TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

nc863id Archive

View 2 posts and 276 comments by nc863id 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)
406

nc863id/r/MensRights10/08/14 12:19 PM
21

nc863id/r/MensRights08/08/13 04:56 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-2

Why denigrate earlier movements in feminism with the whole "even" thing? They had (and in many ways still have) a legit bone to pick. That sort of "othering" language isn't going to do anyone any good. Anyone who's sick of the thought policing, squabbling, sexism, and appropriation (of egalitarianism) of the modern feminist movement is an ally, "even" if they are -- gasp! -- a feminist.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 09:19 AM
4

Why qualify it? Don't give this jackass a platform.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 09:16 AM
6

Progress isn't saying what we should have done, but what we are doing. I was under the impression that this was a progressive movement.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 09:15 AM
1

Hillary Clinton weird flip-flop One of these words doesn't belong with the other two.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 02:51 PM
1

You don't understand that men generally bring home bigger paychecks because they work more hours at riskier jobs. More hours = more pay Riskier jobs = harder to fill = more pay Where the work is actually equal, pay is also equal. It's environmental inequalities in the workplace that drive the pay gap...at least, according to the same study from which the 77% figure is cherry-picked. If women, as a monolithic demographic, want to pick up an extra $0.23 on the dollar relative to their male counter…
/r/MensRights02/02/16 07:01 AM
4

Well I do now, which sucks because I love Emma Thompson.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 02:17 AM
1

I was going to say that this sounded like the ramblings of an angry dude who had been burned too many times, but then I saw who wrote it. 101% chance this'll get passed off as "internalized misogyny."
/r/MensRights05/01/16 11:48 PM
1

Are you my fiancee, by chance?
/r/MensRights30/12/15 04:21 PM
1

All the information is there. I'm talking about putting a little "1" next to each statistic and a little "1" next to each link. The condescension is much appreciated, though.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 11:35 PM
13

Maybe annotate each statistic with its relevant footnotes so it's a bit more clear what goes to what?
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:33 PM
2

You're exactly right. Paid parental leave is a hugely important social need that America is completely screwing up. The occasional well-heeled employer will give it because they're familiar enough with success to not be stupid. Most companies though are too greedy, too dumb, or too poorly-managed to be able to see the benefit. Ditto for those feminists who believe that paying women more than men is the answer, instead of creating a more level and more well-maintained playing field for families. …
/r/MensRights22/12/15 12:59 AM
7

In all fairness, kids are really important. We should definitely make sure that no one is put behind the 8-ball because they're doing that thing that keeps the species going. Single mothers and working-class families should get some assistance in making sure their children are taken care of (i.e. childcare). If they can't afford childcare, they should get it anyways. If they need help paying for food, then there should be food. But asking for what amounts to a huge pay raise based not at all on …
/r/MensRights22/12/15 12:50 AM
3

Well, they're idiots. If your body goes in one direction but your mind is wired in another, that's a disorder. It's a literal lack of fucking order. If anything, this whole "it's not an illness/disease/whatever" rhetoric only further disenfranchises people who are afflicted with what is commonly acknowledged as a disease. If you have MS then you have a disease. If you have gender dysphoria then you're a brave hero. Seriously? Fuck that mentality. Why is it not okay to have something wrong with y…
/r/MensRights19/12/15 06:26 AM
2

In the first thread In the second Your references are the opposite of the links.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 07:14 PM
19

"The last thing our movement needs is attention!"
/r/MensRights10/11/15 08:51 AM
4

There's a gay bar near where I live that I've patronized on a few occasions. Usually in the company of one of my LGBT friends, but on occasion with my (female) fiancee. It's a sample size of 1, but there, they don't really give a shit about your sexuality unless you make a point of it. It's a "safe" space, not an "exclusive" one. If you let them be them, and just keep your mouth shut, enjoy the show, and have fun as is intended, then it's fine. The issue presented in the article seems to have mo…
/r/MensRights01/11/15 05:58 AM
8

Sounds like some sort of sanity preservation add-on, considering the quality of most online comment threads.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 05:36 PM
17

It has 43. Look for the little yellow speech bubble thing directly below the end of the article, where the "share/tweet/email" buttons are. And (to my great pleasure), they're almost universal in condemning the crazy lady.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 05:32 PM
6

This may sound kind of irrelevant, but what you said about women not being interested in the current crop of female actors is what pissed me off so much about the original trailer for "Joy". It's a hell of an interesting story about a really interesting lady, played by probably the most bankable female actress in the business, but the trailer is so goddamn weak it hurts. "Hey, we did a funky remix of a Stones song. Oh look, JLaw. And Bradley Cooper doing a loopy arm thing. and Robert DeNiro is h…
/r/MensRights24/10/15 04:10 AM
9

Knowing how to negotiate those contracts is a goddamned art and science in and of itself. The same cunning that goes into making a $200,000,000 movie with $1,500,000,000 in ticket sales show a loss on the books for taxes goes into writing pay contracts for actors. Unless you're a doubly-gifted savant, you literally lack the skill to handle both acting and representing yourself at the same time to a successful level in either field.
/r/MensRights24/10/15 03:55 AM
4

It was the part where they said back up, and he backed up, and then they tackled him anyways. It's about the last half of the video or so.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:07 PM
20

Gotta love the bit where Pig #3 shoves the guy filming to the ground. It's like an idiotic, backwards game of "why are you hitting yourself?!" where sociopathic POS thugs like these punch other people in the face and then point at the bruises the left and cry and whine about there being a "war against police!"
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:18 AM
1

Your argument is based on the premise that there are, in fact, plenty of female elected officials...which there aren't. If we're just going on a raw numerical basis of what best represents an electorate based on demographics, then half of our elected officials should be women. Racial minorities should also be represented proportionate to their constituencies. This isn't happening. Maybe it's because there is sufficient empathy between any given kind of person from any class, race, or gender, to …
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:13 AM
4

When the entire existence of the MRM is based on the unreasonableness of others, then yes. Reason is exactly what should be given credit. What is it you want that's beyond reason?
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:00 AM
4

Get her so worked up that she's begging for it. Problem solved!
/r/MensRights13/10/15 10:27 PM
1

In Sharia law, three outsides witnesses are required to validate a case of rape, which makes it nearly impossible to prosecute. But yeah, you're right.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 10:22 PM
0

Yeah, I'm not saying we should pick random people and convict them without evidence. Of course, as a crime, proof must meet the reasonable doubt standard. But his standard of proof isn't "reasonable doubt," it's fucking Sharia law.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 09:29 PM
1

That was more me trying to build a little bridge before I burnt it than anything. Because yeah, in reality it's very gray.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 05:04 PM
32

What toxic piece of shit subreddit did I stumble into to read schlock like yours? I mean yes, she committed a goddamn crime for what she did and ought to be punished. But in your sick, deformed little mind, sex is some transactional thing between men and "bitches' who are "giving it up so easily" (lucky you!) because they "didn't value sex enough to hold out to begin with." Is that why you haven't gotten laid? All the bitches holding out on you? It's okay though, because when they throw their va…
/r/MensRights13/10/15 08:48 AM
32

So, what do we do about all the rapes that don't occur "out in the streets in front of 10 video cameras"? Because most criminals aren't considerate enough to show their crimes like that? Rape exists, don't accuse me of saying it doesn't. Right, it's just 1 or 2 per decade that are truly legitimate What the ever-living fuck is wrong with you?
/r/MensRights13/10/15 08:38 AM
1

So, in short, the status quo sucks for everyone involved. Love it! /s
/r/MensRights13/10/15 03:31 AM
1

When you have to budget the same (or less) income for a longer span of non-income-generating time, it is.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 06:49 PM
1

I get what you're saying, but that only works if someone has kids. Otherwise, those that aren't forced to take leave won't, and will have a leg up on those who have families. It wouldn't be "everyone" on equal footing. If everyone were given greatly increase vacation time, and its use were incentivized or its neglect disincentivized, I think that would be a little more equal in the broader sense. It's a complicated thing, though -- there's a variety of legal and cultural facets to it. Not the so…
/r/MensRights09/10/15 03:14 PM
2

I'm just spitballing here, but I believe that most of Cracked's readers are also male. Trying to get in more female writers, and thereby getting more pieces written that other women might identify with, would hopefully increase their female readership, thus their total readership, thus that sweet ad money.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 03:08 PM
1

Not to mention that most people don't have the crazy compartmentalized brain it would take to seamlessly jump back and forth between family and work on the fly. There's a reason why writers shut in their rooms at all hours is a trope and the cheery, breezy familyman/woman writer isn't.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:57 AM
2

I'm probably oversimplifying here, but why not just juice the fuck out of "vacation time" and leave it at that? Every employee can take x number of weeks off per year, for any reason, period. Babycation! Staycation! Marathon Masturcation! You can do it all! I mean, our productivity has been climbing like crazy, but wages have remained stagnant. If they're not going to pay us more, then we should get more time off.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:54 AM
0

He forgot the /s, it's a common mistake.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:49 AM
2

Try it and submit it, nothing to lose but however long it takes, which itself will give you an answer.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:48 AM
3

And the nature of the content is informed by the perspective of the writer. It's not stupid at all.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:48 AM
0

If the second job's income is declared, then it's not an issue. Might be out of the first job if word got back to them, but it's not a tax problem.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:45 AM
6

He literally listed off three "promising new ones" in his post.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 05:44 AM
2

Also, it's a bit disingenuous to say that no one cares about the death penalty when it's such a deeply divisive issue that there was a longstanding federal moratorium on its use, and is still outlawed in many jurisdictions. And consider the protests that break out at every single execution performed in the United States. Plenty of people care about the barbaric, presumptive, and arrogant nature of the act itself, irrespective of the gender (or the actual guilt, even!) of the ones put to death.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 09:27 PM
2

Well, there's that guy in OK who's getting quite a bit of media attention. As for how many executions period are scheduled this month...no clue.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 09:08 PM
1

No, I agree, the better solution is to remove the cudgel entirely, because it's a barbaric and hypocritical application of "justice."
/r/MensRights01/10/15 03:29 PM
2

You don't "cause" someone else to become involved unless you coerce them -- they chose to do so. If you coerce them, then yes, that's arguably worse than doing it yourself.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 03:28 PM
0

Are you sick or something?
/r/MensRights01/10/15 12:32 PM
1

Most people consider the planner/motivator and the executor to be equally guilty. So they should be equally punished, right? They weren't. Hitler never personally murdered a single Jew, you know. Oh, this is the mentality I'm dealing with here. Shit, never mind, lost cause.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 12:32 PM
-2

And in this case the plea bargain is "we're dead set on murdering someone, who's it gonna be -- you or them?" which is patently barbaric. I'm not saying she did nothing wrong or that she should've gotten off relatively easy, just that if they're willing to take murdering the actual murderer off the table in exchange for a favor, then it shouldn't have been on the table in the first place. Prime responsibility falls upon the prime actor. No one is more culpable than the one who actually does the …
/r/MensRights01/10/15 05:33 AM
5

Right. Her late braking or failure to brake is considered negligent, but failing breaking a posted law (i.e. a speed limit) it's not a crime and can't be prosecuted as one. This sort of argument can easily be steamrolled in a case where the accused can't properly defend themselves through proper counsel, but she can afford a lawyer, so she gets the law as it's intended.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 05:25 AM
3

Yeah, from the outside, negligence looks like a slam dunk case. But negligence in and of itself isn't a crime, and her actions failed to meet any other criminal standard.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 05:23 AM
-4

And I can abide that so long as it doesn't become a capital case. Both people should get life in prison. But if the state insists upon murdering someone, it makes less sense to murder the one who wanted it done than the one who actually did it. Exceptions made for cases where the one who wants it done wields some sort of significant coercion (credible threat of death, say) over their chosen tool.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 05:22 AM
2

Yeah, if you want to get after uneven application of the law, this is probably the way to do it. I don't have any hard statistics in front of me (surprising, that, seeing as the people who keep the statistics are of a body with the ones about whom they are being kept!), but an indigent defendant would be totally fucked in this situation. And in a case of indigence, I'd fully expect a male defendant to be treated worse than a female one. Class is the prime -ism, all others come second.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:40 AM
-6

This shouldn't have happened. If someone says "you should totally just kill this guy" without wielding some sort of extreme coercive force over their intended murderer, then that doesn't even begin to approach the same level of criminality as the person who said "oh okay, sure" and actually did the goddamn act. In a perfect world, the state wouldn't perform revenge murder on anyone. But if it had to, then no, she should have been spared the death penalty and instead been given life in prison wit…
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:32 AM
9

He meant a woman being executed is an historic event.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:27 AM
16

State-sanctioned murder, woo! Equality! The whole fucking thing is barbaric.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:27 AM
11

Her case fails to meet one of the two criteria for criminality -- negligence may be a factor, but violating a posted speed was not. Therefore, it is not a crime, but possibly a tort. This is literally just the legal system following the law.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:21 AM
16

There's also this intervening phase called an "investigation," where the prosecutors go from considering a charge to figuring out whether their considerations have merit. A prosecutor wrote in a one-page sheet declining to file charges that Jenner was traveling slightly below the posted speed limit and began braking less than two seconds before the crash. To prove misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, prosecutors would have had to show Jenner was negligent and had violated a basic speed law. There…
/r/MensRights01/10/15 04:18 AM
-2

OK, so you found me out. I'm secretly the author of "Eat Pray Love" come to undermine the MRM. You got me. Is that what you want me to say? 'Cuz that's the direction you're going. "Oh, surely you must've meant this! You...didn't? Well, someone somewhere does, so that's also your fault!" Holy shit, grow up a little.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 01:51 AM
0

My whole argument revolves around the fact that it's a bigger issue than looking after just the man, or just the woman. That it's a relationship where two people's wants and needs are tied to one another and there are very rarely any unilateral decisions that don't have some sort of meaningful effect on the other. I don't think he should get a vasectomy because she wants it. But the bigger argument -- if there is a specific burden upon one person or the other regarding contraception in a relatio…
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:37 AM
-2

Referring to the supposedly inevitable future mate as a "replacement," like some sort of commodity has nothing to do with gender. It'd be just as appalling and misanthropic to refer to a man as a breeding stock or whatever.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:35 AM
-1

might might Right, it's conjecture. That's all or I can do is spin conjecture. He's not evil for wanting that. The fuck? Who said anything about evil? He already said he was fine with condoms, so that means the "she's forced to take hormonal birth control!" argument is bullshit, too. Probably why I didn't make that argument.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 01:44 PM
-3

I see how that kind of thinking is gynocentric, but that's not my kind of thinking, so it's an idiotic accusation to level at me.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 01:42 PM
-4

I'd be conjuring up arguments for their own sake if I were to try to disagree with you, but I should point out that, even if its intended aim is sterilization, contraception is a popular "off-label" usage for the procedure. And yes, the relatively low success rates of reversal are alarming. But in this situation, that may or may not be a concern. Whether or not he has more children, he's going to be responsible for those three. Reversibility might not be so much of an issue for him. Is it right …
/r/MensRights29/09/15 04:52 AM
-3

and thinking her point of view is dispositive is the Princess Complex in spades Or, you know, empathy. If you're in a relationship -- of any sort, with anyone -- then you damn well be taking that other person's point of view into the consideration. Not doing so is "dispositive" (wrong usage, btw) of narcissism in spades. Which leads to: It is absolutely not more impactful for him than her practicing BC, is it. Of course it's not, for him, because he wouldn't be taking birth control. Your trying …
/r/MensRights29/09/15 04:44 AM
-9

Yeah, this is pretty much the only sensible reply I've read here. Pretty much everyone wants to gloss over the fact that it's not a simple binary issue of whether or not he should have a vasectomy. What's at hand is that she's on BC and thinks a vasectomy would be a simpler, less impactful solution. And she's right. It is. Period. But that's not all there is to it. If neither of them are willing to undergo either a simple, reversible, outpatient procedure (in his case) or some sort of non-trivia…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 02:04 AM
2

Wow that's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Should the downsides be ignored just because addressing them might hurt some people's feelings? I didn't say that. as though his opinions trump everyone else's Again, no one saying that until you projected it onto everyone who disagrees with the "consensus." I got circumcised, my life is fine, my sex life is fine. I don't lose sleep over it. If someone else does, or feels as if they're losing out, then that sucks for them and I wish things had turned out…
/r/MensRights27/09/15 08:49 PM
2

I understand that being cut wasn't something I consented to, but it's incredibly patronizing and hypocritical for people in here to be making tsk tsk noises and telling me why I should feel victimized. I'm surprised "internalized misandry" hasn't been thrown around yet, because this is exactly the same sort of crap radfems pull on women who dare to not be offended by their life circumstances.
/r/MensRights27/09/15 01:50 PM
1

OP didn't post source, others who may have found the article didn't post source, and now apparently the source has been deleted?
/r/MensRights26/09/15 01:58 PM
2

VICE isn't running for President. He's on a whole 'nother level of "being on the radar."
/r/MensRights26/09/15 01:57 PM
1

That I don't know. I don't live there, just did some casual Googling is all.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:35 PM
1

In Utah it's 16, but if you're between 16-18, then it's illegal for someone more than 10 years older than you to have sex with you.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:32 PM
-1

While she's way out of line per the half-plus-seven rule, it's also way out of line calling this rape when 17 is the average age for becoming sexually active. Inappropriate and perverse? Certainly. But only a crime based on the strict interpretation of an exceedingly conservative state's outlandish and unrealistic notions regarding age of consent.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:24 PM
25

Never understood "shaving". When you boil it down, its simply a practiced deception. It is so ingrained in culture that it is considered normal, but even so it is naturally off-putting to me, and I tend to question the moral character of someone who spends a large amount of their day unnaturally exposing themselves through the art of deception.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:13 PM
-4

There are three results for the word "cunt" on this page (well, four now I guess), and they're all in your comment. Tone it the fuck down. Edit: Right, vote this down, because supporting vitriolic and demeaning language that give feminists claims to deride the MRM as being hollow and misogynistic is exactly what we should be doing.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 10:26 PM
4

i haven't seen a murder this brutal since The Mountain popped Oberyn's head like Gallagher with a watermelon.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 07:30 PM
-1

Except that's simply not true, so she's not.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 12:48 AM
2

Phyllis Schlafly is pretty widely regarded as a lunatic.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 12:47 AM
2

I get what you're trying to say here, but what do you have against Whoopi?
/r/MensRights24/08/15 06:21 AM
1

but this does not mean that she was not raped Fixed to mean what you clearly meant.
/r/MensRights24/08/15 06:19 AM
5

Unless the age of consent in LA is 18, then yeah, I don't think they should be prosecuted, just fired. Though maybe they should put Ms. Dufresne in prison on account of her name...
/r/MensRights23/08/15 02:34 PM
8

The comments are leaning on every variation of the "man up" theme you could possibly imagine.
/r/MensRights02/08/15 02:06 PM
1

No need to get defensive about it.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:10 PM
4

Most businesses don't have spaces custom-built in anticipation of their workforce to that degree. And it'd be almost impossible to get the bean-counter types like myself (but not actually myself because I'd totally see the logic and sign off on it) to agree to the cost to renovate.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 04:10 AM
1

There's nothing wrong with him having a cuckold fetish. Nothing at all. Not my bag, but it's not my place to say what's right for someone else. That last sentence up there is something he should read 100 times every day before breakfast, because clearly he doesn't understand the concept.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 03:57 AM
1

I went to a restaurant recently where both the men's restroom and women's restroom were completely identical -- one commode, one sink, one changing table for the babies. I was like...what's the point? Why not just make them two restrooms for whoever. Even if you argue that a men's room should have a urinal because they take less water and we don't sit down to pee, so it saves a valuable resource to have the option to use less water in that instance...women don't need any more water to pee, they …
/r/MensRights16/07/15 03:28 AM
1

...because that was the topic of discussion.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 07:50 PM
1

Yeah, that's not blaming him. She didn't say that her getting wrapped up in a relationship is his fault and not hers.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 07:50 PM
4

To the top with ya. We need this comment as a disclaimer to the shitpost. Take this orange arrow and run like the wind!
/r/MensRights04/07/15 03:50 PM
-1

Are you reading a special version of the comment where she blames someone else? What I read boiled down to "I went to school, started dating this guy, stopped caring about school, changed degrees, got into debt, got a degree in something I don't care for. Dammit."
/r/MensRights04/07/15 03:47 PM
3

Ideally, an HR representative would be present for all disciplinary meetings between managers and subordinates.
/r/MensRights03/07/15 01:30 AM
1

Why is that on me, exactly? So far, the question has either gone ignored or deflected. I mean, this is a movement, right? It's kind of right there in the title. Movements have organization, and organization means leadership. If the fact that no one can actually offer an answer to this question is to be taken to mean that there are no identifiable leaders in the movement, then that's probably a pretty glaring image problem. There's nothing there to distinguish advancing legitimate grievances -- o…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 04:19 AM
14

This is what disgusts me about "feminism" in America. These sorts of things are everyday occurrences elsewhere in the world, but what they really have a problem with is "manspreading." Maybe its just my dirty egalitarian streak talking here (perish the thought!), but shouldn't we be fighting, ALL OF US fighting, for basic minimum standards of dignity and freedom for absolutely everyone first?
/r/MensRights10/06/15 04:13 AM
1

It's predicated on the efficacy of the movement. Were there leaders in the civil rights movement prior to 1964? Were there leader suffragettes before the passage of the passage of the 19th amendment? It's a horribly limiting metric, truth be told.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 03:43 AM
1

Then by that metric no one is running it -- it's a movement with no leadership. Is that what we're going with here?
/r/MensRights10/06/15 03:16 AM
1

I wasn't. Care to jump the tracks and address the topic?
/r/MensRights10/06/15 03:14 AM
1

And for the MRM? Who's "running it"?
/r/MensRights10/06/15 01:15 AM
2

Define "running it" as it applies to feminism and the MRM.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 12:35 AM
6

One of the image problems the MRM has stems from the fact that people believe it's guilty of the same thing -- mischaracterizing the crazies in the feminist movement as being part of the mainstream. Food for thought.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 12:13 AM
1

I almost downvoted you out of reflex. And everyone else who replied, for that matter. Those shitheads lol
/r/MensRights10/06/15 12:11 AM
1

Based on 10 minutes of mind-numbing, soul-crushing "research," I'm pretty sure that anyone who comments on a Daily Caller article is an ignorant asshole.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 12:08 AM
1

Our aim is to empower and educate women, trans and non-binary folk, and by standing outside yelling instructions you are disempowering and belittling the people working inside and reinforcing toxic gender stereotypes. Oh yes, that vicious stereotype of "Despite your raging, ignorant, pig-headed misandrist bigotry, I still want to give you money, so you won't let me, so my poor beleaguered girlfriend has to march in there and speak on my behalf -- despite the fact that cycling isn't her hobby bec…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 05:51 AM
5

Exactly. Saying you can't trust women because one did you wrong is like saying you can't trust men for the same reason. That's the sort of prejudice we're trying to be above.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 12:31 AM
0

Ah, a True Believer. Faith before sense, amen.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 05:26 AM
17

As disgusting as this situation is (and that's pretty hard to quantify, since it's like the universe -- infinite but bounded), I have to admit that I felt this odd sense of refreshment seeing a woman on this sub, who isn't actively fighting for men's rights in the overt sense like Christina Hoff Sommers or girlwriteswhat does, being presented in a positive light.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 06:45 AM
9

Unless it's the government, who is incapable of applying duress. Haven't you ever heard of black rainbows-and-sunshine sites?
/r/MensRights23/05/15 06:43 AM
19

A flake? He's been espousing the same platform for decades; that's the opposite of a flake. You might find him occasionally misguided (the wage gap thing may be a prime example), or an outright idiot. Whatever he is, though, he's definitely not a flake.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 05:29 AM
20

Eh, not really one of his "main points." Seems like more of something just tossed in to appease certain elements of the left.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 03:43 AM
10

I'm reasonably certain that actually inviting everyone is staying far above her level.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 12:25 AM
4

Why yes, it does say the same thing, because in both cases it is an unfair stereotype. Good observation!
/r/MensRights18/04/15 02:47 AM
11

BARBARA J. KING (NPR, interviewer) As a woman and a feminist, I winced when reading your equating "maleness" with "a birth defect," "a disorder" and "androgen poisoning." Doesn't this language do more harm than good, in that it describes negatively an entire group of people in an unnuanced, stereotyped way?
/r/MensRights17/04/15 11:58 PM
11

I get what they're going for here, but it looks ridiculously staged. Not in the sense that they got everyone standing around to act a certain way, but that they literally throw the wallets away from them and go running. If I saw that, and saw someone run up after the wallet, I'd think that something was definitely up, but less like "theft" and more like "fraud."
/r/MensRights03/04/15 05:35 AM
4

Slow-clapping at one's own computer may be awkward, but dammit I just don't care right now.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 04:46 AM
3

Illustration of OP's recommended course of action on Monday Substitute "HR Complaints" for "Bees"
/r/MensRights28/02/15 04:27 PM
8

What do you expect from someone shilling for a movement that has perverted itself into fighting against women's agency? The cognitive dissonance in modern feminism is so pervasive that it's actually difficult for anyone who hasn't forced it upon themselves to comprehend. "Women deserve to be equal to men, except where they deserve more because they're in so many ways superior, but inferior men keep oppressing superior men because [mental block, can't let myself think about the logic of that], an…
/r/MensRights28/02/15 04:25 PM
5

Some of the comments here are utterly appalling. You don't want to give feminists ammo against the MRM? Then how about shutting the hell up about how much of an "average fatty" she is (seriously?). Fuck the high road, right?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 01:01 AM
1

Did you actually read it? I'm talking about changing how we treat accusers rather than paying them less attention.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 12:11 PM
-4

That gets difficult, though. When you do less for accusers, you do less for victims, because it becomes more difficult to find the latter among the former. I'm not at all defending the practices being propped up by the rape hysteria working its way through higher education and American culture in general, I just don't think you can have it both ways as simply as that. If you want to do more for victims -- which we should -- while at the same time protecting the interests of the accused who are i…
/r/MensRights04/02/15 05:23 AM
0

Or that its "Sorry (for being on the phone) it's a boy" (goes immediately back to phone). I saw it as a rudeness joke, not a gender jab.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 12:09 PM
3

Denny Crane.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 05:51 PM
1

At least we can comfort ourselves with the fact that pretty much everyone who commented on the article thinks she's a blithering idiot.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 04:47 PM
1

This whole article got blood boiling. Blaming the husband for not giving evidence that was never solicited, setting precedent for conspiracy to murder to fall under the "reasonable person" standard...what in the fuck am I reading here?
/r/MensRights01/11/14 04:27 AM
4

I know "low-effort image posts" are against sub rules, but the "ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME" macro is literally the only response I can muster to this inanity.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 04:09 PM
1

She should expect them, but she still in no way deserves them. If you walk down a dark alley at night, you should have a certain expectation of being mugged. You do not, however, deserve to be mugged.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 04:00 PM
3

Hanlon's Razor in action: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:59 PM
3

Only women have lungs, dude. Read a book for once in your life. scoff
/r/MensRights20/10/14 05:12 AM
1

Well, if the military would actually hold them up to the same physical fitness standards as men... http://www.wiu.edu/coehs/military_science/physical_training/APFT%20Standards.htm The disparity here is appalling. For those of you who don't know what you're looking at: The columns where the numbers range from 50-100 with 50 and 60 underlined are the number of points the amount of reps you perform are worth, broken down by age group. To pass the Army PT test, you have to score at least 60 points i…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:56 PM
1

In many states, this isn't illegal, strictly speaking. Just unethical.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 04:23 AM
3

Top comment refers to the guys as "pussies" and the top reply to that unilaterally declares them psychologically defective. Wasn't aware I subscribed to TRP.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 04:19 AM
7

Pro: Actual facts! Con: Facts wrapped in nigh-hysterical partisan bullshit.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 04:15 AM
1

In all fairness, most of the commenters (with the notable exception of that Josie psycho) seem to find this some kind of appalling or another.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 04:06 AM
3

Oh yeah, I forgot about all that rape that doesn't involve physical contact, shit.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 04:02 AM
6

Teaching that unwanted contact is wrong is socialized into children at a very early age. You couldn't be more wrong.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 04:00 AM
4

I'm pretty sure they don't teach kindergartners to not break into people's houses and steal all their things; instead they tell Timmy to not steal Jimmy's crayons. They also don't teach kindergartners to not rape people. Instead they tell Timmy to stop poking Jimmy. TL;DR -- Little Timmy is an asshole.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 03:58 AM
7

Next time someone drops the "teach people not to rape" crap in your presence, ask them to show you their keychain. Then ask them why they have one.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 03:55 AM
-3

You don't compare data to other data and pick what you think is better, you assess how accurately the data seems to represent what is being measured. That Anita isn't a gamer has no bearing on the fact that Christina states her last experience with a game is from one that is 34 years old. If someone gave you their opinion of Windows 8, bit hadn't even touched a computer since MS-DOS, how informed would you find that opinion?
/r/MensRights17/09/14 03:15 AM
2

Yes, that is the difference. I was just trying to point out that they were all shared.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 04:48 AM
21

Safe to say the images were shared with someone. Not defending the crack, but I doubt the naked selfies were taken and put into their diaries.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 04:12 AM
2

Why not go back to the thought experiment that underlies the red pill / blue pill concept -- Plato's cave?
/r/MensRights01/09/14 05:36 AM
2

"I believe you!" That's all we want to hear.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 05:25 AM
11

I would almost guarantee that if this were a woman doing it, no one would think twice. It's been thought twice. "The Perfect Tomato" is one of the most beautiful prints I have ever seen, by the way. I'd put it on my wall if I wouldn't, ya know, be branded a pedophile for it.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 07:17 AM
9

"Hey, that looks like fun. I like fun. She likes fun. I like it when she has fun. Let's try that!" Tends to be my thought process on stuff like that. Can't speak for anyone else, but I'd like to think that most of us go through a similarly benevolent line of thinking.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:39 AM
0

If i thought this sad little asswipe were typical of us menfolk, I'd be a radfem.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:34 AM
0

Personally, I couldn't even buttle it, much less rebuttle.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:33 AM
5

Her statement in that last paragraph...why is that such a fucking difficult concept for so many people?
/r/MensRights13/08/14 11:24 PM
2

The men were obviously enemy combatant civilians.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 03:37 AM
-1

1.) It's a cliché, not a buzzword. 2.) It's exactly what you advocated doing.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 03:33 AM
1

Fight smarter, then.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 02:39 AM
13

This sort of "contextualization" happens all the time. How often have you heard: "Three Americans died when [airline, flight number] crashed, killing everyone on board." Fuck everyone else, they're just a backdrop to the American tragedy. Everybody, and I mean everybody, even so-called objective journalists, picks favorites and turn their back on everyone else.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 04:06 PM
8

Unlike anti-feminists, who are all bronze gods and goddesses, right? She's an idiot, but you're a superficial idiot.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 03:02 PM
2

Not so much. "The kitchen" could just be a handy metaphor for being a stay-at-home. No reason to believe it is or isn't, so saying one way or another is an assumption. Also, you're assuming children, which (a) may not always be the case, and (b) most people in my experience, women and men, would rather raise their own children than have to pay someone else to do it because of the need for a dual-income family. Also, nowhere was it stated that keeping a home is easier, and definitely was it not s…
/r/MensRights20/07/14 07:01 AM
3

Kind of a nitpick here, but being a homemaker isn't bundled with being subservient to the breadwinner. Every girl I've ever dated would much rather stay home and cook (and have hobbies and spend time with the dogs and all that) than spend 8-9 hours a day poking around in people's mouths or making frappucchinos or whatever. Shit, so would I. Bowing down to the bringer of the bacon is no part of that because bringing it home don't mean shit if it isn't cooked up right. No shame or subservience in …
/r/MensRights20/07/14 05:55 AM
10

Well obviously that's just the systematic malnourishment of women because of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 05:38 AM
5

What possible argument could there be that sexual dimorphism is a myth? Just look at the pelvis, for fuck's sake.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 04:50 AM
0

Why would you protect this stupid fuck's identity? It's not their real-life information, just their reddit screen name.
/r/MensRights14/07/14 02:02 AM
2

Also, since children this age are pretty much incapable of experiencing sexuality, maybe this should be taken as a sign of possible deviant behavior on the part of those responsible?
/r/MensRights13/07/14 05:45 AM
10

There's a mark on my head from where I slapped myself, an involuntary response to the stupidity of these officials.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 05:41 AM
8

I'd hope that the response were less vitriolic than "fuck off, cunt."
/r/MensRights02/07/14 02:57 AM
2

This is completely on point. The idea isn't to broadly paint women as evil -- that's rank sexism. We just want to point out that the evil that exists in the world is a people problem, not a men vs. women problem, and that we can't make gains against it if we excoriate one half of the perpetrators and grant the other half amnesty.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 03:15 AM
0

He's a 20-something Objectivist, what else do you expect?
/r/MensRights23/06/14 12:02 AM
1

Really should've used "plowed" instead if "despoiled."
/r/MensRights22/06/14 11:17 PM
6

Go home, you're drunk.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:13 AM
4

Remember, its always worse to be bit by a dog than shot in the head, because dogs have sharper teeth than humans.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 03:02 AM
5

Unless, of course, the context refers to men and women. Or two of anything, for that matter.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:06 AM
9

Reads more like a person who killed because she was extremely unstable. Also...Professor Moriarty.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 03:04 AM
2

I can see a hole getting poked in that, too -- children don't have agency. It could be construed that you're saying women don't have agency, either. Again, I don't want to come across as argumentative, it's just that if there can be found some logical or rhetorical flaw in anything any MRA says ever, that flaw will be mercilessly exploited to the exclusion of the actual content of the message.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 11:54 AM
-2

That's not a great analogy -- running into traffic is likely to get you accidentally hit by a car. Leaving your drink alone isn't going to get you accidentally drugged and raped. I get your point and I agree, but there's probably a much better analogy out there somewhere.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 11:29 AM
-2

I don't think any of the Jews achieving anything more than living a peaceful and well-earned retirement actually went through the Holocaust... Edit: Someone care to explain what's offensive about my comment? Europe was liberated in 1945, which was 69 years ago. It stands to reason that hardly anyone, if anyone at all, who was actually victimized by the Holocaust is still in the workforce.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 01:09 PM
4

I'm a ringer for the Oppression Olympics, don't tell anyone.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:31 AM
7

As a former white, male Best Buy employee: Yup.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 12:43 AM
39

If your wife had a secret vasectomy then she obviously has other secrets...
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:20 PM
6

an queer group That grammar is strange. Bizarre. Irregular. Singular. Puzzling. Weird. Eccentric, even.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 05:02 AM
261

It's funny how "as you know" is often used as a rhetorical bludgeon to belittle the reader and make them accept something for fear of feeling stupid. It's a disgusting, weaselly little phrase, as often as not.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:04 AM
0

And the person who posted it (and most of the people who commented on it) didn't intend to mislead, they just fell victim to fallacious reasoning. Don't paint them all with the same brush. If we assume that they are all willfully hateful misandrists, then that makes us no different from their worse elements who assume us all to be rapist misogynists.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 10:28 PM
0

I might be belaboring the point here, but there tends to be an inverse relationship between the accuracy of a generalization and the size of the sample it claims to represent. A small group like AMR can be fairly accurately categorized in a few words, a large group like the MRM or feminism cannot. The more outspoken and extremist elements of feminism broadly claim that men, as a population, are misogynists, violent, rapists, etc. Most people, feminist or not, don't believe this. But when you tur…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 03:37 PM
2

I'm pretty sure the feminist movement today comprises mostly of people who generally keep to themselves and don't participate in misandry, i.e. people you don't hear about. If you start painting people in broad, hateful strokes, you're going to turn into the thing you hate.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 01:25 PM
10

"I dunno, man. I was gonna not rape her, but...a 24-pack? You can't resist that. No one can." No Guy Ever
/r/MensRights02/03/14 02:19 PM
1

Gotta love how she calls out American Apparel for sexism (and rightly so) in the top of the article and then proceeds to hock a bunch of American Apparel tshirts.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 01:07 PM
3

From the comments: The intellectual dishonesty in this article is pretty astounding. The original WSJ article is clearly talking about situations where a man and a woman are equally drunk, decide to have sex, and then the man is somehow guilty of sexual assault. To call the recognition of this double-standard "placing equal blame on rapists and their victims" is a terrible joke: under many state laws and university policies, both parties are both the rapist and the victim, but the female party i…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 04:00 PM
8

It'd be interesting to see this broken down further as a proportion of contact time.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 02:32 PM
1

Not mentioned in this topic: Most of the higher comments in the thread were supportive of BatmanBrah's viewpoint and skeptical as to the relevance of OP's claims. /r/Feminism didn't ban you, as if it were some homogenous entity -- an individual mod did. Let's keep this reasonable.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 02:28 PM
3

No...it does change that "fact." I decided they are generally high-and-mighty about being childfree because almost all of their most popular content, contemporary and historical, is high-and-mighty about being childfree. Very little, if none, of our popular content here involves hating women. These things are extremely dissimilar. I don't see what's so hard to understand there.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 06:10 PM
1

I already addressed your misunderstanding how reddit works elsewhere, but I can spell out what you pulled out of your ass: The only person saying that they hate children is you. I didn't say that, no one else in this section said that. Hence, pulled out of your ass.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 04:56 PM
2

Perfect example of misunderstanding the basic functionality of reddit (addressing your previous post) -- if it's on the front page, it is, by design, representative of what the community finds to be the best the sub has to offer. That's what those little arrows next to posts do. Or you can sort by "top > all time" and see posts that are even worse than the ones currently on the front page. Or just keep feigning ignorance. Though I think "feigning" might be charitable.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 04:54 PM
-4

Except it's not at all like that because your so-called ironic point (I can almost hear your fedora tipping) is based on a combination of your inability to understand how this website functions and things you've pulled out of your ass (hating children? The fuck?) In the future, don't interrupt when grown-ups are talking.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 03:56 PM
5

Holy shit, that sub is more circle-jerky than r/athiesm. I don't even understand.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 02:07 PM
2

At least the sanity brigade swooped in...
/r/MensRights13/12/13 03:32 AM
1

How the hell does someone that stupid get EIGHT books published?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 03:25 PM
3

Manhood academy 101 BS. A picture of a dude swiping a credit card in a hooker's ass captioned with something about avoiding relationships and not gambling with your balls. I was dumber for having seen it.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:47 PM
4

Go fuck yourself, asshole.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:39 PM
18

I think you mean women most often initiate divorce, but otherwise yeah, right on point.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:15 AM
-1

I'm getting the point, but the point (as and by commenters, not OP) seems to be missing the source material. Its like an unintentional embodiment of Poe's Law in here.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 04:03 PM
1

Intuitively, this makes sense (zero protective gear, lots of being thrown about). Do you have a source on this? I'd never actually thought of it.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 03:48 PM
-3

Are we on two different topics here? The "review" in the post isn't even a real thing, y'all. Calm down, you sound like a bunch of bitter paranoiacs. Save the anger for things that aren't made up.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 02:25 PM
2

I'd flip the last one so it matches the design of the others, with the male proportion originating on the left and the female on the right. The reversal would be more strongly reinforced this way.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 01:19 PM
1

If you think politeness is a two way street, first off: You're wrong, and Secondly: Prove it. It's probably not a two-way street to you because you're such a whiny asshole. I'd slam a door in your face if I could. But that's just you.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 01:54 PM
0

That's not Ebonics you blithering idiot.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 11:56 AM
1

That's their problem. Racial slurs are forbidden in the workplace. Don't use them.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 04:26 AM
1

What is this, I don't even?
/r/MensRights06/09/13 04:20 AM
1

Except when they do. Which, despite your assertions, happens.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 04:14 AM
1

If someone starts dropping the n-word, I don't poll the room for offended black folks before taking umbrage. However, if someone tells my gay friend to eat a dick and he has a laugh about it, I'm not going to get all up in arms. There's decency and then there's Political Correctness.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 04:06 AM
3

At the time, though, "men's problems" amd "women's problems" were much more distinct than now. They weren't focused on their issues so much out of selfishness than self-interest. They lacked the basic social and legal tools to gain equitable footing in society. It was only after these fundamentals were secure could the more abstract notions of gender roles really come into play. That's where we are today. Both sides are attempting to deconstruct traditional gender roles, but the methods vary gre…
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:16 AM
5

I sex up discrimination real good with my masculine power. Fact.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 10:33 PM
2

Kvetching for the sake of art is as old as art itself. I guarantee you that on the walls of Lascaux, Chauvet, or Altamira, there is a painting made by a Paleolithic proxy of Jerry Seinfeld with the intent of "What is it with buffalo? Why so hard to catch? Want steak, have fire; no buffalo."
/r/MensRights20/08/13 04:16 AM
1

Been here a while, actually, I'm just still caught off-guard by that sort of...I don't even know what to call it.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 10:48 PM
-1

Wow.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 11:42 AM
0

I won't go trawling through topics to find examples, especially as you pointed out that they're there, heavily downvoted. Which is to say, they exist. Though not viewed by the sub followers as a whole as being constructive, they're here.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 02:47 AM
3

The statements aren't defamatory or libelous, as they are a representation of the reasoning used by other parties. Additionally, the Wikipedia Foundation didn't generate the statement, a random person on the Internet did. You can't accuse Google of promulgating hate speech based on the content of YouTube comments, so you can't sue Wikipedia for libel based on the content posted by its users.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 10:01 PM
16

Saying there are no misogynistic posters here is like saying there are no misandrists on r/feminism.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 09:56 PM
3

When you're continuing a quote into another paragraph, it isn't necessary to close the quote mid.way through. The second opening mark indicates that it is a continuation of the quote.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 03:51 PM
1

Are they talking about people foreclosed upon? I saw all these things when house hunting. Pretty sure that not everyomr selling a house in GA at the end of last year nelonged to any one group of people...
/r/MensRights06/08/13 04:17 AM
23

Not a gendered issue so much as a "wow, authority can be retarded," but good to see this getting exposure nonetheless. Wow. *drinks
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:39 AM
5

I enjoyed the part where they guy soeaking and the camerawoman were all calm amd rational and well-mannered and their "opponents" coukdnt open their mouths withiut spewing obscenities. So edgy.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:35 AM
7

"Wise [people] speak becsuse they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something'" That, pretty much?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:33 AM
3

I think it was an reference to the relatively few women pursuing STEM careers.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:30 AM
3

Is this based on anything she said or done? Amd even if she does qualify her statements with being her female, why isn't that relevant here? It's not self evident by her username, and knowing the fundamental perspective from which one is posting is important context. At this point in the movement, we can safely assume that a majority of adherents are male, so knowing when an inherently different perspective is being offered, we need to see that. Don't be so jaded, man. If we're truly egalitarian…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:51 AM
3

Or stumble through things with an open sense of curiosity, with all its inherent missteps like most of the rest of us.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:17 AM
3

So what you're saying is, men aren't raped?
/r/MensRights15/07/13 10:31 PM
14

Eh, they can be. If the smell is just, you know, wafting, then that's one thing. But if an organic compound is being aersolized, then there are probably bacteria airborne among the esters.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:41 AM
0

This is a perfect microcosm of the MRM as a whole. We're more than happy to put the seat down out of consideration for you, just put it up of consideration for ours in return. SERIUOSLY, PEOPLE lol.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:38 AM
1

Believe me, we don't give two shits about your opinions of us, either. Now go play with your toys and let the grown-ups talk :)
/r/MensRights13/05/13 01:45 PM
4

I always shit seriously. Shitting is no laughing matter.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:31 PM
10

I noticed that she outright stated that society is using ways to "reduce the population of fat people" like there's some sort of fat genocide going on, instead of "reducing the fatness of the population." Good Lord.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:29 PM
1

My argument is that you dismissed them as irrelevant because...why? It's hard to refute a negative. You simply failed to address them. All I can really say to that is "Hey...address them." You pointed them out as valid forms of media, and then just say "Eh, nope." I can't really work with that. And yes, women are the primary consumers of media if you consider that media, in order to make a profit, relies upon advertising. Women control the dollars that buy the products and services that are adve…
/r/MensRights09/05/13 08:31 PM
2

Being a patronizing bitch towards people with whom you disagree wins neither arguments, nor friends, nor allies. The only evidence that those other media "weren't realistically ones being discussed" is your say-so. Brushing aside the fact that you engaged in stereotypes by pointing out that others do the same is in no way exculpatory. I can't find the source right off, but there's an often quoted statistic that women control some $12.4 trillion dollars of the $18 trillion dollars of the world's …
/r/MensRights09/05/13 03:31 PM
4

Your post didn't indicate that more consumers are men, just that men perhaps consume more. Or rather, more broadly. You also brushed off several forms of media and invoked gender stereotypes when it came to the Internet.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:16 PM
1

Or do you value your assumptions so highly that they don't need evidence? ... I'm soon completing my degree in media criticism from a university with one of the top media studies programs. Evidence?
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:13 PM
1

She still owes support.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 09:29 PM
2

I don't think its womens' narcissism specifically, just correlating the general rise in pathological narcissism to an issue that's primarily about women.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 09:28 PM
4

It's still a joke, just of a different sort.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 04:45 PM
10

/r/MensRants Not /r/menrants
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:12 AM
1

Good luck wasting your time with that, unless you just get a kick out of antagonizing idiots. Totally okay by me, it's just that you're not gonna win those loons over.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 12:04 AM
3

I loathe her as much as the next person, but there's absolutely no evidence she actually said that.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 01:51 PM
8

I'm having a difficult time making it through the article, sad to say. Ed needs to loosen up a bit and not write like a scared high schooler.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 07:02 AM
2

If you think that content is all that matters in communication then you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how we communicate.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 02:52 PM
2

Yeah, it kind of feels like anyone not ascribing to BillandTedism is missing somesuch point or another. Be excellent unto one another, folks, it's not that fucking difficult. Really.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 06:50 AM
2

Yes, I got that in context. Edit: A deep strain of bitterness stirs in the lower areas of this sub, and sometimes it bubbles its way up. I'm as skeptical of the MRM as I am of feminism, and so when I put those two things together I tend to respond negatively to things such as the original post until I get some clarification. Call me jaded. You'd be right.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 06:36 AM
5

Yeah, I had actually downvoted the post for being insultingly misogynistic...and then decided to read the comments for context. Whoops, my bad, those bitches be cray-cray, apparently.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 04:39 AM
3

I didn't realize you could botch a collagen injection so badly as to cause brain damage. The more you know.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:42 AM
2

Also kinda funny that I've been posting here for months and you're calling me out as a tourist from your six-day-old account. Then again, as you came in at maximum asshole velocity, I'm guessing you got banned for being abusive at some point or another and are just an old troll. Ta.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 09:40 PM
6

Nah, I like to talk. Also, I don't travel.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 12:39 PM
2

You have no idea who I am, but keep in demonstrating your idea of openness and inclusiveness. It flatters you :-)
/r/MensRights04/04/13 12:38 PM
-2

Then seriously, seriously just shut the fuck up. You're in the wrong fucking topic to be having this conversation and what you're doing is harassment, plain and simple.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:24 PM
22

Then stop talking and leave this thread.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:20 PM
-4

I'm not sure either. Feel free to resume leaving me the fuck alone.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 11:35 PM
3

The poster was being idiomatic and perhaps somewhat misguided. Still better than being a pedantic cuntwaffle.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 10:52 PM
0

According to The Guardian, art does not, in fact, imitate life.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 06:15 PM
1

Ah, makes more sense now, thanks.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 05:01 PM
1

The way you tell this story doesn't make any sense. Things like: I came back an hour later and everyone was talking about how I tried to take advantage of the first girl I asked to dance with in the bathroom. Nobody believed the liar [emphasis added] make it really hard to figure out what it is you're trying to say. Can you run it by me again?
/r/MensRights31/03/13 02:02 PM
2

Please don't feed the attention whores.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 04:55 AM
2

Just in case anyone is missing how fucked up the reasoning here is, just replace every instance of the words "rape," "sexual assault," or whatever other related verbiage with the word "crime" and it should soak right into the ol' grey matter. This isn't even a men's rights issue -- this isn't an attack against this or that single group. It's an assault upon the notion of the rule of law, against the very idea of a civil society.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 04:39 AM
6

The truly horrifying thing here is that Hannity is the reasonable, intelligent one in the room.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 04:04 PM
2

Build-wise, Leon Kennedy isn't too far out there. Just sayin'.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:09 PM
3

I'm guessing the "girl who cried rape" is the "mom's friend" and not the actual girl who wrote in.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:39 PM
3

because you merely see this picture as a yet another battle against feminist that must be won. So you scold me for trying to presume how other people think...then try to presume how I think. I don't think there's a war going on here, I just found the image petty and childish. I too am allowed to hold opinions, you know.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:40 PM
20

After dwelling on it just a little more, I believe it is more satirical and informative than mocking. I agree with the rest of your post, but here it just sounds like you're rationalizing. Nothing about that image was informative or satirical -- it's petty and it's mean and it's beneath us.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 02:08 PM
1

How are they different? It is my understanding that the two things you mention later -- degraded physical and sexual function -- is more pronounced in so-called "routine" female genital mutilation than in a "routine" (as in not botched) circumcision. As for degraded penile and sexual function, as I'm aware of that it's a subjective matter of judgment. And yes, it does cause horrific pain. Like I said, I don't endorse the practice. But it's not pain you remember, just as you don't remember the tr…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 10:21 PM
0

I have plenty of empathy regarding actual suffering. I just don't see male circumcision that close to birth as something that creates suffering by default. I don't think it should happen, I don't think it was right that it happened to me, but I also think that people who talk about how their routine circumcision brought them suffering are just attention whores. Also, nice false equivalency you have there.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 12:12 PM
-2

I think we should focus on what's important here, instead of getting bogged down in yet another fruitless circumcision debate: How batshit crazy Blaze commenters are.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 02:21 PM
-5

I feel ya. It's like how I don't get how people come in here crying about how they got circumcised when they were three days old as if this has somehow inflicted some great psychological trauma. On both sides it's pointless attention-getting, people just trying to rile up the debate. Circumcision is wrong, we get it. Everyone quit acting like you so special because you got/did not get and like/do not like your un/circumcised penis.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 02:19 PM
3

Not really seeing an MR angle to this one. I suppose you could do some acrobatics and assume that he resorted to loans because there aren't many gender-specific scholarships for men, but that would be an assumption, and thus invalid. So why is this here?
/r/MensRights22/01/13 01:42 PM
1

This should be cross-posted to r/feminism. I would think they'd have a vested interest in this as well.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 01:35 PM
5

At least she's not in prison or anything -- that'd be too harsh. Thank goodness she's allowed to walk free while awaiting trial! /s
/r/MensRights22/01/13 01:11 PM
2

Sexist, certainly, but also junk. I wouldn't worry about it so much, what with its complete lack of influence.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 01:10 PM
27

Your education policy professor needs to re-do that graph. The clusters don't need to be in descending order, and it would be so much less confusing at a glance if the bars coincided with their placement in the legend. BLARGHLFRALGHGRAPHRAGE
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:34 PM
1

I follow, but you're illustrating an abstract notion (egalitarianism) with a quantitative property, two things which are fundamentally different. When you say that you approach someone with no preconceived notions regarding their capabilities or relative worth, you are exercising the same standard to everyone, which is itself equality.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 06:53 PM
1

So you come into a situation with no presumptions of relative quality (e.g., someone is not by necessity better/worse than you), but that's somehow not equality?
/r/MensRights15/01/13 06:19 PM
16

I see women as competition, just like I would a man. [emphasis added] That would be the "'equals' crap."
/r/MensRights15/01/13 05:11 PM
9

Wait, so what you're telling me is that a woman took advantage of white knighting to get ahead in life and leave them with nothing? SHOCKING.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 06:33 AM
2

He's 13 -- most boys couldn't grow facial hair, either.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 02:57 PM
1

This is where my mind went. Honestly, I wouldn't trust me to take it every day either -- at least, not on my whacked-out schedule.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:46 PM
0

You keep on tilting windmills, while the rest of us stand against actions made by actual people instead of little meme generator boxes.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 01:28 PM
3

You're not getting it. The argument is that, upon conscription, they're given a job they can actually do based on the preliminary assessment that's historically already given upon conscription.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 12:54 PM
5

Congratulations, you made me feel like a terrible father in the best possible way.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 04:52 AM
1

Separate bank accounts with some percentage of your check being automatically deposited into her account. That way, when she fucks some other guy and runs off, she only takes half your money.
/r/MensRights01/09/12 06:04 AM
14

I can't clearly tell whether she expects courtesy to be gendered or common. If she holds the door for a guy walking behind her, then hey, no worries.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 12:46 PM
6

Read as "penetrative," was going to advise against.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 02:56 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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