TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

pssandwich Archive

View 0 posts and 219 comments by pssandwich on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

All right. Now that it's pretty much the weekend I have time to write my response. I agree with you that generally, person A's right to bodily autonomy generally outweighs another person B's right to life. But there's another exception I'd add to your list-- the case in which person B's dependence on person A is the result of malice or negligence on the part of person A. I'm going to present a modified version of the analogy you presented earlier. Suppose Alan gets incredibly drunk and hits Barb…
/r/MensRights19/02/21 07:16 PM
1

Alright, thanks for taking the time to write this. I owe you a detailed response but am not able to write one at the moment. I will do it in the next several days. Thanks again for taking the time to explain your position.
/r/MensRights15/02/21 08:22 PM
1

Look around - you do not see a lot of hyper normative 'real men don't eat quiche' type messaging, but does that mean that it was not the air that we breathed in the 80s? I speak in the past tense, you hear me in the present tense. I say, so, a lifetime ago this happened - you say, I'm looking around and I just don't see it. There really really was a massive upheaval that caused men and boys to disavow any kind of 'sus' behavior or be shunned. "Conform or be cast out" - subdivisions, rush; and an…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 05:25 PM
2

I think my position is clear. I find this shocking because as far as I can tell, you haven't explained your position at all. I'll go over explicitly what I'm unsure about. You are pro-choice because you believe that, in the case of an abortion, the right of the mother to her bodily autonomy supersedes the right of the fetus to life. Right, I got that. My questions are 1). Under which circumstances, precisely, does the right to bodily autonomy of one person supersede the right to life of a second…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 05:18 PM
1

Umm..what? This response doesn't seem to have anything to do with what I said. Actually, your response to my top-level comment had very little to do with what I said as well. I'm not saying that boys need to act in "traditionally masculine" ways to be boys, or that this pressure is a good thing. I'm saying that feminists have misidentified the source of this pressure.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 03:53 PM
1

What you haven't made a case for is it's right to another person's body, IMO. You're right-- I haven't made this case yet. But first, I want to hear your case that it doesn't have this right. What is your ethical basis for this claim? What your kidney argument proves is "there exist situations in which the right to life does not supersede the right to bodily autonomy." I agree, as do most pro-life people. What I want to know is why you think the right to life does not supersede the right to bodi…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:47 PM
1

Since life >>>> autonomy in your view. Same with blood donation, marrow donation. Whoa...hold your horses there! I haven't even told you what my view is yet. It's not this. If I were a pure utilitarian, you'd be right. But I'm not. I'm trying to figure out your basis for being pro-choice so that we can have a discussion about this. Up until now, you've used only utilitarian arguments for your position. My opposition to abortion is not rooted in utilitarianism.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:40 PM
0

It just doesn't have a right to the mother's body or her suffering Why not? You need to actually make this argument. From a utilitarian perspective that considers the well-being of both the mother and the fetus, this seems obviously wrong. From a deontological human-rights perspective I would argue it is also wrong. What exactly is the moral framework you're using here?
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:32 PM
0

I originally wrote a different response to this but I deleted it because I realized that your entire post is a red herring. None of this is argumentation against the idea that a fetus has a right to life, so it's entirely irrelevant to the post you're responding to. The pro-choice argument is not some utilitarian attempt to weigh the well-being of the fetus against the well-being of the mother. It is instead an attempt to deny any moral weight to the well-being of the fetus. If you had to choose…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:27 PM
2

Did you miss the part where I said that the adult was guaranteed to wake up? The vast majority of fetuses who are aborted have a chance at a normal life. Stop denying it to them.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 01:14 PM
0

I'd rather have fetal rights protected for the sake of the fetus. Still, I would at least be relieved to know that at least no one has the right to kill my child.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 01:01 PM
4

This is a bizarre ad-hoc argument that you probably wouldn't apply consistently if the opportunity came up. What if an adult were in a coma for a year but guaranteed to wake up? They wouldn't be able to think, live, or function like a normal person, so that means they don't have rights, right? Would it be ethical to kill that person? The pro-choice argument is built on air.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:49 PM
0

So yeah, being in debt, having a massive responsibility, and losing your life because of a child you never wanted is pretty "inconvenient." Yes, it is! But you know what's worse than this? Being dead. I just don't get why pro-choicers don't get this. You can't just make up an ad-hoc argument that fetuses don't count as people, not test your argument on any issue other than abortion, dust your hands off and call it a day. (Edit: Actually, judging from your comments, you aren't even doing this. Yo…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:46 PM
1

Every single one of these arguments applies to infanticide (or hell, even filicide). And I know where this is going. You're going to make up some ad-hoc argument about how a fetus isn't "really" a person. This ad-hoc argument will not be tested on any other issue and we're all supposed to accept it as a pillar of your ethical system even though it stems from nothing and leads to nothing.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:42 PM
2

What about the rights of the 400000+ girls who are aborted every year in the US? Why don't they count for anything? I'm constantly amazed that people think that a right to consequence-free sex is somehow supposed to be more important than a right to life.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:39 PM
1

No one is forcing her to do anything (unless she was raped). She conceived the baby of her own volition. What's really inhumane is killing innocent human beings because they are inconvenient.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:38 PM
2

So, this horrifying feminism comes after AIDS. After a holocaust that decapitated music, writing, acting, dance . .. and you know, it took uncles and doctors and teachers and friends. Um, what? Feminism has been horrifying for a very long time. This specific trend of viewing masculinity as inherently dangerous and harmful has been around since first-wave feminism. The suffragettes used the motto "votes for women, chastity for men." Don't even get me started on second-wave feminism. Look at how p…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 12:27 PM
5

I think this piece is terrible. This person doesn't seem to have a problem with misandry other than that they take offense to it because they were a boy at some point. The argument essentially amounts to "misandry is bad because it hurts trans women too." You know those "shitty male trolls" jennifer is talking about? Yeah, that's us. That's the people like me who think that far too many boys are harmed by a culture that insists on treating them like defective girls, and that treats male behavior…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:16 AM
1

I guarantee, "TooManyMen," is just gonna become another, "Toxic Masculinity, Patriarchy," kind of term There's no "gonna" here--literally the top response to the commenter introducing the hashtag on the twoxchromosomes thread is a comment that blames men for violence against men. "TooManyMen" was another slight against men from the moment it was introduced.
/r/MensRights17/01/21 09:06 PM
2

I don't think there is anything literally wrong with the statement that too many men do these things. That isn't what is being communicated in this hashtag, though. Note that the commenter explicitly introduced #toomanymen as a rebuttal to #notallmen. The whole point of this hashtag is that if too many men do X, then X is the fault as "men as a class," whatever that is, even if not all men do X. It's no surprise that the commenters immediately followed this lame hashtag with an inane victim-blam…
/r/MensRights17/01/21 07:17 PM
5

I'm not. I think it's a hideous statement to make. That it's less hideous than blaming all men is not really much of a defense.
/r/MensRights17/01/21 01:10 PM
3

I think Norah Vincent would agree with you.
/r/MensRights18/12/20 10:46 PM
1

See, the thing is that the authority figures who pushed this on me, including both of my parents, were not super sexist. I think they just genuinely didn't realize that this is what they were doing.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 11:00 PM
1

I disagree with the meat of this "toxic masculinity" concept. Toxic masculinity, as I understand it, is the idea that men are harmed by limitations placed on them by gender roles. This is the exact opposite of my experience--as a boy, I was constantly told to handle things like a woman, and the mentality that women's ways of solving their problems are superior to men's made me miserable and was incredibly difficult to break out of.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 10:02 PM
1

I think that's the Baltimore Sun's website, not the museum's website.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 09:59 PM
1

It's clear you've deluded yourself here. All liberals talk about is how white cis men want to control women and force onto them pregnancy. Literally the opposite of what you're saying. You chose a fine place to cut off my post. I said "especially among women." I think most pro-choice people have no idea how many women there are who oppose abortion. And when I say deluded I don't mean it hyperbolicly. You saw me say 'by procedure', and subsituted 'all abortions', No, I gave a list of 3 opinions, …
/r/MensRights17/11/20 01:57 PM
2

Right, but my argument is that all of feminism is wrong, because it is all predicated on this false assumption. That doesn't mean that everything feminists do is bad, but it does mean that I oppose all forms of feminism. Said in a different way, I think there are things feminists do that are good, but I do not think that there is a form of feminism that is good on the whole.
/r/MensRights16/11/20 12:45 PM
1

Look at the results by procedure rather than by label. OK. According to Oishiio42's source, 47% total believe in either completely banning abortion (9%), allowing abortion in the case of the life of the mother only (9%), and only in the case of the life of the mother, rape, or incest (29%). That is not a "moderate pro-choice agenda." Pro lifers have been brain washed into thinking post pregnancy abortions are 'pro choice', when the majority of pro choicers are against second term abortions. I th…
/r/MensRights16/11/20 12:40 PM
1

What is mens rights movement predicated on? This is an excellent question, and one I think the MRM should spend more time addressing. Right now, my answer is "I don't know." MRAs don't really have an overarching philosophy the way that feminists do. People like Alison Tieman have been working to develop one, but so far I think her efforts on this front kind of suck (sorry!) I suppose the statement underlying my personal philosophy is something along the lines of "People prioritize women's well-b…
/r/MensRights15/11/20 08:24 PM
1

But in your original post, you didn't talk about overturning roe v. wade, you talked about "threatening abortion access". Quite a lot of people think abortion should be legal but want to add more restrictions.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 08:17 PM
1

Try writing a letter to your representative. I've heard those go a long way.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 05:51 PM
1

Peterson blew his credibility for me with his inaccurate summary of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. Also, I generally distrust "self-help" people. That being said, he seems to be mostly correct as long as he doesn't leave his wheelhouse of talking about psychology. I do think he's onto something with many men feeling like they're missing a feeling of responsibility. I just wish the guy would have the self-control to limit himself to talking about things he understands. In that spirit, I will men…
/r/MensRights15/11/20 05:47 PM
0

I'm optimistic about this. It's nice to see a bipartisan effort to improve the lives of black men and boys, and it's nice to see people like Nancy Pelosi are acknowledging that violence is an issue that disproportionately affects men and boys.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 05:40 PM
7

Yes. Everyone is. I'd go even further and say that you've been discriminated against for your gender too. Even though I'm in the MRM, I wouldn't dream of saying women are never discriminated against. Edit: Not that I disagree with your main point; I don't think there should be a council on "white men and boys" either.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 05:30 PM
9

This is the first and only time "privilege" was mentioned in this thread. You said that "white men are not discriminated against for their skin color," which is patently false. Love it or hate it, and whether you count it as "privilege" or not, affirmative action is discrimination by definition.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 05:12 PM
4

Boys need encouragement ine eduction. I actually don't think this is the reason boys are falling behind. I think the real issue is that competition has been entirely removed from education. Students are discouraged from bragging about grades because it could make other people feel bad. This suppresses boys' natural competitive drive and makes educational achievement feel a little pointless. Boys don't need to be "encouraged" to take sports seriously. I think the best thing we can do to help boys…
/r/MensRights15/11/20 04:59 PM
4

But a lot of the posts (and even more of the comments) seem to be more about expressing resentment for women, This is a large subreddit with intentionally loose moderation. You have to take the good with the bad. There are definitely misogynists on this sub, but I'd argue the level of misogyny on this sub does not approach the level of misandry in even mainstream, non-feminist spaces. resentment for feminism (even when it's objectively good) When is feminism "objecttively good"? And yes, I do re…
/r/MensRights15/11/20 01:24 PM
1

Most people are pro-choice too, In the US, this is false. Pro-choice people outnumber pro-life people, but they are not a majority.
/r/MensRights15/11/20 01:10 PM
1

I want to be a woman and actually get to enjoy life. To get valued for existing. To be catered to, fawned over, valued, given constant self-esteem boosts, to be treated special for existing. To have the ability to marry up and spend time with kids and my own hobbies while my husband works. To have people court me and value me and cater to me. I just can't take having to be a man. I understand how you feel. But being resentful over your station in life is not going to help. Do you have a group of…
/r/MensRights08/11/20 12:08 PM
7

Assuming the Republicans win a senate majority, probably not much. There's only so much the president can do without controlling both legislative houses as well.
/r/MensRights08/11/20 12:02 PM
2

Bye, Felicia! Alright, you asked for it, you paper tiger you. Just to remind you, the question you asked me was You've counted all the examples? And as I've said, there are no examples of men in power passing laws and regulations that benefit men at the expense of women. You, like every feminist I've ever spoken to, have failed to present even a single example of this. The very idea that men seek to benefit other men is ludicrous; it contradicts everything we know about the social psychology of …
/r/MensRights07/11/20 01:01 PM
1

Does it matter? Not really. It's just fun to toy with you. But it's getting old, so if you don't present any examples in the next post, I'll post my threadkiller and we'll both go on our merry ways. What claims did I actually make? Other than explaining that feminists view the patriarchy differently to how you guys seem to understand it, I haven't made any claims. I suppose your post could be read as an explanation of patriarchy theory without an endorsement of it, but it's highly unlikely, beca…
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:56 AM
1

Because I felt like it. Okay, but why? You're clearly out of your depth; you'll happily explain how feminists view the patriarchy but can't provide a single example of the most fundamental claim they make. Really, you're getting eviscerated here. I can't imagine that's fun. Why bother commenting if you don't have what it takes to support your claims? No one is afraid of a paper tiger.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:47 AM
1

I never complained about you not accepting my explanations. That's also how they feel trying to explain shit to people like you and this sub This is what I was referring to. The truth? Seeing the posts and comments in this sub reminds me how much my opinions and I as a person have evolved over the last few years. You can get that by lurking. Why are you commenting on this sub?
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:40 AM
1

Like. Pulling. Teeth. I still don't get why you're here. You don't get to complain about me not accepting your explanations when you can't be assed to find a single example.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:35 AM
1

5 responses; zero examples. You're out of your depth.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:30 AM
1

They don't come up short man. The important words in your comment there are when pressed. It's because you're not interested in a proper discourse. You're just looking for a "gotcha" rather than actually hearing feminists out, and they can tell. So it's not that they come up short, it's that they don't think you're worth their time or effort. It's the same reason I'm not going to waste my time pulling up examples, stats, and statistics; because it's work, and I'm not going to do it if it's a fut…
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:28 AM
1

I didn't come here to give examples Then why did you come here? I'm serious. What, precisely, were you hoping to accomplish? If you're genuinely interested in reconsidering your position and actually listening to what feminists mean I've been surrounded by feminists my entire life dude. They always come up short when pressed. It's like pulling teeth.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:19 AM
1

So do you have any examples or what? Just like I said, it's like pulling teeth.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 11:04 AM
1

I've literally been given zero examples. Getting feminists to give examples of powerful men promoting laws and regulations that benefit men is like pulling teeth. Notably, you still haven't provided any. To be clear, we'd need recent examples, as feminists don't claim the patriarchy is gone and their work is done. If you have some examples, please share them.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 10:45 AM
1

Just that the men in power are going to promote and make laws and regulations that benefit men, But they don't do this. There are more counterexamples to this claim than examples of it.
/r/MensRights07/11/20 12:43 AM
2

Thanks! I had never heard of this.
/r/MensRights14/09/20 07:56 PM
1

It’s second-stage misandry Is this from some widely-known model? I don't know exactly what you mean by this.
/r/MensRights13/09/20 12:44 PM
1

For a left-wing men's rights sub that isn't subservient to feminism, you should consider going to r/leftwingmaleadvocates.
/r/MensRights05/09/20 06:09 PM
4

I hate people who abuse children in foster care. These people seek out children in vulnerable situations specifically because they're vulnerable. Two years isn't enough for this monster.
/r/MensRights05/09/20 02:55 PM
2

No, it's the case. A referendum on women's suffrage (in which women were able to vote) was held in Massachusetts in 1895, and very few women bothered to even vote in it. Note: I don't agree with the contents of this article, but it's good to get a contemporary idea of how people felt about women's suffrage. The situation is a lot more nuanced than "patriarchy stopped women from voting." Note further that warfare is explicitly mentioned here. People at the turn of the century had very different i…
/r/MensRights05/09/20 02:42 PM
2

I don't see any toxicity- could you point me to it? Like, could you link to specific posts you consider "toxic"?
/r/MensRights05/09/20 02:36 PM
6

Yes, I wouldn't want the MRM to take a stance on abortion because I consider the two positions to be independent.
/r/MensRights05/09/20 02:11 PM
2

As a pro-life MRA, I'm inclined to disagree! The main, inescapable reason that I'm pro-life is that I consider a fetus to be a person (no pro-choicer has ever come up with a satisfactory definition of "person" that does not exclude something they want to include and that wasn't explicitly written to exclude fetuses) and the arguments in favor of legal abortion are ad-hoc nonce arguments that don't apply to (and haven't been tested on) any other moral or ethical question. Obviously, this argument…
/r/MensRights05/09/20 02:07 PM
1

I have never studied education, but I have some friends who have. What exactly are you concerned about? Are you concerned that you, personally, will face discrimination as an educator because you're a man? I'm not sure about the answer to this one either way. I think it depends on what, specifically, your career goals are. If you want to be an elementary school teacher, I think you will have a lot more trouble than if you want to be a high school teacher. Take this with a grain of salt because I…
/r/MensRights05/09/20 01:01 PM
1

And you are absolutely right about that one!
/r/MensRights22/08/20 12:28 AM
2

A/B: Are there sex differences? Yes, this is widely accepted among psychometricians and only became controversial recently because of political reasons. Men have better spatial abilities, and women have better verbal abilities. See here for a summary. For mathematics per se, the differences near the middle of the distribution are said to be small. C. Like everything, it's a bit of both. Search e.g. for PISA scores by gender and country. The girls outscore the boys in reading in all countries, th…
/r/MensRights22/08/20 12:23 AM
6

Some people like to make up anecdotes on the spot. When you say women, it suggests that it is a behavior exclusive to their gender, I 100% agree. which is just as sexist as this tweet from a woman saying she hates all men. No, I disagree with you on that one. Making a generalization about a gender is nowhere near as sexist as hating an entire gender.
/r/MensRights21/08/20 11:52 PM
1

Well, I guess I'm happy to be the one to disagree with this. At least in the US/Canada/UK, men face far more serious disadvantages than women. I don't think this was always the case- I think in the past men and women were in such different roles that it's kind of difficult to even compare. But these days, there is pretty much nothing women can't do in these countries that men can (and a lot of things women can do that men can't.)
/r/MensRights21/08/20 11:45 PM
1

First of all, you've completely reduced politics to economic policy. If someone takes a market-based approach to solving a social problem that the left concerns itself with, this approach is called left-neoliberal. I view woke capitalism as an example of left-neoliberalism. Second, I'm not sure it makes sense to have an absolute political scale that identifies an exact point as the center, independent of the specific country and time period under consideration. In a framework that separates coun…
/r/MensRights21/08/20 11:40 PM
1

Neolibs fall right of center by pretty much anyone's standards This is not true. Justin Trudeau is a neoliberal, and I don't think anyone would call him right-of-center.
/r/MensRights21/08/20 09:48 AM
1

In the US mainstream, the terms are used essentially synonymously. This is not how the term is used among the US "left" or in other countries. Actually, the word "liberal" seems to mean something slightly different in each English-speaking country- in the US "liberal" essentially means leftist, in Canada it means centre-left neoliberal (like Justin Trudeau), in the UK it means something politically neutral but pro-civil-liberties, and in Australia it means right wing. Given the US-centric nature…
/r/MensRights20/08/20 09:17 PM
1

I put other. I am on the economic left, social right. I'm pro-labour (and feminism is very much anti-labour, which is something that isn't discussed much), in favor of universal health care and broadly left-wing environmental policy. I'm pro-life and against this race obsession that has taken over the left.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 09:11 PM
9

Sure, but I don't think it's a good message for men to hear regardless. You don't need to be a big, important person to have value.
/r/MensRights29/07/20 01:26 PM
3

I agree with this statement and its "dual"- men have value even if they aren't kings. Learn to value yourself for who you are without pretending to be something you're not.
/r/MensRights29/07/20 09:34 AM
60

I'll say what I said last time- I'm no king. I'm a man. And that's all I need to be.
/r/MensRights28/07/20 10:27 PM
1

Sure, but I have goals beyond making feminists lose their shit. Abortion is very controversial, and if you want to reach the most people, you shouldn't tie your messaging to it.
/r/MensRights28/07/20 08:38 PM
50

There's no need to tie it to abortion- women have the right to abandon their child at a safe haven in every state in the US. That is why the MRM has moved from the term "male abortion" to the much more apt term "paternal surrender."
/r/MensRights26/07/20 12:57 PM
4

Hey Colby, You can only control the parts of your life you can control. Sometimes it sucks- sometimes people will hit you with unfair expectations or a lack of concern just because you're a man. But that doesn't mean that your life is going to be miserable. You just have to make the most of what you have. That doesn't mean that it's hopeless to fight against the injustices you face as a man- but you shouldn't let these injustices stop you from being the man you want to be. You will be much happi…
/r/MensRights25/07/20 02:45 PM
2

Great answer! This whole "toxic femininity" construction isn't useful for anything other than causing feminists to freak out. It should not be taken as a serious concept.
/r/MensRights25/07/20 02:38 PM
1

Yes, that too. If you take the average feminist, weighted by their power within the movement, they would be more man-hating than the average feminist, weighted uniformly.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 11:35 PM
1

Yeah I kinda find this the minimum to being a good person, Even if that's true, what do you gain from packaging this stuff as a gender role? It's a bizarre framing with lots of downsides and no obvious (to me) upside. For example, the implication that these expectations (or their obvious equivalents) don't or shouldn't apply to women.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 11:19 PM
2

I actually agree with the general sentiment that most feminists do not have actual hatred for men. However, feminists have a sort of "cultivated callousness" toward men that causes them to ignore the ways in which their preferred policies or ideas affect men. In that sense, I think even "mainstream" feminists hold what I would call an extreme position.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 12:40 AM
3

I posted this in both this subreddit and a much more feminist subredit to guage the responses. Both essentially said the same thing that it's the other side does it more! That doesn't mean that both sides are wrong.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 12:33 AM
2

I agree- I think there are at least two situations in which men are told to "man up." Sometimes, "man up" is used as a command; other times, it's used as advice. I think "man up" is usually good advice but usually an onerous command.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 12:30 AM
1

In what world is 78 cents equal to a dollar? Canada -Shoe0nhead
/r/MensRights22/07/20 11:19 PM
13

Many of these body parts are named after men who studied their anatomy or physiology. Seeing this kind of push makes me think lots of men will decide: what's the point of doing great things if I won't be acknowledged for them? What's the point of even trying? I really hate this push to remove some of the main incentives people (particularly men) have to do good work.
/r/MensRights19/07/20 11:58 AM
1

The SPLC has labeled the National Coalition for Men as a male supremacist organization. I don't think this is true. They labelled AVFM a male supremacist organization, but I don't think they officially designated NCFM as one.
/r/MensRights14/07/20 02:21 PM
8

“In reality, they offered little help to men other than blaming women or advocating to deny women the structures that they did have to resort to discrimination or violence.” My god, the person who wrote this article is stupid. They literally listed a major accomplishment of NCFM that could potentially be monumental for the rights of American men and boys, and followed it up with a stupid quote from the SPLC about how the NCFM offers little help to men.
/r/MensRights13/07/20 10:15 PM
2

OK, I agree with this one. Not all men handle things in exactly the same way, and I wouldn't want a one-size-fits-all solution for men.
/r/MensRights12/07/20 02:27 PM
14

how they are reduced to their looks I disagree with this premise. Drawing a sexy woman does not "reduce women to their looks."
/r/MensRights12/07/20 01:37 PM
5

I've found that when someone posts something like this, a lot of lurkers upvote it, but the people who actually discuss things in this sub are almost entirely critical of it.
/r/MensRights12/07/20 01:31 PM
6

I disagree. I think that the way men handle problems is fundamentally different from the way women handle problems, and that acknowledging this difference is important. I was miserable as a child/young adult because I was taught to handle problems like a woman.
/r/MensRights12/07/20 01:27 PM
6

"Man up" can mean (at least) two things. On the one hand, it can be a command. "Man up" or I won't deal with you again. "Man up" or you don't have any value. I think that saying "man up" in this context is harmful to men. On the other hand, "man up" can be advice. "Man up" or other people won't respect you. "Man up" or you won't be able to get a girlfriend. "Man up," because you're a man, and you'll be happier if you handle your problems like a man instead of like a woman. I think that saying "m…
/r/MensRights12/07/20 01:24 PM
1

https://twitter.com/manumiss1on/status/1004331266794237952 (has the study and diagrams of the studies e.g. more likely to kill, more likely to electrocute etc.) How are you intending to infer causality from this? Isn't it possible that misandric people are more likely to be drawn to feminism?
/r/MensRights18/06/20 09:33 PM
1

Good lord! That chart is so hard to read! The spacing between words is sometimes smaller than the spacing between letters of the same word!
/r/MensRights26/05/20 08:02 PM
3

I agree. This sub has better things to do with its time than complain about fringe hate subs.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:47 PM
1

I'm a big believer in free speech. You have to remember that hate speech laws are never applied evenhandedly, so it's better to oppose them at every turn, especially if you hold an unpopular opinion (which everyone in this sub does).
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:40 PM
4

There is a common attitude in feminist circles that MGTOW are basically people who say "you can't fire me, I quit!" and that these people wouldn't have "given up" on women if they thought they had a chance.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:34 PM
1

Good lord! Why do people even bother posting on twitter if they can't fit their thoughts into 280 characters? She should have just linked to some post on another site or something.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:31 PM
1

Well, the obvious counterpoint is that when MRAs try to gather together to discuss men's issues on our own terms, we get shut down.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:28 PM
1

I don't think it's bad to upvote opinions you disagree with on unpopularopinion.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:27 PM
2

I think this bizarre tic of "say it with me" is the most interesting part of this post. There seems to be an online population that always says stuff like this. It's really weird- why do you want everyone to be saying the same things? I mean, even if I agreed with this statement, I'd be weirded out about saying it together with everyone else.
/r/MensRights09/05/20 04:13 PM
2

Do whatever the hell you want. No one here is going to stop you.
/r/MensRights09/05/20 04:02 PM
5

I can't believe she explicitly listed go fish! The K and Q are already equal in that game. It could have been worse I suppose- she could've said blackjack. Other than that, this is the usual inane feminist crap. Does it matter that the K is higher than the Q? Has any woman ever actually been discouraged by this?
/r/MensRights09/05/20 03:57 PM
1

I'd be willing to answer, but only if I can remain pseudonymous (or anonymous if you will anonymize the data for your research).
/r/MensRights05/05/20 01:26 AM
1

If you don't mind my asking, who are you planning on voting for this time? I wish Stein ran a third time; I really don't like Howie Hawkins.
/r/MensRights05/05/20 01:13 AM
2

I agree in the case of crimes reported to the police. Although Hawkins made a general statement, he's talking about the Tara Reade case in particular here. If you wait 25 years and then make an accusation to the media, you shouldn't expect an investigation to take place.
/r/MensRights29/04/20 12:18 AM
1

Read the comments on the tweet. That's not what Howie Hawkins is doing. He is using "due process" in a bizarre way.
/r/MensRights29/04/20 12:14 AM
3

Because Howie Hawkins wasn't saying what the MRAs think he's saying. He's using "due process" here to refer to the "right" of "victims" (an honest person would say accusers) to be believed. Look at his clarifications in his post. Howie asserts that women and other victims must be heard and allegations investigated, no matter what's in style. In practice, he's talking about the Tara Reade allegation, which absolutely should not be investigated. What could an investigation possibly turn up? The su…
/r/MensRights29/04/20 12:13 AM
1

Dude, it's just lip service. The guy is saying the Tara Reade allegations are credible. If the guy thinks that there's anything to be gained by investigating an allegation of something that happened 25 years ago, he doesn't believe in "due process" in any meaningful sense.
/r/MensRights29/04/20 12:09 AM
3

IMO this is a losing move. No one cares what UrbanDictionary says, and by making a huge deal out of this, I think we risk looking like people who just don't "get" how the internet works.
/r/MensRights25/03/20 10:50 AM
4

No, not yet.
/r/MensRights23/03/20 11:13 PM
3

The word is "principles," not "principals."
/r/MensRights19/03/20 07:06 PM
3

Are you suggesting rape victim blaming and sexual objectification aren’t genuine daily problems? I'll let the other people handle the victim blaming one, but yes, I'll go on the record as saying that sexual objectification is not an everyday problem. Treating people as objects is something that psychopaths do. It's not something that normal men do. Sexualizing women is not the same thing as treating them as objects, and the feminist effort to conflate these is dishonest.
/r/MensRights16/03/20 10:52 AM
11

When I was a boy/teenager, I was miserable because I was taught that women's ways of solving problems were better than men's. I spent basically my entire childhood unable to relate to other boys and resenting them because I was told women's ways of doing things were the right ways. I didn't really come to love myself- or to learn how to appreciate the friendship of other men- until I accepted my own masculinity. This "masculinity as a prison" framework is exactly wrong in my case. Masculinity is…
/r/MensRights16/03/20 10:47 AM
1

Nobody likes a grammar Nazi bro How are you supposed to learn if no one ever tells you when you make a mistake? This probably wasn't just a typo on your part- it was a genuine misconception about the meaning of the word singular. I'm not trying to be judgmental about your grammar; I'm trying to improve it. I'll admit that I'm harsher on MRAs than I would be on other people- as an MRA, I want the people representing my positions to look smarter, and it's safest to let you know your mistakes in a …
/r/MensRights14/03/20 07:40 PM
1

First of all, the word you want is single, not singular. Singular means unusual or exceptional. Second, there are lots of disney movies without any evil male main characters- Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, the Little Mermaid, and Enchanted come to mind.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 06:17 PM
1

What's interesting in my case is that, unlike the parent of the comment you linked, I was never even a feminist- I figured out the issues with the wage gap claim on my own; I knew no one was trying to send women back to the kitchen; I always thought that objectification theory was stupid; etc.- but I did believe all the stuff about masculinity being harmful.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 06:12 PM
1

I'm not especially convinced it is systemic. Even if it is, I think "calling out" individual instances is pointless and ineffective both at demonstrating the problem and at fixing it.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 06:02 PM
3

Good question! In my case, it involved a number of changes. First of all, I was taught hard rules like "don't insult people; be kind to them." I was always deeply offended when someone (always a man or boy) joshed me a little because that's just not how you treat people. And I never played along when it was not intended to be demeaning, nor fought back when it was intended to be demeaning. I still remember one time back in 9th grade when someone named Frank was being mean to me, and another guy …
/r/MensRights14/03/20 05:59 PM
1

"Somebody" has to be the bad guy in this comic. I don't really care if the good guy is woman and the bad guy is a man. It's kind of ridiculous to complain about no matter which gender is in which role here.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 05:13 PM
5

No, I don't think this is true. I would have been a much happier person as a child/teenager if I had understood that handling problems like a man was OK. Increasingly, society seems to be telling men that their natural ways of approaching problems is faulty. You often hear this phrased as people treating boys as "defective girls." We need to tell boys that it's OK to be boys.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 04:39 PM
7

Yep. I wish I was told to handle my problems like a man when I was younger. When I was young I was under the impression that women's ways of handling problems are "better." In my case, they weren't. I became much happier once I stopped trying to act like a woman.
/r/MensRights14/03/20 04:35 PM
2

The text of yours that I quoted. Since you're having so much trouble figuring it out, I'll quote it again. I know you're claiming the text you quoted doesn't follow. I'm asking you what the text you quoted doesn't follow from. ​ And I disagree, all cultures preferentially protect women and girls, the boys in Nigeria are dead, and they also kidnapped some 10,000 to fight in their wars. I agree with you on this- what makes you think I don't? I never said the situation was equal. I said that the re…
/r/MensRights27/01/20 08:06 PM
1

This does not follow at all. This doesn't follow from what? It's a direct observation, not a conclusion I arrived at via some complicated reasoning. Would you rather raise your son in Sweden or in Equatorial Guinea? And there is no country in the world where boys and girls are treated equally. Even Boko Harem knew better than to kill girls, the boys they burned to death. I agree. What makes you think I don't? I'm not saying "if you focus on fixing the problems faced by girls, the problems faced …
/r/MensRights26/01/20 02:53 PM
2

North Korea, South Sudan, Equatorial Guinea, Burkina Faso,... The worst countries to grow up as a boy are the same as the worst ones to grow up as a girl. Gender inequality isn't the worst thing a boy can face.
/r/MensRights26/01/20 12:47 PM
9

Congratulations to Bettina! I am a big fan of her work. I feel like I learned a lot about sex and sexuality by watching her videos. If anyone reading this hasn't seen these videos, I recommend you check them out.
/r/MensRights26/01/20 12:21 AM
2

Worse than being offensive, this piece is incoherent. Feminists claim that the term "fragile masculinity" refers to refer to the behavior of avoiding anything appearing feminine in order to protect your manliness. That has nothing to do with punching a wall. ​ The person who posted this frame was clearly a feminist (non-feminists wouldn't use the term "fragile masculinity"). I'm always amazed at how little feminists seem to care about the definitions of the words they use even when the words bei…
/r/MensRights15/01/20 10:06 PM
3

Don't fall into the trap of calling things "objectification." The whole point of this term is to conflate normal human sexuality with a sociopathic disregard for another person's humanity. The appropriate response to feminist claims about objectification is "this theory is nonsense," not "men are objectified too."
/r/MensRights15/01/20 06:54 PM
1

Sure. I actually think that the current DV paradigm is terrible for lesbian victims. However, 1). Lesbian relationships weren't considered in the study, and 2). (My main point) Even without reading the study, it should be obvious that the number of lesbian relationships isn't anywhere near large enough to make up the difference. The poster above me was claiming that 28% of women were victims of DV- there is no way you could possibly have a number that much larger than the number of male victims …
/r/MensRights09/01/20 10:31 AM
1

Wait a minute, is section 33 saying that an act of the parliament or legislature of a province can specifically discriminate against a member of a protected class just by saying "Section 15 doesn't count"? And that such a law can last indefinitely as long as it is renewed every 5 years? Am I reading this wrong?
/r/MensRights07/01/20 09:42 PM
9

I've never understood how this statistic was mathematically possible- I don't want to take this out on you (you're not the first person I've heard say this), but I've never understood how women can be more likely to be victims than men if they are the perpetrators in the majority or non-reciprocal cases. In a reciprocal case, both the man and the woman are victims, so the contributions to the number of men and women victimized should be equal. Therefore, the difference in number should come enti…
/r/MensRights07/01/20 09:03 PM
2

I agree and I'd go further- we can't win by playing the same game as the feminists. They have more support and more resources. It's not just that we can be better- we must be better.
/r/MensRights31/12/19 04:49 PM
1

It's really sad to see that environmentalism has begun to suffer from this feminist rot. Now there is no one who is going to be truly committed to saving the environment. I think we've reached the point where every environmental agreement from now on is going to have to include some kind of reference to feminism, and likely a certain amount set aside for feminist causes.
/r/MensRights31/12/19 01:33 PM
5

My answers today are yes, yes, and yes. I am in academia, so I have to be extremely careful about what I say. Most people I meet - and most of my friends - are academics, which means that they are mostly feminists. I can't afford to burn bridges with anyone, so I can't bring up gender issues. ​ I have always been kind of cagey, so maybe someone else in my position would have different answers.
/r/MensRights29/12/19 12:35 PM
2

This map doesn't show the absolute fraction of women who search for rough porn though. It's possible to get a map like this if searches for "tame" porn are pretty predictable in terms of content but "rough" porn is more varied. You can't draw the conclusion from this map that rough porn is particularly popular with women. Also, this isn't your fault, but this map is terribly formatted. Why don't the colors of the states correspond to the search terms?
/r/MensRights27/12/19 01:29 PM
4

People use this argument against us, too. I can't tell you the number of times I've read someone saying something like the following: OK, I admit an MRA didn't actually say this, but the fact that I thought one could tells you everything you need to know about the movement. Since we're a minority viewpoint, we're going to lose this battle of unfair dismissals. We have no shortage of legitimate criticisms of feminism, so let's stick to those.
/r/MensRights27/12/19 01:21 PM
1

Now we're just going in circles. A candidate wouldn't have to disbelieve in a problem of misogyny. A candidate would have to disbelieve that society is deeply misogynistic. ​ Edit: And the reason a who believes that society is deeply misogynistic has no prayer of solving men's issues is that he obviously hasn't put a second's worth of thought into them. The claim that society is deeply misogynistic is so ridiculous that no one who takes it seriously could possibly have anything to bring to the t…
/r/MensRights24/12/19 08:43 PM
1

I agree that the sub overreacted. However, I do not have any confidence in someone who made a statement of the kind that Yang made to address men's issues. ​ But really, I don't care that much about Yang either way. I don't know if I'd vote for him if he won the primaries. But statements like this definitely don't help.
/r/MensRights24/12/19 06:02 PM
1

I see your point, but I’d like to resist your willingness to anthropomorphize society and treat it like a monolithic force (even if you’re doing so in the spirit of taking Yang’s words at face value). I disagree. You can't substitute your own beliefs for what Yang actually said. What Yang said was false, and I'm not backing down on this point. It’s tricky and frankly unproductive to ask whether society hates group X. Hey, I agree! I don't think it's right to say society is misandric either. But …
/r/MensRights24/12/19 05:10 PM
2

I don't know if they do or not- but I think OP was asserting they do. ​ Just an anecdote so feel free to write it off: the male feminists I know all have weird personal problems. I don't know if they're depressed, but they don't seem to be well-adjusted.
/r/MensRights24/12/19 12:44 PM
6

I don't think OP was talking only about women though.
/r/MensRights24/12/19 12:30 PM
1

So you've seen people make openly hateful statements about women? I don't mean to be trite (lol i really do sue me) but why are you asking me for evidence of people hating women when it is a clear a phenomenon as people hating men? No, not people. Society. Yang's claim was that society is deeply misogynistic. This claim isn't equivalent to the claim that there are people who hate women- of course there are. You can go over to the incel sub and find people who hate women easily. But their hatred …
/r/MensRights24/12/19 12:02 PM
3

Yep, this is exactly why I've learned to be strict with definitions.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 08:02 PM
1

Hey thanks for the response. I know about the Laffer curve- one of the main things to watch out for with redistribution schemes is making sure you don't disincentivize people from working. I know that the tax system is already, on the whole, progressive. I think it should be more progressive. I agree that the tax cuts did help stimulate the economy; however, not all taxes and not all government spending is created equal. A scheme that simply takes money and redistributes it doesn't actually remo…
/r/MensRights23/12/19 08:00 PM
0

...because I favor redistribution?
/r/MensRights23/12/19 07:52 PM
1

Well, I guess I'll agree that people in this sub overreacted. I think calling this "cancelling" is a bridge too far, but I don't think we'll agree on that point.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 07:00 PM
2

How can a group of people express disapproval of someone without "soft cancelling"? ​ Edit: More specifically, how can people express disapproval of a politician without "soft cancelling"? I think there's a major difference between saying "you shouldn't listen to x's music because they hold position y" and "you shouldn't vote for x because they hold position y".
/r/MensRights23/12/19 06:43 PM
1

Oh I don't disagree. I downvoted the top-level guy but not you. I just didn't have anything to say to him that wasn't covered by the other comments.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 06:31 PM
2

How so? No one here is trying to silence him or deplatform him, or claim that he should be silenced or deplatformed. Disagreement and name-calling is not "cancelling."
/r/MensRights23/12/19 06:14 PM
1

Huh! I didn't know that. Did he announce his candidacy at that point?
/r/MensRights23/12/19 06:12 PM
1

There's polling low, and then there's polling 3%. I'm not aware of any examples of someone polling this low and rocketing to winning the primary.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 05:38 PM
1

Maybe not! I think it's reasonably clear that Yang isn't going to win no matter what he does; if we can't have honest winners, I'd rather at least have honest losers.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 05:03 PM
1

Do you have any evidence to back up these numbers? Also, I don't understand why you're neglecting to include the UBI I'd be receiving to offset the tax increase. I couldn't survive if 80% of my paycheck were taken away; I could survive if 80% of my paycheck were taken away and I received a wealth transfer from the government.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 04:20 PM
2

Actually, it's worse than that. He said that this country hates women.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 04:09 PM
0

And all bullshit aside, it could very well usher in the next great depression. How so? Poor people have a much higher marginal propensity to consume than rich people do.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 04:03 PM
2

I agree. I don't think that Yang is a misandrist, but I wish he weren't a sellout.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 04:00 PM
3

As someone who thinks this country is neither patriarchal nor deeply misogynist, I'd say there is a difference. A society can be set up in a way to disadvantage women, even intentionally so, without hating them if it loves men enough.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:49 PM
3

Also, the comment, “This country is deeply misogynistic” wasn’t too far off the mark, at least as he said it. The way I view it, women have some advantages and men have others. Men usually benefit economically. The vast majority of the Fortune 500 are men. Women have other benefits, as pointed out on this sub. That isn't what the word "misogyny" means. Misogyny is hatred of women. And saying that this country hates women is off the wall.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:44 PM
1

The minute he says that women also have many things stacked against them This isn't equivalent to misogyny, let alone deep misogyny.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:37 PM
1

He then backed down and said that parents should have the right to mutilate their children's genitals. Do you have a source for this?
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:33 PM
-1

I don't agree with that guy's comments either, but the name-calling isn't accomplishing anything.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:31 PM
2

Who is "cancelling" Yang?
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:30 PM
2

Exactly. I can't imagine someone thinking that the US is misogynist being able to address men's issues in any meaningful way.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:30 PM
2

I'm a leftist Sanders voter and I don't see what you're seeing here.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:28 PM
5

I strongly disagree. I don't think its inaccurate to say that our country has a problem with misogyny. I don't think its inaccurate to say we have a problem with misandry. I think it's deeply problematic to pretend that one or the other or neither is true, and I think its a gross overreaction to say that Yang is a piece of shit because of these comments First of all, misogyny is not "discrimination against women." It's not "disadvantages faced by women." Misogyny is "hatred of women." And I don'…
/r/MensRights23/12/19 03:18 PM
2

What? Azerbaijan, Albania, and Greece's male suicide rates all seem to be lower than Russia, Sweden, or Kazakhstan's female suicide rate. ​ You're right that the men's numbers are way higher than the women's, though.
/r/MensRights01/09/19 07:12 PM
3

RationalWiki was originally an atheist/skeptic wiki, but it landed on Rebecca Watson's side during Elevatorgate. After that, it sort-of became an "atheism plus"-aligned wiki, and everything sort-of followed naturally from there.
/r/MensRights29/06/19 12:35 PM
1

Did you even read the paper you linked? Or at least the abstract? Look at the text in the abstract, which contains sentences such as: ​ Twin and adoption studies indicate that most behavioral characteristics are heritable and The relevant environmental factors appear to be those that are not shared by reared together relatives. ​ This is exactly what I said! Here, I'll even quote myself to remind you: ​ I have never seen a twin study where "shared environment" has been the biggest factor. Like, …
/r/MensRights27/06/19 06:09 PM
1

What matters are results This is crazy-talk. Stalin isn't any less of a communist because the USSR was bad, and NOW isn't any less of a feminist organization because their results are bad. I refuse to budge on this. Except 9 months of pregnancy, birth, hormonal/physical aftermath and the social stigmatization I suspect you will downplay or outright ignore. Of course it's serious. Death is more serious. Fetal rights are irrelevant for the same reason as sperm or ova rights. Nobody has ownership o…
/r/MensRights27/06/19 09:19 AM
1

Let's see if that's true. I know that's what the dictionary and Wikipedia say. Everyone on this sub knows this. I maintain that this does not match the common usage of the term and does not accurately describe what the important feminists actually do. ​ Edit: See this yougov/huffington post poll, for example. The dictionary definition is not descriptive; it doesn't match how the vast majority of the people use the term. To the extent that they do they are wrong and anti-feminist. The vast majori…
/r/MensRights26/06/19 11:37 PM
1

Why was that necessary if nobody was hostile to equal pay? Clearly people were hostile to equal pay. I would describe the National Retail Merchant Association (the group who wrote that statement that I linked to) as hostile to equal pay. Clearly there was work that needed to be done on behalf of women. I think your reading of feminism is extremely narrow when anybody who was agitating for equal pay, more opportunities, and equal treatment in general can plausibly be called feminist What do you m…
/r/MensRights25/06/19 11:43 PM
1

Strict abortion restrictions don’t reduce abortions I'd like to see a reliable source on this. The pro-choice sources all claim you're right; the pro-life sources all claim you're wrong. I think you're wrong- people respond to incentives. Even reducing abortions by 5% would be a huge victory for human rights IMO.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:22 PM
1

my right to bodily autonomy is legally considered to be the highest of rights. By whom? I know I mentioned this in the other comment but I don't know where pro-choice people get this idea. Certainly this isn't true in the US, where the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the unalienable ones.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:15 PM
1

Viability is literally the worst place to draw the line. The woman isn't required to carry the fetus until the fetus doesn't need her anymore? This is exactly backwards.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:13 PM
1

but there is no action you can take that overrides your bodily autonomy, so there is no legal basis for your argument. What? There are tons of actions you can take that override your bodily autonomy. Hell, the government can tell you that you need to fight and die for your country even if you don't take any actions. ​ Do you know the legal basis for the Roe v. Wade decision? It's a bunch of 14th amendment "right to privacy" handwaving. Bodily autonomy has nothing to do with it. EDIT: It goes wit…
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:07 PM
1

Death for something you didn't do is even more harsh.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:04 PM
1

That's only because I elided the obvious part of the argument that I assumed everyone on this sub would have the charity to fill in. I'm saying that she should face the consequences in order to prevent someone else from dying.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:03 PM
1

Yes, I elided the obvious parts of my argument. I'm saying the woman should face the consequences in order to prevent someone else from dying.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 09:02 PM
2

I mean, when it comes to matters of life-and-death, I'm not willing to take someone at their word. Maybe I could trust a hypothetical wife with this. But not a girlfriend.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 08:36 AM
3

It's not "forcing her to be a mother." She could give the father full custody of the child after it's born. ​ It is forcing her to carry the fetus to term. Which I 100% support. The woman voluntarily had sex, so there is no violation of her bodily autonomy. The pregnancy was a direct consequence of the woman's actions. Why shouldn't she be forced to carry it through?
/r/MensRights23/06/19 08:26 AM
1

Incidentally, I've been voluntarily abstaining from sex my whole life for this reason. If the condom broke and I had to be a father, I would do it. If the condom broke and the child was aborted, I don't think I could live with myself. ​ Bodily autonomy shouldn't mean that a woman can't voluntarily commit to a decision regarding her body in advance, and I really don't understand why pro-choicers think it should.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 08:23 AM
2

I agree that the father should be on the hook for 9 months worth of fatherhood. Not 18 years.
/r/MensRights23/06/19 08:13 AM
4

You know, this "paper abortion" terminology is really bad branding, and that's why Hannah Wallen has switched to using the term "legal paternal surrender." About half of the US is against legal abortion, but few people oppose save haven laws. There is just no point in drawing a parallel to abortion when women have a right that is at least as relevant and far less controversial.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 09:17 PM
2

It's going to split the sub as a whole, too. I'm pro-life but I don't mind the MRM being split on abortion. ​ At the very least, I wish there could be a way that a man could have vaginal sex and have a reasonable expectation that the woman wouldn't abort his child.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 09:15 PM
9

No, in the US safe haven laws exist in every state. Motherhood is not forced even without legal abortion.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 09:12 PM
1

First of all, thanks for taking this discussion a bit more seriously now. I actually think that you'll find genuine disagreement is the norm on the internet- you have to dig past people's automatic name-calling responses to get to it, but there's almost always an actual, honest disagreement between two people arguing. ​ You're not going to like my answer: I don't think feminism per se was ever necessary. Certainly not in the 1950s. ​ You are correct that there were real barriers to women enterin…
/r/MensRights22/06/19 03:54 PM
1

Where is the source for your statistic? If you don't provide the research on which the statistic is based, we can't do anything more than guess at what it says.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 09:07 AM
5

Who are these people in this conversation and why am I supposed to care what they have to say? This post has no context.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 08:57 AM
1

Dude, I'm in academia. A vast majority of the people I know are feminists. And I don't dissociate with people because I don't like how they argue. You can say feminists want a world with equal opportunity all you want. I feel I've demonstrated that you're wrong. If you still think you're right, then I want to know exactly why feminists- not just rando feminists, but people in charge of major feminist organizations- are blocking measures that would create equal opportunities for men.
/r/MensRights22/06/19 08:38 AM
1

That is arguable. But you're implicitly accepting my point and making the claim that the intent is there but implemented badly. Are we actually disagreeing? Huh? Someone saying one thing and doing another isn't "bad implementation." It's dishonesty. The person you're responding to is claiming that feminists are lying, and I agree with them. ​ One example of this is the history of mandatory arrest policies in California. Feminists clamored for mandatory arrest policies because they felt that the …
/r/MensRights21/06/19 11:17 PM
2

Because I don't want to call myself a feminist. I think a lot of people have convinced themselves that you "must" identify as a feminist or else you're a bigot. Fighting against that idea is really important I think.
/r/MensRights16/06/19 09:43 AM
3

Don't fall into the feminist trap of calling things objectification. People treating other people like objects is rare and pathological. There is nothing wrong with being attracted to someone for their looks or for their wealth. Both of these are normal, and neither is "objectifying" anyone. ​ Honestly, I'm just amazed at how well feminism has managed to control the gender dialogue that even anti-feminists are using their language, even when the concept doesn't make much sense. If you're saying …
/r/MensRights15/06/19 04:57 PM
1

Yeah. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I'm just trying to give some extra context to EricAllande's statistic.
/r/MensRights15/06/19 04:18 PM
-3

The only two STEM fields where the percentage of women is still well below 50% are engineering and software development. All the other STEM fields have more than 40% women. First of all, do you have a source for this claim? I doubt it's true for e.g. physics. Second, how are you measuring this? By number of bachelor's degrees awarded in each field? This can be deceptive too: women make up well over 40% of math majors, but the vast majority of those women go into education, and more of the men go…
/r/MensRights15/06/19 11:02 AM
1

Even you're making this too complicated. Women, at least in the US, can do this even without abortion- every state has safe haven laws.
/r/MensRights01/06/19 11:53 PM
1

Oh, I agree. I love Shoe0nHead's content.
/r/MensRights30/05/19 02:06 PM
1

Sure, but I'd argue she at least does a lot to promote discussion of men's issues in a way that Shoe0nHead doesn't. My point is not just that Shoe0nHead doesn't call herself an MRA, but that she has a good reason not to- she doesn't actually do any men's rights advocacy.
/r/MensRights30/05/19 01:57 PM
1

Shoe0nHead is funny and antifeminist, but she doesn't really do any advocacy for men's rights. She doesn't see herself as an MRA either.
/r/MensRights30/05/19 06:03 AM
1

I mean, I'm disagreeing with you and /u/MezzaCorux. I don't think that's the same thing as "trying to start a fight." The quote in my post was specifically directed at the claim that /u/MezzaCorux made that feminism was being "derailed" by man-hating. If you don't want to discuss this point further that's fine. But making me out to be some huge jerk for disagreeing is frankly out-of-line.
/r/MensRights29/05/19 10:46 AM
0

The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. This quote is in a rather prominent place in the Declaration of Sentiments given at Seneca Falls in 1848. The "man-hating feminist" is not some "derailing" of a grand tradition of feminists just wanting equal rights; it's been a part of feminism all along. And u/ZombieSazza is wrong to claim that misandry is not a part…
/r/MensRights29/05/19 10:34 AM
5

We're not kings. We're men (most of us on this sub are anyway). And that's all we need to be. I don't want people lying and calling me a king when I'm not. ​ Being a man is enough. Men's contributions should be respected regardless of their title. If you want to make me feel good about myself, talk about what I've accomplished; don't throw an empty platitude at me.
/r/MensRights29/05/19 10:27 AM
1

What? No they can't. They haven't reached sexual maturity yet. A five-year-old child is not biologically capable of reproducing. In any event, your argument also "proves" that menopausal women aren't human, not to mention women or men who have had their genitalia removed or damaged, or people who are born infertile.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 10:30 PM
1

Seriously? This argument applies equally well to 5-year olds as it does to fetuses.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 10:15 PM
1

But why not? I want an argument that's not either just a bare assertion that they're not human, or some silly rationalization that doesn't apply anywhere else.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 10:07 PM
1

OK, so you're making the argument that someone's unalienable rights depend on their body's physical condition. Name any other situation in which this kind of argument is used. ​ Treating fetuses as non-people requires an ad-hoc argument that is literally not relevant to any other legal or ethical issue. You're engaging in special pleading here.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:56 PM
2

Best of luck then. I'm not being sarcastic- if you find a place where you feel like you can do something to make life better for men, then all the better for you.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:30 PM
1

Then you shouldn't have made the claim that we are "celebrating women losing their rights"- we're not. At least, I'm not. Edit: But I agree with you- I'd rather the MRM remained neutral on abortion.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:21 PM
1

If you don't buy that narrative, you aren't going to get anywhere on menslib. And you're right- this sub is small-minded and stuck in a rut, and the majority of content on this sub doesn't accomplish anything. But menslib is working in an explicitly feminst framework, which will prevent it from getting anything done. I wish there was a place that was as capable of staying on-topic as menslib but as intellectually free as mensrights. But if you want to accomplish anything for men, I think feminis…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:18 PM
1

The main problem with this sub isn't the woman-bashing (rare compared to feminst-bashing)- it's the small-mindedness. This sub has been stuck in a rut for a long time and you're not wrong that a large fraction of the content hasn't really been moving toward pointing out or solving problems. ​ The point isn't that menslib doesn't have discussions about how to uplift men- they do- it's that their solutions are always constrained by feminism and (from what I have seen of the sub) will almost always…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:14 PM
1

But your argument was conditioned on women losing rights through the abortion ban. If fetuses are people (and temporarily conflating "girls" with "women"- I don't think "women's rights" usually means adult women's rights), then celebrating an abortion ban is celebrating thousands of women from Alabama gaining their right to life. From the pro-life point of view, an abortion ban gives women a more important right than it takes away.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:10 PM
1

If you want to give rights to women, why not start with the thousands of innocent girls that are aborted every year in alabama?
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:41 PM
0

It's only fucked-up because no one else recognizes fetal rights though. I've never heard an argument for abortion that wasn't ad-hoc (there is a difference between humanity and personhood) or hypoagentic (a woman's bodily autonomy is threatened because she has to put up with the consequences of her actions). Millions of people are dying because people would rather re-define the notion of personhood than hold women responsible for something.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:40 PM
1

Not gonna stop you from subbing to menslib, but I just want to register my opinion that they are opposed to men's rights as much as any other feminist community.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:37 PM
1

I mean, chadwick didn't prove your point though. Your point was that this was a circlejerk of woman-hating; he called you a feminist (because you recomended a feminist sub) and told you to leave. That isn't proving your point at all.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:36 PM
3

I think a lot of commenters are misunderstanding the purpose of this post. The MRM is split on abortion (which is probably right- the population as a whole is split on abortion and abortion isn't relevant to men's rights)- but I can't tell you the number of pro-choice people I have met who said that they favor "equal reproductive rights" without even stopping to consider the situation for men.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:34 PM
1

Abortion bans are an absolute good for human rights. The right to life is supposed to be unalienable, and I have yet to see an argument that fetuses aren't people that didn't rely on some ad-hoc principle like a difference between personhood and humanity. By ad-hoc, I mean that this principle is never used for any legal or ethical argument that's not directly related to abortion. ​ Conversely, the idea that abortion is fundamentally tied to bodily autonomy is hypoagentic. Except in the case of r…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:30 PM
3

Why is that fair? If a woman has the right to legal maternal surrender, which she does in Canada and the US, it's fair for the man to have it too. Abortion doesn't have anything to do with it.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:22 PM
3

Don't fall into the trap of using "equity" to mean equality of outcome. This is a somewhat recent feminist invention; no one used the term that way before feminists insisted on it. It's amazing how effective this particular feminist effort has been- so many people seem to have forgotten that no one used this word this way in the past.
/r/MensRights21/05/19 09:35 PM
2

Mulcair would not have been any better though. Remember that bullshit where justin trudeau was accused of elbowing that NDP MP?
/r/MensRights21/05/19 09:32 PM
3

I think paying men less for the same job was already legal under Canadian law. The new snag introduced by this pay equity act is that paying men more for doing different work is now illegal. Canadian employment law has been anti-male for a long time.
/r/MensRights21/05/19 09:25 PM
5

If any employer gets caught doing this though, they will run afoul of Canadian employment law. You're right that this is how the labour market would normally work, but I don't think that's what is going to happen here. ​ Also, because the definition of "female job class" is up to determination by a hearings tribunal, it isn't clear that hiring fewer women will actually protect you from this law.
/r/MensRights21/05/19 09:22 PM
3

First of all, this is an excellent post. I would love to see more of this kind of post on this sub- a post that highlights actual discrimination against men and provides actual references to the text of the law to explain it. ​ For me, the most bizarre thing about this law is that it doesn't seem compatible with how the labour market actually works. In theory, employees are supposed to negotiate (individually or as a union) with their employers in order to bring wages to the equilibrium level wh…
/r/MensRights21/05/19 09:14 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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