake role to its toxic extreme where it's about control. Passing off anger as concern. The list goes on.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 07:02 AM
1

The technical answer to this is that so long as the law is written in a fair way and doesn't discriminate in practice, I don't care what the messaging is. The slightly more...subjective response is that I have enough experience being in the minority that there are certain issues I just don't fucking expect people to cater the language towards me. So if it's fair in practice but the messaging seems stilted, my gut reaction is "stop whining and take the win." Most people who aren't straight white …
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:55 AM
1

Yup. The implicit threat of rape is taken more seriously when a man does something like that to a woman than vice versa. Still, I can't even begin to imagine an office party thinking someone giving you a roofie is funny, in large part because they are fatal in a non-trivial number of instances. There should have been absolutely no excuse for not firing her on the spot. So having had those experiences (and in particular recognizing, as many here often do not, that the actual amount of physical co…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:50 AM
1

Kudos on providing data. I'm glad people found being a caring partner more important than being provider. And I'm sure the numbers that prioritize being a provider in husbands and wives are closer together than they used to be, so hopefully that trend continues. Regarding consent, first off chastity may some times come into it (especially if it's someone's first time) but that isn't really the primary issue with affirmative consent. Nor does it reverse burden of proof in the sense of any crimina…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:42 AM
1

That's not what I said.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 06:25 AM
24

I'm not even going to bother trying to be serious about this. "Oh, yes, I haven't had someone touch me this deep inside since I first read Betty Friedan!" "Your sexy pussy feels tighter that our workplace anti-harassment codes." "Yes! Yes! Equal moneyshot for equal work!" "Oh baby, I'm going to cum inside you and then support your right to make your own reproductive choices."
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:36 AM
1

I see no indication otherwise.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:24 AM
1

No. That's really not true. Intersectionality is the acknowledgement that we're never just our class, or our race, or our gender. It's actually one of the most sympathetic lenses to the suffering of groups traditionally thought to be in the privileged position. And really, the whole conversation is still in the kiddy box when we're talking about which group is monolithically the oppressor or the victim. All groups are all those things, just not in the same ways or to the same extent.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:23 AM
1

I would argue that this is a bit like objecting to the term "weed" because it implies a prejudice against plants. Plants aren't good or bad in themselves, but a "weed" is by definition an undesirable plant. Likewise, toxic masculinity isn't an indictment of all masculinity. It's the ways in which traditional norms can produce destructive results.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:21 AM
1

I agree on lighter sentences, and I think that female sentencing provides a serious legal jumping off point for MRAs to argue why men's sentences should also be lighter (they are, I believe, trending down in most types of charge save sexual assault). Nominally treating people as individuals, though, is actually how a lot of implicit bias makes it's way into the system: if we don't account for our bias we are ruled by it. A couple found guilty of the same crime but triend and sentenced separately…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:14 AM
1

But does this law, in practice, actually discriminate in any way?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:01 AM
1

So.... you get that what you just described is intersectionality, right?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 03:00 AM
1

There is no effort to convince women to no longer expect men to be their providers. Why do you think women are driving this? In my experience men have more of a problem not being the primary provider than women do with them not being the primary provider. Also, there's already some evidence that this is having an effect: for instance, as women earn more the amount of overall alimony men are paying is going down. Yay for getting rid of conscription; like I say, I don't see much argument against i…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 02:57 AM
1

1 is still an answer, and while I didn't read the statute itself for #2 I don't believe it's ever been applied de facto to men. And that, ultimately, is what this back and forth would boil down to. With a few exceptions, most laws now are written in neutral language but can have wildly different impact in the real world. The rare exceptions, like eligibility for the draft, you and I would probably agree on. It should be equal. Otherwise what we're really debating is the impact of informal rather…
/r/MensRights11/06/18 02:51 AM
2

That would be crazy, wouldn't it? But no, I was being a bit pedantic about the grammar of the question. Asking you to have sex with her is obviously consent. It's just not the only way of signaling consent, is my point. You can have consent in the real world without words. However, you have to be sure as if your non-sex offender status depends on it.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 02:47 AM
1

I would argue that the policies that make it easier for moms to work do help to liberate men from their provider role. I certainly don't want the assumption of who does or doesn't earn an income to hinge on gender, especially as dual-income households become the new normal. I don't see that much evidence of modern feminist resistance to the draft. I found some odd exceptions (pacifists, certain religious feminists) but I don't think it's the consensus opinion at all. Personally there's only one …
/r/MensRights11/06/18 12:52 AM
1

It probably would.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 12:07 AM
1

Asking someone to have sex != to saying yes to wanting sex. I don't know how else to explain that. You can ask that without actually offering it, and you can demonstrate consent without being the one to ask to have sex.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:49 PM
1

Okay. Just so you can't say nobody ever gave you an answer: 1) To walk down the street in public without wearing a shirt or other topgarment 2) North Carolina passed a law in 1979 that states a woman can't withdraw consent after sex has started that is still enforced today. 3) Don't bother. I agree plenty of things are discriminatory against men too. It's not a zero sum game. Things suck for both.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:45 PM
1

I would agree with your deconstruction if I thought she was being completely literal. I said sarcastic earlier, but sardonic might be the better word. It's the kind of "these people suck" article I might write on a bad day. But then, I think I agree with you on this point, if I understand correctly: how much good faith we extend to that sort of argument depends on how seriously we take its premises. She completely ignores what those "millennia of woe" were like for men, which was even worse in m…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:15 PM
2

Consent is not asking you if you want to have sex.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:02 PM
0

Let's look at prison. Do you care about women serving more prison or men less? What if data shows one gender is more likely to be a repeat offender; does that change anything? Free speech is doing just fine, I wouldn't call cannabis a "right" exactly but I'm for it, circumcision of children is abuse, and most of the rest is vague stuff we probably agree on in principle if not in practice.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:01 PM
2

I haven't poured over the policy. I've read two articles on it. Is anything in the actual policy discriminatory? As for the rhetoric, yes, it's certainly gendered. By most estimations (and I realize one could make an argument the other way) sexual harassment is largely if nto entirely an issue of men harassing women. Personally, I'm not hung up on people speaking about it in that general way, but I get how others are. The first rule of social issues is: if a generalization doesn't apply to you, …
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:57 PM
1

...okay. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:52 PM
-1

My only real criticism of what you're proposing is that unless we really understand why in industrialized nations women seem to have better representation in education, it's hard to really contextualize what's going on with the exceptions to the rule. I don't presume to fully understand this myself, although my best operating theory (and I'm not terribly satisfied with it) is that the way most early education has been structured caters somewhat more to girls' learning style than to boys'. I susp…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:47 PM
0

I think that's interesting but I hesitate to draw any conclusions from it. Sincerely curious what you think.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:42 PM
-5

I was careful to avoid gendered language for that reason. The rules need not apply different to men and women, nor do I see anything discriminatory in what he's proposing.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:41 PM
3

So why do you think women are outpacing men in higher education everywhere else?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:13 PM
-1

Hey, if you've got the u/ColonelSwede decoder ring clue me in.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:09 PM
-5

Who said the big wigs were men or the waitstaff women?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:04 PM
-3

Hello, gender-is-zero-sum fallacy! How're the kids? Not sure where you listed anything; I'm curious what right you currently have that you think is about to be "obliterated."
/r/MensRights10/06/18 10:03 PM
1

That's significantly over-reductionist. We're probably never going to agree; it seems to me that you take her literally as many people on here do. To me it seems obvious that she's doing the same thing that some other writers occasionally do when they say something along the lines of, "No matter what we as black people do, we're going to get perceived as being the "angry black" person. Fuck it. Let's get well and truly angry." It expresses a real grievance but in an over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:59 PM
-7

It cited a survey by union Unite which found 89 per cent of workers had experienced sexual harassment, while 77 per cent said their workplace either did not have a policy to address this or they did not know about it. Unite is a union for hospitality workers, around 3/4 of which said they had been harassed by a customer. I'm all for banning NDAs from including sexual harassment; I see no bad outcome from that. But that won't "revolutionize" the problem that statistic reflects. Ultimately, I thin…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:48 PM
1

But the conversation wasn't about men; it was about masculinity.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:40 PM
0

But how could she have known? He didn't say no beforehand. And he seemed like he kind of enjoyed it at the time. How do you know he didn't claim it was nonconsensual afterwards because he regretted it?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:23 PM
1

I don't think conventionality is the issue. Be as certain that the other person wants to be penetrated as you would want them to be if they were penetrating you. What we're really talking about here is the line between unenthusiastic consent and violation of consent. Most of us have been in the "I have a headache, please just hurry up and cum" zone. That's a lot different than someone who is, say, being pressured into giving up their virginity before they want to or who is stuck in a situation w…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:22 PM
-4

It can't fail with you if it never had a chance at succeeding with you.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:06 PM
-2

I have yet to see an all-female remake where I thought the gender-swap influenced me positively or negatively or where I thought it was going out of its way to say something interesting. But then, Ghostbusters and Oceans (insert number here) are also "safe" because neither heists nor ghosts are particularly gendered tropes. Sex, on the other hand, is a different kettle of fish. Sex in the City in general hasn't aged well with time, and the 90s-ish humor revolving around 4 sexually liberated prof…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 09:01 PM
1

The comment as I rewrote it, which is pretty much just the inverse of the original article, would do just fine on this forum. Whether or not you want to hold this sub as representative of all MRAs (I do not), like most of Reddit things get voted on based on tribe, and many people are scoffing at this article in a way that they would totally accept if it were the other way around.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:54 PM
2

Do you sincerely think any of these are unique or even particularly more pervasive among women? There are one or two which I might say manifest a little differently among genders (and the idea that "I love you" is automatically a lie when a woman says it is pure garbage), but this is a list of relationship lies both genders are guilty of.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:27 PM
1

I was fairly careful to only swap MRA with feminism and male with female without confusing the two, and to stick to the original logic as closely as possible. There's a reason the logic sounds pretty much exactly the same.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:24 PM
2

"Everything is fine." "You can tell me anything." "I've never done this before." Women are less in control of their thoughts and emotions than men are and revert to comfortable lies in uncomfortable situations. "Women use crying (vulnerability) to get out of fights." "I'm almost ready." (Are more image obsessed). "I love you," because for men love means commitment while for women it means they're fine until the next better thing comes along. Most of this is too stupid to be worth making fun of; …
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:14 PM
2

My bet prior to listening to this is that the odds are 9:1 that everything on this list is something men lie to women about too. I'd up the stakes and say they lie about the same things about as often, but that's impossible to quantify. My only hesitation is if there's something biologically specific, like "I'm on my period." Let's find out...
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:38 PM
1

I tried to make the point with this comment. If the shoe's on the other foot, I think you'd see it for what it is (or at least is attempting to be).
/r/MensRights10/06/18 06:33 PM
-6

Because "yes" isn't given. If you aren't sure, get sure or stop. From the reverse perspective, think about a woman sticking a finger in a guy's ass while she's giving him a blow job and then saying, "how did I know it wasn't consensual?" The answer is if you aren't really damn sure it's wanted, don't go there.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:30 PM
8

This article is so full of horseshit not even Hercules could clean up the mess. Virtue isn't gendered. Heroism, pettiness, dishonesty, compassion; none of these acts are made any greater or lesser because the person committing them is a man or a woman. Masculinity isn't a virtue. Femininity isn't a virtue. It isn't wrong to be a "girly man" or right to be a "manly man." Individuals should play to their own strengths, not the strengths they're assumed to have because of whether they're a man or w…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:14 PM
1

Cool. People agreeing on the internet. Ed: I meant this non-sarcastically, in case that was unclear.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:33 PM
2

Christ, I'm sure glad I'm not internationally remembered for the worst mistake I ever made in my early 20s. The world does not need another hit piece on Monica Lewinski.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:32 PM
0

All of those questions seek to determine whether or not a "no" was given. Consent is not the absence of "no," it's the presence of "yes." It doesn't even mean you need a literal, verbal "yes;" it just means that things go only so far as both parties express willingness to take it.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:27 PM
1

But (and this isn't a hostile question) I'm curious why you brought lesbians up to begin with. My guess would be as a defense against the assumption that perpetrators are usually men?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:21 PM
2

Didn't mean to suggest that you did.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:19 PM
0

Swoll comeback, bro. Hit me up when you're in the mood for an actual exchange of ideas.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:16 PM
0

Strip the gratuitous assumption that boys are somehow less fixated on appearance than girls are and I'd agree with you.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:10 PM
1

I would go so far as to say the primary distraction is within genders rather than between them. Teenagers don't need revealing clothing as an excuse to be distracted by arousal, but comparing oneself to how the next boy or girl is dressed often is a big deal.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:04 PM
1

Can you? That has yet to be demonstrated.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:56 PM
1

So my question is then, what do we do with that insight? At the risk of using this particular terminology, it's problematic to highlight the suffering of female Afghans* because it does imply minimizing the real suffering of Afghan men. At the same time, I get why that would be more effective for several reasons and if that encourages support for the forces fighting against the Taliban, who are also making the locals' lives miserable and make it more likely that young men will have to fight and …
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:40 PM
1

What are we actually disagreeing about here?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:34 PM
1

What do you think these numbers prove, or at least demonstrate within reason? It's not entirely clear to me why you brought them up. I clearly am a lot more reserved about drawing any sort of conclusion from them, but perhaps we're not really disagreeing over anything in principle here.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:24 PM
1

I would like to be wrong, but I don't see what other reasonable implication to draw from your original comment.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:21 PM
1

This gets into a territory I dislike being in: arguing over "who has it worse." I don't care which gender has it worse because I think the things that drive the shittiness for both genders are generally speaking the same things. So if the O.P.'s point is "boys have it worse why don't we care about that," my response is, "I don't agree on the merits, but more importantly thinking about it that way isn't solving any of the problems."
/r/MensRights10/06/18 03:20 PM
0

At least the second sentence is accurate.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:23 AM
0

People project their own shit onto their animals. To the extent that their hang-ups are sexism or homophobia (or any sort of prejudice in any direction), that too gets projected onto their dogs. It's written in the language of academic postmodernbabble, but the premise itself isn't only not that controversial, it's actually obvious enough to be not that interesting.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:19 AM
-1

Apologies for the redundancy, but https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8pwwzg/why_cant_we_hate_men_the_washington_post_has_your/e0f7pap/. It's obvious when you see it from the right lens.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:15 AM
1

Yes. Also, so can a lot of other people.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:03 AM
1

FFS, this is just bitching about how CNN doesn't only have liberal op-ed columnists. The first article is a standard liberal case for paid family leave and the third is from someone who works at the flagship libertarian think tank, both in the Opinions section. The second is a hard news article.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:56 AM
-2

It's sarcasm. She's being hyperbolic.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:49 AM
-3

Yes, there is. It's the willful desire to be the worst of what you see in the people you hate. This author actually isn't seriously advocating violent uprising against men. You are, by all appearances, relishing in violent uprising against women.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:48 AM
-7

You had better wish you and not your enemy reaches that genie's lamp first. Ed: Actually, scratch that. You aren't suggesting people be "disappeared" as if by magic. You are suggesting relishing the making it happen.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:17 AM
1

It’s not that Aneeta Sarkesian pushed me over the edge. My edge has been crossed for a long time, before Hillary Clinton, before Jessica Valenti, before “toxic masculinity” and “radfems.” Before live-streaming false sexual assault accusation and #metoo and custody courts and the deadening banality of male disposability. Seen in this indisputably true context, it seems logical to hate women. I can’t lie, I’ve always had a soft spot for the red pill smackdown, for naming the problem in no uncertai…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 07:05 AM
-8

That's a disturbing look into the kinds of things you like.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 06:43 AM
-2

It's sarcasm and hyperbole.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 06:43 AM
-2

I don't think r/HeNeverLies4 is wrong. There are a lot of reasons to think that suicide is, in large part (and especially for men), a response to frustrated expectations. White men tend to be socialized to have higher expectations of themselves than men from other racial backgrounds. Other than in their teens, the stand-out spike in suicides for white men is in middle age, which is the time of life where our personal, social and career limitations begin to make themselves pronounced. You don't h…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 06:33 AM
-2

I'm not sure what you're asking. Do Afghani boys have it rough for tons of reasons? Yes. Do I think they have it rougher than Afghani girls? No.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:20 AM
1

Are you wanting more portrayals of the plight of Middle Eastern men?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:13 AM
4

People of both genders with low self-esteem can't tell the difference. Otherwise it's actually pretty easy to spot the difference between someone who is just awkward and someone who is acting entitled in an awkward way.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:10 AM
1

I don't get what your point is. Most of us wouldn't want to be either a man or woman in tribal Afghanistan. Women usually garner more sympathy in the "victim" role (which is a classic sexism-sucking-for-everyone example). So...what are you arguing against?
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:06 AM
2

The biggest problem with the conclusion you're drawing from that study to begin with is that 1/3 of the lesbian group were abused by men, as were the majority of bisexual women. This study is a great single data point, but the issue of LGBT intimate partner violence still isn't very well understood and I'd be deeply skeptical arriving at any hard and fast conclusions from this data set.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:51 AM
1

It's dated and there is conflicting data.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 10:58 PM
1

I'm pretty dubious about that, but even if this were true there are a lot of confounding variable to that. For the most part these conversations are focused on hetero relationships: I find it makes more sense to keep that focus for the sake of not bringing in all the baggage that comes with trying to consider gay ones. (And I say that in spite of the fact that this nominally flatters my in-group).
/r/MensRights09/06/18 08:42 PM
1

You're right. It's not necessarily all bad. Some of it is, though, and in both cases these things exist. Intersectionality is a lens for thinking through how these differences impact our perception in a more nuanced way.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 08:39 PM
1

Well, it's what it says about the times more than the movies themselves that's interesting.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 08:07 AM
1

I think I stand by my original statement.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 06:56 AM
1

I suggest doing your own research on this; you won't exactly get an unbiased opinion here. The short answer is: physical abuse happens about equally across genders in hetero relationships, but the more severe the violence is the more skewed it becomes towards male on female violence. The general understanding is that both genders lose their shit and break something or throw a punch at roughly equal rates, but men are more skewed to use violence as a means of control over the other partner and to…
/r/MensRights09/06/18 06:06 AM
2

I have yet to find the gender-swap cast concept either interesting or off-putting. The biggest statement it ever seems to make is, "Damn, a lot of older movies failed the Bechdel Test." If this movie is better, I'd bet a lot of that is because focusing on an 8-member ensemble cast is easier than one that is larger than that.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:47 AM
1

The newer ones have been a racially mixed cast. Why did the Oceans' 11+ ones go male-only? (Shrugs).
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:40 AM
3

It's not the feminist consensus.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:36 AM
1

Not in my experience.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:07 AM
1

Again, you claims that Kids suffer by giving them to the non-bread winner That link shows well enough to the best of our understanding this isn't true. You weren't comparing non-divorced households, you were suggesting that kids are better off going with their fathers (or the breadwinner, who is more often the father) during a divorce.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:05 AM
2

I do understand. This is why I don't babysit unless I know and trust the parent implicitly. People still associate gay dudes with pedophiles, and I never want to be in that position.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:01 AM
1

No; mistakes are made all the time. Nor do all differences in your experience of the world derive entirely from the way the world perceives you; being different religions or different sexual orientations will cause you to seek out a different subset of experiences, for instance. At the same time, you suggest that your pigmentation causes you to be mistaken for different ethnic backgrounds. Mine hasn't, and never would. You have an ambiguity in that way that I don't, which makes your interactions…
/r/MensRights09/06/18 04:59 AM
1

Your argument was: Kids suffer by giving them to the non-bread winner and it is overdue to reverse that misandric position of the court system. Kids actually do better off in the non-bread-winner home.* *Ed: on average.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 06:27 PM
-2

I don't automatically blame him any more than I automatically blame the woman who presumably jumped off the building with her child a few weeks ago. I don't really think someone who does this can properly be understood as sane, in the sense that I don't think they know what right or wrong is anymore. This isn't the same as excusing it; it's saying I don't think blaming or excusing is precisely relevant to someone too psychotic to know what they are doing. I care more about figuring out how to id…
/r/MensRights07/06/18 05:28 PM
7

Hmmmm... If it was a (I'm assuming park) employee telling you that, I'd be worried that this particular place has a history of children getting abducted and abused there. That kind of overzealousness sounds like a response to prior litigation, such that they are on guard against men taking little kids who might not be their into the bathroom. Parents (and for that matter chaperones) need to be able to take their kids into the bathrooms for all the obvious reasons, and I agree with you that on pr…
/r/MensRights07/06/18 05:22 PM
1

I trust you to do your own homework if you care. I gave you the precise lines along which the stats break down: comparison of single-father and single-mother households in terms of outcome of children. Separated moms re-partner less, at least while raising their children.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 05:07 PM
1

That's because you're reading statistics comparing single-parent households with two-parent households. Children who go with their father in divorced households are both more likely to live in a higher income household and have a stepmother and their outcomes, particularly in boys, are still (modestly) worse. I would note I do not think this says something intrinsic about fathers. It think it says something about the ways society socializes men to think of what parenting is for fathers.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 03:56 PM
1

I'm just imagining the montage of someone walking up to new parents saying that and progressively getting one black eye, then two, then a broken nose, then losing teeth.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 03:54 PM
0

This reads like an Onion article.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 03:56 AM
0

Do tell.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 03:37 AM
2

Well, I have to admit I don't babysit for a vaguely similar reason so I suppose I should be more understanding of it, it just doesn't seem sincere coming from Pence.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 03:29 AM
2

I was complicit. No worries.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 02:03 AM
-1

I think it's pretty generally understood that rape is committed by a small percentage of men who tend towards being repeat offenders. The thing about the Pence Rule is that it's virtue signaling masquerading as propriety. "Look at how proper I am and how good a Christian I am." The Pence Rule doesn't stop anyone from having an affair, it just broadcasts how sexually moral you are. I'd bet dimes to dollars people who follow it are more prone to affairs, for roughly the same reason homophobic bigo…
/r/MensRights07/06/18 02:00 AM
5

Please don't kill yourself. Someone may like you and I don't want them suing me.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 01:56 AM
6

Too late. I've notified Aneeta Sarkesian; she's tracking your location now.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 01:52 AM
4

Um...do you think she's the bad guy here?
/r/MensRights07/06/18 01:21 AM
2

Prison reform, underrepresentation of different kinds of positive masculinity, schools not always being well-suited towards the ways of learning more common to boys, shaming of male domestic violence survivors, agreeing women should be drafted (or the draft should be removed from men), etc.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:31 PM
2

Has even a single boy actually done so? I agree it's discriminatory against boys. I think it's a dumb concession to an increasingly outmoded sense of propriety. What it isn't doing is encouraging them to wear skirts.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:24 PM
1

Kids suffer by giving them to the non-bread winner and it is overdue to reverse that misandric position of the court system. You sure about this? Because the statistics for this do exist and they (to my surprise) showed the opposite.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:22 PM
2

Not based on my interaction with you.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:21 PM
1

Caring for children is not difficult. ...
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:21 PM
1

Actually, the interaction went more like, "I know that in the past other schools have worn skirts so I asked if my son was able to do that - and the school said yes." They're not encouraging boys to wear skirts. They're wanting them to wear trousers.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 10:18 PM
2

No, this place is just an echo chamber for your bullshit. You just don't smell it anymore because you've grown accustomed.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 05:05 PM
3

I've answered these questions. We've been through this. It would appear you care less about women being drafted than women not having the right to vote.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 05:05 PM
1

Oh no. You got us. Our master plan to "kill all men" has been exposed to the world. Better check under your bed tonight. Never know when one of our NWO antifa feminazis might be hiding there. Or worse, sneak a "Clinton 2016" sticker on the back of your car in the middle of the night when you aren't looking. Meanwhile I look forward to your theories on how hot jet fuel burns and how Obama's Kenyan grandmother saw him be born in Kenya, and other things normal British people obsess over.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:32 PM
2

Certainly blaming people for wanting rights without responsibilities is fine, right? It has yet to be shown to me that they rejected the responsibility. It appears to me that they simply weren't arging about something that was nowhere on the table to begin with. I should give a fuck why? Because it demonstrates a willingness to take on the responsibilities you claim they were avoiding. WE don't agree at all, you want to continue keeping your female priviledge at the expense of men. Oh dear. It a…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:26 PM
2

Sorry, but when I came out of the closet the various fears of outing myself were very real and very specific. This squeamish "but maybe people won't like me if they know I'm MRA" sounds kind of like bullshit to me.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:21 PM
1

If by amicably you mean the lawyers settle after telling the father's they have no chance at custody you are correct. I would like more than anecdotal evidence that this is the primary driver, as opposed to what fathers want in the first place. For that matter, if all it takes is a lawyer saying, "well, maybe don't plan too much on seeing your kids again," and that causes a parent to go, "Oh well (shrug)," how much resistance is that person really putting up? I don't think lawyers are what's dri…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:19 PM
1

Did they? I did a google search and I actually can't find suffragist/suffragette opinions on the draft. I didn't do any sort of deep dive so perhaps you have references I don't. For the most part I don't see it coming up, and for what seems to me a fairly obvious reason: women serving in the military at all was decades away. It just wasn't a topic on people's radar. If a suffragist said, "I'd be happy to be drafted for the right to vote," the response probably would have been, "and you want to a…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:14 PM
4

You're arguing with the wrong feminist on that account. I don't think the draft should be gender specific, either. But you can't blame people for waiting until they got the right to vote before they got the right to serve in the military which wouldn't happen for decades later (and may not have happened at all if they didn't get the right to vote in the first place) and then also the expectation that they would be conscripted. I might note also, that women did aid the military effort to the exte…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:07 PM
1

It says that only shelters that primarily are only there to help women can be funded. It technically doesn't even say that. It says "programs," I believe. If you look through it a bit it's actually somewhat specific as to what it can or can't fund as relates to shelters. If a shelter accepts their funding what they have to show is that the bulk of the funding they accept from them is going to programs targeted towards violence against women. I see this as a "it doesn't say in the rules a monkey …
/r/MensRights06/06/18 04:03 PM
2

Do you think gender traditionalists were the ones fighting for the right of women to serve in the military?
/r/MensRights06/06/18 07:57 AM
1

Do you hear anyone typing it into a graphing calculator? It's not about who "wins" or "loses." When it becomes that, it's oppression olympics. More sophisticated example would be: a black person and a Jewish person can relate on the level of having a discriminated racial identity. A Jewish person and a gay person may be able to relate to having a discriminated identity that is, in at least some circumstances, something they can conceal. A black person and a gay person can relate to having societ…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:44 AM
1

They are, but not the way you're going about it. Your joke sort of rests on, "look, if I took this stuff seriously the permutations of human cultural differences are endless." ...yeah. Um...that's actually true. Cue laugh track? If you want it to be funny you have to invoke some kind of irony.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:26 AM
1

Not sure what you're looking for, here. Liberals sometimes play oppression olympics and it is, IMO, our most annoying collective feature. It's an abuse of the effort to try to be more culturally aware.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:17 AM
0

Yes, but to whom? Kali would give me weird hallucinogenic mind control powers in exchange for throwing a man into a volcano, but hecate would increase my magical powers ten-fold and send me visions of the future. We may need more male Psych 101 students for this!
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:15 AM
1

Cool joke.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:06 AM
1

I'm glad the reference felt forced to you too, as you are the one who invoked those names. It's been forty years; let them rest. Trump is NOT Hitler. I...didn't say he was. The only people calling for genocide at a medium level of support are radfems. Eh? I assume from context you mean antifa? Except they seem pretty heavily focused on racism and the alt-right. Hillary didn't win so let's protest the result of the election and say Trump is literally Hitler and parrot accusations with no basis an…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 06:05 AM
3

So your biggest pride never came up. .>Surprised you don't worship Valerie Solanas, maybe Dworkin, or Gearhart. And me without my second-wave feminist Bingo card. Oh Andrea, you'll always be my center square when it comes to quotes MRAs take as representative of all feminists. I'm English, they were called suffragists. The suffragettes were the violent ones. Actually, you got me on that one. I had remembered the difference as being something else, and I was wrong. I wanted to see if it was a fai…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 03:29 AM
4

No, just...death. An unwanted pregnancy you can fix. Dying in a car accident you can't.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 03:03 AM
4

Okay. Well. Then the suffragettes have been reclaimed as a symbol of female empowerment. They've turned into a symbol of female pride. People commit property damage all the time, after all. It's not right but it's precisely relevant to this argument. You know what we call "the peaceful ones"? Also suffragettes. There were some violent organizations; most, as usual, were not. And given what we otherwise gloss over in terms of history, I can't take the sins of even the violent suffragettes all tha…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 03:01 AM
2

Why take the risk of letting teens drive when the accident rate is so high? Why let teens swim when so many drown, or handle firearms when so many commit suicide?
/r/MensRights06/06/18 02:42 AM
1

So what's the solution, and does it apply equally to underage men?
/r/MensRights06/06/18 02:32 AM
-4

Speaking as a U.S. Citizen, we have nationally recognized days of celebration for two mass murderers. Nearly 40% of the country who lives in a region where monuments and flags to the people who led a bloody rebellion against the Republic. The president who committed genocide against a generation of Native Americans is on our most popular bill, and another president who instigated a war against Mexico as a land grab wouldn't be remembered at all, let alone in infamy, if he wasn't the subject of a…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 02:29 AM
1

I'm offended on behalf of satire. You have the entire world of examples of guys acting unself-aware and entitled and this was your best diatribe?
/r/MensRights06/06/18 02:14 AM
3

It's online MRAs in general, but to your point yes, I do try to remind myself not to characterize all MRAs by what one sees online any more than I'd want someone to learn what feminism is from Twitter. So point taken.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 02:12 AM
-6

Thank God we appeased the terrorists before their reign of terror resulted in the number of innocent victims they killed soaring to the...positive single digit range.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:58 AM
1

Sorry, I'm glancingly familiar with IIT but I usually accidentally swap it to "ITT" in my head. I read a few lines of the judge's justification for his ruling and thought, "Yup, that's incredibly sexist" and closed the article. Sexist, I might add, to both men and women: sexist to men in the undue burden it places on them but also sexist to women in terms of the low expectations it has for them to move past the relationship and to require money as an emotional salve to compensate for their impli…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:49 AM
2

Men's Rights Advocate is a descriptive term that has no ideological baggage... Oh, man, you think it doesn't? Because God forbid I don't have the exact right opinion on the Duluth Model. And let's be real; shitting on feminism is sort of the entrance ticket to this community. It doesn't matter how much I'm agreeing with someone on, say, male circumcision being genital mutilation, they will look for absolutely any excuse to make me "wrong" because I'm the feminist and that means being wrong. Whic…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:37 AM
5

What they were doing was dumb, but honestly, unless they were doing it after the school became unlocked to students I would let them off with a warning, at least the first time. They're consenting adults and it's not actually hurting anyone. Endulge your public sex kink in a secluded park after midnight or in an adult movie theater like God-fearing adults.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:23 AM
3

2000 years after being sexually assaulted by God and heaven's HR department is only now getting around to settling the case.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:14 AM
-10

Don't worry. I'm sure the history channel will get the BBC back with yet another documentary glorifying George Washington and the founding Colonial terrorists.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:05 AM
1

Pointing out that people come from different financial classes doesn't invoke socialism. In general the features considered important to consider (depending on circumstance) are: age, race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability status and financial class. I would personally add to this: social class. If you know this much and only this much about someone, you can get a pretty good sense of how that person is culturally situated and the sorts of problems they may be more or less l…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:02 AM
3

And I remember there being a debate within feminism about that. I myself was on the fence. Still not sure how I feel. Most feminists agree on being pro-abortion; this is true. But it's a heterodox movement and always has been, which is why if you look for examples of evil wicked man-haters (especially if you go back to the 80s and earlier) you can find that. You can also find people like me, who tend to take a keen interest in how sexism impacts both genders. My takeaway from r/feminism is they …
/r/MensRights06/06/18 12:42 AM
1

(Psssst...that's also true for feminism. That's half the joke).
/r/MensRights06/06/18 12:24 AM
1

It doesn't say no male victims can get any help. Even if it did, the OCR didn't write it that way, they're just relating what it says. I think the updates to the law were symbolic, and to the extent that it fails men it has less to do with wording than with implementation. I'm sorry, but you keep claiming over and over again that it says something that it doesn't based on an interpretation you have that doesn't match the letter of the text. You assume men avoid domestic violence shelters because…
/r/MensRights06/06/18 12:10 AM
1

Your example of rich girl/poor boy is, IMO, an argument for intersectionality. To consider gender alone and not financial class is to miss the bigger picture, is it not? Moreover, the correct intervention may not be to pour money into helping that one girl over that one boy. The correct intervention may be a combination of a social advocacy campaign to encourage young women to explore their potential in math and sciences while while starting a Head Start-style program to help local people who la…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 11:47 PM
2

(Chuckle). Be careful. Somewhere out there a genie might just be granting a similar wish to a furry.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 11:36 PM
1

Cover to cover at some point. Somehow missed that, and I'd think it would have stuck out!
/r/MensRights05/06/18 11:35 PM
2

Yeah, I still don't see them interpreting the law as it was written as an indication of hostility to men. It seems like they're just repeating what it says in non-legalese. Sorry, wish I could find some common ground on that one. I think you've misinterpreted me a bit, here. I'm not being evasive about gender segregation, it's actually the opposite: I am strongly inclined to believe that it's based mostly in our puritanical roots and that anything that can be gender integrated should be. Comes f…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 11:25 PM
1

I'm a hard 6 on the Kinsey, but I can appreciate beauty in either sex. After all, it's not like I have to worry about people thinking I'm a little too straight if I admire a woman. I got you. I'm mostly just kidding around. I'd rather have someone tell me they think I'm Satan's left testicle than tell me I'm "beautiful on the inside."
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:53 PM
2

As I mentioned elsewhere I really did think I'd get at least one person saying, "I'm an MRA but I'm fine with women being overrepresented in the porn that I watch" or the like. This is just as fun, though. Now I'm just curious. Was this always a thing or did you kind of grow into this as a kink?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:43 PM
1

Never took to him. I guess I hold men to unreasonable body standards.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:40 PM
1

That's cool. I'm a feminist, and Snoop Dogg has been one of the most consistently sexist figures in music, and yet I still find him inoffensive and kind of adorable in a benign old man sort of way.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:26 PM
1

Just asked. Also scrubbing kitchen floor. Will be in and out.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:19 PM
1

Okay. What's your advice?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:19 PM
1

Sure. The O.P. question. You're an MRA, but...
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:17 PM
1

Hmmmm....no and no. Start a topic if you wish, but I make no promises I won't have to leave for a while because life.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:01 PM
1

...did you know that men are responsible for 83% of all homicides where the victim is a joke?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:00 PM
1

And as I predict with 99% certainty that no matter what the course of any actual debate is you'll leave assuming you won and I'll leave certain you didn't, maybe let's have a discussion instead?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:53 PM
3

I'm a feminist, so I believe in equal pay for equal work. Which is to say, as soon as men start doing more of the work of wearing high heels to accentuate their ankles for my appreciation, I'll start paying them more in foot massages. :-P
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:51 PM
1

You were the head of your debate team, weren't you?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:43 PM
1

I'm sorry, I'm still aiming for civil here, but I feel like you can't decide whether you want a discussion or a fight. Let me know.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:41 PM
1

I find the rest of the paragraph you cited informative. I would also note OCR appears merely to be interpreting the legislation, not endorsing a view. Also, this is only one part of VAWA, a subsection designed to target ways in which women systematically face violence but without excluding men under similar circumstances. Could I take issue with part of this? Yes. But it's not the same as the OCR saying saying male victims can't get help. It does say explicitly the opposite. In any event, don't …
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:38 PM
1

Yup, but not on gendered grounds in either direction.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:25 PM
1

And evidently you're a telepath, which makes continuing this rather redundant as you apparently know what I'll say before I do.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 09:00 PM
1

For God's sake, I wasn't virtue signaling, I was mocking you. Do keep up.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:59 PM
2

Like what? Don't you think that being told your entire life that you're disposable, to man up and face your issues instead of crying for help, to get routinely screwed by the justice system, to be vilified just for your gender etc. isn't going to bottle up inside a person and break them at the end? Let's put suicide aside for a second. Does all that happen, and exist, and suck? Yeah. I completely agree. But feminism isn't what does that to men. Traditional masculine assumptions do. What you just…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:58 PM
1

I think that's extremely stupid. (Note, I'm not saying you're stupid, but the idea).
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:52 PM
1

Legislate to provide more, better, cheaper childcare, especially in the lower-middle class communities where it's most needed. Mandate paid family leave (maternal and paternal). Create more flexible work hours where possible and expand the potential for people to work from home. This makes it easier for women to hav kids and work, and for fathers to be able to spend more time with their kids. That way if there is a divorce, the fathers will have a greater claim to custody and the moms will need …
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:49 PM
1

I doubt it. I'm fairly familiar with the trends. You know, the wage gap and alimony are two halves of the same coin. To th extent women earn more, men pay less in alimony (and more women pay alimony to men). Fix the first one, fix the other. Or be okay with the first one, and be okay with the other.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:46 PM
2

To watch MRAs be fragile and lose their shit when unable to keep up a civil discourse, I suppose.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:43 PM
2

Are you opposed to the gender segregation of feminist domestic violence shelters? I see a place for niche gender segregated shelters, but generally yes. Male domestic violence victims don't seek out shelters all that much. I think they should be there as much as they need them, and mostly I don't think gender segregation is as important for people's safety as other people do. So I think if you rally want to help the majority of male domestic violence sufferers, focusing on shelters isn't the mos…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:42 PM
1

According to the data the vast majority of custody cases are resolved amicably. It's not actually clear that the ones that do go to court over disputed custody favor the mother and if so, to what extent. Shared custody is also a problem in many situations; if the parents live far away from each other then it's hardly ever feasible because of school issues. The courts shouldn't assume 50/50; they shouldn't assume 100/0, or 30/70. They shouldn't assume anything. And that's how it generally works r…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:30 PM
1

It's because it's harder to be a woman and have both kids and a job. There are ways of equalizing that which would, IMO, make men a lot happier too.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:23 PM
3

Did you know that men represent almost half of victims of domestic violence and are the overwhelming majority of victims of non-reciprocal violence? (Sigh). Yeah, I'm aware of that. I'm aware of how we get those statistics, how we get the opposing statistics and the general academic consensus as to what the middle ground truth is, although there's still debate. I'm aware that women seek shelter significantly more often, that there are reporting issues on all sides and that getting into any of th…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:21 PM
1

Be careful. I hear there's a "chauvinist" lurking there.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:04 PM
1

I mean, honestly, what actual risk are you running here?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 08:02 PM
1

That's very close-minded.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:59 PM
1

I don't have a big horse in the race on alimony. Men pay more often because they work more of the time. As two-income households become more common, the disparity in alimony is lessening. I think the biggest solution to this issue is to solve the problems that make it harder for women to have both a career and have kids. As managing both a work and family life becomes the norm for both parents, both custody disputes and alimony disparity solve themselves.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:58 PM
3

Like I say, I don't agree with shared parenting legislation. I agree with the ultimate goal of kids having a good amount of time with both parents, but I think those legislative efforts cause more unintended harm than they solve. I think most of the disparity in custody comes as a result of who requests it more, and if we want to fix that problem we have to fix the reasons why fathers request custody less in the first place. It's a harder answer than these efforts.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:56 PM
2

I took your answer to be, "I'll take you at your word until proven otherwise." That seems fair.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:47 PM
2

Okay, so what specific measures are they opposing (or have in, let's say, the current millenium)?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:46 PM
2

That didn't clear anything up. I prefer your voice to whoever wrote this.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:45 PM
2

I'm more interested in your take on VAWA. I may be critical of your take, but I will be respectful so long as it is reciprocated.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:41 PM
1

That's actually really interesting to me. Do you mind saying what it is they would ostracize you for? Like, what incorrect assumption they might leap to about you? Do you really think it would override their previous experiences of you?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:40 PM
1

Oh, that's absolutely to this sub's credit. They have a touchy head moderator. I don't hold that against all of feminism. I also don't hold the worst examples of this sub or even this sub on average against MRAs offline. People are usually their worst online. Honestly, my single biggest critique of the MRM is how little offline presence I tend to see. Hopefully there's more of it out there than what I'm aware of.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:32 PM
1

We'll have to agree to disagree on Sommers. In theory my answer to this question would be: you focus more on the men's causes you care about promoting, not the feminist/women's causes you hate. In practice, though, I find people who can be fair-minded are the ones who show a sense of irony and self-awareness and laugh at themselves a bit. That was the spirit of the initial question.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:28 PM
1

Let's start with, "we agree anti-male bias exists in the courts" and work from there. Not sure what specific anti-male policy is being advocated for by which specific feminist groups. I'm hoping it's not Equal Custody; there are anti-male issues but that isn't one of them.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:24 PM
-1

Yeah. Feminists. Totally a cohesive, go-along-to-get-along crowd. Definitely never see infighting and disagreements in feminism. "I'm an MRA, but the underrepresentation of men in lesbian porn is okay with me" doesn't require an adherence to dogma. It takes a little irony and self-awareness. A quality these responses are not showing an abundance of.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:21 PM
2

No, to my original post.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:02 PM
1

I think the supply should match the demand for shelters. I'm pretty opposed to gender segregating most things that we currently do. Not sure what specifically what you mean by the "feminist ban on helping male victims." VAWA is actually gender-neutral with regards to victim. I'd probably agree with you about many of the flaws of the Duluth model. So did I pass your little test?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 07:01 PM
1

...if you edited the word "feminist" in your mind to "egalitarian," would that help?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:46 PM
2

And I'm opposing your basic human rights by...
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:44 PM
2

Look at that. We found a middle ground. This deserves a toast.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:41 PM
1

That, sir/ma'am, sounds like a challenge.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:15 PM
2

The short answer is that I agree anti-male systemic bias exists in both instances, although I don't usually agree with the way MRAs think about what it is or where it comes from.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:12 PM
-1

How do you recognize it when a feminist makes the same claim about not being against men's rights and is telling the truth?
/r/MensRights05/06/18 05:49 PM
-1

Too many men do get away with rape. That doesn't negate that false convictions happen, too. To me the bigger tragedy is how unlikely it is that male survivors of rape will ever get justice.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 05:40 PM
-2

It's an invitation for everyone to take themselves slightly less seriously. And I in no way mean to distance myself from feminism or other feminists.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 05:37 PM
-3

Sure, but let's understand it as best we can for what it is rather than what it isn't. This does not, so far, appear to be a matter of men in rape cases being singled out by CPS to hide evidence. It does appear to be a case of CPS being bad at procedurally accounting for certain kinds of evidence that disproportionately impact rape cases. Directing MRA energy at the criminal justice system is aces in my book. One of the best causes to support.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 04:20 PM
8

The Daily Mail is going to tell you what you want to hear. It is not your friend in this respect. The BBC version gives us this important context: Lawyers in the criminal justice system have claimed for years that disclosure failures are systemic and not specific to rape...The CPS acknowledges this - we have, for example, seen recent people trafficking and fraud cases stopped because disclosure has failed. As well as some possible context for why this is happening: The CPS found "common themes" …
/r/MensRights05/06/18 04:02 PM
1

I look forward to the day this sub on the whole truly rejects this logic in both directions.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 03:52 PM
-1

A precise equity rule is silly for this reason. Demanding fifty/fifty on the nail is going to keep causing things like this to happen. I'm fine with a 60/40 rule, meaning if either gender dips below 40% representation then some form of redress kicks in. At this point if you have an imbalance that strong you're not doing a good enough job of recruiting the existing talent from the underrepresented group.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 03:40 PM
2

That's like saying, "Why chemistry if all it ultimately boils down to is applied physics?" Individualism is good, but thinking only on that level ignores the influence of culture, which means filtering out a lot of real and potentially important data.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 03:26 PM
1

I'm not assuming something about you, specifically. There's nothing about intersectionality that mandates "pampering;" that's the bad faith interpretation of it. If you acknowledge that these differences exist and tend to impact us in different ways on average, then you're acknowledging the intersectional perspective.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 02:57 PM
1

We're already divided along those criteria, whether we like it or not. Pretending that we're not is usually a luxury of those who have the more privileged position. We have to acknowledge that the world treats us differently along these lines to really get each other. Otherwise we're missing important context.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 02:43 PM
0

Theoretically, but the use of the concept is typically in how groups have average relative advantages or disadvantages relative to one another. It allows for a greater degree of nuance in our attempts to understand each other. Imagine Joe, a poor white guy, and James, a rich black guy, are friends. Joe doesn't understand how someone as wealthy as James is a Democrat and James doesn't understand how someone as poor as Joe is a Republican. That's partly because James doesn't have the same day-to-d…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 02:39 PM
1

The conclusion would be that intersectionality exists and is a meaningful way of looking at the world. The "it" in number two is the influence our demographic features have on how we are treated by the world. In other words, people are treated differently along these lines but never just along one of these lines.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 01:48 PM
3

I have yet to hear an intelligent objection to it. Premise 1: The world will treat you, on average, somewhat differently depending on whether you are white or black, male or female, gay or straight, Christian or Muslim, etc. Premise 2: It's never just about any single one of those things. It's about all of them. A gay Muslim and a straight female atheist aren't going to have the same experience of the world just because they're both Persian. Premise 3: This doesn't negate differences in inherent…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:31 AM
7

This is a great example of a policy that is sexist in practice without intentionally being sexist.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:21 AM
-2

Skirts are more within the realm of formal wear for women. Hey, I don't like that either, nor do I think this is good policy. I'd go so far as to say it's de facto sexist against boys. What it isn't is intentionally trying to discriminate against boys or, as the article tries to infer, force them into skirts.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:20 AM
9

Because British.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 12:53 AM
3

And in "the call is coming from inside the house" news tonight...
/r/MensRights04/06/18 10:58 PM
2

Men built the Titanic and an iceberg wrecked the fuck out of that. Pretty sure the iceberg didn't feel like a victim about it, though.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 10:55 PM
4

Except they aren't saying that. They're adopting a new, stricter dress code that bans shorts. However, since it is gender neutral they can't ban boys from wearing skirts. They're not encouraging it.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 10:51 PM
1

I'm not as inclined to think physical attractiveness makes that big a difference; I think this kid's problems made him unattractive to interact with from the get-go. But otherwise yeah, I basically agree.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 10:22 PM
5

I think getting people away from the idea that they are involuntarily celibate (as opposed to needing to level up their romantic game) deprives the kind of self-pitying that justified this shooting of oxygen. I agree his bullying was more central to the problem, just not to this article.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 08:37 PM
1

Everything about this article is fail. The premises aren't accurate, the conclusions it draws from those premises don't follow even if you accept them, and it doesn't offer a clear solution (although IMO it's basically trying to get "secular moderates" to side with religious conservatism).
/r/MensRights04/06/18 08:22 PM
7

The solution to misogynist crimes isn’t to ensure that violent men have sexual access to women – it’s that we teach men that they’re not entitled to women’s sexual attention to begin with. Framing this around shooters is a problem, because someone at serious risk of committing mass violence might not ever have any hope around being able to successfully have a romantic life. But for people slightly less far down that spectrum, it's not just about teaching them that they're not entitled to have se…
/r/MensRights04/06/18 07:46 PM
2

Yeah...nobody is saying it is, though. People who oppose toxic masculinity (which is just a term for the ways holding guys to stereotypical masculinity norms makes them torture themselves and each other) almost universally oppose conversion therapy, and on the same basic grounds.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 04:37 AM
3

I question whether "typically" is true. I think typically people aren't sure; the standard that sex happens somewhere between date 3-5 helps force the issue and prevent someone who is indecisive from stringing the other person too far along. This is also helped by the increasing expectation that dates split the bill.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 09:13 PM
3

Yeah. And I sympathize with the sense of humiliation. I'd be frustrated. Sometimes that's just how the cookie crumbles.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 08:59 PM
-2

Gosh, I might never find a man with all these sick burn I'm getting.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 08:57 PM
0

...kay. So as a matter of fixing the problem, what do you propose we actually do?
/r/MensRights03/06/18 08:57 PM
-3

This particular issue isn't likely to get you very far. Most medications, cancer and otherwise, primarily used male animal test subjects before moving on to human trials because female menstrual cycles have a stronger impact on the efficacy of the medication, making it harder to determine how effective the medications are. That means most meds are more tailored towards male biology than female biology; better trials including more female animal and human test subjects are becoming the norm.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 07:43 PM
5

The context is usually someone who has a vague sense of the notion that sex is commodity for trade. They've taken you out on three dates, bought you dinner and drinks, now it's time to pony up. But wait! The other person doesn't put out and then suddenly is dating someone else. They (usually she in this context) must have been stringing you along as a "beta" until an "alpha" came along who she'd rather take to bed. "Nobody owes you sex" = "You can't buy sex, either by money or by being nice."
/r/MensRights03/06/18 07:38 PM
1

Feel free to ask me any other sorts of these questions. Truth is, asking MRAs on the whole how to respond to feminists isn't that likely to get you that far. Asking a feminist how feminists think works better.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 07:35 PM
1

Plenty of us on the feminist side are waiting for grown-up, non zero-sum game MRAs. Second-wave feminism was very zero-sum; the MRM movement as a whole is still kind of in its second wave.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 08:47 PM
10

You: Is there evidence that sexual assault is particularly huge a problem in that parking lot/neighborhood relative to other forms of assault? "Womyn": I assume so, but even if there aren't, women operate under a unique threat of sexual assault as well as still being victims of all the other types. It makes sense to reserve a few spaces in front for them to feel safe. You: But that doesn't solve the problem of women in general feeling safe; at best it's a lottery. Also, if we aren't sure that wo…
/r/MensRights02/06/18 05:21 PM
1

HThe charactere seems to me to be a mosaic of a lot of the worst qualities of MRAs, any of which you can find to a nontrivial extent in these communities but rarely would one find compiled all in one person. It paints this community by its worst, not by its nonexistant.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 05:00 PM
-2

I'm having a hard time articulating myself, but it's not a hostile question. I have no problem stating bluntly the things I disagree with. MRM has a strong strain of sexism in it, for instance. But that's not what I'm getting at here. I'm trying to get to what is distorted in the portrayal of this character versus what is just wrong.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:34 PM
1

What I'm trying to get at is the difference between bad satire and inaccurate satire. I get why you think it's bad satire, but what specifically is inaccurate about it? Example: Hank Hill's wife is often a bad satire of a feminist. Poison Ivy is an inaccurate satire of a feminist.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:32 PM
2

My working hypothesis is that it's a combination of feeling like one can't live up to internalized social expectations in combination with generally higher rates of violence in men. Is that oppression? I'd say so, but it's the sort without any clear "oppressor." It's a way most societies are structured that happens to work to the detriment of men. (Likewise, most oppression women face isn't intentional "Mwahahaha, let's keep women down" villainy, either).
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:17 PM
1

It seems like you have a theory, but it's not obvious to me what it is.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 03:42 PM
-2

I'm not on the attack, I'm actually just trying to get your/the O.P.'s perspective. I'll ask this a different way: what would a satire of an MRA look like that didn't go too far?
/r/MensRights02/06/18 03:29 PM
-2

Mostly the article is discussing a satire of MRAs. Neither satire nor meta-commentary on that satire are intrinsically dishonest or disingenuous. I get being offended by it; I'm asking what's dishonest about it.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 02:49 PM
1

...in that it is quite literally a fictional character on a TV show?
/r/MensRights02/06/18 02:43 PM
2

What is factually wrong about it?
/r/MensRights02/06/18 12:55 PM
2

Marriages are doing better because people are being pickier about them. This is a good thing.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 11:31 AM
2

...divorce rates are dropping. I mean, that graph shows it. And they've continued to since then.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 10:12 AM
0

Especially hard to track since homosexual couples have achieved the right to recognized marriage, and gay men having an extremely low divorce rate while outearning heterosexual couples by a wide margin also diluting dual-income statistics. All that proves is y'all straight people need to get your shit together.* All I ask is if someone is saying "the family" is being destroyed, they operationalize it in a meaningful way to back up their case. Because 9/10 what they really mean is the part I outl…
/r/MensRights02/06/18 09:08 AM
0

Sure. That's what one would predict if the younger end of a growing population is waiting longer to marry. It's the waiting longer to marry that predicts more successful long-term marriage.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 09:01 AM
0

Yes, it's in the U.S. Look up divorce rates by year. They're going down and have been. The driver is generally that people are accessing higher education more and waiting longer to be married. Marrying someone at 25 is a lot more likely to be successful than marrying them at 18. Also, with a few exceptions homicide rates are on a long-term downward trend as well. You claim you're seeing the destruction of the family? I'd ask for your evidence.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:29 AM
0

Divorce rates are on a long-term downward trend even as dual-income households are on the rise. "The family" is doing fine.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:11 AM
1

Actually, it's more that I've made the same point and am an evil misandrist because I'm a feminist. The other thing this policy would fix probably better than any other single intervention over the long run is the disparity in custody being awarded more to mothers.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 04:02 AM
1

I'm sure she meant White-guy Piscine-Americans.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 01:02 AM
5

The argument is that Y-chromosome genetic diversity plummeted, with the hypothesis attempting to explain why this genetic plummet impacted men so much more than women. (Ed.: I worded this poorly but I trust you get what I mean.) It's not my area of expertise, but via Google: Wheat, barley, and jujube were domesticated in the Indian subcontinent by 9,000 BC, soon followed by sheep and goats. Barley and wheat cultivation—along with the domestication of cattle, primarily sheep and goats—followed in…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 09:40 PM
6

There's no evidence to back up the claim that "boys crave masculinity," ie., do better when raised by their fathers as opposed to their mothers in a single-parent household. What little evidence I could find on the topic shows they do about as well in either.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 08:42 PM
3

Part of the argument here is that women married (paired?) more outside of their own tribes, which helped preserve their genetic diversity. I have a feeling that it probably had a lot less to do with them going over of their own agency to another clan and picking out the hottest, smartest guys so much as they were traded or collected as spoils of war after their clans collapsed.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 08:23 PM
1

Well, you're obviously posting this to an MRA reddit so (full disclosure) I am a feminist who is deeply sympathetic to the point you're making: traditional masculine archetypes are generally fine (to the extent they're not predicated on shitting on women and gays), but the problem is that we tend to get caught in the trap of thinking there's only one right way of being a man, which is usually the macho stereotype. I think the project of making a conscious effort to expand that perception is a gr…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 03:35 PM
2

I don't think wanting to bang your own daughter is a negative stereotype of men in general; it's based on inappropriate remarks Trump himself has made.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 02:24 PM
3

Awesome piece.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 02:20 PM
3

I'm curious how many MGTOWs you encounter are "real" MGTOWs, and what that means. My bias on this topic is pretty clear: I think the MGTOW movement in general is toxic because it gives guys a way of soothing their egos over their dating problems in a way that slowly entrenches them into a hostile attitude towards women, which only reinforces the original problem. I'm not a fan of it as a movement. But if there's a better, more responsible, less automatically woman-blaming end of it, I'm down to …
/r/MensRights01/06/18 02:15 PM
1

So which is right? Ignoring the other side of the story or paying attention to it?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 02:05 PM
0

Better or not, it has a giant red flag: it doesn't give any indication of what the story is from her side.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:54 PM
1

I mean, you could argue from a specifically MRA perspective that making it harder for women to serve in the military puts more of the burden (and risk) o that service on men. For most military service people this is a hurdle they have to clear; unless they are serving in active combat the number of push ups probably won't matter. And to my chagrin, the best state of the current research is that combat units are less effective if they're integrated, so unfortunately I don't see equal representati…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:49 PM
1

I think this is more about the presumption of good/bad faith. If you think I'm anti-male, not bringing them up probably seems like an intentional slight when really it just seemed like a non sequitur to the point I was making.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:27 PM
1

Male circumcision should be considered equal to female circumcision in the eyes of the law. Awesome. The lumping together of all forms of FGM, and insinuating they are all worse than male circumcision, while singling out the most benign form of MGM is a feminist tactic to downplay men's issues. OP did not compare male circumcision and FGM, you did. Logically, he inferred a comparison of male and female circumcision as they are the ones that are comparable though male circumcision has more advers…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:10 PM
1

I don't think deltoid and tricep strength are most people's primary contribution to their military roles. Not sure why you assume "but not men." They should cull the broadest possible swath of talent and assign them to where they can best contribute.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 12:53 PM
1

Okay. I'm going to try to get this right. You tell me if I succeed. Male and female genital mutilation are both directly comparable because the anatomical parts are developmentally comparable. But Male circumcision is worse, at least in America, because it's more widespread and less protected under the law. While they can both still cum (technically that does depend on the severity of the FGM; I do still have to point out that the medical complications from that procedure are more common and gen…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 04:22 AM
1

Okay. So when the title was, "Remove all bias from law" and the first line was, "The penalty should be equal," when it comes to male circumcision, should be equal to what? He was directly comparing them; I was agreeing with you that they aren't exactly directly comparable. Do we agree that both FGM and MGM are wrong, though not directly comparable? Can we meet that far?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:46 AM
1

...my point, in response to the O.P., is that they're not directly comparable, and specified not as debilitating as FGM typically because FGM does represent a range of procedures. Also, did you note the part where I emphasized that they're both wrong to do to children and are non-consensual forms of bodily mutilation? And while it's true that not all MRAs get so hung up looking for a reason to attack you that they miss the fact you're agreeing with them, and while it's not only MRAs who get so h…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:14 AM
2

I agree, which is why object to him stretching a fairly thin bit of social research into the broad generalization that he does to make his point. He's claiming the mantle of science as if his conclusions are obvious to any empiricist when it's really mostly speculation.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 07:49 PM
1

That's not my issue. It's that he's citing adolescent research to generalize about adult behavior. Aggression looks very different in teens versus adults.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 07:35 PM
1

If you call yourself "egalitarian," this is what that looks like. Treat people as individuals, not as iterations of their gender.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 02:14 PM
2

I dunno. Most positions aren't combat positions. I don't see the reason to deprive the military of female talent. Hormonal differences in utero probably play a big part if becoming gay or straight, but the research on hormone levels in adults shows mixed results (some showing T is higher in straights, some showing higher in gays and lesbians). There's probably not a significant difference in adults.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 10:46 AM
1

I'd rather take my chances with the false accusation.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 08:36 AM
5

Sorry, but I think this kind of makes sense. It's one thing if this is set up in front of their house or on their street corner, but they set it up next to a street fair where a vendor/s who had to buy actual permits were selling beverages, including lemonade. I get that it's supposed to be cute and all, but you don't get to set yourself up to compete with actual business and then play the "but it's just a kids' lemonade stand!" card, especially if you rake in $200 in less than a day.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 04:36 AM
2

The military and vets should allow women in. The Boy Scouts? Meh.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 03:24 AM
2

I don't hate on men either.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 03:13 AM
2

"Fuck TERFs." - Me and most feminists.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 09:50 PM
3

Sorry. I'm not qualified to debate a fucking clairvoyant. People like you make this sub look uniquely bad.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 09:48 PM
3

Well mods, it's your call, but I sure wouldn't want this kind of guy or this kind of post representing my sub. Kind of giving the people who hate this sub ammo.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:55 PM
2

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:51 PM
3

I know it as a mental health professional who has both had depression and also is the owner of a dick. The screen name is a drag name. Want to get into the psychology of rape? I'm here for you. If a rapist is insane in the legal definition, they should be treated in a mental institution. Your previous question was too fucking stupid to merit a response.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:50 PM
3

Not funny. Not cute. Not clever.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:41 PM
3

...okay. So not a typo. "Postpartum." Prenuptial is something else. Mental illness is not always a defense against crime. "Insanity" is in fact not a mental health term, it's a legal one. It means, "no longer able to distinguish between doing right from wrong." In some rare cases, a pastpartum depression can be so severe that the person becomes violently psychotic and loses touch with what is right or wrong. In that case they aren't acting in their right mind. No erection has ever caused someone…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:39 PM
3

Let's see you get punched in the face on the regular and see how docile and sparkling your goddamn personality is.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:32 PM
5

Hard pass.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:29 PM
1

Best typo ever! We should treat mental illness as mental illness. If someone has a sociopathic mental illness that causes them to rape, they should be treated to the extent they can be and prevented from being put in a position where they are likely to be able to rape again. If a woman has psychotic postpartum depression such that she harms a child, she should be removed from her infants after birth until the condition is managed. Mental illnesses are very different from each other; mental illne…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:25 PM
1

Again, mental health disorder versus an erection. They're just not comparable. I don't super care whether FGM or MGM is worse; both should be illegal until one is an adult and can consent. We disagree, the disagreement isn't that important.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:16 PM
-4

It annoys me that Peterson talks about indirect aggression like gossip as being higher in women. The research shows a big difference in adolescents; to my knowledge it doesn't show one in adults. She obviously doesn't sympathize with ideas, but she's also clearly trying to be fair-minded. I think it's a tough but fair interview.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:14 PM
-2

Circumcision is horrible and I agree it's genital mutilation (when it's forced on a child below an age of consent), although it's not as debilitating as FGM typically is. It's a moot point; they're both awful. But we should recognize they're not typically equally damaging. An erection is not a mental health condition. Postpartum depression needs to be treated as an illness, not a crime. I don't think false accusations ruin people's lives nearly as often as people on here take for granted. Defini…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 07:23 PM
1

Incidentally, I watched the entire debate you referenced. Frankly I find that discussion far more interesting.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 12:06 PM
1

Okay. Whatever makes you feel better.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 12:04 PM
1

You're right; I do agree with Goldberg. But she isn't saying that there isn't uneasiness, she says the opposite: that her male coworkers and people in general are getting too uneasy relative to the actual threat, that the who have faced serious consequences were serial offenders, and that in the potential test case of people's careers being hurt based on being on basically a "creep list," they did fine. She's saying the fear of #metoo is greater than the risk to decent people, and I agree. Moreo…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:04 AM
1

By that definition then, online harassment doesn't exist. For not existing, it definitely has some negative impacts on people's lives. You did mention being a fan of video. I see we are going to continue to disagree as to what harassment is...Given this fundamental difference I see little point in continuing this conversation I believe, earlier in the conversation when I offered for us to part on "agreeing to disagree" terms, your response was "you can concede defeat to my logic if you wish..." …
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:51 AM
1

Your initial point was, to quote, "There will always be opportunistic people take any minor encounter and exaggerate it to get their 15 mins of fame." The rest of the conversation flowed from there. Now if you're telling me that this observation had nothing to do with the women in question, there was no point in bringing this up in the first place. But if this was meant to infer something about them, my refutation was that it is unreasonable to assume you could dismiss these claims as attention …
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:58 AM
1

The story is based on multiple independent lines of witness testimony. That's not speculation. While I agree the author probably has bias we don't know that for certain, and she has managed to produce enough evidence to the effect of her claim that it can't be dismissed even if she does have an ax to grind. I do accept innocent until proven guilty - in a court of law, when I'm sitting on a jury contemplating depriving someone of life or liberty. O.J. Simpson was found not guilty; I still think h…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 11:39 PM
1

In one incident, she said, Freeman "kept trying to lift up my skirt and asking if I was wearing underwear." He never successfully lifted her skirt, she said -- he would touch it and try to lift it, she would move away, and then he'd try again. Eventually, she said, "Alan [Arkin] made a comment telling him to stop. Morgan got freaked out and didn't know what to say." - CNN Surmising that the other accusations are "likely extremely exaggerated" is speculation. What evidence do you have for that be…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 07:15 PM
1

You asked me to say how I viewed harassment. So I gave you an example of a standard definition of sexual harassment and my critique of it. First you critiqued me for the definition including (typically of a woman). I pointed out specifically that I thought the parenthetical was gratuitous. You were so busy trying to take me apart line by line that you missed that I was agreeing with you. You then called me "blue pilled," which is to say ad hominem, which is not logic. Which is different, inciden…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 05:28 PM
1

That's a cop-out. Sure, be rationally skeptical of all sources, but some sources are more reliable than others and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you have some opinions as to who.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 04:34 PM
-1

you can concede defeat to my logic if you wish... This tells me it's an ego project for you, which is to say we could go on for eternity breaking down each other's posts looking for reasons to criticize. And one of the tricks of rhetoric is: you can deconstruct anything line by line and make it look stupid, no matter how valid the points actually are. Do this long enough, you can usually wear out your interlocutor. Then you can take them choosing not to waste their time anymore as a "win." If yo…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 04:28 PM
1

Well, if that's your standard then any actor or actress could be walking around set grabbing every crotch and yelling sexual obscenities, and so long as it wasn't caught on camera there would be no way of calling them to account. Rather than get into the CNN debate, let me just ask: who do you trust and why?
/r/MensRights29/05/18 04:12 PM
0

I could break this down point by point or we could call it quits and agree to disagree. Your call.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 03:50 PM
1

The account of him trying to pull a woman's skirt up has Alan Arkin as a witness. If one were lying, it would be another unnamed actor so as not to be able to pin down. If 18 separate people said they saw Joe try to light a building on fire or Jane trying to steal people's wallets, would we doubt those claims had merit? At this point this is going way beyond a reasonable doubt. I too suspect Melas was biased. It appeared to me she misinterpreted the initial interaction and went on a fishing expe…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 03:29 PM
3

Except this story came out all at once. You might argue this is a possibility of one story followed another followed another, but when they are all contacted and the story released at once, this effect can't apply. Would you want attention for being sexually harassed? Most people find it humiliating. There are some people who will go that far for attention, but most people won't. This is why assault and harassment go underreported. If attention seeking behavior were a compelling reason to step f…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 03:09 PM
2

Basically it's becoming easier for men to engage in collaborative activities without shame and easier for women to engage in competitive activities without shame. This is a good thing, right? We're basically stopping ourselves from shaming people who happen not to fit in with what we assume about their gender. As far as men and women with more "masculine" traits (which so far as I could tell the study didn't actually define) doing better in business, it's a little more complicated. Behaving comp…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 02:57 PM
-1

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/24/entertainment/morgan-freeman-accusations/index.html
/r/MensRights29/05/18 01:59 PM
2

The bandwagon effect only applies to the extent that these separate people know each other. "Did this person assault or harass you" is also not going to be as prone to the bandwagon effect as "4/5 dentists recommend Dentine gu, what do you think?" If they're anonymous, this isn't about fame. If they aren't anonymous, their social media is going to be people calling them sluts and whores until the end of all time. Oh, FFS. Does it make more sense to you that 18 people would have a flawed memory, …
/r/MensRights29/05/18 01:55 PM
2

I think it's extremely clear he's been raped. Which makes the dismissive tone of the article maddening.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 01:50 PM
7

I think the biggest danger is thinking any of this is a contest. it's not a zero sum game: each gender faces its stereotypes and it's challenges, and the challenges of one don't minimize the other. It's exactly the opposite, actually: they tend to exacerbate each other. The same stereotyping of women as weak which makes it harder for them to be taken seriously in the workplace is reflected in men being seen as more threatening, which causes them to get less consideration in the courts.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 04:29 AM
-2

Some of what he did would have technically qualified as assault, but to my knowledge nobody has accused him of that.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 03:24 AM
1

The law was never meant to be considered devoid of individual judgment or empathy. It can't be. Coercion may also have nothing to do with physical size. How do we punch into an algorithm factor someone who intimates that you might lose your job, or raises the possibility of that raise? And that can go either way gender-wise. I appreciate your thoughtful response.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 02:18 AM
5

That tells me you either have a conservative uncle who obsessively forwards memes or are that uncle.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 12:07 AM
3

I don't agree with Melas' interpretation of the encounter that bothered her initially, either. But when you get 18 (17?) other women to talk about him and how he had a reputation for this, then that's a different story. He was probably not ill-intentioned, but he had bad boundaries.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 12:04 AM
10

These are heartbreaking.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 12:00 AM
2

How did he trip, fall, and land on that? It's not inconceivable, but hard to imagine, right? But the article reports this in contrast to the man swearing he didn't do this to himself. There's a pretty obvious third explanation here, and a pretty obvious reason he might not want to talk about it.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:56 PM
8

Oh, honestly, I don't even care how it happened. That would be so horrifying to go through, let alone to then become a salacious public interest story. Just regular anal sex hurts like shit if the other person doesn't know what they're doing. This man must have been in agony for days, and discomfort for weeks after.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:51 PM
1

To some extent I see those days as a condescending pat on the head, like, "Awww, little guy(/gal), you matter too!" I would actually take not having a prominent day as a compliment.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:47 PM
1

Most people I know IRL are feminists. I can't think of one of them that would approve of this. It really was an assault.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 09:27 PM
2

If you mean kissing that guy on stage, I only recently heard about it in the context of her getting a lot of backlash. And by the way, rightly so. That was an incredibly fucked up thing to do, and apparently the guy was really sad about it. It goes to show how even a minor thing physically can be really violating thing for the person receiving it.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 06:23 PM
2

I know, right! That's why male domestic violence incarcerations went up so much after it became popular!
/r/MensRights28/05/18 10:36 AM
1

Their inability to take responsibility for their own actions? The seething, just under the surface hatred that makes you feel like you don't want to be alone with them? The lack sos social skills to have normal female acquaintances and romantic partners? The lack of self0awareness to seek therapy? The 100 hours a week they spend on r/MGTOW?
/r/MensRights28/05/18 09:13 AM
5

And (as a feminist) I think criminal justice reform is a great issue for MRA-sympathetic folk to focus on. The criminal justice system at large is genuinely biased against men. "Hey, you see how women get incarcerated and sentenced less? Men too, please."
/r/MensRights28/05/18 05:43 AM
2

My ire is directed at the story, not at you. Those comments were...the kind of appalling that isn't even funny to satirize.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 05:37 AM
3

No shit they should be getting tampons. They should be getting meals and clothing, too. Adequate sanitary supplies are a need, not a want. But this is a question of, "Is it sexist that we torture women prisoners slightly less?" Well, yes, we should be torturing everyone a whole metric fuckton less. And the policies around the male guards seem...fucking useless. Sexual abuse exists, especially in these environments, to humiliate and establish dominance. Men are probably more at risk from female g…
/r/MensRights28/05/18 05:15 AM
1

Sure. Would you care to provide a more precise definition of snowflake?
/r/MensRights28/05/18 04:45 AM
5

There actually is one rule I go by: doesn't care if people thinks he's gay. It shows comfort in one's own skin.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 07:11 PM
1

In one incident, she said, Freeman "kept trying to lift up my skirt and asking if I was wearing underwear." He never successfully lifted her skirt, she said -- he would touch it and try to lift it, she would move away, and then he'd try again. Eventually, she said, "Alan [Arkin] made a comment telling him to stop. Morgan got freaked out and didn't know what to say." -CNN
/r/MensRights27/05/18 05:11 PM
1

In one incident, she said, Freeman "kept trying to lift up my skirt and asking if I was wearing underwear." He never successfully lifted her skirt, she said -- he would touch it and try to lift it, she would move away, and then he'd try again. Eventually, she said, "Alan [Arkin] made a comment telling him to stop. Morgan got freaked out and didn't know what to say." - CNN
/r/MensRights27/05/18 05:10 PM
1

Man-Repelling Flamethrowers!? Where the hell has this been all my life? "The wage gap is a myth designed to..." Swoosh. "But why don't they call it egalitariani..." Swoosh. "According to Jordan Peterson..." Swoosh. Three things: one, this is a joke. Relax. Two, I checked several articles, they're designed to be nonlethal and so far as I can tell nobody has actually died. Three, ever other reference has referred to these as "Pervert-repelling flamethrowers." Marketed to women, but not necessarily…
/r/MensRights27/05/18 04:11 PM
3

(Rolls eyes). He's a handsy old man who thought he was being charming. Nobody is coming after him on freedom of speech issues. His reputation will be singed but remain intact.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:21 PM
13

If the kid were old enough to be able to articulate both the risks of doing it and why it was important to take those risks anyway, I'd allow it. Go fight your dragons. If I didn't think they understood the risk or how to mitigate it I wouldn't.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:12 PM
1

You know, some would say Freeman should get the torches and pitchforks but I tend to favor asking him to apologize for corrupting the morals of the youth before humanely forcing him to drink hemlock. /s
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:07 PM
1

Two men and a girl walk into a bar. One guy starts playfully trying to reach up her skirt, so she pushes his hand away. So he does it again. So she pushes it away again. Eventually it gets uncomfortable enough that the guy's friend tells him to stop, which he does. ...hilarious!
/r/MensRights27/05/18 02:43 PM
1

We'll see how his indictment tomorrow goes.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 02:02 PM
2

The woman reporting it seemed not to. One would be in their rights to call that assault, but she didn't.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 01:58 PM
20

Happy Unintentional Irony Day!
/r/MensRights27/05/18 10:32 AM
2

I cannot express how disappointing it was to type "misofalakrosist" into Google and find out it's not an actual word. I personally wouldn't make the figures identifiable along lines people might get worked up by. But then perhaps I'm a disgusting Miltonbradleyist.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 09:31 AM
2

That would make this sub a perennial blizzard.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 09:22 AM
1

I see the dilemma but I don't think that's the best response to it.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 07:34 AM
6

He was specifically handsy with some of them. The worst one I read was trying to pull up her skirt. That he was consistently described as either inappropriate or harassing in spite of that tells me he consistently gave the same impression: perhaps irritating but not really threatening.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 07:31 AM
7

One of the reasons I think it's virtually impossible to say there isn't substance to these claims is how consistent they are on one point: out of 18 different people who said he committed some form of harassment, none of them said he committed assault. He's a handsy old man, basically. I'm sure he thought it was harmless.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 06:19 AM
6

Yeah, it's too obviously a troll to take seriously. Hypothetically though, if your 12-year-old, cisgendered son wanted to go to school in a dress, would you let him? (Let's pretend it doesn't violate dress code and assume the kid is making his own point).
/r/MensRights27/05/18 04:16 AM
2

As priorities go it doesn't rank high.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:23 AM
0

I know thy had updated it because of previous complaints about racial bias. If this is their most updated version and it didn't occur to them to fix the gender imbalance as well... Honestly, it's kind of baffling. It would be virtually impossible to get this kind of imbalance by random chance. Maybe it markets better among boys so they cater to them.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:12 AM
1

Most people are bothered at least a little bit by feeling underrepresented. I don't know what if any intent there was behind it, but it seems like a gratuitously dumb mistake to make in 2018. Unless it was a "classic" version or something.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 03:06 AM
1

I'm glad this is out there. I bet a lot of Venmo users don't think to account for this.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 12:34 AM
4

My experience is that it significantly lowers getting complaints from women but significantly raises getting complaints from men. A hetero guy I know once hugged another guy in what was an appropriate moment for the circumstance, but was seen doing it. Within a month he had three sexual harassment complaints from other guys who almost certainly got the impression he was gay and started reading him differently.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 12:03 AM
1

One might draw the conclusion that you're too scared to find out the truth by trying it out. Either way, not my monkey, not my circus. I'm out. Final word is yours if you want it.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 12:11 PM
1

...you reinserted this back in the thread to make it public, and I failed to notice. I switched to PM to change the mode of discussion. I adopted a very different tone with you. I explained my intention clearly multiple times, ignored the barbs you were putting out and gave you my reason for why I was concerned enough to stop the bickering. And you pull this. Do you think this was clever? Do you think this makes you look awesome? The lack of clarity around consent isn't the only problem here. It…
/r/MensRights26/05/18 12:00 PM
1

Okay. So no. I get it. This is the internet and you don't know me. But if you change your mind and have the thought, "Maybe that person wasn't just looking for an opportunity to attack," hit me back up.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 11:39 AM
2

I see I've handled this very wrongly. I am asking your permission to disengage from the debate. To let go of our respective opinions on gender politics or who is straw manning the other. I've put down my guns. I'm not here to attack. I'm here because I have an actual, sincere concern as another human being. Do I have your permission to restate that concern, I hope in a slightly better way, as something for you to consider and perhaps discuss?
/r/MensRights26/05/18 11:29 AM
1

You're still responding to this like a debate. I'm telling you, I'm not PMing you because I want to win an argument. I'm reaching out because what you're saying has me seriously concerned for you. Your comments were tantamount to saying that you don't see the difference between coercion and consent. What I hope is that you were in debate mode, out to score a point and overstated things a bit. But if there's an issue, whatever that issue is, that makes it hard to tell that difference for you I'm …
/r/MensRights26/05/18 10:35 AM
1

I don't know enough about the specifics to presume the politics of this interview. It seems like it was meant as a puff piece. I wasn't really thinking of this as a workplace environment, although to be fair they're both working. I'd expect professional behavior all-around. It's not clear to me that you get I'm agreeing with you about the interpretation of Freeman's comment in this instance.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 08:54 AM
1

I'm becoming unclear on what, precisely, we're talking about. Harassment is usually a workplace complaint, which is different than street harassment, which is also different from when something isn't technically harassment under any code or law but is an assholish move to make. Specifically with Freeman: If what he really meant was, "I wish I could have been there to see you having sex," that's not an okay thing to say to a stranger. It's creepy, but not prosecutable. He'd deserve some hit to hi…
/r/MensRights26/05/18 07:56 AM
1

The recipient of the pass gets to decide if they think the behavior went too far and whether to make a complaint. The police and/or HR department get to decide if there's merit to the claim. It isn't always the woman who gets to decide, but since the point of these rules/laws is to protect people from being victimized, they emphasize the POV of the potential victim of them. One of the more interesting and indeed IMO compelling cases people have made here is that sexual harassment is far less sin…
/r/MensRights26/05/18 07:04 AM
3

This is becoming increasingly creepy, as if you don't get why it's bad to pressure someone to be romantic/sexual with you, or how using power you have over someone to get them to be romantic/sexual with you is bad.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:47 AM
1

Go fight your straw man, then. It's clear whatever I say you will force into your preconception of what "SJW"s think.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:41 AM
1

Do you actually, sincerely disagree that you should try to make someone want to be with you rather than exert pressure on them to feel compelled to be with you?
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:40 AM
1

You're just repeating the part I already agree with you on.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:38 AM
1

Why do you have to bring ageism into it? Sibling then. Most people would say its okay if women make such sexually suggestive passes. Can't speak for them. I disagree. I don't think I have it on me, but there was two women interviewing a guy who is pretty famous. I forget what it was, but basically they were two 20something women who were talking about the guy's shirt and asking him to undo a few buttons, he was laughing and kind of playing along. Morning talk shows are often flirty in that way. …
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:32 AM
1

Me: Makes a point. MRA: But SJWs think (this thing that resembles nothing like what I just said). Me: ....kay. u/4e351d81-7956-461a
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:17 AM
0

Bro (or Sis; God forbid I assume), you're just a sexist dumbass. In your worldview when a disparity seems to disfavor dudes it's a social problem. When a disparity seems to disfavor women it's just the way men and women are. You think men's perspectives are the only ones who count and that they're always only ever the victim. You are, hilariously, the thing you hate, you just swap the genders. If I have your username correct you also have an issue with LGBT people, because of course you do. When…
/r/MensRights26/05/18 05:14 AM
3

Oh for God's sake. It's harassment if it's an unwanted advance. If you feel strongly enough and certain enough about it that it's worth putting your job on the line, go ahead and make the pass. But don't do it with a subordinate; they might not feel like they can say no to you. If they make a pass at you and you reciprocate, that's not harassment but it's also inviting all sorts of trouble into your life. Generally speaking, none of this is worth the hassle. Most people can find someone to date …
/r/MensRights26/05/18 04:54 AM
1

The murdered outnumber the captured, but you admit to not being able to care compared to survivors. To paraphrase myself, I said I find it easier to sympathize with the living rather than the dead. In this specific case that's a covariable I don't think is being accounted for when presuming the reason the young women get more sympathy for their gender. I then brought up a control group to make my point. and not you. It's like talking to a wall. I don’t see a “slow steady burn” regarding child so…
/r/MensRights26/05/18 01:03 AM
1

So this is that point where I could go hard mean or we could have a civil discussion. I'm holding out for civility, in exchange for the same. Technically I think the girls who have been returned to their families were mostly released, probably largely at ransom. I didn't go out of my way to acknowledge this point because the focus of our discussion seemed less about the girls themselves than how we react to them as a (foreign, I'm assuming American) public. That The Lord's Resistance Army is sti…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:48 PM
-5

He's the Ray Comfort of Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:24 PM
1

You would rather be murdered than raped. Check. Not what I said, and making it personal in that way is a dick move. BTW, quite a few of these girls have escaped I'm aware You might want to read more and imagine less. You may want to assume less about my reading habits. Perfect! Show me the push to get them back? I assume it's larger than the one for the girls, there are so many more child soldiers. Or at least an equal sized effort? Was the backlash against Joseph Kony more or less than the back…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:12 PM
0

Speaking personally, it's often hard to know what to do with the natural moral outrage one feels at the unfathomable tragedy of a genocide. For me, it's easier to grapple with the ongoing plight of someone who is alive but in a state of being tortured or brainwashed than of someone already dead. So in this case I do feel more sympathy with the girls, but not specifically because of gender so much as I think they're in an ongoing state of hell. Were I to compare it to the ongoing plight of, say, …
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:39 PM
1

That's a severe distortion of my point.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:28 PM
1

In my home county So I don't know about your home county but it actually makes me quite happy that you can cite local statistics. I hope you're engaged in local politics. So then, this is an open question: what are the available facts on need for service? Are the women's shelter beds going unfilled but men are being turned away? Are the gender non-specific services not fulfilling most of the community's need for service for male survivors? (I'm not approaching this combatively. I think it's a si…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 08:56 PM
1

Asking people to imagine having skin in the game is not an unfair point to make.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 08:26 PM
-1

That's flat out distorting my point, which is that it's hard to directly compare these scenarios in terms of public reaction to them, versus the notion that we can or should have no sympathy for said boys.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 08:25 PM
1

I'm admittedly pretty lost in this back and forth. Yeah, there are times and places where sexual comments are allowed. u/dazed111, I think the point u/4e351d81-7956-461a is trying to make is that you have to factor in context to determine what's appropriate, and I completely agree with that. There are very few rule across all contexts for what is and isn't appropriate to say (with regards to anything). So don't say anything when you're stronger than her?? That rules out damn near all interaction…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 08:20 PM
2

I think it's crucial to consider how this would come across in a situation where one is naturally, justifiably emotionally invested.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 02:50 PM
1

You mean besides that if you're falsely accused your life is effectively over Yeah. Being a rape victim can also have that impact. The question is how to appropriate balance justice and presumption of innocence. That means if it's false, the accuser should receive the same punishment at the rapist. One is libel/slander. The other is rape.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 02:14 PM
1

Almost as easily as one's life can be ruined when it actually happens to you. I wish guys on this sub would spend more time contemplating the amount of consideration they would want as victims of a male rapist and balance that with the amount of consideration they would want as a falsely accused rapist.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 01:42 PM
1

I think it's important to weigh what you would want as a victim in comparison with what you would want as someone falsely accused.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 01:01 PM
2

(Come on, ask me what happened next...)
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:51 PM
0

Seems like pretty clear nonverbal consent to me.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:47 PM
3

Oh, I was far too drunk to consent. I turned myself in to the police immediately.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:40 PM
4

It was college, I was at a kegger... I don't want to talk about it.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:31 PM
2

Yeah. I think that's right.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:30 PM
2

Thanks for the civil exchange.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 12:10 PM
-1

If boys and men are always expected to be able to cope with harsher treatment and circumstances than girls and women who is being oppressed? Both. That's my point. My exact point was that neither's suffering mitigates the other.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:49 AM
3

But how do you prove it was rape?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:43 AM
5

Non-verbal consent is accounted for according to the wording of this article. Again, you wake up in that situation, and the guy in question says, "he wanted it." How do you balance your right to justice in that case with defense against false accusation in the other?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:42 AM
1

I agree with your initial point, and I think it goes deeper than that. Both and.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:32 AM
-5

My point was more that they're not apt as a direct comparison because I think the standard level assumption of what happened to them is different.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:15 AM
1

Was agreeing with you not enough?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 11:13 AM
-7

I don't get the issue here. If you woke up with an ass full of someone else's cum because they roofied you, would that not be rape even though you didn't technically say "no"? That they didn't technically threaten you or "force" you against your resistance? What better balance is there between the right of the victim to seek justice and the right of the accused to defend themselves?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:46 AM
-4

It's not that I think you're wrong, it's that I think it goes deeper than that. The extent to which our outrage is selectively activated by female victimization is directly proportional to the extent to which we assume men are better able to take care of themselves. I suspect, though, that a huge amount of the difference in these cases is the presumption that while the boys were killed the girls were kept alive and serially raped. That adds on several layers of complexity to how we perceive thei…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:26 AM
4

This is pretty much the perfect example of sexism sucking for both genders. The extent to which women get more sympathy as victims is pretty much exactly the extent to which men are assumed to be better able to take care of themselves. The ways in which it sucks for one doesn't mitigate the extent it sucks for the other. Now, let's take it one step farther- switch the genders. If a woman had screamed at a man in exactly the same way, what do you think the reaction would be? That she's a shrew an…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:21 AM
4

You have to have a compelling theory for bias. If someone were to say, "Well I guess that just reflects intrinsic gender differences," what's your counterargument? I think there are ways education is more tailored to young women than young men. Boys are on average more restless and (I believe) more subject to disorders of attention like ADHD. One might make a compelling argument that changes in the way education is structured would compensate for this bias.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 10:06 AM
6

Meaning when it's okay to make a sexually suggestive comment (which is usually a pass). Basically it's not okay if the other person might want to reject it but has some vested interest in making you happy, like if they're worried about their safety or obligated to please you for their job (or their tip). If it's not a pass, ask yourself if it was your kid (both genders), would you be okay with that being said to them in that situation?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 09:55 AM
3

They never specify where it is ok to make sexually suggestive comments btw, it seems you can't make them anywhere. In most circumstances it's this simple: it's okay if it makes it easy or desirable to say yes. It's not okay if it makes it hard to say no. In this case I think the operative test is: would I be okay if Morgan Freeman said this to my daughter? And would I also be okay if Morgan Freeman said this to my son? If both answers are yes, it passes the test.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 09:35 AM
5

The bumbling, thin-skinned male stereotype is the natural complement to the frigid, nagging female stereotype. Everybody Loves Raymond should be burned and never spoken of again. To me this is an illustration of how stereotyping usually cuts both ways: cartoonish depictions of one gender usually lend themselves to opposing cartoonish depictions of the other.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 09:20 AM
2

I'm curious what your point was.* *Not a hostile question. Sincerely curious.
/r/MensRights25/05/18 09:06 AM
1

Why not end imprisonment for everyone but those who pose an ongoing, dire threat to those around them, and get everyone else into treatment, training, and/or a restitution program where they can literally and meaningfully pay back society?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 05:29 AM
2

IMO it's absurd that prenups are seen as this optional accessory rather than the norm. Marriage is a contract; individual couples should be forced to think through the implications of that contract. Monogamy ought to be a term of the marriage you proactively choose, not be considered normal and mandatory. Renewable, time-limited marriages should be an option. There are obviously different models of fairness regarding alimony and child-rearing; there should be maybe 3ish options for how couples w…
/r/MensRights25/05/18 05:23 AM
2

If I'm being honest, I think it's the fact that I spend my mattress time with men rather than women that causes me not to buy into a lot of the MRA arguments; I think a lot of this springs from feeling vulnerable to women in a way that I'm not.
/r/MensRights24/05/18 11:17 PM
-4

The Rohingyas are themselves an oppressed minority, and most oppressed minorities have some minority percentage of people who respond to their oppression by being assholes. Tamil Tigers, for instance. I don't agree with them or their actions. But I also get why some people in their situation might do something like this.
/r/MensRights24/05/18 11:15 PM
2

I already have a fair degree of sympathy for MRAs in the sense that I think the pain people express here is real. I just think it's wrapped in layers of false machismo and defensiveness as well.
/r/MensRights24/05/18 10:49 PM
1

I appreciate your commitment here. I've been responding to a lot of threads between work and am perhaps a bit worn out. I feel like the race and sexual orientation issues risk getting into a derail. Talking about being at relative disadvantage is matter of grammar; I was trying to speak in a neutral way and I don't feel like getting more into this is productive. Is there one point you'd really like to debate, presuming that I'm attempting to have this debate in good faith with you? (I really am,…
/r/MensRights24/05/18 12:10 AM
3

I'm going to speak for myself here on this point, although it is the point I generally heard made: maternity leave encourages kids to bond with the mom, who learns what their language is as infants. By not learning that dads become the secondary parent. Paid paternity leave redresses this by letting the father get to know his kid at the ground level up. It also creates fewer barriers to entry for women (God forbid you mention that you're about to get married as a woman in an interview). It's jus…
/r/MensRights24/05/18 12:00 AM
2

I see it as both. I'm of the opinion sexism usually hurts both men and women. I am such a feminist. It is strange to be told "feminists never wanted this..." when I am, personally, a feminist advocating for this.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:55 PM
1

For what it's worth, your effort to say this was appreciated.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:53 PM
1

So you chose to perpetuate the notion that it's rape only when men do it No. Ensuring there continues to be no social stigma for a women who rape. Actually my point is predicated on the current lack of that stigma. For you to say "Ensuring there continues to be..." acknowledges my point. I don't think it's fair, either, but it is how society tends to interpret things now. Because you couldn't argue against a boy, who by your own admission wasn't exactly great at defending his own arguments, abou…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:44 PM
2

You'd get somewhere with me on male circumcision. It is to my mom's credit that she had the integrity to apologize to do it to me before she passed. Try to get them to at least admit that they are much safer than men in day-to-day life, and that security measures society takes for women would be better served if they were extended to men as it would help far more victims, you'll get nowhere. You'd have to get into some specifics here, but I'm not natively opposed. At least with online feminists,…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:38 PM
1

I mean, I don't much know how to speak to the experience of "that bloke in Canada."
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:35 PM
1

Awesome. A point of agreement.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:33 PM
1

Well, somewhat to my embarrassment I started off as someone critical of it based on the negative stereotyping of it. So the primary examples I have of that in my personal life are me. As far as national/international affairs go, as an American we aren't exactly governed by a feminist-friendly Administration right now.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:33 PM
2

I can't tell you how uplifting it is to hear that. Thanks. Be well.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 11:31 PM
1

This and this make my point.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 08:22 PM
1

Not as many as should, but: https://fairygodboss.com/maternity-leave-resource-center?sortBy=paid_paternity_sort&order=desc The better the paternity leave, the easier it is for women to work meaning the easier it is to have a duel-income family. That's a feminist issue. because men are under vastly more pressure to earn money and turn up to work. A great example of sexism that hurts men. They're looked down on for taking paternity leave. That norm needs to change. Have feminists ever cared about …
/r/MensRights23/05/18 08:19 PM
1

That's not stating a question.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 08:09 PM
5

Have you heard any feminists saying we need paid leave for men specifically? Yeah. Literally just Google "feminism paid paternity leave" and several links will show you this. If I asked feminists why not they'd all say what do you expect? if men want stuff they should lobby it for themselves. Me, a feminist, literally just made the counterargument here. I can't represent my point and defend the straw man at the same time. Do the articles you cite not support the poicy that's also good for men? I…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 08:08 PM
1

You made the point that black women get paid less when education is accounted for. I googled it. Every link I encountered said otherwise. I'm not actually particularly hostile to the claim' it's conceivably true although I find it intuitively unlikely. I gave you counter-evidence. Help me out and show me your evidence. Well I guess we know you're not a teacher of English comprehension now. No. No I was not saying that. Okay. But you did say both: that male shits on all the other males to secure …
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:57 PM
1

You haven't precisely been a good faith interlocutor here. Do me a solid: pick one question you want to engage with and state it to me in your best faith way, such as a productive conversation might ensue.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:43 PM
4

If you define feminism as man-hating, no point sympathetic to men I could make will be viewed as feminist. Paid paternity leave is a feminist issue, though, because it makes it easier for women to get back to work more quickly while giving fathers more time to bond with their infants. Women pay less for having both a family and career; men get to enjoy their family more. Everyone benefits.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:38 PM
2

I sympathize with many of the pro-men arguments on here. Some I think are deeply under-researched, and anything feminist is generally shat on on principle even when it would benefit men as well (paid paternity leave, for instance). I'm frustrated in part because you guys don't make your best arguments. There's a grown-up MRA movement that this place is still in the adolescence of. But then, r/feminism isn't grown-up feinism either, so...
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:11 PM
1

Don't shit on rape victims was my point, and I would have been just as quick to point that out had the survivor been a boy.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:06 PM
1

You're telling me the it's better for black women? I'd love to see your source. Speaking of not having thought hard enough about things, "that male shits on all the other males to secure his sexual rights of access to all the females," is a phrase I don't really don't think you've considered from the female perspective. You're saying someone having to beat someone else down to compete for their "sexual rights of access to you" is a position you'd want to be in? But hey, I suppose I havent' conte…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 07:03 PM
1

Adieu
/r/MensRights23/05/18 04:01 PM
1

I thought I was making a point the audience I was speaking to would miss. It would appear that has been validated.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 03:51 PM
1

Oh. You mean I remind you of your cumrag. That's insulting, but uninformative.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 03:48 PM
1

Oh? How so?
/r/MensRights23/05/18 03:43 PM
1

Men's reputations are, in general, rewarded for them being sexually aggressive. Women are punished for it. So for him to be a creeper is to say, "He's got bad game." For her to be called a slut is to say, "She's a bad person." The difference is him doing the right thing in the wrong way versus her successfully doing the wrong thing. I think that's a generalization that isn't really valid anymore. I hope you're right. I'd sincerely love to be wrong on this point.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 03:00 PM
1

Wait! You mean this whole time...I've been the problem!? Jumps up, races out door to fix all the things.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:55 PM
1

You didn't ask a question that time. I had thought you meant that in reference to me. If you meant you, I can't tell you that you're using "spic" wrong. Well...if there's a "right" way.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:52 PM
1

Sure, depending on the situation. At the same time, ask a large mixed gender group to raise their hands if they've gone out of their way to avoid rape specifically (as opposed to general physical harm). Virtually every woman will raise her hand; virtually no man will.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:43 PM
1

You're using your slurs wrong.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:37 PM
1

Have you ever had the experience of someone coming off so strong about something that information you're otherwise not defensive at all about feels weird to disclose? You're doing that right now. That may be why the downvotes. Against my better judgment: I'm a gay white dude.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 04:20 AM
2

I'll read a link. I won't watch a video. I'm not actually hostile to your point about Sweden, but you brought it out of left field as a rhetorical hammer rather than as a meaningful point of debate. I'm not catering to that tactic.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 04:12 AM
1

They are positive about things like the street in Tulsa that is getting named after them and the Pope being nice to them. We aren't at a point where anything like that would happen for us. The LGBT movement has done things like forcing Christian bakers to bake their wedding cakes, ousting Brendan Eich, boycotting Chick-fil-A, trolling Rick Santorum's search results, and generally complained a lot about media representation. Do you consider those positive or negative? Have you considered that you…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 04:09 AM
1

I haven't heard of many guys going through the situations you described either. Emphasis on the word: many. I'm sure you have an example of each. There are also some problems with the examples you brought up, but rather than get into that I'd rather submit the following premise and see if we can agree on it: Labeling a woman a slut is fairly common but less socially damaging. Falsely labeling a man a rapist is rarer but overall more socially damaging.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 04:03 AM
1

Yeah. Poor Sweden. Last scene drifting off into the Norwegian Sea. I can't respond to words you put in my mouth, man.
/r/MensRights23/05/18 03:54 AM
1

It's not this subreddit. It's anywhere I've ever seen MRA's online. Thus sub was just...what I was expecting. If you want a direct comparison, I'd say go the the LGBT subs. There's a lot more positivity because there's more people channeling their energy towards positive ends. Confirmation bias; people see what they're looking for and miss what they're not. MRAs look for the worst in feminists and feminism.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 11:29 PM
1

At the cost of her still being labeled a slut, and also a liar. His rumors don't bear that penalty on him.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 11:22 PM
1

I hope that you see my broader point here that the bad faith becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because in the real world, most feminists are closer to my point of view than what the people on this forum think feminism is. Do you at least understand why we assume such bad faith from feminists? That's what I hope for you to take away from this. I think a lot of guys feel like their issues are being minimized, and in some cases I would agree. But if more people were out there in the real world ac…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 11:09 PM
2

No. Boys. The point is the social shame it brings, and people would write off girls as an orgy.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:44 PM
1

We probably have several, it's just that now that I'm identified as being on evil team feminist I'm the automatic enemy and we'll never get there.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:42 PM
0

I'm saying context matters. I'm also not saying either situation is okay; they're both wrong. They're both sexual harassment.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:22 PM
1

What rational response would you expect me to have to that kind of ad hominem? Or better yet, if you'd like a civil discussion, what are you saying is the flaw in my logic at large?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:18 PM
1

I prefer Ms. Lee, and I was rather proud of coming up with that as my drag name.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:15 PM
1

Good luck with that petition to the SPLC.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:15 PM
1

You clearly don't know my views.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:14 PM
1

Actually no. I don't. There are relative privileges women have.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:13 PM
-2

That is, to be un PC... absolutly fucking retarded.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 12:00 PM
2

You...literally think a crows would cheer a girl forcibly sodomizing a boy. You actually think that?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:54 AM
1

The call is coming from inside the house.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:49 AM
1

In that case give up your stupid evangelical beliefs and also get into rehab
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:48 AM
1

1, No. I'm not. Re-read the thread. Also no. (Edit: That's weird...I have these separated as 1 and 2 and it comes out as a subpoint. Sorry. Not sure how I fucked up the editing there)
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:46 AM
1

Definitely. Because we live in a world where boys and girls are totally, equally strong and where rape happens absolutely equally across genders. Have fun looking up that study tickling the back of your brain showing men are raped more than women.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:42 AM
1

Yeah. The crowd would never come to the advantage of a boy being sodomized by a girl. "He's so lucky!" they'd think.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:37 AM
1

That's not what I'm saying.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:27 AM
0

I see. So people are trying to get women into STEM because "vagina" but I'm absurd? Sure. Speaking of accepting things because they have holes in them, your argument that institutions that are mostly male dominated have an anti-male bias is...fun. it's obvious that is the leading contributive factor. Is it? So...women get accepted to colleges more because people are just biased against men but men get higher paying jobs because they're just more driven. Intriguing. Very logical. Can't see any fl…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:25 AM
-1

PM me if you care to continue the conversation.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:17 AM
1

Oh good. Youtube.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:15 AM
1

Well, I definitely was part of the push for this in the U.S., so I don't take responsibiliity for others who held the opposite position.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:13 AM
1

That's not what I said, and I'm getting a wee bit tired of explaining to MRAs how reading comprehension works.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:12 AM
1

I suppose if you're criticizing me on feminist grounds Ill take the conceptual win at my personal expense. Cheers.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:10 AM
-2

I'm willing to bet Jamie doesn't fucking exist, but to the greater point if you're telling me that the threat of being falsely accused of rape is more compelling than the threat of being raped, I'm curious as to the basis of your claim.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:07 AM
1

If you care to get into any specific point, cool.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:06 AM
1

I'm glad you get it.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 10:03 AM
1

How does he approach you? Where? Is there reason to be intimidated in that situation?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 09:12 AM
-7

Is it that much of an assumption that physically fit teenage boys are stronger than physically fit teenage girls? I feel like this is a point MRAs harp on to some extent. There are average differences in gender. Personally I don't dispute that point. Physical strength is one of them. Yeah, teasing, harassment and intimidation are different things.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 05:11 AM
-1

As a man I steeply disagree.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 05:09 AM
-11

I agree with much of what you say, but if it's inconceivable to you that women are ever on the downside in these situations then I don't see enough common ground to continue the discussion.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 04:37 AM
0

Hm, by introducing her second I already had the image of Jamie in my mind as physically fit. For this to make sense I think it makes sense to presume both are in good shape for their age and gender. He can find a way to come at her later. Or spread rumors that she's a bitch or a slut. Women tend to have to worry more about that than men.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 04:33 AM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 04:30 AM
1

Okay, if every point at which we might agree on is dismissed as me being one rando on the internet, this really won't go anywhere at all. I'm not asking you to speak for all MRAs. I'm speaking for me. You speak for you. For the sake of brevity, is there one or two points you'd like to focus on? Responding to all this will just snowball the exchange.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 04:28 AM
3

I once taught in a place where a girl got gangraped at a party by a bunch of high school boys. One of my students was talking about it in the aftermath and said, "Well, she was drunk!" I walked up to him. "Well, she was drunk so..." He looked at my blankly. I said, "You brought up her alcohol level for a reason. She was drunk, therefore...finish the sentence." Nervous stare, now. "You mean she was drunk, therefore she was fair game." "Well, I mean...yeah. No. I don't know." "Okay. Take a moment.…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 04:03 AM
4

If it's a private club with some form of membership dues, then it's legal. You can exclude pretty much anyone on the basis of that. An while it's been a long, long time since I've been to a gay bathhouse, I don't super want women allowed in there either. The problem with these spaces can be that they can become a networking club for those who want to exclude others based on their prejudices (ie., our Board of Directors only ever meets at this male only golf course). But people should have their …
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:53 AM
2

I really, really, really want to pull this prank on my gay partner now.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:47 AM
-23

There is a difference. There is, typically, more of an intimidation factor when a man does this to a woman versus the other way around. Jamie probably doesn't have much to worry from Gina physically intimidating her into getting more sexual than he wants. For Gina, that fear is more likely to be true.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:45 AM
58

I wouldn't want people constantly comparing me to pictures of me around 20ish either.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:38 AM
3

Anecdotal evidence isn't adequate to this claim. There needs to be some empirical evidence to back it up.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:36 AM
1

I'd say identity politics is a matter of how you behave relative to your identity within a system I would also say (and in some ways this is more important) it impacts what you think is reasonable to expect from the system you inhabit. A lot of white people blame black people for getting shot by police officers in certain situations because they operate on the assumption of how white people tend to get treated by the police rather than how black people do. We empathize with whom we can relate to…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 01:07 AM
1

Have you ever tried to argue with regards to something: "Yeah, I think your general critiques are valid but at the same time I think you're overestimating their importance and I don't think your line of reasoning is what will lead to a solution"? That's me with the Duluth Model. It's a hard position to argue. Happy to go into more detail on this should you wish. If men are victims, it's victims of ourselves under that model. I don't see it that way. it's a societal way of thinking that both gend…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 12:53 AM
0

One of many generic lists. My point here is this: it goes both ways. Actually, I would even argue that it goes both ways inversely: find something that acts against one gender, you can find a thing that acts against the other gender by inverse. (Men are convicted more because they are seen as more threatening :: women are taken less seriously because they are perceived as less of a threat). Many things are, like academic admissions and employment. That operates on the presumption that, as things…
/r/MensRights22/05/18 12:29 AM
1

I'm an equality minded person and a feminist. Don't know what to tell you.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:40 PM
1

Yeah, sadly, that's largely true, IMO. I sympathize as to why, but...I don't think it ultimately helps. There should be some "members only" subs where people get to talk within their in-groups, but mainline forums aren't the place for that.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:39 PM
0

I know you're a troll, and I'm right on the verge of blocking you unless you start having an adult conversation.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:36 PM
1

I'm not in the mood to defend the mods at r/feminism at the moment given recent experience. All I would say is that they aren't necessarily representative of feminists as a whole.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:29 PM
2

That was a thoughtful reply, and I hope we can have a civil discussion. My position is: everyone has an identity politics based on your race, class, gender, sexual orientation, etc. The worst stance is to be unaware you have one, and therefore unable to account for it. Second to worst is adopting a supremacy stance (my identity is better that yours). Ideally you view it as your frame of reference; I see the world this way but have the capacity to realistically imagine the world from other points…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:27 PM
1

Define yourself by what you positively want, not by want you hate. That way you can be indifferent to whether feminism exists or not so long as your cause gets what it wants. I'm gay. I don't care nearly as much about the bullshit, hateful Family Research Council as I used to. They're everything I hate, but these days I get to bask in their increasing irrelevance than worry about how they might come after my family. Be pro-you, not anti-something else. Otherwise you make your life miserable.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:18 PM
0

Okay. I'll bite. Can you give me your sources?
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:14 PM
1

That's an excellent question. I think that feminists have, by and large, progressed past the concept that gender is a zero-sum game. I think MRAs are still in that phase. I think MRAs don't take seriously enough the concept that sexism seriously hurts both ways, and that measures that make things better for women tend to make things better for men. A prime example is coequal parenting measures. I wish people understood that concept like "toxic masculinity" aren't actually antagonistic to men. Me…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 05:08 PM
1

Because, "once they meet all my needs I'll contemplate taking their needs seriously" ever got anyone anywhere. All the best of luck.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:01 PM
1

The reward for winning the fight for a cause is your movement becoming irrelevant. I don't think we're there, but I welcome the day we are.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 08:49 AM
0

If words mean nothing and we can be free to interpret things as we wish rather than on the basis of what the other person actually said: Thank you! You know, it's friendly, thoughtful discussions like this that really represent this sub well!
/r/MensRights21/05/18 08:46 AM
1

That is completely missing my point.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 08:43 AM
1

Anti-feminism has been popular since...well, feminism. Feminism survived the Moral Majority, the Red Scare that associated it with communism, and Phyllis Schlafly. It'll be fine.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 04:04 AM
0

It's because people think you are basically concern trolling That is my presumption as well, but it precludes the capacity for honest an open dialogue in most circumstances. You don't believe me unless I'm mean, but you assume I'm a mindless feminazi unless I'm nice. To me, it's the beginning of a tedious, patronizing argument that ignores what we have been saying and what your movement has been doing. Couldn't have stated a feminist critique of MRAs better myself. Again I think this boils down …
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:59 AM
1

I dunno what to tell you. If you're that defeatist about the things you care about then...okay. Good luck.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:52 AM
1

I said institutionalized, not systematic. Nevertheless, I'd like to see how women are oppressed in either sense. Rather than list examples (and there are endless listicles of them on the internet) I want to focus on the phrase, "how women are oppressed." I just want to be clear that IMO most of this isn't necessarily intentional anymore. The "oppressor" isn't men in general. You definitely insinuated it. Oh, no. Look, I'm a feminist on an MRA forum who tries to be nice but mostly has no fucks to…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:50 AM
-5

This sub is none too friendly to certain facts. r/feminism has (IMO) an itchy trigger finger on trolling, but that's not necessarily representative of feminism as a whole and is, at the very least, an understandable reaction to being the vanguard feminism sub on, well, Reddit. ...Come to think of it, I never have (and never will) step foot on 4chan, but God help the mods who have to police whatever feminism forum exists on that.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:31 AM
1

If we're going to talk about anecdotal examples, I would note that my original point here was that this was specifically a case in which I think we should examine the claim critically until further evidence comes to light. I'm actually on your side regarding Besson. That just doesn't mean I think we should be dismissive of claims, either.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:13 AM
2

I don't worship the law, so I could care less. I've never followed laws just because they were laws. An excellent attitude to retain, particularly with regards to Biblical law. It is excellent to hear that this is not your approach.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 03:04 AM
0

Women don't really face any institutionalized sexism or institutionalized dangers. Men do. This, to me, is the hallmark of a futile interaction. I have no problem acknowledging that men are systemically disadvantaged in some ways. If someone can't acknowledge that the reverse is also true, they're seeing what they want to see. Also, to insinuate that I don't show females empathy is beyond ignorant. It would be. That isn't what I said. What I said is that it's harder to empathize with pain you ha…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:57 AM
-1

Individual, anecdotal claims don't prove the point that men are underprivileged in this regard. Again, I want to emphasize: I have all sympathy and mean no disrespect to the people this happens to. But I have to admit (and I don't want to start a hostile interaction here, but this was a frustration) that it was irritating to hear you use the Mark Twain quote. The inability to cite statistics in your favor is not an excuse to dismiss statistics, and Twain was referring to the way they could be ab…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:50 AM
2

If your God is Christ, his words said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." He also didn't shy away from engaging on a personal level with prostitutes and tax collectors. You know who judged him for that? The Pharisees. Otherwise known as: the primary bad guys of the New Testament. As for the law, no protected class but religion has special rights by which to supercede federal law or discriminate against other groups. This is not my feeling; this is the world in which we operate. But of …
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:37 AM
0

I'll stop assuming bad faith when feminists give me a reason to stop. I'm trying, I guess? I am just me. But I don't think I'm the exception; I don't think most feminists operate from the presumption of female superiority in 2018. We rarely get to talk to feminists about these things since their spaces are so authoritarian and censorious, and they rarely come into ours. Here I am. Honestly, I've got thick skin. Probably too thick. I couldn't burn toast off of the heat most people have given me h…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:33 AM
6

I had an experience yesterday (as a feminist) where I engaged with someone who was coming across as a troll on r/feminism but whom I thought was more missing the point. He got banned. He PM'd me. I explained the ways in which I thought there was a misunderstanding and why he came across as a troll. He got it, and acknowledged the misunderstanding. So I decided to message the mods and say, "Hey, I get how this guy comes across, but I don't think he's a troll so much as a pedant." I didn't expect …
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:21 AM
1

Feminism was the underdog, too. Trans people are roughly 1% of the population and they have a strong advocacy effort on their behalf. When I hear people say they don't have the backing, I think: either you don't know how to organize or you don't know how to form alliances. I mean, seriously, Wikipedia on [Men's Rights Organizations.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Men%27s_rights_organizations0 Unless there's some massive underground MRA movement happening offline that's...(I don't want t…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:12 AM
-4

I mean, to the extent they exist false rape allegations are usually scared kids who don't want their conservative parents to know they had consenting sex and spouses who don't want to admit to an infidelity. I don't think the definition of rape is really the issue. People’s careers do get crushed by single accusations without proof of guilt by court or by jury. I'm sure that happens, too. But...how eften? Is this a statistic that ranges up even into the 1% range? Not to dismiss the tragedy for t…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:03 AM
1

My response is that it's like looking at a Picasso. I recognize and wouldn't necessarily disagree with a lot of individual bits of it but the Gestalt is just confusing and sexist. Which is to say, probably a Jordan Peterson quote.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:53 AM
2

It can't (legally) insight violence. I felt like the legally was implicit. And no, the church has far more leeway to discriminate than virtually anything (or anyone) else.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:27 AM
1

Christ, would that it were obvious in this day and time. But point appreciated, and cheers.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:26 AM
-1

You know what the super-honest answer to that is? Wallets. Wallets fuck up men's backs. Not women's backs, mind you. But men's. Why is that? Because men tend to keep their wallets in a back seat pocket. This causes them to sit slightly unevenly, which causes them to develop back problems over time. And when you first start wearing your wallet in your back pocket, it's super uncomfortable. In around three days you're used to it and don't notice the discomfort. Okay, internet rando, what's the poi…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:24 AM
0

So on the basis of this report alone, what we have is a single, thus far anonymous accusation wherein charges have not yet been filed. On the basis of this alone, I would argue nobody should jump to conclusions. False rape accusations are rare, but he has no prior history of known harassment (that I could find) and it's still being figured out. So for a studio to fire him thus far would be premature, and for the public to automatically operate under the presumption of his guilt would be prematur…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 01:12 AM
0

Just to clarify, you mean the claims made in the link? Ed: Meaning the link you sent?
/r/MensRights21/05/18 12:42 AM
1

Well, for what it's worth I agree with you in principle. I don't think it should or needs to be a zero-sum game in most instances. There are a couple of reasons why I'm more critical of the MRA side. I think their arguments are often weaker. I personally see (and confirmation bias no doubt plays a part, but still it seems overwhelmingly so) much more willingness on the feminist side to actually consider the ways in which men as well as women are targets of the way things are. Feminism, while oft…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:58 PM
1

I'm in a Poe's Law situation here. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or what you're trying to convey.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:53 PM
1

If you limit it to that, toxic masculinity cannot be the end-all-be-all of men's issues the way feminists seem to say it is. I don't think it is the end-all-be-all and I don't personally see other feminists making that claim either. Disposability isn't just Social Darwinism. It's also the expectation of tolerating unfair treatment. That's the underlying theme of most of my examples. I think there are plenty of ways in which the world is systematically unfair to men, but I don't particularly agre…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:50 PM
1

The point about paternity fraud raises too many complicated issues that I don't feel would necessarily be productive to get into. I'm on the fence but it's not necessarily a sticking point for me. I guess I would say that however we treat it, it should be on par with the way we treat men who tamper with paternity tests to get out of being identified as the biological father. The good news about marriage is that people are defaulting on it less than they used to, but I think "default" points out …
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:41 PM
-1

If you want we can talk about the link you posted but most of it doesn't stand up terribly well to scrutiny. Also, when you say, "Read this link and read it closely," I picture you as Maleficent saying, "Listen and listen well!" It's a little douchey; I doubt you'd respond well if someone said that to you. We disagree as to most of the links, although I can far from justify all of them. My biggest criticism of it as a list is that it's weighted more heavily towards things people have said rather…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:30 PM
1

I considered posting this, which discusses the research but doesn't directly cite it and also meta-analyzes it in a way that I'm afraid would derail the conversation. I am personally unaware if the research has linked higher arousal in women specifically to lowered empathy; it has so in men (with testosterone's effect on the brain being the presumed mechanism). I think it's probably not controversial that while young men and women are both immature about sex, they way in which they are immature …
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:21 PM
1

Dismissing the scientific credibility of academic psychology at this point is backwards thinking. There was a time not that long ago the criticism would have been merited, but it no longer is.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:49 PM
0

I was really clear about what I meant in the original post.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:46 PM
1

A great example of a standard that hurts men and women.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:32 PM
1

I would argue the opposite. It's all about them and their needs. Love is about being willing to sacrifice for another person out of your care for them.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:31 PM
-2

Tomato/tomatuh? The point either way is you're focused more on fulfilling your own needs rather than the other person.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:30 PM
0

So do you think we could come to a reasonable compromise between us? I'm with you on the last paragraph. Same page on dress codes. I'm fine with sex ed teaching hypergamy, so long as they don't frame it as "gold digging." Instead of offering those who reach the age of consent free vasectomies, mandate that vasectomies be covered by insurance (if they aren't already). I'd be worried about the fallout to men from making paternity fraud illegal, but I don't feel like I know enough about it to expre…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:23 PM
1

Men are less socialized to fear rape. Men put a lot less work into avoiding being raped specifically (as opposed to general self-protective measures). That doesn't make their fears or feelings any less real. It just means that sexual harassment has a gendered dynamic.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:04 PM
1

Not in a good way. Hot people tend to be listened to less. Attractive women are, on the whole, taken less seriously at work than unattractive women. Have you ever been put on a pedestal (sexual or otherwise)? It tends to suck, because the person doing it isn't really seeing you. They're too caught up in their own needs.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:02 PM
2

Upon consideration, I think it might actually make the most sense to ask "Would a reasonable women feel harassed in this situation?" in cases for women and men.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 08:59 PM
1

I am intrigued by the research that suggests that women are more predisposed towards the type of sexual harassment that involves manipulation while men are more predisposed towards the type that involves intimidation (ie., kiss me if you want that bonus vs. kiss me because we're alone in this elevator and I'm bigger than you). A little background googling found a study suggesting that the application of these different standards doesn't necessarily affect the outcome all that much in these cases…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 08:14 PM
0

Okay. So if you found a magic lamp and a genie popped out and offered you the chance to remold social gender norms to what you think they should be, what would that look like?
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:56 PM
-1

In reference to the concept of toxic masculinity, yes, I think fair way of describing it in non-dictionary terms would be, "Men being punished for being too feminine." That is a problem. That doesn't mean men don't have other problems. You want to talk about male disposability? I'm down. I think it's a real thing. I think we tend to hold men more accountable to the concept (misappropriation, really) of Social Darwinism, wherein the "strong" survive and the weak perish/are sidelined. Which is a p…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:52 PM
-1

I would say it's putting people on a pedestal. Idealizing someone reduces empathy too because you don't really see them as human.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:38 PM
0

I've seen different lists like this, and I actually appreciate that the person who composed this one showed some care to specifically link what he cites to feminism and to contextualize when that link isn't as direct. I know there's no way to say this without sounding confrontational even though that's not my intent, but I think one would be hard-pressed to compose as long a list of MRA accomplishments for men with as strong a direct link.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:36 PM
1

No.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 05:34 PM
0

Is marrying up bad for society? I don't personally think so? Rigid, cross-generational class lines seem like a bad thing. Failed monkey branch? I'm really not getting what you mean here. I mean, how many times have you seen "16 tips to drive him wild" or "10 things men hate in a relationship" while standing in the check-out aisle? The more high-minded version of this tends to revolve around girl's self-esteem and getting them to act more confidently. The notion of changing women's behavior isn't…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 05:33 PM
4

It was a legit study, although it didn't immediately come up on Google for me or I'd link it. I should mention the effect was observed to be temporary (it went away when arousal did). Of all things I'm not super sure why this is getting so many downvotes? Who hasn't had that experience of getting off to something on PornHub and then immediately feeling kind of gross about what they just watched, even if it was vanilla? Watching porn when I'm not aroused makes me feel kind of embarrassed for the …
/r/MensRights20/05/18 05:25 PM
4

As an adult, you typically have to have a couple different wardrobe sets. There's business, business casual, evening formal, evening informal (ie., "club" wear) and casual. To the extent that this is an exercise in training people to dress business/business casual, I'm fine with the dress code. To the extent that it is an intentional effort to "slut it down" by having girls cover up more of their body...meh. The letter is right; spaghetti straps aren't going to be the difference between driving …
/r/MensRights20/05/18 01:28 PM
-12

There is research to show that sexual arousal tends to reduce empathy, which is to say, causes people to be more inclined to objectify the person they are attracted to. Think about the ways teens discuss sex vs. the way men do. Teens describe it in a much more impersonal, objectifying way where getting their own needs met ('scored') is the focus. Men tend to discuss it in a much more relational way. Learning not to objectify the person you are attracted to is a developmental achievement.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 01:19 PM
2

u/Cuttlefish444 I think I may bookmark this interaction as the platonic form of what toxic masculinity looks like.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 12:32 PM
5

What's your best personal outcome, and how does filing the police report help you achieve it? Yes, the police are likely to believe you. They may also not do much about it without some compelling evidence. If you're afraid, document everything that's happening the day it happens. James Comey that shit. If you think you're in serious physical harm, then you should try to remove yourself from the situation and file a report.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:42 AM
1

So. OP. You got responses from both subs. Did either one convince you more?
/r/MensRights20/05/18 11:37 AM
1

You see the problems with the book you cited, yeah?
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:56 AM
2

No worries. When and if you have time. Thanks for the civil engagement.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:55 AM
-6

This comment struck me: I also noticed a link about Swedish feminists finally opening a male shelter after years of pressure by MRA's. The article itself doesn't bring up MRAs so I'm assuming that's from a different source, but it's so positive in terms of being supportive of men with regards to sexual assault and combatting the issue of stigma. This is a win. This is a total, unambiguous, 100% win. Even if this had to come after years of MRA advocacy, that means your advocacy paid off. We can f…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:53 AM
2

Whoo! (Wipes tear from eye). Thanks for the laugh. I haven't read a synopsis like that since Utopia X.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:33 AM
2

You are incorrect, good sir! The four classes in this world are economy, premium economy, first class and business!
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:12 AM
2

I'm hitting Poe's Law here. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 08:59 AM
4

I sincerely doubt that's the key factor. In fact, if anything I think sexual liberation has aided in people finding lasting attachment because it lets people marry for the right reasons rather than out of a pressure to have sex. I think there's a big, glaring technological advance that's largely to blame and we're both on it right now.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:40 AM
4

If you want people to take your issue seriously, you have to take it seriously. Some generalized, shitty remark isn't doing false rape accusation victims any favors.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:12 AM
10

Virtually everyone I've heard is frustratingly wrong on this topic. The answer isn't to legalize prostitution (which I'm in favor of, incidentally, but it wouldn't help most of these people all that much). It isn't to "man up, put on a better suit of clothes and make yourself a better partner." The answer is connection. People are lonely, and they don't know how to actually reach out to each other in real life. Most of the people described are suffering from some pretty crippling social anxiety.…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 07:05 AM
2

That's because most people on here don't really have a working theory of the problem beyond, "Society hates men" or "Feminists!" Want to change suicide? Do some research on factors specifically drive up suicide in men relative to women (hint: look at the specific age and race demographics). Then develop a working theory from which you formulate a solution. Figure out a way to target the communities that are underserved by targeting why, specifically, they are underserved. Want to change circumci…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 06:42 AM
2

The church doesn't have to cater to gay people. it doesn't have to accept them into the church. It doesn't have to marry them. It doesn't have to preach tolerance or acceptance of them. It can't insight violence against them. It can't deny selling them access to a wedding chapel if it sells out that chapel for rent to the public. Otherwise it can discriminate all it wishes. Just like churches, to this day, can refuse to accept black people in their ranks and deny marrying interracial couples.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 04:48 AM
0

I'm just going to liveblog this: On the other hand, Toxic Femininity is a taboo subject. Is it? I don't ever hear it used, but it's one that doesn't bug me as a feminist. They would instead define it as a complex of harmful ideals, expectations and behaviors intrinsic to masculinity and supported by culture, that are encapsulated in the phrase “patriarchy hurts men too”. He might have had me but for the word "intrinsic." These are cultural norms, not (IMO) innate ones. Now, geek feminism is an i…
/r/MensRights20/05/18 01:34 AM
1

...goddammit. (Just kidding, I'll totally check it out). Ed: I had a Futurama flashback to that post. Fry: I can't swallow that! Farnsworth: Good news! It's a suppository!
/r/MensRights20/05/18 12:57 AM
2

Probably not; I prefer reading material to videos. I'd stand by most of them, but even if one doesn't I think it's important to note they aren't criticisms of men being bad. They're criticisms of the expectations we hold men to, and by extension how they are harmful primarily to men.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 12:41 AM
1

A list of examples of toxic masculinity norms.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 12:13 AM
1

Have a good day.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:47 PM
1

What would you like to happen next? Ed: If you think this was a win, then you won. The question isn't really "what happens next?" it's how you'd want to see that win built on.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 04:14 PM
1

I don't think all MRAs are evil/misogynist. I also work hard to keep the division in my mind between the people who post about men's rights online and people in the real world: people have such a (IMO) distorted view of what feminism is because they're used to hearing about feminism on Twitter. I try not to replicate that mistake.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:32 PM
1

Yes, MRA is identity politics. That is part of the reason that I usually don't label myself as an MRA, and the main reason I would never vote for a single issue MRA politician. (Stops for a moment. Sips coffee. Savors the win. Whatever comes next, we could at least meet this far). Feminists and I rarely agree, but #MeToo. Flaws and overreach notwithstanding, it took too long to fix something that has been darkly hinted at for all my life. I have plenty of songs in my collection by female artists…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:23 PM
0

you know it isn't we know it isn't I'm saying you've gotten the wrong impression about it. You can't call slur Jews and say its ok because "social expectations" or whatever. Would you say "Jewish guilt" is an attack on Jewish people? I think you call it dog whistling. (Shrugs). I'm not precisely shy about stating in no uncertain terms what I disagree on. I'm not dogwhistling you. Again, where is the toxic femininity in this? I answered this. I gave you several examples. True, the term specifical…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:04 PM
4

And what of the gay cafe owner that kicked Christians out if his cafe? You mean the ones harassing his customers? How about Muslim barbers vs women's hair? Are there more single sex Muslim barbershops versus single sex barbershops of other kinds? A quick Google search showed me two examples, one in Canada in 2012 that was resolved amicably and one in Australia that didn't actually seem to have anything to do with their being Muslim. It's a vaguely interesting question. Sex isn't as strongly prot…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 02:40 PM
-6

Toxic masculinity is a deeply sympathetic term to men, because it frames the issue primarily in terms of their suffering and the distorted ways they're forced to cope. But if we use your examples, are women not expected to be feminine, attractive, motherly, submissive etc etc? Sure. Toxic feminity might be said to include (as a rule) eating disorders based on distorted body standards, or ways in which women are subject to exploitation by beauty gimmicks, or tend to be blamed more than fathers fo…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:34 AM
11

If you dislike anti-discrimination measures limiting private business your issue is the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th. This isn't some modern media or progressive wedge issue. Gay cake makers can't discriminate against Christian fiances, either. It actually works both ways. Religion is plenty protected.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:13 AM
3

This makes me omnidirectionally sad for humanity, but not in any sort of gender-specific way.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:07 AM
-6

I refer you back to Google's definition. When I talk about or hear people talk about toxic masculinity it's usually not in the context of some big act of physical violence. It's in it's low-grade but pervasive form of telling males, "Real men ________." Real men are good at sports, have big muscles and big dicks. Real men don't cry or show emotion. Real men are always 100% in control of their situation. Real men don't like pink, do anything that might even remotely be interpreted as faggots and …
/r/MensRights19/05/18 09:50 AM
4

That was an inappropriate response to a friendly post in which I owned my mistake, outlined my thinking and did not claim false certainty or dismiss your point.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 08:01 AM
-1

Gah, I knew I should have looked it up. It's one of those terms that I almost always spell wrong because, knowing it's a word I tend to get wrong, I manage to second guess myself into the actually wrong answer. I'm not sure what the study you cited suggests about why a mother would be more likely to kill a male child than a female one. I also don't see why the infant's gender would make a crucial difference in cases of young, unmarried mothers giving birth outside of the hospital. I could imagin…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 07:16 AM
-3

First off, that's not what toxic masculinity actually is: The concept of toxic masculinity is used in psychology and gender studies to refer to certain norms of masculine behavior in North America and Europe that are associated with harm to society and to men themselves. So the equivalent would be the female social norms that lead to harm to society and to women themselves. As a matter of precision, I don't think we actually know why she did it yet; the claim that she did it "so his father would…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 06:23 AM
3

I would suspect this may have something to do with post partem depression manifesting differently according to the gender of the fetus. I'm not sure "intentionally" applies if someone is acting out of a psychotic episode.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 06:12 AM
2

The Bowles piece had some definite flaws: there's plenty of room for rational criticism of it. Shapiro's response, however, is an absolute embarrassment. He actually seemed to be intentionally trying to systematically commit every mistake he accuses her of, often times before even finishing the sentence.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 05:32 AM
3

I would ask a left-leaning MRA advocate two questions: do they recognize that MRA is a form of identity politics, and can they identify any idea or policy that feminism has promoted within the last decade that they agree with?
/r/MensRights19/05/18 04:04 AM
2

If you strip all the specific identifiers out of it the basic point of the article becomes: promoting outrage is a lucrative pursuit because it's relatively easy to sell people on a sense of their own victimhood. I would bet everyone can think of a group that they think this description totally nails. Feminists, Fox News Viewers, BLM, the NRA, #metoo, Christian evangelicals, etc. If it seems obvious to us how groups we don't agree with are stoking up false outrage and using that to bilk people, …
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:56 AM
-3

I doubt it. I'm not normally of the opinion that the criminal justice system is too light on people, but she seems like an ace in the hole for a sentence that rivals that of murder. It's also important to note this happened in the EU.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:32 AM
3

Or as The Guardian reported it: "Woman found guilty of throwing sulphuric acid at former partner." She was convicted of "throwing a corrosive substance with intent," which also carries heavy penalties.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:30 AM
1

She didn't get off. She was found guilty of "throwing a corrosive substance with intent." She's almost certainly going to spend a long time in prison.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:25 AM
1

Sure. I don't think these cartoons make anti-feminists look great. The failed attempt at satire says a lot about the merits of the position.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:19 AM
3

In spirit, yes. In practice, we have to allow ourselves the room to consider how sexism impacts the genders differently and how each has its unique concerns.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 03:06 AM
1

I agree; tribalism is at a peak, and I think the internet plays a big role in that. It creates an atmosphere of paranoia where when so many people are trolling, everything starts to seem like trolling. Which means that even a hint that someone isn't on the same side as you can feel like a giant red flag rather than a minor disagreement. To me the Aziz Ansari story was interesting because it was an opportunity to set aside the question of "Did he cross the line into assault?" because IMO the answ…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 01:39 AM
2

I think the biggest way that reasonable people arrive at radically divergent opinions is on the basis of how much good faith they extend to people making the argument. So for me, I see this as Ford responding to what she thinks is unfair criticism of her by parodying the evil feminist man-hater that people are making her out to be. As a sharp-tongued person who also has a penchant for sometimes trying to point out someone's absurdity by taking it to its logical extreme, I relate. I think the cri…
/r/MensRights18/05/18 10:16 PM
1

One wouldn't know it to read this, but I googled this story and his record label dropped him shortly after the incident. That's an example of this hurting his career outside of his own defamation suit, although unable to perform is overstating it.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 01:53 PM
0

Okay. Let's operate on the assumption I missed something. What specific harm did this cause his life that wasn't a derivative of him pressing charges?
/r/MensRights18/05/18 01:01 AM
0

I'm saying that based on the evidence of this article, which is written from his side, he doesn't show any harm done to his life by these accusations in and of themselves.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 12:24 AM
0

Well then, trends like this one are part of the cost.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 12:22 AM
2

We had the same reaction to each other's posts! The thing about custody is women get it more mostly because they request it more. I think there is sexism involved in terms of why women request it more and men less; as coequal parenting becomes more the norm I think we'll see the gap lessen. The article does roughly explain the tweet: she was making a bad joke in response to someone who accused her of hating men. I don't think it was funny but it wasn't intended literally. Since Trump I feel like…
/r/MensRights18/05/18 12:20 AM
1

The irony is that is was a war to second wave feminists. To most current feminists it isn't, because gender isn't a zero sum game.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 12:09 AM
1

1) Then it didn't ruin his career, now did it? 2) I'm going off the link provided 3) So let him name himsel ftoo if he's bringing this to social media 4) Prove he has no career left. Evidence required.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 11:48 PM
0

I'm tempted to respond point by point, but I'd rather wait for this longer answer your suggesting. Incidentally, you should know I'm a guy.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 11:46 PM
1

I'm sorry, what would you prefer: traditional gender roles where women don't work and therefore favor men who are good providers or gender equality, where women don't need to care nearly as much about men as providers and therefore favor men on other things?
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:44 PM
1

1) Yes 2) Depends. My issue with shitlords is the same judgy ass standards by which they attack other people are really self-imposed standards of suffering by which they are hurting themselves. Bros, just stop operating on traditional gender assumptions and so much of your life would be better. But if you're going to masochistically hold yourselves to that, don't make the rest of our lives worse because you need to cut yourselves because the pain makes you feel alive.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:24 PM
0

1) Based. On. His. Choice. To. Sue. 2) You're right. He's not. I'm sorry, did you see a link to the toxicology report in the source? I missed it. If I'm wrong, please do link. Otherwise it's him saying what it said. Which comes back to the "this being his side of the story" problem. 3) She's not naming herself. He's naming her and not himself in this post. 4) He chose to force this to be presented in court and proven false. Yes. Was there another option to do that? Moving on with his life. If he…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:53 PM
1

You get why anecdotal evidence isn't adequate, yeah? And to reiterate, this is on a point I'm inclined to agree with you on.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:41 PM
-1

I'd just say you women STEM the hell up and compete. I actually take this point seriously, and am willing to reconsider my own position. I want people to do what they want to do. I don't feel like there are really all that many barriers to entry for MRAs in academia, but I might be wrong. I only care about women in STEM to the extent that there are artificial barriers to entry based on the presumption that women are bad at STEM. Do you have any sincere concern for women who pursue gender studies…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:38 PM
1

Well, that's why I'm not saying this sub shouldn't go that way. It's really not my call. But as it stands, as a thoughtful, evidence-based feminist I still find common cause with enough people on here to have decent discussions. Inviting the shitlords would effectively end that. I guess I think that making common cause with the reasonable MRAs and reasonable feminists is more important than salving the ego wounds of the shitlords, but again, not my call.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:29 PM
1

So you're a fan of the trend the title suggests?
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:26 PM
1

Oops! Sorry. Free speech.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:25 PM
-1

1) ...show me any evidence at all his career was compromised before he came after the women, one of which never accused him of anything. 2) His testimony is not in itself evidence for his testimony. 3) My issue is him not outing himself while clearly naming them. 4) At his own choice. He chose to sue them. They didn't choose to sue him. There' no evidence given that his livelihood before he filed suit was compromised. 5) He has no need to prove he's innocent. He's not under legal scrutiny. Man, …
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:24 PM
1

There's gotta be plan for after the dam breaks. And it won't be the gender roles of the 1950s.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 04:18 PM
1

I agree this was a thoughtful post. I would only submit that you can't make it more safe for them without it becoming more hostile for others, namely the women and queers they tend to shit on. I'm not actually advocating one way or another, but I am saying it's worth being mindful that it's not simply a matter of increasing acceptance. It's recognizing the trade-off.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 08:38 AM
1

Actually, feminism has simply been a history of women basically demanding things and then those in power giving it to them, even if it harmed other people in the process. For instance, the suffragettes, who wanted middle class white women to be able to vote, fought against the suffragists, who wanted everyone to be able to vote. Not to mention how feminists basically shat all over veterans by doing this and then forcing the government to put more women in college when it was only accessible by t…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 08:31 AM
2

You're not wrong. My general approach to this sub/topic has been, Me: "Oh, yeah! Let's talk about men's issues!" This Subreddit: "Feminazis misunderstand the wage gap!" Me: "Okay, no, can we focus on criminal sentenci..." This Subreddit: "This woman did a shitty thing! If she were a man..." Me: "Right. Fine. But also, can we talk about how shitty the normalization of circumcision is?" This Subreddit: "MGM doesn't get as get as much attention as FGM because feminists!" Me: "R/Feminism? I need you…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 08:08 AM
4

Christ on a cracker, that's reasonable and would vastly improve this sub.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 08:01 AM
1

Feminism started out as a socially hated fringe. It won out in large part because people did the damn work. Same with LGBT people. Sorry but if you feel marginalized, the shitty part is you've gotta do the work. If she has the ability to have it terminated late term, I think it’s fair that he be given basically the same deal. He can't veto her decision not to carry the fetus and he needs to decide if he's in or out prior to when she can decide to get an abortion so that she can make an informed …
/r/MensRights16/05/18 07:48 AM
3

The emotional journey that was reading this post: To me feminism was about believing that being a woman should never limit what you can and cannot do or what you should be doing. Never had a “men holding us down” relation in my mind. This is that point on the roller coaster where it feels like a relaxing escalator ride but you're pretty sure things are about to go upside down and sideways. Those goals were accomplished Here we are. The point in the ride where modern feminists are bitching about …
/r/MensRights16/05/18 07:16 AM
5

Hey, sexy mama. Want to get together and kill all men?
/r/MensRights16/05/18 06:43 AM
2

Sure. Men are expected to be the providers and women are expected to be good in the kitchen and bedroom. And those assumptions suck for both.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 06:36 AM
1

Don't be so damn fragile. I don't agree with most of the POVs on here. That doesn't mean I hate men.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 06:13 AM
-2

Then academic it the hell up and compete.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 06:12 AM
1

Let's be clear; I didn't shit on MRAs here. I was shitting on him, and not because he's fat, incidentally. Because he's being an entitled hypocrite. You and I could probably come to an amicable agreement on what the rules ought to be around abortion/parental rights. (Short answer: I'm fine with guys having an opt-out option that's at least 4-5 weeks prior to when the woman stops being able to get an abortion. This gives him time to decide and her time to choose based on his decision). I don't ca…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 06:09 AM
4

LOL
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:58 AM
2

Yeah...in most cases where someone says, "But if they were _____ they would totally be ruling _____," I roll my eyes at the unproven speculative. In this case, I agree. If this were a guy, especially a not white one, nobody would give a shit that he had a young kid. in fact it would probably work against him; "if he had cared he should have known better."
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:57 AM
-3

1) "Dealing with this" = him pursuing legal action. That's not them ruining his life. That's him making a choice. 2) Citation needed. 3) But not his. He outs them, not himself. That's bullshit, especially when one of them isn't pressing charges. 4) Doesn't contradict my point. There's no evidence they put his livelihood at risk. 5) That's not "trying to open a dialogue." That's trying to get paid. If he feels like he was wronged and he wants $$$ to soothe the pain, fine. I sincerely don't judge …
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:54 AM
0

He tried to sue her? That's horseshit!
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:50 AM
-1

If you don't already see it, nothing I'm going to say here is going to change your mind. (Or mine).
/r/MensRights16/05/18 05:48 AM
23

I'm afraid the link will send me to the dark web.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 11:26 PM
5

In this case I'm in the uncomfortable position of siding with the MRAs. The reasons for the reduced sentences, that they had young children and difficult childhoods, are things people don't even begin to consider for most people in the criminal justice system. And perhaps, ideally, this is the right ruling? But then we have to radically rethink how everyone else gets judged as well.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 11:20 PM
-4

No offense taken, and thank you for the respectful reply. My point with HistoryBuffman was that this subreddit strawmans feminism to an absurd degree; I get his complaint about MRAs being strawmanned but let's acknowledge that's not a one-way street. It's good to hear this used to be something different. It gives me hope that there is an offline presence that isn't like what MRA is represented as here. If I thought this sub was representative I would write it off pretty much entirely. But you gi…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 11:06 PM
-7

1) There's no indication his career was ruined 2) This is entirely his side of the story 3) I know the names of both women, including the one supposedly choosing to remain silent and not accuse him for now. I do not know the name of the man. 4) The only legal action in this situation is the guy suing them for defamation for posting on Twitter. His livelihood has not been threatened by having to protect himself in court. 5) "I am not trying to silence her. In fact, I am hoping to open a dialogue …
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:53 PM
8

Yeah, the European style of crossing one's legs. In America there's an implicit, incredibly stupid assumption that men "can't" sit that way, presumably because their massive junk just gets in the way. I got made fun of by other kids for that, but for a teacher to do it, there's no excuse.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:34 PM
-3

Frequenting? I've taken a pet interest in it the past few days, but it's one I check in on from time to time for the past year. Before that I've seen plenty of quotes from it, mostly not of the flattering variety. Full disclosure of my bias: I'm a feminist who is sympathetic with the concept of a sincerely pro-male movement and thinks there's some good points in MRA, but who views this sub as primarily a place where people bitch about stupid things for my amusement.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:30 PM
1

It really wasn't wrong, either. He wasn't asked to make an apology until he went out of his way to be an ass to the woman who filed the complaint.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:18 PM
11

The data also has a tendency to be deceptive in the way people popularize it; the wage gap and child custody settlements are both stats people misquote all the time.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:14 PM
-4

is that we have grown in such large numbers. I would love to see hard stats on that, which I haven't found yet. >As it is, feminists tend to insert what one crazy thing one person said, that others will often strongly disagree with, and imply that we all believe it Okay, sure, but...please tell me you see the irony. I believe we should only define what is important and not squabble over smaller issues. The key is focusing on what you do want rather than what you don't. Mostly this subreddit is a…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 10:03 PM
1

That's my point. It's universal code for "I can't prove they're civilians but they're civilians."
/r/MensRights15/05/18 09:48 PM
-4

Dear fat white guy, Okay, I have to ask: you get Youtube is a visual medium, right? Because if you're going to go after other people's weight, you should know the hoodie and bad lighting aren't hiding as much as you hope they are. But hey, you want MRAs to be taken seriously because they have some serious issues. I agree! Like, for instance, how you got three girls pregnant...and they had abortions...and you felt like you wanted a say.... Sure. You want a say? Go out there and invent the technol…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 09:26 PM
11

I don't expect Reddit to a place of noncombative exchange on the whole, but what strikes me about this sub is how joyless it seems to be. R/politics, for all it's trademark absurdity, still has people who actually seem to be enjoying engaging in the debate. This one feels like the grumpy old man shouting at feminists to get off their lawn. Yes, ideally this would be a place that actually did it's theoretical purpose and posted mostly on issues for men as opposed to against women and feminists ge…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 08:49 PM
4

It's a functional stand in for, "including civilians." I agree with you; this isn't how we should say it. But if you say "civilian," the issue arises, "how can you prove they were civilians?" And if there are men (especially young men) in the group a lot of people are immediately going to jump to the assumption that they were terrorists. So it's a choice between a way of phrasing it that implies "civilian" or just saying civilian, which for many people will imply "terrorists and others."
/r/MensRights15/05/18 08:26 PM
1

The thing is the woman didn't ask for an apology and he wasn't requested to make one by the board at first. He was just informed of the complaint. He took the initiative to reach out to her for the purpose of being an asshole about it. That deserves an apology.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 07:54 PM
1

The short answer is that going with definition one is like laughing along with a joke at your expense. Definition three is like getting defensive at that joke and explaining in detail why the joke is wrong.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 07:49 PM
3

I think this was a dumb piece of journalism based on a hypothetical that the world's most elaborate vibrator might lead the robot uprising.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 07:35 AM
4

It's already the law in CA that all single occupancy bathrooms be unisex. The idea of gender segregating bathrooms where only one person enters at a time was always silly.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 04:20 AM
2

I have a lot of thoughts on that, but I think perhaps best saved for another time. Suffice to say our disgust at other people's reactions can sometimes cause us to lose sight of whom we ought to be sympathizing with in the first place.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 04:02 AM
2

I could have phrased that better. I actually didn't intend disrespect to the kids themselves at all; I just disagree that them being male rather than female would evoke more overall public sympathy. I apologize for the way I came across.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 03:32 AM
0

Trust me, you guys want the definition that's at the top to stay at the top.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 03:16 AM
2

I know the newest season of Westworld is out and all, but reign it in!
/r/MensRights15/05/18 03:10 AM
2

Come on, take a joke! If you didn't want it you wouldn't have been wearing that fedora. Besides, it gets off pretty light compared to urban dictionary's entry on feminism. I actually can't say which one of these I thought was more hilarious.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 01:54 AM
3

...I'm not sure how these work. I'm not sure I want to know how these work. It just seems....about as improbable that a sexbot could assault you as it is your vibrator could lie in wait over your bedroom door and then spring down to attack once you enter. Seems like you'd need a third person using the sexbot to assault you for the sexbot to assault you.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 01:44 AM
1

Damn, if you stopped telling us what we think you'd probably be surprised how much of what you said that feminists can actually really agree with.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 12:53 AM
2

The youthfulness and whiteness of the victims probably did make a positive impact on how much overall sympathy they got. The maleness, though? I would think that this happening to a group of young white females would basically max out the public sympathy card.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 12:35 AM
6

Yeah. There's a reason we made debtor's prison illegal...and yet shit like this still happens. And yeah, it was a woman this time but this does disproportionately impact men and that legitimately sucks. This is a straight up, we can all agree we're against it issue.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 12:21 AM
-1

So first off, let's acknowledge the real victim here: the guy just doing his job on the damn elevator having to put up with conference attendees thinking they're funny. Second, this supposedly sincere effort at an apology wasn't that sincere: Lebow, informed of the complaint, wrote what he said was intended to be a conciliatory response, assuring Sharoni that “I certainly had no desire to insult women or to make you feel uncomfortable” and suggested that Sharoni, born in Romania and raised in Is…
/r/MensRights14/05/18 11:28 PM
1

Men are allowed to attend the event, bruh. They're just not allowed to perform at this (one) event. The tongue-in-cheek is kind of obvious.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 10:30 PM
1

In this case it is quite literally the opposite of that.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 10:26 PM
1

That's a super disappointing response. Everything you just said was some way in which you think you'd be less of a victim. If you can't imagine ways in which it might have been at least equally complicated and difficult in a different way, I find it hard to take you seriously.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 08:03 AM
1

Well, sure. But that, if anything, should move you closer towards a position of empathy with women who are expected to (and usually do) put all the preemptive work into avoid getting raped (although not always effectively, given the difference between the stereotype of who commits rape versus who actually does). So, I actually want to open this up to you if you want to go here, and have this particular thing not be so much of a debate just as much as an open thought piece on the subject. What, i…
/r/MensRights14/05/18 06:16 AM
1

Okay. So did you report it? Was there anything holding you back from doing so? The parallel is, "Most people in my dating pool are decent, but a few are predatory assholes and I don't necessarily know upfront which is which. How defensive do I need to be against everyone while still trying to have a functional dating life?"
/r/MensRights14/05/18 01:43 AM
1

As a waiter/waitress? Like fuck it's not. That's how you get tips.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 01:34 AM
1

Because her job is to be nice and flirty to you. She doesn't know if you're an asshole or not. If she shuts you down and you make a scene, she risks not only losing her tips but all the tips in that vicinity of the restaurant. And if her manager is an asshole, she may be held to account because you as a customer couldn't deal with rejection. Not saying you personally would do that, but it happens and it's a risk she has to deal with. Don't make passes at people whose job it is to be nice to you.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 01:17 AM
2

If she hands her number, she has made an unambiguous first move. Otherwise mild flirtation is part of the job. Making a pass puts her in an impossible situation. Even if you think maybe something is there, let it go. This is equally true if the gender roles are reversed. Offices can have sexual chemistry. That happens. And if I try really hard to rationalize it, I could maybe justify an escalating string of incidences which make mutual romantic chemistry clear where it doesn't seriously risk you…
/r/MensRights14/05/18 01:06 AM
1

So, for the overwhelming majority of women (and let's just assume heteronormativity here) admitting to being raped even when it actually happened is deeply undesirable. But there are a small minority of women who do make a habit of victimizing men in this way. How much sympathy does this give you for women dealing with the possibility of rapists?
/r/MensRights14/05/18 12:59 AM
1

Not really. You just have to gauge the pass to the situation. Is it at work? -----> Never appropriate. Is it towards someone, like a waitress, who is obligated to be nice to you? ------> Never appropriate. Is it towards someone in a potential dating environment, like a club? -------> Probably okay. Is she making her disinterest clear? -------->Don't go there/back off. Who cares if she's "playing hard to get," don't reward that shit. Etc. There's a fairly simple set of rules that helps you know w…
/r/MensRights14/05/18 12:46 AM
1

On one hand, I completely agree about the fluidity of memory. But have you ever had a sexual encounter where you ever started to wonder if you were being more rapey than you thought you had been? If you're in the habit of only sleeping with people who you are sure are willing participants, of backing off if they ask you to, of not pursuing people in situations where consent could be considered ambiguous (and this is the overwhelming number of guys), your chances of having anything to worry about…
/r/MensRights13/05/18 08:17 PM
1

But falsely claiming rape isn't one of those things, by and large. Would you falsely claim someone you didn't like raped you? Women typically don't for the same reasons.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 07:50 PM
1

If you're that bad at reading human body language, yes.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:11 PM
1

What precisely do you think my choices are?
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:09 PM
1

Yeah. Sincerely, thank you.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:08 PM
1

By your logic, false rape accusations are more common than murder That's a logically incoherent claim. so perhaps we shouldn't be concerned about the crime of murder and we don't need to prosecute murderers? Nothing I've said would suggest this. Fortunately, the people that write our laws don't disregard entire categories of crimes simply a feminist thinks that crime isn't committed frequently enough to worry about. I never said false rape accusations are a thing we shouldn't worry about. We jus…
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:06 PM
1

Well then, good for feminism for encouraging women to be assertive about their sexual needs.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:03 PM
1

So you're here to save women from themselves? This is an act of mercy on your part?
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:12 PM
1

I guess I'm asking the same question, basically. (Although I don't think it's a function of income).
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:04 PM
1

You're 100% right on that point. That sucks too, doesn't it? Maybe don't replicate the mistake.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:01 PM
-2

There's just no breakdown of the evidence that doesn't make rape way the fuck more common than false rape accusations.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 04:00 PM
-2

Today is a day I'm fresh out of patience for asshattery. Fuck right off for telling anyone on the basis of their genitalia what their lane is.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 03:55 PM
2

That's funny. No feminist has ever bothered me about going to a bathhouse.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 03:51 PM
1

Holy Goddamn people are still missing the point. Also, somehow missing the bajillion other people who have said this?
/r/MensRights12/05/18 03:41 PM
-3

False rape accusations make up 5-10% of rape accusations and virtually never lead to a conviction. Anecdotal examples on a sub that is, let's be real, more of a circle jerk than the hypothetical love child of r/politics and a Japanese bukkake film aren't particularly compelling evidence. And, btw, just general life advice here: if you don't know her well enough to be reasonably certain she wouldn't pull that shit on you and this is your fear, maybe wait til the third date. This isn't that hard.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 08:33 AM
1

Be well
/r/MensRights12/05/18 07:50 AM
1

.5%? Where are you getting that statistic? As just one example of a dozen or more counterexamples to that point I've seen.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 07:38 AM
1

I think attachment theory explains it better. One doesn't need to be a psychopath; one just has to have deep insecurities around their own lovability and a tendency to resort to violence as a means to solve problems. From that point insecurity -----> violence ------> attempt to reattach ----->eventual resurgence of native insecurity ----->repeat.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 07:24 AM
2

Okay. Operating on the assumption that you're a straight guy with more direct expertise, do enlighten me.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:57 AM
0

What I'm citing actually came from textbooks at a point when I was studying domestic violence, but the research behind them seemed quite sound. Specifically it accounted for how men and women are equally likely to be victims of domestic violence, but that men are overwhelmingly more likely (and we're talking specifically about straight relationships here) to engage in the cycle of repetitive, escalating, attachment-based violence that tends to characterize domestic violence as we typically under…
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:55 AM
-1

Um...maybe get to your point. This is personal beyond what I'm comfortable with.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:43 AM
1

In general when there's any sort of unfair statistical sentencing discrepancy I personally care a lot more about bringing the side that gets harsher punishments down than I care about the side that gets softer punishments up. That's just me. Yes, I think sentencing standards should be the same across genders.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:35 AM
0

A quantity I'm not inclined to divulge on the internet. It's a non-zero number.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:32 AM
0

My default assumption is that both genders do things for roughly the same reasons, but domestic violence is one of those areas where there seems to be a fairly stark divergence, and in that domain women tend to use violence to effect an outcome whereas men tend to use violence to establish dominance. So if we apply that standard, women who hit their kids tend to do so because they feel like that is their best, only or last option to get the kid to behave. On the other hand, I can imagine (and th…
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:31 AM
2

I guess I would have to hear his evidence to have any real opinion on it. ED: Where are my manners? Thank you for the synopsis.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:26 AM
-6

As a gay guy I find this all bullshit. It's not that hard to tell when someone really wants it, when someone is too drunk or ambivalent to know what they want, and when someone doesn't want it. You just have to pay attention. Likewise, I know what it's like to wake up knowing I've been taken advantage of, when I made a decision I regretted and when I wasn't in the mindset to make a decision at all. Fare thee well, alcohol, both love and bane of my youth. Look, this just isn't that hard. Straight…
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:17 AM
3

Synopsis, please.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:09 AM
-1

It would surprise me a little if it weren't the case that mothers did more of the corporal punishment than fathers. Mothers do more of the punishment of all kinds because they tend to be left more with the kids. That this problem dropped the more developed a nation was tells me a lot, too: this is what people do when they don't feel like they have other options. That might be a function of education in non-corporal forms of behavioral modification or it might be because if your word counts for l…
/r/MensRights12/05/18 06:07 AM
-2

You are simultaneously bitching about the fact that women actually are paying their own way more and also that they aren't back to the days where their primary roles were in the kitchen and bedroom. Fucking pick a side to complain about and stick with it.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:58 AM
3

You can have a men's only space easy as pie. It just has to be a private club, meaning membership dues. Only businesses open to the public have to follow CRA rules.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:53 AM
3

There's a visible-from-space racial component to this as well: she's white and he's black. In two separate ways she codes for "victim" while he codes for "perpetrator" such as to put this sentence into context. Ed: I suppose I have to say explicitly, as a feminist, I find this appalling. Either she needs to be held accountable to the standards we would hold a man accountable in this situation or we need to be more contextualizing and merciful with men. I'm on the latter side.
/r/MensRights12/05/18 05:38 AM
1

I appreciate the link to a timely scholarly article, although without knowing which part to focus on it's TL;DR. I had seen the HuffPo article and find it frustrating that he doesn't cite his evidence or really back up his claims, particularly as he himself appears to be a divorce lawyer who focuses on dads. It comes across as an advertisement. By your logic they're just choosing to go to jail and if they fought they'd do just as well. That's unfair, particularly in the context of me making an a…
/r/MensRights11/05/18 10:44 PM
1

They are, largely thanks to feminism.
/r/MensRights11/05/18 10:20 PM
2

I can't imagine (assuming they were in the U.S.) that they didn't get fired for that.
/r/MensRights11/05/18 09:30 PM
1

I got that, I just think it's kind of like, "But what if I find out my wife is a different religion?" You'll probably know how they feel about that by then.
/r/MensRights11/05/18 02:07 AM
2

I don't see the evidence that this is as a function of devaluing men.
/r/MensRights11/05/18 12:11 AM
1

If that's the kind of thing you haven't discussed and/or the kind of thing she would do behind your back, there are some big underlying problems with that relationship already.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 10:58 PM
3

It could be a triangular albino man, I suppose.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 09:22 PM
2

I agree. The idea that single occupancy restrooms would ever be gender segregated seems absolutely stupid to me. Ceiling to floor stalls would resolve most of the nonsense hangups people have around bathrooms.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 09:21 PM
2

Circumcision in and of itself is an atrocity that ought not be legal at least until one is old enough to get an earring. I would be surprised if mothers weren't usually the ones to sign the consent form given that it's usually performed in early infancy. What that doesn't tell me is to what extent it's done against the will of the father.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 09:17 PM
1

I want you to understand most people know the bias going in and men are advised against fighting too much by their lawyers because they're unlikely to win and will be hurt in the long run. Citation needed. It's like how innocent black man take more plea deals than innocent white women. Yes! You can take the racial component out of it and even still, that is a clear example of bias against men in the courts! I don't know why people focus on custody, which makes the point poorly if at all, and not…
/r/MensRights10/05/18 08:51 PM
2

I want this to be stamped on the top of this sub in giant neon lettering: Women get custody more because they request it more. Most of the time the division of custody is amicable. It's not clear that women get custody more often in disputed cases. Now if you wanted to dig into why they request it more and what that means, awesome. But the factoid in itself doesn't prove privilege.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 08:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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