TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

petemate Archive

View 1 post and 161 comments by petemate on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
182

petemate/r/MensRights10/02/13 01:01 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

It's not at all misuse of a word. It's the very definition. But since you'll never accept it anyway, there is no point in arguing further. I am not saying rape is a men's rights issue. I am dying that your behavior and lack of acknowledgement of other people's feelings is damaging to the men's rights movement.
/r/MensRights15/04/19 08:54 AM
2

Like I said, some people do lie, but most often prior tell the truth. I'm not asking you to sentence someone based on nothing but a story, I am asking you to respect the feelings of someone who have experienced something traumatic.
/r/MensRights13/04/19 07:30 PM
1

Maybe, but then you have to produce more than a single sentence as a reply.
/r/MensRights13/04/19 07:13 PM
1

No. A person can be raped, even though there is no rapist. You base your definition of rape on the legal definition, but thats not at all what we are talking about here. There are plenty of examples where people do something in the heat of the moment and then later realizes that their boundaries were horribly overstepped. That might leave a feeling of rape, but it does not mean that the other party committed rape. Rape can very much be a feeling and something you can decide happened to you later…
/r/MensRights13/04/19 09:48 AM
1

Please read my post again :)
/r/MensRights13/04/19 07:14 AM
1

No, not at all. Whether or not you believe what another person is feeling, is totally irrelevant to the actual feelings. My feelings aren't gonna go away just because you don't believe in them. Sometimes people lie, but more often they tell the truth. Thats just how people work. And going straight to the "you lie" position just adds fuel to the argument that the mens rights movement is a bunch of rape apologists.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 11:21 PM
0

If you feel like you got raped, then you got raped. Why is this so hard for you to accept? It doesn't mean that there is a rapist. You have no idea how much you are damaging the mens rights concept with your retarded statements about rape. Seriously.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 10:48 PM
0

Why is that relevant?
/r/MensRights12/04/19 02:03 PM
-4

There sure is, but the massive misunderstanding that's going on in this thread is just adding fuel to the fire.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 08:00 AM
-8

Jesus, get a grip guys. No wonder mens rights face so much flak from women. This has nothing to do with sentencing of someone without evidence. It has to do with accepting the feelings of another person. If a woman(or a man for that matter) experiences something so traumatic that (s)he would label it as rape, you should be supportive and understand that said person is having a horrible time. That doesn't mean thay someone should be sentenced without evidence. It is entirely possible to be raped …
/r/MensRights12/04/19 05:54 AM
7

Is the ponytail supposed to be a blow job reference?
/r/MensRights04/08/18 08:29 PM
1

Credit valley? Sounds like my life..
/r/MensRights01/05/17 12:00 PM
0

Then you should have said it like /u/Not47, who was much more delicate about expressing the issue.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 06:13 PM
12

What is the argument that you are trying to present here? That 2-3 births is equal to a lifetimes work of e.g. bricklaying? Don't turn it into a pissing contest.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 05:02 PM
1

What's your basis for saying that men routinely get nothing? The article mentions nothing about it.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 07:06 AM
1

Man, I thought you were just an idiot, but you are actually insane. In the 'WAKE UP SHEEPLE THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLS OUR MINDS WITH CHEMTRAILS THAT CAUSED 9-11' kind of way. Good luck man, hope you find the help you need.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 07:33 AM
1

Nice comeback. You really pulled together and put me in my place with that genius reply. But seriously, don't you care that you fuck up everything for everyone when you spurt out retarded statements like your previous comment? You basically argue exactly like a feminist when you gulp up unsubstantiated shit like that, and it makes everyone look bad.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 07:02 AM
1

Why is that assumption justified?
/r/MensRights04/01/16 05:25 PM
1

Yeah, I got a big problem with that. Because your idiotic statements reflects badly on all of us.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 05:23 PM
2

Well, that attitude isn't going to help anyone. Sure, this sub has problems but why not try to fix it like I do?
/r/MensRights04/01/16 01:23 AM
-1

You gotta be able to back up such a claim with evidence, right?
/r/MensRights04/01/16 01:07 AM
-1

No, pointing out the false accusations is not an attack on women. But it feeds the flame because it does not try to present the complete picture of the debate. Its fuel for the fire, when we should be trying to put it out. Its a very bad practice that we, as men, should not be interested in, because it lowers the level of debate, when we should try to raise it. It is easy to see why mens rights have a bad image when articles like this gets put out there, there is no resoning, analysis or other i…
/r/MensRights04/01/16 12:58 AM
-2

The article is manipulative because it does not try to show the complete picture. It is a one-sided presentation with wild claims that are backed up by nothing. A list of ~31 false accusations does not speak to reason, but to feelings. The article is a big problem, as it doesn't actually provide any light on any subject, but just feeds the flame that women are liars who use rape accusations to destroy men.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 12:16 AM
6

This is a terrible article that only serves to manipulate. A list of false rape accusations on it self is just manipulation, trying to say "look, this many!" We should be better than that. Lets use statistics when we argue a case.
/r/MensRights03/01/16 04:33 PM
1

What kind of bullshit is this? This Coleen is shocked that no one helped her, that is all. In the same way that she would be shocked if someone got beat up in front of 25 people, and none of those people did anything to stop the beating. She is disgusted with the guys at the party. She doesn't blame men. You look waay to hard for anything that could even remotely be considered misogyny.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 10:18 PM
-1

Am I the only one getting really annoyed about posts like this? OP doesn't know what the difference between manslaughter and murder is and the whole topic stinks of "if this was a man he would go to the chair" without any sort of basis for saying it.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:59 PM
1

Thank you for replying and elaborating. Basically they are trying to cover their own asses..?
/r/MensRights11/10/14 09:30 PM
7

I doubt that to be the case.. Have they made a public comment on this?
/r/MensRights11/10/14 07:03 PM
22

Why does the CDC use this expression "made to penetrate" instead of rape?
/r/MensRights11/10/14 04:15 PM
1

Are you allowed in the US to serve alcohol to your children at home?
/r/MensRights25/09/14 09:01 PM
1

Why? What is the argumentation?
/r/MensRights25/09/14 08:01 PM
2

What is his arguments for lowering the drinking age ? Don't get me wrong, Im all for it, but what help would it do to reduce it to e.g. 17, 16 or 15? What is really needed, is a safe framework for learning about alcohol consumption, learning your limits and so on. Im from Denmark, where there is no legal age. There is only an age of purchasing and drinking in bars, but your parents could buy all the junk in the world and serve it to you without any issues. As what is perhaps a consequence of thi…
/r/MensRights25/09/14 07:04 PM
1

Very true. Nothing more to say about that. Had she in any way been forced into anything, she would be a victim of rape. No question. The evidence in this case is pretty clear, but none the less, it is important to remember that one can easily jump to conclusions when the full story isn't clear.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 01:11 AM
78

Im not denying that she was not raped, but this is a very bad headline! Plenty of things could change her decision after asking about condoms but before having sex, and arguing that she was not raped because of the the text messages is very bad practice. She had consensual sex because of the reasons outlined by /u/Steampunk_Moustache , not because she asked for a condom. This kind of headline can easily be transformed into a kind of claim by our opponents, to show how /r/mensrights users really …
/r/MensRights12/06/14 01:44 PM
1

Sadly, I think most people will just forget about it 5 secs after its over. There wasn't really anything really memorable about it. Just a lot of people trying to make different points, without relating to the points that were just presented. So, like any other TV "debate". If he could have managed to stick to discussing one point in depth(I know thats hard with four people in the room, interrupting all the time), I think that he could have caught the attention of the viewers better. The "the sy…
/r/MensRights09/06/14 03:28 PM
1

You have a very good point about him not countering the issues that women faces. Thats a good point and a good strategy. But I think he could have been more engaging, so to say, showing some willpower and commitment when trying to convince the others about mens issues. Basically, my first impression of him was poor, and that is what people will remember, regardless of how well his arguments are put together and regardless of how nice he is as a person :)
/r/MensRights09/06/14 03:17 PM
9

I don't agree. I think he came across quite poorly. His arguments were good and so were his responses. But he looked quite arrogant and rolled his eyes several times. He didn't really "engage", he just sat back like he didn't have to be there. edit: typo.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 02:31 PM
-3

So, what makes you believe that were willing to publish that thing because it makes MRSs look bad ? Sorry, but in my book jumping to a conclusion like that is just as bad as printing a false quote. Times probably published this because they thought it was an article that can sell copies, not because it makes MRAs look bad. I don't want to defend the guy writing the article, but previously there were a lot of things in here that can seem very.. well, sexist. Not by intention, but by outcome.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 08:14 AM
1

I think you're the one who should give it up now :)
/r/MensRights06/04/14 08:34 PM
1

If you don't want to waste your time, you shouldn't argue on the internet..
/r/MensRights06/04/14 07:50 PM
1

There is more to it than "just" being able to express oneself intelligibly. There is also body-language, facial expressions, implicit knowledge and so on.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 07:14 PM
0

Well, yes, actually. When people say something, look at what they are actually trying to say, not just the words that are coming out of their mouths. In this case, it does seem quite odd that they can't work out because there are men in the room, but lets give the woman the benefit of the doubt. There may be more to it than just "ugh, men!". And it most likely isn't entirely her fault that the room got women-only times, although she probably was the one that made management make the decision.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 05:32 PM
1

Well, that was what OP heard them say to each other. I'd like to believe that there is something more(and valid) than just "there's men".
/r/MensRights06/04/14 04:36 PM
1

No, thats not what I said.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 04:13 PM
2

I like to believe that they had, at least in their own minds, a good reason.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 01:44 PM
5

What was the argument for not being able to work out while there were men in there?
/r/MensRights06/04/14 06:42 AM
14

Add a [citation needed] tag.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 04:43 PM
2

For some reason, some men do like to mention their spouses weight. I have a friend who does it, and my dad would do it to my mom every now and then. I don't think it has any relation to sexism or anything, but I don't think its a nice thing to do. And the fact that he is under a lot of stress dos not justify it. If you do not mind the jokes I don't see an issue, but I don't see why you should put up with it anyway. And I have to say that the "i sit on my fat ass all day" comment does make me que…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 10:08 PM
1

Why? What theory?
/r/MensRights25/03/14 07:20 AM
0

Responding to literally every comment worked up? No, resorting to name calling and rude behavior worked up. It really amuses me that you think that will do any good. Good, because I give a shit about your pathetic attempt at passive aggression. You give a shit? Thats nice. Where can I collect the aforementioned shit? Or is it that you in fact do not give a shit? In any case, I think you should look into what passive aggression is. Because the emotion of feeling sorry for you isn't an attempt at …
/r/MensRights25/03/14 12:04 AM
0

I really like how you get so worked up. And that name-calling! Its just so mature! (If you don't see the ironyin calling someone in /r/MensRights a whiny piece of shied and a baby, then I really do feel sorry for you.)
/r/MensRights24/03/14 11:22 PM
1

Yes. Lets just leave it at that.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 11:17 PM
0

Great post. You sure know how to show off your intellect. I especially like the fact that we are in /r/MensRights, yet you somehow feel the need to call me a whiny piece of shit.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 11:09 PM
0

Basically you have to assume there is because you don't know there isn't. You have to be skeptic.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 10:57 PM
-1

Where do you see me searching for a made-up story? And that is completely different than wanting the story to be real. So I ask you again: Why the hell would I want the story to be true? What kind of retarded accusation is that? Edit: Maybe I should ask in a different way: What indications do you have that I want the story to be true?
/r/MensRights24/03/14 08:54 PM
0

I am saying that if you decide to approach the story in the most skeptical way possible, you also have to approach the evidence trying to disprove the story in the most skeptical way. And an image of an address bar saying "cnn.com" doesn't have any weight as evidence and could easily have been manufactured for some reason. You then ask whatever that reason could be. I am then saying I am not sure that there is something, but that you have to assume there is. Because you don't know his motives, y…
/r/MensRights24/03/14 08:22 PM
-2

That doesn't even make any sense. What does me believing in the story have to do with the location mentioned in the story? Fact is that the story clearly states the location of Valdosta, Georgia. You somehow claim that isn't a location. You are not making any sense.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 08:08 PM
-2

Why the hell would I want the story to be true? What kind of retarded accusation is that?
/r/MensRights24/03/14 06:01 PM
-1

Im not saying that there is something to gain. I am saying that you have to assume that there is.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 05:57 PM
-1

What is it that you don't get?
/r/MensRights24/03/14 05:56 PM
-1

Perhaps the location was withheld along with the girls name. That isn't uncommon. In any case you could easily call the Valodsta school district to inquire if you want to.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 05:54 PM
-5

Thats probably because you didn't read my other posts in this topic.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 07:26 AM
-8

Its not unsourced. There is clearly a link to CNN. And then whomever created the picture tried to show that the source links only to "cnn.com", and not an actual article. And that proves nothing. If you have to assume the most skeptical angle on this(and you guys apparently do), you also have to assume that the creator of the pictures has something to gain and thus a motive for not displaying the full source.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 07:24 AM
-7

So the location of Valdosta, Georgia isn't a location now?
/r/MensRights24/03/14 07:19 AM
-13

I get that, thank you.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 12:25 AM
-3

You're probably right. I didn't get that the story was fake, only that the picture wasn't related to the story.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 12:21 AM
-17

I get that the picture is real. I meant that it is "fake" as in "not related to the story".
/r/MensRights24/03/14 12:20 AM
-19

Judging from your post history, I'm pretty sure you are the moron here.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 12:17 AM
-21

Is there any reason to believe it isn't? The only thing I see from the link is that the picture matches another story(which is what I meant by "fake"). A screenshot of an address bar that says "cnn.com" doesn't prove anything either way.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 12:15 AM
-40

So, the picture was fake, but the story is still horrible! If a girl was really sexually abused, two days suspension and no authorities is certainly not OK! edit: when you decide to downvote, please tell me why.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 11:13 PM
2

Have you thought about any action against the police for allowing her to stay in your apartment? Even if you can accept that they arrested you instead of her, its clear that it was a serious mistake on their part to not allow you to secure your place before going to jail.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:42 AM
0

How about we stop comparing totally different situations as if they were the same thing? There is no background information, no facts, no anything. Just a bunch of replies. Stop acting like butthurt people. Start acting like the smart, intelligent persons that you are, and look beyond this lame attempt at comparing something that none of you know to be comparable.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 02:04 AM
1

Sorry if im a bit late to the party, but i just want to make sure you give a great presentation. Im not gonna comment on the actual content, only the presentation: You have waaay to much text on just about every slide. They are very overloaded. The only slide that has an adequate amount of text is the one called "Shocking stats". You probably need to use a bigger font on that slide. I don't know how you plan on doing this, but with all that text, I fear that you'll just read aloud whatever is on…
/r/MensRights07/12/13 02:08 PM
17

Why doesn't anyone challenge stuff like this? It seems to me that examples like this, are perfect in showing the biased system and the discrimination against men. Im not from the US, so I don't know how this work. Hasn't anyone brought the child support scheme to the supreme court, or anything?
/r/MensRights14/08/13 10:59 PM
1

Its not about what you think, its about what you can document.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 12:39 PM
7

Please stop statements like that. It just makes you(and the rest of MensRights) look like we are butt hurt. International outcry doesn't happen because its women being killed. It is happening because women are being killed for things that we do not consider to be a big deal and because they are being killed in horrible ways, like stoning.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:31 PM
1

I can see some of the issues from both sides. In an argument, there is nothing more frustrating than having your opponent walk away from you and refusing to handle the conflict. The conflict needs to be resolved. Otherwise they just pile up until everything explodes one day. That being said, every person has a right to refuse a discussion or to walk away from it for a while. No matter how frustrating it is when you are all worked up over something, its that persons right to disengage. The fact t…
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:50 AM
3

I'd step it down a notch, and move away from the "she is a feminist"-view. Since it is a school magazine, there must be some sort of editor. I'll assume that it is the teacher who changed your work. I would ask(I would actually demand) the editor in charge to print a notice in the next edition, apologizing for the "mistake" along with printing the original artwork. I wouldn't go into "this is a feminist issue", because doing that could backfire(Even though it may be true, you shouldn't 'speculat…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 11:04 AM
2

Upvote for you, young man! It is nice to see someone who cares enough about the view points of other people to actually take the time to understand why they are the way they are!
/r/MensRights08/03/13 01:07 AM
2

I think the reason for much of the difference in perspective is that the European countries are more focused on the preservation and the functionality of the country as a whole, where the US consists of individuals, who historically had to fight for themselves. This also explains the different positions on universal health care, high taxes, and so on.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 09:49 AM
2

Well, all I can say is that we disagree. You should of course have every right to only let the people you want, into your own personal house. But you can't discriminate against certain groups/genders/whatever in public space. In a public space, we all need to function together, and we can't allow a person to deny a service to a certain group, based on his own (stupid) ideas. If he wants to provide that service, he has to do it on equal terms for all.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:32 PM
1

Thats illegal. The law says that it is not illegal to differentiate, if there is "a valid legitimate reason" for doing so, as long as "the means employed are appropriate and necessary". This would mean that it is for instance allowed to have a womens-only gym, since the need for public decency/modesty and the execution or sports activities is a legitimate goal, and since there was no inappropriate and unnecessary means used in obtaining the needs for public decency and sports activities. (This w…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:33 PM
5

Isn't there some sort of agency that handles stuff like this? In Denmark, we have the Board of Equal Treatment, which handles cases like this. Isn't there something similar in the US, or would it be required to go through a civil lawsuit ?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:27 AM
21

I have discussed this many times before in here, and it seems to me that US Americans have a, to me, very strange tendency to not see this as sexism or differential treatment, but rather as a natural aspect of private ownership and free market conditions. This is very strange to us europeans, as this would be very much illegal. In the EU, you are not allowed to differentiate based on gender. That also means that you are not allowed to charge different prices, based on gender.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 11:20 PM
2

I see your point. I don't know what else to call it, though. It is clear that she had sex without wanting it, but that doesn't make it rape in the traditional sense.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 11:17 AM
4

Can you guys please stop turning this into an issue. Every other post is about how men are not able to read minds. No one says that. There are only 3 fucking lines of the answer. Stop jumping to conclusions. She was raped. No question. She had sex against her will. That is the very definition of rape. That doesn't mean that the guy did anything wrong. He could have been more careful, because there is a damn big difference between being 16 and 19, but there is no reason to believe that he carried…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 08:23 PM
3

This should be the most upvoted comment in here. Thank you for providing valuable input.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:57 PM
0

I can say for a fact that every single firefighter in Sweden that is incapable of actually doing their job is a woman. Then you should have some sort of data to back it up. Please provide it. I am sure that the swedish government would like to see it as well. Because their gender IS the reason they are inferior firefighters. No it is not. It is specific issues that makes them inferior. There is too much diversity in 3.5 billion people, or in the ~4 million Swedish women, for you to say that the …
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:55 PM
0

No one is saying: "All women are inferior". No, technically not. But it is the sense you are left with, when you read the posts. And that is why i am so focused on not generalizing and about sticking to the actual issues. What people are saying is that: "Every fire-fighter that is inferior, is a women". And that is very problematic. While there is certainly no indication in that statement that says that that every woman firefighter is inferior, it does use their gender as the reason for being in…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:56 PM
-2

I don't care what you would guess. You need to back up your argument with facts, not gut feelings. The ONLY statistic here is that two women took 10 minutes to break down a door, not that there is a problem with any other women or women in general. There is some sense in investigating if women are not up to the task, if the initial requirements aren't based on the actual requirements needed. But there is no sense in jumping to conclusions.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 04:44 PM
0

We can all agree that firefighters should be top notch at their game. No question. And i don't believe in different requirements for genders. But i also don't believe in saying that all women are inferior because a few women have proven to be. You need to address the specific issues and the actual issues. One issue is that there are different requirements, and that is problematic and should be addressed. The other issue is that two women had trouble breaking down a door. There is no evidence tha…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 04:40 PM
-3

There is no evidence that in general women have a hard time breaking down doors. There is evidence for two people having a hard time, and then this leads to a discussion on separate requirements for the genders, and that discussion is completely valid. But there is no point in assuming that women, as a gender, are inferior in various situations, just because a few women have proven to be inferior in various situations. And that generalization is what I am warning people against making, both beca…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 04:35 PM
-5

First of all, the fact that you use the term "these people" just proves the necessity of my statement. Don't make it into a "us-vs-them" thing. Second, the only actual information here is that two female firefighters took 11 minutes to break down a door. Not that females in general unable to do firefighting. The discussion on reducing the demands that women needs to meet, is very valid. But there is no indication that women in general are inferior in breaking down doors or in firefighting.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 04:25 AM
-5

So, this was discussed 3 days ago, here in /r/MensRights. I'll basically just copy the post i made back then, because I believe my point to be important: What bugs me, is the generalizing statement that "female firefighters take more than 10 minutes to break down a door". This exact statement is very much what keeps us(as in mens rights movements) back. It is a discriminating and generalizing statement. We need to free ourselves from that kind of talk. We need to be specific and focused on the a…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 03:32 AM
3

What was the feminists argument for not calling it a sport? I get that calling it a sport would make Varsity lose a lot of income, but I don't get why the feminist didn't want to call it a sport. I can sort of see the point in it being art as opposed to sport, but if that is the only argument, its just semantics. Was there any other connection between the feminist and Varsity, than just the fact that Varsity benefits financially from her position on the issue?
/r/MensRights24/02/13 05:24 PM
1

I wasn't thinking on the carnival specifically, but yes, that is part of it. It may very well be that I am wrong, since I really don't know much about Brazil, but I have the perception that the women body is much more idolized than it is in other places. But I am sure that it is much more diverse than I make it out to be. Anyway, I understand the issues you are trying to raise, but I just don't see it as a big deal. There are many other areas where improvement of mens rights is more critical tha…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:56 PM
1

First of all, I have no idea about the dialogue in the commercial, but that doesn't really matter. It just makes the commercial really, really weird. Why was Psy there? I don't see anything wrong with this. Part of advertising is presenting certain stereotypes and prejudices. And I am sure that some women think it is nasty with a lot of chest hair. A lot of men thinks that women with (too much) hair is nasty, too. In fact, I think it is hypocritical of men to complain about this commercial, cons…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:33 PM
6

The article, and the comments made here about how gender-prioritization shouldn't be prioritized above actual skills, are completely valid, and I completely agree with those. If there is a woman with the skills needed, there is no reason that she shouldn't be a firefighter. End of story. What bugs me, is the generalizing statement that "female firefighters take more than 10 minutes to break down a door". This exact statement is very much what keeps us(as in mens rights movements) back. It is a d…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:01 PM
1

Please read my other replies in order to find out what i mean by "the cause".
/r/MensRights17/02/13 03:12 AM
2

Its a joke because it is supposed to be funny. You see the "lol" in the headline? It does not make a valid point. It makes the mens rights movement look like we think all women are a bunch of idiots towards men. Its bad for our image. Focus on the real deal and the actual issues, not stupid and generalizing pictures. Finally, I did try to google PC troll. Nothing explanatory came up.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 02:56 AM
0

I comment because it is stuff like this, that makes us look bad. The mens rights movement is not something to joke about. Its a serious issue, and projecting the kind of seriousness that the pictures does, makes it seem like we think the whole idea is a joke. Also, your "don't like it, don't look" philosophy is pretty stupid, because if no one stands up to this shit, then noone will see that we are taking this seriously. Or maybe i should just say to you "if you don't like my comment, thne don't…
/r/MensRights17/02/13 02:40 AM
9

I disagree!
/r/MensRights16/02/13 04:48 PM
11

Don't post stuff like this. You are hurting the cause. It may be funny, but we need to be serious about the issue.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:43 AM
3

If you only look at the time spent on an actual job Note that the low number of hours is because the study addresses each day of the year, not each working day of the year. And as you may know, Denmark has a lot of holidays. I think that explains it.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 11:13 AM
1

Well, that is the question. I would like to see how much time women use on house work, but I can't find the original report anywhere.. Women do probably spend more time on house-related work, but I'd like to see something more definitive before deciding on the issue. The 2 hours and 17 minutes that men spend on house work already seems pretty high to me, so if women were to do the same(or greater), there'd be plenty done around the house. But yes, you are also right in the fact that the hours yo…
/r/MensRights10/02/13 09:06 PM
10

Don't talk like that. First of all, there are plenty of reasons to have this study. Just because you seem to think it is common knowledge, doesn't mean that it is. And the factual and objective conclusions provided by the study does indeed add to the pile of evidence needed by the mens rights movement. But most importantly, the way you are acting makes you and everyone else in here look like chauvinists. And it hurts us all. Please address the issues at hand instead of attacking an entire gender…
/r/MensRights10/02/13 07:17 PM
1

At the risk of sounding chauvinistic, she probably just "needed" someone to set her straight and to let her know that her bullshit is not tolerated. The actual content is much less important than the emotion that went into his speech. (But don't go around making stuff up, of course)
/r/MensRights05/02/13 03:04 PM
1

Thank you for your input. I really agree with what you are saying. Both with the thing about attracting various unwanted elements and with the fact that some posts are just too stupid to not downvote. The main problem i see is that we, as the subscribers of MensRights, do not do enough to combat the trend of appearing to be sexists. And I see a lot of posts that are vindictive or people saying that we should fight fire with fire and so on. As long as we don't hold a moral high ground, we can gai…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 01:00 PM
1

Im sure its better than many other subreddits, but it still sucks. I have to say that i see a lot of what either is or can appear as old-school sexism. I pointed that out, and was told that i "reek of estrogen" and other remarks like that. Its fine if you don't agree with me, but if you are going to downvote me, you could at least take a few seconds to write a reply.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 10:45 AM
-4

I have one big problem with this post: It has nothing to do with feminism. Sure, the lady is a jerk who could have chosen to provide support to her boyfriend instad of ripping on his late father, but that is still irrelevant to mens rights. I see 90% of the replies to this post being about how she is a cunt or a bitch or "a stupid feminist", and regardless of the fact that she may have been, its not relevant to this topic. And she even did apologize to him. What this is, is two people that are t…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 06:13 PM
1

Really? Thats your best comeback? I am a woman? Jesus. You are just like a feminist..You don't care about equality, you want do dominate women. You are no better than the feminists. Terrible. If that other guys comment set us back 100 years, then this comment has set us back 1000 years.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 11:01 AM
1

Stop looking for excuses for your previous posts and start accepting that the only way we can "win" this battle is by truly obtaining equality. Don't fight to get the upper hand once again, fight for true equality.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 02:31 AM
1

It has nothing to do with political correctness. It has, however, everything to do with not appearing as an idiot and not alienating everyone from your cause.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 02:11 AM
1

It doesn't matter what you think about women. What matters is how you present your thoughts. And the way you do it is retarded, because it makes you look like a bad guy. I have explained this above, so there is no need to do it again.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 10:39 PM
0

You have got to be the most stupid person online. If i didn't know any better, i'd think you were a troll. The only way to destroy the man=bad/woman=good myth is by bombarding people with positive examples of men and negative examples of women. No, that is the worst way to do it. It will make you and all others look terrible. Smearing campaigns are terrible and nothing good ever comes out from this. It makes the sender of the message look at least as bad as the target. And if you have a problem …
/r/MensRights28/12/12 10:37 PM
-4

Say what you want, but that is the truth. When someone enters this subreddit and see the attitude presented in the headline, they will think that the mens rights movement is a bunch of petty and vindictive idiots. And thinking that hurts us all.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 12:11 PM
-3

Who wants to bet she gets no jail time? Can we PLEASE stop that form of retarded statements. 1) NOTHING in the article suggests that this is in any way a mens rights issue. The only thing that even comes close is that there is dispute on custody, but nothing indicates that the man has been treated wrongfully. 2) Saying what you did makes you and the entire mens rights movement seem like a bunch of retarded idiots who only wants women behind bars. You are literally making it worse for everyone by…
/r/MensRights28/12/12 08:42 AM
1

I don't get the part about why women would destroy your stock if you ran a saloon, so i can't really comment on it. If it is a legitimate concern, then i am sure it could be allowed. In any case, we are talking about a period that was before the womens rights movement and before there was equality. People have to collaborate to even continue surviving even if they hate each other, and it doesn't take force or governments to make that happen. Yes it does. Unless there is a law, you'll find someon…
/r/MensRights26/12/12 07:04 PM
1

I realize you don't consider the US to be civilized, but I don't particularly care. I value my freedom (what little I have left) more then I value your "civilization". I was thinking more along the lines of Saudi Arabia or something like that. I don't consider the US to be particular uncivilized. I value my freedom (what little I have left) more then I value your "civilization". That doesn't make sense. You value your freedom, which means that you value that everyone can deny you certain things …
/r/MensRights26/12/12 05:07 PM
1

Now you are mixing two things. 1) If you chose not to associate with women personally, that is your choice. No question. You can also choose not to associate with blacks or Muslims or whatever. That is your personal choice. 2) If you are a business owner, you can not differentiate between persons, based on sex, race, religion, etc. Its as simple as that. You can't deny certain people to participate in your club, just because its what you want. Do you honestly want to tell every fraternity, every…
/r/MensRights26/12/12 04:12 PM
0

No, it should not. Fact of the matter is that it is illegal to differentiate based on gender, sexuality, race and so on. Its as simple as that. I agree that this is really not that important for mens rights or equality, but it is based on the idea that you can refuse a certain group privileges, and that is wrong. Period.
/r/MensRights26/12/12 04:23 AM
7

He is a member of Radikale Venstre, the party typically seen as the ones with all the right opinions with respect to immigration, LGBT rights and the ones the right balance between just about anything that is opposite, like welfare vs taxes. This leads the party to project a holier-than-thou attitude. Im not saying that they do that, but i can certainly understand why people would think so. In fact, his nickname in the media is Såren(in stead of Sareen), literally meaning "so clean/pure", relati…
/r/MensRights09/12/12 11:00 PM
2

Well, maybe anal sex without regard to gender isn't considered unappealing in those countries.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:23 AM
3

They don't identify as gay. Thats just it. There are many places in the middle east where boys are required to receive anal sex from older males that are not identified homosexuals, since they do not love men. They just like anal sex. They still practice male-on-male sex, but they do not necessarily love their partner in the way that a western homosexual will.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:22 AM
2

Despite the formal disapproval of religious authority, the segregation of women in Muslim societies and the strong emphasis on male virility leads adolescent males and unmarried young men to seek sexual outlets with boys younger than themselves—in one study in Morocco, with boys in the age-range 7 to 13.[22] Men have sex with other males so long as they are the penetrators and their partners are boys, or in some cases effeminate men.[23] Liwat is regarded as a temptation,[24] and anal intercours…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:20 AM
0

No, you you should stop claiming everyone is something because you think they identify with it.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:16 AM
1

Of course the literal meaning of the word "homosexual" makes them that, but again: They do not consider them self to be into men. Its just a natural thing to do for them, i guess.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 03:32 AM
4

It seems strange to us that you can have sex with another man without being gay, but in many middle eastern countries, it was/is quite normal to have homosexual sex without being a homosexual. Just like in jails. Edit: Jesus, this has got to be the stupidest bunch of replies i have ever seen on reddit. Let me be clear: Just because YOU consider someone to be a homosexual, doesn't mean that he identify as one. Your reasons and labels may not even be able to apply to that person. I have never seen…
/r/MensRights28/11/12 11:43 PM
1

I like how you have to hide behind another username in order to attempt offending me.. Real internet though guy!
/r/MensRights10/11/12 07:31 PM
1

Well, its a thin line. I'd say that said line is very close to being crossed if he seeks out help in a forum dedicated to bloodthirsty men that would love nothing more than to prove a potentially sexist/misinformed/whatever woman wrong. The dedication that is present in this subreddit can very easily turn in to what i would label as over-aggressive hand-holding, if you know what i mean. I am not seeing anything wrong with a guy asking certain, concrete questions, e.g. "I am wondering if the main…
/r/MensRights10/11/12 04:50 AM
10

So, a lot of people tell you to go above the teachers head and discuss it with the principal and/or the media. Lets not get carried away. It may be that the teacher is not the terrible, man-eating bitch that most people in here assume or make her out to be. Maybe she literally doesn't know about male rape and the other parts that you raise in your paper. It is not uncommon for females to be unaware of this or to be taught to deny it due to e.g. physical differences("Males can't be raped because …
/r/MensRights10/11/12 04:28 AM
7

I will now provide you with one upvote for realizing and admitting that you made a mistake. This is perhaps the rarest kind of post on reddit. I salute you for being able to admit your errors instead of trying to ignore them or defend them like every other post would do :)
/r/MensRights10/11/12 04:20 AM
1

I get what you are saying about it being a social problem, but it still results in the business setting unfair standards and rules, and that is illegal. A simplified analogy is that it is still illegal to steal, even though you need food to survive. I don't think it is unreasonable to demand that businesses do not differentiate because of gender, and that is also the law. If the business needs a certain clientele, they can target that group by e.g. serving stuff that appeals to said group. But t…
/r/MensRights06/11/12 08:05 PM
0

I didn't say i was a communist. I said that one of the thoughts of communism were that exact thought.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 01:03 AM
0

No. There is a difference between you giving a gift(or having sex) with a special someone, and you as a shopkeeper denying someone a service. Then the shopkeeper must give all his goods away, in the interest of all people. Yes, that is one of the thoughts of communism. In return, the shopkeeper gets what he needs and wants(in theory, in practice to a lesser extent).
/r/MensRights06/11/12 12:59 AM
0

1) Because equality is a human right - It goes for all humans. You can't deny someone something that you do not deny others. 2) The general requirement for equality must weigh higher than the requirement for a single shop keeper to maximize his profit, since the principle of equality is of interest to all people.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 12:33 AM
8

I am not arguing that they aren't the same. I am arguing that they are equal. Especially when it comes to something as silly as getting to buy something in a store.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 12:14 AM
2

No, like i wrote, it is a human right.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:59 PM
2

Again, it appears that the rules are similar in Denmark and the UK. Just file a complaint with the EHRC. They even have a hotline you can call for advice and information. Edit: And just to be clear, that kind of "women-free-men-pay" thing still goes on in Denmark. But the only way to combat it, is to complain and call attention to the problem.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:53 PM
0

It goes against the principle of equal treatment, which is a human right. That alone should invalidate your statement.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:49 PM
4

Businesses should be free to decide how to maximize their profits. Thats a terrible argument. It would essentially mean that i could refuse selling stuff to black people because i wanted to "attract a clientele that isn't commonly associated with the typical black person". Or in other words, "i don't want to do business with blacks because they don't buy enough to make it worth my time".
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:42 PM
3

Have a look here. I know this goes on in just about every line in front of every club every night, but when it is as blatant as you say, with the bouncer literally telling you that you can't go in because you are not girls or do not bring any girls, it seems to be thing to complain about. I checked the danish Board of Equal Treatment, and there are currently fire rulings in their database regarding clubs: It was found to be illegal that a club required men to be at least 25 while only requiring …
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:39 PM
5

Have you considered filing a complaint? Since you are from the UK, your country probably have some sort of equal treatment board or similar. I believe it is required by a certain directive that each country implements a board in order to address the issue of unfair treatment. You could consider raising the issue with them. It sucks that it has to be that way, but if you don't complain, no one will do anything about it.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:15 PM
16

None of those are true, except perhaps the one about paying for dinner. Can we PLEASE focus on real mens rights, and not over-simplified and non-existing issues.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 02:24 PM
8

So, here are my two cents, as this is the first i have ever heard about this case: There is way too much emphasis on the gender aspect in this case. And there should be just about none. Has there been any indications that the bus driver would not have been suspended if he was hitting a man? Because that is what is being implied in this petition. And i just don't think that is correct. It is common practice to suspend persons while an investigation is running. And i am sure that the bus company h…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 08:41 PM
7

I don't get that amber alert checklist.. Even if you answer no to every question, you eventually get down to question 5, which overrules everything else.. How does that work?
/r/MensRights16/09/12 09:18 AM
1

There will be no cookies! Only rødgrød med fløde!
/r/MensRights19/06/12 09:22 PM
1

Damn, youre on to us! We are gonna have to silence you if you don't join us!
/r/MensRights19/06/12 05:24 PM
1

I had no idea there was such a thing as "danish pants"? :D
/r/MensRights19/06/12 05:00 PM
1

Thank you :) Both my parents were English teachers, so that was a special attention area during my childhood :p
/r/MensRights19/06/12 05:00 PM
1

Sorry about that :) You can throw everything through google translate and it will pretty much tell you what goes on.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 04:57 PM
1

But it will not appear on your criminal record that you were accused, right? Its only in internal police files?
/r/MensRights19/06/12 04:56 PM
2

That is a bit too extreme for my taste, but what the hell :)
/r/MensRights19/06/12 04:55 PM
1

And it tastes awesome! We would always eat it when visiting my grandmother :) Edit: It struck me that you might not know that it is actually a dessert :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B8dgr%C3%B8d
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:41 PM
4

We're just discussing various aspects of the case, where the burden of evidence is, how its word-against-word and how he can proceed with the case. But it does unfortunately seem to be a word-against-word case with no proof of anything either way.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:40 PM
1

Har du sagt det til politiet? Det virker jo sært hvis hun har sovet helt op til at du har smidt hende ud. Måske det var værd at påpege overfor politiet at hun har meget at tabe på at sige sandheden :)
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:37 PM
1

Har politiet afhørt vennen? Hvis pigen er så modbydelig som hun lyder, må vennen da på en eller anden måde vide at der er noget galt.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:21 PM
1

Det har som jeg ser det ikke noget med omvendt bevisbyrde at gøre, men snare manglende bevisbyrde. For at du kan blive dømt for voldtægt, skal det kunne bevises at du voldtog hende. Det kan det ikke, og derfor bliver du ikke dømt(eller derfor bliver sigtelsen ikke opretholdt). Men det kan åbenbart heller ikke bevises at hun løj, da hun sagde at hun blev voldtaget, så derfor kan hun ikke sigtes. Men det er mærkeligt at hendes historie(som jeg ikke kender) kan stemme overens med en fysisk undersøg…
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:09 PM
1

Du kommer nok til at slås en del med det, fordi det er sådan et unfair emne, men du må blive ved med at kæmpe. Og så skriv en række kronikker, kontakt ekstrabladet og hvad-ved-jeg.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 01:56 PM
5

It doesn't matter that it is only five or six hours. You should be able to get reimbursement anyway. If the two police officers who picked you up were in any way rude or out of line, then file a complaint. Your lawyer should be able to help you with everything.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 01:35 PM
16

Danish guy here: You(and everyone else in this discussion) should keep in mind of things: 1) The police can detain you for 24 hours if you are a suspect of a crime. That has nothing to do with the case or the girl who accused you, its a consequence of living with Danish laws. Granted, she is the one who caused your arrest, but the fact is that it is "just something you have to put up with", and it makes sense. Its the acceptable compromise between detaining someone indefinitely while a case is b…
/r/MensRights19/06/12 01:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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