petesaq Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
5	I cannot defend A Voice for Men's Paul Elam from his scathing comments in 2010 about women "begging to be raped". If the feminists should take their worst to task, why not us? I agree. Radicalism often appears due to individuals using hyperbole and exaggeration to make a point or stand out, then someone using that as a frame of reference to do the same to make a point or stand out. You end up with everyone lined up on the far ends with no middle ground. We tend to respond to a radical view, with an equally and opposite radical view. Vicious cycle	/r/MensRights	08/06/14 03:16 PM
4	I cannot defend A Voice for Men's Paul Elam from his scathing comments in 2010 about women "begging to be raped". If the feminists should take their worst to task, why not us? Yeah, my opinion. Are they? Hating for no good reason is certainly a radical view. But that does not have to make them a radical. Someone can have horrendous views, like racism, and not be a radical. Woodrow Wilson was a voracious racist who thought Birth of a Nation was extremely accurate. He also tried to keep us out of World War I and prevent punitive damages to Germany knowing it would lead to World War II. Racism is not radical-its pretty much the norm, on some level or concept, worldwide. …	/r/MensRights	08/06/14 03:04 PM
4	I cannot defend A Voice for Men's Paul Elam from his scathing comments in 2010 about women "begging to be raped". If the feminists should take their worst to task, why not us? Well, then don't be aligned with it. You don't have to support every view and opinion of someone consider a like minded person. Call out the person and the message, but that does not mean you cant align yourself with them on other or similar issues. No run is running for Jesus here, perfection is autocratic.	/r/MensRights	08/06/14 02:57 PM
5	I cannot defend A Voice for Men's Paul Elam from his scathing comments in 2010 about women "begging to be raped". If the feminists should take their worst to task, why not us? with very few exceptions, a person may have some radical views without needing to be labeled a radical. Meaning, a person whose views overwhelming, almost without exception,fall on a far end of the spectrum is a radical. A person whose views sometimes, maybe even often, fall on the far end-but not overwhelmingly is not a radical. denounce the message, not the messenger in these circumstances. No need to personalize the disagreement	/r/MensRights	08/06/14 02:37 PM
0	TIL that for three years Pee Wee Herman had to register his address with the sheriff's office and could not be in the company of minors without their parents' permission despite child porn charges being DROPPED! It's in the citations of the article you posted above	/r/MensRights	09/02/14 06:46 AM
2	TIL that for three years Pee Wee Herman had to register his address with the sheriff's office and could not be in the company of minors without their parents' permission despite child porn charges being DROPPED! Plea deal	/r/MensRights	08/02/14 02:09 PM
2	TIL that for three years Pee Wee Herman had to register his address with the sheriff's office and could not be in the company of minors without their parents' permission despite child porn charges being DROPPED! We're they dropped on the condition of sex offender registration?	/r/MensRights	08/02/14 10:00 AM
9	TIL that for three years Pee Wee Herman had to register his address with the sheriff's office and could not be in the company of minors without their parents' permission despite child porn charges being DROPPED! Part of plea agreement I believe.	/r/MensRights	08/02/14 03:52 AM
3	Is this a good subreddit for this screenshot? Would You be equally as upset if the genders were reversed?	/r/MensRights	02/02/14 02:24 AM
0	You wouldn't define a thief as "typically black", so Oxford shouldn't refer to a rapist as "typically male". (Considering how young boys can be sexually abused by older women) I'm arguing point about an analogy, so I don't have any sexism to defend. But if you can't figure out the answer to your style question, that's not my problem, try a book	/r/MensRights	26/01/14 08:01 PM
3	A true hero dies in a fire while the world centers concern on how his mother feels about it I know, those survivors are POS.	/r/MensRights	26/01/14 12:59 PM
-1	You wouldn't define a thief as "typically black", so Oxford shouldn't refer to a rapist as "typically male". (Considering how young boys can be sexually abused by older women) The definition of rape from the beginning of time was Male on female, whether you think that's fair or not is not the point. The recorded history of rape equates to male raping a female. The definition of thievery has nothing to do with race. That's why it's a false analogy, the two occurrences are not comparable.	/r/MensRights	26/01/14 12:55 PM
3	You wouldn't define a thief as "typically black", so Oxford shouldn't refer to a rapist as "typically male". (Considering how young boys can be sexually abused by older women) Yes but, my issue is the comparison is false	/r/MensRights	25/01/14 03:04 PM
6	You wouldn't define a thief as "typically black", so Oxford shouldn't refer to a rapist as "typically male". (Considering how young boys can be sexually abused by older women) I see your point but I think that's a bad analogy. The typical black thief is an American stereotype, and relatively new in the history of thievery. Rape as a male action is a stereotype and assumption since the beginning of records of society. Female rape as a stereotype is even more new than the black thief. Not comparable	/r/MensRights	25/01/14 01:17 PM
1	"I'm a nun, there's no way I could be pregnant..." ...Ok?	/r/MensRights	19/01/14 12:55 PM
-2	New subreddit for those who like and respect women but also realize there are a few issues that males need to push. Men's rights is a laughable term for the innately selfish and dumb without any vision outside of their own eyes.	/r/MensRights	11/01/14 11:14 AM
1	Question from a Muslim guy.... Gender specific treatment is not the same as rules of how to treat a gender. The former implies a reaction to gender differences ( normal) while the latter, to me at least, implies a preconception of how someone should act based on a gender without regard to that person's belief in their gender role. Similar to a woman believing a man is unable to bond with their child as much as a woman can therefore in the event of divorce the woman should have "dibs" on primary physical custody.	/r/MensRights	09/01/14 01:06 AM
-5	Question from a Muslim guy.... What attributes are different that would then need different rules for each gender?	/r/MensRights	08/01/14 02:59 AM
-6	Question from a Muslim guy.... Yes	/r/MensRights	08/01/14 02:57 AM