TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

outsider Archive

View 8 posts and 463 comments by outsider 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)
3

But who's going to tell women that they have to educate themselves not to objectify men? I don't fancy losing my job over it. In film courses I have taken, without fail a woman (professor or professor's wife) has told the class that it is good for feminists to objectify men in slash fiction, that it was wholly incomparable to the objectification of women, and to shut up if we disagreed.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 10:35 PM
0

Can you cite the source that most overweight people are not overweight due to improper calorie intake please? Can you cite the post where I said most overweight people are not overweight due to improper caloric intake?
/r/MensRights14/08/13 01:25 AM
-2

Where on earth did you get the idea that reducing your calorie intake can cause you to put on 50lbs of water weight? That's complete nonsense. It isn't nonsense. Your body retains water and fat if it thinks it is going into a starvation state. For people doing certain types of weight loss regimens it can trigger what is known as the 'whoosh effect' where a person hits a weight loss plateau and looses a bit of weight overnight. It is also a big cause of distended bellies which can get massive in …
/r/MensRights14/08/13 01:24 AM
1

Myelination reinforces nerve pathways to be quicker and more reliable. It doesn't do much with your body allocating nutrients etc.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 11:05 PM
1

It doesn't relate to muscle building ease. It relates to being slower to put weight back on and quicker to lose weight since certain biological functions are reinforced or made easier through myelination.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:42 PM
-7

That just isn't true by any stretch of the word. A mere 6 gallons of extra water retention, not that much by any means, will put you up 50lbs through a mechanism which can be triggered by not eating enough. Just because you want to go with your gut instincts doesn't mean you ought to. Cushings disease can, and does, lead to massive weight gain as well and not by eating too much but because your body stops metabolizing food properly.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:32 PM
0

You are right. It's called myelination. Once established certain physiological effects are more likely to remain established.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:56 PM
-2

i know you disclaimed it by saying most, however, it has more to do with a poor diet than eating too much. A generally low-fat high-fiber diet means you'll crap out stuff your body doesn't need unless it can convert some of it to fat. Failing to get enough sleep leads to weight gain, heightened stress gets your body to store more fat than it otherwise would, certain medications tend to get a person to retain weight, certain diseases also contribute to weight gain whether cushings disease or hypo…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:54 PM
-1

Like all of your earlier attempts you add exactly zero. The topics at discussion here were narrow at all times even with your bad arguments which attempted to expand them. I have been clear in most of my posts here about the relationship between strength and hunting. If you have failed to get that you will fail at many more things in life. And good riddance to you.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 06:39 PM
0

I already removed the first three links from the post when I noticed problems accessing them, leaving instead just the Google Scholar links from which I arrived at the three problematic links. From the Google Scholar page, one can easily access caches of text that demonstrate similar usage. Yes you have a habit of changing what you said after the fact. Adorable attempt at an insult, but no. This isn't even an insult. You are either an undergrad at best or you have had an unfortunate series of in…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 03:10 AM
0

What view would that be, exactly? It was unclear from context. You mean what I have previously quoted? What view? What ideology? Again, unclear. That men hunt because they are stronger. A point I have been clear if not persistent on. So yes, I used "unclear referent" in the same way as the phrase is used in the articles available via the Google Scholar links I provided. No, they refer to uses of words like 'this,' or arguments without context. Context which we have here. I know you thought using…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:59 AM
0

The first does not use it like you did and is just the first link you could pull from searching for your phrase, I can't access the second, the third has an expired session, the last are just Google Scholar search pages. It's funny how your referents get more and more unclear as you continue to defend just that phrase of your crap argument. Also the more and more you argue the more I get the feeling that you're an undergrad, at best.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:49 AM
0

EDIT: Go ahead, look up "unclear referent" or "ambiguous referent" in your article database of choice. You will find plenty of usages that exactly parallel my own. Nice try at insulting me, but you fail. Again. Just looked and I saw none. Plenty which use those phrases while referring to responses which just say 'this,' or ambiguous uses of 'it,' 'they,' and the sort. Not named articles or authors or whatever it is you are referring to. You've been a better example of your intended use than any …
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:32 AM
0

That makes no damn sense. I referred you to articles published in peer reviewed studies by author and title. My choice of them was obvious even from the title. You're just dragging your bad argument down even more now.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:19 AM
1

Wow, you are so full of shit I do not even know where to begin. If you are going to do nothing but misrepresent my statements and insult me, there is no reason for this to continue. I am done with this. I quoted you. I could continue to quote you contradicting yourself as well. As I said when i was on a mobile browser, you were done before you ever started since you had nothing to begin with just like the last time you accused me of being a petulant child. Good thing you continue that whole tren…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:12 AM
1

Cute straw-man, but I never made such a claim. If you read my points about strength-intensive activities in hunting, I primarily listed activities that are peripheral to the actual encounter with the prey. In fact, I even mentioned setting traps and snares. Save of course for where you specifically used wresting prey as a reason for men to hunt you mean. I brought up meat consumption because you mentioned that gathering provided most of the food for H-G's, which while obviously true, was entirel…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:00 AM
3

I'm coming back to this since I am no longer on the road and I have a computer in front of me. The claim I made is that women tend to the gathering because adult women in hunter-gatherer societies are almost always pregnant, nursing, or old. Hunting doesn't mix well with any of those. Hunters in hunter-gatherer societies tend to hunt with snares, poisons, or other technology since their prey is usually faster and/or stronger than them. Being stronger than a woman still doesn't mean that you're g…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 12:24 AM
-1

Sigh. I did not just ballyhoo (FTFY) about comparative strength differences between men and women. I have already provided examples of why those differences are important for hunters, and you have simply chosen to ignore them. You did and I'm on my tablet so you can go back under your bridge to chew your smug. Yes, men are on average stronger than women. That was not in question though it is the one and only thing you have demonstrated besides your unfamiliarity with anthropology. I can't think …
/r/MensRights26/06/13 11:07 PM
-1

You haven't provided an argument. You have said "men are stronger, hurrr," without considering the reasons why it is irrelevant because you have some romanticized view of hunter gatherers which you need to justify your failed ideology. Hunters don't wrestle animals down, they trap them, drive them off cliffs, mortally wound them and follow, or kill quickly. If you want to argue against established scholarship you need to do more than bellyhoo about men being stronger than women.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:25 PM
-3

Yeah, you have no idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:37 PM
-2

If you had a degree in anthropology you would be far better better on this topic and you wouldn't have jumped to an illogical inference about the difference in strength and whether that difference matters when hunting. You also laughably missed how strength is more important for gathering which supplied the bulk of food for every h-g society other than the Inuit. Peddle your BS to people who don't know better.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:50 PM
-2

As someone with a masters degree in anthropology, you're wrong and are advocating a long discarded view with unrealistic views of strength and one's sex.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 05:30 PM
-1

Strength has little to do with hunting. Most hunters in h-g societies used their brains or endurance more than brute strength and what application there is for strength, women are plenty capable of.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:48 PM
3

You shouldn't be getting any downvotes here. Your responses are pretty much right on the mark. Different hormonal balances can at best incline us towards certain things, culture itself informs us of what those things are. The generally held explanation for the hunting roles for men and the gathering roles for women in hunter-gatherer societies is basically one of pragmatism. Women in hunter-gatherer societies are very commonly pregnant or nursing a child which is not the sort of thing that lends…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 08:53 AM
1

Experiments can be unreliable if you are unable to gather an appropriate sample size and/or fail to control for various factors.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 08:35 AM
0

Than they should have been linked to instead of this piss poor one. My MS is in the social sciences and I've never come across any sort of story to justify the charges here.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 04:11 PM
0

No, this is more a case that can be analogized as "those who golf weekly will get better grades in high-school," while ignoring the economic factors that both allow someone to golf weekly and get better grades. The pretense that height is a causal factor (besides maybe in mate selection and even that has plenty of arguments against) is specious.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 03:53 PM
1

It is what it is. But what it is, isn't what you're saying it is.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 03:38 PM
1

You're right the world is engineered for short people. Hell, I can rarely even go out without some short person trying to pick a fight with me. You really need to contend with the confirmation bias present in a guy who is 5'2" complaining about people taller than him who uses zero controls for why some people make more money. Most people don't get tall with poor nutrition. It's an economical factor for most tall people. Poor diets stunt growth in most people. But hey, you're too busy saying how …
/r/MensRights24/11/12 03:22 PM
0

I'm 6'7" and grew out of the possibility of a number of careers. I've grown up in an area that thinks tall men are scary and where if I even raise my voice I risked the police being called on me. I get handcuffed if I get pulled over for going 2 miles over the speed limit. Yeah, I'm so advantaged. Oh what's that? You need me to get something off the top shelf? Oh boy my favorite. Some shallow women are more attracted to me based on my height? Wow, just what I want in my life, a shallow woman who…
/r/MensRights23/11/12 02:54 PM
1

Not being sarcastic. There are good reasons to address different groups which share a problem as different groups.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 10:24 AM
1

You're missing the point. Discarding categorization would, for a more distant example, lump colds, the flu, allergies, sinus infections, spicy food, and probably a handful of other things all together since they can all involve runny noses. Refusing to differentiate between some fine habanero sauce and the flu should have some rather obvious issues.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 10:23 AM
58

Because if you don't address things sorted in categories you will fail at predicting and mitigating those damages. If there is a reason for men to commit suicide more often it can't be adequately addressed so long as people expect it to be subsumed into a category-less tragedy.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 01:20 PM
1

Just as a point to make, make sure the admins have been informed of this before assuming they're just ignoring it. Though there's really nothing defensible about r/creepshots.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 02:22 AM
2

Claiming that the size difference is what keeps men from getting hurt is bs btw because women can be quite fierce even when considerably smaller than their opponent. It also does not state how much of that initiated violence is in defense of a perceived threat. (one does not have to be physically assaulted to physically defend, yes it can be confusing but it is the truth) That's generally reflected in studies which show that when serious injuries occur it is usually the man who is seriously inju…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:58 AM
3

That's actually pretty typical to let a person who was bailed out to stay out so long as the court feels the risk of more crimes being committed or trying to run away are low. They'll release people without needing bail posted as well if the jail is pretty full. "rape released on own recognisance"
/r/MensRights20/03/12 08:14 AM
1

No I made it a point to not sign up. I had every intention of making a spectacle about it if I ever got flak for it.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 09:49 PM
1

Yes, I graduated with federal loans and also had a census job in 2000 (although they said I needed to be registered to work that job).
/r/MensRights16/01/12 07:24 PM
2

I never registered for selective services. Hasn't ever been an issue.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 06:05 AM
7

That's called a slippery slope argument. And you know, when basically all of their rights have already been taken away why would you expect complacence when their remaining few are infringed upon?
/r/MensRights11/01/12 09:09 PM
2

Never mind that women can show themselves to be just as bad as prison guards. Reminds me of Abu Ghraib.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 09:05 PM
2

No, it doesn't define the rapist as the person who is penetrating the other. It refers to the person who initiates the unwanted penetration no matter how slight.
/r/MensRights07/01/12 05:47 AM
6

So, sue them. http://www.hr.ufl.edu/eeo/sexharassment.htm http://www.aclufl.org/get_help/aclu_suggested_referral_list.cfm
/r/MensRights01/01/12 04:28 AM
1

It's quite a bit broader than that. Demonspawn linked you to a Wikipedia page citing specific statutes that are still on the books in New York. In fact it even grants the right to use deadly force for the situation in the OPs link.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 12:20 AM
3

Teach men to file complaints the same way women are taught to file complaints and things like this will go away.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 01:35 AM
1

It was a campaign talking abut how milk calms down PMSing women. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ipmts/this_new_got_milkmilk_helps_pms_advertisement_is/
/r/MensRights23/07/11 11:22 PM
6

That's all plea bargains are.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 06:16 AM
1

They might have something to say about someone trying to manipulate scores using spam tactics. In my experience they don't care at all.
/r/MensRights19/06/11 06:49 PM
0

Trying to correct for this deviation would be an estimate at best. All statistical analysis is estimation. Very good estimations but estimations nonetheless. As far as correcting for it, you would need to include a few questions relating to raises that are asked of employers and employees.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 12:51 AM
0

Then those studies have issues which should be made public. If simply asking for a higher wage is the main factor than you need to control for that.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 12:23 AM
3

How do you report it? Call your state labor department.
/r/MensRights09/04/11 10:42 PM
1

Sending a letter to the judge wont help you. If you need to contact the judge do so by proxy of a lawyer. Any contact you have with the legal system needs a lawyer that will vouch for you and protect you.
/r/MensRights08/04/11 06:06 AM
2

I always wish I could practice that kind of pacifism but I'm very bad at it.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 07:31 AM
-1

Maybe you shouldn't trust what every conspiracy theory website says. It's a sure sign of mediocre reasoning ability.
/r/MensRights02/03/11 10:15 PM
0

Lemme guess, you didnt request them to cut the umbilical cord either, but they did it anyways? Actually I cut the umbilical cords. They gave us the option of saving it for cord blood banking which we would have done if we were better off financially and since we didn't it went into the biohazard bins. And babies don't get vaccines right away nor do blood draws accompany them. Don't attribute a problem with Texas to a problem with the rest of the country. None of what you wrote or posted corrobor…
/r/MensRights02/03/11 07:32 PM
0

Neither of my kids have had blood draws. The X-Files is great fiction but it is fiction nonetheless.
/r/MensRights02/03/11 06:36 PM
3

That isn't at all how I'm reading it. Things my wife does piss me off and vice versa. Those situations lead to all manner of emotional rigamarole such that I'm not sure how you justify just dismissing it. It happens, it exists it's mentioned in passing in an article that tell women to stop being angry bitches and you're jumping to the defensive because she addressed human beings and their wholly human behavior. An here's the thing if you flip or don't flip the genders it's pretty good advice. Wo…
/r/MensRights16/02/11 02:13 AM
6

You read that with a much more negative light than I did. You never have self-doubts? It's not bashing someone to suggest that though they are human they will behave remarkably human.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 01:16 AM
2

That list would, with slight modification, apply perfectly well to my brother-in-law. Though he was raised in a house with mostly females. He goes on about how he just wants to have someone to love that will love him back which is perfectly reasonable. He then goes out and picks up on girls at a bar or tries to break up someone else's relationship and whines about only meeting shallow women.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 01:13 AM
2

Ugh. I was fixing up my credit when I got married and suddenly I found out my wife owes tons of bills and she had just gotten herself into a car loan with lame terms for a lame used car with problems. She had been putting most of it off and I wasn't going to have any of that so I made her call all the people and arrange payment plans for things she knew she owed and to get to the bottom of debts from random collection agencies that had no reason attached.
/r/MensRights08/01/11 09:46 PM
4

I don't really understand your headline. Where did she claim to know the correct anatomy of a cow?
/r/MensRights03/12/10 11:14 PM
2

You know it might be illegal to leave children unattended like that depending on age and state.
/r/MensRights16/10/10 02:11 AM
2

I would. So would someone else who won't tape that poor kid to a wall.
/r/MensRights02/10/10 06:29 AM
1

I still stick to straight razors here. It pretty much cleared up every skin issue I had and with practice took less time to shave and I got a better longer shave. Plus it's cheaper in very little time for DE or SE. I've got a SE that was from the late 1700s or early 1800s that shave great still and will shave great in another 200 years as long as it isn't left to rust and the DE are like what 6-15 cents a blade? I don't know why people still mess with cartridge razors. The switch away from those…
/r/MensRights20/08/10 05:56 PM
1

Call the cops on her for looking up child porn.
/r/MensRights20/08/10 01:57 AM
7

Get a double edge razor or a straight razor. There's a learning curve to it but you'll get less razor bumps and a better shave. It also might be a violation of sex discrimination laws in your state to require men to shave.
/r/MensRights20/08/10 01:25 AM
3

I had a lot of the same stuff happen to me except I did end up fighting back (and was arrested for it and decided to be homeless from 15 till I was 18). It's really lame to be in that spot. No one believes you, the people in a position of authority who should be helping you are actually the ones who will do the most harm to you. I'd get school to try to help me and then they would mostly just start saying it was all my fault (until they witnessed it first hand). Boys Town Hotline told me it was …
/r/MensRights10/08/10 08:59 AM
-6

What's 999? 911
/r/MensRights07/08/10 07:39 AM
5

I will move out of this country after I graduate college. Good luck with that with a DV conviction. :/
/r/MensRights27/07/10 06:38 AM
1

USAA is cheaper than any other insurance company in my experience.
/r/MensRights29/06/10 06:22 PM
-1

No I'm including the well established fact that some men pay less than some women.
/r/MensRights29/06/10 06:21 PM
-5

I paid less for two cars than my wife paid for one when we first got together. But that's more a USAA vs Geico issue I suspect.
/r/MensRights29/06/10 10:03 AM
3

More or less. It's using a more severe medicine for a not severe condition even if the medicine was appropriate at one point.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 10:52 AM
1

I think that sounds like a Dr. prescribing percocet for a broken arm and then deciding that one should keep taking percocet for headaches.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 10:08 AM
1

If I were the recipient of domestic violence and sought (and found) a temporary shelter I think I'd just assume it's location be a general secret. It isn't discrimination to give someone a safe place and if what one needs in a safe place is separation from a certain class of person so be it. That's the prescription and I'm not qualified to challenge it.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 10:07 AM
0

Interestingly that's one of the reasons why the Bush administration's writers used a lot of repetition in phrases and why political parties in general all share common catch phrases. It's a form of brain washing. This was thematic of pretty much all of the Marxist revolutions in Asia and their reeducation camps. Not to equate anyone of these groups with the other.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 04:02 PM
0

Geez, I'm really getting under your skin, aren't I? No. But it's keen to show you're a hypocritical whiny bitch. That's exactly what the moderator said, though. So it's not like your crazy confabulation about multiple constant downvoters. You can confirm with the reddit admins. You're persecution complex has no corroboration. In all seriousness, go get some sleep. You're embarrassing yourself. Right. Because your persecution complex is justified. Maybe you should stop responding? Maybe you shoul…
/r/MensRights29/05/10 02:08 AM
0

By the way, thanks for the downvotes, readers. I noticed that your new moderator has given you guys free reign to downvote what you don't want to hear, even when it's true. I'm sure you guys are all very proud of your ability to maintain the principles upon which Reddit was founded! Nice persecution complex there chuckles. I bet you'll have some really smart comment about this won't you?
/r/MensRights29/05/10 01:59 AM
3

I don't think a surgery should be done on a guy to make YOU happier. That's like saying we should start putting breast implant is newborn girls.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 06:00 AM
4

Make a birth plan and make sure your doctor is aware of it (You can use something like this). Also just don't let your son go anywhere without you. For both of my sons the doctors were made aware a bunch of time by verbal and written demands that neither son would be snipped and that I'd be violent towards anyone who tried. I think you made the good choice. I think my reasoning was basically similar in that you shouldn't perform surgeries without a good reason to do so and you shouldn't amputate…
/r/MensRights19/05/10 05:56 AM
1

You should file alimony precedings so you can maintain your same standard of living you enjoyed during your marriage. ;)
/r/MensRights09/05/10 08:08 AM
0

Good point. I was hella tired when I wrote that. Wait... the submission starts with "Federal Court" did I misread the article?
/r/MensRights04/05/10 05:48 AM
2

I think it is common knowledge but the statistical relevance seems it would be a sure thing for expert testimony under Federal Rules of Evidence #702 for opinion testimony.
/r/MensRights03/05/10 06:30 PM
7

Feminism, like racism or sexism is a preferential basis of reasoning for one gender. If feminists wanted equality they'd be equalists, practice humanitarianism or the like and their focus wouldn't be on women's issues but issues of human inequalities. But you are very probably right that this article has little to do with feminism.
/r/MensRights27/04/10 06:25 PM
17

I hate rape and makeup too! I'ma go downtown and wreck some stuff. Wait I don't think that's how it works.
/r/MensRights26/04/10 08:34 AM
1

Out of curiosity and as an aside can you name 10 accredited colleges (I'd even accept community colleges) that offer any sort of men's studies program?
/r/MensRights26/04/10 08:01 AM
8

Why is it so horrible to have an academic program oriented to explore men in context with men instead of men in context with... whatever? Why should a bunch of clearly self-interested feminists with no shortage of insults and other derogatory quips towards men even be considered when discussing a men or male studies program? Do the arguments really have to go along the lines of: A. This is bad and we want to change it. B. Ha fuck off already we have this field already. A. We have a field oriente…
/r/MensRights26/04/10 02:06 AM
1

OK, you've made a claim. Now show your proof.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 03:31 AM
2

Yeah I had a lot of say over that when I got asthma at 7 years old. Man why didn't I think of that. Actually I'm going to continue to support candidates who have my interest in mind when they cast votes. In otherwords you can GFY with your asinine and wrong generalizations. Insurance denied coverage to people for things they couldn't prevent before they were able to get insurance and then when those who are insured get sick they tend to get kicked off of the insurance. You're wrong and it's pret…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 03:26 AM
2

Shilling for the right. Great way to try to co-opt MRA into the Republican party. Great way to turn people away from it.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 10:36 PM
1

Your canned response does not fit the post you replied to.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 09:55 PM
1

No it isn't. The point is to expand the insurance pool and to engage in practices which reduce the amount spent on healthcare. The passage of this bill means I will actually be able to get insurance. It had nothing to do with if I could afford it or not it had to do with a preexisting condition. The passage of this bill means my two sons can get health insurance if they ever end up with asthma, diabetes or any of the other common ailments that are preexisting conditions.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 09:54 PM
3

In Firefox Tools>Options>Security>Saved Passwords>Remove All
/r/MensRights17/03/10 05:50 PM
6

If s#$% ever hits the fan you're best off not being around. If I was nervous of my wife pulling some crap like you seem to I'd assume fully that she had plans to empty the joint accounts to make things worse for me. I think ideally you'd have enough for a weeks stay at a hotel and then move in cost for at least a studio apartment. But absolutely next time she hits you go to the hospital and get checked out and every time she does that just go to the hospital. Pretty sure hospitals have regulatio…
/r/MensRights17/03/10 08:20 AM
23

Open a new bank account. Transfer all your money into it. Move out. File restraining order Get checked out at a hospital
/r/MensRights16/03/10 08:33 PM
2

Dove makes cleaning products and wants to market to people who will buy their products. Thus they survey cleaning habits so they can come up with some clearly demarcated tendencies. They then plan on how to market to the various groups largely independent of their marketing to the others.
/r/MensRights14/03/10 09:46 PM
1

which is exactly my point.
/r/MensRights05/03/10 07:55 PM
4

If you accuse someone of a crime and they suffer consequences for it without conviction for it often that is very clearly libel or slander. School debt isn't anything to screw around with and if you think someone should be expelled you should go the distance and actually pursue all charges in a criminal court. If some random accusation is enough to get you expelled form school the person being expelled should find a good tort lawyer and ruin some people's lives.
/r/MensRights05/03/10 12:47 AM
3

I actually don't see that as relevant unless the school has the same standards of guilt and evidence as a court of law.
/r/MensRights05/03/10 12:10 AM
2

Soooo... I guess the elephant in the room is that you must be religious?
/r/MensRights03/03/10 07:48 AM
4

Wow. What a first post.
/r/MensRights02/03/10 05:32 PM
-3

Let feminists concern themselves with dictionary.com definitions. What we need to focus o are the actual legal definitions of the various states.
/r/MensRights01/03/10 07:41 AM
4

It's actually amazing to me that his story is being carried.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 07:47 PM
2

You think that's bad? My mom had this nutty habit of knocking everything off every shelf and telling me to pick up my mess if she just had a bad day. I learned real fast to just not pick up my room and also how to handle being belted.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 04:57 AM
1

But none of these studies show what you are claiming they do. There really isn't anything that does show women doing more work than men. And actually it makes the exact opposite claim. That when a woman has a full-time job and the man doesn't the woman simply works less. So I don't see how you could have interpreted it differently since it was explicit in that claim.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 04:50 AM
3

Actually if you look at those reports most men and women, regardless of work situations, put in a near equal amount of work and have done so for a long enough time that people shouldn't still be perpetuating the myth of the "second shift" nonsense.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 02:35 AM
0

As I replied to your other post: What I have seen is women pretend they do more but actually the distribution is near equal. See: http://www.slate.com/id/2164268/ and the cited study http://www.nber.org/papers/w13000 http://www.ns.umich.edu/index.html?Releases/2002/Mar02/chr031202a Men and women do similar amounts of work but where it is done is different. It would be hard to argue that one's contribution was more important than anoter for the most part.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 02:16 AM
12

What I have seen is women pretend they do more but actually the distribution is near equal. See: http://www.slate.com/id/2164268/ and the cited study http://www.nber.org/papers/w13000 http://www.ns.umich.edu/index.html?Releases/2002/Mar02/chr031202a
/r/MensRights08/02/10 12:25 AM
4

If there is better research that draws a different conclusion, anyone here is free to post it. You mean like the second bullet point I posted earlier?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 07:10 AM
2

I didn't misread. I posted clarification for what was said wasn't there. I think maybe you should take a breath and not react inappropriately. But looking at it more closely (the whole article is available online) black men make up the highest risk group for spousal homicide. Read it however you want, I don't really care.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 04:32 AM
3

Relevant parts: Mercy, J. A., & Saltzman, L. E. (1989). Fatal violence among spouses in the United States, 1975-85. American Journal of Public Health, 79, 595-599. (Examined FBI figures regarding spousal homicides. During the 10 year period from 1975 to 1985 found higher murder rates of wives than husbands <43.4% vs 56.6%>. Black husbands were at the greatest risk of victimization. Spousal homicide among blacks was 8.4 times higher than that of whites. Spouse homicide rates were 7.7 times higher…
/r/MensRights07/02/10 02:32 AM
6

Entrenched baby-boomers is certainly an issue. That's who holds those positions by and large. Now look at graduation rates for their generation and for recent generations by gender.
/r/MensRights04/02/10 09:05 PM
2

There is a selection bias to start with. Females who never had sex were excluded and the coercion question includes items which are not strictly related to coercion. Thus it is certainly not 15% of all women but 15% under loose definitions of a very specific group. Pregnancy coercion was assessed using an investigator-developed assessment consisting of the following six items: “Has some one you were dating or going out with ever”: (1) told you not to use any birth control (like the pill, shot, r…
/r/MensRights02/02/10 06:34 AM
1

Seems more like an exercise of poe's law.
/r/MensRights10/01/10 04:18 AM
1

I didn't claim that. I claimed that strength has little bearing on how effective one can hit. That said there is no reason to put one gender in a different light as far as assaults go except that men are by and large much less likely to defend themselves.
/r/MensRights10/12/09 05:32 PM
1

I'm not sure why this snippet of my opinion raises such contention when my main point was no one should hit anyone regardless of gender.. Because you clouded it with erroneous gender infusion. But generally, women will be less likely to hit effectively be it by virtue of strength or experience. Strength has nothing to do with hitting effectively. Experience is had by either gender and in fact is a gender neutral experience.
/r/MensRights10/12/09 09:16 AM
1

stronger person can do more damage, is harder to defend against That's a misconception not a fact. If I had to fight someone, I'd take the skinny office worker over the ripped bodybuilder any day. OK. So you have more misconceptions. Point of order, Bruce Lee was skinny as hell and could hit quite a bit harder than the biggest bodybuilders. If I had to fight someone, I'd take the average woman over the average man any day too. You base this decision based on perception of strength. Strength has …
/r/MensRights10/12/09 08:40 AM
1

But you think the average guy is just stronger than than average chick? In this instance what does stronger have to do with it? The average person man or woman hits like a pillow.
/r/MensRights10/12/09 08:19 AM
1

So basically you now agree the difference is negligible?
/r/MensRights10/12/09 08:08 AM
2

OK. But why is it less likely? How does strength play into using a weapon?
/r/MensRights10/12/09 07:38 AM
1

How much stronger do you have to be before a knife can no longer cut you or a kick to the crotch doesn't hurt you?
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:00 PM
3

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/kidnapping Moving an inch is moving. A good lawyer should get charges reduced or removed depending on circumstances but yes you can absolutely go to jail for kidnapping for doing that.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:52 AM
3

State is a malleable word. :)
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:45 AM
5

I'm saying if you restrict someones movement like that you can be charged with kidnapping. It's not just about stealing kids in a van with a free candy sign. You would need to check your states laws but many, if not most states do operate n such a way.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:37 AM
7

Those suggestions turn into kidnapping charges.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:31 AM
10

So you've hit a woman Yup. Kick me in the balls and you're going down. I think it's an odd instinct to not hit someone back. In fact I'd say it's absolutely an instinct to hit someone back.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 07:27 AM
13

I've had a general rule of punching anyone who attacks me whether male or female, half my size or twice my size. The only exception really is a kid. Edit: My caveat is I don't go around attacking people ever. If I hit you it is because you struck me first.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 03:58 AM
-1

Bah you're an idiot and I'm not wasting anymore time on an idiot. Keep making things up and wondering why people accuse you of making things up.
/r/MensRights05/12/09 06:22 AM
-1

The topic was gender segregated education and that is what I discussed That's not what you discussed. You got your feelings hurt because the entire point of the american school system is to socialize children and to (hopefully) mold them into hard working members of society- not to actually "educate" them. You presume too much both about the point of school (actually that you say school isn't to educate means your opinion menas jack and squat) and about how I feel or what I've said. And an intri…
/r/MensRights05/12/09 06:02 AM
-1

Sorry. You can continue to play the victim. That wasn't the topic but if that's what you want to be, go for it.
/r/MensRights05/12/09 05:38 AM
-1

You aren't talking about the topic in the least. But hey attribute falsely to me anything you want. It only marks your future credibility. Now run along and let adults talk.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 07:30 AM
-1

No. I realized you wanted to talk about every other thing but the topic. When you can pay attention we can continue.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 04:06 AM
-1

Wow. You sure can take one topic to an unrelated one without even flinching. Must be nice with your head in that sand. Further discourse is useless when you are so interested in talking about everything other than the topic.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 12:02 AM
-1

Well I'm not a parent yet and probably won't be for a while (provided that this birth control shot really is as reliable as they say it is). So it isn't really fair to say that I have a "lack of participation" in the lives of people who don't even exist. But that's pretty socially Darwinian of you. Because someone has crappy parents, they deserve a life of social destitute while people with good parents continue to be pampered and have everything handed to them? No I'm not saying anyone deserves…
/r/MensRights02/12/09 11:30 PM
0

Yeah, in an ideal world that would be true. This is the real world, and though parents should do a lot of things, they usually wont. And I'm willing to let your children suffer for your lack of participation. It's up to schools to try to turn these neglected kids into reasonably sane and responsible members of society. No it isn't. Not everyone has the benefit of coming from a stable and loving home. That has nothing to do with the role of schools and parents. I'm sorry for children whose parent…
/r/MensRights02/12/09 06:28 PM
1

No, more accurately, why should it be my problem and not the boys problem? What makes them so special that they get a free pass on dealing with annoying preteen girls but I wouldn't? Because girls are creating the problem. Not the boys. But other girls should be forced to be subjected to it. Why? Because girls are creating the problem. I'm female. My whole point revolved around the fact that I'm a female who would have been miserable in an all female school. Right and I didn't come in with a dif…
/r/MensRights02/12/09 06:25 PM
1

Schools don't exist for socialization. They exist for education. Frankly, socialization is something parents should play a role in. I'm not willing to let my sons get poor educations so that others can get better ones. That's really the bottom line.
/r/MensRights02/12/09 06:17 PM
1

That's not really my problem. Why should I have to be grouped with them exclusively and be permanently distracted by their annoying behavior because I share similar genetic makeup with them? It's not your problem but it should be a boys problem? No. If girls are creating such a problem it is fair to say boys should be free from it. You just said you preferred socializing more with boys. It seems clear that you took that stance. I've known more than one guy who had these feelings about his male c…
/r/MensRights02/12/09 05:46 PM
0

Boys and girls interact differently among themselves and by the time they enter into the school system have begun integrating into gender roles. Whether it is biologically or culturally driven is irrelevant for this point. Thus as gender roles establish themselves different approaches work better or worse. If you take recess away girls do better (not that girls don't benefit from it) and boys do worse. That's a pretty simple difference right there. So simply in regards to recess; that binary dec…
/r/MensRights02/12/09 05:42 PM
1

Those same girls that annoyed you so much... what do you think their effect was on boys in the same school?
/r/MensRights02/12/09 05:19 PM
2

You seem to repeatedly make a premise and jump to a non-derived conclusion. Whether it's more closeted gays in an all male school or that you think MensRights is inherently more misogynistic (instead of markedly less misandristic) or that an all boy school just creates a bunch of boys who hate women.
/r/MensRights02/12/09 05:15 PM
3

You change the argument mid sentence. Blame yourself. Then pick yourself backup and familiarize yourself with what you want to argue about. And btw, you responded to me. Kind of hard for me to troll like that. Bah you suck at reddit markup. so then as a man you should understand that Women Infants Children is a poor name, Being that you are none of the above, but still participated. It's not a poor name. The people who make use of it are primarily women, infant and children. And if that's all th…
/r/MensRights28/11/09 01:29 AM
5

If you are unaware of how the program works you need to STFU and learn about it instead of jumping to an accusatory tone and making yourself and any who you convince to agree with you look like an ignorant jackass. Ironically you seem unaware and ignorant of the points made in this very argument you are engaged in. I'm not going to verse myself in everything about whatever cockamamy argument you invent on the spot based on your own profound absence of information. You've invented a ridiculous po…
/r/MensRights28/11/09 01:21 AM
4

I am a father who has used WIC to purchase formula for my first son. That you don't know it can work this way shows how dishonest you are in your approach to arguing. As in you begin arguing before you have anything but the most basic concept of what you are even arguing about. I've been anything but dishonest. You've been obtusely ignorant however.
/r/MensRights28/11/09 01:16 AM
2

It is a child nutrition program. As in pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers and later male and female children. There is nothing sexist about this unless pregnant men and breast feeding men are being turned away. Your grip is at best an example of Poe's Law. If you are unaware of how the program works you need to STFU and learn about it instead of jumping to an accusatory tone and making yourself and any who you convince to agree with you look like an ignorant jackass.
/r/MensRights28/11/09 12:54 AM
4

What? That doesn't even make any damn sense. Self-righteous indignation gets you nowhere fast. Neither does changing your argument from one post to the next. You were upset that men weren't included, then that you thought men couldn't get formula for their kids and now that men aren't on the fucking picture of stick figures?
/r/MensRights27/11/09 09:39 PM
7

WIC does cover formula if you need it as a matter of fact. I suggest rather than trying to raise a stink you try investigating it first. It seems you saw the word woman and you got mad when you should have checked out its implementation where your gripes would have been assuaged.
/r/MensRights27/11/09 09:32 PM
8

Are you a breastfeeding mother? Can you be? That's specifically what it is supposed to support when it mentions women.
/r/MensRights27/11/09 09:09 PM
15

If WIC outrages you I think you are picking the wrong fights. It benefits women in so much as healthy food is provided so that breast feeding is healthy. It benefits children by providing certain nutritious foods. WIC isn't even like food stamps for that matter. You get checks for certain food items. A pound of cheese, a certain amount of juice, vegetables and such.
/r/MensRights27/11/09 07:30 PM
1

It's really only sexist if preference is given to one or the other.
/r/MensRights24/11/09 11:51 PM
3

I really don't think it's horrible to have single-sex organizations. I think it's horrible when so many feminists have trumpeted as success their intrusions into men-only organizations and then prop up female only groups. Basically if men and women want to self-segregate either gender should be able to. And frankly I really wish I could get in on the "safety" as a commodity business since it seems to be pretty lucrative.
/r/MensRights18/11/09 10:18 PM
-2

So basically yay for stalking?
/r/MensRights15/11/09 06:11 AM
-1

Grody.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 02:14 AM
-1

Right I was too broad with it. But still you haven't exactly been toned down for others you've disagreed with now have you?
/r/MensRights15/11/09 02:13 AM
-1

And yet when you've been asked what it is you avoid it. Maybe you should learn to read.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 02:12 AM
-1

Maybe you should spruce up on the ol' reading ability. You like to tell everyone else what they are saying after all.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 02:12 AM
-1

My keyboard is crappy. Bite me. You don't have a point to make apparently. You've at least made THAT abundantly clear.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 01:25 AM
-1

That's because you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 01:24 AM
-1

I don't care what your sincere beliefs are. Admins also looked into it and put a stop to it and he had admitted it. It's good to know you want to silence everyone who isn't in lock step with you.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 01:24 AM
-1

Right. How you are following me and insulting me. Hence following and harassing. I do't think you've got a leg to stand on grammar wise and I think it's telling you are trying to make that the focus instead of making a point.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 01:00 AM
-1

I'm sorry but someone hiding behind a gender related argument by calling someone a pedophile is a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 12:55 AM
-1

Stalking is following and harassing another person. Exemplified by responding to nice old threads and replying to non related posts.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 12:54 AM
-1

You go right on ahead and make friends with someone who had 21+ proven accounts. It doesn't help your argument. Being annoying simply makes it more annoying to talk with you it doesn't make you more right.
/r/MensRights15/11/09 12:53 AM
-2

What does that have to do wth any of this?
/r/MensRights15/11/09 12:52 AM
-1

It's interesting how your arguments break down into petty insults and stalking. It's almost as though you have nothing worth saying.
/r/MensRights14/11/09 11:49 PM
2

Go get run over by a train.
/r/MensRights14/11/09 11:16 PM
0

Actually I'm happily married with two kids. But thanks for stalking.
/r/MensRights14/11/09 11:12 PM
2

Or if a woman doesn't want a baby she can also decide not to have sex.
/r/MensRights14/11/09 11:08 PM
7

One is justified in taking the law into one's own hands only when the law has collapsed upon itself.
/r/MensRights10/11/09 04:20 PM
6

I remember that advice column specifically for that issue and I'm also happy to see it again. That advice was sound.
/r/MensRights08/11/09 12:36 AM
-1

No, I am claiming that vaccine MAY lead to autism and diseases later in life. There is enough info on the Web to validate my hypothesis. People with no reason to say it saying it is not evidence. The only science to lead to your conclusion is pseudo-science.
/r/MensRights16/10/09 11:26 PM
1

You are claiming the vaccine leads to disease and cancer. You haven't done research if you came to that conclusion. Saying to look at alternative health is like saying make up random stuff and believe it.
/r/MensRights16/10/09 09:00 PM
0

Do you have any peer reviewed medical journals instead?
/r/MensRights16/10/09 05:30 AM
-3

So some women want men to have another burden and risk so they can avoid having to deal with it? Time to learn to swim.
/r/MensRights16/10/09 05:26 AM
0

Right I did get the wrong person on that last part. It is still a notion you are for whatever reason defending. But the fact and my point is you can't force evolution and technology is not evolution. You don't decide you need light skin and then get light skin, you don't decide to drink milk and then produce lactase as an adult. These things happen independent of environments and lifestyles where it would be beneficial and either can be mitigated by diet alone. It maybe weird for you to eat live…
/r/MensRights15/10/09 11:14 PM
0

You generally haven't said much of any of that. You said the ability to drink milk evolved with agriculture or that white skin evolved after a vitamin deficiency forced them to do so. That's simply not how it works. Or you know when you wrote 'The Great Leap to agriculture, metal tools and literacy.' as an explanation for how 'evolution has adapted us to modernity.'
/r/MensRights15/10/09 10:31 PM
-1

That does not change the fact that my description of the fashion in which evolution works, the original issue, was not incorrect. Yes it does and that has been consistently where I've been saying you are wrong. Really, well then the sources I read might have been incorrect. You're reading it wrong and the scope of the research is too narrow to really make those claims. The full journal submissions is available here. It doesn't come close to examining or explaining the diffusion of alleles which …
/r/MensRights15/10/09 07:54 PM
0

I said that the ability to drink milk came with agriculture... And you'd be wrong. Adult production of lactase has occurred all around the world regardless of use of milk in adolescence or adult diets. It occurs more often in some populations but that does nothing for what you are claiming. You should go back to the drawing board a bit. I'm really trying not to be a jerk here but you are speaking about something you grasp less then you think you do.
/r/MensRights15/10/09 09:28 AM
1

No I'm correcting your flawed explanation. How you wrote it is birds looked into the sky and decided to evolve to fly. Or more to the actual posts that humans learned to farm and then some could drink milk. How I wrote it is birds ended up eventually being able to fly and it helped them to survive. Or more to the actual posts humans learned to farm (yes I'm ignoring the whole agriculture pastoralism tidbit) and some were able to drink milk as could others who had nothing to do with agriculture.
/r/MensRights15/10/09 07:14 AM
0

You're looking at it in an "if before than after" mode which is not the case. You don't evolve to fit a need. If you have the adaptation you can use it though you may have a mutation which has no bearing on your survival and that as well can be passed on. Being able to digest milk is something which occurs more often in some people than others but does occur in all people regardless of agriculture. And Europeans didn't evolve white skin to make more vitamin D, those with lighter skin were able t…
/r/MensRights15/10/09 12:25 AM
0

That's cultural and not strictly inherited from one's progenitors.
/r/MensRights14/10/09 10:00 PM
1

7 months ago. Troll elsewhere.
/r/MensRights02/10/09 09:55 PM
2

Not that I give credibility to a 1-in-3 claim but sexual assault includes rape but also includes many other things that are not rape. It doesn't seem that you were trying to say that 1-in-8 are raped so I'm not trying to correct you so much as clarify for others. Also While Steve Levitt's sources may be superb (I have no idea) my first inclination is to give an economist no ore credibility in such a discussion than a feminist. That said I am going to assume that his citations are accurate and in…
/r/MensRights23/09/09 09:59 PM
0

Craigslist? Mark it as prohibited.
/r/MensRights20/09/09 09:31 PM
6

I was the only guy working there. At least one time it was fun. I got to ride a pallet jack like a scooter for about half a mile down a slight slope (not fun to stop over a 1/4ton of books though). Anyways I was the only guy there. I don't know what they did after I was fired. I'm guessing they just hired another guy though.
/r/MensRights13/09/09 02:07 AM
7

I worked at a college bookstore as a cashier and was always the one sent to lift boxes. At one point I refused until they started sending others to go do that or give me a raise. I got fired shortly after that.
/r/MensRights13/09/09 01:51 AM
1

The Oedipus Complex is an interesting play should you ever have the chance to see it.
/r/MensRights12/09/09 03:58 AM
12

The silence allows it.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 06:22 AM
7

There are some very sane comments over there though I admit to not reading all of the comments.
/r/MensRights08/09/09 10:23 PM
3

Isn't that the kind of thing that leads to women being acquitted of murdering men?
/r/MensRights07/09/09 06:47 AM
8

Amen. I've had to give many similar answers for why I was so adamant against circumcising my son. People said oh he won't be like you, Oh what if he gets made fun of in a shower. And I answered essentially that I'd rather let him make the decision for himself than I for him and that he should be suspicious of random people looking at his wiener. It's a surgery that you don't need. Circumcising your son is like giving him a tummy tuck.
/r/MensRights31/08/09 12:04 PM
5

Good male role-models? Tune in to the Mythbusters, The Daily Show. Pick up a DVD or two of Mr Wizard. If it's got to be Disney round up some Disney movies.
/r/MensRights27/08/09 06:54 AM
-1

Yes I understand that and if it was a traffic ticket it wouldn't be so bad. But when facing significant prison time and such the worst thing you can do is to get advice from people who don't know what they're talking about. Getting bad legal advice and acting on it is worse than not having legal advice.
/r/MensRights18/08/09 07:28 PM
-2

WTF, you need a lawyer for this not reddit. I mean good luck and everything but I doubt anyone here is a lawyer and that's what you need, not some guy on the internet in Edmonton pretending to be a genius California lawyer with Google.
/r/MensRights18/08/09 10:13 AM
-1

So your answer is to not answer? Feminism perpetuates a 'gender system' where men get the short end of the stick and women get advancements regardless of merit.
/r/MensRights12/08/09 10:21 PM
6

As far as men losing their rights, you must be careful to not confuse this with men losing their privilege. You should elucidate on that.
/r/MensRights12/08/09 09:23 PM
0

Bashing women is tacky. Bashing feminism isn't when feminism is the driving force behind stripping men of rights, burdening men with responsibilities, giving women right above men and alleviating them of responsibilities. What the hell kind of male privilege do I have? I'll die earlier, be more likely to be attacked, I get to lift all the heavy crap on top of my normal job and I'm expected to gt the same pay as someone who does less,s hows up less. If I'm working part time I make less than women…
/r/MensRights12/08/09 09:21 PM
2

I suppose this isn't strictly Men's Rights but it is something that effects men
/r/MensRights11/08/09 10:54 PM
6

I never signed up for it and haven't had any issue with it.'m 28 now. A friend of mine was threatened with deportation if he didn't register, but he's American Indian so I don't know how that'd work out.
/r/MensRights31/07/09 09:51 PM
6

That reminded me of a study that said basically men with 4 or more kids live longer and when I tried to find that I found this study that says men with more wives live longer. Hmm.
/r/MensRights29/07/09 10:44 AM
1

Bigamy is kind of dumb/weird but it shouldn't be illegal.
/r/MensRights29/07/09 09:38 AM
6

Uh yes I do. Sorry but you are now applying double standards for men. I know I don't post here much these days but it's because I'm sick of seeing men avoid mimicking what feminists were successful with and instead some of you here are mimicking the worst parts of feminism. If it's OK for you to joke about prison rape why would it be bad for feminists? No, prison rape jokes for men or women are total garbage. Meh, you're not doing us any favors.
/r/MensRights21/07/09 06:35 AM
3

Or maybe prison rape jokes are pretty crappy all around.
/r/MensRights21/07/09 03:42 AM
1

the next time I leave a reminder in Equality about not downvoting because you don't like someone, I'll hear, "But in Mensrights they post feminists' profiles so everyone can go downvote them!" You might just hear that. This wasn't however an invitation to downmod the user. Beyond that it isn't my job to appease users in your subreddit. 1 post in /r/feminsims awhile back led to all of my posts being downmodded pretty soon after they were posted for the next month or so down to -6 or so in a day. …
/r/MensRights17/07/09 09:15 AM
2

Interesting point. This wasn't posted to direct downvotes at him/her and frankly it doesn't appear many if any downvotes happened because of this submission. I can assure you that poster had significant downvotes before I made this submission. It seems more likely that a few people gave upvotes since I posted this. What this does is serve as a pretty poignant example of what men have to deal with. That person's douchey comments are the kinds of things many, if not most, men deal with on a regula…
/r/MensRights17/07/09 08:07 AM
7

Most of your downvotes occurred before I posted here. That wasn't my intent, just to point out the brainless definitions that seem common to many feminists and the double standard that some feminists make when dealing with gender relations.
/r/MensRights15/07/09 07:45 PM
2

Reverse white is... what? Reverse on is ... what? Reverse asleep is... what? Reverse sexism* implies a lack of sexism.
/r/MensRights15/07/09 08:55 AM
0

Maybe you were downmodded because you were wrong. Begging the question is the fallacy where someone makes a claim and asserts that another should assume it to be true. "We all know the ocean is orange..."
/r/MensRights15/07/09 08:54 AM
-1

So a girl who is forced to do things she doesn't want to do is learning to become a man? It's really pretty gender neutral and that's the point. I'd also say learning how to stand up for yourself is an important part of growing up, as in telling people you aren't having any part of a play in which you don't want to be in. It's the same as telling a teenager that they have to try out for every sport their highschool offers instead of focusing on something else that they actually like. I'm not sur…
/r/MensRights07/07/09 01:02 AM
-1

So obviously gender roles aren't so clearly demarcated as you earlier suggested? Honestly it doesn't bother me if boys like cars and girls like dolls or anything like that. Mostly it's the whole Part of becoming a man is doing things that you don't want to do. remark. No one is learning how to be a man in a school play they don't want to be a part of. Probably the only thing you really learn from that is that people will tell you to do all sorts of stupid things and if you don't try to stop it t…
/r/MensRights06/07/09 11:11 PM
0

I hope she knows how to sew by the time she's 5.
/r/MensRights06/07/09 09:58 PM
6

Yes and part of becoming a woman is learning how to sew, cook, wash dishes, get spots out of the laundry and get used to staying at home with the kids....
/r/MensRights06/07/09 09:37 PM
0

Same period as in first 5 years, though I guess it's 6 years now, the death toll wasn't much different. Though at this point of the Vietnam War deaths did start to skyrocket and the deathtoll in Iraq gladly isn't.
/r/MensRights04/07/09 12:45 AM
-2

Speaking as someone who did lose a loved one in Iraq and has a brother-in-law with uranium poisoning (not to say you shouldn't voice your opinion) I think your perspective is an island amongst many. It depends where you are stationed, what your job is, what chain of command you are in and so on. Death tolls at this point in Iraq are very similar to death tolls for the same period of the Vietnam war (or were last I looked).
/r/MensRights03/07/09 08:03 PM
4

http://gwengalerevealed.blogspot.com/
/r/MensRights27/06/09 01:08 AM
1

I got my wife garnet earrings and a necklace for mother's day. I got breakfast and salt water taffy. I was happy enough and if I had gotten her a toy from a gumball machine she would have been happy as well.
/r/MensRights22/06/09 06:27 AM
1

The drummer from Def Leppard has only got one arm.
/r/MensRights17/06/09 05:26 PM
5

Men more likely to use weapons in fights are men more likely to win fights.
/r/MensRights11/06/09 11:51 AM
4

If you want to drastically change those figures women are going to have to give up safe jobs like medical records technologies and start looking into hard labor jobs like working as a roughneck at some oil rigs, welding, manufacturing, asbestos removal and the like.
/r/MensRights09/06/09 05:58 AM
-1

If I had some of the scholarships available to me as women have available to them I'd have a much easier time with schooling. Edit: I want to clarify a bit. I'm glad those women are finding increased opportunity to go to school and get degrees and better themselves. I'm glad that many women find ease in that. I just wish the opportunities were the same for men.
/r/MensRights08/06/09 03:50 AM
-1

Hangly. I'm sorry if my lack of clarity insinuated you. I didn't mean for that to happen.
/r/MensRights04/06/09 02:16 PM
-4

Without publicizing his site he suggests the solution is to rape women until they like it.
/r/MensRights04/06/09 06:56 AM
3

I have no idea about pretty much any of the case however starting with a motive, evidence, possible character testimony, corroborating alibis. Things like that that you would expect to see in most criminal investigations. I won't go so far as to say this guy did or didn't kill his wife because I'm not in a position to know or to weigh facts of the case. I am however in position to know that if he was convicted because pregnant women simply don't hang themselves that the trial had a pretty gaping…
/r/MensRights26/05/09 10:23 PM
13

He may have killed her. However what he deserves truly is a proper trial where the likelihood of his guilt is demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt as opposed to the prosecution saying there is no way she would have hung herself.
/r/MensRights26/05/09 04:16 PM
6

Open heart surgery without anesthetics? The thought of that just made me cringe.
/r/MensRights10/05/09 05:40 AM
1

But that's the thing. You are using Eve and Lucy as interchangeable and they absolutely are not unless you are making a childish argument. Seriously the spread of disinformation does no one any good. You end up with people trying to buy carbon monoxide in stores, freaking out about wifi rf, repeat misclassification and furtherance of errors and all number of stupid things. You say religious metaphors should be indicated yet in either the scientific sense or the Biblical sense the name Eve was th…
/r/MensRights07/05/09 08:37 PM
1

Lucy wasn't human though. Lucy is Australopithecus. Eve is either Homo Sapien or very very close. One is a hominid, the other is a hominoid. Your statements have been misleading and childish at best.
/r/MensRights07/05/09 07:18 PM
1

Lucy != Eve. Even if you want to insist it is equal.
/r/MensRights07/05/09 03:45 PM
1

Wrong. Lucy is a hominid remain. see here
/r/MensRights07/05/09 03:03 PM
2

How about keeping the names of both parties anonymous until the conclusion of the trial at which point if the accuser was determined to have falsely accused (not the same thing as a failed prosecution) than publish the false accusers name. In fact listing the accused as John Doe on official documents and court records absent a conviction would probably be the best solution overall.
/r/MensRights07/05/09 04:46 AM
2

Eve is also an anthropological concept. The most recent ancestor that all women can be genetically traced back to.
/r/MensRights07/05/09 03:36 AM
0

Unlawful restraint would be a kidnapping charge in Oregon.
/r/MensRights28/04/09 09:24 AM
0

I agree with naming and shaming but saying a false accuser deserves to be raped is no better than someone saying a rapist deserves to be raped. I can't agree with either stance.
/r/MensRights27/04/09 09:45 PM
3

I'm glad there are some mothers out there who recognize this disparity.
/r/MensRights22/04/09 09:45 AM
5

Back in November my wife, my son and I moved a few hundred miles away. We both worked at the same place before we moved. We thought she had a good line up on a job, that didn't work out but she got a job quickly and turned around and got a better job just last week. I am a full-time student so haven't been looking as much as I maybe otherwise would be but I get no responses on my job inquiries or checkups. She works at a medical office now processing records or something or other. My college gra…
/r/MensRights21/04/09 09:53 AM
10

Susan Caringella raped me. Google bomb her. Post that phrase in as many places as you can let her name by synonynous of a rapist.
/r/MensRights17/04/09 10:02 PM
0

No I've just got better things to say than 2nd grade insults. Unlike you I'm pretty good at what I do.
/r/MensRights17/04/09 07:17 AM
-1

So even with that said your arguments suck. Interesting, now let's apply that to your current argument, yeah it's lacking too.
/r/MensRights17/04/09 02:38 AM
0

Have you ever considered that you are incapable of making a cogent argument?
/r/MensRights17/04/09 12:38 AM
1

Outsider, you would do well to spend several days reviewing my blog http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/ before you challenge me to an intellectual debate. On anything. Running a blog isn't a sign for or against intellectual ability. Claiming it is however is fallacious reasoning.
/r/MensRights16/04/09 03:52 PM
-1

Right. It's why within 10 minutes of your earlier post a whole lot of my posts dropped to -2, because you weren't doing that.
/r/MensRights16/04/09 09:41 AM
-1

Oh I haven't ever heard someone use that insult before. Might want to shut up before you end up being the ass of a gay joke. If you can't read well get off the internet. How many accounts are you downmodding most of my posts with anyways? at least 3 from the looks of it.
/r/MensRights16/04/09 01:23 AM
0

You probably got the brunt of it when another was more deserving. I just didn't feel like copy and pasting a more in depth response or writing a new one and so wrote what came to mind immediately.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 09:48 PM
0

A number of people did. Voices of complaint indicate no level of universal agreement or disagreement.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 08:49 PM
-2

I'll assume the following deleted comment belonged to you: Hey Outsider, stay outside, please. You add nothing to these discussions, and it's persons like you who engender disrepute of the entire movement. People who can't understand the written language but who use a medium where writing is almost universally the method of communication do nothing good for anything. To make it much much more clear I made an analogy where genders were reversed to show the stupidity of saying men are responsible …
/r/MensRights15/04/09 08:48 PM
0

I think you have little room to accuse anyone of trolling legitimate comments.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 07:27 AM
-2

Holy shit you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 07:22 AM
-2

Are you dumb? Read what I responded to before you read what I responded with.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 07:22 AM
1

I think you need to go back to 5th grade English since you clearly read the exact opposite of what I posted. Maybe before making a dumbass comment in the future you should read something over a few more times or ask for clarification of you still don't get it.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 07:21 AM
0

I think you're right. I don't know if this is an example of schools failing males or if it's just some utter mouth-breathers who really ought to understand the written language better before venturing out on the internet.
/r/MensRights15/04/09 07:19 AM
-1

So if a man rapes a woman and there isn't prosecution it's the fault of women? Do you really want to start blaming the victims?
/r/MensRights15/04/09 12:07 AM
5

I think it was reasonable to require her to take initiative at her expense to advertise the mans innocence. If she didn't wish to do that than stick her in prison for the maximum time allowed, run the ads and charge her restitution for it.
/r/MensRights10/04/09 12:44 AM
0

Since many feminists say a rapist deserves to be raped in prison perhaps that women deserves to be raped so she has to go through what she put that man through? Meh I won't even suggest that. It looks like the accuser didn't contest or appeal the sentence though.
/r/MensRights09/04/09 07:32 PM
1

You have ceased to be amusing.
/r/MensRights09/04/09 07:08 PM
0

I've heard said that trolls are no good Coz they skulk under rocks and in woods But mine stay at home They prefer not to roam And would say so if only they could!
/r/MensRights09/04/09 03:50 PM
-2

Almost certainly 5-7 of the downvotes are from her or Aerik.
/r/MensRights09/04/09 02:10 PM
0

squawk squawk.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 11:40 PM
-2

Hah, you just showed why your generalization about Americans fails and why generalizations are not science and why you are full of crap. You might want to actually invest some time practicing science, you'd see why you come across as an idiot and a troll. Being as the basis for any argument I've seen you make is "no I'm not you are" I'll end this here. You can troll someone else.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 10:59 PM
-4

Generalization implies going from individual data points to patterns within data sets. Generalizations are based on data, evidence, facts. Without data, evidence, facts, no generalization can be made, there would be no set to generalize over. Hate to break it to you but that isn't science. Nor are generalizations based on evidence, data or facts. This is why you make such generalizations as you did about Americans, science and indeed what generalizations are. Racism, sexism, elitism, and so on a…
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:35 PM
-1

With people like you out there no wonder so many people don't know what science is. Generalization implies a lack of facts. You have a lack of facts, certainly a lack of facts about Americans buying whatever is advertised to them. I would need one example to ruin your whole argument. At this stage if you want to insult someones intelligence I suggest you start in the mirror and let the adults talk in the future.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 07:26 PM
-2

Science isn't a series of generalizations. Regardless, the generalization you made is inaccurate and sweeping.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:32 AM
-1

Contrast your statement with sweeping generalization. Interesting how stupid retarded morons fits in there.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 08:20 AM
1

You said: And no one is claiming that they are. How about you start keeping some consistency between your posts and responses. Clearly, and even more clearly if you actually read most of the comments on that submission most people are saying just that. Consistency. Learn it, live it, love it.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 02:40 AM
8

You're fucking shameful the lot of you, get some balls. Oh also the part about men being whining little bitches as a response to a submission titled Men's lives are cheap, so each and every man is required to risk his when a woman is in danger. Maybe you need to read before commenting.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 07:46 AM
5

Men aren't your protectors. Men aren't your servants, your moral slaves. Men aren't obligated to put their life or body in danger to satiate your ideas of morals and what is right or wrong.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 02:46 AM
0

Buy stocks in the company and vote against those people. That's how it works.
/r/MensRights02/04/09 03:42 PM
3

No my argument is not circular. An employer wants someone who meets certain qualifications and will pay a certain amount for those qualifications. When that employer finds an employee that meets those qualifications and they want to enter into an employment agreement that is how much that person's work is worth. CEO salaries tend to be decided by a board and the board is elected generally by shareholders of the company. Thus the share owners vote for people to represent their interests in a comp…
/r/MensRights01/04/09 11:41 PM
2

You are worth as much as you get paid. That is why you get pad what you are paid. Now I may value my time more than I am paid for and we may value that guys time less than he s paid for but that is a subjective opinion compared to the objective fact that he is paid what he is paid. He is paid that much for his work, she is not. She has no claim to anything other than what was agreed to in the prenup and honestly I think that is even ridiculously high. Instead of demanding more money perhaps she …
/r/MensRights01/04/09 09:00 PM
1

You'd think. My brother was pretty much raped, though he wouldn't call it that, got contacted 5 years later for paternity tests has paid off all back child support, is in school has moved across the state to be closer and she has lost the kid to child services at least once, moves every 3 months, has put the kid in 3 kindergartens in the current school year, has had police at her house for drug possession, throwing dogs off her balcony and so on and courts won't consider my brother as a custodia…
/r/MensRights01/04/09 06:51 AM
3

Of course. They've spent the last many decades indoctrinating everyone that when women make accusations they can't be a lie and that whatever a man loses n response is his just desert.
/r/MensRights30/03/09 10:51 AM
5

It's because when you point out fallacies to retards feminist or not, they respond with nuh-uh.
/r/MensRights30/03/09 10:48 AM
2

Do all of your arguments require slippery slops and red herrings, or just this one?
/r/MensRights27/03/09 09:23 PM
2

Circumcision is an equal rights topic, but being that female circumcision isn't legal male circumcision end s up in mensrights and it is very at place here. You should no have the right to have your infant circumcised anymore than having a right to scalp him and tattoo swastikas over him. Are you saying if you were subscribed to the feminism subreddit you'd whine when anyone brought up FGM?
/r/MensRights27/03/09 07:00 AM
6

There are a few feminists with multiple accounts who downvote stories. That's why you will find posts with 15 upvotes and 15 downvotes. Reddit tries to correct for that by giving an equal amount of both votes when it detects multiple accounts.
/r/MensRights26/03/09 12:01 AM
2

From the article it wasn't Ulrika who named him but a one Matthew Wright.
/r/MensRights24/03/09 10:47 PM
3

If I am to take this woman's complaint at face value I would have to wonder if she had a face full of fear or passion. I am pretty sure if I was having sex with a woman and she looked really disturbed by it, whether she said yes or no, I'd stop and figure out what the hell was going on. However I can't really take either person at face value since there isn't really enough to go on from the article.
/r/MensRights24/03/09 10:46 PM
1

I'm curious about he research you refer to. Horticultural societies did indeed lead to larger familial units for a number of reasons and rape or lack thereof isn't one I've ever seen suggested until now. Common reasons include but are not limited to: not having to carry kids around that the more people working the fields the better outcome an horticultural society increases the carrying capacity of the land they live on In fact a polygynous society would have been more advantageous in such a sit…
/r/MensRights24/03/09 07:07 AM
3

The more reproduction-rights are concentrated with a few men, the more men's effort will go into fighting other men rather than helping/building society. That's polygyny (1 husband with more than 1 wife) as opposed to polyandry (1 wife with more than 1 husband. Polygamy is a blanket term for both preceding terms. In some cases, at least historically and I believe contemporarily polygamy was a culturally required thing to do if say your brother died. You would then be expected to marry his widow …
/r/MensRights23/03/09 01:34 AM
7

I think that's the first time I've seen the accuser have her name published.
/r/MensRights23/03/09 01:13 AM
7

F'ed up on the charges. It's also messed up that he'd cheat on his wife like that.
/r/MensRights19/03/09 12:04 AM
0

If she hits you and she gets a bruise from you blocking it, guess who's facing the DV charge. If you hold her down guess who's getting the kidnapping(or similar) charge. If you push her you are definitely getting an assault charge. If you're driving you aren't going to be able to do any of those things. I hit back. It's fair and if I was driving might be necessary for me to protect my life. Instead of you saying it's not ok for men to hit women, say it's not OK for men or women to hit one anothe…
/r/MensRights14/03/09 08:59 PM
0

They were arguments? They looked like broad generalizations and petty insults without any argument or evidence or well anything to back up what small claims he snuck in. All you have to do to find honest discourse and information is to look at the subreddit itself. There is plenty there. There are plenty of comments you can read as well to see that, if you actually look it is self-apparent. Too many times men here have to reiterate that they aren't out to subjugate women only for women or femini…
/r/MensRights13/03/09 03:22 AM
-1

Wow, yet another post that completely ignores the point and wallows in details not related to your original argument. You say the headlines false, it was a quote from the article (and it's headline) and at least one person's opinion (the defense attorney's). In fact within the comments on reddit for that article pn6 provided examples of places in the world it is already happening with the same or similar reasoning that is often used here. The article wasn;t stolen it was written to him. As in Pa…
/r/MensRights12/03/09 04:31 AM
-3

What? You lie your little head off and than when confronted with exactly what you're doing you provide absolutely nothing more than an ad hominem?
/r/MensRights11/03/09 09:43 PM
-3

The headline you're citing is a quotation from the article and the article explains it further. You might dispute the facts of the case but to say the headline was false or misleading... Well you could show how it was, the article seems to o well enough to show how it isn't misleading to me. As for Anzi I think there was a tad bit more sarcasm there than you wanted to see. It's why I didn't respond to it because I wasn't sure. What needs to change is how quickly you jump to conclusions. I advoca…
/r/MensRights11/03/09 01:59 AM
-3

Do the men's rights people really care about information and honest discourse? Or is it true what people say, that it is a circle jerk of hate, paranoia, and bitterness. Like how feminists tend to stalk anyone who doesn't agree with them in an attempt to silence them? Rhetoric like I've seen used by pn6 and many other 'male rights activists' does nothing to help further the cause of MR. It only goes to serves to further baises and polarize more people away from MR. The MR group is in danger of g…
/r/MensRights11/03/09 01:06 AM
1

Maybe I'm missing something but it seems your post was over the top and flippant for the post you replied to.
/r/MensRights10/03/09 07:42 AM
1

I really am glad when I read some of these articles that it is women writing them if for nothing else than that they can't as easily be branded as women haters out to subjugate women.
/r/MensRights10/03/09 07:37 AM
8

I'm sure there is some victim's brigade feminist group calling this a travesty.... but really it's a nice change of pace to hear about.
/r/MensRights08/03/09 09:58 AM
2

"“You’re talking about all the things the man has lost,” Lis says. “The woman is left with the house. The house is a dead asset. She can’t sell that. She has to pay the rent or the mortgage on that. She’s got to then pay for the children.”" She turned getting a house from a divorce into a bad thing for women? In this case a woman who hasn't worked or contributed to it's cost in years? A house that was likely only affordable because of the father who has since been kicked out? Aye carumba!
/r/MensRights08/03/09 05:34 AM
3

But for icing on the cake after you've been reduced to living in squalor.... you become unfit to have custody because all of your earnings go to a mother, who if my experience is the norm, expects child support to also support her.
/r/MensRights08/03/09 05:28 AM
1

Well, a mistake is different than a lie, though it'd still be damn hard for me to even consider it.
/r/MensRights08/03/09 04:41 AM
2

It occurs to me that these people falsely accused have spent a year in jail, lost their jobs, lost girlfriends if they had them. Their names will show up for any google search a prospective employer does of their names. If they had been convicted of the crime they would have had an even harder time getting work due to the prevalence of background checks. So, why are these liars who accused them escaping even having to disclose that they lied about rape to future employers? Why do they get a pass…
/r/MensRights05/03/09 11:46 AM
1

The problem from, pardon the pun, an outsider's perspective is that you seem to be replying without reading. He advocates that the press use the same procedure for accuser and accused, you interpret that as gag the press or close off the court room. I also don't see any hostility let alone haughty hostility in his post.
/r/MensRights05/03/09 08:09 AM
1

Well, typists have taken a reduced pay the same as people who worked as computers are pretty much extinct. But as you went through the links did you notice that a BA at GMU required general ed + BA requirements + 39 credits. The BS has the same requirements + 54 credits. Here are more examples: Example #1, Example #2. Some schools don't have a big difference, all the schools I've ever looked at though have required more credits for a BS. I understand being hesitant about accepting non peer revie…
/r/MensRights03/03/09 04:34 AM
0

BA vs BS: At George Mason University you need General Ed +39 credits for a BA At George Mason University you need General Ed +54 credits for a BS At John Hopkins you need 120 for a BA and 120-130 for a BS. Just as a coulpe examples where yes you do need more credits for a BS. I could expand the list but I think that kind of proves the point no? For Librarians, maybe I'm misreading the data but tables found after this article: http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6490671.html Seem to show that…
/r/MensRights03/03/09 01:22 AM
1

I think of difficult as harder to do, more physically demanding, more prone to injury, longer hours &c. I'm not discounting kids being unruly or adults in higher education being more frustrating but at the end of the day your body isn't as damaged as an autoworker's would be. You aren't as likely to be injured and if you are injured the severity is likely very little. You also have less room for error. I can't think of a single way in which a teaching position at any level is more or as difficul…
/r/MensRights03/03/09 12:26 AM
0

Just want to point out that teaching and librarianship require a Master's degree, whereas auto manufacturing (assuming you mean the blue-collar workers) does not. Wait, actually, I'm not sure what your point is here comparing auto workers to librarians. Who do you think is paid more? Or is that not the point? You don't need a masters degree to be a teacher, you need a teaching certificate which does entail some college. My point however is that auto manufacturing is a more difficult job and also…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 11:11 PM
1

Yeah, I can apply myself when all people see is a mule. :/ I've actually never taken a SAT or GRE though my IQ came back in the top 2-1% when MENSA tested on campus. "The jobs need not be identical" is a common theme when you read about equal pay for equal work. If the work isn't identical than it isn't equal work. No, what you hear when people discuss this subject is how women make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. It's a measure of the median pay between full time women workers and full-t…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 09:23 PM
2

Your post offends me. It must be sexist. Blame the patriarchy bogeyman.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 09:37 AM
7

There goes another instance of it doesn't matter what choice a guy makes, there's a woman out there who wants to override it.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 09:27 AM
2

Well, the Child to be has rights as well. Which aren't negated when the father asserts his rights to not be a father. Certainly if any part of the child's rights were reduced it is to a lesser extent than an abortion. To back up the prison pop, 18 years after Roe v Wade the crime rate started to decrease Correlation != Causation So you have no position on abortion either? I'm pro-choice anti-abortion. Not my choice to make but I don't think anyone should do it. Its not about fairness, its about …
/r/MensRights02/03/09 06:08 AM
1

Really? Because I've never heard when complaining about equal pay when their qualifications are equal to those of men around them or conversely when they are paid more than men around them. The whole equal pay movement never mentions the type of work or the qualifications, just they they want equal pay while tossing cooked statistics to make it look like women make less. At least some feminists have argued to reduce physical requirements to become a firefighter, if you'd call that a victory I'd …
/r/MensRights02/03/09 05:58 AM
1

An opt-out solution is the only solution that doesn't impede on anyone's rights and the consequences on society can't be held accountable to the individuals who might use it. The effects on welfare and prison population are subjective and well don't have much to really back them up besides pointing to fatherless families wherein the father is generally barred from being a father in person. A mother can abort, a father can't. It's that simple, the solution is to either prevent either parent from …
/r/MensRights02/03/09 05:44 AM
1

No but it shouldn't happen. Sooner or later the sperm donor will be tapped for child support and the non-biological mother will shrug her shoulders of all responsibility.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:09 PM
2

It's a fair question to ask though. Women want to get paid the same as men, and I agree they should for the same work, however what seems to actually be the practice is women want the same pay that men get in high risk difficult jobs when they themselves don't seem to be willing to do those obs by and large. I'd actually really like to see statistics comparing how many women applied for such work to contrast to how many were hired and if any entrance qualifications were relaxed for women applyin…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 08:31 AM
2

Me: Equal reproductive rights, as equal as anatomy allows anyways, doesn't preclude a mother from getting an abortion (which I really have no taste for), finding a family to adopt the kid or making use of safe-haven laws. You: you don't have identical biology. Yes, I am aware. The rights of the child aren't impinged by a father relinquishing all parental rights and responsibilities. In fact the rights of the father, mother and child are preserved. Abortion impinges on the child's rights and in m…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 07:48 AM
6

Where is the bashing?
/r/MensRights01/03/09 07:36 AM
1

no, you ignore the fact that you have a choice about who you sleep with. I'm not ignoring that fact. I'm aware that men can say no to sex. However I'm not giving women a break on that. Women can also say no. If every father could abandon their child, it would increase welfare recipients, it would increase crime rates, it would increase just about everything negative about society. Until fathers have the same rights as women in child rearing everything you are pinning on men is just an idea. As i…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 07:32 AM
2

I understand that, I'm just not outto blow off all accusations. Ideally an investigation would be thorough enough where if the woman is lying it would actually be found out and where if it went to court the idea of reasonable doubt was a primary concern as opposed to making a possible rape victim feel vindicated.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 07:12 AM
2

I think it's fair and reasonable to take accusations seriously. I think the seriousness that prosecutors pursue cases needs to be reevaluated though, are they out for justice or are they out for convictions.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 10:56 PM
1

Scare tactics don't work so well. If a woman is not obligated to carry a child full-term or to keep the child once born a man should not be required to be a father for a kid he didn't want. It really is that simple. A woman should not seek to have children outside of marriage that she can't afford on her own, motherhood is an option though fatherhood simply is not.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 10:54 PM
1

Yes there is. Let the father absolve all rights and responsibilities early on. She has choices the whole time but the guy doesn't.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 09:28 PM
2

My brother was raped and now pays child support. He's not upset about having a son but by the circumstance that conceived it. He never consented yet he is on the hook.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 09:24 AM
1

There are options to give post-coitus parental termination for women and completely feasible options for men. The difference is men are denied the option.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 09:22 AM
1

Maybe I'm missing it, but what does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights28/02/09 09:16 AM
2

If having pepper in prison is a class C felony (possession of contraband) I'd hope something more fitting was done to false accusers.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 04:15 AM
9

Women also have easier to get into jobs and are less likely to get laid off, killed or hurt on the job. If my wife wasn't pregnant I'd rather she was the one making most of the money. She's also the more likely between the two of us to get a job with decent pay and benefits. A 6'7" guy comes into apply for a job and the only thing most people seem willing to hire me for is some minimum wage throw my back out job.
/r/MensRights28/02/09 04:13 AM
3

Between yelling and getting walked all over I'd err on the side of yelling myself. No silent movement has been successful.
/r/MensRights27/02/09 11:42 AM
2

I'm guessing: WBB = Women Behaving Badly VAM= Violence Against Men Probably being used so readers can filter out what they don't really want to see or have seen enough of.
/r/MensRights27/02/09 11:38 AM
3

It's a shitty fine line between being walked all over and yelling, there aren't many ways to combat feminism's march on men's rights other than to be loud and to show them how their books are cooked, to show them that women have as much potential to be lame-o's.
/r/MensRights27/02/09 11:34 AM
1

you messed up on the link.
/r/MensRights27/02/09 11:31 AM
0

You know, if your posts showed up normally for me I'd love to continue this, however that in combination with your poor grasp of these things has gotten me to my last bit of patience. You're a troll who doesn't know the first thing about what a proper citation is or how to use one, you think coming up with a citation impossible or difficult for the other to check is the right way to do it, well it isn't. You keep citing things that have some relevance to the discussion we were having though not …
/r/MensRights25/02/09 04:46 AM
1

I don't know if that's really true. I don't think there are many men who think a woman should get paid the same as a man if all things are equal other than XX or XY. I don't think there are men out there who really excuse rape or who think men should instantly get child custody. On the other hand you'll get a slew of women defending those things or subverting the topic into something different enough where it only looks like the same topic.
/r/MensRights24/02/09 10:38 AM
0

So far I've been pretty spot on. Feminists want to be able to dodge positions, saying that only fake-feminists do crappy things.
/r/MensRights24/02/09 10:34 AM
1

I wasn't bluffing, it's why I provided sources. On the other hand you have consistently cited sources that don't say what you are trying to make them say. Accessibility in citations is important, If I cite some obscure book with only one printing I may be tasked with providing it due to it's obscurity and rightfully so. Feminist culture has a female power structure. The definition you gave for patriarchy earlier was a male power structure. Remember, you're the one who wanted to use your own defi…
/r/MensRights24/02/09 01:25 AM
0

What's the point of citing something that you can't read for yourself? It does no good and I'd be better off not citing something in that case. Interesting, you say none exist, I provide a few examples and you rather than dispute it are going on a different tangent. Surprise surprise! Women engaging with women is a matriarchal culture as the only power structure in such an instance is female whether it is from mother to daughter female friend to female friend or girlfriend to girlfriend. Culture…
/r/MensRights23/02/09 02:13 PM
2

The may not be passionately trying to achieve equality between sexes, but instead give themselves the advantage. You'll never get one to admit it though.
/r/MensRights23/02/09 09:10 AM
1

What do you think would be getting taught in a Men's Study course?
/r/MensRights23/02/09 09:07 AM
1

So, non-biological mother wanted kids, they split up, court ordered her to pay child-support (I agree with that) she is bummed out and suggests the biological father should be paying instead and an appeal court found he should also have to pay child support (why? being a biological father has little bearing on men paying child support) and there were two financially responsible parents in the case. I remember reading that story a while ago but I don't remember if he was an actual sperm donor in …
/r/MensRights23/02/09 03:55 AM
8

An alternative argument for not buying diamonds is that their worth is very very little. Diamonds lose value quicker than a car going off the lot.
/r/MensRights22/02/09 10:15 PM
4

That's a great link with great comments.
/r/MensRights22/02/09 04:41 AM
1

If you ever get into a relationship, and I'm not trying to make light of it, I suggest not having anything resembling a butcher knife in your house. Maybe stick with plastic knives or something like that.
/r/MensRights22/02/09 03:34 AM
1

Pretty much every day I get all of my comments downmodded at least 3 time and more if I reply at all to any feminist. As soon as I reply to a feminist I can reach -5 in 10 seconds.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 10:34 PM
-2

That was never a suggestion made. Though I did counter many of the downmods I had seen, that is different than downvoting everyone and everything that has to do with feminism.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 10:28 PM
2

No, I was showing examples wher I could show examples that at least a couple of feminists have taken it upon themselves to downvote/silence Mens Rights issues in the mensrights reddit and in other cases.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:49 PM
2

Lawyergirl has since changed her settings. She seems to have changed her mind about having her BS on display. The entire dislikes page was probably filled up 90% or so with her downmodding mensrights posts, specifically but not limited in her trolling to pn6. I really am not looking for your approval so your determination on how rational I am isn't particularly important though I did try to explain it, you've just got a non-dictionary definition of rational.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 12:52 PM
4

They've been doing it for sometime now and I'm sure a few guys have done it as well. However in these two cases two feminists got caught trying to silence men posting about mensrights in the mensrights reddit. If you don't want to read about Men's Rights issues, well don't go to the mensrights reddit. Pretty simple solution.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 12:41 PM
3

So why visit this optional reddit?
/r/MensRights21/02/09 12:27 PM
-1

I'm an anthropologist by trade, so fair warning on these terms. Women lead other women to shave, to put on make up and perfume. That is a female social structure, that is matriarchy even if you want to distort it as absolutely far as you can. If you used the definition of patriarchy and swapped the genders as mentioned you would find that it creates a definition of matriarchy other than what you refer to. In fact the definition would cover a number of cultures such as the Iroquois, the Mosou, th…
/r/MensRights21/02/09 12:23 PM
10

feminists trying to silence non-feminists is very relevant to Mensrights.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 08:26 AM
0

Female shaving was a female driven thing (except in some instance like Islam where men and women seem to shave their armpits). Go matriarchy. An anthropological perspective is that men and women tend to differentiate themselves from each other by manner of dress, habits and grooming, something that can be seen in different forms across pretty much every culture whether patriarchal or matriarchal. Damn men for liking women who are feminine. A historical context has over 2000 years of women in art…
/r/MensRights21/02/09 08:23 AM
-1

No, when you blame patriarchy you by definition blame men and to a lesser extent women (who are quite happy with a male head of house). There is no ongoing narrative about women's bodies being repugnant unless they practice poor hygiene which is just as likely to happen with men, thus it is not a gender issue. I don't know who you know but the smell of random women's vaginas is not a daily or otherwise typical subject of conversation. There are a ton of females, I'd wager that I could go on to s…
/r/MensRights21/02/09 05:54 AM
6

I thought that part was covered by hypocrite a seperate clause in your sentence from coward. So your response to finding being downmodded unpleasant is to downmod others? Hmm. Okay, you're a hypocrite for that, and a *coward** for not showing your votes publicly*.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 03:27 AM
8

Are you going to call Lawyergirl a coward now? How about the slew of other women who in fact have that setting disabled?
/r/MensRights21/02/09 03:10 AM
2

Well, at the least you are vindicated in that claim now in at least 2 instances.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 03:08 AM
2

Obviously we're all just cowards.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:38 AM
4

How about you read it instead?
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:27 AM
3

That doesn't even make sense. But no, I'm not going to. I have no shame for not showing my likes or dislikes so your shaming tactics really aren't going to work. The beauty is I don't have to do what you do, nor does anyone have to do what I do. If you don't like your votes being commented on you can turn it off, though if you were really concerned with one's likes/dislikes, turn your attention to the feminist reddit first. I mean feminists have nothing to hide right?
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:25 AM
3

Oh shaming me, wow never saw that one coming. Further, whoever said I was downvoting people, well other than you? I comment far more than I vote anyways, though in your case I upvoted everything it showed you had downvoted. I'm not a coward, I just don't feel like dealing with it and guess what, I have that choice to make. My likes and dislikes tend to b pretty apparent by my comments. I'm not hiding behind anything.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:18 AM
7

Not showing my likes and dislikes isn't hypocrisy. I made my choice, you made yours. You exposed yours and opened them up to criticism. I started looking when I was trying to figure out who was following me around downmodding everything I post, going to -4 is a matter of seconds kind of makes you wonder.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 01:12 AM
12

You mean like how you downmodded 9 of Whispers posts (that are 4-6 months old) immediately following pn6 linking to one of his posts? Or that the majority of your downmods all have to do with the mensrights reddit?
/r/MensRights21/02/09 12:59 AM
6

Exposing the fraud of caring about men's rights and honest discussions.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 11:34 PM
25

Saydrah also hates Mensrights so much she stalks people to downmod them: http://www.reddit.com/user/Saydrah/disliked/
/r/MensRights20/02/09 11:09 PM
3

You remember that old adage about most rapists are people who know the victim?
/r/MensRights20/02/09 11:06 PM
29

I'm just getting so god damned sick of women saying that girls should be allowed to be girls but guys acting like guys is some sort of problem. I'm sick of women excusing false rape claims. I'm sick of women playing the perpetual victim and I'm fucking sick of seeing the word patriarchy getting tossed around like it's going out of style. Those women and women pretending to be men don't know what equality is.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 10:58 PM
-2

Patriarchy is a familial system where the male is head of the household as opposed to the female. If you blame patriarchy for everything you blame men for everything via the transitive property. WTF are you even going on about the smell of a vagina for anyways? Yeah they get funky smelling after some sweat, nothing saying she can't take a shower which really is I'm sire the most common way by which a woman ditches the funk. There is no dominant narrative around women's bodies saying that they ar…
/r/MensRights20/02/09 08:48 PM
1

I had something similar happen at a bar. I was wearing a kilt and some stupid girl thought it'd be awesome to try to stick her finger up my ass. A couple of people laughed, I decked her and no one denied that she deserved it.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 12:45 PM
1

Rough housing is kind of part of being a social mammal. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/03/kids_roughhousing.html http://social.psych.cornell.edu/385/docs/PankseppArticle.pdf What is not good is when people don't roughhouse a bit and it isn't a male specific thing.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 12:38 PM
1

Yes, because it's fucking horrible to be a man. Feminine behavior is good, masculine behavior is the devil oohhoohhoohh.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 12:13 PM
0

Do what they say, not what they do.
/r/MensRights20/02/09 12:08 PM
-4

Yes, because if a man isn't happy with how a woman smells he just has to deal with it? What does a black lady wearing a wig have to do with anything? You also realize that there are razor ads for men right? Ads for antiperspirant, well men don't have menstrual cycles so we don't have tampon commercials. Though there are certainly cologne ads directed at men and other hygiene ads directed at men. Know why? It sucks to be around stinky people. That shouldn't be a surprise and isn't a gender issue.…
/r/MensRights20/02/09 10:18 AM
2

I got picked on a bit when I was younger until I realized I could fight back. It ended up being a common theme from 5th grade on that I'd beat the crap out of anyone who bullied me or my friends or anyone in my view. If someone thought they'd be cool and get their friends to help their friends would get beat up also. You get a couple people like I was and you don't have much to worry about. Generally completely brutalizing a bully was enough to make anyone else who wanted to try to think twice a…
/r/MensRights20/02/09 04:26 AM
4

You never hear of morning wood? You think that getting erections in high school in the middle of class happened on purpose? Erections are an involuntary thing.
/r/MensRights19/02/09 07:22 AM
5

Poor stereotypes of both men and women are portrayed in the media. How many "stupid dads" and "bitchy moms" do you need to see on prime-time television? You think models don't contribute to body issues for men and women?
/r/MensRights18/02/09 01:28 AM
3

She deserves a wikipedia entry. That or someone should make a name and shame wiki.
/r/MensRights16/02/09 08:55 PM
1

For Valentines day I spent $1000 on new computer parts and. My wife is getting my old PC and $100 of ruby/garnet necklaces.
/r/MensRights12/02/09 05:36 AM
7

My personal experience is different than anyone else's experience. I have though dealt with many women who live by the mantra that all men are rapists, pigs, worthless and so on. Women who think it's OK to hit men but horrible if a guy does anything back. When relationship issues arise it always seems to be the man's fault, if a woman says a guy hit her she gets a restraining order and free legal representation. Personally I welcome anyone, women or men, who are for equal rights and responsibili…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 05:16 AM
5

After a lifetime of women telling men they are scum is it any surprise that some men want no aid from women in this fight? If you kick a dog every day eventually the dog will want nothing to do from you whether you have food and water for it or not.
/r/MensRights09/02/09 04:33 AM
6

Had to reformat your list since it gave me a headache to read. -> Reproductive rights: no man should be held liable for a child he did not CONSENT to have -> Paternity fraud: a man should be able to terminate his parental rights and duties if he finds the child is not his -> Abolish alimony -> Marriage reform: each party has what it brings, free day-care for children (paid by taxpayers) so mommy can and should get a job -> Shared parenting: should be the default assumption in family courts -> Ch…
/r/MensRights23/01/09 11:02 AM
1

Giving handicaps implies one can't do the job properly. I would prefer the city I live in not hire women firefighters who might not be able to lift me if I was unconscious in my house the same as I'd rather not be treated by a paramedic who didn't know CPR.
/r/MensRights14/01/09 11:55 AM
5

Not sure why you were downmodded. While that fear wouldn't prevent me from looking for a job in those fields I acknowledge it as a fear many men have.
/r/MensRights13/01/09 07:19 PM
2

There may not be as much help to get into the field for men but there are programs out there where you get trained for free but you have to work for the company that trained you for a certain number of years (the work is paid). How do women have an advantage in firefighting? Many men can't even get into that due to physical requirements.
/r/MensRights13/01/09 07:18 PM
2

You actually attacked me. I was making pretty normal comments when you basically called me a liar an a fool. Well, it turns out you can't be consistent in the points you try to make and you suck at writing. But you know, thanks for jumping to conclusions and being a condescending fucktard.
/r/MensRights13/01/09 12:34 AM
2

You're like a really bad chat bot.
/r/MensRights13/01/09 12:33 AM
2

Yes you gave terms and I applied them. You decided to say something entirely different in almost everyone of your posts I've seen.
/r/MensRights13/01/09 12:32 AM
1

You don't sue women's groups moron. You sue the places denying membership to men. It isn't only radicals filing suit against places that were men only. It's the same as it isn't only radicals who perpetuate poor stereotypes of men. WTF are you talking about "last case failed"? This also has nothing to do with ego but equal access to facilities since laws pushed by women's groups seem to imply that in fact they can't. Ideally until they realize that maybe they went to far and were idiotic in thei…
/r/MensRights12/01/09 03:53 PM
2

Are you even responding to what I'm writing?
/r/MensRights12/01/09 03:43 PM
1

Filing lawsuits against a women's only gym is the only legal way to hold women to the same standards as men. Yes it seems stupid but I think there are deeper societal reasons for that. When seeking equality guys have to be willing to play by whatever rules are already on the table and the rules we have on the table are decades of lawsuits being used to shape equal rights laws. It is a gender issue or else gender would have nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 02:07 PM
1

If that is the case you may want to be more concise with your writing because it is what I got from your post.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 02:03 PM
1

No. You gave conditions, one of them being that the majority of customers are men. Thus ostracizing them is ostracizing your customer base. While there is a market for women only gyms that was not the conditional laid out.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 02:02 PM
0

Now it obviously makes financial sense to provide women only gyms and women only hours where the majority of customers are men No it doesn't. If you cater to the smallest part of your clientele you ostracize the majority of your clientele.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 08:00 AM
2

This isn't special case. Men-only gyms risk discrimination lawsuits to allow women entrance yet the reverse is not true. See I understand the point of a women only gym but am only OK with it if men can have the same without risking hassle. There are any number of reasons a guy might not want to work out around women. Got an off-color joke? Too bad you can't tell it around women without risking a sexual harassment charge. Embarrassed about your weight around the opposite sex? Too bad you only hav…
/r/MensRights12/01/09 07:59 AM
2

But why do you seem to think it is OK for women to have women only gyms but men to only have co-ed?
/r/MensRights12/01/09 07:21 AM
2

A lot of strip clubs will actually give women free drinks.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 07:16 AM
1

While I tend to believe this I'd hope people apply the same causation/correlation argument I've seen brought up so many times here in the past.
/r/MensRights19/12/08 09:12 PM
12

[ like 25% of women are sexually assaulted at college?????] Only thing you need to debunk that statistic is to make the person citing it define the term "sexually assaulted" and the argument falls apart.
/r/MensRights27/11/08 11:20 AM
4

Most men and women I know would share the consensus that women cheat far more often than men.
/r/MensRights26/11/08 07:18 PM
0

The laws that allow a parent to leave their children at a hospital, fire station or wherever I think are very good laws in most regards in that it very likely saves the lives of many children. However that a woman could drop a child off and the father may never know he was a father and may have been completely willing and interested in parenting bothers me. What is a good solution to that?
/r/MensRights15/10/08 08:19 AM
3

He should sell them to a glue factory.
/r/MensRights15/10/08 07:54 AM
3

That's a really great article. It's sad that it all had to happen to culminate in the ruling and it's great that his daughter has done we she could to help her father get as fair a shake as he could get.
/r/MensRights15/10/08 07:51 AM
6

A suspended sentence means in essence that if she does anything else against the law than she will have to do jail time. In this case she did in fact walk free.
/r/MensRights14/10/08 11:01 PM
0

Oh really? You could start by explaining how I am a feminist or how I hate men's rights. Until you can explain either of those you are blatantly lying.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 01:19 AM
1

You mean like outright lies and slander that I can't backup with facts or quotes? Oh, that's right, that's you troll boy.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:57 AM
0

No, you've shown your eagerness to lie and lie again despite being corrected plenty of times. You are nothing more than a troll.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:56 AM
1

You'll say anything to feel better about yourself won't you? There really isn't any need to start coming up with yet more lies if your point is as good as you think it is.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:43 AM
0

I've admitted I was wrong about my use of the word most. I am however not inaccurate when I say many or if I said numerous. I'm not overreacting and when wrong I will admit it gladly. Something I can not expect of you after your many completely insane and baseless accusations.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:41 AM
1

0 is far different than any number. Even now you try to act like it never happens. That is obviously false.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:24 AM
0

Here you go again. It never was. Only in your mind did a couple of comments hold more value than the thousands of submissions and tens of thousands of other comments. Tens of thousands of comments? I'm not seeing those threads in this subreddit. In many articles that get more than a handful of comments however you can find at least one comment that is nothing but hateful and finds support. No they don't harm their movement. It's been very successful for them, to the degree it's acceptable to "ba…
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:22 AM
0

You said it dint happen as did others. I only needed one example to show otherwise. There are plenty of other examples. Many of your posts might be included in that. Yes you are. If you weren't you would shut up about it since everyone makes generalizations everywhere. No I'm not. If I was I'd actually be defending the women who say it. If I was you'd have more evidence than the absence of evidence.
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:12 AM
0

No, I admitted a fault in my statement because I was factually wrong on an instance. Rather than invent lies to win an argument I am happy to admit my faults. I hold any subreddit that I subscribe to to a standard that it should merit. This subreddit should not be a bunch or even a few men insulting women, this subreddit should be better than to support a blatant troll like you who has to actively lie to make a point. I've never excused feminist groups of similar behavior however when they do it…
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:10 AM
1

No one said that That person would be (if anyone had said it) one subscriber to the subreddit. Would a nazi make the main subreddit nazi? Women say this casually all the time about men. You are being sexist by pretending it has any more value when a man says it of women. Remember the feminists movement according to the above article by a feminist about feminists revealed they were successfully going about with SIGNS in public saying ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS. Yes people did say it and I've linked to a…
/r/MensRights12/10/08 12:03 AM
0

You see a difference is I've read your comments and you haven't added anything insightful to any conversation you've decided to chime in on at least as far back as the first page of your comments. That's all I can see of you is trolling, no insight, no intellectualism just slag and lies. Also I insult you for what you've said, not what I completely make up about you. Men's rights groups are a joke in size and power. This is because they have been fooled to 'tread carefully' and be politically co…
/r/MensRights10/10/08 08:27 AM
1

Isn't it obvious by your assumption that people are dating "nutjobs" and it's "easy to find great women"? That is improbable (esp. with some of the harmful feminist ideologies being peddled amongst women), hence my comment. Half of all divorces end in divorce and less than the sum of divorces end up horribly thus more than half of all married couple end up amicable at worst with the minority having been in a relationship with a nutjob now facing some troubles. So yes I'd say I made a pretty fact…
/r/MensRights10/10/08 07:00 AM
0

I used the word accurately. There's a vast difference. I also think it's quaint at best that you think the title of this submission isn't part of the argument. In fact it is essentially the thesis for the argument. So the title certainly doesn't take away from the argument since it it the premise of the argument. I've only made two posts... You are delusional. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/75s0p/mensrights_reddit_a_place_for_misogyny_or/c05sfbt http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/co…
/r/MensRights10/10/08 06:14 AM
1

Listen here kid, you may have some idea of what logic is but from I gather your idea about it is certainly wrong. If you cared so much about logic your argument would be more inclined to argue that this isn't a subreddit for women bashing but perhaps it does happen instead of accusing me of being a feminist which I'm not for starters and following that it isn't something I've alluded to in anyway, it's a subreddit I've never even glanced at, one you seem to know much more about, and something th…
/r/MensRights10/10/08 05:09 AM
0

No. I am very much in favor of men's rights. I'm just not anti-woman and I don't have to hide behind terms that inflate one's ego to use. You haven't proven anything as you have consistently ignored the argument from the beginning. Your whole argument seemingly amounts to "no screw you women lover, man hater!!!" or some other ridiculous notion. I know you just learned what autophobic meant last week so I'll excuse your poor argument trying to demean me with a term that you couldn't even come clo…
/r/MensRights10/10/08 04:59 AM
-1

I'm sorry you are unable to actually discuss subjects without delving into insults. That is of course the root of this whole thing.
/r/MensRights09/10/08 10:55 PM
0

Isn't that what you said a post or two ago? But sure accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you a troll. Accuse anyone who expects that if you interject yourself into a discussion that you will discuss the topic instead of trying to cast attention everywhere else. Go on, make more personal attacks me ad others and justify my point even more.
/r/MensRights09/10/08 10:53 PM
-1

Well you actually ceased discussing the topic a bit ago by deciding to talk about other things. These also aren't personal attacks, personal attacks would be me calling you an idiot or some such. So to rehash you went off tangent, are still claiming it was at all relevant and accuse me of making personal attacks by listing why no one should actually pay attention to the argument you are making because it is a separate argument than the one you ostensibly had decided to discuss. You than follow t…
/r/MensRights09/10/08 08:57 PM
-2

Yes, I do know the truth of it. You in fact are the troll which should be clear as day to anyone else.
/r/MensRights09/10/08 06:58 PM
-1

No I'm lifting in what should be an easy to convey way why your argument blows and why no one else should even bother with any similar arguments with you. You are afraid of actually discussing the topic. You want to inject something unrelated into the argument. Oh and all those questions I ask? That was something like 2-3 questions to which you ignored while posting some other amount of junk? Sound about right? There isn't anything positive about callin women idiots unless you aren't secure abou…
/r/MensRights09/10/08 06:57 PM
-1

As I thought, your arguments never had any merit.
/r/MensRights09/10/08 01:27 AM
1

Dispelling a myth does not also need to appear to be a vilifying of women. Using it as an excuse is all fine and dandy and as I've said I can see the point of it, though I think it is done excessively. What use would a feminist group have for posting "men suck" articles? To show they are still subjugated, dismissed or treated unfairly/improperly. Their reasoning would be just as justified as the applied reasoning here. Vilifying men or vilifying women despite insistence that there is a reason do…
/r/MensRights09/10/08 12:32 AM
-1

Struck a chord? Do you think your replies are needles pricking me or something? In a thread about free speech speaking of free speech is appropriate. In a subreddit about men's rights claiming free speech to insult women can still apply but not in the context of promoting men's rights. Sure people are free to hate women but don't mislabel that misogyny as a men's rights issue. Someone saying women suck does not promote men's rights. Sorry, that makes very little sense. What exactly are you askin…
/r/MensRights08/10/08 11:22 PM
0

Furthermore, feminists posting articles about men behaving badly can't serve the same purpose as men's rightists posting articles about women behaving badly That is a double standard no matter how you excuse it. I'm not even saying that I don't see the point of them but to say that men can and women can't is disingenuous and claiming that it is morally OK in one instance and not the other is of no benefit when they are the same thing.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 11:15 PM
-1

You aren't discussing it but claiming it is a carbon copy or labeling me a troll or some other such dismissive language. Further you haven't contradicted anything. You have linked to previous posts of yours that had little to nothing to do with my argument.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 10:45 PM
-1

You had to search pretty hard for something to try to use to tear down my argument. Too bad that comment is pretty self-explanatory and if it isn't it will be if you RTFA. It was also in context of free speech. Are you saying that men's rights is really about misogyny or that misogyny is a part of it anyways. You've got a lot to learn about consistency other than consistently accusing me of hyperbole and trolling.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 10:41 PM
0

I will concede that they are the minority after having taken much more time to examine comments here. they still make up a good number of the comments that show up in this subreddit and often find support.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 10:34 PM
0

Topic A and Topic B are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they're perfectly analogous to each other. A red herring would have been something like, "Let's discuss why outsider is a stupid feminist and thus his opinion doesn't matter" (which is NOT what I said). That would be a strawman argument, ad hominem, poisoning well or a number of others it could easily fit into. I don't care that you won't answer the question, in fact I take it as a source of your uncertainty or inability to do so without s…
/r/MensRights08/10/08 10:30 PM
0

Again with deliberate ignorance. when this subreddit stops being a haven for women hating comments than YOU will have a leg to stand on argument-wise. Until that point and as long as the women hating comments are upvoted and their detractors downvoted you will not have a leg to stand on. You may not be in the "we hate women" group but if you deny that element of this subreddit you really aren't paying attention.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:33 PM
0

Furthermore, feminists posting articles about men behaving badly can't serve the same purpose as men's rightists posting articles about women behaving badly because men aren't put up on a pedestal the way "the fairer sex" are. So you are favoring double-standards?
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:24 PM
-2

Or what makes more sense is that there are a number of other folks who support men's rights issue but don't see this reddit as supportive of it and in fact counter-productive to it. You can dismiss me as a troll or this thread as a carbon copy but it doesn't mean I'm going to disappear. In fact your inability to discuss anything that you don't agree with only helps my argument. Not everything is some conspiracy delusion either. When you post bile and spray rosewater it's still bile.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:23 PM
-2

How does calling women idiots help men? How does expecting something more insightful than "women suck" not help men?
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:20 PM
0

You are deliberate in ignoring the premise of my argument at this point. I have made it clear tie and again that my issue is not with the articles being posted here. You can keep harping on it as though I said the opposite but it simply won't make it true. It's the comments that get support merely for calling women idiots or some such.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:17 PM
1

No. Comments themselves are a minority in this subreddit. Misogynistic comments are not a minority of the comments. There is no subject changing. If one doesn't do as the rest the group comes in and down mods. You can claim that misogynistic comments aren't the norm here but if you actually read comments, or maybe I'm only seeing a fraction of the comments, than they are close to parity at least. The we hate women crap is only making it more likely that women will be able to take advantage of me…
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:15 PM
-2

Yes it is a red herring. The feminist reddit has nothing to do with the MensRights reddit. Mentioning it is casting the discussion aside. We are discussing Topic A, you brought up Topic B as though it was relevant and it sn't. Ta-dah. Also as I've said a number of times I'm not complaining about the articles posted here, I'm mentioning the tone of many commenters here and I thought I've been pretty explicit about that.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 08:09 PM
0

I wonder sometimes if those people who troll are actually doing so or if they are just voicing their opinions. I think what would be worse is if people didn't get irritated when someone shows up in a thread calling all women bitches or whatever because when someone comes into a thread and does that and only gets cheered on it subtracts credibility from the idea of men's rights and adds credibility to the idea that men just hate women. There is plenty to be angry about but just blurting it out wi…
/r/MensRights08/10/08 04:38 AM
0

See I don't even need to dispute any of those links as they have nothing to do with the sheer hatred I see all too often on this subreddit. None of those things are insults to women but saying all women are idiots or other such garbage is specifically what I see too often and what I think doesn't belong here. Many of the articles that get posted here I see no real issue with. I think some seem misplaced but I see how they can fit in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 04:26 AM
3

Really? Next time you see someone ranting about how women are bad try making a level headed response that amounts to "not all women are idiots" and see where that gets you.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 04:23 AM
0

Same way I get downvotes 20 seconds after I submit I imagine.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 12:39 AM
-3

Hating women and Men's rights are not the same thing any more than advocating equal pay and treatment of women would be compatible with hating men. If the only thing someone can say is a bitter insult perhaps that voice would be better kept silent less it becomes the anthem and something to rally against. The "We hate women" crap will only be used against men who claim they want equal rights and will only hurt the idea.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 12:35 AM
1

You should be too. The "We hate women" crap will only dilute issues that you can actually positively effect the outcome of. The "We hate women" crap will chase women away who otherwise would be your allies. The "We hate women" crap distracts from comments with actual ideas for how to correct things, you drown the signal with noise. Can you imagine if a political activist group instead of talking about issues talked about what toppings they hate on pizza? Nothing would get done and the group woul…
/r/MensRights08/10/08 12:32 AM
2

I did not make that claim. I said those types of comments are not scarce here and they aren't.
/r/MensRights08/10/08 12:27 AM
4

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/75jvr/is_it_fair_that_only_women_have_reproductive/c05qrxc http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/755kj/advice_to_young_men_do_not_marry_do_not_have/c05qa9c Stuff like those two comments happens pretty often when an article gets comments.
/r/MensRights07/10/08 11:55 PM
1

WTF? My ax to grind is with a mensrights groups that seems to exist mostly to insult women. See, I understand a lot of the things that get posted here when it shows a juxtaposition of treatment men get or women get. What I am taking issue with very specifically is the "We hate women" mentality that seems to be prevalent here as that is the exact opposite way to advance any men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights07/10/08 11:41 PM
-2

I don't read or subscribe to the feminism reddit and if I was a woman and was interested in that reddit and all I saw was men bashing I'd have issue with it as well. Seriously this reddit seems much more like a Men who hate women reddit than a MensRights reddit. Beyond that why do you need to cast attention elsewhere with the red herring of a feminist reddit?
/r/MensRights07/10/08 11:39 PM
4

I abstain from a number of conversations in this reddit because it seems like a big "hate women fest." Comments like the following are not scarce here: chicks are like that. it's really all about them in their heads, they only claim to be doing it all for you, cause they think you're stupid. and the ones that fall for that, are. avoid chicks. they stink. or this very good advice. it's a rigged game, spun to you as a fraud called 'love'. it's a scam. 'love' is the bait (biochemical process that W…
/r/MensRights07/10/08 11:35 PM
14

I see what seems like a majority of comments where anyone who isn't insulting women in chided, downmodded, told to piss off. If this sub-reddit should rather be labeled "women and why we hate their fucking guts" then I'll leave. If it turns into promoting Men's Rights I'll stay. If what you bring to the discussion are just insults than you aren't promoting men's rights, you're just dumbing it down and making it ineffective.
/r/MensRights07/10/08 08:14 PM
2

Not all divorces end with messed custody battles or anything else all that economically damaging. While I don't have statistics on that I'd wager it wasn't the norm. Though since it is less than half of all marriages that end up in a messy divorce it is accurate to say that you have a better chance of not getting screwed over than of getting screwed over.
/r/MensRights06/10/08 10:57 PM
1

So what you mean is that you agree with my posts.
/r/MensRights06/10/08 09:11 PM
0

More than half of all marriages whether they end in divorce or not are not this evil you think they are. I'm speaking as a husband and father, you're speaking as a disgruntled teen. Maybe you should stop talking out ofyour ass.
/r/MensRights06/10/08 07:29 PM
1

So less than the whole of the half of marriages ending in divorce is enough for you to assume all women are nuts? Maybe you should go join a monastery. And seriously, you had to make two replies to the same post?
/r/MensRights06/10/08 07:28 PM
2

The problem is you think the psychos are the norm when they simply aren't. As it says half of all marriages end in divorce. Not all of those divorces are systemic of sexism towards men. That by definition makes those cases the minority. For the record I never said anything about courts but that if you stop hitting on psychos you won't have such an issue; even if God forbid you end up in divorce.
/r/MensRights06/10/08 07:26 PM
3

Stop dating nut jobs and it's easy to find a great woman.
/r/MensRights05/10/08 06:48 AM
6

You now, I'm married, have a kid and am incredibly happy. Don't marry a psycho more like it.
/r/MensRights04/10/08 03:19 AM
8

I'm circumcised, I had a son recently. My decision was that circumcision is an unnecessary operation. I have no idea what its like to be uncircumcised and if he wants to be at some point I''ll even pay for it. People tried telling me it was healthier and blah, blah, blah though the pediatrician agreed with me. The only difference that it seems it would make is changing his diapers and keeping his wiener clean.
/r/MensRights25/09/08 06:47 AM
2

WTF is your problem? Anyone who isn't in on the "DOWN WITH WOMEN" parade is a troll? Fuck you dipshit. I want men's rights, I donate to men's rights groups and promote the concept. meanwhile some complete fucking tool like you comes around and thinks men's rights is about putting women barefoot in the kitchen? Go drink some bleach or hop the fence at the bear exhibit. I wish I had a lawn as whiny as you. It'd cut itself. you fail
/r/MensRights23/09/08 03:16 AM
1

WTF is your problem? Anyone who isn't in on the "DOWN WITH WOMEN" parade is a troll? Fuck you dipshit. I want men's rights, I donate to men's rights groups and promote the concept. meanwhile some complete fucking tool like you comes around and thinks men's rights is about putting women barefoot in the kitchen? Go drink some bleach or hop the fence at the bear exhibit. I wish I had a lawn as whiny as you. It'd cut itself.
/r/MensRights23/09/08 02:48 AM
1

The internet doesn't exactly emote sarcasm and I've seen worse comments than yours that were serious.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 11:33 PM
0

Yes and that's what I'm saying happens in men. Women's hormones are by and large on a monthly cycle coinciding with their period.Men have fluctuations throughout the day every day.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 06:48 PM
1

I'm a troll because I don't see mens's rights issues simply as a reason to sit around and bash women? I actually like a lot of women, I just don't want preferential treatment for women or derogatory treatment for men.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 06:47 PM
1

Some of the symptoms are only found in older men. In all men though testosterone fluctuates throughout the day.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 10:41 AM
1

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-13094283-details/Study+shows+men+also+suffer+from+PMS/article.do http://www.myhormonology.com/malehormonecycle.htm
/r/MensRights22/09/08 09:55 AM
2

Men's rights does not equal women subjugation.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 08:18 AM
1

Monthly hormonal changes are shared by men and women. The big difference is the cramps and bleeding.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 08:15 AM
2

pms is not much more than an excuse to be a snatch. Men have similar hormonal fluctuations sans cramps, we just don't use it as an excuse to do whatever we want. Also I've known plenty of women at work who were total assholes all month long. The best answer is to be an asshole right back and stop that train in it's tracks.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 08:12 AM
4

I really am all for men's rights but the example you give, while it is an example of a woman abusing a system, it is more an example of managers being poor managers. There is plenty of reasons for a for cause firing in what you said.
/r/MensRights22/09/08 08:05 AM
1

because feminism sells and masculinism is derided as outmoded.
/r/MensRights18/09/08 06:37 AM
1

Except that the courts and society at large measure all men against some unrealistic standard and all woman against unrealistic standard. The simple fact of being a woman increases the chance of the woman getting custody, child support or whatever else she wants and in fact gets more child support on average. The only way I can see to actually change that is to categorically show that being a woman specifically does not make one better than being a man. Comparing a man to his wife/ex-wife doesn'…
/r/MensRights17/09/08 06:30 PM
1

So how do you show that men are equally fit parents without pointing out faults of mothers? How do you show that men make more money generally because they do different jobs without raising the ire of a woman who wants to get paid the same for an easier job? Sure some things don't need a juxtaposition such as the "dumb dad" on TV or other ways where men are belittled for some other perceived cultural value.
/r/MensRights17/09/08 09:24 AM
3

Where did you get that from my post?
/r/MensRights16/09/08 07:56 AM
3

Because in such cases the man is almost always the one handcuffed while the woman yells about all the evil things he did I suspect.
/r/MensRights16/09/08 06:23 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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