TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

nonplussed_nerd Archive

View 3 posts and 158 comments by nonplussed_nerd on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Fyi there's an edit button for that
/r/MensRights04/05/14 12:32 PM
2

Actually the discrepancy increases proportional to the square root of the number of transactions. /sorry
/r/MensRights10/12/13 01:06 PM
3

I would strongly encourage anyone interested to read all eight or nine "meditations on privilege" on this blog. I found them very insightful.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 03:05 AM
7

Well, we have the term 'gender roles', so I prefer to use that one.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 10:25 AM
2

You say that utilitarianism is about achieving the optimal result regardless of what anyone says, but you see 'optimal result' in utilitarianism is defined as matching as closely as possible 'what everyone says' (well not quite, it's more like 'what everyone wants', because people sometimes lie or are mistaken about what they want). So these are one and the same, and are usually not in conflict. If someone makes a utilitarian argument where they disregard the true preferences of the majority, th…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 11:21 PM
2

You're either a troll or not paying any attention at all. I don't have time to explain why every criticism of yours is a straw man, but most of them are addressed here.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:55 PM
1

There's of course some debate about who decides, but typically you want to do some average over everyone's individual utility functions. (democracy is one method of approximating this for example). So although most people have a term for living longer in their utility functions, they also have a term for not being a vegetable. So in practice we weight these two against each other, and we try to live longer to the extent that it doesn't impact too much on the rest of our preferences. This is all …
/r/MensRights10/11/13 04:43 AM
3

Many philosophies can be misapplied, and when this happens often we need to ensure governments don't have that right. So it pays to give the people with less power (individuals) more power than you would if the government was infallible. Merely claiming something to be utilitarian/good doesn't make it so, so of course we have to be wary of that. If you feel like reading two very long related documents by the same author defending utilitarianism and attacking libertarianism, I found the following…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 04:15 AM
6

Well, yes, that's true in a sense. For me, morality=utilitarianism, by definition, and all that people do when they argue about it is argue about whether it is the best definition for what people usually mean when they talk about morality, which it does seem to be. There are competing moral theories though, such as virtue ethics, adherents of which say that they would never kick a small child even if the consequences of not doing so would be that a million children are killed. They believe moral…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 03:50 AM
9

I have, and it has an excellent utilitarian rebuttal. You see, in a society where this sort of thing was allowed, nobody except those already near death would ever seek medical care, and we would all be worse off for it. The medical system wouldn't work at all, and many more people would die. Therefore a utilitarian society should, for the greater good, disallow killing the one to save the five. Your specific wording of the problem suggested the doctor would do the killing in secret though, so m…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 02:07 AM
8

Individuality is a great heuristic for implementing utilitarianism, not an alternative to it. And the moment you find yourself making an argument that something is better than utilitarianism because it benefits people in some way, you're making a utilitarian argument, which only works if we presuppose that utilitarianism is correct. Anyway, most people's utility functions include some term for individuality, so any system that suppresses individuality needlessly (suppressing it to protect others…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:25 AM
20

This whole matter of not giving women as much agency as men really is at the core of most gender inequality it seems. It means women both get off easy when they do wrong, but also that they aren't given as much credit for their own success. Men get plenty of credit but also no sympathy.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:21 AM
7

Let us know how it goes!
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:46 AM
2

An hero'd. Haven't heard that term in a while.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 02:38 PM
1

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
/r/MensRights09/10/13 02:35 PM
3

I think the author was expressing scepticism on that point, not supporting it: Is it the man’s responsibility to think of the women and children first or have times changed in the wake of feminism? I can’t claim to know the answer to that question. After all, it’s a pretty big question, and I’m not a pro on gender issues.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 02:08 AM
2

Well, the internet at a social thing was starting to take off. Reddit was quite young and niche at the time, its popularity exploded in mid 2010. I don't think anything massive happened in 2008, it was just the continuation of a slow trend. A good trend, mind you. Actually, I think Google probably changed their trends data collection in 2008. Here is another trend result. Notice that before 2008 the data is only nonzero when it is above some threshold. After 2008 even very small results are disp…
/r/MensRights17/09/13 01:57 AM
1

It was probably just the search frequency gradually rising over time, and that's the point where it crossed the threshold for google trends to actually start recording it as nonzero. It's rising, yes, but that spike is likely not real, I'd say it's to do with how google measures it.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 01:29 AM
1

Its simply the harshest swearword we have. Usage doesn't have to be connected to its literal definition.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:36 AM
1

It's a grey area. It's the sort of rape that bulks up the 'one in four women' statistics, and if you count it as rape then most people have raped and been raped. But I don't know what the law says about it.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 01:03 AM
2

Actually if a man was recklessly causing damage like that for his own selfish ends, cunt is probably the exact word I would use.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:55 AM
0

It did seem pretty implausible, but Fahrenheit is ridiculous enough as it is, so I wouldn't have been surprised.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 09:46 PM
1

That is not appropriate. upvoted
/r/MensRights24/08/13 01:36 PM
1

Degrees Rankine? Do any ovens actually use that, or are you being facetious?
/r/MensRights24/08/13 01:33 PM
24

who | grep -i blonde | date; cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger; mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount; sleep Also 'fsck' would be triggering for some I'm sure.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:19 PM
2

Half the comments are deleted in this thread. I'm not sure if a user has to be banned for their posts to disappear or if mods can remove them without leaving a [deleted] tag in their wake, but I've seen posts vanish that were previously there, including my own. I'm working on a bot to monitor comments on the sub so I can see their patterns of censorship better. Already I'm seeing tons of posts disappearing moments after they're made.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 10:20 PM
4

I replied with this. Shadowbanned immediately.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 07:44 PM
5

I've been banned for absolutely nothing. Here's a screenshot of all five posts I made with an account, don't know which one got me benned but I thought they were all friendly enough. I would really like to partake in discussions with them, but making new accounts constantly is frankly a pain.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 05:27 PM
2

My gosh, who are you? Did I say I wanted to decide for them? You continue to put words in my mouth, so I'm just going to have to stop responding to you. For anyone reading this thread I think I've made my position clear, and there doesn't seem to be any changing your mind. I hope you're a troll. And if you're a false flag, I hope you've learned something today.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:46 PM
2

When did I say I supported shaming of masculinity? I agree that gender roles should be optional. To give a concrete example, one gender role I think exists is that men self-sacrificing by putting themselves at risk for others. Now, if a man truly wants to do this, I support him. However I suspect that in a world where men were not shamed for looking after themselves first, many men would choose to work safer, less stressful jobs. I am about increasing choice, don't get me wrong. But if I say I'm…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:13 PM
1

A little good faith, please? No, I would prefer to remove gender roles, not to push people into new ones. For example, at the moment it's perfectly legal for men and women to split the bill on a date, or for women to pay for men. It's perfectly legal for women to be the primary initiator in courtship. It's equally illegal for men and women to hit each other. However, in each of these cases, there is a strong gender role, despite equality under the law. I would like these expectations to go away …
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:07 PM
0

Maybe that's because they're better than everybody else. ...i keed....sorta. But seriously, I see them as the only ones who are confident enough in their beliefs to say so instead of pretending that religion is compatible with science.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:03 PM
2

Oh, a social movement that wants to change people's minds about things, the horror!
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:53 PM
2

On the contrary, I want men to be making free decisions themselves. However decisions are made in context, and because of the ideas of what is manly and what is not, the decisions men make today are not truly their own. In a different social context they would make different decisions, whether they realise it or not. I want to remove expectations on men to conform to gender roles, so that their decision whether or not to do so is truly free.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:52 PM
2

The goals that feminism claims to have I would wager are shared by many people here. It's the implementation that we're not happy with. What are we disagreeing about anyway? I don't like gender roles and want them to go away. I don't think equal rights under the law will do this. Do you like gender roles? Do you think equal rights under the law will make them go away? I wager many MRAs would like there to be only one gender equality movement, and believe we only have our own because the feminist…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 11:33 PM
2

That sounds like pretty circular logic to me. But anyway. All I'm doing is providing you with a datapoint that not everyone here agrees with you. That's ok, but just be aware that you don't speak for the whole movement when you say what you want.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 10:38 PM
5

Speak for yourself, I'd love some social engineering. Equal rights under the law isn't enough. There are social expectations on men that the law will not change without going further than equal rights. I don't want others' rights infringed in the process, but simply giving everyone equal rights doesn't solve the problem. We need people to actually change their minds about things, not just the legal right for them to change their minds to be there.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 08:47 PM
6

Wow, that's ridiculous. Tax systems already tax the rich more than the poor, and welfare systems are already available to the poor more than the rich, and these systems are generally gender neutral. It makes absolutely no sense to turn a gender neutral system, which considers people impartially as individuals, and add a layer on top based on statistical trends between groups. If men earn more than they are already taxed more. If women earn less than they are already entitled more to welfare. Chr…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 08:08 PM
6

That's funny, I generally do like people who identify as agnostic atheists, and that encourages me to use the label. What don't you like about them if you don't mind me asking?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 07:55 PM
4

I definitely think thats it. And the more rarely used (and therefore possibly loaded) word is always second, because ambiguity is reduced due to the fact the reader is expecting a synonym to the first word. This is normal, nothing to see here. In fact we should be mad that the writer wrote about boys first /s
/r/MensRights18/08/13 07:44 PM
1

Commenting to watch later when not on mobile
/r/MensRights17/08/13 11:20 AM
-1

Commenting to save and watch later when I'm not on mobile
/r/MensRights17/08/13 11:02 AM
1

Your biggest problem seemed to be verb conjugation, the rest was pretty much fine. English verb conjugation is pretty simple, remember, only 3rd person singular is different from the infinitive!
/r/MensRights07/08/13 09:33 AM
7

It's not too old to upvote, it's a non-participation link to discourage brigading. Out of courtesy you shouldn't upvote even if you normally would.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 09:26 AM
2

He mentions it in his book The Myth of Male Power. Of course you'd just be taking his word for it, so it's not much of a source, but that's where I heard it.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 04:47 PM
1

It doesn't always translate too well on the internet, but still.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 03:33 PM
1

http://i.imgur.com/VWr6I.gif offenders are being charged
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:50 PM
2

The fact that a bunch of unreasonable feminist views have become mainstream and are endorsed by powerful organisations is pretty much the reason that the men's rights movement exists.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:45 PM
5

I assure you it is not.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 01:53 PM
10

Everyone had some reason to first create their account, everyone started somewhere.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 12:28 PM
3

Links or it didn't happen
/r/MensRights28/07/13 09:56 AM
3

No, you're committing the exact same fallacy. If you don't have time to think something through, and reacting with your gut instinct is better than stopping to think about it, then it is rational to act on your gut instinct. Really, every time you hear an argument like 'rationality is bad because x is better', the argument is wrong because assuming they're right about x, then x is actually what is rational, and whatever they are calling rationality is not. Rationalists often call this type of st…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 10:32 AM
0

This guy has no idea what rationality is. Rationality is not blindly following rules that you think have a vague feeling of being logical. It's about doing whatever maximises getting what you want. If reacting with spite gets you what you want, then it is rational to react with spite. Gah. For a one hour video on the matter, see Julia Galef's the straw vulcan. Edit: spelling
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:28 AM
2

That is a common fallacy about rationalism. If it don't work, it aint rational. Rationality is winning, and if ditching something makes you win more, then it's not rationality you're ditching.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:17 AM
1

Especially since the same method works just as well for the run of the mill things that more mainstream feminists and women actually say.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:13 AM
2

Really? I wonder why...at least it's starting to seem more equal, but really, both twox and mensrights should be fine...
/r/MensRights24/07/13 11:59 AM
2

I already have so many tabs open that chrome doesn't show their icons any more — how dare you link me to TVtropes at a vulnerable time like this!
/r/MensRights23/07/13 10:20 AM
2

Agreed. I think there is a lot of resentment just below the surface that would come out if ever it was no longer social suicide to mention men's issues in public.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 10:16 AM
1

So many feminist arguments can be reversed while remaining equally plausible, this sort of thinking needs to be more widespread. Seriously, before anyone gets angry at anything gender related, they should swap the genders and see if it's possible to be angry the other way around. If they did we would have far fewer problems arguing with each other over who is more oppressed.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 10:06 AM
0

Does the same apply for a prostitute?
/r/MensRights22/07/13 12:11 AM
1

We are talking about fundamentally different things here. I don't care that women were denied that right. We created a culture in which men wanted to go and die for their country. I don't care that they chose to do so more or less freely, they were still dead at the end of it. Society had to choose who was going to go and die, and it chose men.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:36 PM
3

Oh god but the drama! Girls dating each others' exes and weaving intricate lies about their past with other girls that they all know and they're all lying to each other all the time....I'm just talking about one group of lesbian girls I know but if they're all like that I want no part in it!
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:32 PM
0

I'd say that makes it even more of a male issue. The fact that men are more violent is a problem that needs to be fixed. Whether it's a social problem or simply a biological fact, the male species is a victim of it and needs help.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:16 PM
1

That's not the point, it doesn't matter if women were prohibited from combat roles. The conclusion is the same. If society thinks I'm important and doesn't want me to die in a war, that's a privilege I enjoy. If they think I'm weak and won't let me serve in a war, well, I'm insulted but I'd rather be insulted and alive. It's still a privilege.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:03 PM
2

Well, there are two points to be made with the sentencing stats. One is that men live livestyles and make choices that lead them to commit more crime. This may be biological. If it's not, it's a sign of some sort of sexism or gender roles in society, and in this case, one that harms men. And even if it is biological, perhaps we should still pay special attention to boys' development to try and reduce the numbers. To make this point you don't want to correct for equal crimes. Just like feminists …
/r/MensRights21/07/13 10:54 PM
1

Thank you for reminding me this still exists.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 09:19 PM
1

Well usually the point is something like "Imagine if the genders were reversed, this would never have happened if they were". So it's usually hard to come up with examples. When one thing is totally acceptable to society than another, examples of the latter as less likely to come up. So it's easier to just imagine. TL;DR, good suggestion, hard to do in practise.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 08:38 PM
1

Well it's already legal, just against this particular school's dress code. I guess it looks silly now, but if men wore them more often we'd get used to it. I'm just frustrated that there aren't as many acceptable options for a man looking to show off his body as there are for a woman.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 05:33 PM
1

Oh, ok I finally see what you mean. However there are approximately the same number of men and women on the planet, so this seems like totally a null point.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 02:05 PM
5

Indeed, it's both evidence of existing sexism, and a sign of improvement. You already knew about the existing sexism, so being reminded of it shouldn't ruin your day. We should instead be happy for the progress.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 01:29 PM
2

I do think it's the right analogy. I've tried suggesting that toilets be unisex, and the reasons people give for disagreeing are discriminatory ones. Basically, women I've suggested it to say that they would fear being attacked by men. This makes me a sad panda.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 01:27 PM
3

I interpreted these more as "when convicted of a given crime, how likely is a given person to be given the death penalty if a woman vs. a man?" and "when convict These interpretations are equivalent as far as I can tell, so they work too. But I was trying to highlight what the 100% was in that case, because /u/evilbrent seemed to take issue with comparing the probabilities without them being proportions of some whole.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 12:29 PM
6

Why haven't I heard of that? Because it's not true. The Australian Bureau of Statistics changed the definition, but it has nothing to do with home ownership. It's about whether what you live in can be considered your 'home'. A person who has somewhere to sleep is still considered homeless under both the old and new definitions if the place they sleep is not their home, ie they don't have their own toilet or kitchen and can't socialise there, and don't have any guarantee on how long they can stay…
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:43 AM
8

do you make a three segmented pie chart with three 33.3% segments? Yes, that's exactly what you do. The 100% is not all fruit, it's all fruit that has worms. The pie chart shows you 'of the fruit that has worms, what proportion are apples, bananas, and oranges?' This is a perfectly sensible thing to do, we're not interested in the fruit that don't have worms, just like we're not interested in the men or women who don't have cancer when we're trying to demonstrate a point about how those with can…
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:27 AM
-3

Sexual promiscuity is not a bad thing and has nothing to do with it. Edit: oooh, ten upvotes and eleven down, controversy!
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:11 PM
1

Yeah but 'rape' is only what bad translations from swedish are calling it. Other translations are calling it 'sexual molestation', or something similar.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 01:55 PM
-3

ITT: People not using their downvotes
/r/MensRights11/07/13 02:51 PM
1

Only when they're moderated. Loyalty to anything vaguely feminist is the status quo for organisations and officials, but the public is not nearly as steeped in it, especially when they can give their opinions anonymously.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 08:12 PM
8

In high school a girl who went to another school falsely accused me of hitting her while we were on a bus that the two schools shared. She told her school that I hit her and her school got in touch with mine. The teachers at my school said that they believed me that I didn't hit her, but that it wasn't worth the fight with the other school. They didn't want to call the girl a liar. I appreciated their honesty about it but I still got a detention.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 12:08 AM
0

I find it bizarre that anyone thinks this assumption is unreasonable. If I hold an opinion that I think is objective, then of course I either think people agree with me or they're misinformed. The only other option is that I'm wrong, and if I thought that I wouldn't hold the opinion, now would I?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 10:38 PM
-1

Yes it is. Intuitiveness is a desirable feature of language. And yes they do. Lots of things change over time in order to match existing patterns in a language. If people find transgendered more intuitive, as it seems they do, then it might win out in the long run. There's no point fighting it.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 12:20 AM
-1

Although it's already an adjective, it's a bit of a counterintuitive one. Gender is a noun, and trans- looks like an adjective tacked onto it. So people add the -ed to make it mean 'guys in posession of a gender which is trans'. This seems pretty sensible to me, and both forms have approximately equal usage rates. So I think at this point both are acceptable.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 09:27 PM
1

The book's a comedy. It has a provocative title on the cover, but uh, isn't there a saying about this? Don't judge a book by, ...something something? I forget. If it's about what it looks like it's about, sure, I'll bring enough pitchforks for everyone. But a little scepticism, please?
/r/MensRights25/06/13 02:29 PM
2

Ah, thanks. I must be getting old. Or maybe I'm too young. Either way, I'm retarded.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 10:34 AM
1

It's actually a really good book, that bit is done to emphasise a character rambling on for ages and not really pausing. The rest of it is written more normally. Highly recommended.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:18 PM
5

I...can't parse this post. Explain like I'm five?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 10:26 PM
2

This is nothing. There's a sentence near the start of A Brave New World which is 259 words long and has 11 semicolons.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 10:11 PM
1

Is this so surprising?
/r/MensRights21/06/13 09:05 AM
1

The system is not the same in all countries. In Australia one normally starts a 3 year Bachelors degree at age 18. If you don't take any breaks, you graduate at 21. I'm 2.5 years into a PhD and I'm 24.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 09:00 AM
2

Whether or not they're getting government money is irrelevant, private organisations in Australia are not allowed to discriminate on the basis of gender either. However organisations can apply for an exemption, which is how gyms have women's only hours and things like that. The government grants exemptions based on a list of reasons that are deemed to be justification for discrimination. I imagine these men's sheds have such an exemption. Edit: someone downvoting me for stating facts about Austr…
/r/MensRights21/06/13 08:47 AM
1

It doesn't have the same connotations.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:14 AM
2

It's a metaphor. Alluding to love and romance is a good way to emphasise the deep connections that some men have in their friendships with each other. We are adults, we should be able to use metaphors without getting hung up on the literal interpretations thereof. Don't see a problem with this at all.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 05:42 PM
1

No, I'm just a random commenter who happened to see this post just now. Would love to see a site like that but don't have time to help out myself. Sorry!
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:21 PM
1

Hello, it has been a month or two, here is a reminder :)
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:57 PM
2

Uh...that's the entire point of the site the screenshot is from.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 03:03 PM
1

I couldn't work out whether it was the correct spelling of peals getting me upvotes from the grammar nazis, or the proper em dash getting me upvotes from the typography enthusiasts. Now I know, thank you kind sir. Edit: accidentally a letter
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:39 PM
23

Oh this had me in peals of laughter — gotta try and remember this one.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 08:43 AM
1

I'm not making apologies for them. The article says this is their official policy. Its bad behaviour whether its official or not, but articles written about it claim that it is, when it appears not to be. I like articles I read to tell the truth, whether it supports my aims or not.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 11:27 AM
1

I'm looking for the official policy itself, not allegations about it. The AVfM article says: It is now against Facebook’s community standards to criticize the religion of gender-hatred and violence But Facebook's community standards say simply: Facebook does not permit hate speech, but distinguishes between serious and humorous speech. While we encourage you to challenge ideas, institutions, events, and practices, we do not permit individuals or groups to attack others based on their race, ethni…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:40 PM
1

Where can I see that specific mention? I've been looking for it but can't find it.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:03 PM
1

You're in the right, but nobody who doesn't already agree with you will see it that way unfortunately.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:02 PM
1

Yeah but facebook removes things pretty randomly, you can't really infer official policy from it. They also remove things occasionally like anatomical diagrams of vaginas or breastfeeding mothers, and piss off feminists in the process, even though these things are fine by facebook's policy. I think facebook's problem is that their moderators are too trigger happy removing things that are reported. It means that the biggest factor in whether something gets removed is how many people click 'report…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 01:41 PM
1

You're welcome!
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:37 PM
2

I was banned from /r/feminism for posting this link. (Archer: 'No Cyril, when they're dead they're just hookers!'), in response to some other discussion about whether the girl that was killed in a recent story was an escort or a prostitute.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 11:59 AM
1

Interesting opinion. Not sure I agree but thanks for articulating it clearly.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:43 AM
3

I read that as: He would become a villain of equal repute to Joffrey Baratheon And was like woah, woah, let's not get carried away here.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:31 AM
2

I don't see in facebook's community standards where it says criticism of feminism is not allowed. It says hate speech pertaining to sexism isn't allowed (though it allows humour), but that seems reasonable. Am I missing something?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:28 AM
1

I am already effectively censored on Facebook, since I have feminist friends on there who I like as people so long as we don't talk about feminism. Their horses are so high, there's no way I could say anything without coming off as the bad guy. Even non-feminists will think you're the bad guy.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 07:48 AM
1

Too lazy to make switcheroo link post
/r/MensRights05/06/13 11:12 PM
5

I'm not precisely sure what you mean, but if you mean there's not much diversity of opinions, I like to think that it's because they're right about most things. If everyone's right, they're gonna have the same opinion. Unless you're talking about their opinions on a technological singularity. Still, they have better ideas about it than everyone else.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:46 PM
7

Goddamnit, I like the online rationalism community. Is there any community that is immune to infection by misandry?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:53 PM
13

You can never be too careful, though. Smiling, being too friendly, using your phone or camera in questionable positions that make it appear to others that you are taking photos of children, are warning signs. It sounds tough, but if we investigate 1,000 incidents of this sort and we find one paedophile then we’ve done our job, and [children] are safer. This is like saying 'don't be a muslim, people might suspect you of being a terrorist'. I'm a dude with long hair, some piercings, soon a tatoo, …
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:37 PM
5

Don't be disheartened, I've seen a men's rights TEDx talk before. Can't find it right now sorry, though I'm sure it's been posted in this sub before. Anyway, TEDx isn't a monolithic organisation, it'll depend on the local organisation that's running it. Good luck!
/r/MensRights29/05/13 09:49 PM
20

TEDx events are independently organised, usually they aren't as high quality, and have allowed far too much pseudoscience into them that they were already tarnishing TEDs reputation.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 09:40 PM
2

There's been a women's room at Monash for as long as I can remember. There's also a queer (ie gay) room, and though I haven't really been following I think there has been some gender based conflict where lesbian feminists have commandeered the queer room and gay men are generally not welcome there. These were run through the student union, which has always been very steeped in feminism. A related story is when the old student newspaper was replaced with its current feminism-heavy one by feminist…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:53 PM
2

What's the exception then that allows my local government-run swimming pool to have women's only hours? I suppose the service is available, but not 100% of the time, seems like a grey area. Edit: apparently they applied for an exemption
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:42 PM
2

Holy fucking shit. You cannot make this shit up
/r/PussyPass19/05/13 02:33 PM
10

Well, sortof. I mean if there is a systematically different way that society treats one gender compared to the other, it'll come up in these statistics, even if no-one is actively discriminating. For example, workplace deaths are mainly male because men are generally socialised to self sacrifice to provide for others, or to gain their own success. So they end up in dangerous jobs. Since men made these decisions themselves, we can't point the finger at anyone in particular and say 'you're discrim…
/r/MensRights19/05/13 02:26 PM
3

I like this analogy. Reminds me of 'Whose Body Is It Anyway?' on philosophyexperiments.com.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:14 PM
3

I put on my robe and wizards hat
/r/MensRights14/05/13 03:20 PM
1

where they want it Phrasing!
/r/MensRights14/05/13 03:17 PM
2

I've seen a lot of nonsensical downvotes in the last 24 hours, I wonder if something is up.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 03:11 PM
2

The headline is "California dad 'begged for his life' as police beat him to death - witnesses" Everything after the colon in the post title is OP's addition. I was confused too.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 10:24 AM
1

I'm not sure sex-positive means what you think it means. It's generally something along the lines of being cool with all things sexual so long as there's consent. I don't quite see how this fits in with character references or the number of partners you've had.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:06 PM
1

Well, that's counter to my experience. The only thing that makes me uncomfortable about being around scantily clad women is being worried about the implications for me if I'm seen perving on them, and being parandoid about how my behaviour around them might be perceived. If I could speak my mind about their appearance, paying them a compliment the way I might for a new haircut, then it would be entirely a non-issue for me.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:02 PM
3

Christ, fuck everything about this. That really sucks, dude.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 12:40 PM
-2

Seems like it's only uncomfortable because you have to pretend it doesn't exist and don't want anybody to know how sexy you find it. Imagine you're in private and she's your girlfriend. You could be like 'damn, nice ass babe!' without repercussion. That's not uncomfortable, is it? Imagine for a second you could say that in public to the assless-jeans stranger, instead of pretending you don't find her attractive. Image if that was considered completely normal and she took it as a compliment inste…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 11:20 PM
2

Yes but that original point of yours only made sense if it was interpreted to mean that some individuals are predisposed and some are not. I contend that almost all are predisposed in this way, and certainly the same proportion in the US are as elsewhere. Dietary recommendations are also pretty much the same between western countries, so it's unlikely that you can blame them, either. I don't blame individual choices entirely, because I never do, people's choices are a product of the environment …
/r/MensRights11/05/13 06:07 PM
2

Well of course genetics play a role in that sense, clearly we evolved to try and eat as much as possible and hold onto it in the form of fat. But this role played by genetics is identical in the US and elsewhere, so the fact that the US is more obese points to something else being different between the populations. As you said: diet has changed in a way that is in conflict with the population's ethnic dietary histories. Sounds like a plausible explanation to me. In fact it sounds like we're agre…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 05:36 PM
2

Just in case you weren't aware, I'm a different person than that who made the original post you're arguing with, and I'm only very mildly engaged with this discussion. All I'm saying is that it's not genetics. Its not genetics, it's not genetics, it's not genetics. The genetics between the USA and other countries that are far less obese are not different enough for it to be genetics. The USA's obesity problem is recent, and genetics do not change that fast (good point whoever said that, somewher…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:54 PM
2

Maybe, maybe not, but if so it's backfired — as usual the most reasonable posts are at the top. Don't know why they bother trolling here.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:32 PM
1

be nice
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:30 PM
1

I'm not ruling anything else out, I'd be happy with an epigenetic explanation. I'm only trying to rule out genetic ones. Don't put words in my mouth. But you're right that my point doesn't work unless European Americans are somewhat genetically representative of Europeans. So where do European American genes come from? Wikipedia says 43.8 % of people in the USA are descended from the Germans, Irish, English and Italians. So the question comes down to whether these 43 % are more overweight than p…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:57 PM
1

These assumptions are irrelevant to the point, stop nit-picking Limit it solely to people of European descent then. Americans of European descent are fatter than Europeans of European descent. Do you dispute that? It really does require explaining and it can't be genetics.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 11:14 AM
2

Well maybe you shouldn't have made it about how their P3N1S is too small and they should BUY CH34P MED5 N0W
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:29 AM
50

I'm a healthy weight, and surrounded mostly by people who are not. They're not obese or anything, but compared to them I'm thin. People very often say ''oh, nonplussed over here, he can eat whatever he wants and not gain any weight, I'm so jealous!". And I absolutely resent that. I've been overweight in the past and I watch the scales, am careful what I eat and I exercise an absolute fuckton. And when I slip up, I start gaining weight (incidentally, at the exact rate that calorie counting predic…
/r/MensRights10/05/13 11:55 PM
2

Dude, I never said any of the stuff you're accusing me of. Chill. Gender roles exist, and they suck for men and women in various ways. I never implied they only affect women. The example we're talking about is women in IT, so that's the only reason I'm focusing on women. I am a male, and I would be sick of the argument you're accusing me of making as well, if someone had made it. But I am not that someone.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 11:25 PM
1

I'm gonna go with: there is really that much spam.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 05:33 PM
1

I'm of the opinion that it's probably sexism, but not from IT employers or anyone else in the industry. I think it's the overarching gender roles that people's preferences are shaped by from a young age. I would probably sooner blame toy companies for making girls' toys fucking boring as hell, and parents for conforming to gendered expectations when buying toys for their kids. Although all this shit really only starts to matter in adulthood, I find it bizarre that feminism has pretty much ignore…
/r/MensRights10/05/13 05:26 PM
2

also physics postgraduate offices
/r/MensRights10/05/13 05:20 PM
2

I heard that quote from some researcher being interviewed on Penn and Teller's Bullshit for their episode on the death penalty.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:29 PM
1

Gah to the semantic bullshit going on in reply to this post, who cares if it's a 'belief' or not. The criticism is that they've lost any semblance of evidence based reasoning.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:19 PM
1

wow...this might not be true, but it would explain a lot.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 11:41 AM
5

Naw, for once I'd like to see a post where the top comment doesn't say exactly why it's bullshit. Why you gotta go ruin that for me like this buddy? edit: Do I really need to point out that I'm being sarcastic?
/r/MensRights04/05/13 04:54 PM
2

So basically being snarky is more important to you than making sure your point isn't attacking a strawman. Gotcha.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 04:35 PM
6

Lol at the top of the atheism+ subreddit 'You are not a member of this community. Please respect that by not voting'. It's a stupid request, but its extra stupid that they're not applying it in reverse. Man they love having their own little walled community protecting their precious little brains from the evil facts out to get them.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:25 PM
3

I read too quickly and the 'sp' from 'spot' made me read 'sperm diggers'. I suppose they exist too :p
/r/MensRights25/04/13 10:45 PM
1

As I see it doxing shouldn't be an issue as this would be identifying individuals taking part in violent, criminal activity But that's always what it seems like to people that want to drop dox. Everyone always thinks their case is special enough to break the rules. But people get it wrong so often that exceptions really can't be made.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 06:47 PM
1

I hate little comments like this. "Not helpful" "You just don't get it, do you?" I'm sorry but please make a point yourself rather than just acting smugly like you've made one.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:52 PM
2

I was once laughed at (by men, and I'm male) while running with my shirt off. I'm not even overweight, but I'm a bit pasty and my muscles aren't very defined. Anyway you can bet that did wonders for my self esteem, can't imagine how people with a bit more fat on them would feel in the same situation. The only time I've run shirtless since was when I was with running with a woman, figuring no one'd insult me in front of her.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:42 PM
2

I take it with a grain of salt when someone says 'don't get me wrong, I'm all for feminism, but ...', because I say that all the time, even though it's a huge lie. I often don't have the energy to get into a big argument with people who are neck deep in their irrational ideology, so I'd rather not have them write me off as a person while I make one small point. And unless I have time to fully explain why I think modern feminism is so poisonous, I'd rather just not bring it up because people will…
/r/MensRights19/04/13 06:05 PM
2

Downvotes? This is a pro mens rights post, rationally arguing why the Schrödingers rapist argument is stupid. Thought you guys would like it, not sure why you don't.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 11:38 AM
6

That is a very good documentary and confirms what I've suspected for a long time....it's the toy industries fault that I don't meet many women in my profession! Edit: have now watched past the first 15 minutes and the plot thickens.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:26 PM
1

moral fitness Tell 'em you're an atheist, that oughta disqualify you. Hooray for discrimination!
/r/MensRights07/04/13 12:58 PM
5

Can you tell me more about this? Has there been any writing on it in the feminist literature or such? Any more specificity on what mistakes were made?
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:32 AM
5

Yeah I don't get it, what about the username indicates OP is from SRS?
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:17 AM
2

This would probably be good for the mens rights movement (by drawing attention to the double standard in what is considered rape) but is not good advice for any individual.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:13 AM
1

This a thousand times. Yeah it's rape, and yeah it's worse than many of the things that get men labelled as rapists by SRS types. But many couples have raped each other by the strictest definition, and are barely even annoyed at each other about it, and only become so once the world tells them they should be outraged. I'd be really annoyed at her if I was in your position (I've been in similar ones), but I'd be far more upset if she say, outed my gay friend to his parents after I told her not to…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:10 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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