nuzzle Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
2	One thing that bothers me most. Well actually it might. I remember reading an article about a study that claimed that said study showed that criminals are less reluctant to target men. Given that I can't find the article at the moment and that further that information is now fourth-hand (study-article-me-you), take what I said with a chunk of salt please.	/r/MensRights	25/05/12 06:35 PM
0	r/SocialistMasculism Launch Subscribed. High time, too.	/r/MensRights	20/05/12 12:40 AM
5	"The Hatred of Women." Pretty incredible soundtrack for the MRM. How can you parse that to arrive at your first guess?	/r/MensRights	15/04/12 06:23 AM
1	Feminism's latest triumph: Boys are afraid of girls. Suffice it to say: "What the fuck?" I'm sure that clears things up.	/r/MensRights	15/04/12 04:51 AM
6	Feminism's latest triumph: Boys are afraid of girls. At best, you are pointing the stupidity out, but I think everyone knew that already. "What the fuck" isn't criticism, it is an expression of bewilderment.	/r/MensRights	15/04/12 02:21 AM
1	"In Sweden, a debate over whether gender equality has gone too far": parents pushing back after schools promote the use of the neutral pronoun "hen" to refer to boys and girls now. This issue seems to be about personal pronouns, not articles and grammatical gender as such. I don't speak Swedish, but from what I gathered the idea is to refer to specific persons of either biological gender as "hen", while indefinites are usually referred to using feminine pronouns. Wikipedia provides an example with a possessive using "hennes". I'm not sure about sets of things, as the plural pronoun for everything seems to be de/dem/deras for nominative, objective and possessive, respective…	/r/MensRights	10/04/12 03:37 AM
5	BBC News - Girls 'believe they are better than boys from age four' Which then also plays into boys doing worse from a "self fulfilling prophecy" type of scenario. Alright, looked it up: Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: why do women like women more than men like men? is the study that girlwriteswhat referenced. The abstract is: Four experiments confirmed that women's automatic in-group bias is remarkably stronger than men's and investigated explanations for this sex difference, derived from potential sources of implicit attitudes (L. A. Rudman, 2004). In Experiment 1, only women (not men) showed cognitive balance among in-group bias, identity…	/r/MensRights	26/03/12 04:27 PM
12	BBC News - Girls 'believe they are better than boys from age four' Which then also plays into boys doing worse from a "self fulfilling prophecy" type of scenario. Girlwriteswhat linked a study that showed that in-group preference among adult women is greater than in men (with men actually often showing a reverse bias, i.e. an out-group bias). I don't have time to search for the youtube video at the moment, but perhaps you can find it if you are interested. (in- and out-group refer to their own and opposing gender in relation to the gender of the studied subjects respectively)	/r/MensRights	26/03/12 02:15 PM
1	Rebecca Watson, founder of Skepchick, admits to being a Skepdick, and enters the sociopathic spectrum via cruelty. Is not this kind of behavior, via the bloom of power, as unbecoming in a female leader, as it is in a male leader? Part of the argument hinges on Watson's handler quitting. Was this a paid position? If not, that part of the argument doesn't fly.	/r/MensRights	15/03/12 12:18 AM
1	Trans issues are part of men's rights Why are you so aggressive? I genuinely would have liked to know how you'd properly argue your case. I don't know whether you can't, or won't; but given that what you replied spectcularly misses the point and shows a lack of understanding of almost everything we know about us (newsflash: even great specimen like you can't control their emotions), I'll go with the former.	/r/MensRights	06/03/12 10:55 AM
0	Trans issues are part of men's rights I can't be offensive. You can decide to be offended by what I say... Well, this doesn't seem to be right. Communication is not semantically void, and further, communication is not possible without some information being transmitted and received. The act of receiving whatever you say in itself affects the receiver of your information transmission. How do you define offense so that it is suddenly entirely independent on this causal chain? The only way I can see your statement to be true is if you …	/r/MensRights	06/03/12 01:33 AM
1	Rebecca Watson Attempts to Explain the MRM The "gender" of a word has nothing to do with the word's meaning. That is only half true. English has largely lost its gender system. Gender in English actually demarcates sex now, with obvious exceptions such as ships. German is on the same path, albeit because of language engineering (to a large extent). It is hard to get away with the generic masculine in German now, even if it is historically correct. Language changes with usage.	/r/MensRights	05/03/12 08:44 PM
2	Sometimes feminism is about a hatred of women How do you prove that "institutional sexism" is at the root of this discrepancy? You said that: But why do women gravitate towards those jobs? Because women's role as the house-keeper and child-carer has not disappeared, it has simply accompanied them into the workplace. Is there actual research on this (as being the reason)? Could it be the case that men and women have different interests a priori?	/r/MensRights	04/03/12 11:53 PM
1	What's the men's equivalent of slut shaming? Example provided. Can you source this: There is no such correlation with the husband's number of previous partners. I've seen studies that provide evidence that the number of previous sexual partners is correlated to the likelihood of infidelity, but for both partners.	/r/MensRights	04/03/12 10:12 PM
3	Would the world be more peaceful if women were in charge? A challenging new book by Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker says the answer is “yes.” I didn't yet read Pinker's book; I'm thus limited to commenting on the article. I think that the article has it backwards when it suggests that Pinker is "... correct when he notes that the parts of the world that lag in the decline of violence are also the parts that lag in the empowerment of women". This, and the information economy angle, both are perceived as being a result of the empowerment of women, but I think that the empowerment of women is the result of both. In a society that is no l…	/r/MensRights	03/03/12 09:43 PM
1	Men do not have rights; they have obligations. Women do not have rights; they have privilege. The fact that women have legally augmented their privilege to include extending a man’s obligations beyond the life of a relationship is just downright clever as fuck. What did you think that we were doing? In any case, this gets us somewhere. According to you, feminism extended class struggle into gender politics. And you also state that feminism is leftist in nature. Earlier, you argued that feminism is intrinsic to the left, which is the exact opposite of what you claimed here. If you claim that Feminism is intrinsically leftist I'd probably agree, but to claim that it is intrinsic to leftism seems wrong to me.	/r/MensRights	02/03/12 11:38 PM
1	Men do not have rights; they have obligations. Women do not have rights; they have privilege. The fact that women have legally augmented their privilege to include extending a man’s obligations beyond the life of a relationship is just downright clever as fuck. There is no argument concerning this in the video. Should I have missed it, please point me towards it. Simone de Beauvoir tried to bring feminism under the umbrella of marxism, forming an analogy by considering women and their lack of independent access to resources and means of production, if I remember correctly. Her analysis of what was then contemporary society uses the methods of marxist analysis of the same, but with a different focus. In modern feminist writing and theory, where is the m…	/r/MensRights	01/03/12 01:25 AM
1	Men do not have rights; they have obligations. Women do not have rights; they have privilege. The fact that women have legally augmented their privilege to include extending a man’s obligations beyond the life of a relationship is just downright clever as fuck. Is that your argument?	/r/MensRights	01/03/12 01:02 AM
3	Men do not have rights; they have obligations. Women do not have rights; they have privilege. The fact that women have legally augmented their privilege to include extending a man’s obligations beyond the life of a relationship is just downright clever as fuck. I'd have to believe that women will collectively work to gain advantage over men just because they have less responsibility for society. Butting in here: Women exhibit automatic in-group bias to a higher degree than men While the "less responsibility"-part is not shown in this study (and it sounds fishy to me), the general premise of women working to gain an advantage over men might be supportable.	/r/MensRights	29/02/12 06:00 PM
3	Men do not have rights; they have obligations. Women do not have rights; they have privilege. The fact that women have legally augmented their privilege to include extending a man’s obligations beyond the life of a relationship is just downright clever as fuck. Feminism has divorced itself from Marxism long ago. You can argue that historical materialism and early feminist theory have similar concepts and that the latter was informed by the former, but there are two key differences: It is much easier to argue for some truth in the axioms of historical materialism, which started with an analysis of society and history, than arguing for the same with feminism, which already had a lense through which it began the analysis; and feminism has broadened so muc…	/r/MensRights	29/02/12 05:57 PM
0	I tried to have a meaningful conversation with a liberal feminist, yet this sums up my experience. For example, if a woman can take time off of work to care for her newborn, I see no reason why a man can't do the same and let his wife return to work I've seen the documentaries by Harald Eia called "Hjernevask" recently, and a seemingly more science-oriented sociologist claimed that there are studies that show that children need a single, primary caregiver in the first few months (unfortunately I don't remember the exact timeframe given), and that two caregivers (such as when the woman at firs…	/r/MensRights	05/02/12 01:59 AM
0	Dresses, drinks, and misogyny. Sexist jokes are a form of rape culture. When is something offensive, and is anything that is offensive not okay? Those are not easy questions. In the end I am a kind of libetarian when it comes to this; there is a fair number of things that might offend me, but I can't and won't forbid people from doing or saying them based on that. What is your solution?	/r/MensRights	04/02/12 11:12 PM
2	Dresses, drinks, and misogyny. Sexist jokes are a form of rape culture. There was an additional element; the "Sharon Osbourne thing" was about a concrete, identified victim, and she gloated about his misfortune. There are comparable rape jokes in a way - jokes about the Austrian Fritzl case. Those jokes don't end with "Imagine her [makes humping motion]. I find it quite fabulous". Most rape jokes are also not told at national TV shows to the delight of (apparently) a sizable part of the population. But you are right, there might be some hypocrisy here. edit: Failure…	/r/MensRights	04/02/12 04:12 AM
1	No, seriously, what about the truth? - Feminist blogs pretending to help men I'm not sure what we are doing here. I don't fundamentally disagree. Most definitions of patriarchy I came across are in some way meaningless. I said that. However, given a definition of patriarchy that subsumes traditional gender roles in the societies christianised Europe spawned, it is true that it hurts both men and women. As for productiveness: This was both a pragmatic and ontological quip. Pragmatically, sarcasm won't get us anywhere if we are trying to win hearts and minds. Ontologically…	/r/MensRights	03/02/12 08:49 PM
1	No, seriously, what about the truth? - Feminist blogs pretending to help men Okay. That is a very unproductive definition that I am not sure many feminists (or MRAs) actually use. But thank you anyway.	/r/MensRights	01/02/12 10:42 PM
-4	No, seriously, what about the truth? - Feminist blogs pretending to help men Even such a system can hurt both men and women. And that isn't a very useful definition I think ;)	/r/MensRights	29/01/12 11:25 PM
1	No, seriously, what about the truth? - Feminist blogs pretending to help men Could you paraphrase what in the video addresses this? "Patriarchy" is a term that can be very narrowly defined or all-encompassing. Without context, I find the term almost meaningless. But that does not mean that there aren't definitions of patriarchy in use, especially those who also encompass gender roles, where the original statement is true. If you choose to reply I will read it in about 7 hours or so. Until then, good day.	/r/MensRights	29/01/12 11:23 PM
-4	No, seriously, what about the truth? - Feminist blogs pretending to help men Well depending on what one actually means when saying "patriarchy", that is likely true.	/r/MensRights	29/01/12 10:51 PM
1	Angry misogynists! - another awesome video by girlwriteswhat I think it isn't that simple. Sacrifice is an intrinsic part of male gender roles; it is masculinity that is questioned when a man hides behind a woman in case of danger, not whether that behaviour is "economically" sensible.	/r/MensRights	11/01/12 06:52 PM
4	Women's rights activist vs feminist All you do is post links to videos of manhood academy. Would I be wrong if I said that you were a sockpuppet? Kindly remove yourself from the premises.	/r/MensRights	19/12/11 10:22 PM
3	6 out of 10 Welsh men who take a Paternity test turn out not to be the biological father Paternity tests by and large are not done without some suspicion - your figure of 30% is likely much too high for the general population. That the sample size is big has nothing to do with the inherent bias of the sample.	/r/MensRights	19/09/11 05:40 PM
2	Man with zero sperm count becomes a dad thanks to miracle treatment Apologies. And agreed, I also wondered why that tabloid article was there in the first place.	/r/MensRights	17/09/11 03:22 PM
3	Man with zero sperm count becomes a dad thanks to miracle treatment No. Read the article.	/r/MensRights	17/09/11 03:11 PM
-1	r/mensrights, this made my blood boil (pics inside). Okay. There is a reason I don't watch TV much. Still, that is not a context where non-consentual sex is actually the subject, or so I think. Just for the record, I didn't grasp the ad at all at first, I thought it was about cheating first. And I still feel that it is mainly stupid.	/r/MensRights	11/09/11 10:52 PM
1	r/mensrights, this made my blood boil (pics inside). Your conciousness and ability to consent (or not consent) is an add-on. Stimulate a human in the right way, and the body will prepare for sex. I am loathe to use the word "aroused" here, because that usually is meant differently. Men get erections naturally during the night while sleeping. Sleep is not a concious state. Further, can have erections during sleep if their bladder is full.	/r/MensRights	11/09/11 09:10 PM
0	r/mensrights, this made my blood boil (pics inside). I find that strange. In which context were those jokes made? Was it a "haha, he is so bad at sex/unmanly/badly endowed that she didn't even wake up" or a "haha, I fucked her even though she didn't want to" context? I find neither particularly funny, but the framing device of "sex with sleeping people" might be used differently. And both perhaps questionably.	/r/MensRights	11/09/11 09:07 PM
2	I'm about to take a class from my university's Women's Studies department. What should I expect? No. It depends on the teacher. My three (so far) women's/gender study classes were alright overall and fairly graded (i.e. I disagreed often, but "participated and argued properly", so got good grades regardless). Unless you are a really good debater, keep your head down. Women's studies might not be really academic, but it certainly has a huge amount of material, theory and arguments. And you might be up against a person (namely your professor) who has massively more leverage in class and unive…	/r/MensRights	10/09/11 02:32 PM
2	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex Sure, consult the textbook. My gender essentialism education is rather rusty as well. It has been years since I sat in a women's studies classroom. But I don't think we should continue this discussion. You said in response to Gareth<sup>1</sup> that the stance I accuse you off is not necessarily your stance, and you repeated it here. We will not get over our differences regardless, because of these things: I'd idealogically would like to think this allows any human get past any natural differenc…	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 10:21 PM
8	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex Swashy: I disagree that gender essentialism exists [...] where it matters; mentally. Even if we do find concrete differences, they're hard enough to find that they're very minor and women are still humans and shouldn't be treated differently because of it. Source and Source Gareth: It's accurate to say that behaviour is a combination of nature and nurture. The degree will probably forever be in question. Needless to say, neither Demonspawn's use of the extreme, nor yours, is entirely accurate. S…	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 10:14 PM
2	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex I wasn't disagreeing with you, I just clarified my stance. Your examples again are for me not issues of gender equality. I also think they are not really good examples; rape is a prolongued process. I don't know if it is correct to say that rape is the kind of momentary irrationality that punching someone is. What is probably more important is that ideally I don't want to have either statement considered a non-contemptible argument. But as I said, if that can not be eroded by convincing society …	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 10:04 PM
6	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex You misunderstood me. I am not the person who you were arguing with. I am the person who said that your conclusion didn't follow from the premises. This happened: Person A: Rainbows have red in them. Person B: Are you saying rainbows are not light? Person C: This is a non-sequitur. Person B: Wow, you are Person A! Yet I want to comment on this: HoweverI don't really believe neuroscience and psychology together are sufficiently advanced yet to have concrete studies proving major differences betwe…	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 09:57 PM
3	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex These are two different issues. "Office of X for Women" is anti-equality, if you will; I have heard arguments that such offices are transient solutions that are ment to usher in distribution-equality in the way I mentioned, but I'd argue that distribution-equality is a mistaken idea. If it is the case that any person can use a "the victim has previously been a perpetrator"-defense in assault cases, then there might be a general problem with the law. Such things could be regulated neutrally. Howe…	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 09:42 PM
1	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex I disagree with In all honesty, I don't think it's possible to have equal rights between men and women, mostly because of the biologically granted privilege. You can have gender neutral rights, but to expect the outcome to be a society where every group (such as gender) permeates every aspect of it equally might be wishful thinking. For instance, if women are by and large inherently better at being school teachers or predisposed to be teachers, and I don't know if that is the case, then you can …	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 09:29 PM
3	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex I am just your friendly neighbourhood drive-by-philosophy-man.	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 09:23 PM
5	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex Do you know what a non-sequitur is?	/r/MensRights	09/09/11 09:12 PM
1	Dear MensRighters-from a self described vehement anti-sexist (feminist) Whence this? It is fact that the average man is different from the average woman, and not only because one has a uterus and one has a prostate. You argue from anectodal evidence. I am sure you are an exceptional specimen. But you average out. It is hence you who is thinking of extremes. In the link above, you will notice a height difference of about 3 to 4 inches in every single country between the sexes. Again, why? As for your only problem: No, the law doesn't work this way, and for good reaso…	/r/MensRights	04/09/11 05:45 PM
1	Dear MensRighters-from a self described vehement anti-sexist (feminist) Anti-sexist is how I would describe myself [...] A sexist is someone who assumes certain characteristics about a person because of the sex they were born. I would call what you are a non-realist. At first I thought you might be talking about murky, badly defined "character traits", but you also wrote [Flaming] me for not believing in evolutionary/hormonal difference between men and women [...] Please explain how you can hold these ideas in the face of reality. How, for instance, do the two sexes…	/r/MensRights	04/09/11 02:10 PM
8	Is There Anything Good About Men? [pdf] Are you sure "asexual" is the word you are looking for? Plants certainly don't all reproduce asexually (what are flowers for, decoration?), ants have essentially 2 genders (or more if you want to work with sterility as a gender), and so on. Species that reproduce asexually usually are single-celled and clone themselves (but might use gene transfer, and so on).	/r/MensRights	27/08/11 10:57 PM
2	Where does r/MensRights stand on the subject of abortion rights? That is certainly very convenient, especially as I just showed you how those two are related, namely via the possibility to accept or reject a responsibility that arose out of a situation where one or two parties might not have consented to bring the situation about in the first place. If we are going down this path, I might as well write: "Well one is about slavery and the other about caring for your child" and be done with it. Unless you demonstrate that P(x) ∧ Q(P(x)) ≡ R(x) ∧ S(R(x)) namely …	/r/MensRights	26/08/11 01:52 AM
2	Where does r/MensRights stand on the subject of abortion rights? We are still talking about different things. This doesn't get us anyhere, and you just softened your argument. Regardless, let's continue with your argument, which I think is invalid, namely that it is the same thing and responsibilities derive from that (note that I actually would concede that willingly having a child implies responsibilities, but that isn't here nor there). Currently, one party in our thought experiment has the ability to not accept the responsibility by unilaterally aborting.…	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 11:19 PM
3	Site encourages women to take pictures of men on London underground without their knowledge, then upload them so their appearance and clothes can be rated and bitched on - but men taking photos of women is not allowed as 'it feels different'. No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that cosplay is at least partly about attention, as are many, many things people do in public (or which have a public impact), and that we tend to dislike attention from the wrong kind of people, and should be honest enough to admit that. On the picture issue: I am not comfortable with public photography at all. But as for the upskirt photography: No, not acceptable. I always tend to argue minor points. I might have to change that for reddit. I've gotten into …	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 10:36 PM
2	Site encourages women to take pictures of men on London underground without their knowledge, then upload them so their appearance and clothes can be rated and bitched on - but men taking photos of women is not allowed as 'it feels different'. Okay. You are really interpreting a lot into what I said. I'm glad someone agrees, but if so, why use "attention whoring", which has negative connotations, for a behaviour I just practically called "human nature"? As for the whipping, I don't know if that is the case. Many people argue like Sco+t, I don't know that they are all just whipped and don't just see a flaw with the kind of argument I proposed.	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 10:22 PM
2	Where does r/MensRights stand on the subject of abortion rights? I think we are talking about different things here. My point is that Assuming, both parents were willing participants in the conception is not the same as saying "Both parents were willing participants in sex". I'd argue that we have reached a stage where sex can be decoupled from reproduction insofar as that we are dealing with a situation were one can willingly have sex and not willingly conceive. As for living with the consequences, yes, I agree; but I think that a model where unwilling conce…	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 10:18 PM
3	Where does r/MensRights stand on the subject of abortion rights? This is a non-sequitur. Sex and conception have become seperate things. You talked below about taking risks and responsibilities, but being a "willing participant" is not the same thing as living with consequences. "Everyone who works in a mine and dies in an accident has willingly died"? No. Not valid logic. Mining accidents are not always preventable, so that comparison is, while not great, somewhat apt. There is a difference between "willingly doing something", "consenting to something", and …	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 09:58 PM
7	Site encourages women to take pictures of men on London underground without their knowledge, then upload them so their appearance and clothes can be rated and bitched on - but men taking photos of women is not allowed as 'it feels different'. I totally understand your friend. I was in a band once, and we just wanted to make music. Nothing pop-ish, and we never had a lot of melodies. We didn't do it for the attention (at least from 'women'), we did it because we loved music and playing it. Anyways, I often lost count at our concerts of the fucking creepy people who would turn and look at us, and listen to the music! Creepy fucks would just walk right up to us and shove their ears in our direction. Of course she does it for the attenti…	/r/MensRights	25/08/11 09:34 PM
2	I was charged with promoting socially-unacceptable ideas and browbeating a 19-year-old woman. I lasted just over three weeks. Oh! Yes, I concur.	/r/MensRights	21/08/11 04:15 AM
2	I was charged with promoting socially-unacceptable ideas and browbeating a 19-year-old woman. I lasted just over three weeks. If you were to analyse IQ in males and females, you were to find that the males have a higher standard deviation. The female bell curve would be taller/narrower, the male curve wider. "Genius" is not defined as a point, but as an interval, just like any other IQ category. You might define "normal" as ]90,110[ for example, and genius as ]140,inf]. There are actual intervals you can look up. Colloquially, that means what I stated. We can discuss technicalities, but I didn't mean to provide a prope…	/r/MensRights	21/08/11 01:11 AM
4	I was charged with promoting socially-unacceptable ideas and browbeating a 19-year-old woman. I lasted just over three weeks. For men's rights: Specifically, Quinn claimed that women were incapable of genius and tried to substantiate this with the assertion that the bell curve describing male IQ is broader (meaning there are more geniuses, but also more idiots, and less people of average intelligence) than that of women, which is true as far as I can tell, but doesn't support the assertion.	/r/MensRights	20/08/11 11:03 PM
3	I was charged with promoting socially-unacceptable ideas and browbeating a 19-year-old woman. I lasted just over three weeks. Someone called David Quinn started a discussion with a very broad slight against what he perceived the members of the forum to be, then there is some ontological and epistemological back and forth with rather wooly and unsubstantiated, but not especially outraging posts by Quinn and posts of varying complexity and rigor by others (in so far as I am able to judge that). There was an empistemologist, someone who aptly called himself "Plato", a person who had a somewhat strange obsession with pre-w…	/r/MensRights	20/08/11 10:59 PM