TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

okymyo Archive

View 1 posts and 179 comments by okymyo 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)
13

Wasn't that long ago that Reddit was looking for a new person to join the board of directors (I think? Or was it a new C-level) and they had it as a requirement that the person had be a POC.
/r/MensRights26/08/21 09:39 AM
1

It's not awful but it's not that great either. I donate to the Cure Alzheimer's Fund and the ALS Therapy Development Institute and their expenditures are over 92% and 86% on programs respectively.
/r/MensRights21/07/21 04:25 PM
4

It's not illegal to not want to work for someone based on any characteristic. It's illegal for someone to refuse to hire women. It's not illegal for someone to not want to work for a female boss. (EDIT) Sources: (US) https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964 (UK) https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/discrimination-because-of-race-religion-or-belief/discrimination-because-of-race/#race_discrimination_in_employment_and_training (Canada) https://laws-l…
/r/MensRights28/04/21 11:42 PM
14

In Spain once an accusation is filed you may be sentenced without even being allowed to step into the "courtroom" (it's actually a special court that hands out decisions within hours, only prosecution testifies), and punishments includes things such as the deed of your house, car, etc, being transferred to the "victim", along with the more typical ones of fines, jail sentences, etc. If you do manage to testify, you're only allowed to speak when the judge asks you a question, and the judges are, …
/r/MensRights04/02/21 03:58 PM
75

Minecraft teaching survival skills
/r/MensRights15/12/20 12:26 PM
5

That would imply losing the independence they have over their own curricula, because now they require another accredited university with accredited professors that they consider qualified enough to be evaluating their own examinations. In addition to that, an important part of any evaluation is the ability to appeal or a review, and if the evaluator was from another institution, that makes the process much more difficult. If the appeal is handled by faculty at the student's university, then it's…
/r/MensRights17/08/20 07:09 PM
7

That's very difficult to do. Most lecturers aren't accompanied by a number of qualified evaluators that aren't part of the faculty for the course in the first place. Most often, assistant or associate professors will be part of the faculty, even if they aren't the lecturers, and will have contact with students. In fact, more often than not, other members of the faculty had more direct contact with students than the senior lecturer, because the senior lecturer would only partake in the lectures, …
/r/MensRights17/08/20 04:48 PM
51

Gaslighting. "So, what did you do wrong to make her do these things to you?", to immediately make the victim the one who's responsible for what happened, not the abuser.
/r/MensRights03/05/20 03:45 PM
20

HoW DaRE yOu TeLL wOMeN wHaT tO WeAR
/r/MensRights27/01/20 03:44 PM
47

A friend of mine has split custody but still pays child support equal to half his salary... to his ex-wife who makes almost twice what he makes. He makes 75k/year, pays 35k/year in child support, his ex-wife makes 120k/year. Poor ex-wife, still drives last year's mercedes, should probably increase child support payments - the judge, probably
/r/MensRights27/12/19 04:58 PM
5

Let me guess, you think nothing should've happened to him, because stealing people's property and setting it on fire is apparently a-ok. He would've gotten 7 years even without it being aggravated for being a hate crime. Him specifically claiming in court that he did it because he wanted to send a message to LGBT people is what got him screwed, because you have to be freaking retarded to claim that in court, yet he still did. Not my fault he's retarded and doesn't use his 5th ammendment rights.
/r/PussyPass21/12/19 02:43 AM
1

He was found guilty of harassment. Regardless, that was irrelevant (30 days) when it comes to the total jail time, so I'm not sure how do you claim that it "conveniently allows them to proceed with their kangaroo court". He still stole a flag from a church then set it on fire within the bar's property. That's arson, plain and simple. You can burn a flag if it's your flag, you can't steal someone else's flag and burn it, and especially not if you're also gonna burn it on someone else's property. …
/r/PussyPass21/12/19 02:00 AM
77

It's more complex than the title says. He threatened to burn down a bar, then proceeded to steal the flag from a church, take it to the bar, and set it on fire. So he got charged with arson, harassment, and reckless use of fire. The arson charge was aggravated by being considered a hate crime... since the guy decided to state in court that he chose the LGBT flag to send a specific message to those groups... which I'm sure made his lawyer facepalm. He would've gotten 5 years, but it was his 3rd o…
/r/PussyPass21/12/19 01:17 AM
1

It was specifically outlawed (for women). It is illegal to charge women more for healthcare than you'd charge men. But perfectly legal to charge men more than you'd charge women, in lots of other scenarios.
/r/MensRights02/10/19 04:20 PM
3

Sometimes it's just penetration. Specifically, being forcefully penetrated. So being forced to penetrate is only considered "sexual assault". It's bullshit, and there are even instances of large organizations of a certain movement successfully opposing the criminalization of female-on-male rape, but they're totally for equality.
/r/PussyPass27/07/19 02:07 PM
5

I think someone admitting it is pretty hard evidence. If some dude went around claiming she had raped him, yeah, basically no evidence. If she goes around claiming she raped a 13 year old, and how he didn't want her to do it, then I don't think you need much more evidence.
/r/MensRights27/01/19 01:31 PM
84

You'll die earlier, which looking at the fucked up future it looks like we're headed to won't be a bad thing.
/r/MensRights30/12/18 03:11 AM
153

Those results are so fucking biased it's ridiculous. 38.3% of women being university students compared to 27.7% of men? That's equality. 40.5% of women being in school compared to 28.3% of men? That's equality. 53.4% of women in university being in education, health, welfare, humanities and arts, compared to 29.2% of men, due to their choices? That's inequality! Nothing more to be expected from the country that creates affirmative action programs to get women into STEM, but abolished them everyw…
/r/MensRights18/12/18 09:34 PM
2

I don't think there needs to be an intervention about it. As long as people are gravitating towards those jobs because it's a choice they make themselves, nothing is wrong with it. What we should do is not push people towards jobs or areas based on their gender, but that's not nearly as prevalent as it was some time ago. And we should also increase the contact that high school students have with different areas, so that they get a glimpse of a wider range of possibilities. As an example (anecdot…
/r/MensRights15/11/18 01:07 AM
5

If 90% of the candidates for a subset of jobs are men, or women, it's likely that 90% of the workforce in those same jobs would be men, or women. Any expectation otherwise is obvious discrimination and bias.
/r/MensRights14/11/18 11:28 AM
7

Also actor/actress, obviously!
/r/MensRights14/11/18 11:26 AM
9

Exactly, it's not binary: it's not like either the accused or the accuser go to jail. If the accused is found guilty of the crime, they should go to jail. If the accuser is found guilty of making up the accusation, they should go to jail. If neither is found guilty of anything, neither goes to jail.
/r/MensRights02/10/18 01:28 PM
53

Even if it weren't filtered, a therapist's goal isn't to make you a nice person, it's to suggest what's best for you, even if that makes you an asshole.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 07:37 PM
18

Meritocracy is equality. How can equality be anything other than "the merit of what you do is the only deciding factor"?
/r/MensRights21/03/18 11:19 AM
6

I guess it goes more like how false accusations can destroy a family. Or how they can end up with two people dead. Whether it was his mom or his dad committing suicide doesn't matter, only that someone in his family also did.
/r/MensRights29/10/17 10:59 AM
17

If he wanted to be a football player, there certainly are.
/r/MensRights09/10/17 06:06 PM
9

I had to register for selective service because I'm a man. Isn't that a pretty simple example of institutional sexism towards men?
/r/MensRights13/05/17 09:11 PM
2

If it can't be proven false then it's true in the eyes of the law. What... No, it's the other way around... If you can't prove someone's a murderer then they're not a murderer. It isn't "guilty until proven innocent", it's "innocent until proven guilty". If it can't be proven true, then it's false.
/r/MensRights19/03/17 11:37 PM
22

Chuckled at "communist units"
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:58 PM
6

The absolute absurdity comes when you consider a counseling session during the surgery. At what precise moment does federal law no longer require insurance to pay for the session? Like, the second the last thread of tissue from the testes is severed the counselor has to punch the clock? It's probably whenever there's a sex change from the legal perspective, that is, whenever whatever documents make the sex change official are signed. So tbh I don't think there's much of a legal problem there as …
/r/MensRights03/02/17 01:24 AM
22

Anything you write is protected by copyright to protect you. Otherwise, had you forgotten to put a copyright notice in every single document, it was public domain. Like, imagine if you had died and all of the things you've ever written, including personal logs/diaries/notes, they'd all be public domain whether or not you liked it, and nothing your family could do about it. EDIT: Oh, and I forgot about a special part that made it even worse: any photo or video you ever took of yourself, or friend…
/r/MensRights30/12/16 12:42 PM
35

Won't The Patriarchy™ just send them their monthly male bonus payments to cover for it?
/r/MensRights26/11/16 11:42 AM
20

I'm yet to see you cite how they don't vaccinate boys because they don't have the money, rather than because they don't want to spend money, or don't want to bother redirecting funds from elsewhere. You simply claim over and over again that this is done to save people and that it's the most cost-effective way to save the most people, but you've yet to cite anything related to this, as if vaccinating boys is the worst cost-effective treatment you can possibly do, everywhere. I'm almost sure that …
/r/MensRights13/09/16 07:24 PM
2

If you do not wish to have children, you should completely abstain from one of life's greatest pleasures? Abstinence isn't the way forward. Proper birth control has extremely low failure rates, and it should be advocated for. Sure, abstinence has 100% success rate, but so does staying home and avoiding all human contact when it comes to most diseases, still not a reason I'd advocate to "stay home and avoid all human contact" rather than proper vaccination and medical care.
/r/MensRights31/08/16 01:17 AM
4

It's shitty to tell everyone who doesn't want kids that they can't have sex. Giving a kid up for adoption isn't a drain on the national systems. If there are way more kids than those that are adopted, sure, but the act of giving a child up for adoption isn't inherently bad. Lots of couples want kids but are infertile or can't reproduce for any other reason, and adoptions are needed for those. And lots of people are unfit to be parents. I'd rather see a child being given up for adoption than bein…
/r/MensRights30/08/16 11:31 PM
22

she can choose to support the baby on her own or to get an abortion. Or give it up for adoption, if you don't want to raise it but don't want to abort it. Or even abandon it under safe-haven laws.
/r/MensRights30/08/16 11:12 PM
8

It's called court dress and it's the clothing British judges wear (and some other Commonwealth countries too). Same thing for the robe. Depending on your rank (e.g. judge, lord justices of appeal, high court judge, etc) you wear a different wig style and/or different robe.
/r/PussyPass23/08/16 01:25 PM
76

So... prostitution app..? Just go to the whore over there on the street corner, $50 for a 30-min """date""", $70 for a 1-hour date.
/r/PussyPass14/07/16 06:25 PM
11

No, it's racist to not be racist against white people, and sexist to not be sexist against men. Wait a second...
/r/PussyPass27/04/16 02:56 PM
1

There has never been a right to freedom of speech on Facebook Not really. Likes on Facebook, for example, are protected as free speech. The article is talking about likes, but it also mentions the posts: "Other courts have ruled that posts on the social network are protected as free speech", although it doesn't offer source or a link to those rulings. Considering the court rulings, there is a right to freedom of speech on Facebook, at least, and it applies not only to posts but also to likes.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 03:29 AM
1

Dailymail may be shit but there is TONS of articles and movies on the internet about animals being badly treated. Why didn't you use any of those as a source? I know they exist, and you should've used a better source. I just felt like people went way to hard on the first comment, that is now deleted. Even though he maybe didnt express himself in the best way, he did have a point. What the poster had said was that this was what happens at farms. The poster complained how people care about this ha…
/r/PussyPass17/02/16 11:08 PM
1

What they do at pig farms is very far from torture. Torture implies intention to hurt, and more than that, that the pain or suffering is the primary objective. It isn't. You're comparing a couple who mutilated, injured and killed animals for their enjoyment, and who liked to watch the animals cry in pain and fear, and are comparing that to what happens at farmhouses. They're nothing alike. You have to be seriously delusional to think that people at pig farms, or any other farm, do what they do i…
/r/PussyPass17/02/16 09:48 PM
9

Comparing that to people torturing animals for fun is far-fetched at best.
/r/PussyPass17/02/16 01:48 PM
54

Oh yeah I forgot how in animal farms they torture animals for fun, and leave them to die while laughing at their demise. They chop them up while they scream in pain, and try and prolong their torture for as long as possible. Or maybe it's just something that you think happens, but doesn't.
/r/PussyPass16/02/16 11:20 PM
12

In this context, being "like that" is essentially being someone who, after a divorce, would try and get the best possible outcome for themselves after they no longer love and possibly hate their ex-partner. It's not an anti-woman argument, but rather an anti-marriage argument, at least as I see it. One goes out to assume all men are the worst, treating everyone as a small sliver of the population. The other goes out to assume that a breakup is possible (and perhaps even likely) sometime in the f…
/r/MensRights06/02/16 10:56 PM
13

Doesn't have to be the woman starting the divorce, court is still gonna fuck you over.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 10:49 PM
146

If he thinks innocent people should be imprisoned to make up for criminals who get away, he should start with himself and confess to a crime he didn't commit. If only idiots decided to lead by example...
/r/MensRights06/12/15 02:06 AM
3

In my old school's PE class, you had to complete a mile in 8:30 (9:00 for women) to get the minimum score in endurance, below 7:00 (men and women) to get the highest.
/r/PussyPass28/11/15 09:19 AM
7

Oddly reminiscent of ASOIAF, either join the Night's Watch or face your punishment...
/r/MensRights08/08/15 10:25 PM
36

Yup, he has no issues pointing out problems with the MRM as well, and the way he speaks about it makes it seem as though he's NOT an MRA, just someone with some sanity to realize the MRM makes valid points (but that he's no activist)
/r/MensRights05/08/15 02:51 PM
4

You don't even need to go that far: men have to follow strict clothing (dark suit, generally) and women can wear skirts or even shorts.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 11:28 PM
3

If you take the possibility of divorce out of the equation, marriage ends up being beneficial in general, with tax benefits, having more responsibility over the other person should they be sick, etc. Divorce laws are what fucks everything up, and are personally the only reason I don't want to get married. If only things were fair, rather than "if you get fired you're gonna end up in jail because you can't pay wife-support" (splitting the kid's expenses is something I'd expect and fully support, …
/r/MensRights27/06/15 10:55 AM
16

I think it was being satirical.
/r/MensRights20/06/15 02:11 PM
1

One of the problems of the law, but if it weren't like that I think it'd be prone to abuse: how will you determine whether the person lied about their age? What if they had lied about their age in the past, but told the truth before the act and the act carried on regardless? I think it's more of a "kids might do wrong shit, make sure the person you're with isn't a kid". It's messed up, sure, but you get into an area full of loopholes if it weren't so. It's a way of going "all sex with children i…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 11:46 AM
3

The "without access to internet" part of the punishment, just what? What the heck kind of punishment is limiting someone's access to the internet? Essentially, that person is mostly not allowed to use smartphones, non-specialized computers, and cannot work in any position that requires internet access, or uses any sort of internet-based communication (i.e. emails). And the crown jewel: "You went online, to use a fisherman’s expression, trolling for women to meet and have sex with. [...] Totally …
/r/MensRights17/06/15 09:04 PM
15

I got banned for saying, right after the mattress girl shit started, that we should wait for more information to come public before we start going after the guy's life and branding him a rapist.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:34 PM
4

FatPeopleHate, the main subreddit this censorship is about.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 03:59 PM
14

I'm kinda neutral in regards to the subreddits being banned: as long as they don't break any laws, and aren't directly causing harm (or inciting it) I couldn't care less about whether they exist or not. What I do care, however, is about their right to exist according to the policies reddit USED to have, and reddit being a website I visit frequently, how these policies changing will affect reddit as a whole. Reddit's stance, however, can't be that of neutrality anymore. Either they adopt a "hands…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:48 PM
67

They've stepped into a pool of quicksand. If they don't backtrack their bans within 24 hours, or something of the sort, then consider this the official beginning of the end of reddit. Not only will they be taking in blows from every direction: people who approve of the bans who dislike other subs (arguably more damaging subs) not being banned, people who disapprove of the bans, and trolls who just want to create a bigger mess. If this is the way it's headed, I'll probably be making a couple of r…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:21 PM
3

Sort of. When it comes to people accused of rape, society treats that accusation as proof that they are guilty in and of itself, and regardless of what the courts decide they are still considered rapists.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 12:32 PM
3

I know, I was just pointing how what they were doing was not just lumping MRAs and TRPs together, but that they were even making stuff up to make us look even worse.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 12:03 AM
12

Red Pill doesn't even defend the use of drugs to rape women.
/r/MensRights07/03/15 11:04 PM
4

Some animals are more equal than others.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 11:05 PM
10

I meant in regards to what was prosecuted, the law is what decides what someone should be prosecuted for. Now, whether we agree about the law or not is a different thing, but I meant in regards to what was being prosecuted.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:55 AM
41

According to the legal system, he's a victim. Whether he felt victimized or not is irrelevant, the law states he's a victim, so it should be prosecuted as such.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:46 AM
6

Men are so oppressive they're a majority even when they're not. (0.99 men per each woman in NZ, 1.00 for Australia)
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:20 PM
3

Even if the baby was born on November 6th 2001, it'd still be "1 year-old" on August 18th 2003. One year and 9 months.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 09:50 AM
6

There is a large pool of tumblrfeminists who think that if you're being criticized it's because you're onto something great. Hitler? Stalin? Frieza? WHAT WERE YOU UP TO, WHAT DID YOU DISCOVER.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 09:48 AM
1

Based myself on /u/MastaBlasta925 's quote: "13% of rape victims commit suicide"
/r/MensRights17/09/14 03:37 PM
1

I was assuming they had a 100% success rate. That is, even if they didn't succeed at first, someone who attempted to suicide once WILL succeed later on. I don't have any statistics to back anything else, but if for example only 30% of women who attempt suicide actually die (either in that attempt or another one), then we'd have possibly something as high as a 10% attempted suicide rate for women.
/r/MensRights17/09/14 03:35 PM
8

It becomes even stranger when you mix it with other stats. So, 13% of all rape victims commit suicide. 1 in 5 women (sometimes 1 in 4 but I'll use 1 in 5) are raped. Therefore, 13% of 20% of all women commit suicide. Almost 3% of all women commit suicide. Since men commit suicide at a rate of 3:1 (although according to Wikipedia some sources state up to 10:1, but I'll go with 3:1 which is the most used one), then approximately 8% of all men commit suicide. Seems legit.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 10:00 PM
8

Being lied to about being on the pill or having your condoms punctured, but still your fault? Yet somehow male BC isn't needed? Thanks for proving that male BC is needed with your blue-pill reasoning.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 08:04 PM
0

Whining? I'm presenting facts to you: reasons for why male BC is needed. Grow up, seriously. Let me know when you decide to unplug yourself, because for now women are so far up your ass I can't even see them anymore. The fact that complete abstinence, or sterilization, are the only ways to avoid being forcefully made a father is disgusting. But you don't seem to think so, women should be able to control our fates, for some reason. Bring on the male BC.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 07:51 PM
6

Sure. Then I also ask you that you never use condoms. Trust that your partner doesn't have STDs. Trust that your partner is responsible. Trust that your partner isn't lying to you about contraception. That's a lot of trust I'm unwilling to put on a chick I might've met just a few hours ago. But I already know your answer: "keep it in your pants". It's always the man's fault. Woman lied? Man's fault for not keeping it in his pants. But since you seem to believe women are never like that, and that…
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 07:24 PM
1

Although they did say they accept condoms if used to stop STDs from spreading, but they reject it as a contraception method. I think that was a good move.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 05:40 PM
10

Trashy women exist everywhere. Even if it's just 1 in 100, it's still one that can easily ruin your life. Also, trashy or not, you'll find millions of women who'd be willing to have a successful man's baby and call it a deal. Steady income for 18 years for taking care of a kid? Hard to turn that down, especially since that "steady income" can be several times above the average income if the guy is rich. But if with you it's okay to have women grab you by the balls and have total control of you, …
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 03:23 PM
2

(I'm curious to see if what the Catholic Church has to say. They are pretty pro-male but anti-contraception.) My guess will be they're against it on the same grounds as before, but they will probably mention something along the lines of "but if women have it, men should have it too, but we still condemn it".
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 03:01 PM
12

You do, but how is complete and total abstinence a "power"? It's the only way a man can, with 100% certainty, avoid the liars who are willing to do anything to get pregnant nowadays, but it's a pretty fucked up way. Women also have the power to not be fucked, doesn't mean BC shouldn't exist. Same for condoms and STDs.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/14 02:59 PM
12

Off-topic but Napoleon was actually above the average height for his time. He was roughly 1.7m, or 5'7". The 5'2" figure (1.57m) comes from improper conversions from french inches to english inches.
/r/PussyPass05/09/14 10:44 AM
1

I don't really mind spending 10 seconds writing that I think it's bullshit, PLUS downvoting.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 10:36 PM
1

Exactly why I didn't reply anymore. Left the remark, because I'm expecting AMR or SRS to pick it up and say "HEY, LOOK AT WHAT THE MRAs ARE SAYING!".
/r/MensRights04/09/14 09:34 PM
3

Except misandry. Because misandry don't realz.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 08:15 PM
2

Yeah, I'm not agreeing with that. That's dumb as shit.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 08:11 PM
5

But what about their mothers, wives, sisters, daughters!? /s
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:52 PM
5

Does that really matter? Are women incapable of committing suicide? No, women simply pick, generally, methods which do not guarantee success, and this is because men are taught not to ask for help, while women are taught to do so, which clearly reflects in the suicides. Or, as /u/baskandpurr says: Women tend to use methods which allow for second chances. Their suicide attempts are a 'cry for help' because they know they will get help. Men are taught that they should not ask for or need help. Nob…
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:51 PM
2

Yeah, trying to convince an "idiot" that people threatening to falsely accuse men, and it having a shot at working because even if they're not convicted their lives are ruined by the media, isn't a men's rights issue. Nice to know that. So basically, false accusations are a men's rights issue, BUT threatening people with false accusations isn't.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:44 PM
2

there isnt anyone hunting men and accusing them of rape you idiot. Whenever someone isn't right, they always resort to insults. Keep it civil, or otherwise you've already lost your entire argument. what this is really like is a white guy robbing a black guy and then everyone yelling racism. No, it'd be like that if the system was designed in such a way that threatening black guys with weapons wasn't seen as problematic. Then, once someone threats a black guy with a weapon AND asks him for money …
/r/MensRights04/09/14 04:21 PM
2

People use false accusations as a way to rob people, not an issue? Why? Because they were punished? That's like saying it's not a racial issue if there are lynch mobs hunting people of color, since the people in those mobs are being arrested.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 01:07 PM
2

Here's the key aspect of your answer "if asked". If asked, feminists would say they don't support it. In fact, they'd end up redirecting the criticism. But they ONLY criticize it if they feel they are in "danger" of being associated with these types of feminists. In all other scenarios, they're okay with it. They're not going to oppose it. They either sit down, quietly, and when someone asks them directly about it, "NAFALT!", or they support them. Also, haven't seen it endorsed, ever? Then you'v…
/r/MensRights25/08/14 01:58 PM
46

This sort of thing is pure bullshit. The worst sort of crimes against humanity, when against men, is somehow acceptable and not a problem: forcing the disappearance or severe reduction of a group of people through any means whatsoever (genocide); genetic manipulation (illegal on humans); kidnapping; torturing; raping; enslaving. All acceptable, that is, if the victims are men. And yet, feminists like this aren't criticized by other feminists. Nope, they're supported.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 07:23 PM
1

I stand corrected then. I had assumed that they were being backed by examples in previous situations, in which they had given food to different people and watched the results, or something of the sort.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 11:19 AM
2

No no I meant in regards to the broken windows. Sorry for the confusion. Also, with over 40% of DV victims being male (if counting only adult DV victims, otherwise it goes to something like 46%), I don't think going for statistical data is the best way to behave. "Statistically speaking, 6 out of 10 aggressors are male. So, we're from now on arresting all men in DV scenarios". Change that to any other crime and you realize how dumb it is: "Men are approximately 70% of all murderers, so we're now…
/r/MensRights23/08/14 11:53 PM
5

"He had it coming" was something the cops would say, I'd imagine.
/r/MensRights23/08/14 08:41 PM
3

White knights aren't as bad as AMR.
/r/MensRights17/08/14 08:05 PM
4

Your feelings don't constitute an argument in favor of default circumcision because they'd actually be overturning the wishes of those who don't want to be circumcised, whereas the feelings of those who don't want to be circumcised do not make you unable to get one yourself. If babies aren't circumcised by default and you still want to be circumcised, you can. If babies are circumcised by default and you don't want to, you can't (already done, nothing you can do). Basically, your personal story …
/r/MensRights13/08/14 09:43 PM
12

I'm an atheist but seriously, shut up. Making him a nonbeliever doesn't make his life any better. Let him believe what he wants to. Unless he's making the world a worse place because of his religion, no reason to 'convert' him. Faith gives people hope, and more often than not, a reason to be good. Believe whatever you want to believe, as long as you're not an asshole about it. For all I care, you can worship a pink unicorn.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 12:27 AM
170

Still waiting for that federal program that gets women into coal mining... Or any male-dominated industry that isn't a nice cozy office job.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 07:52 PM
2

Made me chuckle
/r/MensRights08/08/14 02:26 PM
3

TIL that men are able to voluntarily control their erections, at all times, and that having an erection is a sign of sexual consent to any female present, regardless of anything the man might say or do which would say otherwise. /s I wonder if "yo, dat bitch was wet" will hold up in court for male-on-female rape? Since being "wet" is the female equivalent to an erection, I can rape any woman, provided they are wet, since if being hard is irrevocable consent from a man, being wet should be irrevo…
/r/MensRights04/08/14 09:17 PM
1

Quite a few feminists started endorsing Nivea, and telling people to buy their products to make up for the male boycotting as a result of their male shaming. Example: http://evolve-today.tumblr.com/tagged/Nivea
/r/MensRights03/08/14 07:04 PM
3

Legal foreplay?
/r/MensRights01/08/14 07:15 PM
2

Anyone should treat him as innocent until he's proven guilty. That's like, how the law works (or how it should work)...
/r/MensRights15/07/14 01:13 AM
9

You can literally see, on her own footage, the points being deducted when she kills the women. And that was a pretty big hit on the score.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 01:43 AM
16

"Lets not forget how it objectifies women by portraying them as pieces on a playboard that you're supposed to just order to do the things you want." "Err, everyone is a piece, that's how the ga--" "STOP DERAILING!"
/r/MensRights12/07/14 01:39 AM
1

And I have no doubt they'll find a way to make this a problem about women. I mean, if Hillary Clinton manages to say that women, because they lose their husbands/sons/fathers, are the primary victims of war and not the men who die, I have no doubt men being unemployed or with lower incomes can be turned into a problem (for women).
/r/MensRights12/07/14 12:48 AM
20

Do not sign absolutely ANYTHING that states you raped her unless YOUR LAWYER, not the mother's, not the adoption service's, YOUR LAWYER, the one that only benefits from protecting YOU, says you should. Signing that is legally equivalent to a confession: you'll be confessing to a crime you never committed.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 02:47 PM
1

His name is Poperiarchy, with an unverified 1-day-old account. It's a troll.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 01:50 PM
1

Even if the body is ready, and the person wants it, the teacher is in a position of power. It's illegal. It's to avoid things like being coerced, or being biased because of the relationship.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 08:36 PM
1

Of course it is. It's less stable. Try cutting a cardboard Y and getting it to stand up, much harder than getting an X to stand up! The Y chromosome is simply corrupt! /s
/r/MensRights06/06/14 07:32 PM
1

It's a teacher having sex with a student. Regardless of whether the student wants it or not, it's still against the law, since the teacher is in a position of power.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 07:17 PM
5

100% of all female victims of inter-gender murder were killed by men, how can you not see that's a major problem!? Misogynist pig!
/r/MensRights01/06/14 12:45 PM
6

So, basically, a radio station broadcast designed to publicly bully people (men only? dunno) who attempt to hit on other people (women only? dunno). How nice it must be to hit on a girl who you don't realize isn't interested, and then hear your own voice on the radio. If as much as a single person entered in any sort of depression because of that, the radio station should be sued for every penny. Publicly shame people who hit on you, then "oh my god why doesn't anyone hit on me!?".
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:38 PM
1

Get, for, example, the raw CDC data, then look at the categories "forcibly penetrated" and "forced to penetrate". The difference is of 3000 cases, which, in over a million, is negligible. Also, the CDC clearly states that the definition of rape they use is "forced penetration of the victim", which rules out female on male rapes. I will reply to this when I get home and have the link, if nobody does that before I get home.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 12:29 PM
1

I think it's more common when you're talking about the so-called "nice guys". They treat women like princesses, and feel that they're entitled to get said women because they've treated them nicely. And if you look at things like every single fairy tale, you'll see why they might be conditioned to think like this: white knight in shiny armor saves princess from demise, and they live happily ever after; nice guy treats woman like princess, and they live happily ever after (not?) I think it's ridic…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 12:16 PM
16

There are some people I know who act that way. Basically, it's a direct consequence of the "man up" and things alike. "If you don't do X you'll never get a girlfriend" -> "I did X, where's the girlfriend?" Personally, I think that it's a culmination of all the things society expects of men, and for which the reward is usually, well, "women". I kind of understand those types of men: they fell exactly into their gender role of being the provider, but women don't find them attractive or simply aren…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:43 PM
3

I've stored it for reading, although I'm doing it more for the "what goes through the mind of a killer" rather than "is he part of the MRM".
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:25 AM
5

It's going through a far-fetched connection. Basically, having certain subscriptions on YouTube was "linked" to him being misoginistic and wanting to be alpha, which for some reason lead to TRP, and, as usual, it is assumed that TRP = MRM, and so he is assumed to be an MRA. I really don't see what's the point of these bullshit comparisons or talking about what group he belongs to, as if his wrongdoings are in any way fault of the group he was in. Hell, he might've not even be in the group, they'…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:18 AM
2

Yes. Lots of conclusions can be drawn, but saying MRM = TRP is wrong, because most people here don't identify themselves as TRP, and most TRP don't identify themselves as MRM. We're two different groups with similar topics of interest, but different manifestations of that very interest. Any attempt to associate us because of a minority that overlaps is ridiculous, the same way you can't associate MRM to TumblrInAction... And guilt by association is inherently bad, and hilarious. Feminists attemp…
/r/MensRights21/05/14 12:46 PM
15

AMR are already concluding that all MRM are TRP, even though they're less than 10%. Who would've guessed? sigh
/r/MensRights20/05/14 08:50 PM
1

If it's a "truth" and a "fact", then you should have absolutely no issue providing reputable sources and peer-reviewed papers.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 01:01 PM
3

This is brilliant. I don't really have much of a commentary to make other than that. Reading through it all shows how some arguments really are stupid.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 07:24 PM
0

Main disadvantage I'd see with this would be certain courses being made man-only or woman-only. For example, if [insert course here] didn't have enough males interested, it wouldn't be available for any man, even if lots of women were interested in it. By limiting colleges to gender, you'd also indirectly limit certain courses to gender: "I'm sorry, you can't become a professional [something] because not enough men like that." But fighting for gender segregation would reveal their true skin, so …
/r/MensRights19/05/14 06:13 PM
21

It'd count as who built them, I guess? I'm starting to realize how many things would say "built by men", and already expecting a "stop oppressing us with your inventions" response...
/r/MensRights19/05/14 03:41 PM
41

Am I the only one who started imagining how ridiculous society would be if things contained the gender that harvested/built it?
/r/MensRights19/05/14 02:57 PM
1

"All these horrible men falsely accusing these poor girls just because they were successful and intelligent!"
/r/MensRights17/05/14 10:20 AM
1

But wouldn't saying "that's stupid because you're crazy" be ad hominem? It's, I think, what people are doing: since it's Katie Hopkins saying it, they're deeming the point as invalid.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 08:54 PM
3

Although attacking the 'argument' based on who speaks it is a fallacy (ad hominem), but yes, if it had come from a source with a better 'reputation' it would've had a better impact, or at least not put aside because "she's crazy, she says crazy things, so this is also crazy".
/r/MensRights16/05/14 11:36 AM
2

What exactly is the line? Considering we can't watch it unless we're from the UK, a quote would be great
/r/MensRights15/05/14 02:31 PM
2

Just to correct you: the girls were taken because they were being educated, not because they were girls. Boko Haram targets western education. They weren't targeted for being women, they were targeted for being schoolchildren: just like the boys before them who were killed were also attacked because they were in school.
/r/MensRights15/05/14 01:19 PM
1

Makes sense. Either way, breast cancer affects, most commonly, women. Having such an enormous effort put into it while basically neglecting the other forms of cancer, seems pretty wrong. Only other form of cancer I know that gets attention that could be put close with breast cancer would be lung cancer, but even then, not entirely sure on what the funding on it is. It's probably bigger than breast cancer, though, but I don't have any figures.
/r/MensRights15/05/14 06:41 AM
2

Jobs aren't the only things that factor into life expectancy. Things like healthcare, social assistance, etc, is mainly directed towards women. Women have a fund 8x larger directed at them in healthcare alone: and this isn't even taking into account research or campaigns in that field. For example, prostate cancer gets less than 1% of the funding that breast cancer does. How many people does it kill? 92% of what breast cancer does. But, back into jobs. Women won't take up the jobs in mining, so …
/r/MensRights14/05/14 09:44 PM
14

I think turning the fact that men die, on average, 6-8 years earlier, into a problem which puts women as victims is pretty god damn awful.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 07:32 PM
20

Whether they entered retirement single or end up outliving their spouse, many elderly women end up facing the higher living costs associated with living on their own. In fact, only 45% of women 65 years and older were married in 2013, compared to 71% of men, according to Census data. I really enjoy the fact that men dying is turned into a problem for women. Poor women for having their husbands die earlier!
/r/MensRights14/05/14 03:38 PM
9

If it's a man being raped, it's a false accusation, apparently. Have you not heard? Men can't be raped! Hurr durrr rape culture! Patriarchy!
/r/MensRights13/05/14 05:20 PM
5

She's one of the few self-proclaimed feminists who I actually like: argues with facts, not with feelings; is always calm; goes straight to the point and is able to criticize bogus statistics even if they benefit her "movement", among other things.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 10:14 AM
5

Probably wouldn't be a divorce for me because of the first kid, who I would probably be unable to get custody of.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 11:14 AM
7

Be careful, you might get PTSD from the insults for saying that.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 11:03 AM
2

I might begin referring to the policing feminists as "Big Sister", fits them perfectly.
/r/MensRights24/04/14 01:28 PM
2

No only means no if you're a female. Actually, if you're a female, not saying yes means no (or at least, that's what they're fighting for), but as a male saying whatever you say is still "yes" (and they fight to keep it that way, by fighting criminalization of rape if the victim is male).
/r/MensRights24/04/14 01:26 PM
16

I'd place my bets on him having seen the posts elsewhere, but no longer finding them, possibly after SRS brigaded them.
/r/MensRights24/04/14 01:14 PM
1

And a different comment since it's a different thing: regarding your suggestion, that's interesting but extremely difficult to implement, and it could potentially increase corruption. For example, should the judge learn the name of the defendant through unofficial channels he could sentence him to a longer period. If he were accused of being biased, as long as there was no evidence of him learning who it was before the verdict, the accusations had nothing to base themselves on.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 05:54 PM
1

First awareness has to be raised: for any problem to be solved, people need to realize there's a problem. Unfortunately it might be several years (hopefully not decades) until this happens. Feminism directly opposes and stops any attempts to raise awareness towards unfairness in court rooms (see the boycotts on Canadian universities, on the talks of Janice Fiamengo, among others). After that is done, a change of mentality is needed. People need to start realizing that men aren't evil, that women…
/r/MensRights23/04/14 05:35 PM
5

I'd say it has something to do with women behaving as they should and getting help, but men being "taught" to cope with things since they're supposed to be "men", and real "men" don't need help.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 02:27 PM
2

You'd probably have to look at the law itself. And I wouldn't be surprised if there were ambiguities that would lead to things like both male lovers being sent to jail for having sex, or a woman being allowed to have sex with an 8-year-old girl without being punished.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 12:34 AM
1

Probably because they were written at a time when women raping would be unthinkable. At a time when women were thought to be the fragile and weaker sex, and as such there wasn't even any point in considering they could commit something like rape. These "laws", several centuries old, carried on and were probably never changed. Attempts to change these laws have been met with feminist uproars. And then feminists claim they're fighting for men's rights. Yeah, sure.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 12:29 AM
17

Simple "flowchart" for heterosexual relationships: 1) How old is the female? a) Under 13 - The boy is getting sent to jail (for life?) b) Under 16 - The boy is getting sent to jail (for two years?) c) 16 or over - Go to question 2 2) How old is the male? a) Under 16 - Female charged with indecent assault (no jail time?) b) 16 or over - You can legally have sex! If this isn't representative of a clear sexism in the law, I have no idea what is.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 12:16 AM
25

"When you tear out a man’s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say." - George R. R. Martin It wasn't in regards to any equity debate, but applies beautifully.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 11:28 PM
1

Unfortunately it's not like that. In most of the cases women are never accused of rape because they are always seen as victims, and as such, aren't seen as the offenders. The problem the poster was raising is that if having sex with a drunk person is considered rape (which according to many feminists, it is), then a drunk person having sex with an underage teen would get the teen in trouble (for rape), instead of the actual person committing a crime being the one in trouble. He was arguing again…
/r/MensRights20/04/14 06:59 PM
1

According to the law, no advantage is conferred by the gender, but everyone as well as their dogs know that it isn't like that.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 06:17 PM
3

Neither of them go to jail because women can't rape, but both of them go to jail for raping a woman, but none of them can go to jail because women can't rape, but both--- ERROR, COULD NOT COMPUTE
/r/MensRights20/04/14 06:16 PM
1

It was most likely a mix of different things. But some things are out of control by society (sibling rivalry), while others are/should be in control, such as school bullying. There's nothing we can do, as society, that stops people from having broken families. But we can put an end to bullying, at the very least in schools.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 12:28 PM
2

This is also a very insightful article/study for anyone who wishes to make a more in-depth read: http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
/r/MensRights17/04/14 10:39 AM
1

It was planned, and most people know it, but I think what most people are complaining about is, well, the lack of complaints. If it were a woman who had her shirt ripped off (even if she had a bra), it'd be one hell of a public spectacle, and whoever did it would be burnt at stake...
/r/MensRights17/04/14 12:59 AM
2

Amir..?
/r/MensRights17/04/14 12:54 AM
14

Major problem with bullying, at least towards boys, is that they're told they're supposed to be men and grow up. If they complain about bullying, they may even be told things like "man up". To a certain extent, patriarchy is what causes the issue. But feminism isn't the solution, that's for sure. These boys need to know that people care about them and that nothing is wrong if they ask for help against bullies. This sort of crap needs to end. A 11 year old having suicidal thoughts is alarming, to…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 11:25 PM
1

Hence the idea that I'm criticizing. I'm not building any laws, but there should definitely be regulations when it comes to how far you can take sexism, but that's my opinion. Things that are morally wrong usually end up becoming illegal: racism is a recent and strong example. Sexism should be next in line. It's not an issue I have with this hostel in particular (which I'll never visit, personally) but with society and businesses in general. As far as I know, there's no law stopping sexism, no m…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:38 PM
2

"Please don't eat off the ground lady, this is a formal company meeting, and the floors might even be contamin---" "STOP OPPRESSING ME YOU MISOGYNISTIC PIG!"
/r/MensRights16/04/14 01:18 AM
1

That's not what I've been saying, so please do not distort my words. I'm simply saying that discriminating customers based on their gender shouldn't be accepted in general, especially if they make remarks such as the ones they did. If a business were refusing customers because of their race, it wouldn't be accepted by anyone. But a business refusing customers because they're male seems to be accepted for some reason? They can run their business the way they'd like provided they don't break any l…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:50 AM
1

If it's a business that is selling something and turning a profit, I'd probably say no. If it's just a place paid for by the people who "hang out" there, there shouldn't be any laws dictating who you are allowed to hang out with. But even then, a country club is very different from a hostel. The country club is basically a social gathering: a big group of friends. A hostel resembles a shop more than it resembles a country club.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:24 AM
1

Sure, they can, but being able to doesn't make it acceptable. They could make it so that the room was for white people only: I'd love to see the public outrage on that... Denying business to people because of their gender should be as accepted as denying people business because of their race.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:09 AM
1

Even after posting that second quote, you still talked about inefficiency in allocating resources, so I don't get what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 06:41 PM
1

Do they lose anything from renting those to men as well? Those obviously refers to the "female-only rooms" It's not about making a men's only floor, it's about not making a women's only floor. Keep it for both genders [...] Can it get more explicit than that?
/r/MensRights15/04/14 06:10 PM
2

How is it inefficiently allocating resources. How does NOT refusing male customers suddenly make it inefficient? I never said they should make a male-only dorm, but that instead of having their female-only dorms, they make those gender neutral. I have no idea where are they would be inefficiently allocating resources by allowing a potential customer to rent a certain room instead of saying "no, sorry, you're male". I'm not saying they should say "no, sorry, you're female", I'm saying they should…
/r/MensRights15/04/14 06:00 PM
2

It's not about making a men's only floor, it's about not making a women's only floor. Keep it for both genders and problem solved.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:54 PM
6

Even if there wasn't a demand, there's no need in making "girls only" rooms. That's simply sexist, because even if there is no demand, even ONE group of males who'd want it in the entire world, they wouldn't be able to get it because of their gender. And that's sexist. Do they lose anything from renting those to men as well? No, unless they're being sexist, which they are. Any business that refuses clients because of their genders is sexist.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:48 PM
1

Or those who are simply forgotten? Unless a bot was built. Even then, it's probably harder to do than adding simple authentication measure (like other people are discussing!)
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:42 PM
8

Or maybe because you're bringing up that point in a completely irrelevant scenario. We're discussing false statistics being spread by feminists, and you decide to bring up that we're spreading on hate and advocating for male supremacy. Even if it were true, which it isn't, it'd still be completely irrelevant for this specific discussion.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:29 PM
11

Blatantly insulting a movement because of statistics which were brigaded is acceptable for you? We can't show any sort of outrage from being insulted publicly, by a person who can be considered a public figure with some influence? I guess it's because we're MRA, and not feminists. If it were feminism getting insulted even Saudi Arabia would've stepped in to defend it.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 05:24 PM
8

Good luck trying to get a reply on that website. She's notorious for censoring anyone who disagrees with her, making it seem like everyone actually agrees.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 05:17 PM
1

Because the so called third sector (sorry if that isn't the name anymore), the one that is basically about services, has a larger percentage of women than of men. And that sector is growing, while others are either remaining the same or shrinking. That being said, assuming that both men and women are entrepreneurs, there will be more businesses created by women than men. And quotas are an attempt to distort reality by searching for equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity. I've oppose…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 03:39 PM
1

The "study" was about the willingness to get married, not actual marriages, as far as I understood. Actual marriages would always be inconclusive as long as heterosexual marriages comprise a huge portion of all marriages (not an actual statistic, but they're probably like 99%?).
/r/MensRights14/04/14 09:37 AM
1

If the purpose is to keep trials moderated by the community, then keep names of the involved secret until the trial. There is absolutely no point in making the names public before formal accusations are even made, or while investigations are being conducted. When it goes to trial, sure, names are put out, but why should someone be publicly shamed even if it ends up not going to trial for lack of evidence? Or if the accused is cleared? The current system, with absolutely no secrecy, only promotes…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 01:19 AM
13

And there's nothing that you can do about it right now. You can only attempt to change the mindset. If you, as a woman, do not get your promotion (even if you DON'T deserve it), society will immediately go for "Oh yeah she didn't get promoted because she's a woman! Oppressors! Bigots! Patriarchy! Boo!". If you, as a male, do not get a promotion (even if you deserve it), society will bash you if you complain: "Oh you just think that because you're a man you should've gotten the promotion instead …
/r/MensRights14/04/14 01:06 AM
17

Feminists simply ignore the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome. Everyone should have equal opportunity, but forcing an equality on outcome is ridiculous. Not only does it fail at "equality", it skews statistics, reduces overall performance, and increases possible abuses of the system. Why would I, as an employer, promote my best employees if I could then be taken to court for not giving "equal pay"? And why would I, as an employee, give my best if I couldn't be rewarded for i…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 12:51 AM
3

Individuals define a group when the group itself does not condemn and/or even endorses said individuals, which is what is happening with radical feminists and feminism.
/r/MensRights12/04/14 10:42 AM
2

So if there are insufficient women with knowledge in the area who want to take the job, they start getting random women with no knowledge about it whatsoever? This is going to be great, I hope they apply this to coal mining as well.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 11:36 AM
1

Forgot to mention something: they need to pass the physical tests though, and there might be a higher percentage of women who fail them than of men.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 02:19 PM
2

It's self-defense. It would've been aggression if she were defenseless and he attacked. In this case, he simply forced her to stop attacking him by showing her she'll be in trouble if he fights back.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 01:56 PM
1

In most civilized countries they are allowed to, they just don't want to. And drafts are mandatory for males only, even in countries where women are allowed to join the military. And it doesn't have to be soldiers only: compare male civilian deaths during time of war with female civilian deaths.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 01:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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