TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

mug-buliku Archive

View 0 posts and 280 comments by mug-buliku on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
10

Trust doesn't come out of thin air. It takes time to build.
/r/MensRights27/07/23 11:47 AM
1

¿Por qué no los dos? The two are good mutually exclusive. In fact the two are not even in the same type, which means that, essentially, good committing a category error. One is a causal explanation why a certain trait originated due to selection pressures, the other is a moral evaluation of the trait.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/23 09:34 AM
4

Disagree. "Women will seek out the best possible partners to be their baby daddies" is only half of what might be called "traditional relationship expectations". The other half is, of course, that men also will seek out the best possible partners to be their baby mamas. And one part of being a good mother is not having a demanding job like a CEO. Women are free to have jobs as men are free to not be traditionally masculine. But if women being attracted to traditionally masculine men because of e…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/23 09:22 AM
1

I think you could've used "good/bad in law"? that's the phrasing I see in my country's legal apparatus.
/r/MensRights13/02/23 12:08 AM
1

It wasn't a law, THAT's why it COULD be overturned huh‽ you think previous laws can't be repealed? a law once passed remains in effect forever? yes, the right to repeal a law rests with the legislature, not with the judiciary. which just means that, if nationwide abortion rights had been effected by law, the anti-abortion activists would have focused their efforts into convincing the legislature instead of convincing the judiciary.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:59 PM
1

Women no longer have a constitutional right to abortion. It's much easier to get law changed at a state level than trying to influence the group of unelected people on The Supreme Court. True, but that applies in both directions.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:43 PM
0

including the majority of the Supreme Court past decisions of a court are reversed all the time. just because one set of judges at one time delivered a verdict doesn't mean it's not bad law. your argument—that the judges who passed that verdict believed it was good law—applies to every verdict of every court.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:40 PM
0

Do you seriously think MRAs approve of Roe v. Wade? Technical error: You should've said "Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization".
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:35 PM
3

So women are passive patients right? Women cannot choose birth control, but must passively accept whatever level of birth control the man uses? You acknowledge that there exist birth control methods for women, yet men are the only ones who must take the responsibility to prevent pregnancy?
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:22 PM
4

And who should pay for the child you created? The rest of society? which already happens in case of safe-haven laws.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:06 PM
2

Would you say also that having to carry your pregnancy to term (in the absence of medical problems) isn't slavery either, because it's "your kid"?
/r/MensRights12/02/23 11:02 PM
3

So women who are so desperate that they would consider throwing the baby into the trash should be given the option of safe-haven child surrender, but men who are so desperate that they would consider walking away from the child shouldn't have an analogous option?
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:50 PM
1

I assume you never eat food that tastes good, then? Are you aware that the word 'sex' comes from 'sexual reproduction'? Are you suggesting that sex is a clipping of sexual reproduction, like how copter is a clipping of helicopter? If so, you're simply wrong.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:29 PM
5

If someone said he/she would never stay with a partner who doesn't spend time with him/her, would you ask him/her "Do you consider yourself entitled to your partner's time?"?
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:22 PM
4

To “deny” is to withhold something to which another is entitled and due. (emphasis added) where did you get that definition of deny? and how many people do you think will agree with that definition (specifically, the emphasized part)?
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:19 PM
0

it's so trivial to find dictionaries that include the definition "female (n): woman or girl; female human being" that I have to wonder if you're being intentionally disingenuous.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 08:54 PM
0

yeah, because the English language is soo conscientious about clearly distinguishing nouns and adjectives and never using one as the other, right? and English isn't the only language with that property either.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 08:47 PM
4

sometimes, people don't realize a problem exists until it personally affects them. that might be a bad thing, but it's also a known human failing.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 08:37 PM
1

I'm curious if anyone said the same thing when Barack became POTUS. Or when Hillary became the Democrat POTUS candidate.
/r/MensRights27/10/22 01:16 PM
1

men stopping renting out to women would be just as fine Women not renting to women would also be fine, per that logic. As would men not renting to men. There's no rule that a person can only be shitty to someone of the opposite gender, after all.
/r/MensRights15/10/22 09:27 AM
3

I'm pretty tipsy Maybe don't make comments in an impaired state? And as usual, would you say the same when someone avoids some other demographic group?
/r/MensRights15/10/22 09:25 AM
1

black people ≠ black men, "genius".
/r/MensRights15/10/22 09:22 AM
1

TheSpaceDuck didn't compare black men with all men. He or she compared black people with men. Improve your reading comprehension, please.
/r/MensRights15/10/22 09:21 AM
1

black people are mostly men Um, the so gender split in the black population is not (close to) 50:50? WTF are you smoking?
/r/MensRights15/10/22 09:20 AM
2

Nor do I care to find out. Likewise.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/22 09:51 AM
1

Ask them if this means men who do bad things are not guilty as well (because clearly patriarchy made them do those things).
/r/MensRights01/10/22 06:33 AM
9

Okay, but how does one determine if someone who's essentially an an-/pseudo-nymous reddit username is a feminist or not?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/08/22 08:18 PM
6

so why don’t you wait for the trial Why didn't you wait for the trial before proclaiming "self-defense"? If you can have an opinion on the matter before the trial has taken place, so can others. before executing her first. You do know reddit comments don't have the force of a judicial verdict, right? Again wait for the trial until then stop making assumptions. Maybe take your own advice? You have no idea if he tried to murder her, put a gun to her head, etc. And you do?
/r/MensRights13/08/22 08:03 PM
3

Then you should blame OP, who's the one that posted a link from buzzfeed. This bot simply changed the AMP link to the non-AMP version.
/r/MensRights13/08/22 08:02 PM
1

Misogyny and misandry don't preclude each other, and can in fact exist pretty comfortably side-by-side.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 02:11 AM
1

The person who posted that tweet (assuming the screenshot is not doctored) is considered one of the prominent MRAs of India. I'm like 66.67% certain she has evidence for it. Out of curiosity, what sort of source would you accept for that? And do you always dismiss statements posted to social media with no further evidence? Also, sometimes being right will lead one to be attacked by both sides, but that doesn't mean someone being attached by both sides is necessarily right.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 02:02 AM
1

This particular woman is oppressing this particular man (assuming the story is true). Don't miss the trees for the forest.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 01:56 AM
1

There are a lot of misogynistic scumbags* in India, unfortch. Of course, not all Indians are. * And scumbags of many others flavors too.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 01:47 AM
1

Please tell me, without consulting any reference, the name of the fourth-largest national park in India, the names of all the locations that were attacked during 26/11, and the names of three prominent writers of each of Hindi, Kannada and Assamese literature. Being Indian doesn't grant you omniscience about India. And how does the existence of Indian Penal Code section 498A† negate the existence of dowry deaths? † This is an international forum; don't assume you're speaking to an audience of on…
/r/MensRights24/07/22 01:36 AM
0

India doesn't have juries, fyi.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 01:22 AM
2

You're an idiot; and don't gatekeep manness, and don't throw around this "real man" bullshit.
/r/MensRights20/07/22 05:10 PM
3

If the court erroneously says "the constitution bans restrictions on this" the legislature can't just go and say "no it doesn't". They can amend the constitution? (Yea, I'm aware doing that for the USA constitution is very difficult. It is still in principle possible.)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/22 09:29 PM
2

Are there any medical clinics that perform only abortions?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/22 09:20 PM
3

Constitutional amendment? But of course, that requires having control of 37 states also.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/22 09:00 PM
2

Think of it this way. Semen is a gift Why should I think of it that way? Thinking of semen as a gift is an absurd way to think.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:28 PM
2

99.9% of men who have sex voluntarily. You don't have any idea of the true number of male rape victims, do you? You just used the common tactic of typing 99.[as many nines as one feels like]%. You did not do so because you really believe male rape victims are 0.1% of all men If you don't know something, that's fine, but don't pretend that you do.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:25 PM
3

it sounds you want to have sex with no risk or consequences. That's exactly what a pro-lifer would say to a woman who wants abortion rights. Abstinence is an option for women too.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:20 PM
1

The risk of financial slavery alone should be enough to compel men to make better choices about who they sleep with. How so? Whether a man is forced into "financial slavery" depends on whether he had a child, not on whom he had the child with.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:19 PM
1

So, deflection, instead of providing a straight answer. Nice.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:15 PM
6

RvW happened in 1973 but only caused abortion to be legal as of 1992. Huh? I assume you're referring to Planned Parenthood vs Casey? That did not eliminate abortion rights.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:52 PM
3

I thought Roe v Wade was from the early 70s? 1973.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:49 PM
5

You missed the whole point of u/0ooO0o0o0oOo0oo00o's post. Nowhere did zey claim that men should have a choice what a woman does with her pregnancy. The male reproductive rights are you can chose to have a vasectomy and or use Birth control Women can use tubal ligations?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:37 PM
1

Roe v Wade is appalling You mean "Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization".
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:33 PM
13

I reckon that lands legally somewhere within the right to practice religion freely. You do know that a large part of the opposition to abortion comes from religion, right? So you should take your own advice and take it up with "the [people] who think an ectopic pregnancy should be replanted as the embryo is part of God’s plan".
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:29 PM
3

Thanks for informing about the second one being fake. The story itself may be false, I dunno, but zeir claim that vanguard is a satire website appears to be false).
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:25 PM
5

Your second article is a satire website. evidence?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:21 PM
18

If [women] weren't buying into [men's] perfectly reasonable arguments and telling [men] they didn't need [men's] votes BEFORE But aren't women asking for men's support NOW?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:16 PM
4

they get to say…get an abortion No, zey is not advocating that men have the right to dictate women get abortions. Zey is simply saying men (should) have the right to disengage from the situation, regardless of the women's choices (which will remain her choices). And nope the hell out, in any circumstance. Women can also "nope the hell out" (by getting abortions, or via safe-haven laws), in any circumstances. So why should men having that choice be a problem? It will also make it so if a man want…
/r/MensRights26/06/22 07:13 PM
6

Maybe they couldn’t speak up on it because they were too busy trying to rights for themselves?? So, maybe men cannot speak up on abortion rights now because they're too busy trying to win rights for themselves? If women fighting for their rights is sufficient reason for them to not care about men's rights, the reverse is also true.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:59 PM
11

it is not [men] carrying it for 9mths, and going through all the potential life altering effects which come with pregnancy. But it is men paying child support for 18 years, and going to jail if unable to pay.
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:57 PM
6

It is a response to men and women (keyword: and) who have unsafe sex and don’t feel like dealing with the outcome of their actions. So you think women who have unsafe sex should have to "deal with the outcome of their actions"? That the option of abortion should not be available to them?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:50 PM
6

You do know you're an idiot, right?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:48 PM
21

So both men and women pay the price, which means that the situation is already equal. So what's the problem, again?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:46 PM
14

If we give men the right to choose if a woman can abort or not, No one in here asks for that. They just want men to have the right to choose whether he is to to bear responsibility for the child or not. 9 months is a prison sentence, and women don’t want men holding the keys to their jail cell, just like men don’t want women to dangle the threat of jail time over their heads for child support. That's exactly what (some) people in here are saying: that the current laws allow women "to dangle the …
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:43 PM
14

It’s almost like it’s the woman’s responsibility to make sure she’s safe. Yea. Just like it's the man's responsibility to make sure he's safe. Otherwise, men would have BC now right? Lol. you think the only reason male birth control pills (I presume that's what you meant by "BC for men") don't exist is that men don't want to use them? Have you any idea how difficult it is to make a male BC pill? the fact that men have made pregnancy a woman’s issue, when it’s an issue for both parties. So no wom…
/r/MensRights26/06/22 06:39 PM
4

but will also arrest a woman who wants a baby? Who wants a baby against her partner's wishes and obtained by fraud. I and every other guy on here would sure as shit tell any doctors or anyone else to eat shit and die if they tried to tell me I couldn't get a vasectomy That will not magically make that doctor reverse his/her opinion and agree to vasectomize you.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 01:02 PM
18

Are women not allowed to get tubal ligations?
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:58 PM
3

everyone just had their rights stripped away Women had their rights stripped away; women≠everyone.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:50 PM
1

You didn't address the question: If men don't even fight for their own issues, how can they be expected to fight for women's issues?
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:48 PM
1

Martial law sucks. It sucks for men more, which is the point.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:46 PM
1

That occurs when there is not even a deceptively plausible appearance of valid reasoning, because there is an obvious lack of connextion between the given premises and the conclusion drawn from them. "I'll throw a lot of words and reasonings, in the hope that it will confuse my interlocutors enough that they won't disagree with it."
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:46 PM
1

You've quoted the Ukrainian Constitution; please provide a source about whether those regulations on conscription were or are being followed in Ukraine in actuality. the use of forced labour is prohibited. Military or alternative (non military) service, and also work or service carried out by a pwrson in complience with a verdict or other court decision, or in accordance with laws on martial law or on a state of emergency, are not considered to be forced labour. "I can't force you, except in the…
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:41 PM
1

Outside of Ukraine, presumably. Are you surprised people care more about the issues in their own country? So everyone outside of Ukraine remained absolutely silent when the Ukraine war broke out, right? No one who was not Ukrainian had a single thing to say about the war?
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:35 PM
3

It's just women can say the same thing right back at you. That it's ok for them to not care about male bodies in war since men don't care about female bodily autonomy. Many people would reply that they already don't care about male bodies, so this is nothing new (and, more to the point, not a threat.)
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:32 PM
2

Men can get a v-sec without any problem. Citation needed. There have been cases where vasectomy was refused.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:31 PM
1

You can only allow so much emigration before the racial imbalance upsets people. You mean "immigration".
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:28 PM
3

Whataboutism is not necessarily a bad thing. Often it is a call to/demand for ideological consistency.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:27 PM
2

This is going to affect poor people in conservative states. Poor people already struggling who cannot afford (financially, emotionally, or mentally) to have children resulting in neglected and abused children. Who will still have the choice of abstinence?
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:26 PM
3

Money and rights aren't the same thing; your analogy is bad.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:25 PM
1

Nothing proves abortion is elective Was anyone claiming otherwise? (Except for rape and threat to mother's life, which even pro-life people generally agree should be valid grounds for an abortion.)
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:23 PM
0

You can argue it's equality but it's the wrong kind. If that's the only kind of equality possible... We should be pushing for the oppressed groups to have more rights, not the privileged groups to have less Not necessarily. When White people in the USA had the right to own slaves, the solution to that would not have been giving that right to all races.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:18 PM
5

What do you repopulate a city with? So you'll be okay with a law that says every women must have at least one child to repopulate the depleted population?
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:15 PM
2

You: Men are not the primary tool for winning wars with today's rechnology, Also you: Women are generally hopeless in combat.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 12:11 PM
58

Maybe, but if X wants/asks for help from Y when X needs it, but is unwilling to provide help when Y needs it...
/r/MensRights25/06/22 11:33 AM
1

it's undeniable that Such arguments may be effective when speaking with/amongst a group that already shares all or most of the speaker's core assumptions; it is not effective or useful elsewhere.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 02:31 PM
1

ignores point that disproves this claim Neither of you in this debate have proved jack. All that both of you have done is provide (contradictory) bare assertions at each other. is a fucking weirdo that thinks feet are hot ad hominem; irrelevant. The thigns you're accusing your debate partner of are true of you as well.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 02:28 PM
0

"I say thing true so it true" Throughout this argument you have done the exact same thing you're accusing your debate opponent of: make bare assertions with no supporting evidence. You may not feel like providing evidence, it is certainly no obligation; but if so, why continue in this argument that is essentially "X is true!" "No, X is false!" being repeated over and over?
/r/MensRights15/06/22 02:25 PM
1

You refute my arguments by basically saying "nah your wrong I'm right let's move on" That's what your arguments were too, basically. Your arguments also consisted of little more than bare assertions. For example, you said: who mainly it is that either mocks men or discourages men from showing negative emotion, because in my experience and I would say most men's experience it is other men. Most women (and notice I say most, I'm not making sweeping generalisations) are accepting of men's emotions …
/r/MensRights15/06/22 02:18 PM
2

Is it not due to discrimination and gender roles? Why do women have vaginas and men don't? Is it not due to "discrimination and gender roles"? There are differences between the genders; it is not at all a stretch to imagine some of those differences extend beyond the realm of anatomy and go into behaviors and preferences. When you see a difference between men and women, consider that factors other than gender-based discrimination may be responsible for it. In other words, don't jump to discrimin…
/r/MensRights15/06/22 01:56 PM
2

Maybe not to same extent women do. There are gender differences in behavior, y'know.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 01:52 PM
2

Ok, we can call it an earnings gap then, Look how smoothly you went from "wage gap" to "earnings gap", implicitly equating them and implying that they're different words for the same thing. The primary idea that is brought to most people's mind when they hear "wage gap" (which idea is indicated by the slogan "equal pay for equal work") is that women are paid less than men are for doing the same work. That is not at all the same thing as "women chose to work less, and to work in lower-paid jobs".…
/r/MensRights15/06/22 01:52 PM
-1

I'm not sure why receiving such a message is supposed to be damaging or anything. I received such a message once, and I merely shrugged it off.
/r/MensRights23/05/22 06:48 PM
8

It used to be men advocating for fathers rights and husbands rights. fathers and husbands aren't the only men. The worth of men qua human beings isn't determined by their relationships to others. Like pretending that men aren’t inherently motivated by pussy on a level thats completely different from women. Speak for yourself.
/r/MensRights23/05/22 06:39 PM
1

Also, he makes it pretty dam hard to disagree with when he puts things so eloquently and logically, you just go "there's no way he is wrong" and "I wanna be like that". Now that could be a red flag. If you're so dazzled by someone's (perceived) brilliance that you automatically believe everything he says must be true, that's not a good sign.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 11:01 PM
2

The fact of the matter is EVERYONE is going through something, Fallacy of grey.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 10:45 PM
2

DO you know what happens when the same punishment is given for crimes of any degree of severity?
/r/MensRights09/04/22 09:57 PM
2

Are we really having sympathy for sex offenders? Why not? Believing that criminals should be punished is not contradictory to believing that criminals deserve sympathy.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 09:54 PM
5

I presume your name only gets added to the list if you have been convicted by a court, so the vigilantes cannot even use the excuse "the law failed to punish them, so we vigilantes must do it.".
/r/MensRights09/04/22 09:53 PM
2

Nice to know you defend mob justice and hate due process.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 09:39 PM
5

Being in favor of due process and against mob justice doesn't mean being in favor of criminals.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 09:33 PM
1

rights for fathers this subreddit is about men's rights, not father's rights. Of course fathers are men too, but not all men are fathers.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 08:34 PM
2

It definitely does imply that, that's literally how the English language works. Specifying "toxic something" implies other versions of something, No. vide my other reply to you.
/r/MensRights09/04/22 08:23 PM
2

Toxic masculinity implies the existence of non-toxic masculinity. No, because adjectives can be both restrictive ("I want a green car") and non-restrictive ("I am but a mortal human being").
/r/MensRights09/04/22 08:22 PM
1

Could you clarify what you mean by "leaning pretty far to the right"? What are some of the political views you hold?
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:09 PM
2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry The "criticism" section is especially insidious.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:57 AM
2

understandable but still not justifiable.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:31 AM
1

There are restrictions in law on a landlord's right to evict a tenant, right? A landlord can't just randomly decide to kick out a tenant; a legal process has to be followed. The relevant legal term is "renter's rights". But of course, there is an important distinction that there is a formal agreement between a landlord and a tenant; I agree with that point. But still, my original point was that homelessness is a bad thing; and most people would consider it wrong to cause someone to become homele…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:12 AM
5

Why is sex so special? For better or worse, the wider society does treat it that way. See my other reply to you comparing mugging and rape.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:56 AM
1

I think it's the threat of kicking someone out (instead of the "threat" of breaking up with zem) that makes it coercion. Homelessness is a very bad thing; no one wants to be homeless. And even if it is your right to kick someone out (making zem homeless, at least in the short term) because you are the only owner of the house, doing so is still wrong. Also, if you kick someone out from your house because he stole from you will in general be considered far less wrong (or not wring at all) than if …
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:54 AM
3

And "eating pussy" does not included in the contract either. Sure. But, say, if the contract didn't explicitly mention washing cars, and didn't have the "such other duties as may be specified" thingie, would it be okay or not for the boss to demand it of an employee? Like it or not, sex is treated as special. Forcing someone at gunpoint to give up zeir money (ie mugging) is considered far less severe a crime than forcing someone at gunpoint to have sex (ie rape), even tho both are nonconsensual.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:54 AM
2

I won't blame anyone for using any method they can to escape an active war zone.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:46 AM
5

The comments a user has made can still be seen, even if one does that. So if a user has recently made a comment in a "verboten" subreddit, anyone going to zeir profile will be able to see it.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:39 AM
6

Maybe a coin should be tossed to determine whether one would be allowed to leave, or be forced to stay and fight. This'll still allow half the population to escape.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:37 AM
1

the prof spends the next half hour telling us exactly what the student did wrong in regards to the scientific process Could you please spend two minutes telling us the same?
/r/MensRights11/02/22 12:51 PM
1

If people think more of women than they should, attempting to bring that level down may be misogyny literally, but it's also justified.
/r/MensRights11/02/22 12:43 PM
1

Isn't it a pretty fine line between that and misogyny? NO. Women aren't wonderful and saying that isn't misogyny in the slightest.
/r/MensRights11/02/22 12:40 PM
1

If she wants perfect safety, forever. This applies to men too, of course.
/r/AntiFeminists08/01/22 07:53 PM
1

Condescending much? And your statement You are a disgusting asshole was not? I understand the difference between positive and normative statements just fine Do you? What about the second difference I mentioned? Going back to Ezekias1337's example, whose behavior do you think we should aim to modify to prevent such incidents: the lion's or the person's who went into the cage?
/r/MensRights08/01/22 06:52 PM
1

You need to have more nuance in your thinking. In particular, you need to distinguish between positive and normative statements, and between causing an action and being responsible/culpable for it.
/r/MensRights08/01/22 06:40 PM
1

it can happen to any one of us. True, but it happens to some subgroups of us more than to other subgroups, and ignoring that does no one any favor.
/r/MensRights08/01/22 06:31 PM
1

A single anecdote does not repudiate data. What happened to you is wrong, of course, but the conclusion "Unfortunately- the sex of the person doesn't really matter." does not follow.
/r/MensRights08/01/22 06:29 PM
1

Nope Citation? What law exists in India that compels reporting of a crime to only use the legal term for that crime? I'm not aware of any.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/22 06:08 PM
1

This is not rape per Indian law, but it is penetrative sexual assault if the victim (regardless of gender) is underage. The law that deals with sexual offences against children does not define a crime called rape. It does define sexual harassment, sexual assault, and penetrative sexual assault, the last whereof is approximately coterminous with rape. So yeah, the article could easily have used sexually assaulted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/22 06:03 PM
1

PPP is the relevant metric here, whereby the fine amount is slightly less than USD 1000.
/r/MensRights08/01/22 04:12 PM
1

An eye for an eye leaves the world blind. And simplistic aphorisms leave people with a stunted understanding of nuanced issues (which means all issues).
/r/MensRights31/12/21 08:44 PM
2

"if it takes two to make it work then it takes two to make it fail"... I was like "no. That's the opposite of valid logic" Quite true. ¬ (P ∧ Q) = ¬P ∨ ¬Q
/r/MensRights31/12/21 08:38 PM
1

When crime and violence happens, more crime and violence is always the correct answer. Yes. Note that the criminal justice system is nothing but State-sanctioned violence.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 08:16 PM
3

What does bringing in the word "patriarchy" achieve?
/r/MensRights31/12/21 12:12 PM
3

The correct measure to use here is PPP. whereby INR one million equals about USD 50K.
/r/MensRights18/12/21 09:32 PM
-2

Could we not have such clickbait titles, please?
/r/MensRights13/12/21 07:39 AM
1

Ah, Opinion Myopia in action...
/r/MensRights12/12/21 08:56 AM
1

I want to say all of them (the people who made the comments screenshotted) are cunts but I won't; cunts are nice.
/r/MensRights05/12/21 08:45 PM
0

Anyone being physically abused in a scenario, isn't the asshole. Isn't the only asshole.
/r/MensRights04/12/21 12:58 PM
1

Meant by whom? And should one care about their ideal anyway?
/r/MensRights04/12/21 09:06 AM
1

Ah, I remember seeing this story a few months ago in this very subreddit. Well, good that those two were appropriately punished.
/r/MensRights02/12/21 06:19 PM
1

I'd say 50% to Broadwater and the other 50% to The Innocence Project or a similar organization.
/r/MensRights01/12/21 03:03 PM
1

Just because the prosecution was theoretically deeply flawed, that does not mean the guy wasn’t guilty. No, but it does mean he shouldn't've been convicted.
/r/MensRights01/12/21 02:54 PM
7

no one seems interested in discussing the systemic abuse by the police. I'm pretty sure I've seen many posts about how the criminal justice system is biased against men (giving harsher punishment to men for same crime, etc) in this very subreddit.
/r/MensRights01/12/21 02:20 PM
3

second question in the quiz: Who is affected by sexism and sexist behavior? A. Women and girls disproportionately B. Only sad, lonely feminists C. Just girls in mini skirts No option for "both sexes, but in different ways". The subsequent questions are just as bad. (To be precise, the questions aren't necessarily bad, but the possible answers given are.)
/r/MensRights01/12/21 09:40 AM
2

Some problem being faced by women doesn't automatically make it sexism. One has to show women face that problem at a significantly higher rate/probability than do men. For example (quoting from that article) 63% of women journalists have been confronted with verbal abuse No mention of how many men journalists have faced the same. 59% of women in Amsterdam reported some form of street harassment Likewise.
/r/MensRights01/12/21 09:31 AM
1

the fact she gave birth to him irrelevant. You have one mother. irrelevant.
/r/MensRights27/11/21 08:43 AM
2

ISTM that the reply (2nd picture) is facetious as well.
/r/MensRights27/11/21 08:29 AM
3

Incidentally, it should be "lmfuckingao".
/r/MensRights22/11/21 07:08 PM
2

Right, because being 28 makes me a paragon of wisdom. :D Well, okay, here's something: There are generally no magic tricks to success (in anything). With few exceptions, if one wants to successful one will have to put in the effort.
/r/MensRights20/11/21 05:56 PM
14

barefaced hatred.
/r/MensRights20/11/21 05:03 PM
1

Good? (I mean the punishment is good, obviously. Not the crime.)
/r/MensRights20/11/21 01:25 PM
2

Link is working fine for me.
/r/MensRights20/11/21 04:59 AM
3

He/she meant "run" and not "lead".
/r/MensRights20/11/21 04:52 AM
1

If you personally do not feel you need one, fine. Don't participate in it. Many others don't share your opinion.
/r/MensRights19/11/21 07:52 PM
2

I was one, nine years ago.
/r/MensRights19/11/21 07:38 PM
2

Strangers just like real people You're yet again using the word "real" as if it doesn't include strangers (and not just internet strangers either, strangers period).
/r/MensRights19/11/21 06:40 PM
3

Someone should post a post purporting to be from a man who's cheating on his SO because the SO isn't good sexually. See what reception it gets.
/r/MensRights19/11/21 06:34 PM
1

So the options are "(I think) This subreddit is biased not more than 5% of the times" and "(I think) This subreddit is biased not less than 95% of the times"? LOLWUT. Did you think through the options before creating the poll?
/r/MensRights17/11/21 10:44 PM
54

Why is women being avoided by men a punishment? Women aren't entitled to men's company, or acquaintanceship.
/r/MensRights17/11/21 07:34 PM
2

A comment on the article says, "what was dickless husband doing while whorish wifey desperate for adolescent cock?".
/r/MensRights05/11/21 05:45 PM
1

Not rape under Indian law (which, like many others, define rape as a male-perpetrator- and female-victim-only crime). The relevant law, under which she was punished, does not use the term "rape".
/r/MensRights05/11/21 05:18 PM
1

This is from India, not The USA. Not every country is fucked up in the same way.
/r/MensRights05/11/21 05:16 PM
2

¿por que no los dos?
/r/MensRights30/10/21 03:04 PM
1

'Slong as there're sufficiently many empty seats nearby, I don't mind. But the moment the habg-having seat is the only empty seat, you must give it up! Where I live, most people probably wouldn't even ask; I know I wouldn't. I'll just physically move the bag to the floor and sit down, and to hell with what the bagowner thinks. That's assuming the bagowner doesn't immediately remove zeir bag from the sit, which is exceedingly rare here.
/r/MensRights29/10/21 12:54 PM
3

On the other hand, the idea of femininity is linked to masculinity. It was formed by the idea that it is everything that a good man should not be. You cannot simply assert that.
/r/MensRights28/10/21 07:30 PM
1

to an extent. look up "doxastic voluntarism".
/r/MensRights28/10/21 01:11 PM
1

Atheist, irreligious, mildly antitheist.
/r/MensRights28/10/21 01:10 PM
2

Well that country is known to be authoritarian in some aspects, so not a surprise.
/r/MensRights28/10/21 09:01 AM
2

What country?
/r/MensRights28/10/21 08:53 AM
1

Punctuation and line breaks are your friend.
/r/MensRights27/10/21 08:03 PM
6

You don't get to say what "real men" are like. There is no such thing as "real man".
/r/MensRights27/10/21 07:48 PM
15

I dunno about the others, but Simone de Beauvoir was definitely a feminist. Could you elaborate on which of the signatories were feminist, and which not? it's just a petition signed and written by both men and women not french feminists, surely you're not saying men can't be feminists... if you know anything about french philosophy you'd recognize some of those names to certainly not be feminists. could you elaborate on which of the signatories were feminists, and which were not?
/r/MensRights27/10/21 07:41 PM
13

The heading says "french feminists", not "french women".
/r/MensRights27/10/21 07:34 PM
2

By Samantha Brick, right?
/r/MensRights24/10/21 07:42 PM
3

Can't you edit the post?
/r/MensRights24/10/21 06:58 PM
3

I think what zey means is that you didn't redact the user's name.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 06:13 PM
3

The woman-only company in UK?
/r/MensRights24/10/21 06:08 PM
2

"All the raping traditionalists are very real. (I) had to abbreviate [traditionalist to trad]." I guess.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 05:51 PM
1

I'm pretty sure falsely accusing someone of crime is already a crime, in any halfway-sane legal system.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 05:25 PM
2

By the way, "beyond reasonable doubt" and "preponderance of evidence"/"balance of probability" are two different standards.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 05:23 PM
2

Just like a sexual offender registry has people added to it only after conviction, a false-accuser registry would be also. Mere failure to prove an accusation in a court beyond reasonable doubt does not amount to false accusation.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 04:10 PM
5

doubt all women That seems too extreme. how 'bout "trust but verify"? or better yet, "trust after verifying"?
/r/MensRights24/10/21 03:53 PM
4

you guys all say the exact same things about each other Even if true, it does not thence follow that "you guys are all the same.".
/r/MensRights21/10/21 08:57 PM
1

You know what happens when you assume....? We reach conclusions about the world which may or may not be correct? You can argue that a certain assumption in a certain situation was or was not unwarranted, but a blanket prohibition on making assumptions is not only undesirable, but more importantly, impossible. You know what happens when you outsource your reasoning to thought-terminating cliches?
/r/MensRights15/10/21 07:45 AM
1

It deals with the topics of "women being allowed to be exempt from their actions' consequences" and "a problem being portrayed as gendered when it is not (because presumably a man in the same situation would face the same fate)".
/r/MensRights14/10/21 08:07 PM
1

Eighteen years, actually. (POCSO, section 2, clause d)
/r/MensRights14/10/21 08:01 PM
7

Fallacy of relative privation, or appeal to worse problems.
/r/MensRights14/10/21 09:35 AM
1

No. I'm Indian, not Japanese, and I don't know the language.
/r/MensRights14/10/21 09:30 AM
1

Definition of monolith, sense 3: an organized whole that acts as a single unified powerful or influential force
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:39 PM
1

It’s like asking why did men buy suits with wide lapels in the seventies if they didn’t like them. Why are you assuming the men buying such suits didn't like them? Declared preference vs revealed preference.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 08:39 PM
1

if you walk into store x, go to department y for the type of pants you want, and go to rack z to find the length that will fit, you get what you get. That is true for anyone buying any type of clothing. Then we ask: why is it that, for no x or y, do there exist pants with pockets for women? It is a general principle that, if there is demand for something, eventually someone will start making and selling it. The question is why it has not happened with pocket-having women's pants, to which you ar…
/r/MensRights13/10/21 07:46 PM
1

That's why you use angle brackets for ordered pairs (or n-tuples, for that matter). :)
/r/MensRights13/10/21 07:40 PM
2

People talk a lot about how men disrespect women but women do the exact same thing... . That's because this behavior is not specific to one gender, nor is it more likely to manifest in one gender than in another.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:43 AM
1

SO you believe that low percentage of women in tech fields are because women want to join but are prevented, and not because women in general are less interested in those jobs than men are?
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:40 AM
1

But that doesn't mean everyone can do that kind of work. But everyone can do tech work?
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:35 AM
2

if u rly care that much, u can just become trans Pretty sure the majority of transpeople, and trans rights advocates, would take exception to that statement.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:30 AM
1

I prefer [0,1) myself. Outward-facing brackets simply look weird.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:28 AM
3

So if someone made an analogous post in an analogous subreddit about men in nursing, and someone asked an analogous question about women, and received the reply "idiot", you would not have any problem with it?
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:23 AM
1

I should answer why clothing companies don’t want money when that’s something I never claimed? What is your claim then? If there is a demand for pocket-having pants for women as you say, why don't companies make them? Sure, incompetence on the manufacturer's part is a possibility, but you have to actually show it, instead of just claim it a priori.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 09:17 AM
1

It is your right to leave a discussion at any point you want to; but if others perceive that you left a discussion just when you were asked a question you could not answer, or were presented with arguments you could not rebut, then they are not likely to judge you well.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 08:55 AM
1

A) nothing is stopping women from buying men's jeans True, but body shape differences may mean that they are less suitable for women. B) nothing is stopping women from starting clothing lines with deeper pockets; some of the largest clothing retailers have female CEOS as well Few women are in such positions of power (just like how few men are in positions of power). C) nothing is stopping women from hiring someone to add pockets to their clothing, or learn to do it themselves. True. D) Marketing…
/r/MensRights13/10/21 08:15 AM
3

Isn't humankind already a (very common) word? Are you telling me that Justin, who I presume is an L1 English speaker, is unaware of that?
/r/MensRights13/10/21 07:47 AM
5

The word "man" was originally gender-neutral. "Female human" was "wif" or "wifman" ("wif"=female, source of modern English "wife"). "Male human" was "wer" or "werman" ("wer"=male, survives only in "werewolf"). Gradually "wer" fell into disuse, "man" acqiured a male-only meaning (but continued to hold the gender-neutral meaning) and "wifman" became "woman". Later some thought it is unokay to have the same word ("man") have both a gender-neutral and a male-gender-specific meaning, the gender-neutr…
/r/MensRights13/10/21 07:46 AM
0

You literally cannot be “fat” and healthy. Strongly disagree. One cannot be morbidly obese (which term was the one originally used) and healthy, sure. But one can definitely be fat and healthy. Also, healthiness is not a binary.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 06:37 AM
1

Yes 👶 kiddo. You will understand everything...when you grow up dear. Your condescension in much appreciated.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 04:05 PM
0

responded in a different comment.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 04:04 PM
1

Possible. But how likely? That is the real question.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 04:01 PM
0

the business management is all about finding productive entities and awarding them. really? If they don't the labor, force knowledge and skill will find a place that rewards them suitably. really?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 03:06 PM
2

Is it tyranny or more of an emotional response some women are having towards certain men due to past injustice? The two are not mutually exclusive. Tyranny is defined by its effects on the victims, not by the motivations of the perpetrators.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 02:59 PM
9

The point is not whether the patriarchy exists. The point is that, when you are part of a group that facing problems, throwing up your hand and going, "man, the problems are 100% outside our control, nothing we can do about it" is not a productive attitude to have.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 02:56 PM
0

Well, if rape victims do that, they can hardly complain that nothing is being done about it.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 02:30 PM
11

Two r/noahgettheboat/ stories in as many days!!!
/r/MensRights11/10/21 10:07 AM
7

It would likely be denigrated as an "old boys' club".
/r/MensRights11/10/21 09:25 AM
7

I got a reply saying that men need to stand up for themselves instead of asking women to stand up for us. Did you ask them whether the same applied to women?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 09:16 AM
1

Is it sexist to say men succeeded more 500 years ago because they are stronger, faster, and more agile? What do you mean by "succeeded more"? What definition of success are you using?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 01:04 AM
4

Many fields that used to be male-dominated are no longer so, like medicine and teaching. Has anyone offered an explanation for why the patriarchy has been successful in keeping women out in some fields and not in others?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:57 AM
3

The claim under dispute here is that sexual harassment exists everywhere, not the claim that it exists at all. No reasonable person would argue against the latter. A person who concludes that it exists everywhere because zey has personally experienced it is just as stupid as one who concludes that it doesn't exist because zey hasn't personally experienced it.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:50 AM
1

You were btfo by the facts. What's btfo mean?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:45 AM
0

I work in a steel shop and half of the people there are women. Good for them?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:44 AM
1

I'd rather have a house made from brick, rather than concrete and rebar Made entirely of brick, with no concrete and rebar? The buildings I generally see around myself are built with reinforced concrete forming the load-bearing structure and brick-and-mortar used to make the (non-load-bearing) walls.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:28 AM
1

it's a thing that exists. Yes, but it is not a thing that exists widely, and the situation described in the preceding clause is unlikely to change in the near future.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:25 AM
2

Roofing in Texas as a redhead or diving in Bombay sewers. clarification?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:23 AM
2

What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to women? wasn't similar arguments used to justify racism at one point?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:21 AM
5

I've never seen it therefore it doesnt exist" "I've seen it personally therefore it exists everywhere."
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:19 AM
2

97 percent of men have been victims of sexual harassment in their lives too. This claim, along with the analogous claim about women, needs stronger evidence than has been provided.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:18 AM
5

Guess who knows? No one. Not my parents, my other siblings, my other relatives, my husband, my friends, no one. I don’t even think the cousin mentioned above knows. Are you saying this is a common occurrence for victims of sexual offenses? If so, how can we have any confidence whatsoever on the statistics sexual offenses?
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:16 AM
1

I’m just an open minded woman emphasis added. being downvoted for simply posting. anyone ever who gets downvoted gets downvoted for "simply posting". the people who decide to downvote a comment generally do so based solely upon the contents of that comment or of other comments posted by the same username. especially in an anonymous forum like reddit, people who view a comment are extremely unlikely to know the real-life identity of the poster, hence that cannot be the basis of the decision to do…
/r/MensRights11/10/21 12:06 AM
1

Maybe you don't tell "all and sundry" about your rape, but do you also hide it from your closest family members?
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:59 PM
1

Forcing oneself on a sleeping drunk woman who would've said no if asked That is already considered rape. No need to put a "technically" there. Also, the struck-out part isn't necessary. Also, there is a duty on victims of a crime to report it to authorities so that appropriate action may be taken. If the victims won't even take that basic first step, they can hardly complain that nothing is being done.
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:58 PM
1

I dont know what the IRB is From Wikipedia: An institutional review board (IRB), also known as an independent ethics committee (IEC), ethical review board (ERB), or research ethics board (REB), is a type of committee that applies research ethics by reviewing the methods proposed for research to ensure that they are ethical.
/r/MensRights10/10/21 01:08 PM
3

If you’re a man, don’t call yourself a feminist. We need to stop unquestioningly assuming that every man who demonstrates an entry-level understanding of gender equality is an inherently good person. So funny, this whole thing. I know you're not the one advancing this argument but I wanted to offer some counterarguments anyway: Why is she assuming that all men who call themselves "feminist" are demonstrating only "an entry-level understanding of gender equality"? What do the man with an "advance…
/r/MensRights10/10/21 12:51 PM
1

The law telling people not to discriminate against others has nothing to do with freedom of speech. I never said otherwise. That’s simply upholding the constitution Where in the constitution is nondiscrimination mentioned? Also, my hypothetical law could also be justified under the same grounds because freedom of speech is certainly mentioned in the constitution? You think a country that locks up children cares about “ethics/philosophy”? 1) Why should I in particular, or society in general, refr…
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:39 AM
1

That may be the legal definition of freedom of speech, but not necessarily the ethical/philosophical one, and certainly not the only one. Also, private entities can still have their rights restricted by the law/the State, for example the laws that a private business or place of employment cannot discriminate on the basis solely of protected characteristics. It would not be out of the realm of plausibility for there to be a law that private entities cannot visit adverse consequences on a person o…
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:12 AM
1

Freedom of speech does rule out some (although certainly not all) possible consequences of speech. Eg the State can't punish one solely for one's speech.
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:02 AM
1

works for hire automatically have copyrights transfered to the employer unless contact specified otherwise. That is by no means universally true. (although it appears to be true for newzealand, from the brief search I did). Regardless, that rule applies to works commissioned by someone, not to marriage.
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:00 AM
1

P(a|b)≠P(b|a), fyi.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 09:57 PM
1

you are free to say what ever you want, but there may be consequences "you are free to say that you hate our supreme glorious leader. ignore the gun pointed at you."
/r/MensRights09/10/21 09:55 PM
1

The other day, the top post here was about how women don't like short guys. Was that the topic of the post? IIRC, the post was about how women not liking short men is generally perceived as a perfectly okay preference not deserving of criticism, while many other such preferences are generally perceived as bodyshaming and deserving of criticism. One can disagree with the thesis of the post, but that doesn't mean the height preferences of women was the topic.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 09:20 PM
2

If this sub had less hate for feminism, the movement would grow VERY rapidly. How do you know that? Also, you do know that the MRM doesn't begin and end with this one subreddit, right?
/r/MensRights09/10/21 09:13 PM
1

Yes, and?
/r/MensRights09/10/21 08:46 AM
3

Then it is similarly a reason not to draft men.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 08:45 AM
7

Everything you saids applies to women too.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 08:40 AM
3

How can the copyright itself be shared? A portion of the earnings from her art, yes, standard separation of assets. But how can the copyright of something belong to someone who didn't create it?
/r/MensRights09/10/21 08:26 AM
5

r/NoahGetTheBoat/
/r/MensRights09/10/21 07:45 AM
13

What about making holes in condoms?
/r/MensRights09/10/21 07:26 AM
6

What does equality, in this context, mean exactly? Women want to have the same opportunities? Going to war is an opportunity? Do women not have the same opportunities? equal opportunities and equal responsibilities.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 07:00 AM
3

And I never acted like men don’t get raped? No, but you acted like the possibility of rape is a reason to bar women—and only women—from the draft.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 06:58 AM
2

The possibility of rape/sexual assault isn't sufficient reason to bar women from the armed forces.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 06:56 AM
1

thereby resolve themselves of It's absolve.
/r/MensRights07/10/21 07:37 PM
23

In order for there to be a healthy relationship between two persons, both of them have to be healthy (mentally, emotionally) as well. If your mother's personality, attitude and behavior as described by you are correct, ain't no one having any healthy relationship with her.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 04:18 PM
1

Not in the immedfiate future maybe, but surely eventually...
/r/MensRights06/10/21 04:10 PM
1

Feeder fetish is weird. There are literally "porn" videos of fat women eating a lot of junk food... I was so confused the first time I came across it... "what, you're telling me that's porn?"
/r/MensRights06/10/21 02:22 PM
1

As soon as you can, completely cut all ties with your apology of a family.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 02:20 PM
4

Complete annihilation of USA as a country might not be such a bad idea... actually, scratch that, complete annihilation of humanity is what we all should aspire to. Also, it's neutered.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 01:47 PM
1

The objectionable part is that an acronym is being interpreted as something it is not to take cheap shots at men Oh yes; that too. Reminds me of the stupid idea that "good without god is zero.".
/r/MensRights06/10/21 07:42 AM
12

Gentle PSA that none of it matters. The biology of fetal development does not inform anything about gender relations or about the worth of the genders. The only objectionable part is the insinuation that the entire male sex ought to be "sorry" because of its traits.
/r/MensRights05/10/21 05:43 PM
28

Did she check whether the people who refuse to call her doctor call other doctor or not? personally I wouldn't call anyone doctor.
/r/MensRights05/10/21 05:31 PM
37

No one owes random strangers jack. Intervene if you want to, but there's never an obligation to do so.
/r/MensRights05/10/21 06:37 AM
1

Is it really too much to expect a fellow man to actually be a man. Men are protectors. Men are providers. Nope.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 03:00 PM
2

As others have pointed out, it could be interpreted as "stop interrupting, women!" or as "stop, interrupting women!".
/r/MensRights04/10/21 01:58 PM
3

You do realize that you're not the only one who is allowed to have personal feelings about this (or any other) issue right? also that saying "this topic is personally relevant to me" isn't an argument of any sort?
/r/MensRights01/10/21 06:50 AM
6

badly photoshopped meme, you're showing your bias already. there was no need to bring up the graphical designing skills of the person/people who made these posters.
/r/MensRights01/10/21 06:48 AM
2

Is that why 90% of middle aged male suicide victims received or seeked professional "help"? The past tense of seek is sought, just so you know.
/r/MensRights30/09/21 06:46 AM
0

We need the draft in case we need the draft. "A tautology is a tautology."
/r/MensRights29/09/21 05:54 PM
1

*dost.
/r/MensRights29/09/21 05:52 PM
1

Your idiolect suggested that you might be. I just wanted to see if my guess was correct.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 05:35 PM
2

That comment is a few years old at this point; surely some more examples can be added?
/r/MensRights27/09/21 05:21 PM
1

I reject the whole patriarchy/matriarchy framing.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 05:05 PM
1

I think all "days" are kind of stupid.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 05:05 PM
1

Man I so much dislike portrait videos.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 04:41 PM
1

Hey OP, are you Indian?
/r/MensRights27/09/21 04:33 PM
5

Would be nice if you provide a few such examples.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 03:45 PM
1

It appears the whole post is a quote by that person, yet you have only put the first paragraph in quotes. This can engender confusion in readers.
/r/MensRights22/09/21 05:44 PM
1

Pretty sure no one will disagree with that...
/r/MensRights22/09/21 01:53 PM
1

Do you have any idea of the relevant law, or are you just speaking ex culo?
/r/MensRights22/09/21 01:49 PM
1

There needs to be better knowledge in both sexes about how to interact with the opposite sex. This "threatening to commit suicide to get your way" is toxic and evil and needs to stop.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 05:18 PM
3

How would helping China achieve anything? Why would you think China would even be interested in ending sexism in India?
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:37 PM
1

intersectional feminists absorb other right wing movements Did you mean "leftwing"?
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:35 PM
2

Like, by what logic do these casteist operate? The operate similarly to racists. An immutable characteristic of a person, inherited by birth, is considered to be a salient or even overriding feature of that person's identity, so that all other characteristics of that person become subordinated to the person's caste.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:35 PM
2

Untouchability is almost nonexistent. Caste doesn’t matter much in daily life. Nobody asks what caste you are or discriminate you based on it if you’re walking down the road or when you’re shopping in a supermarket. Looks like your knowledge in such matters is quite lacking.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:32 PM
1

Indian here. It really is, especially in urban areas. In the place where I live, women and girls are treated like literal ‘goddesses’. Like legit. It’s as if they cannot do anything bad at all and us guys are always to blame, especially when it comes to dating. Could you elaborate on that? Including where "the place [you] live" is? Girls literally threaten to commit suicide just to get the guys to date them. How common is this?
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:30 PM
1

I'm pretty sure there are many reasons to get out of India (for the few who can) which would come far ahead of India being a "feminist shithole"
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:28 PM
1

Nope. Twenty years is the minimum punishment for this.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 04:07 PM
3

The POCSO (Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences) act is quite strict; and unlike the ordinary rape law, which recognises male perpetrators and female victims only, is gender-neutral. Unfortch, it also has presumption of guilt.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 03:15 PM
5

They’re wired to get over us and get over us fast. If we get eaten by a t-rex, they need a new protector for themselves and the children ASAP. I'm always strongly sceptical of these evopsych stories. You could as well say men are wired to knock up as many women as possible hence they won't get attached to a particular woman. Also, you probably should've used some oether animal as an example, given that humans and trexes didn't exist at the same time.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 02:11 PM
12

One comment under that twitter thread says However they can control women, they will. Like, that means they have been controlling men all this time, but apparently that's not a problem. Another comment: What’s one more thing added to a woman’s long list of responsibilities? Birth babies Nurse babies Educate kids Nurture kids Manage the household Work a full time job Care for elderly parents Fight a man’s war Men are so fragile. Yet another: That is just stupid moms with young children can be dra…
/r/MensRights21/09/21 01:50 PM
8

Something negative done to a woman isn't necessarily or inherently sexism/misogyny. Unfortch, many people don't realize that.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 09:45 AM
8

Most of these won't pay tax If prostitution is legalized, there's no reason they can't be made to pay tax. contribute nothing of inherent value to society. They're providing a service for which there's a demand. That's contributing to society.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 09:14 AM
2

Fully in support. It's a profession like any other. And workers' protections for prostitutes.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 09:07 AM
2

Does she lock her house? Ask her why she's adopting a surface-level solution instead of teaching people that it's not okay to break into someone's house. "but you don't understand so I feel alone talking to you about it" "Why the fuck did you talk to me about this then? Shut the fuck up."
/r/MensRights21/09/21 08:38 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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