TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

pocketknifeMT Archive

View 5 posts and 1,739 comments by pocketknifeMT on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,739 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

Probably nonsense, simply because doing all that while pregnant or with small children is unrealistic. It doesn’t matter that women could technically do the job if it’s not practical for a huge portion of your expected lifetime.
/r/MensRights05/01/24 01:01 PM
2

It’s not a coincidence that there’s suddenly progress on this front. Now that women are identifying as men, they’ll get their way and we all benefit. Kinda damning indictment of society in general, but I’m not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth.
/r/MensRights21/06/23 10:31 PM
0

Why? This only affects the tiny percentage of men at the top getting all the dates. The average guy will never grace that app, not because he wouldn't act that way, but for the simple expedient of actually not ever having the chance of acting that way. Even those men won't be affected really, because there are plenty of fish in the sea for them. Frankly I don't really see the downside for society here.
/r/MensRights18/06/23 02:09 AM
3

My sister did this to 2 guys. Bother were decent guys, and did nothing wrong. And she's maybe a 2-3. Even if she lost weight, she'd only be a 6. My parents legitimately regret sending her to college on the basis that she's going to ruin her own life because of it.
/r/MensRights18/06/23 02:03 AM
2

They are actually the most delusional. The delta between their desires (same as all other women) and their reality is the greatest. an 8 holding out for a 10 is maybe understandable, especially with beauty being the in eye of the beholder. That's striking distance maybe. A 3 holding out for a 10 is just weapons grade delusion.
/r/MensRights18/06/23 02:00 AM
2

I think society is in this odd transitionary phase where societal conditioning of boys/men is lagging behind reality it's not. It's just that society needs men to be disposable. It's the grease for the wheels of civilization.
/r/MensRights18/06/23 01:54 AM
6

You can’t really buy intimacy. You can buy sex, but not intimacy.
/r/MensRights04/06/23 02:34 PM
11

This is objectively wrong though. If they don’t get it from a man, they get it from the man, Uncle Sam.
/r/MensRights04/06/23 02:31 PM
4

This. I make good money and I get exactly the same at bats as I did when I didn’t make good money, basically none. Maybe this is different if you flaunt it? But it’s hard to flaunt it on OLD, unless you take pictures on the hood of you exotic sports car? And even if that did work, you are attracting the exact sort of women you don’t want in the first place.
/r/MensRights22/05/23 10:50 PM
2

I’m not sure they consciously realize they do it. Your mother probably lied about this to you growing up, and it’s hard to say mothers do this intentially.
/r/MensRights22/05/23 10:38 PM
2

Yep. “All men are bastards/don’t put in effort” is the cry. All men actually means the top 5-20 percent, depending on who you ask. And of course those men act like that. They have what amounts to a magic sex summoning rectangle in their pocket. They don’t have to even be civil. And depending on how you look at it, the rest of the guys are either lumped in with “all men”, or worse and possibly more accurate…don’t even register as human in their eyes. And the normal guy’s complaint isn’t anything …
/r/MensRights22/05/23 10:31 PM
1

I’m in Tallinn right now, and this weekend all the bars were doing Eurovision promotions, like bars and restaurants do in the US for the Super Bowl. I went out with people, specifically for the company, but watching the event itself was like a fever-dream. Just baffling and incomprehensible. And people got angry over the results, also like sports. People really hate Sweden, basically for winning so much. They are the NE Patriots of Eurovision. The Finn’s insane Cha Cha Cha song was clearly the f…
/r/MensRights16/05/23 11:19 AM
3

Sure they can. Accuse you of abuse, restraining order. Now you’re out of your house, yet paying for it.
/r/MensRights12/05/23 11:12 PM
1

It’s not really even a contract. Contracts need to have consideration.
/r/MensRights12/05/23 11:06 PM
8

Yes. But she presumably doesn’t have any money, so is judgement-proof. You would spend more on the case than you could hope to recover.
/r/MensRights09/05/23 12:02 PM
10

And she’s presumably judgement-proof.
/r/MensRights09/05/23 12:01 PM
6

depends if the media or activist groups pick up on it.
/r/MensRights02/03/23 08:57 PM
2

You were expecting the courts to hold themselves to account? Lol.
/r/MensRights20/02/23 01:47 AM
2

It’s just so advantageous to do so, with zero downside. Even if your accusations are proven objectively wrong, there’s no consequences for it. Meanwhile you get tons of stuff, defacto, and the guy is fighting an uphill battle.
/r/MensRights20/02/23 01:44 AM
2

It will go nowhere. Qualified immunity, dismissed.
/r/MensRights20/02/23 01:41 AM
6

Unsurprisingly, the court system has made up a whole formalized system to never take any blame for their decisions. It’s called qualified immunity. There’s no basis in law for it. The legal system just made that shit up and said “you can’t sue us for stuff we did while doing our jobs”
/r/MensRights20/02/23 01:40 AM
2

Just way after the election… which was the whole point of the lies and censorship.
/r/MensRights29/01/23 03:51 PM
7

You never know when Gustavus Adolphus might come pillaging…
/r/MensRights27/01/23 01:42 AM
6

Volcels, surely? This is a choice, not involuntary.
/r/MensRights26/01/23 01:09 AM
2

Those are the rules: Be attractive. Don’t be unattractive.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 11:09 PM
1

She doesn’t want to lose her virginity. She wants a marriage, but presumably to a top 1% guy. After all, she’s a 1% woman. An olympic athlete. Surely she deserves such a man. Announcing she won’t have sex before marriage basically ended any interest any of those guys would have had in her. They can get women on demand practically. And she, like most women, literally does not see most men. Doesn’t even register in her perception. So subjectively, she’s right. Revealing guys won’t get any in a rea…
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 11:07 PM
1

They believe it because it’s true. Say something they don’t like and they will try to ruin your life for it, and succeed a not insignificant amount of the time.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 10:56 PM
1

The terrible message of taking responsibility for your own life? It’s delivered as crudely and rage-baiting as possible, but at core it’s basically Jordan Peterson’s position. Also, who knows about the trafficking thing. That’s at least plausible, but comes at a suspicious time. They could have gone after him at any point for years, but waiting until he pissed off powerful people is telling.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 10:18 PM
1

I’d still bet men are still the majority, even with an honest accounting.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 10:03 PM
3

Except for 50% of the nerve endings not being there anymore, and the babies who die from shock, because they don’t bother with anesthetic. Also the guy who just made it popular in the 19th century was a quack non-doctor. Invented graham crackers and was generally anti-sex. It’s popular to this day because hospitals can charge an extra line item, and then sell the foreskin to cosmetic companies. And it’s not popular in the rest of the world because it’s not medically necessary and then didn’t hav…
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 09:21 PM
–

…but you dislike that they say that right?
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/23 09:06 PM
1

Easy. Harems. It’s already happening, informally.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/23 07:56 PM
1

This is called hypergamy, and there is literally decades of studies and proof for it… People just like to pretend it’s not true because (anecdote about their friend). Statistics don’t lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/23 07:43 PM
12

That it’s like every other company?
/r/MensRights21/11/22 02:24 AM
2

All of those examples aren't because of petitions, but other things that happened concurrently. Protests, civil unrest, etc. Nobody was like, justice for George Floyd? well, even though all these people are protesting and literally setting cities on fire, it's this petition that really pushed it over the edge. These arguments are like saying umbrella use drives raincoat use
/r/MensRights22/05/22 10:32 PM
2

The whole point is that she should be a felon, as she committed what is normally a felony. But not in this case, because reasons.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 04:16 PM
2

A felon is charge with, and convicted of, a felony.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 02:49 PM
3

Name even one.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 02:48 PM
1

She's not a felon though?
/r/MensRights22/05/22 01:44 PM
4

No, never. But that is true even if it was a new one. Petitions are worse than pointless. They give people a false sense that they're doing something.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 01:40 PM
5

Gotta sign the petition to make petitions matter first.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 01:38 PM
4

Or be ginger.
/r/MensRights15/05/22 09:57 PM
3

Well, and there are tons of corporations happy with the status quo and don't want liability.
/r/MensRights15/05/22 09:55 PM
5

The only men in HR I've known are either tech recruiters or the axeman. The guy who gets to tell potentially unstable people bad news.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:04 PM
2

... For the underclass. It's like college tuition assistance. Super poor and you get tons of help. Parents just above the poverty line? Pay your own way, you privileged fucker!
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen30/10/21 01:23 AM
1

Because a huge subset of literal second class citizens has never led to anything bad happening...
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen30/10/21 01:18 AM
3

"A man is given the choice between loving women and understanding them." -Ninon de L'Enclos
/r/Divorce_Men12/07/21 01:15 AM
1

It was AT&T before it reformed like the terminator.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen28/05/21 02:23 AM
0

It is a zero sum game though. There is X attention to go around. It does make people who complain look hateful and bitter though.
/r/MensRights22/05/21 05:15 AM
1

You know the Giving Tree? Presumably at some point they'll want furniture crafted from your bones.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen05/04/21 03:06 PM
4

Surely it's Dr Beta, Mr. Chad. Mr. Hyde was the violent destructive one.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen05/04/21 02:53 PM
2

The people serious about cardio are generally jogging outside, not a gym.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen04/04/21 10:33 PM
2

I thought cardio was best in terms of burned calories?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen04/04/21 08:41 PM
12

My favorite aspect is the gaslighting. Nobody will admit to any of this, and everyone has to simply pretend that women don't want assholes despite all the evidence to the contrary. Bring it up and you're 'just bitter' or something to that effect. It can't be that it's an accurate observation.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen04/04/21 07:09 AM
4

I Google this term, as I hadn't heard of it before. Read the description on know your meme and thought to myself... Oh that sub could have lasted long. Down the page a bit... 24 whole days before being banned.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen22/03/21 03:33 AM
1

It actually uses pictures instead of words so they don't have to localize translations. Lego does the same thing.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen11/03/21 10:44 PM
2

There was a Tweet I saw the other day that was basically: I thought travel pictures in profiles were a hobby preference thing, but I just realized it's actually class signaling. Only the well-off can travel once they are real adults.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen06/03/21 11:39 PM
9

Society used to enforce this. Simping itself carried huge social costs to the point men wouldn't do it.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen06/03/21 02:25 AM
14

"I want a man with a personal relationship with Jesus" -'has children' -'doesn't want children' Then it's usually double chins... And for some reason pitbulls. It's always pitbulls. Are pitbulls like 50% of all dogs now, or is there some strange correlation here?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/02/21 10:15 PM
6

That's the problem with juries. They're almost never competent.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/04/20 12:18 AM
9

It's actually just liability. They don't want you defending yourself because they're the ones who will be sued over it.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/04/20 12:12 AM
1

Oh, it is. They will take HR first, and then the rest of an institution.
/r/MensRights30/01/20 09:13 PM
24

"Sounds mislabeled then, HR. Should have named it "titty pump room" or something."
/r/MensRights10/01/20 11:42 PM
4

Does this mean in NYC you need 42 bathrooms?
/r/MensRights10/01/20 11:36 PM
5

It's also basically impossible to prove, and white men don't have access to the laws minorities use to launch discrimination lawsuits. Nominally they do, but in practice they don't. And HR isn't trying to remove bias. They want desired outcomes and a system that gives them plausible deniablity for their actions.
/r/MensRights05/01/20 01:20 PM
1

People also live in the green parts of not America... But that hardly matters.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/10/19 12:50 PM
14

Banana hammock.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/10/19 12:47 PM
1

Easy.
/r/MensRights17/10/19 04:30 AM
5

Yeah, but it's often a sort of shit test. So lots of guys will be like "no, I got this." as to pass the test.
/r/MensRights10/08/19 03:58 PM
1

Because it's nice to wake up next to someone... And there is giant social pressure to marry.
/r/MensRights10/08/19 03:50 PM
5

The onion: https://youtu.be/84phU8of02U
/r/MensRights16/07/19 03:01 AM
4

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/amp/
/r/MensRights14/03/19 07:52 AM
5

This was established by someone suing the NYPD for failing to stop the guy stabbing him repeatedly on the subway. The cop was in the same subway car, in uniform, and did nothing.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 02:32 AM
10

Basically that men are bad and need to do better.
/r/MensRights26/01/19 04:08 AM
1

Because he injected politics into one of the few commonly shared social topics that used to be non-political.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/01/19 12:35 AM
3

It's great for admins. They don't have to investigate or assign blame. It's harder to sue them over such a blanket policy as well. It's the best option and administrator has, for them anyway.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/01/19 10:15 PM
2

Not quite. When first enacted, VAWA was actually written gender neutral because feminists never considered there might be so many female aggressors. So when it was up for renewal they modified it to require the Duluth Model as a rubric for who to arrest.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/01/19 10:10 PM
2

Sure it does. Cold hard utility. If the State doesn't help women defraud partners, then the state has to pay for the kids.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/01/19 09:54 PM
2

Bathrooms in Bremen's restaurants and clubs were the most elaborate washrooms I have seen by default.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/01/19 05:44 PM
1

That might indeed be the policy, but then the hammer comes down on whoever actually avails themselves of the policy.
/r/MensRights05/01/19 12:09 AM
2

The better tack is probably the airline stewardess route. Employers can't whore employees out as "part of the job." Airlines said the same thing to stewardesses, Handsy men are part of the job. Nevermind that we basically advertise on that basis. That didn't fly. Neither did the Playboy Club thing once exposed. There is already caselaw to this effect. Letting men grope you can't be a job requirement.
/r/MensRights05/01/19 12:06 AM
1

She can always carry to term and then abandon the child to the state, which is free (to everyone but taxpayers).
/r/MensRights04/01/19 11:56 PM
7

Not for the lawyers. Now they get to gear up for a custody battle, even if there aren't kids to fight over.
/r/MensRights04/01/19 06:31 AM
1

It would have been fine if they put noam chomsky up for it. It's that (R) after his name that really did it for them. They did it to Clarence Thomas as well, and he isn't exactly low on the oppression Olympics totem pole.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 08:40 PM
1

2019 plot twist. Identifies as male, female reporter.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 08:36 PM
2

Presumably this was the common sense rule for forever. Then someone made the argument: Nobody watches female sports, so a career in sports journalism for women is being sandbagged by not being able to do locker room interviews. Also, nobody would dare to force women into live locker room interviews, even if women's sports were popular, televised. So the same argument applies even there. Therefore, you have to let women in to the locker room. Someone should simply sue the NFL on the way out of th…
/r/MensRights03/01/19 08:31 PM
2

I don't know about best. "Most definitive" is probably accurate though.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 06:49 PM
1

They just fund them and make they keynote speakers... Nothing major.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 06:22 PM
3

Snopes carries water for the DNC.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 05:49 PM
6

Oh yeah, sure. They never considered it, but then immediately started advertising her race. Yeah, that totally hangs together...
/r/MensRights03/01/19 05:47 PM
2

Well, we had a little... Kerfuffle over state's right to leave the union a while back. Violent men with guns say States can't leave the union.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 05:35 PM
2

We had a good SU and I felt they had my back I still fail to see the difference between a Student Union and Class President type organizations. At best, they are a powerless wing of the administration used to manufacture consent among students for admin policies.
/r/MensRights26/10/18 06:29 PM
10

If you’re never in such a position, no one can say anything. Uh...he definitely took shit for that position. The Media attack on him about it is the only reason the general public know.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 04:07 PM
2

we save money with the same effect. Not really...
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:49 PM
0

Feeling are always enough.
/r/MensRights08/07/18 08:24 PM
1

You should be able to designate someone else in a legal document.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 09:25 PM
1

Who doesn't? I am naked right now.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 09:23 PM
1

Because it gives them more control. If the FBI wants to fire an employee for some reason, but can't find a legitimate reason... They magically fail their polygraph and are booted out.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 08:54 PM
2

Depends on the court and situation, sadly. The FBI still uses them for recruits and employee evaluation. If you fail there they can punish you and it will hold up in court despite they are relying on something as useful as a dosing rod...
/r/MensRights23/06/18 08:51 PM
2

Polygraphs are not a lie detector. They measure your blood pressure and how much sweat you have on your skin and other such irrelevancies. The inventor of the Polygraph regrets ever making it after seeing what law enforcement did with it. The real life lie detector is actually quite new. FMRI is a no bullshit way to test for conscious lying. A polygraph is some jerry springer shit.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 08:48 PM
1

Rubenesque is the classier term.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 08:31 PM
1

Obesity definitely seems pretty curvy to me... No straight lines. It's simple ego stroking. When NASA tried to stock condoms (for peeing) for astronauts, they had 3 sizes, small medium and large. every single astronaut insisted they were a large... So they just renamed the sizes large, giagantic, and humongous.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 08:29 PM
1

See, if men still had any guts, one of them would have phoned the police and had her arrested. Somehow I think that guy still ends up in HR as a harasser.
/r/MensRights17/06/18 04:32 PM
1

I know arbitration is binding... I mean, I don't know how compensation works in such a case. They aren't covering the cost of a user car or whatever.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 04:11 PM
6

It's my understanding they simply get them to sign releases and agree to pay the judgments (unsure how a custody case ends up on Judge Judy, or how that works in this case), so there isn't a loser per se. Typically its two low lifes arguing over a $5000 car or something like that. Legal themed Jerry Springer. Production just cuts a check to resolve it.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 08:18 AM
10

Well some do...but they are into that sort of thing. Also, interestingly, those probably aren't the ones you have to worry about anyway.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 02:37 AM
3

They were definitely connected party members. I can guarantee that much.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 11:48 PM
1

It's interesting her nome de plume is male. Typically the purpose is to fit in better, and this is the opposite of that in this case.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 03:54 PM
1

This isn't Balder's Gate.
/r/MensRights27/01/18 02:25 PM
1

Fuck their malware ads.
/r/MensRights24/01/18 09:08 AM
1

Do you move in elite social circles? If not, keep your day job.
/r/MensRights24/01/18 08:46 AM
5

It's how institutional feminists reproduce. Angry mob picks and industry and large fish in it to single out and slam with bad PR until they relent and hire feminists to do HR stuff in an attempt to end the bad PR. The feminists adopt policy, hire other feminists, and start ruling with an iron fist because it's like the secret police, basically. Eventually everyone learns what is orthodox, or more likely with engineer types, simply not say anything at all because how does one even know in the fir…
/r/MensRights10/01/18 07:27 AM
2

Why do all these places have to strawman the argument? Because otherwise there are too many questions.
/r/MensRights10/01/18 07:17 AM
3

What does Google get out of this? Initially, they don't get harassed by SJWs, or at least have some basic PR canned response when they do anyway. Eventually, they get a petty tyranny of unproductive people.
/r/MensRights10/01/18 07:14 AM
5

Google hiring based on sex and race is disgusting. Google, being a company and not a person, is literally a sociopath. It doesn't care beyond the fact that not putting on the diversity dog and pony show means the government will come slap them around. If I ran a large company, I too would have a diversity program despite not liking the idea or even agreeing with the premise at all. It's just good business, like lobbying.
/r/MensRights10/01/18 07:10 AM
3

Nobody "cut off" Venezuela. Most people simply refuse to accept their currency because their socialist government kept printing it while production and GDP kept falling (turns out seizing the means of production doesn't work that well without regular maintenance and skilled workers to run it) Failure and starvation is where socialism gets you, every time without fail. 100M dead in the 20th century alone.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 09:38 PM
21

"this guy tried to steal my bags!"
/r/MensRights02/12/17 07:57 PM
5

And now you know why there are metal detectors in courthouses.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 02:57 PM
1

Except an grand jury would "indict a ham sandwich" if asked to by a prosecutor.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 02:56 PM
6

except for the fact that National feminist organisations campaign for it...
/r/MensRights19/08/17 11:29 PM
20

This began because they wanted to protect a Robert E. Lee statue. If you think anyone was out there because of a statue, you haven't been paying attention.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 12:16 PM
1

So... You didn't read the article...
/r/MensRights10/08/17 02:55 PM
2

Just keep your head down and graduate. College will literally be harder for you otherwise. You can try and be an activist if you want the grief and torment, but inviting it at a time in your life when your nutjob opponents have massive leverage over you is objectively a bad idea.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 08:54 PM
8

Any smart & practical biologist will simply not touch these topics with a 20ft pole. There is NO way to win. So the smart move is just to keep your head down so you can keep your career and paychecks coming. Best case scenario you just become one of the mangled corpses some argument against this abuse is built on in the future. What a prize. As soon as this thing hit the internet, this guy's fate was sealed.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 08:31 PM
3

The market is all about the path of least resistance, usually. Google fired this guy to end the PR storm. Nobody else will hire him (unless also as a PR stunt) because they won't want the ire of the left focused on them.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 08:11 PM
2

(that's the joke)
/r/MensRights23/07/17 08:15 PM
4

Excellent. We are in agreement. The social contract is made! Anyone who doesn't agree are savage inhuman monsters, who need to be put down by force if they resist us. In this manner we will remake the world into Utopia. Where all thoses other attempts failed we will succeed, for we have the pure strength of will! (That escalated quickly)
/r/MensRights23/07/17 06:26 PM
9

Not until everyone lives in a manner I approve of.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 05:14 PM
9

Sounds like a fancy pedo trick! /s
/r/MensRights27/06/17 09:50 PM
2

The problem is that that it's not a market decision anymore. The Government took that aspect of property rights away in the Civil Rights Act (1964). We live in a world where it says no discrimination based on sex/race/etc but for some reason men don't count, white people don't count in practice.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:19 PM
5

That's different because it doesn't align with my worldview, so doesn't count.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 03:52 AM
1

Well, it's certainly a lot easier to fabricate a rape claim than say a murder. Though I think CP is the best tool in the bag. You don't even need someone to make a claim. Simply "finding it" on someone is enough.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 06:39 PM
1

Nope. Lizard people are exactly as plausible as the gulf of Tonkin incident never happening.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 08:53 PM
1

To each their own. Michael Moore called it. I think his analysis is spot on here.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 11:15 PM
1

Well, not for lulz so much as out of frustration, but otherwise, Yes.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 11:09 PM
1

But his solutions, when he even has them, and hasn't proposed several mutually exclusive plans, are uniformly terrible.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 09:30 PM
1

But now, when the peacock-proud men of America announce "I voted for Trump, and he won, bitches", we all kinda look tiredly back at them and reply, "...you're proud of that? Still?" you think people are like "Oh no, suddenly we know Trump is a a piece of shit. What have we done?" They are like: "Lol. It took you this long to figure out we upperdecked the toilet that is US politics. Fuck everyone for failing so hard and long." If anything, they are angry their prank isn't having wider effects. On…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 09:26 PM
1

the sandwich in the phrase "Shut up and make me a sandwich"
/r/MensRights08/05/17 09:18 PM
1

With equal rights comes equal responsibilities? I feel Uncle Ben would approve at least...
/r/MensRights08/05/17 09:17 PM
1

Nobody is born Muslim. They grow up and decide to be terrible human beings. Even moderate Islam is incompatible with the modern world. Who better than terrible human beings to mock? If they don't want to be mocked & hated, they should leave other people the fuck alone.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 08:24 PM
10

It's because they have a fixed pie mentality. There are X dollars for domestic abuse. If the feminist lobby can convince the government men can't be abused, they get all the money. They would have to share otherwise.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:44 PM
4

Well, I will believe it when I see it. This stinks of soft science fuckery. Also, I like how quickly we went from "anyone who tries to make distinctions in the brains various cohorts is a racist, sexist, bigot homophobe" To "how dare you question our findings of differences in brains, this is science"
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:38 PM
4

Bill Nye is simply saying that the understanding of what sex and gender are has changed and is likely to continue to change and as a scientist he has changed his positions accordingly based on new evidence. has it though? Looks like a bunch of soft science types have simply decided this is how the world works now, and started shouting down and painting as racist bigot homophobe transphobe anyone who disagrees. Unsurprisingly not many researchers who disagree want to feed their career into a wood…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:15 PM
1

Everyone sits for number two? Thus at any given time it is statistically more likely the next use calls for seat down.
/r/PussyPassDenied04/05/17 05:25 AM
6

🎵fuck shavin it, I like your little rain forest.🎵
/r/PussyPassDenied18/04/17 09:40 AM
6

I am with you on your points here. She deserved a split when they went through the divorce. She got her split in a way that made her happy at the time. Now, later, when it turns out she probably should have held onto the equity I am unsure why the family courts are involved at all? Apparently to protect divorcees from their own bad financial decisions? I mean, what exactly is the logic here? This is the part to be angry at. All transactions are final, so long as they go a particular way. Otherwi…
/r/MensRights05/04/17 06:57 PM
12

Correct. The winning approach is to say "Now that you are X times richer, your children deserve X time more support. Hand it over." There will be little he could do about that.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 06:50 PM
11

I have had professors mark words they didn't know as 'wrong' instead of taking 2 sec to google it. English professors.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 06:25 PM
28

Lol. The dean has a working relationship with this tenured professor. Students are merely the regretable drawback to running a school. These jobs would be great without all the fucking students around the place. Unless your proof is ironclad, shit isn't going to go your way, and then you have new enemies.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 06:22 PM
4

Which is ironic considering the push for women in engineering. Well, it's more a push for women in "the currently highly prized, cool, important jobs". They did lawyers and doctors generations ago. They are just going down the list. You won't seem them demanding to fix the disparity in garbage collection jobs, at least not until they run out of better targets first, or garbage collection becomes the 'it' job to have. They didn't care about programming jobs either until that was suddenly extremel…
/r/MensRights12/02/17 06:06 PM
1

Ok. Now get standing before a court.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/17 05:01 PM
3

HR is just a little government feifdom you pay for by law once you are a certain size.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 10:59 PM
12

They don't have to pretend to be publicly funded.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 07:08 PM
2

Per the law, she is the victim here.
/r/MensRights26/12/16 12:31 AM
66

Not making the claim, but presumably he means 25% went on the list as a minor, not that a quarter of the list is minors currently.
/r/MensRights15/12/16 06:18 PM
7

Remember when colleges were a place to go and challenge your preconceptions with open communication and free speech? Kinda like the leave-it-beaver nuclear family, this is something that people think existed at some point in the past, but actually didn't. Before the Free speech protests of the 70s, the administration controlled campus speech fairly tightly, and then PC culture wrested control of it.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 11:31 PM
0

Well, why should it be cured? There is a fair amount of evidence that autists are responsible for much of modern life. It's their super autistic children that rise to the level of disability, like what happens around high tech industry centers like Silicon Valley. It's mostly this related social burden for the autist and family that people want to make go away. Different brain wiring produces different thoughts. So long as this can be communicated somehow to the rest of society, I really don't s…
/r/MensRights30/10/16 06:22 AM
2

So the decades of thinly disguised corruption didn't do it for you, but taking a pic of the opposition does? Good to know where the line is...
/r/MensRights30/10/16 05:49 AM
1

It's how brains are wired. A "cure" is effectively a personality death, definitionally. Thus to support the "curing" of autism, outside of maybe preventing it before birth/development is essentially a call to genocide. I don't mean to be bombastic. Genocide is literally the correct term here.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 05:46 AM
5

Where is the box for "Transcendental Otherkin"?
/r/MensRights14/10/16 06:42 PM
2

Heaven forbid you gain some perspective. I think you mean "be exposed to hatred".
/r/MensRights14/10/16 02:06 AM
5

Gotta have something to bitch about. Not like they can focus on women's rights in the middle east...since those guys fight back, literally.
/r/MensRights05/10/16 06:28 AM
6

I was once in a bar with such a party. They were playing tgis sort of game, and one of the girls pulled a card that said something to the effect of "get a guy to buy a round for the party". Her attempts to get me to pay for their loud, annoying drinking were super insulting both to women, men, and personally.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 03:43 PM
11

So the rule is you shouldn't do it because it cheapens everyone, unless they are an asshole you hate? Then you can knock your socks off? Yeah, that totally hangs together...
/r/MensRights21/08/16 03:36 PM
4

Robots don't have genders. They just struggle to blend in with the flesh blobs around them.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:09 AM
1

Europe seems to have FAR more barroom violence than the US.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 12:31 AM
1

Well, she is definitely human garbage, but it's sad everyone here is cheering thought crime. This is a bullshit charge which assumes that, literally, her boyfriend has no agency.
/r/MensRights04/07/16 06:12 AM
2

"Three little girls"
/r/MensRights04/07/16 06:07 AM
5

"That doesn't sound good" - Prison union lobby
/r/MensRights13/06/16 09:00 PM
1

The legal system is the way these sorts of issues get resolved. Not really. The legal system might make the correct judgement, but that just means HR cracks down on people saying shit, not that actual policy will change. From the perspective of employers, this is a "someone is running their mouth" problem, not a "we need to change how we do things" problem. Followed by a sound "don't hire that guy" for your brave crusader with the tiny settlement. You basically can't win this one. The real probl…
/r/MensRights04/06/16 12:22 AM
1

...but someone on the internet doesn't like you. How will you sleep now?
/r/MensRights04/06/16 12:12 AM
6

Yet feminists buy their books, show up to their conferences, and listen to their talks. Cheering all the while.
/r/MensRights10/05/16 07:50 PM
1

I wouldn't be so sure. Rhetorically, trump is a master orator, and just took all the GOP's toys against their wishes. He could go all the way. Especially since Clinton is so universally distrusted.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:38 PM
2

They aren't. The claim is that Hilary harassed, discredited, and circled the wagons on a string of sexual assalt victims. If Bill has sex with someone, whatever, not a big deal. If Bill is committing statutory rape and his wife attacks the victims as whores and liars, that's different.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:23 PM
2

Ugh. One cannot coin an old phrase. Someone else did.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 08:34 AM
6

Pets are more sympathetic.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 10:36 PM
1

This might help in a controlled environment like a high school. Irrelevant in public.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 09:18 AM
1

I would just say it's bad Rae is a Mary Sue. See, once you decide to pander to women, you end up with an Uber mensch character, because if they fail at anything, it's a direct attack at female ability. It's why Janeway was the least compelling captain too. Basically, the only valid criticism I see is female leads like this are fantastic at anything they do, because they get letters if they fail at all. This makes for a bad character.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 10:25 AM
1

Hey, at least they put pronouns on it this time. A few years ago, it just straight up said men this and man that.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 10:16 AM
0

The "so what?" is they lied repeated for the better part of a month. And then lied about their lies. Nobody, including her, cares much about the event itself.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:19 PM
0

Most are working off the security footage to understand what happened. The problem with the footage is that it has a very low frame-rate, so you can't get a good sense of momentum from it. Additionally, the angle is poor for determining whether Lewandowski actually touched Fields. Agreed. We can't be 100% certain he did not grab her Actually, we are 100% certain he did. Tom Harris corroborated her story the day of. He saw the bruises (there is even audio of that), and the police documented them.…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:41 AM
2

it's odd. You would think this sub would be at least halfway decent about playing "spot the pathological liar in this situation". Fields made one account on March 10 and it hasn't changed. Tom Harris Lewandowski has made both mutually exclusive and objectively false statements. Knee jerk "hate the woman" seems to be the rule of the day here now.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:22 AM
0

Start again here. It's interesting all by itself, I promise.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:07 AM
3

The reasoning you are using is so poor, I don't even know where to begin. We'll skip past all the fallacies you managed to group together (impressive) and move right to substance. What evidence existed for Jian Ghomeshi? In this case we have a witness (Tom Harris at the Washington Post), his audio recording, her immediate bruising that Mr Harris attested to, as well as IDing her assailant as Lewandowski. We have a video confirming this now. We have the mutually exclusive statements made by Lewan…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:06 AM
2

You're so full of shit. Hope that made you feel good, because it accomplishes absolutely nothing else. The video obviously shows that he barely made contact with HER UPPER ARM (not her wrist or forearm) That whole side of the body is not visible, and it's an aerial view, so the angles are quite hard to tell. And we only have the before and after. "obviously" isn't the word I would use. I would point out to an observer to watch how her body rotates and ask yourself where one has to grab someone t…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:50 AM
-2

I beg to differ. The grab is evident, as is the halt in forward progress. So are the bruises left on her afterwards. She didn't almost fall on what basis are we evaluating this? One could make the argument that anyone walking is "almost falling". It is indeed how people move about. We can say she didn't fall, objectively. I have no idea how one would go about proving that she didn't or did almost fall. Either way, this isn't central to her claim at all. the guy didn't pull her down. She has neve…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:58 AM
2

I don't suggest he doesn't deserve a trial. I am saying his only lines of defense all start out with immediately conceding that his actions happened. They won't be able to argue that it wasn't him and he never met her, like they have for the past few weeks. They will argue he acted in defense of Trump and that she was a threat, but to make this argument, he has to admit lying for the last several weeks, repeatedly. His guilt or innocence lies in motive, which is debatable, but not the substance …
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:47 AM
0

Why wouldn't I be serious? He is guilty of battery, and all the evidence exists and is readily available. Unless you want to deny that it was Lewandowski on film? If nobody wants to make that claim, then quite simply he grabbed Fields hard enough to bruise her and completely halt her forward momentum. The police examined her arm and took pictures, so again there is no debating this point. Taken in conjunction, Lewandowski committed battery. Feel free to try and make an argument to the contrary, …
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:28 AM
2

Actually, their refusal to apologize, followed by Breitbart throwing their own employee under the bus as a favor to the campaign caused this. The media's lies? This is captured on video, and her injuries are documented. In what way is this a lie? Lying video huh? The guy 100% beyond a doubt grabbed her. There is no debating that. It's on video, and the physical harm is documented. In Florida, this constitutes battery. He is guilty of battery if that's him on tape, and it is. You can argue that i…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:12 AM
-4

How? The evidence is clear.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:00 AM
3

Do you not see Lewandowski in that video? Their original statement was Lewandowski wasn't there. This is objectively false. There is video evidence, physical brusing, as well as audio of her exclaiming how she can't believe how hard she was just grabbed. Despite all this evidence, their new stance is "nothing happened". You can wait for a biased jury to decide what amounts to a poltical show, if you want. I submit that any outcome will be a political one due to the circumstances. I will side wit…
/r/MensRights30/03/16 11:58 PM
-9

Except he should in this case. He did grab her and yank back hard enought to cause brusing. This has been documented for over 20 days. The campaign categorically denied that any of this happened, until the tape was reviewed. Then started lying about their previous lies. Trump is siding with the guilty here.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 11:43 PM
0

The attack is true. It went down exactly as she said. She got a police report and they documented her bruises and account at the time. There is cellphone audio from the time with her exclaiming how hard she was just grabbed. The video shows Lewandowski grab her and yank back. She stumbles because of it. I don't know how people can watch the video and say "nothing happened".
/r/MensRights30/03/16 11:37 PM
-1

No. Both could be readily supplied by the free market, and don't require violence to make happen. Police are fairly straight forward. and Prisons simply would not exist. The vast majority of those incarcerated are not a violent risk, so in a restitution based legal system, there is no reason to lock them up, and force others to pay to house and keep them. They would be forced to pay their own way. The remaining violent offenders would check themselves into a "extended stay" facility at the insis…
/r/MensRights30/03/16 02:01 AM
1

She gets away with Scandals. Which is an ability of sorts.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 11:39 PM
1

No, you are thinking of "clearly". "Aha, that's a wallpaper word. When people say clearly something, that means there's a huge crack in their argument and they know things aren't clear at all." ~William de Worde (The Truth, Terry Pratchett)
/r/MensRights29/03/16 11:36 PM
-1

I don't find anything wrong with that statement. The only irrational thing there is undoing the American Settler State. Can't resurrect the dead or undo america-pox. Even if we all decided that the colonization of America should be undone, there is nobody to give it back to. Native American culture is gone, to say nothing of the lack of people.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 11:30 PM
1

Because that's a vote winner...
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:53 PM
1

Fun fact: golf balls used to last approximately 1 hole. They would deform like crazy. That's why the rules say you can replace on a green, since it wouldn't be a sphere anymore by the time it landed on the green.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:17 PM
1

All that just leaves a record to substantiate the accusation. Back in the day it was he said, she said.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 07:56 PM
8

Not really. The number of people who would go and put porn on the counter in front of a cashier is far lower than the number of people who would pull up a browser.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 03:35 PM
5

If you are going to make a coffee table book out of the pictures and sell it, you absolutely need to get releases. Also, you have a very weird definition for batshit crazy.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 10:28 PM
9

You know more insults just make you look unreasonable to bystanders, right? This whole thread is predicated on the existence of a coffee table book, sold for money.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 10:25 PM
16

This book is published in the US, by Simon & Schuster so the UK is irrelevant. This book is being sold, it is a commercial enterprise. I don't understand how you can miss this. Regardless of the Nation, the rules are largely the same in this regard. You have still provided no evidence, just insults.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 09:03 PM
12

No, I am not. And if you wanted your retort to be effective, you should have actually backed up your claim, especially since cursory research will reveal your mistake. Like so: Oh, look several sources saying I am correct: Getty Images The American Society of Media Photographers Rocket Lawyer explaining the associated legal concepts. And bonus for the UK, since you brought that up: Amauturephotographer.co.uk
/r/MensRights12/03/16 08:28 PM
9

You can take a picture in that you taking a picture of the subway car is fine. If you are taking a picture with a person as the focus, you need them to sign a release, since they are the focus.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 08:06 PM
2

A solid point. Jacket and tie is a very low bar thats been the same for a century plus.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 12:41 AM
2

Why bother, you get the full measure of pity regardless.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 12:32 AM
2

Or someone thought to ask legal, or legal came down with a memo on it.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 12:31 AM
1

Also, can you point to the guy who thinks hitting someone with 5 inches and 100lbs of muscle on them is a good idea and nothing bad could possibly result?
/r/MensRights08/03/16 12:27 AM
-8

Please. The US government's efforts to control media makes the rest of the world look like ham fisted retards. They are fantastic at it.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 03:08 PM
1

A libertarian who lobbies the government for more laws huh? That's like a vigin rapist, or violent pacifist.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 09:42 PM
1

Feminist don't reason their way into positions, they feel them.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 09:40 PM
1

How is it symbolic?
/r/MensRights14/02/16 09:30 PM
0

Yep. Nothing like two wrongs to make a right.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 09:22 PM
0

This conflates capitalism, a market based economic system, with systemic government corruption. Bad definitions.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 09:21 PM
1

We'll find out large corporate entities are more important that one guy.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 08:15 PM
1

And what is the purpose of laws? the uniform enforcement of property rights and contract disputes. It's annoying when you kick the can downfield instead of broaching the question. near as I can tell, you haven't asked any questions besides those I have answered. I'm pretty sure every first world country provides food, shelter, and healthcare for it's citizens except the US. No, they don't. They might steal from Peter, grab a little slice for "administrative purposes", and give to Paul so Paul ca…
/r/MensRights04/02/16 06:05 PM
1

Yes, but we are willing to withhold, say, automobiles, from people who can't afford them. That is one reason automobiles can exist as a free market. We do this with basically all goods, except those the government has decided to handle "free" to the end user, like roads for defense, or the class of services the government forbids others from offering, like mail delivery. The purpose of government is to protect the citizenry. Do you agree? No. The nominal purpose of a government is to enforce the…
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:41 PM
1

The same can be said of anything, including food, clothing, and shelter. The places where they try and hand this stuff out for free end up starving, naked, and homeless.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 04:27 PM
1

Did Rhode Island or some such allow widows or something?
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:27 AM
31

Well, like <5% of the population anyway. Those who owned land & a penis. edit: downvotes for simple, verifiable facts huh? well done.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 06:32 PM
2

People don't "feel" verifiable facts.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 04:26 PM
1

Yes, but that means there is an Earth's atmosphere still pressing down on you there, and thus still shielded. I don't know how catching 2x the sunlight affects the math per se, but I should think it's far better than what Mars has going for it.
/r/MensRights12/01/16 08:46 PM
2

The Law isn't a contract. There is no such thing as a unilateral contract. And I do reject fiat law. Otherwise you get outcomes like jews massacring themselves in concentration camps. Or Black people beating the fuck out of themselves via the police, or deciding to be property after an extended Atlantic cruise. They are the people, the people are the government, therefore they do these things to themselves. Hurrah Democracy. Polycentric Law is voluntary, and thus morally viable. Finally: you oka…
/r/MensRights12/01/16 12:56 AM
3

So you think the government has no right to demand anything from you? Correct. Just like I, or JP Morgan Chase, don't have the right to unilaterally demand anything from you. If anyone besides the government "conscripted" people it would immediately and correctly be classed as slavery, just like if anyone besides the government levied a tax, it would be instantly and correctly recognized as extortion. Why would taxes be justified? Isn't it just the same as protection money, just like gangs do? T…
/r/MensRights12/01/16 12:18 AM
2

You are gonna have to do a lot better than that to justify slavery.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 08:32 PM
3

You don't need to conscript people to defend their own homes. You need to conscript people for things they wouldn't do otherwise... Like show up in someone else's country and wreck up the place.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 06:56 PM
1

If only the process allowed for upstanding candidates like a potato.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 06:46 PM
1

Certainly derailing, now that I have had to defend the validity again and again. It's not dumb though. The atmosphere of Venus is the most earth-like place in the solar system. People just like Mars because you know...you can stand on the surface...in your tiny spacecraft.
/r/MensRights10/01/16 10:28 PM
0

Why would anyone colonize the surface? That's insane. The Earth is inhospitable under its mantle too. Nobody suggests that's where we have to build our cities. What's actively hostile about short sleeves weather at sea level pressure with 4x the sunlight as Mars and earthlike gravity? Oh, and a thick atmosphere to blocks solar radiation. Venus is far and away the better choice given current technology. It's only real obstacle is the acid atmosphere, but that's easy enough to handle with the corr…
/r/MensRights10/01/16 07:46 PM
2

Yet 50km up, it's 1 atm of pressure and short sleeves weather. Obviously the acid is still trouble for your bermuda shorts plans, but that means no pressure suit needed. Everyone would be decked out like firemen meets scuba divers. Plus the gravity is essentially the same as Earth, while Mars is only 30%. This could be a boon, depending on how well life develops in microgravity.
/r/MensRights10/01/16 07:18 PM
-3

I know this is just a sloppy analogy, but Venus is probably the easier planet to colonize, since you can get by without pressure suits, and it's way closer.
/r/MensRights10/01/16 06:42 PM
2

I am aware, but by the numbers they actually got it only in the 1960's.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 06:57 AM
1

Well blacks didn't actually get the vote until the 1960's. Jim Crow and all that.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 08:33 PM
1

That only works against the poor. A shipping magnate doesn't really care.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 06:47 PM
1

My guess is they would treat you like Rastafarians and claim your religion is merely to avoid the law.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 06:32 PM
1

Becuase then their opinions on how the Justice system operates don't matter then. Oh and bonus- the same system labels minorities as felons disproportionately, as intended. It's a hold over from Jim Crow.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 06:29 PM
1

No, but presumably if one goes back far enough, there was a time where facts were on their side.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 06:19 PM
1

43, and there were a handful you probably can't lump in. Harrison, for instance, died before doing anything.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 08:06 PM
1

Nobody is coming for the wealth either though. The people who get taxed like crazy are high income earners. People with a big paycheck. Surgeons, doctors, lawyers, etc. The top 10% are not paycheck earners. They straight up own things. They are governed by cap gains, if even that. Unless you want to just start nationalizing things at a whim (oh, that will end well), you pretty much can't do anything about it, unless you want to completely retard the economy at the same time. Then there are the p…
/r/MensRights03/12/15 08:03 PM
1

It will be fine.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 07:48 PM
2

I figured legit sociopath and corrupt as fuck were reason enough to not.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 07:45 PM
2

His story is the American story One of near ceaseless violence and meddling for reasons of expediency and pride?
/r/MensRights03/12/15 07:43 PM
2

as he is wont to do.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 07:33 PM
1

The ones who like money should.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 05:35 PM
0

Well, when marketed with phrases like "jiggle physics", it's not an insane charge.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 12:12 AM
2

Right... But calling the police rarely makes the situation better.
/r/MensRights20/11/15 04:37 PM
2

Well, the plan seems to be to export your indignation to the world too, and then whip up a mob to force your position. And it works more often than not.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 06:26 PM
1

It's valid, just weak and craven, to a degree.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 08:08 PM
60

Don't worry, the mods locked the thread, so she won't have to deal.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 12:00 AM
1

Not a psychopath. I doubt she just likes hurting people. She's a sociopath. If people get hurt? Meh. All that matters is things go the Hillary way. You basically need to be a narcissistic sociopath to make it to high office though, so it's not much of a damning charge to throw around.
/r/MensRights28/10/15 05:22 PM
1

‘Putting up a statue to someone who tried to stop a war is not very, um, statuesque. Of course, if you had butchered five hundred of your own men out of arrogant carelessness, we’d be melting the bronze already.’ Terry Pratchett- Jingo.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 08:46 PM
0

NASA did teamwork studies, for obvious reasons. They discovered mixed gender teams did best, followed closely by all male teams, with all women a distant 3rd. Summed up the result difference as "too much chit-chat"
/r/MensRights15/10/15 10:01 PM
10

Marriage should be a contract, but it isn't. It's currently a pseudo-contract like the mythical social contract, which while mostly predictable, actually has no terms, or even basic consideration.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 09:56 PM
12

I don't think it ever made much sense. It did in the context of only men getting full time jobs. It makes very little sense these days outside of some very specific scenarios, which might as well be unicorns, statistically. the wife who puts husband through medical/law school, the 20 year homemaker who gets the kids off to college and finds hubby plowing the secretary on a trip to Europe, etc You know, the actual horror stories alimony is based on in the first place.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 09:51 PM
-7

Presumably the argument goes something like this: Couple meets in college. Wife gets a job and puts husband through medical school, residency, and a specialization (let's say anesthesiology). They get divorced just before his income balloons to 1mil/year (malpractice insurance is a bitch though). Why shouldn't the wife be entitled to the income they were working towards jointly? It's not gonna be close to this sort of thing most of the time, but such a scenario is possible and probably does happ…
/r/MensRights13/10/15 09:44 PM
1

Not as much as being a Canadian citizen, though.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:38 PM
1

Cromwell doesn't count as democide. The hereditary title "Lord Protector" is a king by another name.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 07:16 PM
1

Why would you think that? Delusional people can be the most dangerous. Democide killed more people than war in the 20th century, and the rationale was always some socialist claptrap.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 04:30 PM
1

He played agent Casper in The West Wing after all.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 04:18 PM
1

They would be tremendously stupid to do so.
/r/MensRights05/10/15 11:52 PM
0

Not really, both are choices about one's own body the government has arbitrary decided to regulate. Her bill is to show the absurdity of how states are fucking with women.
/r/MensRights05/10/15 04:30 PM
2

I actually read The Private Residence just last week. These people have no reason to lie per se, and lots of reasons to keep their mouth shut for the most part. They didn't like the Johnsons or the Clintons because they were by and large abusive assholes. Fun fact: Apparently popa and momma Bush were the croud favorites. Apparently, because they would insist workers go home to their families at reasonable hours. They were also apparently super undemanding in regards to food prep and the like, an…
/r/MensRights05/10/15 04:11 PM
1

We can't be seen as sexist...
/r/MensRights05/10/15 03:55 PM
3

Ayn Rand was perfectly happy with the US government's size and power when calling for them to destroy the USSR through military might. And Thatcher literally ran for office, and then ran the State. Neither are very anti-collectivist when the chips are down.
/r/MensRights05/10/15 03:52 PM
0

You willing to bet she never cheated either?
/r/MensRights05/10/15 03:48 PM
2

Yep, but also loudly bitching about it for attention is a corollary PR trick.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 10:20 PM
0

So... You're for free speech, except when it's offensive?
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:11 PM
0

It's always been comfortable for the people making the decisions.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 02:03 AM
0

They didn't need the draft after 9/11 because everyone was feeling quite patriotic at the time. An attack on US soil? Sign lots of people up! A few years later when it turns out Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Afghanistan was equally pointless, then there was talk of the draft to get the boots on the ground they needed.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 02:01 AM
1

You don't need to draft to fight a defensive war. People gladly defend their homes. The State needs the ability to draft so it can fight foreign wars the populous might not care about.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 01:58 AM
1

It's an economic change, fundamentally. A monopoly provider of a service since times immemorial is about to be displaced. That's scary for them in their world view, and maybe in a real practical sense.
/r/MensRights19/09/15 09:24 PM
1

A combo of AI, better robotics, and materials science getting to the point where sexbots are preferred by most johns to prostitutes. Once you hit that tipping point, the economics of sex change drastically. This is pretty much like oil tycoons bemoaning renewables. Or ice house owners and refrigeration.
/r/MensRights19/09/15 09:16 PM
3

That's exactly what happens.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 06:54 PM
7

So X company owner puts the business in his wife's name. Problem solved for him. That's pretty much what happens.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 06:53 PM
1

It's been a unclosely held secret for a long while.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 01:45 PM
1

That's the real reason, but they have to come up with something else.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 02:27 AM
2

Sometimes i really dont get what feminists end goals are. to develop a veritable golf bag of rhetorical clubs for political use, basically. Here they develop the concurrently held, yet nearly mutually exclusive clubs of "Women can dress however they want, nobody should oggle them" and "Women are sexual beings who the patriarchy oppresses" This basically justifies anything anyone says, so long as it's being stated by a woman.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 06:33 PM
14

Besides, all you need is a gold hoop ear ring and white T shirt to get that Mr. Clean halloween costume going.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 09:04 AM
1

In pretty much any academic debste
/r/MensRights04/09/15 05:03 PM
7

They play to evolution well, right?
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:53 AM
3

We don't have to respect culture at all, and certainly not bad aspects of one. Otherwise, why don't you climb up on this altar? The harvest needs to be bountiful, and I have this ceremonial obsidian dagger already.
/r/MensRights25/08/15 09:22 PM
1

That's why social security is still messed up. The person to fix it guarantees themselves a negative public image forever because of it.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 06:34 PM
1

Good, honest work. Not whoring themselves out like politicians! ... Wait.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 03:44 PM
7

You have an agenda, you have clear, unabashed bias... Towards evidence? Which still hasn't been provided. You demonstrate bias in your rhetoric in addition to vitriol. asking about evidence is vitriol now? I'm going to feel sad that someone is this warped... and then I'm going to forget all about you and go on about my day. I doubt it, but god I hope so.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 05:15 PM
5

So...in lieu of providing evidence you simply say "look at the organization that distanced itself from him after being publically called a rapist"...as if that was evidence of rape. well done.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 04:49 PM
4

Well... People with actual evidence against them seem less qualified than Cosby.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 03:36 PM
1

No. That's a State thing. They have to use language like this becuase "line up for enslavement!" doesn't have that positive ring to it.
/r/MensRights08/07/15 07:37 PM
1

No. Title IX is for the schools compliance.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 12:03 PM
7

All I wanted to point out was how people might get the crazy idea to actually pull the "trans" card when they are cisgender. The idea of a "trans card" that people can pull is pretty repugnant on the face of it.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 09:57 AM
3

And any government agent who cares to serve your company with a request...
/r/MensRights22/05/15 06:11 AM
-4

Well, he had objectively taken things a little too far...with the following.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 03:56 AM
2

You can't convict anyone of slander in the US, unless they are extremely and very specifically stupid.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 03:54 AM
1

Retain an lawyer to find out.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 08:22 PM
2

People have successfully sued doctors and parents alike for their circumcision, without the benefit of a recorded refusal. The doctor has a lawsuit to fear.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 08:02 PM
4

You need the coaching to frame it as the doctor both ignoring the patient's wishes, and doing so for a medically unnecessary procedure.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 07:00 AM
16

The easy solution would have been simply to coach the kid to flat refuse the procedure and document it. Then he has a nice slam dunk case against the doctor whenever he wants later. Not to mention it being questionable, ethics wise.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 06:54 AM
2

It's like the 2 major parties. Pop quiz. In the 20th century which party occupied the Whitehouse more during war? Go look it up now. Were you surprised?
/r/MensRights15/05/15 06:32 AM
4

All the quotes I see are opinion statements... And they are pretty ugly at that.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 06:21 AM
1

If they needed to, they would simply draft older men with specific skills like IT, logistics, etc. They already have laws in place to do so. Kinda like drafting doctors.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 06:13 PM
4

If this was the US, no lawyer would touch it, unless the accuser had enough money to make a quick settlement likely.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 08:32 PM
0

gravity doesn't really allow for that, to say nothing about the heat and pressure, and even in the absence of gravity you eventually are digging shallower and shallower again.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 08:07 PM
7

This should be the top post here. She isn't defending against anything lawsuit related....bad publicity maybe? But thats gonna come no matter what you do or don't do.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 08:03 PM
4

And then you go to "definitely not debtors prison" for non-payment.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 05:28 PM
1

Ah, separate but equal.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 04:47 PM
2

Lol. r/anarchism doesn't have many anarchists in it. It's mostly Marxists.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 04:41 PM
2

I believe it should be legal, but much like Hooters, it's in bad taste. Also the sushi off naked women thing is straight up creepy.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 04:36 PM
3

100 dead marines is a statistic. 1 dead female marine and it's a media event. very few wars end because the rich side ran out of bodies.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 06:27 PM
2

People overestimate their memories. Our memories are terrible terrible recorders of history. "Join us next time when I explain what you think are your cherished childhood memories are actually just fictional simulations created by your brain."
/r/MensRights16/04/15 08:18 PM
3

It's like the "rule of thumb" anecdote. It's been proven false for decades, but that doesn't stop fresh editions of textbooks with it still printed.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 08:14 PM
3

Your easy path of least resistance is to wait until he can drive. Then he sleeps wherever he prefers...until and unless his mother gets litigious about it.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 05:08 PM
0

I am not advocating it, merely pointing out that nobody's hands seem to be tied when its going to inconvience their branch of government, or the government as a whole (It prints the paychecks & buys the black robes after all). But when someone's life is going to be ruined? Oh well. Hands are tied.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 01:26 AM
1

Except when the chips are down they are more than willing to act extra-judically. Fucking Marbury v Madison proves this. (I know it's the UK, but the point still stands)
/r/MensRights11/04/15 12:57 AM
9

You have too much faith in the record keeping.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 12:54 AM
1

Don't forget dickwaving in the Falklands.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 06:48 PM
3

You've had 8 years to rule and accomplished little The 8 before that weren't exactly the golden years, and from a policy standpoint we might as well lump all 16 together as Bush I-IV.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 06:47 PM
1

Their culture is... Unique. It's not all bad, but it's certainly not the best business culture ever.
/r/MensRights02/04/15 01:12 AM
0

Uterus starts with U
/r/MensRights24/03/15 09:05 PM
1

But now you lose than title X money, and eventually even your accreditation.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 08:55 PM
12

I suppose it's just feminism's special relationship with facts.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 08:25 PM
1

He meant one worth the paper it is printed on. Your constitution doesn't even have free speech protection.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 07:31 PM
1

Good for you guys. Try it here and it's a patriarchal tool of oppression.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 06:58 PM
1

Only because other media had already been taken by others.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 06:49 PM
1

Democracy in action!
/r/MensRights13/03/15 04:52 PM
1

Frankly, if I was a doctor, I wouldn't want to touch this with a 10ft pole. Purposely performing an unnecessary operation on a patient that expressly said they did not want it performed... Sounds like a winner.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 04:49 PM
1

That's not true. Hillsdale exists. They refuse students with government loans.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 04:29 PM
3

This is accurate.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 09:56 PM
1

And you need the legal system to agree... Which isn't guaranteed.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 09:14 PM
1

This was my reaction too. "holy shit, someone did some fact checking."
/r/MensRights10/03/15 08:46 PM
1

if there are five people, four sound like white males and one sounds like a woman, you believe they have an equal chance of being trolled? If everyone is 100% going to be trolled, that is an equal chance.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:17 AM
1

So, going back to my example, if there are five people, four sound like white males and one sounds like a woman, you believe they have an equal chance of being trolled? Its a statistical certainty all five have/are/will be trolled.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 08:14 AM
1

More like being a woman greatly increases the chances that trolls use sexist comments to harass you, rather than "I fucked your mom!" style comments that you might get otherwise. Women probably get those too anyway. Sounding Black greatly increases the chances of your trolling being racist in nature. Trash talk is universal, but any "unique" characteristics you might have is gonna be the prime target. Hell, a few weeks back I had to kick an asshole out of a Payday 2 lobby for harassing another p…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 02:26 AM
1

Trolls are by definition not well adjusted individuals.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 02:20 AM
1

Do you feel that the harassment men are subjected to in games is equal to the harassment women are subjected to in games? Have you ever been specifically targeted for harassment because of your gender? You have asked the wrong question. Nobody is targeted because of their gender. They are targeted, and gender might be an avenue of attack. Since women are so uncommon, it's easy to latch on to for trolls. Trolls latch on to whatever they can. Sounds like a kid? time to rag on puberty. Hispanic acc…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 02:19 AM
8

IF the Mod above them has any sense of integrity or morals. They mod r/socialism. Thats not on the table.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 02:00 AM
0

It being law doesn't make it right.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 07:37 PM
0

Doesn't mean it's a good law... Or even logically consistent.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 06:09 PM
0

That makes an asshole, not criminal.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 06:07 PM
0

Incitement is a pretty bullshit charge. It's at least thought crime adjacent.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 06:06 PM
2

Whoa, Ireland doesn't do abortions? Do they all jump on flights to the UK? Or head to Belfast?
/r/MensRights03/03/15 05:15 PM
2

As a father you could also "box" your baby. And be arrested for child endangerment when the mother raises holy hell?
/r/MensRights27/02/15 10:48 PM
1

Well suggesting drunk kids should arm themselves with guns will do something... Just not what they want.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 07:54 PM
0

This sounds like your standard mental illness stuff. Police have had to deal with her numerous times, etc.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 07:45 PM
1

She did the digital equalvalent of chumming the waters. No comments allowed on anything she does, except one newly posted video. Then she simply waits for the hate, collects a sample and then turns off comments, like everything else she has posted. Mobs are super predictable, and internet mobs even easier to manipulate, becuase there are even more suckers to be had. Manufactured outrage.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 07:26 PM
0

That's because the US family court system is about money, by and large. If you put kids into foster care here, the State pays. If you still the kids with the parent that makes less money, then the parent with more money pays.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 07:13 PM
0

In the words of our previous governor, currently sitting in prison, "when you got something this valuable, you're not just going to give it away."
/r/MensRights16/02/15 06:58 PM
1

The only people complaining are hapless men looking their children they have never seen. Pretty easy to dismiss.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 06:47 PM
3

They are useful as an interrogation tool, but they do not detect lying at all. and only if the victim is unaware they are BS.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 09:42 PM
2

LPS should also be an option for mothers. This has been an option for well over a century, and the church basket & ding dong ditch even longer than that.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 12:12 AM
3

/shrug. You asked for a legitimate western woman's issue. That's all I can think of.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 03:49 AM
2

They do tend to have crazy polticians trying to force their unwanted children on them at every opportunity? Its like a "oh look CISPA is back" for uteruses (uteri?) That's gotta get annoying. It's hardly the end of the world though, especially since they have their rights currently and have for decades.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 03:25 AM
1

Right... And if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle. What's this have to do with reality?
/r/MensRights30/01/15 03:19 AM
1

Sure you are. The prison will be happy to have another pseudo-slave they get to bill the state for, and rent out to multinationals.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 11:21 AM
6

I don't want group to monopolize the "equality" debate. Here's the thing...there really shouldn't be any debate at all at this point. Very few people seriously believe other races/the opposite sex are inferior at this point, and hopefully the vast majority of them are old or are social pariahs. Racism against the irish or germans died with the last idiots to believe it. There is still debate because the government literally classes people, so there is suddenly interest groups defending their spe…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 08:37 AM
1

The modern nurse spends most of his or her workday in some sort of frumpy pajamas. I have always seen this as a bonus....Who else gets to walk around in PJs and be socially acceptable?
/r/MensRights21/01/15 07:39 AM
14

Well... As Mencken said, "Puritanism: the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time."
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:46 PM
1

The US has to have either way worse stats, or far more lax requirements. This is more a police policy failure.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 04:19 PM
3

Forcing abortion is a non-starter. Women own their bodies and you can't force such a decision for any reason. Legal paternal surrender is workable though.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 04:07 PM
3

He claims to have rock solid alibis for the times in question. I have seen no proof of this, but it would be kinda crazy to mount and expensive and very public case to defend your reputation based on this assertion and not actually have the proof. Only a crazy person would do that. Anyway, time will tell. Maybe he is crazy.
/r/MensRights08/01/15 12:28 AM
5

Except feminist group explicitly lobbied for exactly that.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 06:54 PM
-1

Or if it did the response would be "so?"
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:10 PM
1

I wasn't alive, but if memory serves, Nixon conspired to commit a wide range of felonies, there was recorded evidence, only key bits of which were "accidentally" destroyed by his secretary. Despite this he refused to resign until it was clear they would kick him out off office, and then was immediately pardoned by his successor. We didn't band together and kick anyone out of office, and a man who committed more felonies (and more serious, impactful ones) than your average bank robber walked away…
/r/MensRights13/12/14 12:58 AM
1

There was a time when American's came together when things got way too out of hand and we would put politicians back in there place. And Ward Clever would always be home by 5 to be greeted by his loving nuclear family. Are we listing shit that never happened, or common american myths?
/r/MensRights13/12/14 12:28 AM
1

All voting blocs are some politician's tools.
/r/MensRights13/12/14 12:25 AM
2

yeah, but I doubt that's the case here....or in the majority of case.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 09:01 PM
3

Copyright is for the photographer, not the subject.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 07:18 PM
2

What capitalism? They traded the USSR for the Mob and people who ran the USSR, who claimed all property as their own, and administered law. Sounds like they traded one autocracy for another.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 01:15 AM
2

Not if you trick a government into doing your dirty work...
/r/MensRights11/11/14 06:01 PM
20

140 character limit means only asshole comments fit. It's basically incouraged.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 09:54 PM
3

Considering any posited scenario violates the NAP, all this poll has shown is that at least 2/3rds of those polled cannot define Libertarianism, let alone follow its only tennant. "Half of all mute people shout racial slurs at strangers." makes about as much sense as this headline. The implied definitions make this all but impossible. Sadly, lots of conservative republicans are trying the Libertarian hat on because the reputation of "republican" is in the shitter. This doesn't mean they understa…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 07:17 PM
0

You surely put him in his place with that well reasoned comment.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 06:57 PM
1

That's because laws changed. Generally speaking their bad decisions stick around until the law changes drastically... Or a civil war (for Dread Scott's black people are sub-human & suitable only as property decision)
/r/MensRights19/10/14 03:24 PM
-1

Nope. This is a problem with any public solution to an ongoing problem. Fixing it would mean less resources and influence than not and demanding a bigger budget to deal with it. This is why we spend 10x more o education than we did half a century ago, yet have worse performance stats. If schools were effective we wouldn't keep uping the budget that never seems to make it to the classroom. If the CDC was good at their job, they wouldn't have this new opportunity to cry "underfunded" Therefore, in…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 03:20 PM
3

it all gained public attention with the infamous "hot coffee" judgment so many years ago. It was world famous long before that point...and that case was not an example of money grubbing victim/lawyers. McDonalds cranked the temperature of the coffee at that location up so it wouldn't go bad as fast, directly against the McDonald's SOP, and there was an email chain stating they did this to save money and upper management knew exactly what was going on. When the woman spilled coffee on herself, sh…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 05:10 PM
1

The cigars are straight up illegal if your club has employees... even if it's private.
/r/MensRights30/09/14 10:08 PM
2

That would be illegal discrimination... Obviously.
/r/MensRights30/09/14 09:59 PM
1

As I understand it, all you can do is document it if/when she doesn't show up. No organization will enforce anything against her, and especially not the day of. Best you can do is stack ammo with it, and you can arrange things so that looks worse. Not showing up for dad is minor in comparison to refusing to produce him for his own birthday party with his friends. Laser tag or some such. Wheels within wheels.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 09:32 PM
1

This is a little alarmist. They just want to do what they have done to countless other communities of interest. Show up and make them beholden to their will. They want the kingmaker power for the industry, or something to that effect. Nobody is sitting around plotting how to make games worse. Just how to effectively ruin the lives and products of those that don't toe the line. The media is more than happy to push this narrative, as it avoids the criticism focused at them. Anyway... Its fucked up…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 04:44 PM
1

4 for you Glen Coco, you go Glen Coco!?
/r/MensRights06/09/14 03:26 PM
16

Amanda Marcotte don't care. She is impervious to logic and reason. She quite literally believes her feelings are more important than pretty much anything else.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:49 PM
1

They will do other things like lump all doctors together... Basically comparing GPs and OBGYN against all the other specialties that pay better then acting shocked at the results.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 10:59 PM
1

Nothing modern about it. It was devised in the 19th century and remains largely unchanged.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 05:58 AM
1

If the goal is to pander to feminist groups (which it undoubtedly is), Rubio will be working against himself by doing so.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 04:32 PM
1

Doesn't matter, he is clearly after the Women's lobby as a prelude to a 2016 presidential bid. Wants to be able to campaign on getting one the feminist action points accomplished. Remember, women have in group bias, whereas men don't give a fuck about other men. In the game of politics pandering to women is always numerically superior, and throwing men under the bus isn't even noticed.
/r/MensRights03/08/14 04:13 PM
2

Tastes like despair.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 06:14 PM
1

It does in that, while clearly being in the wrong herself, managed to eject him from the flight via proxy violence... Basically out of spite.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 05:18 PM
1

Switch the roles and all you would say is "what an entitled bitch" but no matter the role the woman has no justification. I think the exclamations would still be "What threat?" first. Wouldn't be in this sub in such a case though.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 04:33 PM
2

I'm just "team logic and reason". Is that so? Occam's razor time. did she read a tweet with no externally identifying information that didn't bode well for her job and react, hoping to cover it up before HR/PR took notice? Or did she feel physically threatened by a non-threatening tweet about bad customer service? The only plausible way to feel threatened is for her job.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 04:30 PM
1

Because clearly deleting the tweet would guarantee the safety of the airplane. No, it might guarantee the safety of her job. I doubt she wanted HR/PR to know what she did.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 04:25 PM
2

But I highly doubt she will receive any disciplinary action for her bad behavior. Punishing her would just discourage other gate attendants from leveling real accusations in the future. /s
/r/MensRights24/07/14 04:15 PM
10

I really think we can pursue our own interests respectively and still not have to "beat" the other group. This would be the case if their methods of advocacy for themselves didn't involve throwing men under the bus so often. We are forced to oppose feminists when they try and abridge men's rights.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 04:02 PM
4

This. She is coming from standard cultural marxism in her analysis, and her responses are predictable as such.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 03:53 PM
1

They would if fewer people insisted on being one. Supply and demand.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 02:51 PM
1

All those positive effects were just too much for them.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 01:45 PM
1

Except it isn't happening... At all.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 01:35 PM
1

According to the AMA from the other day, that article already exists. Literally about eating babies.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 01:33 PM
1

More like if you aren't blaming the rebels for recent events you haven't been paying attention...
/r/MensRights21/07/14 01:32 PM
2

Frankly, those tools were probably created by the US and given to allies.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 04:20 PM
11

This has been known... Where did you think "cruelty free" cosmetics testing came from?
/r/MensRights15/07/14 02:22 PM
1

I can't believe people agree with this statement. It is flat wrong. If, as a group, we support financial abortion, we must support a woman's right to control her body. Having your cake and eating it too is a feminist past time. I prefer the MRA not make hypocritical statements like this.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 04:43 PM
15

It sounds like you agree with your sociology professor's definition. Yeah...the issue is feminists aren't using that definition. I would love to call myself a liberal....but that word was stolen by marxists 150+ years ago. I could stubbornly insist I am a liberal, per X definition...and I would be correct, technically. This doesn't mean I won't confuse people profoundly though. Now the liberals of yesteryear are called libertarians/anarchists. For better or worse, liberal is never coming back to…
/r/MensRights11/07/14 12:21 AM
13

This is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 12:07 AM
24

It's not even a drop of sanity. Its just realizing the PR isn't going to be worth it. I doubt anyone at the department "saw the light".
/r/MensRights11/07/14 12:06 AM
1

So Elam decides throwing stones is a good idea, despite himself being the only one in a glass house. That's gonna go well for him.
/r/MensRights04/07/14 04:11 PM
1

Both got household work. Different types of demanding though...
/r/MensRights04/07/14 04:00 PM
-1

But people don't do that. They like the government. They think it helps them. that's why Occupy Wallstreet camped out on the Washington Mall or in front of 1600 Penn. Oh wait...they blamed the beneficiaries, like people are wont to do.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 11:48 PM
1

With such anti-social parents like that, the named person could have police seize the child by force...
/r/MensRights30/06/14 10:58 PM
1

They are also the largest purveyor of violence, yet are in charge of minimizing violence... The State is nothing but a ball of contradictions like that.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 10:53 PM
1

If anything we should point the finger at the government and courts. That is where these problems we face are enforced and codified." Feminists lobby the government like any large industry would. They are good at it too, as they get the money they use to lobby from the government itself. We should point the finger at government, just like we should point the finger at government for GM and Bank bailouts. Lots of people still want to harangue the banks about it, etc. Same deal here.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 10:22 PM
0

Shrug....Nearly all legal inequality for men was put in place by feminist groups. This is documented. Your argument is basically akin to "We shouldn't bash the KKK, because currently they have good press and people like them." These groups exist, are pushing further inequality (in the name of equality of course!), are well funded by tax dollars, and subscribe to (and built) a worldview where there will never be enough to satisfy them. Just because the media hasn't seen it yet doesn't mean we sho…
/r/MensRights30/06/14 10:03 PM
3

You can cover your ass for a future hypothetical institutional lawsuit with an hour of "self-defense" courses. Its much the same as diversity training for corporations. They know its BS...but it's BS they can stand up in court later and say they did.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 02:05 PM
1

I know what bias is. biaism is a non-sense word. The plural is biases....if you were aiming for that.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 07:36 PM
2

Biaism? The fuck?
/r/MensRights23/06/14 06:45 PM
1

HHS will. They would be happy to write a fine out and audit.
/r/MensRights18/06/14 11:52 AM
1

The doctor will find out when HHS comes to audit for HIPAA and fines start piling up.
/r/MensRights18/06/14 11:50 AM
1

Insurance is the bigger reason. You can't get a payout if you died in the commission of a crime.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:31 PM
9

Protip: your turn never comes.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:15 PM
0

No. That's not how evidence works. Multiple unsubstantiated anecdotes are as useful as one... Not useful at all. Statistics is the valid form of what you describe.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 04:37 PM
-2

Anecdotes =/= proof.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 04:06 PM
2

Neither. It's done on purpose, for effect.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 04:03 PM
2

That would be equality... Turns out we are after "equality", meaning whatever looks best for women at first glance.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 12:47 PM
2

I like that by the end she was reduced to saying...its mean anonymous internet messages that make this group dangerous, not the group itself. Which is an insane position to take.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 01:38 AM
3

i didnt put much effort into that comment since the question is really narrow minded. How is it narrow minded? if you really wanna find examples, please familiarize yourself with the womens law project, and a variety of similar groups. So you can't come up with a single example... your powers of persuasion are irresistible... and yeah, i can say you dont know what its like. Well...you can make the words come out of your mouth...but its a logical fallacy and morally bankrupt. Rather than address …
/r/MensRights13/06/14 12:14 AM
7

This is nearly unaddressable due to readability/formatting issues. I also note you are making various assertions without evidence. I also noticed your comments that "I just don't get it", and "maybe you cant really know what its like". These are plain bullshit statements. Beyond all this none of the laughable arguments I think you made actually address the topic at hand: The current legal disadvantages of being a woman in the western world. You start by listing non western countries, followed by…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 11:24 PM
7

Then you will have no trouble naming those areas where women are worse off than men....
/r/MensRights12/06/14 11:01 PM
6

This is about all I can come up with too. And Women currently do have that legal right...it just gets attacked by crazies more often than not.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 11:01 PM
2

He probably stole a STEM spot from a deserving girl too.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 10:53 PM
2

To be fair, it would already appear to be national news.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 12:14 AM
2

Should you be able to nap on a park bench with your wallet next to you and have nothing bad happen? Sure. Will that happen? Maybe....or maybe not. If you end up robbed, it will have been fairly predicable...still not your fault...but damn did you make it easy to attempt for them. Same thing here. If you are walking around drunk with virtually nothing on....you don't deserve to be violated...but damn do you present an easy target for the unscrupulous.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 06:12 PM
1

if sustained, your recording couldn't be used to help you after that. You would go down for the false accusation AND wire tapping, with a vindictive enough DA.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 05:42 PM
1

Haha. Title IX only works in one direction.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 03:57 PM
1

People complain about western feminists for the most paet becuase thats the group that won their rights 40 years ago... And are now trying to score more perks for themselves and legally disadvantage men. Feminists in Asia have actually got real problems like western women had in the 60s. Nobody here is out to criticize people fighting for their rights... Just people looking to systematicly strip the rights of others in service to their own perceived cause.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 03:45 PM
1

You aren't aware medical facilities sell the "scraps" to cosmetic companies? Hence "cruelty free" cosmetics.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 03:20 PM
-1

Sadly not a joke. She had almost no idea how to operate the equipment for that flight, relying on her copilot for navigation, etc.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 02:18 PM
1

You should have made it anti-irish. Racism always looks far sillier after a century or two.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 02:04 PM
-2

She also died becuase she couldn't be bothered to learn how her equipment worked...
/r/MensRights04/06/14 01:41 PM
3

If the author is to be believed, Kate Millet is the one responsible for their current state by pressuring government to close the mental health system down 40ish years ago.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 01:35 PM
2

but this really sounds like they are trying to display her as a victim that went though "harsh" stuff in her past. Thats kinda like saying John Wayne Gacy went through harsh stuff in his past like murder and rape...
/r/MensRights02/06/14 03:11 PM
9

They catch prostitution rings...not human trafficking.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 04:04 PM
6

Perhaps....but there isn't much evidence to support that assertion.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 04:00 PM
4

The provably false accusation is the only countable one. If X says Y raped me at 8pm on Jan 1, and it turns out Y was out of the country/in a coma/etc at that time. We know for sure that was a false accusation, and can count it (not that anyone is actually keeping track...)
/r/MensRights01/05/14 09:04 PM
2

Fighting words aren't about speech but more about calculating chances of future action and building a legal case in relation to assault and such.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 07:09 PM
10

We are on the same page I think, but a speech code implies prohibition, not social pressure.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 06:53 PM
2

If the school take public funds then they are public for our puposes here.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 06:36 PM
12

If you aren't going to allow all speech, then just pack it in now. Offensive speech is the kind worth protecting.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 06:34 PM
184

The concept of a "speech code" is, in and of itself, offensive in a free society.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 03:48 PM
3

I do love me some Mencken. "The most costly of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind."
/r/MensRights19/04/14 03:46 PM
6

I thought that was the ISS...
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:20 PM
3

I can only assume Stab Time's are a brand of disposable knifes.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 08:54 PM
30

I love it. Being investigated because they decided by merit was the way to go...
/r/MensRights06/04/14 04:42 PM
3

Emeritus degree means he didn't actually earn it.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 10:15 PM
1

Well, if they were educated about their own legal they would know the presumption of innocence has been around since Hammurabi.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 10:10 PM
1

Morgue workers? How pedestrian... I was thinking gladiators.
/r/MensRights02/04/14 12:36 PM
1

Only works if you got a name like Taylor, Hillary, or Pat.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 12:41 AM
7

This... I think the female equivalent of "asshole" is bitch, semantically speaking.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 12:30 AM
-2

Well, its either that or assume extreme liability at any and all times... Both are bad.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 09:06 PM
-1

And the answer, as always, is public places are public... Until they wrote a law contrary to hundreds of years of common law... Now the question is... Is that law permissible.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 04:16 PM
2

In the US? ...lol
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:37 PM
1

nepotism doesn't mean what you think it does.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:25 PM
1

I have always heard Weebie/Meebie for Women and Minority owned businesses, respectively.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:23 PM
1

I know of 2 businesses that are minority women shell companies. Big company A makes a bid for X contract, but faxes the bid over to Minority woman owned shell B, who tacks 5% on and submits to the government entity entertaining bids. That's literally all they do, and I get the sense one of them isn't even aware thats how she is being used. The other knows exactly whats up and straight up doesn't care. Six figures for repackaging bids, work from home...flexible hours...etc.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:19 PM
1

probably the first time....better to let some free tickets go than deal with an expensive lawsuit. Then they would work hard on figuring a way around it in future.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:09 PM
-1

Because paying for the privilege of paying for drinks makes any sense. A cover is only acceptable if there was a special cost for the event. Bringing in a certain band that night, etc.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:05 PM
5

He believed that photons that come off a person are for anyone to collect, this isn't the case. Physical reality disagrees. Thats exactly how light works.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:00 PM
-1

I would readily believe its worse in female prison. To wind up there in the first place, you really have to fuck up, considering conviction bias, sentencing bias, etc. I could totally see more behavior problems in general, as uncontrollable outbursts at the legal system is probably the quickest way to turn the legal system from pity to anger.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 02:30 PM
1

Not only super-sociopaths, but super criminals as well. Its business networking and higher education for the career criminal.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 02:27 PM
2

Well, considering a court will have to rule one way or the other, that sets an important precident. Either way its interesting law.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 02:21 PM
1

That and attrition. 50 guys go off to hunt or raid the next village... The 25 that make it back are the stronger, better fighters... Who live on to pass their genes.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 02:17 PM
1

Well... Thats a pretty good description of a feedback loop... Like evolution.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 02:15 PM
1

I thought rule #1 is never get into a land war in asia?
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:54 PM
3

Call the police? You trying to get people killed?
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:47 PM
7

Shit... That means xbox live is the failed rape capital of the world.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:45 PM
1

I was apparently suspected of being gay at age 2, becuase I asked for a play kitchen for Christmas.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 06:23 PM
38

$200+ million dollars is an OK replacement....
/r/MensRights01/03/14 07:50 PM
2

the label "gamer" doesn't apply to everyone who has ever played snake or pong in common speech, but thats how the numbers are reflected here. Just pointing that out.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 03:15 PM
1

This gender split doesn't distinguish between candy crush or farmville and COD/starcraft, etc.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:42 PM
1

Why not? Sue for legal costs too.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 04:06 AM
3

So is she in that case. She produced it.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 11:16 PM
9

You forget option 3, sue the girls' parents, and sue the district when they fire him without cause.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:21 PM
3

It already has ruined him. That's why the rest of his actions don't make sense.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:06 PM
10

Age is most detectable in faces. Doing so off bodies is much harder.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:05 PM
4

Then statutory rape isn't even on the table.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:03 PM
2

Even if he were to be cleared, I'm not sure he would have been able to continue teaching. Well...legally they couldn't do anything about it at that point besides make his life hell until he quits.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:00 PM
3

Did they have sex? I didn't see that mentioned.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:59 PM
9

Well, unless he did something you didn't state...I don't know why he would have resigned. He didn't do anything illegal, as it wasn't known she was underage and his student. Its like the reverse of To Catch a Predator. "Thinks its a 26 year old contemporary, turns out its a student."
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:43 PM
50

Well, if smart, he would get a lawyer and sue her parents for damages, as well as the school for wrongful termination. He reputation is already gone, so all he can do is get paid now. He has the standing to bring these suits, and it should be straight forward.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:37 PM
1

If there wasn't sarcasm, all comments would be the same few replies pointung out the fallacies, etc. It would get boring quick because feminists are incapable of changing rhetoric.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:31 PM
3

Actually they are trying to sell you a person... Not a thing.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 10:51 PM
1

Vote with your eyeballs(?) I guess.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:48 PM
1

On the contrary. They can, have, and will.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:39 PM
1

Xbox live isn't "imminent" though, and thus doesn't count.
/r/MensRights09/02/14 07:39 AM
3

Polygraphs are worthless. Full stop.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 02:56 PM
6

Polygraph? Lol. Why not just read tea leaves?
/r/MensRights08/02/14 02:35 PM
2

but I don't see any acknowledgement that boys are told to go throw a football. well, obviously not when we are talking about CS. That doesn't play into the narrative. The amnesia lifts when its time to talk Title IX though.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 08:48 PM
2

who of course had the wunderkind Penny helping him out. More like saving Gadget from certain doom at regular intervals. She was basically the protagonist.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 08:42 PM
1

I'm saying there aren't enough numbers of white males in existence to solve the problems that need solving out there. Women and minorities are almost completely untapped pools of talent. There is no nefarious plot to keep women and minorities out, and its pretty damn hard to make a case about minorities anyway. A solid portion of any CS class is going to be Indian/East Asian/Pacific islander. Maybe blacks? But thats an issue across the board for them (unfortunately). Programming is like art; por…
/r/MensRights07/02/14 08:37 PM
1

That and the converse of not give a shit about stuff the average person cares about...sports, gossip, etc.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 08:22 PM
8

Wrong they're.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 01:30 PM
1

Well...that means that paper/editor is delusional in the same way she is. Not good for Sweden.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:28 PM
1

They did have that aspect on lockdown....
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:27 PM
1

Well, if they published it in a "look what the crazy said!" way...that makes sense. I got the impression it was a serious op ed that may or may not have been satire.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:25 PM
2

Legal and permissible? Absolutely. Moral and fair? Not so much.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:23 PM
2

Her view doesn't represent even lightly represents a fraction of Swedes. So the logical conclusion is its worth publishing?
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:14 PM
1

Swedish News Papers published that crazy woman's rant. and even if you wanted to say its satire...it doesn't really fit as the parallels are not there.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 06:03 PM
3

IF you think thats clever just wait til you see their plan for world peace....
/r/MensRights05/01/14 05:46 PM
2

I hope they don't get better. I hope the feminists win and utterly destroy Sweden, making it so ruined that it's a clear example to the rest of the world. Yeah...because the marxist/leninists will readily admit their pet theory leads to starvation and death in practice...
/r/MensRights05/01/14 05:38 PM
-1

You seem to be happy enough to publish hateful screeds spoken by crazy people as if it were real news...
/r/MensRights05/01/14 05:36 PM
3

Did I ever tell you about the time Bill Brasky and I....
/r/MensRights05/01/14 05:30 PM
1

What is the point you want to convey ? that you are reading these studies wrong, and your title is misleading. Also, you don't seem to have a good grasp of the scientific method and logical reasoning. You have decided that one study that says a lack of folates will produce birth defects means that male diet affect children. You simply cannot draw this conclusion given the evidence, all you can say is that lacking certain required vitamins is bad for offspring. You can't say fathers who eat bette…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:44 PM
1

It is not just malnutrition, what if people have issues with digesting folates. Then by definition they are malnourished. You might care to look up the definition of Malnutrition.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:27 PM
0

I am sorry. You have no evidence to be making this assertion that it isn't just malnutrition. Thats all the study says. Stop trying to add your own meaning.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 03:42 PM
0

No. I am saying thats all the study says, and there aren't any corroborated studies yet, so we don't even know that for sure. Even granting that it is true, its a case of malnutrition, not lack of food. If you don't get folates, bad shit starts to happen all around; its not surprising it fucks with sperm too. Folates are not hard to come by. Green things, fruit, milk, beans, egg whites will all suffice. This is someone with a crazy unbalanced diet, like nothing but Ramen style. Fucking poptarts …
/r/MensRights16/12/13 07:01 AM
0

This title isn't quite right. It should be something more like: "Folate deficiency in fathers leads to unhealthy reproduction." Also, it is really hard to be folate deficient if you eat green things regularly. I wouldn't doubt fathers with Scurvy siring unhealthy kids either...this is kinda on that level of nutrition fail.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 12:57 AM
11

Its basically Atheism+ for the skeptical community at large. This particular one is responsible for the rash of anti-male convention policy of late, becuase she snapped when someone asked her to coffee in an elevator. Apparently that is near tantamount to rape, and indicates a systematic goal of keeping women at conventions fearful for their safety.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 08:13 PM
2

So sexism is fine when it seems to benefit feminist women, but not when it doesn't... Yes. That is intentional.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:55 PM
10

Its a portmanteau of Skeptic and Chick.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:49 PM
3

I was banned from Linguistics for (correctly, mind you) arguing a word's meaning; Cracker is in fact a racial slur, like nigger. I was branded a racist and kicked out of the sub dedicated to words and their meanings and uses for asserting this point.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:28 PM
2

Thanks, TIL. I assumed it had something to do with towing barges through locks or some such, coordination being key in such maneuvers.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 09:27 PM
1

More like "our position is logically untenable"
/r/MensRights14/12/13 06:21 PM
1

Offering solutions when they want to irrationally vent is a bad move. I learned that as a teenager.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 06:14 PM
5

For sure... But alas, being a douche isn't illegal.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 05:48 PM
1

Why is "toe" correct? I have been under the impression "tow" was correct.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 05:46 PM
17

Eh...the girl most guys are looking for is: reasonably attractive. Basically don't be hideous. Its a really low bar in actuality. Don't be bat shit crazy. Be reasonably intelligent; Not vapid. This is not a huge bar either. Nobody wants to spend years talking about the Real Housewives and US Weekly, though.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:56 PM
1

So....Romneycare is also a racist term? I have a hard time following the logic....
/r/MensRights10/12/13 07:09 PM
9

No. Her body her choice, and that's absolutely correct. The difference is that feminists leave it at that, where we insist on the corollary: if you bear 100% of the choice, you bear 100% of the responsibility.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:33 PM
3

Read as: Board discovered their position untenable, logically speaking, and moved quickly to fix that. Good on them. Its not the mea culpa they would have had it taken them longer.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 01:46 AM
1

This would make sense if they disbarred the treatment, not the sex of the patient to be treated. Where does it say women won't be treated either? It doesn't becuase they still are being treated by OBGYMs.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 04:35 PM
1

Remember, those doctors that don't like this new rule can always just not be certified by the board. No. They can't, as its illegal to practice without insurance, and most insurance companies wouldn't touch an uncertified doctor with a 10ft pole. Beyond this, most, if not all hospitals will require certification; a doctor's main employment opportunity. Like Lawyers, Doctors run their own professional cartel backed by government force and if you disagree with them, they will put you out of busine…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 07:29 AM
8

I see your argument of mission creep, and it makes sense...but if OBGYN is doing anal cancer...and they are for women...and they are the specialists in it...why say "No Men", rather than "No anal cancer treatment"? This is the part that doesn't make any sense.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 07:19 AM
3

I like the part where not wanting to unnecessarily snip body parts off of an unable to consent victim is antisemitism.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 11:09 PM
15

I have a hard time understanding the board's rationale.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 11:05 PM
5

All this really shows is that the industry is suitably scared of feminist backlash, and corporate PR is more important than Dev opinions at Blizzard/Activision. to my mind he answered relatively well. He could of shut them right up with "Where are all the people complaining about Jim Raynor's impossibly proportioned barrel chest? Its not just women we are cranking to 11, comic book style, and its disingenuous to pretend like that's what we are doing, and to assign your own suspected motives to B…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 10:01 PM
0

While a bad practice, one can hardly imagine her comments in context are any better. She is a crazy thats sigular goal in life is to be turned into sound bites.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:49 PM
0

Not CP obviously, but most revenge porn isnt CP at all.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 01:04 PM
0

No... It doesn't exist to protect your privacy... It does exist to protect your copyright... And photos are owned by the person who takes the picture. This is copyright 101. If you let someone record you and then they post it on the Internet... You have no recourse, as they own the rights to it and can do as they please. If you record it you can DMCA anywhere it pops up and sue for damages.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 10:32 PM
2

Copyright would be a good way. If you want to do naughty recordings and make sure your partner never shares them.... Make them yourself, and a massive body of copyright law is on your side.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 02:32 PM
5

There is no law against being a dickhead.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 02:21 PM
14

The girls can sue the boys for a few things, the most serious of which would be copyright violation. As the orginators of the pictures, the girls own the rights to them. This is and should be a civil matter.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 02:19 PM
2

Because of how copyright law and the first amendment shake out, its not straightforward.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 02:17 PM
1

Sexist? I can't possibly see how.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 11:44 PM
1

Jackson's trying to escape!
/r/MensRights14/11/13 05:44 PM
0

...Nobody goes looking for crack. They generally go looking for cash or something they can trade for cash, so they can buy crack. If you steal from your dealer, it becomes hard to get more...so they steal from other people. Also, your example isn't an equivalent setup.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 05:37 PM
13

100% to Susan G Komen. /s
/r/MensRights14/11/13 05:20 PM
1

Can you think of a better word for "singularly possessing the right/power"?
/r/MensRights10/11/13 08:06 PM
2

The State is the entity with the monopoly on violence for that given territory.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:26 PM
1

A lot of feminists also don't like women who are pro-life, which I am. If only most people were pro-"none of your damn business"...
/r/MensRights02/11/13 07:12 PM
1

Time to warm up that polygraph to see if she really does remember it. I think you mean FMRI, as that actually works...unlike polygraphs. Also the 5th amendment makes it a fruitless pursuit.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 10:22 PM
2

just making them in the first place....awesome.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:28 PM
3

Well traditionally, authoritarian regimes don't function nearly at all. They generally have trouble keeping the lights on and food in stores. Singapore at least is functional, and strangely well so.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:51 PM
5

You refuse to believe, despite all evidence to the contrary? Society's influence is pretty much the barometer of what's acceptable. Spartan women left their unperfect newborns on a hill to die of exposure and be eaten by wolves. This was culturally expected and done by well meaning mothers. Today, mother's who love their children still have circumcisions performed for "the child's best interest" according to society. So... Refusing to believe it doesn't make it untrue.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:36 PM
5

DAs are politicians. They don't get held responsible for their decisions.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:28 PM
2

But they have a couch, right? Right?!
/r/MensRights21/10/13 01:35 PM
1

Why were you giving them money?
/r/MensRights21/10/13 01:34 PM
2

It will be immediate though... The moment its on the books, any hard working woman who didn't want a handout is lumped together with diversity hires.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 10:17 PM
4

Just keep an eye out for Patriarchy Decoder Rings. Its easier.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 02:24 PM
1

Next time you happen by a store, ask the manager if you need to verify your age to lift the content filter. It could be to stop a minor from accessing porn, etc. with a prepaid phone.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:55 AM
1

I think you mistyped 'infinite'.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:50 AM
1

The older generations have the money... Yet are subsidized by the young careerless generation? This seems fair and equitable...
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:49 AM
1

Surgeons know their shit, etc.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:43 AM
0

What critical part of the eco system do pandas cover?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 06:07 PM
6

Soviets weren't friendly to people, full stop.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 05:36 PM
8

No...its probably "Men rape the earth, like they rape women" Edit: I guessed correctly! "Ecofeminism connects the exploitation and domination of women with that of the environment, and argues that there is a connection between women and nature that comes from their shared history of oppression by a patriarchal Western society." Apparently Nature and Women have joined forces to stop the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 02:29 PM
15

Its a question of policy. Feminism has crazies, but they get book deals and speaking engagements, not shunned like crazy MRAs.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 12:10 PM
2

I agree with Ted Turner on one thing: Animals that are useful to people generally get taken care of over the long run. He decided to save the bison by opening a chain of restaurants that serve bison (and delicious fridge pickles they serve like rolls or chips and salsa at a mexican place), thus making them economically useful and worth seriously farming. I can get behind keeping delicious meats on the table.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 12:16 AM
2

I was thinking the Swiss plan of blowing up infrastructure and hiding in bunker complexes in the event of invasion was the real reason nobody invaded. Its a can of worms that won't net you anything realistically, except an angry and well prepared guerilla enemy...
/r/MensRights23/09/13 03:18 PM
1

although it is poor journalism. Does writing falsehoods told to you down qualify as journalism even? Reporting maybe...but journalism implies some thought and critical thinking.
/r/MensRights23/09/13 02:20 PM
1

no, the event planners are responsible, not the protest groups.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 09:30 PM
2

Well, assuming feminists hold similar events that need policing...and they get the police for free, while MRAs are charged for their policing...that would be discrimination on the part of the school by showing favoritism. This would have to be a lawsuit though, and the likely result to save face in court will be to charge the well funded feminist groups too, not stop charging MRAs. Someone with standing should sue; not much else can be done.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:51 PM
1

when was the last time a rights event was held responsible for its own security on a university campus in Canada? Thats a good question. I doubt many got reliably violent protest, so its not really apples to apples. EDIT: Policing public events are paid for publicly by the state and should not be otherwise. That is true. This is, regretfully, a private event hosted by a private group. I don't see how your pronouncement applies?
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:39 PM
6

Why is this ban worthy? Its not advocating anything illegal, merely against someone's arbitrary rule. Edit: Mod says he was doxing. Mystery solved.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:05 PM
0

All events/groups are responsible for their own security. I can think of no example of this not being the case. Can you think of one? It may very well be discriminatory behavior based on the schools actions, but it doesn't change the fact that any event needs to finance their security. Do you think E3 gets free security? Everyone can be angry...but this isn't outrageous and unprecedented. This is how event organization works.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:02 PM
4

Someone will record it, post it, pick it apart, and they will look insane. This is why they don't want it recorded. Thats not really going to stop anybody though. Patience and you will have what you seek.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 03:48 PM
0

We live in a gynocentric society and so no this is the norm. What? How does this logically follow? Name any time where protesters were forced to pay for security at an event they were protesting.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 03:39 PM
8

Is this even out of the ordinary? Who pays for security outside a planned parenthood when the crazies come to protest? I doubt its the protesters. When a City hosts G8 or some such, its not the protesters paying for the extra cops, etc. So, does this just mean MRAs finally hit the bigtime, as we can count on irrational violent protest at every event in at least one university's estimation?
/r/MensRights21/09/13 03:28 PM
1

Sure thing. Right after we get the petition to make petitions matter in the slightest signed and posted.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 12:47 AM
1

Beyond this, can anyone point to an online petition that actually did anything, ever?
/r/MensRights19/09/13 12:45 AM
1

If only they all thought an alien spaceship comet was coming...
/r/MensRights19/09/13 12:04 AM
1

I get that there is a pretty powerful mindset in that women essentially have full control over that but shouldn't men have a damn large portion of a say on a topic like that? No. It seems like it should be more fair a decision because children happen to couples, not just women, but pregnancy happens to just women. This means its 100% their choice. Her body, her choice, as the saying goes. Everyone gets full bodily autonomy. Full Stop. However, If she does have 100% of the choice, then she defini…
/r/MensRights17/09/13 07:52 PM
3

"That's sexist." will be the unironic response.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 04:31 PM
0

and the masses won’t admit that traditional gender roles really were/are the answer until it’s too late to solve the problem by switching back. Quit advocating for traditional gender roles. Equality under the law is an appropriate goal, and is in theory achievable. Practical enforcement will be an uphill battle though.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 03:18 PM
1

With single digit approval and 90%+ relection rates... Thats not going to happen from within the system.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 12:59 PM
1

They are actually their representing the National Students Union as well as some sort of Campus worker union. The guys being picketed in the video are actually helping to pay for the privilege of being picketed. This was institutionally approved shenanigans.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 03:54 AM
4

Consistency and logic have never been their strong points.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 03:49 AM
1

Here is the real, no nonsense, defense class... Run the fuck away. If you can't get away, fight dirty. pocket sand , groin, eyes; Whatever. Then run as soon as you get a solid hit in.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 03:15 AM
5

This is the reason. It is literally their only rhetorical option.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 02:54 AM
6

Its not anecdotal when you are talking about a policy and a country of millions. Anecdotal would be something like, "I'm an australian male that retired at 45."
/r/MensRights05/09/13 02:03 PM
2

Once you have 3, you can avoid taxes by telling A you pay B, B you pay C, and C you pay A. Unless A,B, or C is the United States of America, where they will demand a fraction of your income regardless of where you are on the globe.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 02:01 PM
1

Now does everyone realize signing him was a PR stunt that worked relatively well now?
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:36 PM
1

it won't, ever. The moment people try they will declare it ok to discriminate against boys to make up for imbalances found by experts. This rationale will give them license to do whatever they want.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:29 PM
1

Well, its only an issue if you cry wolf...its not something you can do accidentally.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:38 AM
2

I can't say one way or the other. I can tell you nuns were responsible for an awful lot of physical abuse. My mother was born left handed, until the nuns beat it out of her, and she finally started writing the "proper way". This was the late 50's/early 60's though.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 06:47 PM
5

Anyone else want to bet she had previously advocated for publicly shaming those arrested in the local paper, etc.? Bonus internet points for anyone who can find her advocating against "respecting privacy", even more if there is video/audio.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 06:31 PM
3

Pastebin or finish in a comment. It sucks you took all that time and still ended with something unreadable. Lessons for next time I guess.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 05:03 PM
3

I hate to be that guy, but for the love of god fix your wall of text. Paragraphs are not optional in something this long.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:06 PM
1

This word is dead. Give up on it. It will never mean what it once did again. Sommers would be better off coming up with a new word, or using egalitarian.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 02:19 PM
0

Yes, but generally not for a few decades (gots to pay loans off, build experience and a practice.) Women drop out at 30-35 there in huge numbers...before they start to really make money.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 04:57 PM
1

You keep using irrelevant terms like "deserves", even after I point it out to you. I am just speaking of human nature in regards to sympathy. A human mind will be less sympathetic to things that don't provoke sympathetic reactions. You can make value judgements all you want, but it doesn't change how humans calculate sympathy.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 04:46 PM
3

sympathy is greater for the truely random and unfortunate. Take the Tiger example. If you are on a photo safari and a tiger mauls you without warning, etc everyone is going to be naturally sympathetic. "That could've been me, and I wouldn't of been able to do anything about it!" people think. Jumping into the Tiger pit at the zoo on purpose though garners next to no sympathy. "This couldn't happen accidentally, and I certainly wouldn't of made the same decisions, and neither would any other rati…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 04:23 PM
5

Your feeling that she sort of got what she deserved and is to blame for the bullying campaign. Ok, one last time very slowly. She didn't "deserve" anything. She simply got the eminently predictable response. Its not shocking that this happened. It was the expected outcome. doesn't make her any less of a victim of a bullying / shaming campaign in the situation. This makes me think you are not reading my responses or, again, have really poor comprehension. She is a victim...just not a sympathetic …
/r/MensRights23/08/13 03:29 PM
0

I am unsure of either your meaning here, or reading comprehension skills. I didn't say she wasn't the victim, and I never said he was. I said she doesn't make a very sympathetic victim, like an idiot who jumps in the tiger pit isn't very sympathetic either.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 03:13 PM
5

Victim of her own actions and the entirely predictable response from the rest of society? She is a "victim" like someone who jumps into the tiger cage at the zoo who gets mauled is a victim; True in the strictest sense, but hardly sympathy inspiring. "what did you think was going to happen?" will be the common refrain.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:55 PM
4

she is a victim of bullying. Ok, so what? Sticks and Stones constitute a crime, while words constitute free speech. People don't have to like and be nice to you, or even be polite. Being a victim in this case is literally being a victim of other's wit and biting comments. Aren't all public figures victims of bullying by your definition?
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:44 PM
1

as well as removing intellectual and skills capital from countries that arguably need them more (and often countries that expended resources to train people who will now provide no ROI). If you want to keep skilled labor around...try being more competitive with the places people are leaving for. They aren't leaving because we want them here. They are leaving because they want to GTFO. Blaming the west for being too desirable is kinda shitty logic.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:31 PM
2

You know college jumped the shark when you can count on one hand the number of professors you had that held real jobs before teaching. The rest are career academics, who live permanently in the ivory tower.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:27 PM
1

If you do it the natural way and have an agreement, if she decides to "Alter the deal", you have a shot of seeing your kid(s).
/r/MensRights20/08/13 09:19 PM
20

The world where this gap needs to exist to justify continued lobbying.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 04:11 PM
2

I like the sour looks on all their faces. Clearly this would be a pleasant group of people that one would love to share a glass of lemonade with. /s Also, if you don't already know, the one with her hand up point to the sign is Carrie Nation; Guilty of assault and property damage with a hatchet, which she did repeatedly across the US to Saloons. Nobody would arrest her except small town sheriffs, and she would post bail and leave for the next Saloon. She was eventually banned from the State of K…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 03:41 PM
2

A sex strike, sometimes called a sex boycott embargo is a more accurate word I feel.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 03:30 PM
1

You should read Lysistrata by Aristophanes for a glimpse into how it was done in ancient times... ugh. Too bad you need to be a classics major to get most of the jokes, but yeah, the story involves a pussy embargo to stop a war.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 03:29 PM
1

AI is the only way a man can legally 'donate' without being held liable for CS sometime down the road. Correct. Now the Father cannot legally be considered the father without the express consent of the mother. This is advantageous when you already have a legal agreement for what amounts to CS with the guy. Its having your cake and eating it too. Wait a decade and you will hear stories of these "families" breaking up and the guy not being allowed to see his "non-children" and not even having the …
/r/MensRights20/08/13 03:04 PM
1

fair enough. This would be unworkable under modern IP law, then.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 02:46 PM
2

Correct, but correlation across time, countries, and cultures strongly implies causation. I can just as easily correlate it with TV, Microwave dinners, or any number of modern things. The modern age happened all at once from a historical/generational perspective, and picking it back apart is going to be extremely hard.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 02:12 PM
2

One thing I fear is; What happens if I get semi-drunk at a party and have intercourse with a girl who is also drunk, then the girl says I raped her? Or what if the girl turns out to be abusive and when I try to defend myself she exaggerates it and tells the police/my friends I assaulted her?? Am I worrying about nothing? Life is for living. You could be hit by a truck at any moment. Calculated risks my friend. These specific fears are almost as likely to happen without you seeking female attenti…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:34 PM
3

(US government has gone from 3% of GNP to 40% of GNP since women's suffrage.) Correlation doesn't equal causation, though. Your first point is very valid though. 20% of tax base, 55% of vote.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:21 PM
5

giegerwasright must of been confused by the starburst dispenser they have instead.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:19 PM
2

This would be illegal under modern IP law.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:14 PM
2

Yes he would. His ISP would get the requests rather than Youtube. There will be way less as its not a button you can automate, but you can still DMCA them.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:12 PM
1

Seconded. I was planning to do this myself just now.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:10 PM
1

In that listing, one could make an argument for striking the obscenity exception, and I do. I also hold that incitement isn't a crime, and the commercial speech section is IP law run amok over a century. The rest is fairly straightforward and all(?) countries have those exemptions. As an aside, the obscenity part might be de facto obsolete with the rise of South Park, etc in personal life. It still affects the FCC's regulatory power over radio and TV though.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 02:30 PM
1

I am not ranking importance, simply showing Norway's freedom of speech is certainly limited, and at least a portion is for prudish busy-body reasons or the sake of tradition rather than any logical concerns. Norway is not a perfect bastion of Free Speech, as this proves. You are right in that its not super crucial, per se; But it still falls under the heading of Free Speech, and Norway doesn't respect it. Australia is pretty good about freedom of the press and protest for instance, yet they don'…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:56 PM
2

Says the person from a country with baby naming laws. Freedom of speech isn't all about letting people protest. Sometimes its about freedom from busy bodies, and Norway fails on this count.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:40 PM
1

And which of those countries lets you pick children's names only from a list of approved names? Its not all standard free speech concerns. Australia doesn't let adults play video games uncensored, for instance.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:37 PM
5

Why do the police ever respond?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 07:03 PM
3

First amendment? If that ever happened to me, it would be nothing but a string of profanity at her until she left. "you could've just asked politely, bitch."
/r/MensRights18/08/13 07:03 PM
36

‘I knew Charlie would be a great dad because he’s a really good provider, he’s got a huge heart and he’s very driven. With those qualities, I knew no matter what happened that we’d always be a family,’ says Apryll. Damian and Charlie ‘are like best friends’ and they all regularly meet up. ‘To all intents and purposes, I have two husbands!’ she laughs. This is the key to the whole article. It seems like a nifty way for women to hedge and compartmentalize relationships. Bad boys are fun, but not g…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 06:45 PM
1

to be afraid of strangers due to the Schrödinger's Muggler. How does one muggle?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 06:37 PM
28

It simply demonstrates how little free speech is actually respected in the the rest of the world. the US is pretty shitty about good governance, protecting rights, etc but at least the US government actually really does a good job with 1st amendment issues. We let Neo-nazis march and Westboro do their thing for heaven's sake. Stuff like this shows the rest of the world is just paying lip service to free speech.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 06:34 PM
10

Men in a foreign country shut them down, and there was nobody bigger and badder than the protesters to appeal to, so the program had to change. Here in the US, if you tried the same thing, you would be arrested and painted as a misogynist.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 10:22 AM
1

I don't mean in actual outcomes these are the rankings. I mean "social justice" groups have these priorities. The plight of a black man is more concerning to them than that of a white guy, while a black women is more concerning still. Heaven forbid white women have trouble though...
/r/MensRights16/08/13 02:44 PM
4

Priorities, I guess. gotta learn the pecking order; It goes: upperclass white women middle class white women minority women LGBT, etc minority men white men We are still in the make everything awesome for upperclass white women phase. They are slowly working their way down the list. Be patient and don't try and solve problems yourselves. That would be Anti-feminist.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 03:47 PM
1

I don't think it takes 6 years to learn a pseudoscience.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 03:34 PM
1

Why not the case worker or judge though? Sure, the ex is greedy, but why put the blame there when outside parties actually choose your fate?
/r/MensRights15/08/13 03:32 PM
3

at least it really doesn't have wiggle words. NO LAW is pretty damn clear.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:13 AM
1

Other countries really don't like you pointing out how shitty their free speech protection actually is. Cognitive dissonance and such.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:12 AM
1

Looking away from your neighbor passing out in his front lawn is one thing, when your neighbor posts it on twitter himself...I don't know you owe him that, or even if he wants it.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:24 PM
6

"women hold up half the sky", as I recall.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:09 PM
4

Well, they kinda had to move the needle this way, they were starting to look cartoonishly bad.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:01 PM
1

We can't go charging people with the worst case scenario outcome of their actions. Tell that to DUI law supporters. That is EXACTLY what we do in that scenario.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:54 PM
2

Lol. As if shouting "Thats not true!" repeatedly actually was a refutation of an argument.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 08:17 PM
2

Screws over young responsible people, then; the ones who already had being paying insurance... In favor of older people and irresponsible peers.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 04:05 PM
2

Yes there was, and the numbers look like reddit in general, skewed towards men (for obvious reasons). If you were to poll /gaming, /atheism, or other large subs, you would get numbers much like that, without the male bias. This still means a majority male, actually, because reddit is mostly male. Not to even touch upon other issues like self selection bias.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 05:16 AM
1

A person cannot just joined the oppressed by fiat. when they say stuff like this, You get the sense they actually know how logical debate works. Then when you try it, they go batty.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:32 PM
4

Its like virgin birth. A nice excuse...provided someone else hasn't ruined it for you by claiming it already. You had your chance and that ship has sailed...with Sarkeesian on it.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:30 PM
2

How about she is gathering undue influence on people who don't play games, yet influence government and corporate decisions regarding them? She is pretty much universally reviled by gamers for the lies and misrepresentations in her videos, and one can tell she has a foregone conclusion to state, regardless of what the video content is. People are not even sure she has played these games for an afternoon, and its pretty clear she hasn't played them start to finish, nor gotten main plot points cor…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:27 PM
7

As much as I disagree with her standpoint, I can admire her doing three times as much content for one part. Indeed. If only the content was accurate and actually produced by her...
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:08 PM
0

Aka a damn good conversation? Only if they play by the rules, which is extremely unlikely to happen. 99/100 it will be a shouting match with Big Red types.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:59 PM
0

The level of biological resource commitment for one...
/r/MensRights26/07/13 01:30 PM
-14

What do you mean no? Factory: Womb Nails: sperm wood: egg resulting product: Baby What if I'm married and want to procreate with my neighbor though? Could my wife use that as grounds for divorce? If a married woman can choose any man's sperm, then a married man should be allowed to choose any woman's womb. The word he wanted was egg, and beyond that...two wrongs don't make a right.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:46 PM
5

Apparently MR is channeling feminists today. /shrug
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:43 PM
-19

The Troll isn't wrong in this case. They are not logically equivalent. Eggs and sperm would be equivalents. Like I said below. Downvotes don't make me wrong. It just makes this sub look like asses.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:40 PM
1

Yes. This would be the take away. Parenthood should be opt in for both parents...
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:32 PM
-6

No. Everyone who dislikes my comments is missing the point. The orginial comment is basically "whats good for the goose is good for the gander" This is wrong becuase: Two wrongs don't make a right Even if stealing reproductive resources was acceptable, it really not the same. Shop lifting versus grand larsony, so to speak. Both are crimes and morally wrong, but the implications are drastically different. "commendeering" 10 calories of protein that your body is going to replace in a few hours is …
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:30 PM
1

Indeed.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:20 PM
10

I am not advocating it. This is more of a historical analysis. When there is no legal recourse, people resort to violence. Its true of the french revolution, ancient China... Hell its the reason for drug gang violence today.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:18 PM
-1

Well, in theory all that is needed to make it a better system is accountability. Since the legal system refuses to seriously tackle legal accountability, the shortfall can be made up by vigilante justice. Its not ideal, but one was to kill a judge because they demonstrably fucked your life up, other judges would think twice about doing the same thing. Also, sadly, it would have to become a trend before you actually see any real movement of the needle.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 07:35 PM
11

I don't think he will have a remedy against the state, since they never do anything wrong and aren't accountable. This is why people wonder why more Judges and Prosecutors aren't killed, or their families (as sad as that would be). If the legal system isn't going to grant justice and accountability, there is little recourse besides victimhood or violence.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 07:20 PM
7

I'm not comfortable advocating a breakdown in the judicial process. If it were the case that judges were receiving violence for verdicts that parties didn't like You missed the point. The breakdown in the judicial process IS the crazy verdict without proof and no serious means of appeal.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 07:16 PM
-28

Its like comparing a factory...to nails/screws/etc.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 07:02 PM
-46

sperm =/= womb. sorry, but thats a false equivalence edit: way to act like a bunch of knee-jerk reactionaries. Did I hurt your feels with my unwelcome logic? The female equivalent to sperm are eggs. If you want to criticise feminism for doing this, you kinda have to address it in house too. Downvoting things because it doesn't sit well with you, despite being demonstrably true is a feminist pastime.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 06:52 PM
1

There is no audit of how it's spent, and both are written to the mother. Functionally, there is no difference.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 12:17 PM
1

Women become uncontrollable sex machines after one, maybe two marijunanas. It is known.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:05 PM
0

Well, its not like they place a lot of emphasis on logical arguments, and edgy 'feels' right, therefore is right.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:02 PM
1

I feel that this clip is more appropriate a response.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:36 PM
2

Only the old boys club doesn't have a genetic in-group bias... Advantage, Ladies.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:09 PM
1

This would require the jury to have perfect information though. Otherwise you are equally advocating letting guilty rapists go based on exculpatory evidence that doesn't exist. After all how else will the jury know when to nullify or not? Or perhaps the goal was to let everyone free until the laws change? Fat chance of that, and plenty of "MRAs want to let rapists go free" accusations to boot.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 08:37 PM
21

My guess would be cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 01:53 PM
9

I think kilts are thick and heavy and yet they can be made of anything, in any thickness.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:38 PM
15

yet still unbifurcated... I see no major difference.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:12 PM
8

Call it a kilt, and bam, you are already there.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:10 PM
2

The barbarians are the minority here. Name an ancient civilization that had pants? We are talking Heads of state here. Think Asia, South America, India, Africa, North America to some extent... anywhere that had cities in the ancient world. All I can think of is Genghis Khan, because pants are awesome for riding horses, but while I consider the Mongols to be a civilization, and are pretty much the definition of Barbarian, as commonly defined today. So, they don't really count for the sake of this…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:06 PM
1

I suppose the argument then, right or wrong, is women won't give a shit until a few of them are thrown on the expendable person heap, so the most effective way to change it might not be to decry the unfairness of the system, but rather to try and get women subject to it as well. Then the support for it evaporates and becomes pressure to end the unfairness. Morally speaking, its wrong to advocate for bad laws, but if you know that enacting it will end injustice sooner than you could hope to do ot…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:35 PM
5

Don't hold your breath for that, and if you do, be sure there aren't any sharp edges between your head and the ground.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:27 PM
14

For most of human history, pants were considered barbaric actually. A wild crash course clip appears! http://youtu.be/3PszVWZNWVA?t=3m56s
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:01 PM
1

Wow. Just wow.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:34 PM
1

Well, yeah... But they didn't get to choose the random lot of jurors that started the selection process... What did that group look like? Lawyers simply try and assemble the best 12 for their case from that.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:17 PM
1

So you admit to being short on facts, yet insist on outrage? Classy.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:12 PM
1

Well, saying it and then dying after someone claims you did exactly that isn't going to go well for your case...
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:10 PM
1

Why do you skip the whole assault part? It is key.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:43 AM
1

"Found no guilty in a Florida Court of Law." will be the defense's favorite phrase.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:34 AM
-1

How do they come to that conclusion? Surveys of the recently departed?
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:54 PM
19

at the cost of thousands of dollars.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:53 AM
6

Thats the minimum bar in every state, as it was decided by supreme court ruling regarding the first amendment.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 02:03 AM
7

Child Protective Services.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:53 PM
4

Non sequitur?
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:49 PM
8

the problem with this is chain of custody. If you personally download this site, you could do anything with it in theory. Its trivial to edit text on webpage. You need to use an archival site like the wayback machine or freezepage.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:42 PM
23

Thats the UK. The UK is INSANE with their libel laws, you can be sued in the UK having never set foot there or done business there. The US is the opposite. It is crazy hard to get a conviction. In order to get standing, you need to prove that it has hurt you financially. You have to prove that she thinks otherwise, but said these lies anyway, and you have to prove that it wasn't a lie. It basically requires self-incrimination, and obviously thats just not going to happen most of the time. Also, …
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:39 PM
7

start here: http://archive.org/index.php You can always roll your own using their crawler: http://builds.archive.org:8080/maven2/org/archive/heritrix/heritrix/3.1.1/
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:35 PM
9

well, at least archive the website.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:22 PM
12

I would copy the website and WHOIS information because once you bring it up, odds are her council will want it shut down in a hurry.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:05 PM
3

Anyone else find it odd that there is a mandatory qualification for hairdressing at all? Its not odd at all. Governments like money, and licenses are a big part of that. They will licenses almost any business, regardless of legitimate need. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQscE3Xed64
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:31 PM
2

Your one issue would be children, who the family court would claim dominion over, and assuming your spouse wants the divorce, will most likely be happy with the change of venue.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:21 PM
1

Haven't they got that sonic thing down pat yet?
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:08 PM
1

the MRM is not an intellectual or academic movement I don't know by what definition you consider something an intellectual movement. If its defined as having to do with ideas, and not relating to primary survival, but more to do with philosophy and such, I don't see how you can call feminism as intellectual movement and men's right's not one, as they literally use the same criterion to qualify. If you define intellectual as basically academic and just wanted another word in there for good measur…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:27 AM
1

This is correct, he simply is one of the only ones that spent years building himself a nice bullhorn and hitting all the main points (then saying a bunch of crazy extra shit) Everyone is force to say....I don't disagree with a lot of what he is saying, but some of it is just hateful/antagonistic for the sake of it.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 02:58 AM
91

Well, can't one turn around and say, "oh look, female power fantasy?"
/r/MensRights06/07/13 01:52 PM
1

Why does the top level comment rule exist in the first place?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:51 PM
1

Excellent, a group that will understand my history lesson. The word Libertarian exists because the "progressive left" glommed on to and then subsumed what libertarians used to be called, Liberals. Once they figured out the word was lost to them because of the vast number of people who didn't have Liberty in mind started using it. They tried Classically Liberal for a while, but that just some adjective-Liberal and you still get put in the same basket; Hence a new word. So, I fear the word feminis…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:48 PM
2

has very little tolerance for anything but respectful debate and it's members will gleefully direct you to any logical fallacies you have incorporated into your argument. They are also not fond of jargon which hasn't been defined within the debate it is used in. god bless people who follow the rules of debate. Its pretty much philosophy majors and debate team people. Scientists, sadly, go either way on this (though usually follow the rules in their field, if not elsewhere)
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:30 PM
1

it's a mentality of people who can't accept they are solely responsible for their failures in life. While ostensibly correct, people get struck by lightning, etc. Random things you simply can't reasonably plan for.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:25 PM
1

What power did Obama ever fight? wasn't he a community organizer? (read guy who helps arrange local elections to the benefit of his party?) I suppose he "fought the power" of the other party...
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:10 PM
4

You say feminists, but in reality you are advocating against women's interests.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:21 PM
3

You are attacking the rights of women and calling it an attack on feminism. Stop conflating the two.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:16 PM
0

So you advocate that the MRA act solely on political expediency rather than morals? Right and wrong don't change like that.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:02 PM
4

Right up until this thread, I would agree with you. Now its fairly clear the majority of this thread just wants to spite women, regardless of its effects or the morality of the situation, so I don't know how I feel now. I am forced to admit at least some of the feminist criticism of the MRM is essentially correct, and damn all the stupid fucks here for that. If this is the MRM, its doomed. Spiting 50% of the population just because a fraction of them were unfair to men in the past is an insane a…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:04 PM
2

no. This is akin to extra paperwork at the DMV, a longer/better written exam, and more learners hours to get the license. You are talking about the right to drive, which remains unaffected. We are simply talking more hoops to jump through before X is granted by the State.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:39 AM
3

hey, we agree on the issue. Occasionally opposites will do that. Nobody here (or scant few at any rate) wants to make abortion illegal. So why put hoops to jump through. Also, for all you that actually think at will abortion should be prohibited: That is NOT going to happen at a federal level, and that makes it unenforceable Even if it did happen at a federal level, you would get people going to Mexico and Canada, or other places "on vacation". I can see it now, that daily commuter 747 from to T…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:35 AM
-2

Also, you are a sucker if you act morally to those who don't do so to you. Not in the court of public opinion. 'GHANDI' Now read your statement again. You give up no rights by supporting this, prove feminists wrong, and succeed in making the world a little more free from petty interference by bureaucrats.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:01 AM
2

We are talking about ease of access to the abortion process here. The state is just making it harder to operate clinics, and building hoops to be jumped through in the hopes it will stop some abortions via guilt trip. LPS is entirely aside from this issue.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:56 AM
1

Well, pregnancy is strictly a female affliction, so consider us equal for all intents and purposes here. What's your issue with opposing bad policy?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:04 AM
0

Yeah, you shouldn't be able to sign up for one while high/drunk. Besides that, what else do you need?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:56 AM
6

Because its morally right, doesn't hurt men at all, and if MRAs want to continue throwing criticism at feminists for only thinking of themselves, kind of needs to happen.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:54 AM
1

Doing the right thing isn't optional, and the morality doesn't change based on conditions.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:51 AM
2

Somebody has to act in good faith. Legitimately, this is an issue, so why not?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:49 AM
15

ah, the nuremberg defense, shrewd as always.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:28 PM
2

Well, its a good song... but not really based in reality or really even the sentiment of the song being a good one. The chorus is "...Every goddamn weekend when she catches me cheating". Take the Black Clover Posse Cut for example. Standard rap trash talking by the same people. As I recall theres a line to the effect of "giving x women dick until those hoes be limping" Trust me, gender commentary is not on their agenda. This song was literally meant as a joke.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:53 PM
10

But the kind of sad where hysterical laughter isn't amiss...
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:30 AM
1

what do you reckon the chances of being granted parole are? I am thinking 90%+
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:42 PM
3

I am amazed I can hear the speaker. I was expecting banging on walls and chanting. Did the feminists realize it was never going to help their cause and stop attempting to protest?
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:31 PM
1

Its rare, because when that happens, people tend to sue and win.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:11 PM
1

If you think that obamacare isnt just regulatory capture by large insurance companies, you haven't been paying attention. Prices will go up across the board as functional choices are stripped away. As far as I can tell, the monsterously unhealthy making poor decisions will be the only clear winners. Everyone else was the chip the government cashed in with insurance companies to gain their support for the plan.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:03 PM
1

Eternity? 7 years is hardly an eternity.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 03:49 PM
1

Selection Committee: I’m thinking 5 people (to help select the fathers to be featured). I suggest finding people to play devils advocate as well, trying to poke holes in the guy's stories, etc. Its best if all selected fathers are air tight choices with tons of supporting documentation.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:01 PM
13

back in the day /r/mensrights would get SRS sockpuppets coming and leaving a fake post, waiting for comments to accrue and then changing the original post, so the comments look bat shit crazy/racist/sexist. This is what we get instead of reasoned debate, because they know they don't have a leg to stand on.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 02:54 PM
1

Indeed. Alienating your prime customers is probably not a wise business decision.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 02:01 PM
2

Yes! Upvotes for you.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 01:58 PM
1

This is correct
/r/MensRights29/06/13 01:55 PM
5

That will be refreshing. Getting accused of sexism alone must get boring.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 01:52 PM
5

"it's my body, it's my choice!" Indeed it is. "Your choice, your responsibility." is the phrase that comes next that nobody wants to admit to.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 06:17 PM
5

You learned a lesson, and you learned it relatively quickly. So that's a plus. At least you are not separated, kicked out of your own home, and scratching your head wondering what happened.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:30 PM
1

Yeah, I did a little reading into the UK law after the other post. The US FOIA is far more rigid. I couldn't imagine a country writing such a labor intensive FOIA law, but indeed they have. It sucks to gather documents for FOIA requests, I couldn't even imagine having to literally answer the public's questions like that. Its a whole other level of work, especially if its a poorly defined question. It also requires so very little work on the applicants part, I bet they get way more of them too. I…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 10:14 PM
3

FOIA requests are for documents, assuming they are publically available (you can't request a government employee's medical records for example) Requesting RADFEM's application and any materials and email chains generated by the venue in regard to that specific booking would be a valid format for a FOIA request. Writing an angry letter demanding answers != FOIA request Look at the first comment on the website: Ideally FOI requests should simply describe the information being sought. Our site is o…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:14 PM
15

Makes sense. If women aren't doing it... It must be patriarchy. Thats the only explanation. /s
/r/MensRights27/06/13 01:54 PM
1

Its not censorship... Thats just not how FOIA requests work.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 01:39 PM
18

Not to detract from this, assuming its genuine, but damned if this doesn't read like what an abusive spouse would say to get you to come back home.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:35 PM
3

And then she goes on to break the prime directive repeatedly for far less cogent reasons. She travels through time on purpose at least twice with the express goal of changing history, which is much worse on an ethics level. Furthermore, when she does it on accident, she usually decides that she should probably makes some changes, just to be on the safe side. Voyager is the least popular star trek for good reason. It doesn't hang together very well, and the people watching are the kind of people …
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:55 PM
2

SF bay doesn't make for a very good "average" population. Its a tech incubator Cost of living is insane Those that see you can afford to live there and see you. Somehow, I think you have a very select cross section of Trans people.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:38 PM
2

Statistically longer life, but that might not hold true so much anymore. It was true 80 years ago.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:05 PM
1

Does this mark the first time a mainstream outlet has put together a remotely accurate list of issues? This seems spot on, which is odd, because usually they miss the point entirely.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:01 PM
2

This is hilarious. Someone is trying to derive ethics from emotion, seriously? http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-ethics/ check it out.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:46 PM
5

Nobody says it doesn't work. Its just having sex with women has little to do with MRA goals. That and most PUA enthusiasts are actually not egalitarian, which is understandable for a group that basically short circuits female mental processes; the idea of equality rarely comes up.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:41 PM
1

That doesn't even make racist sense. As any klan member knows, the negro cranium is well adapted to ballistic calculation, hence the skill in Basketball. /s Crazy racists, can't even keep their own stereotypes straight.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:13 PM
3

Watching straight white women successfully co-opt the problems of others FTFY
/r/MensRights18/06/13 03:10 PM
9

I was just thinking something along these lines the other day. I had the thought, "I wonder how many gender studies degrees require a course in logic...probably not many, if any." and then a few minutes later, it struck me, "I wonder how many women major in Philosophy, as its unforgiving of emotion." Now I have my answer. Ironically, the only philosophy major I know is a woman, but logic is very much her mindset.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 02:55 PM
6

They think MRAs don't understand them, and if they only show up and spout the same nonsense everyone else does, we will all suddenly abandon logic and agree with them. Then they are the great feminist hero, who did what all others couldn't. In order to have a snowballs chance of this, they would need to have an ration argument that justified feminism's assumptions. This I have yet to see. Its always an emotional shitfit instead. Maybe one day we will be surprised.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 02:31 PM
3

you are aware egalitarian was in that same listing?
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:49 PM
1

I went with egalitarian for that.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:40 PM
1

I am sad it didn't give a snapshot of the results after I finished. Out of curiousity, how long is the survey up for? When do we see the results?
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:39 PM
3

The only sure winner in a divorce is the State.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 11:34 AM
1

Can someone explain how this won't result in blackmail of the Johns by prostitutes?
/r/MensRights17/06/13 11:06 AM
3

How could it not?
/r/MensRights16/06/13 03:07 PM
1

I accept your stipulation. If anyone gets credit, Gorbachev should. You are right, 99/100 people would have turned it into a blood bath most likely, and he didn't.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:54 PM
0

ah, equality.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:49 PM
4

that's probably good enough.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:32 PM
1

In the US, one needs standing to bring any case to court. This situation presents a catch 22. You need to prove you are the father to get standing, and in order to prove you are the father you need a court admissible paternity test, which you can force once you have standing. He can wait until she starts proceedings for CS, she will basically defacto make him the father should it go this far.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:22 PM
2

Its not their job either...
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:08 PM
3

Do you have documentation of the money you have been paying here already? If not, you will be paying it again, should she get ahold of you.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:06 PM
6

good luck proving it.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:55 PM
10

(how many women can claim they toppled the Soviet Union?). None? No single person topped the Soviet Union, and economics has better explanatory power than any human's actions.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:52 PM
0

Like you can't be a hairdresser without being accused of being gay? Well, if he was straight, he would call himself a barber. /s
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:48 PM
2

The war on drugs has been perfectly crafted to keep the cycle of slave labor fresh in our privatized prison system. Its not like they planned it out like that from the start, or even the conditions that lead to it. They just don't give two fucks and it ultimately means more money for campaign efforts. This is more of a recent development, when corporations caught on to the idea of leasing the government's sizable war on everything POW population to other corporations for a huge profit. 30 years …
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:38 PM
1

Slavery is never popular with the enslaved.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:22 PM
0

They were splitting hairs already, by using the word conscript instead of slave.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:20 PM
0

Israel, for instance, has three years of service for men and two for women. I assume Israeli feminists protest this inequality...this service gap?
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:19 PM
1

This. I am so saving this comment. When someone is pointed out the facts, and then they double down... "Those aren't real feminists." (let me throw my lot in with them anyway)
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:15 PM
2

Too bad they are unaware that their crazy compatriots are using them as ballast, window dressing, and shock troops in their war on equality.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:12 PM
1

I feel like this a good place to drop the Ken Burns Prohibition documentaries: Part One A Nation of Drunkards Part Two A Nation of Scofflaws Part Three A Nation of Hypocrites Check out this gem: http://youtu.be/3Ta3UAJfUcY?t=2m50s in the 3rd one. Keep in mind she is basically talking about Proto-feminists here. They are a good watch and doesn't mince words.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:26 PM
-1

I like to think there's a table everyone can come to with their concerns instead of being shut down and lambasted before they sit. /r/mensrights is such a place. One only gets shut down and lambasted when they trot out unsound reasoning and the victim narrative. If a feminist was able to provide rational arguments, this sub would hear them and engage. It would be a huge deal too, because it NEVER happens here (or anywhere), but we are more than willing. Eager would be a good word. This would nec…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 07:26 PM
14

I support feminism as a doctrine, without having to subscribe to the doctrinal particulars Solid reasoning you have right there. I support X, except for the parts I don't like. Also, I bear no responsibility for the things done in my name while I associate with them, and I can't be bothered to figure out who they are or what they are doing in the first place. If the majority of feminists are like you, society still has a MASSIVE problem.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:53 PM
18

Well, we could approach this a few ways. Largest feminist organizations: NOW actively campaigns against shared parenting, despite research clearly showing its better for the children. http://www.now.org/nnt/03-97/father.html And The YWCA, with 25 million members, along with NOW pushed for and and still pushing for a very gendered revision of VAWA, HR629. Both of these organizations always portray women as victims, and men as perpetrators, and all of their material reflects that. This is of cours…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:15 PM
12

We keep our hangers on in check. Manhood academy doesn't receive a warm welcome here, and MRAs will engage and shut them down. Where is the vast majority of good feminists carefully policing themselves? Why do all the good feminists keep buying books and going to conferences organized by the "small minority nobody agrees with"? As a whole you sure do seem to support the fringe elements that "nobody" agrees with.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:37 PM
20

Sorta. The assumption is the leaders of the movement actively make life worse for men, based on evidence and their actions. This sub then asserts all that supports the leadership is either willfully promoting misandry or, at best, hasn't realized they are being used to promote outcomes they wouldn't nessesarily agree with. Care to point out the flaw in this reasoning?
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:22 PM
52

You jusy unilaterally claimed "feminists abhor rape", and now claim not everyone believes that. You can't have it both ways. Feminism has core beliefs that cannot be reconciled, Logically. This allows people to dismiss it out of hand, like someone dismissing the notion of Santa being real. Its not that we don't understand what you are saying, we just know better, based on logic and feminism's track record.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:16 PM
48

Exactly. Thats why feminists hate the Vagina Monologs... Oh wait they love that, and it's "good rape" scene.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 04:50 PM
2

Not to be flippant, but your definition of feminism no longer reflects the definition as the rest of the world sees it. It was stolen from you while nobody was paying too close attention. It sucks. Liberal has such a nice ring to it too, but alas, stolen by statists decades past, and to try and take it back would be tilting at windmills. You just have to realize it and move on. Those that hijacked the cause are using the huge number of unwitting people who dont know what they are doing to exert …
/r/MensRights12/06/13 08:25 PM
1

Exactly. Its like /r/debateacommunist Really not for non-communists anymore. Or maybe its not a good comparison because at one time there was debate in debateacommunist, until the mods change. I doubt the feminists ever allowed nonbelievers in the first place.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:16 PM
6

Dont cohabitate either. Marriage isnt the only way to end up "married".
/r/MensRights11/06/13 02:08 PM
4

Damn. Thats about the best response possible, even if you had a week to write it.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:54 PM
2

Themselves? I always wondered why we dont see more dead judges.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:48 PM
1

One could even make an argument for 4-5 years, to go get a degree, etc. Beyond that is crazy.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:45 PM
5

The same way the draft doesnt run afoul of the same. Because they say so.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:41 PM
2

I am with you on that. While the deals were not fair, amending them after the fact darth vader style isnt a road you want the government going down.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:36 PM
2

A feminist organization would never say one thing and do the exact opposite. That would be out of character. /s
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:32 PM
1

I spent some time looking for it, and still no luck. Its going to be hard, as I recall thats not really what the video was about. I think they mention it as an aside by way of explaining that the hotlines were in sorry shape when they started an investigation into something. "Back when it first started, the switchboard was slammed and a lot of it was crank calls, but it took a few months to really figure out it was mostly people calling on neighbors they hate and Boyfriends who dumped them." Tha…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 02:34 PM
5

I think AVFM shoots itself in the foot far too often. lack of editorial intelligence. This right here. I don't know how hard it is to grasp that being purposely inflammatory ultimately works against one's goals. They know feminists love to quote mine, and AVFM makes it so fucking easy for them.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 02:26 PM
1

Either that or she was on top at the time, and he was effectively pinned in place.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 02:21 PM
1

Wow; You don't see that every day. I am curious if they will have the audacity to say "Best interest of the child!" and take the money. If they do, simply sue the funeral home for 18 years of CS.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 02:18 PM
1

Do we have an example of it being used to male benefit yet? Doesn't really matter how nice they wrote it if it still is used unilaterally to benefit women.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 01:19 PM
2

This isnt a new phenomenon. Since 9/11 feds have been getting calls of false accusations of terrorism by spurned GFs. They had to hire people to do basic checks becuase this is so frequent.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 01:11 PM
5

Makes me very proud to have used to read his material religiously in the early 2000's. You simply can't ignore a full grown adult that can draw better than children.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:07 PM
1

but could definitely put together something of quality... Its easy to be better than AVFM; its such a low bar. Their production quality is SHIT. I even offered to help them with proper networking equipment so they wouldn't have dropped every second call and stopped VOIP artifacts that plague them. They didn't even return my email.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 06:53 PM
30

Wow. We are doing a shitty job with our patriarchal oppression. Its almost as if the whole concept was bunk.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 01:50 AM
1

We are talking about a Feudal system with strict Primogeniture (except Dorne), modeled on the classic fantasy kingdom. Their entire societal setup is literal patriarchy. Feudalism leaves a lot to be desired in the area of personal rights, etc.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 02:58 PM
1

I would say thats a fair point, but very few libertarians are John Galt ubermensch, but in just two words, a picture was painted. the purpose here was characterizing/sterotyping; with John Galt on one side and Alan Alda/Michael Kimmel on the other.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:23 PM
2

Well, that is to say you have evaluated it and found it wanting, and now dismiss it out of hand. If someone takes the time to lay out a rationale, its on you to actually look at it. Obviously, most will revert to ad hom and such when pressed, and then you can dismiss them out of hand. It sucks, but thems the rules. Ideas should get a fair hearing, and you have to find out whether or not its the same old dogshit ones or not, at the very least. I agree though, once a person says marxist things I c…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:17 PM
0

that GWW is just needlessly politicizing the MRM, but it's probably more problematic because of her iconic stature in the MRM, and thus will probably be more divisive. I don't know how you can be a rational thinker without eventually hovering somewhere around anarchy. Violence is bad, and the State is violence writ large. Feminists need state violence to make the world turn under their regime. Of course most MRAs are not going to be fans of the State, what with it being the tool of their oppress…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:03 PM
3

painted as backwards-thinking knuckle draggers. Not agreeing with feminist theory is backwards thinking. That's the explaination.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:57 PM
6

I loled
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:39 PM
6

My response was more to the "wish i were gay" statement. Obviously your statement is correct.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:37 PM
3

Right, but until such time as legal equality is realized, a relationship without a female in it is by far the safest. You and your partner are equal under the law, and that has to be nice. Straight guys have no such peace of mind.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 07:47 PM
3

I know I should help them, but a veil would be the best of both worlds. With a veil they can have both at once.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:59 PM
1

A little jug of bleach is much cheaper.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:48 PM
2

The silence is deafening.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:28 PM
7

Thank you. I was trying to remember this phrase and it was driving me crazy. All I could think of was the golden rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 02:17 AM
5

Hit F5 with the jewel of your secret Patriarchy decoder ring. Works every time.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:12 PM
3

It might sound not PC, but that statement is ostensibly correct. Men get rights from the State when politicians are scared of what they might do.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:09 PM
1

Find me someone defending feminism in a debate. I think you will be looking a very long time.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:37 PM
3

I assume a hormone cocktail helps adjust your frame of mind when pregnant, not unlike craving foods with viamins and minerals you need.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 11:24 PM
4

OK: this movement is being taken over by the libertarians. In 5-10 years MR will be a joke just like feminists. Seems pretty clear.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 02:40 PM
3

To begin, Draw an S, followed by a more different S. For the head, put a top mark on a long V.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 01:16 PM
7

You best back up your wild assertion that libertarian ideology is like feminism somehow. Poor reasoning skills are another good way to be downvoted around here. I suggest this is a case of that.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 12:15 PM
7

They do love their echo chambers....
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:40 PM
5

You can thank/curse Chattel slavery for that. In SA, slaves were treated like NA treated the Irish, to be used and disposed of, while chattel slaves held value beyond muscle power, so one was less apt to let their backs break, etc.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:24 PM
22

Bahaha. Did facebook really just agree to censor their site according to the whims of feminists? Got to run and short their stock before the rest of the world finds out. Censorship rarely works for social media sites. Should be entertaining. /popcorn.gif
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:19 PM
4

If they did enact these policies, they would simply be hastening their own demise. Censored websites quickly lose to uncensored.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:10 PM
16

Only 5% of imported slaves went to North America, and they get all the mentions. yet people never mention the other 95%, becuase there is no white guilt t to exploit.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 12:30 PM
3

I don't know that one should take "separate, but equal" as a principled stance, but basically the whole world segregates bathrooms, so if you are gonna make that argument, the bathroom is one arena its probably not worth the argument against.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:09 PM
2

Sounds better, but doesn't equal compliance.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 04:13 PM
3

Don't forget other countries entirely. A nice tax haven would kill a few birds with the one stone.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 04:12 PM
146

Fuck that, walk in as a man and force them to remove you, if they want you gone. Them: "This is a safe space." You: "I agree, I haven't seen any violence since I walked in. [blank stare]"
/r/MensRights28/05/13 04:07 PM
2

Maybe its just personal projection, but I think men on the whole generally prefer a low key wedding. Keep it low stress, inexpensive, and fun/memorable. The wedding industry feeds off princess fantasy, not the need to book a venue and ensure catering.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 03:16 PM
1

Glad someone expounded on that.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 07:48 PM
1

Why don't they just use a dowsing rod to discover the truth? /Shitthatdoesntwork
/r/MensRights26/05/13 05:48 PM
1

this is most likely a political move after all the bad press. Economically, it can't be anything but a loser.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:17 AM
0

Much like Science, Hostility is whatever we want it to be.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:07 PM
11

At the least, its a hint that its time to start positioning yourself to leave.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:03 PM
13

Actually its compliance.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:00 PM
1

I never asserted that cloning could be done without a womb. Dolly was most definitely born from a sheep, like a human clone would be born from a woman. I was countering the assertion that we can't clone things, let alone a human. This is false. The only thing stopping one from cloning and raising your genetic self is a willing surrogate and the law.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 03:56 PM
1

I think you have cause and effect reversed. One builds a product to appeal to an audience, not the other way around.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 11:41 AM
3

If that were the case why is fatherlessness a comparatively recent development? It skyrockets after welfare is instated in such a way as to encourage broken homes. This is just conincidence?
/r/MensRights20/05/13 11:27 AM
2

Its near illegal to clone anything. It is cost prohibitive to make steak or milk this way.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 10:54 PM
4

Maybe others know something I don't... But we can totally clone someone. It is just highly illegal. There is not a technical hurdle per se. Remember dolly the sheep? Functionally no different from cloning a human.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:58 PM
3

Since when can public schools enforce a dress code? I mean substantively, not the "depicts violence/distracting to other students" stuff.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 07:39 PM
1

Discuss it with a lawyer, but any rational person if served papers to start the international process and then presented with a positive paternity test (even if inadmissible) would probably concede the issue rather than pointlessly trying to fight it. Their lawyer, if worth their salt, will advise them it would be an expensive and time consuming near certain loss for them.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 04:10 PM
5

I don't know why you have it in your head that you need to go there at all. Its most likely going to be 95% international legal back and forth. The only time you go may very well be to pick up the child and return to Ireland with him. I would rely on the international treaty process. Wealthy individuals are seldom matches for Nation States. Have you looked into contacting the Irish Consulate in America? They will most likely be able to point you in the right direction.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 04:03 PM
1

It would 100% confirm it for you, personally. Not to speak ill of the dead, but a test would put all doubts to rest...not legally, but objectively. You could have it done surreptitiously because its for personal knowledge, not legal advancement.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 03:55 PM
2

Apparently they already have a legal team prepared to bounce on me should I ever do anything. You had mentioned them being prominent. If so, they will be quite unlikely to want to get into a long, embarassing (for them) legal battle. The local press will have a field day, and their congregation will think less of them, should this concern ever become public. This assumes they don't have "fuck you" money, but actually require a solid reputation for business/social status. Also, as written, they w…
/r/MensRights18/05/13 03:38 PM
4

It's not that they hate me, they just think that I'm the reason Megan is dead. Well, if they are not going to chalk it up to the proximate causes and shitty luck, they have to entertain the fact that sending her to Europe started this chain of events, ergo they killed her. This is shitty logic all the way through.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 03:29 PM
4

I've seen the pictures and he looks just like I did when I was a baby. Pretty much all babies look like that, sorry to burst this particular bubble.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 03:27 PM
4

This is an interesting catch 22, legally speaking. You dont have standing to get a DNA test ordered in order to get standing. This sucks. Have you thought about contacting your home country's consulate?
/r/MensRights17/05/13 08:33 PM
71

And if all else fails you can always call then out publicly in the middle of mass. Oh the looks they will get... Dont do this though.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 08:26 PM
9

"having it both ways" is the feminist creedo.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:28 PM
2

Only one side is willing to engage in logical debate. Thats the night and day difference.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:21 PM
12

It legally qualifies as rape if its a Man lying about birth control. Why the double standard then?
/r/MensRights15/05/13 04:23 PM
1

Everyone alive before JFK?
/r/MensRights14/05/13 09:33 PM
1

Indeed. Now as soon as they respect the rules of debate.... Oh wait... Never gonna happen.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 09:32 PM
3

The literal King of the Road. I wouldnt want to be in a semi being hit by a garbage truck, let alone a car.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 06:05 PM
1

He would have done what obama did, in broad strokes. Just like Obama did what bush did. No substantive differences.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 11:58 AM
1

I don't know. Now the school can say they handled the situation correctly... as they pretty much did. You could sue for libel/defamation if she actually spread the rumor, and its actually actionable (this is extremely rare), becuase the email will act as confession to prove intent.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 07:40 PM
1

Did her email already go out, or are you still waiting on it?
/r/MensRights12/05/13 07:36 PM
0

And White's only lunch counters are valid becuase they feed some people?
/r/MensRights12/05/13 07:19 PM
1

Its called child support then, same difference as the money can be spent on anything.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 01:31 PM
3

Also, if you reproduce, its all the bad of being married without any of the rights.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:57 PM
4

The US has high infant mortality rates becuase we count everything in the stats, unlike most other countries. Its an apples to oranges comparison. In cuba for instance, they wont issue a birth cert right away, just incase it dies right off the bat and messes up their stats.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:25 PM
4

not really. I figure it would have turned out much the same way had it been a girl lobbing sandwiches.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:40 PM
1

There should be a certain level of respect you show towards the Prime Minister You presuppose they are worthy of respect. I submit those types are the exception to the rule.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:39 PM
3

their content filtering service. Its enterprise stuff, not consumer.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:28 PM
-1

Well, as the US still makes up a plurality of Internet users, and a majority of redditors, I feel the American definitions should be assumed. Not to be flippant or anything... But its color, not colour. Deal with it.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:35 PM
3

"They don't count... Except when they do... Whatever works with our argument at the time. Boo yah to moral relativism"- feminism
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:28 PM
1

I think your understanding of government needs a little work.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:18 PM
5

Thats ok. After another round of it, few people will be equipped to notice the difference.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:55 PM
3

I recall that...wasn't the thrust of the story their opponents getting the league to D/Q the team with the "unfair advantage"?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:41 PM
3

This. I often wonder what they teach in journalism courses now...because basic investigation, checking both sides out, and trying to be impartial went right the fuck out the window some point in the last 2 decades.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:39 PM
3

if nothing else, women are allowed to forcibly join a men's team if a Women's team doesn't exist, while the converse simply isn't true.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:19 PM
5

and the enforcement?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:05 PM
2

who aren't use them as cover. and shock troops.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:54 AM
2

Personally, I often wonder what Orange juice will taste like after brushing your teeth....once we do away with Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:53 AM
7

common sense? Nobody would agree to a tilted legal system, so such systems wouldn't exist. Its only government force keeping the system together currently.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:51 AM
3

Worst. Title. Ever. Let me try my hand: "Person makes noises at camera."
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:45 AM
11

it doesn't work that way. Its a one way street, like most of feminist lobbied law.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:36 AM
9

I like that he still hasn't put two and two together and realized that TED was selling access to him, basically. They were just pissed product wandered off instead of 'dancing' for the customers. Its like an NFL team refusing to pay players but then scolding them for having the audacity to leave practice early. "There are plenty of college players who would kill for that spot." If TED is basically going to sell access to speakers as a business plan...they should probably work actual compensation…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 07:25 PM
1

Conscription is only useful when you fight wars of aggression. You never have to run a draft to defend the homeland...only to invade someone else's.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 07:29 PM
33

I'm a young gay guy, mid-twenties, and I work as a teacher Holy fuck. The only thing you have going for you is your relatively young age. Literally everything else is going to flag as "Pedo" in peoples' minds, and once you are suitably old, your age will too. Pretty much all guys get this treatment...you just are setup to live it every day of your career, so you have my sympathy there.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 04:11 PM
22

Not to be hyperbolic, but that rationale isn't too far off of terrorism. "I planted that bomb because XXXX shouldn't feel safe going about their daily business."
/r/MensRights03/05/13 03:55 PM
8

Leslie Knope as the misguided sexist feminist. and cartoonish Patriot too. take the episode where the south american country's parks and rec dept comes for a visit.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 03:53 PM
13

Feminism is one of those things that looks good on paper. Not really. If it looked good on paper, feminists wouldn't have to silence criticism at every opportunity.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:46 PM
6

By telling the millions of men that they cannot be trusted with children, we are reinforcing gender stereotypes at school, at home and at work. If men can’t take care of kids, women have to do it. And that’s holding us back. Good to see she brought it back home to what's really important, the impact on women.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:51 PM
2

Do you prioritize equal opportunity or equal outcome? You are asking the wrong question. The question to ask is, does this hurt women?
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:01 PM
3

Rule 1: Never ask, or allow others to ask, questions you don't want answered.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:59 PM
23

Yep. That Valerie Solanas sure was a class act.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:52 PM
1

Is this the same woman who is pissed her son got fucked by feminism? edit: no it is not.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:44 PM
4

everyone who wasn't skeptical in the first place, apparently.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:41 PM
4

Nope. Definitely out of left field.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:39 PM
3

When the day comes that feminists can finally admit that patriarchy theory is pure bullshit. This day will never come. The best you can hope for is it eventually not being taught as gospel, and those really committed to it die off of natural causes.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:25 PM
-1

It is a volutary organization no...it isn't. This is like saying a teacher's union is voluntary...only even worse, as in theory you can teach without belonging to a union. You CANNOT practice law without approval of the Bar. This makes it quasi-governmental, as the State lets it regulate an entire industry, backed by State violence.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:15 PM
3

I am surprised that metal balls are a thing, actually. It would be awesome to say that you have literal balls of steel, but I can't get this out of my head.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:31 PM
43

"Set phasers on fun!!"
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:08 PM
14

As much as I don't want to steer you away from balls of steel or titanium...you might look at the human version of nudicles, which should be more life like.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:03 PM
3

So, does a homonsexual FtM like guys or girls? I have spent the last 5min trying to reason the answer, and figured it was best to ask. There's a double negative-esque quality to the phrase... And now I am really curious.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 01:54 PM
2

I see lots of proactive suggestions, which is good. I have a more petty suggestion, if the high road doesn't work out. Keep all that evidence of the mother keeping you away from your kids, package it up in a nice presentation and send it to your kid for their 18 birthday with a nice forward: "Attached is 18 years of evidence that I have tried to be in your life, but your mother and the court system wanted the arrangement you got. Now that you are not under their thumb, I would love to start a re…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 01:16 PM
2

Everyone likes to be a winner, and you certainly have a better chance of a good track record representing women in family court.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 01:04 PM
6

Every single outlet would label us a "hate group". Only because it would be true, if that were the case.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 12:43 PM
2

All I hear is people acting like gamers. It could have been guys saying the same things.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 04:41 PM
5

Based on the data we have...yes.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 06:06 PM
10

This is simply a 3rd party saying NOW came out against it, and even then its a reference to a CA bill, not FL.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:57 PM
5

Correct. Had the whole confrontation happened because he hit someone 30 sec before the filming started...its becomes a grey area. Based on the video we do have, the old people are in the wrong...
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:50 PM
6

NOW is actively campaigning against this. source for this? I just looked and couldn't find anything.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:47 PM
11

feels are better than facts, because you don't have to check them.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:41 PM
1

Too bad the inital confrontation isn't recorded or even known. Not like the guy was acting 100% respectable by the time the filming started. I heard much swearing from him. This, of course, is just rude, not illegal...like assault and battery is.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:32 PM
7

or a full 50% of the entire world's expenditure. granted, much of this will be fleets and installations setup to keep trade routes safe, and is more or less provided as a service to other nations/regions. If the US didn't spend it, someone would. the US still spends far more than it should or needs to, but its not a totally unexplainable number either.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 06:11 PM
6

Our offensive people get downvoted and told off. The feminist ones sell books and are invited to speak at conferences. There is a difference in reaction.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 01:19 PM
1

Title XI is about sports, but is also about crazy BS. The idea is that women should have the same opportunities as men to play sports. This forces schools to fund female versions of teams or to accept girls onto the men's team if there isn't enough interest. This is part of a quota system, so some times men's sports teams will be shut down to make the funding ratio match title XI reqs. This is why girls play on the men's football team, if they want to. Oddly enough the law doesn't work both ways…
/r/MensRights19/04/13 01:07 PM
0

What he says is true. The FBI has entrapped a number of people; Who are usually mentally ill.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:17 PM
1

Shit happens anytime anywhere. You can be run over by a drunk while sitting on the couch at home. This really isn't any different.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:10 PM
5

That's more to stand up against injustice done in the name of feminism than I've done today, and I'll wager it's more than you've done too. Well, seeing as she was an active feminist for decades...she has quite the hole to dig out of before she approaches the break even point.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:57 PM
6

Apparently so... Despite the goofy sentence structure even.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 12:56 PM
-5

Remember, not only is this not an everyday occurrence in the US, it's unthinkable that anyone would do this.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:04 PM
17

Your first point is spot on, your second is crazy. It's not the passerby's job to avert their eyes because someone feels embarrassed by their own actions all of a sudden.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:14 PM
1

I don't know if Hook is a verb in this case. I think you are looking for "turns tricks" or "Parties".
/r/MensRights06/04/13 01:21 AM
1

So basically a Bender-esque protest? "We'll build our own protest, with BBQ and beer...actually forget the protest", as even crazy bigots are allowed to spew batshit. That's how free speech works. Just ask the Jews of Skokie, IL.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 12:03 AM
1

Anyone know if there has been any of the main stream stories posted yet? I am curious to see what light they paint the whole event with. Also, if anyone knows if feminists have reacted one way or the other to this yet? I can only assume they have been keeping their mouths shut like usual... But NAFALT responses could happen too... It's popcorn.gif time.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 01:44 PM
7

If they had a lick of technical sense, they wouldn't constantly have VoIP distortions and artifacts in every show they do. I doubt they had cameras running with that in mind. The building might have some...but they would of caught whoever did it the first time too, if that were the case. The thought had occurred to me, but then I perished the thought. Shoestring budget for one, kinda inpractical for another.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 02:38 AM
4

As a rule, people that can't format their writing legibly usually have equally bad content within.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 01:37 PM
7

Then don't go. They are looking for dumb fucks to turn this into a win for them. All they need is one. It's a gamble in that they end up looking bad if nobody plays along with them...but the PR payoff is huge if they get even one dumbass to retaliate.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 05:14 AM
2

They you get immortalized as the irrational MRA who attacks protesters unprovoked. All the news stories will say so.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 05:02 AM
2

It doesn't matter if you are justified in self defense. All anyone will ever take away from the reporting of the event is MRAs attack protesters. All they need is one dumb fuck to play their game. Don't be that guy.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 04:59 AM
5

Thanks for the obligatory NAFALT response. Just like good cops become bad when they don't stop bad cops from abusing their power..."good" feminists can't be said to be good unless they are trying to set their house in order. If you don't want to try and police them...simply quit calling yourself a feminist and find something else.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 03:15 AM
1

This is why I employ similar rules in my Santa discussion sub. We simply can't focus on the important stuff like what materials the sleigh are made of and the finer points of Elf life cycles with all these people constantly claiming he doesn't exist. The Sideboard clearly states that this sub assumes that Santa is real, and anyone saying otherwise just wants to troll those who know the truth about the holidays. How fucking insane would that be? If you are not open to logical arguments, you are a…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 07:09 PM
2

3rd shift and taking on admin tasks will do that.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:32 PM
6

No we don't do the exact same here. If people come with an argument, people will address it logically, and maybe a debate takes place. /r/feminism's rules categorically ban criticism of feminism. The only arguments I am going to make in regards to feminism is that listing, and they disqualify them unilaterally. Its as if I was open to debate sub about Santa Klaus, but the following arguments are banned: He can't fit down a chimney, its physically impossible to go to every residence in the world …
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:25 PM
1

Ports get one charge, cord ends get another. I don't see the problem
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:12 PM
-1

You seem to be under the illusion that feminists will actually engage in legitimate debate. They rely on other rhetorical means in general, and generally the ones associated with other dogmatic systems. Your best bet is to turn any statements they make back around on them, or ask for the logic behind their statement. Then they will dismiss your argument, ad hominem you, and then pretend as if they "won the debate". Oh, and you are a misogynist for even bringing it up. If this isn't how you will …
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:59 PM
2

Any substantive arguments against it? or did you just want to publicly dismiss it out of hand with no explanation?
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:48 PM
17

/r/feminism is actually quite level. At least from what I've noticed observing comments posted. From the /r/feminism sidebar: "Discussions in this subreddit will assume the validity of feminism's existence, its egalitarian aspect, and the necessity of feminism's continued existence." So reasonable. ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:31 PM
7

Yes it was. When started, women were literally fighting for rights they didn't but should of had. One can't fault them for this. It's the fact that once they got equality, they started pushing for supremacy and insist on calling it equality still.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 04:25 PM
0

I am sure all the "real feminists" will be along shortly to put RSU in its place and explain how misguided this effort is. I will just hold my breathe until they arrive...
/r/MensRights24/03/13 07:36 AM
0

Mutton also doubles as the lamb equivalent to beef, pork. Chicken is something that isn't obfuscated at all. its a chicken while alive, and its chicken on the plate.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 12:08 AM
2

how come I can buy lamb? because "mutton" went out of common use some time ago.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 08:28 PM
3

Well, I don't want to be antagonistic but... If feminism is dogma because it doesn't offer any evidence and is often self-contradictory... Why don't you apply the same analysis to the Bible and Christianity? All anyone is attacking here is irrationality...which apparently is fine until it turns on your beloved dogma...then its hurtful. You are welcome here, your BS goes on the same pile as everyone else's though.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 08:26 PM
-1

I would submit all groups do this to a degree. This is due to the simple fact is its often far easier to destroy than it is to build something up, so groups tend to do whats easy.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:33 PM
3

skepticism+ Its Skepticism without all the pesky Skepticism!
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:21 PM
1

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, bitch. This is not true. If you are looking to catch flies, the vinegar is the better choice. Beer would be even better still, but isn't mentioned in the idiom.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 04:31 PM
1

Plus... Jeremy Piven.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 04:27 PM
5

I believe that's called a hate crime in our current legal system, though its not like the guy handled it well...
/r/MensRights23/03/13 04:15 PM
7

"They're basically retaliating against her for speaking out about sexual harassment," Nah, Sendgrid was responding to the Internet's reaction, not her. Can't keep hated people on the payroll...bad for business...especially if her job is to get people to like her/sendgrid.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 04:12 PM
15

You say that as if courts are going to be neutral about this.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 04:10 PM
1

its mentioned in the pastebin link, and can probably be dug out of 4chan in its entirety.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:35 PM
19

Based on the evidence I have seen, yes. Nothing is quite as scary as telling management your servers are down, and thats the tip of the iceberg. Adria's dentist has been dragged into this. If you don't want the internet hivemind tearing through your personal, investors, and staff's lives with a fine tooth comb looking for skeletons, you should probably cut your losses. This is a very effective threat.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:58 PM
11

I think this is more to do with self-preservation than a moral sea-change. http://pastebin.com/ubmznGhn They were standing behind her right up until their existence was threatened.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:49 PM
8

Threats from anon will do that. http://pastebin.com/ubmznGhn
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:18 PM
2

Yes, and you can too! You will get a cut of every sale you make, as well as a cut of everyone you recruit below you. Whats the polite phrase for pyramid scheme now?
/r/MensRights21/03/13 05:46 PM
10

Plus, as the sole distributor of eye patches, I should be sitting pretty!
/r/MensRights21/03/13 05:19 PM
2

It's not about men only. It's about applying rules evenly. Pycon just fucked up. They should have kicked her out for violating the privacy policy. Instead they enabled her.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:35 AM
4

How is missle defense not a political topic? :)
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:27 AM
5

This is like thunderdome?
/r/MensRights20/03/13 09:19 PM
3

I'm sorry. You are simply wrong. Here, this explains it more concisely than I can.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:56 PM
3

Get off your high horse and follow the logic. If we start from the assumption that the best interests of the child are paramount... Why can women abort children? Surely this isn't in the child's best interest? Why can women abandon the child to a heated box for the State to take care of? Surely having a mother is in the best interest of the child? Why would society give women these options unless the goal was to give them options, a way out of being a mother against her will? It straight up does…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:32 PM
43

Gots to defend the Dogma.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:28 PM
1

yeah...I can't even think of a tenuous link to men's rights here.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:27 PM
6

Clearly society gives a flying fuck about the child. They only care about making the mother's wish come true, whatever that may be.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 03:14 PM
6

I personally would rather have the biological father pay than have the state pay for it. But society is OK with women just handing kids over to the state, which bears 100% of the cost, even if there is a father willing to take the child. If the mother wants to give it up for adoption or leave it outside a police station in a heated box...thats that.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 03:05 PM
4

Its not libel if they did say those things. You can't make a libel case stick in the US. You just can't.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 02:58 PM
1

how does this unbreak capillaries?
/r/MensRights20/03/13 02:52 PM
1

Libertarian views are orthogonal to the Left-right dichotomy. If the left is Fiscally liberal and Socially liberal, and the right is fiscally conservative and socially conservative...how does one fit a fiscal conservative/socially liberal on that spectrum? And I suppose the converse to libertarian thought also doesn't fit...your true authoritarians...the socially conservative and fiscally liberal.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 06:24 PM
1

As someone with organs (and family with organs) that might one day need a replacement, I support people's decisions to ride motorcycles.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 05:17 PM
1

Tell that to the State.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:35 PM
1

If only it worked this way. Plenty of Libertarians still want the security blanket that is the State. Minarchists and the like. They are the utilitarians of the Libertarian ecosystem. Ancaps actually take the NAP to heart and say...You can't have a State, period because their mere existence constitutes a violation of the NAP. Sure make your communes and pseudo-states, etc. But if people want out you can't use force to keep them in like States do.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:31 PM
1

If they both agree to the fight, no problem there.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:15 PM
2

Wow...just wow. Also: markets aren't all good. In fact you could make the case that they ruin everything they touch: I can't think of a single thing they ruin, and the list you provided is INSANE. Drugs are ok, and where ok for most of human history, but when there is a drug market, it erodes society as a whole. Which drugs? Penicillin and aspirin? No...you probably mean the state banned ones, in which violent crime is the only way to solve disputes and nobody quite knows what they are getting? …
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:14 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:40 PM
1

I know there are more than a few Ancaps in here, which is what libertarians become once they do enough reading, and like internal consistency in their worldview. There is only one Law: The NAP. Because it doesn't allow for the formation of a State, there is no body to lobby for goodies and extra rights, and the abridgment of other people's rights. The MRA is in line with this because by and large all the issues we take seriously are State Policy run amok, like it always does.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:40 PM
-2

The libertarian notion that independent people acting in free markets somehow magically solve all problems is pretty much the same as the communist notion that free people acting in independent communities magically solve all problems. Except markets do help all participants, and society in general, provably. Communist policy has a much worse track record for the bits and pieces implemented, and even then the communist planners are cribbing price information from neighboring markets.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:07 PM
2

Live however you want. You just can't violate the NAP. Its a simple rule. edit: fixed conjugation.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:04 PM
5

Classically Liberal. Read as "libertarian".
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:01 PM
2

Then too many users have admin rights. I can't save I had this trouble with SEP, and SMS is fantastic in my opinion.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 05:52 PM
9

Well, Symantec had best change their tune, sooner than later. I will start swapping customers to a competitor when agreements run out. They have until then. After each, they will get a nice little note saying why they lost this business.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:34 PM
2

Good ones are not cheap...
/r/MensRights10/03/13 06:55 PM
2

Cloth eh? That sounds slightly better than the dried up plastic handles I have seen every time I move a mattress. Rather than just ripping, they snap and become 2 jagged edges.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 06:54 PM
1

If I thought it was worth refuting you, I would, but... Said every defeated debater ever. Not fooling anyone sea_warrior.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 06:47 PM
1

You are. "We should do something similar" They are going around censoring Wikipedia, and you want to do the same, apparently?
/r/MensRights10/03/13 12:48 AM
2

Will they be voting on the permissibly of tides on the weekend too? This won't ban porn, but it will hurt european businesses, give cover to child porn peddlers, be increasingly costly to fail at stopping year after year, and eventually the EU will have to admit its wrong. Prohibition NEVER WORKS. full stop. I don't know why people can't get that through their thick fucking skulls.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:34 PM
0

but it never has the word patriarchy next to the word theory, therefore it doesn't count. I think that's the rationale they are adopting there...which is fucking crazy.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:24 PM
3

I would say Al Jazeera and RT are probably the best cable news channels available currently. CNN and Fox are too far down the statist rabbit hole to be close to reliable.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:03 PM
1

One only engages in censorship when one has something to hide. We don't, and therefore don't need censorship. We can logically take all comers; They can't, so they do this sort of shit and think it doesn't make them look bad.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:01 PM
1

Does this sort of thing result in a ban?
/r/MensRights09/03/13 02:57 PM
1

That and we are a skeptical bunch who wouldn't think about complementing the emperor's new clothes, just laugh at the naked dude. Trundling out the patriarchy dogma won't get them anywhere with ancaps.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:17 PM
5

he kept swinging his body at her knife, and there was nothing she could do to stop him.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 03:21 PM
1

Even if he did as you suggest, the government will still come around and take money at gunpoint from him and spend it however it wishes.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 01:43 PM
2

I don't believe feminist debaters would be able to hold their own against that level of scrutiny, because their theories are not based on proof, but strong belief and a lot of repetition. And this is why you will never see a debate with feminists. If one agrees, the other's will move in with the death threats against her. Its almost as if they instinctively know what would happen should one ever agree to a debate. This is unacceptable in a field of study they bill as "science".
/r/MensRights05/03/13 05:47 PM
7

"Those MRAs would be ok...if they accept patriarchy theory, and male privilege. Then once we collect all the goodies, we might get to their issues too. They just don't see we are on their side, even when they aren't." That's basically the jist of the conversation. I doubt refuting patriarchy theory will get anywhere. It's like trying to disprove the exodus to a Christian. All the evidence in the world won't help.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:58 PM
2

there's a business critical function...
/r/MensRights03/03/13 06:44 PM
27

Very easily. When your peers are drinking the same cool-aid, you won't have to stand up to much scrutiny, and you can claim whatever you want.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:31 PM
6

Yahoo is on a decline. Basically the only winner they have left is yahoo finance, which is extremely popular and nice. They also run AT&Ts email system, which is utter garbage. Let em slide into obsolescence. Oh, and I believe the CEO is a woman, making the odd comment make less sense.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 03:52 PM
2

Just don't spray the judge with shark repellent from your utility belt. They hate that.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 03:31 PM
0

There are truency laws on the books in every state. It is illegal to not go to school.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 03:28 PM
11

The administration was technically correct; the best kind of correct!
/r/MensRights03/03/13 03:27 PM
5

Citing reddit doesn't count... That's the whole basis of this thread. Academic sources are best, and the reasoning is sound. For contemporary social issues this will fall on its face sometimes. For men's rights, the lack of scholarly work can be attributed to suppression, intimidation, and violence aimed at any scholar who dares tangentially question feminist dogma. Combined with the utter lack of funding for the work, and its an empty field. Then, the lack of a body of scholarly work is pointed…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 03:18 PM
4

Spanish American War in 1898 was due to the Democratic party pressuring McKinley. that and yellow journalism/False flag attack depending on how you view the story.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:26 PM
5

They won't do this because of the feminist shit storm it will bring down on them. The school will be looking to sweep this under the rug ASAP.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:23 PM
2

Or fun activity for people who thing democrats are against war... Check out which party was in power during every war in the 20th century. Its not the republicans.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:16 PM
13

they are "covered" until they are declared aggressors by VAWA. Then things go as you are familiar with.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:13 PM
2

proof is in the pudding. Watch the status quo persist.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:12 PM
1

Perhaps you are unaware of the extensive and accurate facial recognition software that exists today, and will only get better and better as time goes on? This isn't a problem computers can't solve.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 08:42 PM
1

Actually, from a technical standpoint, its probably much easier to alter a criminal record. Assuming you were of a mind to do one or the other. A secured non-public database is a much easier goal than trying to irradicate an image from the wider web.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:10 PM
3

Nobody bothered to gather evidence from them, just the guys. It's most likely too late to get it now too.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:52 PM
1

Because if you check them, then you have evidence.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:47 PM
2

When the only tool you have is a hammer...everything looks like a nail.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:31 PM
1

Only if we are talking klugeing together scripts homebrew style. I could see someone making a turnkey package to accomplish this.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:29 PM
3

Just straight up refuse. Contracts signed under duress are not contracts at all.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:27 PM
2

More the court appointed lawyer advice. Their job is to help judges clear dockets fast, not help you.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 03:11 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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