TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

redditbannedmeagain Archive

View 0 posts and 183 comments by redditbannedmeagain 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)
3

Call me when the life-expectancy gap stops getting narrower. Biology may well have an effect, but discounting historical lifestyle differences because women today are smoking more is retarded. Women's worse health towards the end of their lives could itself have biological causes, and so it does not follow that it disproves the lifestyle theory. Also I hope he controlled for behavioural explanations when looking at life-expectancy differences in animals...but we'll never know, since he chose to …
/r/MensRights21/10/10 04:06 PM
1

It's a fallacy to suggest that because two situations are similar they must have the same cause and solution. The two situations each have their own set of evidence that needs to be taken into account when trying to understand them.
/r/MensRights16/10/10 01:17 PM
2

1) Women make more suicide attempts than men, but are much less likely to die. /r/health thread 3) Even if that policy was dropped it would still be boys and men who are socially trained and expected to go to war. 4) Much the same as #3. There's a strong current within feminism which argues that women are oppressed by being socialized into being "lowly" housewives. Recognition of male death rates at work is just the logical counterpart to this.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 09:58 PM
-1

Your choice. People on here like to point out that much of the wage gap is due to women's choice to take less demanding jobs for lower pay, and that is valid. But then the same goes for men. There are two important differences here. Firstly, signing up is is more likely to be a choice made out of desperation than choosing lower paid work, and secondly, government has made it a target to reduce the wage gap, but it hasn't made such a commitment regarding the military service gap.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 09:47 PM
4

The life expectancy gap has been closing for decades now, with some predicting that it will be closed within two generations. Although it may be partly biological, differing jobs, behaviour and healthcare are also factors.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 09:38 PM
1

Christ, I'm usually in favor of men's rights issues, but this is absolute crap. Equating every drunken one-night stand in history to rape is absolute crap, and would shift the ratio of male:female rapists much closer to even than your opening paragraph suggests.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 01:02 PM
1

This doesn't belong in MensRights, but not for any of the reasons you stated. Differing physiology doesn't in any way justify what she did, or make it any better. This woman, if guilty, deserves to be vilified as much as any man who commits the same crime (and such men have been vilified). Lots of shit happens in the third world that doesn't make the news, but would if it happened closer to home. Crimes against women in the third world don't excuse crimes against men in the first. The reason thi…
/r/MensRights24/08/10 12:56 PM
5

Expressen broke the story, Aftonbladet later spoke to one of the women.
/r/MensRights22/08/10 04:34 PM
3

Yet, apparently, the "molestation investigation" continues. There are two women involved. One claimed rape, the other claimed molestation.
/r/MensRights22/08/10 04:16 PM
4

The arrest warrant was dropped, not the charges. Do you have any evidence that the accusation was false? The rape charge was dropped, and Sweden's chief prosecutor said this: "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."
/r/MensRights22/08/10 03:47 PM
2

Two thirds of MBA's are women: http://www.cnn.com/2007/BUSINESS/04/30/execed.women/index.html That link says women "fill only around a third of seats in classrooms teaching MBAs". Did I miss something?
/r/MensRights12/07/10 08:53 PM
4

According to the PDF linked in the article the Norwegian law does apply both ways.
/r/MensRights12/07/10 08:33 PM
5

If there's a position for which a male is qualified, there will, by any reasonable measure of probability, also be a qualified female. Can you provide some evidence for this and define what you mean by qualified? Men are more likely to enter business than women, which suggests that men will be proportionally higher represented at the top levels of ability. In a competetive field you want the best person you can get, not someone who can simply do the job without causing the company to go under. W…
/r/MensRights12/07/10 07:40 PM
1

Also: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0435.pdf
/r/MensRights22/04/10 07:38 PM
6

How is paying women the same as men is infringing on men's rights? That was already answered long before you posted. We have no problem with equal pay for equal work, but equal work is not what the 70% stat is talking about - it measures the disparity in hourly earnings between men and women across all jobs, work patterns, levels of experience, qualifications and so on. Any solution that ignores this, and attempts to force equal pay in spite of these differences, will necessarily discriminate ag…
/r/MensRights22/04/10 07:31 PM
2

Related links: Who Needs Fathers - For the Sake of the Kids (BBC iPlayer, UK only) Agony of the frozen-out fathers (The Telegraph, 27 Mar 2010)
/r/MensRights07/04/10 06:13 PM
2

Oh, sarcasm. That's what I get for giving up on you after your first sentence and hardly reading the rest of your post. That, and I'm from the UK where we have most of those things you listed: "Good" access to abortion (despite of a lack of legal reform) Ever-improving levels of sex education (with the government proposing it start at 5 years old) Maternity leave Access to flexible working hours for women Civil partnerships (the same as marriage in all but name) Strong anti-discrimination laws (…
/r/MensRights26/02/10 08:25 PM
3

If feminists to control some of the strings of our political system, point out examples where that control is revealed. My claim was actually that feminists have great political influence. You seem to have already accepted that assertion when you said: "The "decades of massive, feminist-instigated reform" is absolutely true." So I'm left somewhat confused as to what point I'm supposed to be arguing. Are you wanting me to document the disproportionate influence of feminism's radical elements, as …
/r/MensRights26/02/10 07:42 PM
3

Wikipedia? I expected something else. You make a fair proposal, but one that is difficult to take seriously. Citing a Wikipedia article on bias, which has been flagged for being biased, is not evidence and does not strengthen your argument. I linked to the wikipedia entry on Self-Selection Bias only because you seemed to reject the fact that the phenomenon exists. Making you aware of the issues self-selection bias introduces in determining causality should have given you pause for thought. It sp…
/r/MensRights26/02/10 06:57 PM
5

Dr. Papadoupolous's report included a number of recommendations on how to fix the over-sexualization of children, one of which was "a ban on Jobcentres advertising positions in lap-dancing clubs and massage parlours". This looks to me like a blatant attempt to impose her morality on the adult population in the name of protecting children. Also annoying is that her report is going to give this wretched Labour government yet another hard-on for ISP-level internet filtering. It's an authoritarian g…
/r/MensRights26/02/10 04:06 PM
6

The bills' supporters say it is important to recognise that actual violence against women is always preceded by psychological bullying, and that this too needs to be outlawed. Numerous studies have found that women are more likely to use psychological abuse in relationships. What are the odds the prosecution rate won't reflect that? Edit: The law is, at least, gender-neutral (according to the NYT).
/r/MensRights26/02/10 01:44 AM
3

And once again, if the father does choose to fight for partial/full custody in court, he is by and large granted it. You can repeat that as often as you like, but that won't remove self-selection bias as a possible explanation. Frankly, I'd expect better from someone pursuing a masters. It is absurd to think that in some way feminists have political control, or as you accuse of Flood, are seeking to subordinate men. Criticism of hegemony should not be taken as anti-male rhetoric. If women were i…
/r/MensRights26/02/10 01:08 AM
9

Telegraph article for the "Don't link to the Daily Mail" crowd
/r/MensRights23/02/10 08:12 PM
3

You are far too eager to find excuses for Real's comments, and those of the others on his blog. If I were to call for 90% reduction in the population of Blacks, would you simply dismiss me as being "angry"? Would the police accept "anger" as an excuse, or would they go right ahead and charge me with hate speech? The comments I refer to are those entered by the blog's comment system. I must say that this should have been perfectly obvious, if only because none of the comments copied+pasted from /…
/r/MensRights23/02/10 07:09 PM
2

I just saw kragshot's reply, so I feel this deserves a seperate response. "Radicalprofeminist" has called for the extermination of 90% of the male population (here), then accused MRA's of being excessively violent for suggesting that, given the choice between killing him and 90% of the male population, they'd kill him in a heartbeat (here). Read the comments on that second link to get an idea of just how virulently sexist and racist that blog is. I do hope that you only linked to it because it h…
/r/MensRights23/02/10 05:13 AM
5

I'm not sure why you think it would matter to me who founded the organization. I'm not going to agree with misandry just because it's coming out of the mouths of men. Which brings me nicely to Mr. Flood's article. The kindest thing I can say about it is that it does not offer anything new. At its core it is just yet another play in the endless game of back and forth where MRAs provide evidence that false accusations of X are prevalent and argue that men should be innocent until proven guilty, an…
/r/MensRights22/02/10 06:34 PM
8

While I did indeed add a link, you already quoted from the page that equated father's rights with male supremacy in your original reply. I think it's safe to assume you read it.
/r/MensRights22/02/10 05:01 PM
14

What an absurd response. They target their education at men only, tacitly implying that those problems are men's fault. This organization isn't about making society better, or enriching men's lives; it is about telling men they're wrong and broken, then selling them feminism as their only chance for redemption. You still haven't responded to them equating Father's Rights with Male Supremacy. Perhaps you agree?
/r/MensRights22/02/10 04:43 PM
17

I really don't see what is particularly offensive to you about this group. Is it the pro-gay or the anti-racist aspect? Wow, nice. What I find offensive is equating "Father's Rights" groups with male supremacy groups. What I find offensive is denying that men make up 25% of DV victims, and suggesting they be ignored. What I find offensive is the fact that they blame men for everything evil in the world, like racism and homophobia (why else only "educate" men?). What I find offensive is manhaters…
/r/MensRights22/02/10 04:22 PM
17

Male supremacist groups (“Father’s Rights”) have caused unspeakable harm to our country and to our children... Men should be accountable to women, and against pornography (if a woman tells you you're being sexist, she's right!) Jack C. Straton on why battered men don't matter
/r/MensRights22/02/10 04:12 PM
2

Good video. Unfortunately, including Erin Pizzey's comments about "consensual violence" at the end takes this from a video I can share to one I can't.
/r/MensRights21/02/10 02:07 PM
1

That's what I meant when I said this: Then again, as was said in the other submission's comments, you can't squeeze blood from a turnip. I assumed that you meant only rich people/companies could sue, not that only rich people/companies could be sued.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 07:08 PM
3

The lawyers get paid, but only if they win. "No win no fee".
/r/MensRights19/02/10 07:04 PM
3

Our libel laws are for rich people/companies. There are no-win-no-fee libel lawyers in the UK. He should at least take legal advice. Then again, as was said in the other submission's comments, you can't squeeze blood from a turnip.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:57 PM
10

Well he doesn't seem to be avoiding publicity. He's been on the local BBC news, in the local paper, on the BBC website and in the Telegraph.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:35 PM
0

New FB group: Sally Pepper deserves no sympathy
/r/MensRights19/02/10 05:37 PM
22

Oh we most certainly have laws against such things. In fact we have probably the most stringent libel laws in the western world, and are probably the global center for Libel Tourism (though that may soon end). He should be able to sue her arse in to bankruptcy.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 03:07 PM
5

whether or not the figures quoted are 'scientific' Sorry, just "not" The British Social Attitudes survey is carried out by a nonprofit organization associated with the LSE, and it is sponsored by government grants and philanthropists of varying political interests. It is not unscientific, you're just pulling the same bullshit as the OP: "I don't like the reporting therefore the source must be wrong" None of these stories are relevant, and just because you say they hold truth doesn't mean they do…
/r/MensRights19/02/10 07:15 AM
5

"Linking to the Daily Mail" only gives MR a credibility problem among people who get their opinions on newspaper articles from Reddit memes about the publisher. I don't think that's a valid reason to stop linking to them, especially when we have a fine example of such a person (the OP) who couldn't make it 8 sentences without embarrassing themselves with ignorance. Edit: Now to be clear, the specific articles referenced do indeed suck, but the OP would do well to criticize them rather than shoot…
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:45 AM
5

The fact that you're calling 3 of 20 articles "half" hurts yours. And the fact that the OP called the British Social Attitudes survey an "unsuported tabloid study" hurts theirs.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:18 AM
11

% Women lying to get engaged % Women want men as breadwinners. THIS IS NOT REAL NEWS! THIS IS FAKE NEWS! With real figures from real (and in the latter case, respected) surveys. Now you posted this at 4am UK time, so I'm going to go ahead and guess that you're not even from the UK, like most people who criticise the DM on Reddit. The Daily Mail is not a softer version of The Onion; it doesn't make up its stories, it just sensationalizes a lot of them. Its position as a right-wing shock-rag doesn…
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:02 AM
1

Out of interest, where is here?
/r/MensRights18/02/10 02:14 PM
4

They didn't say they believed she was potentially innocent, they said she definitely was innocent.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 02:54 AM
4

It's context. The wikipedia article I linked contains citations for the suicide figure.
/r/MensRights17/02/10 04:57 PM
10

Reposted from /r/netsec. The article is from 2008, but it's worth remembering the cost of paedo-hysteria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ore Bonus article: Why you need balls of steel to operate a Tor exit node.
/r/MensRights17/02/10 09:15 AM
1

She's clearly been through a lot. She can't even afford shoes.
/r/MensRights16/02/10 03:10 AM
1

This is an issue that primarily affects men. It is an issue about voting rights. It is therefore a mens rights issue. His logic isn't strained, yours is. it's difficult to find something that doesn't have some sort of impact on half the world population It is? Funny, because I picked my nose this morning and I'm pretty sure it didn't have an impact on half the world population. But hey, maybe it'll cause a tornado in a butterfly-effect manner? Strained logic indeed. Of course, your absurd reduct…
/r/MensRights10/02/10 03:24 AM
2

Sorry, I meant how long has she been publicly speaking against radical feminism?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 05:52 AM
4

I'm finding your post somewhat hard to interpret. Do you mean to suggest that stereotyping women is the only thing done in this subreddit? If not, please clarify. Do you think that there is another prevalent class of misogynist MRA that is not covered by the two classes I described?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 05:46 AM
2

Inserted in to the first part of the video was a black and white photograph of some women holding anti-Erin placards. How long has she been at this, exactly?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 05:20 AM
7

/r/MensRights subscribers are largely aligned in their opinions. The lack of debate can be largely explained by most topics simply not stirring much controversy between members of the user base. For example we almost all agree that false rape accusations aren't taken seriously enough by the legal system. I think the same dirth of debate over big issues is seen in every 'movement' subreddit, including /r/feminism[s]. I think it would be true to say, though, that there is less debate over fine det…
/r/MensRights07/02/10 03:12 AM
4

There was a good discussion on this recently in /r/Equality. My opinions are buried somewhere in there, and are pretty much the same as tomek77's here.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 01:36 AM
2

Notice the tone of Henshaw's statement above and that of many of the contributors to the DAW piece. There's an unmistakable air of perplexity. They seem to have such a hard time grasping why men might not share their enthusiasm for being denied food or being left off title to houses they'd built. Sarah Henshaw and co. are the product of a society that does not value men's work. In MRA parlance: She's an entitlement princess.
/r/MensRights06/02/10 05:23 PM
6

Link to Little_Kitty's question
/r/MensRights03/02/10 11:20 PM
4

The original BBC headline didn't mention it. Perhaps you should have just read the article before commenting on it, huh?
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:58 AM
7

Then you're a fucking moron. You've been on /r/MensRights for far too long to still not understand the importance of raising awareness of male DV victims. That's actually what the article is about - it highlights a campaign to improve services for Scottish men.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:47 AM
2

So, you had to Google. I see you know the research really well. The fact that I knew such research existed at all is enough to prove I have a greater knowledge of it than you. My failure to memorize the particulars of the studies is hardly relevant. The point remains that the evidence is widely available, so to deny its existence is patently absurd even for a rabid feminist such as yourself. I notice that wiki states 'citation needed' for the sentence on gender variance. There is more than one s…
/r/MensRights25/01/10 06:33 AM
2

but they are currently more hard working Blatant sexism with no evidence. Differences on most scales except aggression show men and women to be very similar, Giving women more of the male hormone testosterone can turn them into fairer and more amiable game players, link to aggression 'all in the mind' There's actually no reason to believe men are more aggressive than women rather than simply more able to follow through. Give me one scale where that is true and show me the evidence? IQ, math and …
/r/MensRights25/01/10 12:38 AM
3

From /r/worldnews
/r/MensRights24/01/10 01:15 AM
3

Your comment assumes that men are 90% of the time better at doing managerial jobs than women? Where did you get that from? Nothing like 90% of managers are male. The article talks about 90% of people who make it to the board being male, and there could well be a reason for that: men are over-represented at the top and bottom ends of many ability scales. Men are more diverse than women. And why would that be if women are continuously outperforming men in academic achievement, which gives us some …
/r/MensRights23/01/10 11:24 PM
2

This law doesn't promote equality, it promotes parity at the cost of fairness. My point is that such laws are only ever applied where it benefits women, a fact you seem to want to ignore. They should either apply across the board, or not at all. To do otherwise is to deny men the benefits of your twisted definition of equality. Furthermore, your proposed solution - making traditionally-male workplaces (mines, construction sites, oil rigs, etc.) safer to the point that men and women die at equal …
/r/MensRights23/01/10 11:22 PM
13

Don't worry. I'm sure a bill forcing companies to ensure that women make up 50% of workplace deaths will be passed soon. ... lol.
/r/MensRights23/01/10 07:56 AM
3

In 1970, black wives were already more educated than their husbands. Astonishing given that people are still claiming black boys only suffer because they're black and never because they're male. Anyone got a better source than a Y! article for this stat?
/r/MensRights23/01/10 02:18 AM
11

Landingham's public defender told the judge there was a long history of domestic abuse between his client and her late boyfriend. Women: always the victims, even when they're murdering men.
/r/MensRights22/01/10 03:56 AM
9

Ok, but something that still isn't answered - to what degree does "being ugly" mean you won't get contacted/hear back? If I understand you correctly then your question is answered in the article. The bottom line is that, even though women are more likely to rate a man as "below average", they are more likely to contact "below average" men than men are to contact "below average" women. As an aside, I seem to remember one or two other studies being carried out on how a man's possessions affect wom…
/r/MensRights21/01/10 07:32 AM
9

However, last year boys outperformed girls for the first time in more than a decade in mathematics GCSE after coursework was abolished two years ago and ministers have proposed similar plans for other subjects. Awesome.
/r/MensRights20/01/10 04:25 AM
9

Women currently represent about 60 percent of university students in Sweden, a pioneer in gender equality. lol.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 03:46 PM
20

I wrote a complaint. Anyone else who cares should, too.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 12:55 PM
1

Oh. Oops. Sorry.
/r/MensRights09/01/10 12:32 PM
3

Do you have a point, or are you just really desperate for an excuse to call circlejerk? If anything, the fact that men can suffer from breast cancer yet were excluded from this 'campaign', shows that they are not exactly on the forefront of anyone's minds.
/r/MensRights08/01/10 06:05 PM
9

It's a sad state of affairs when such a law can be described as "progressive".
/r/MensRights06/01/10 02:40 PM
6

Can you imagine the uproar there'd be if this law was adopted in an Islamic country with the genders reversed? Edit: You don't actually need to imagine
/r/MensRights06/01/10 02:36 PM
1

The comparison may not be perfect. It's not even close. This criticism of feminism is based on the fact that feminists dislike being treated as genuine, bonafide damsels in distress. If that fact does not apply to Men's Rights, then neither does the criticism. And the picture could not be clearer: Men's Rights does not dislike being treated as distressed victims. In fact, encouraging the notion that men can be victims is central to the cause. What we dislike is being falsely accused of hamming i…
/r/MensRights06/01/10 06:34 AM
4

Oh sorry, you're right. I just realized how often MRAs complain about being treated like damsels in distress! ...are you retarded?
/r/MensRights03/01/10 12:57 PM
6

Many MRA's complaints center around men not being treated like victims even when they rightly should be. This critique of the feminism movement, then, in no way applies to us. Quit trolling.
/r/MensRights03/01/10 07:01 AM
0

That's a strawman, and even if true that would be conjecture with a much stronger basis in reality than "maybe those in charge of funding know something everyone else apparently doesn't". If there was good evidence that women's diseases were harder to cure than men's, I'm sure the myriad women's health lobbyists would be shouting it from the rooftops. I'm sure you'd have a better source than "maybe". Edit: Your cited source, while interesting, is unrelated to your claim that "maybe" the funding …
/r/MensRights29/12/09 11:38 AM
0

Downmodded as worthless conjecture. The healthcare funding gap is across the board, not just with those two specific cancers. Furthermore there is no reason to suspect anybody knew this "cure" for prostate cancer was just around the corner, nevermind the politicians and so forth who decide what to spend where. The gap in healthcare spending is something that should be first investigated, then either rectified or justified. It should not ignored on the basis of baseless intuition.
/r/MensRights29/12/09 11:04 AM
2

There's a large gulf between not agreeing with everything we say, and calling us the worst misogynists on the internet.
/r/MensRights18/12/09 05:21 PM
1

Two more female pedophiles have also been jailed today.
/r/MensRights15/12/09 04:00 PM
6

I posted a couple of comments on their wall and was promptly banned. All the comments did was point out that the following areas are 80% male: Workplace deaths Military casualties The homeless The incarcerated Suicide victims Could the picture be any clearer? Feminists hate men!
/r/MensRights14/12/09 08:49 PM
6

Single people can adopt and single women can go to sperm banks. Having two supporting parents is a nicety, not a necessity. The welfare state exists to support children who are not being adequately provided for by other means.
/r/MensRights14/12/09 04:48 PM
7

That's irrelevant to the original question: What choice does this suggestion take away from women? The answer appears to be "the choice to make a man give me money to pay for my choice to have a baby". It really doesn't matter whether the money is enough to live on when you shouldn't be getting any money from him in the first place.
/r/MensRights14/12/09 03:51 PM
3

So basically we'd be taking away the choice to subsist on a man's earnings. Cry me a river.
/r/MensRights14/12/09 03:15 PM
14

What choice does this suggestion take away from women?
/r/MensRights13/12/09 11:55 PM
1

Regarding the first story, here are some good statistics from Mind UK on the mental welfare of male/female prisoners. In some statistics women are indeed over-represented, but that doesn't justify sending men who meet the same 'vulnerability' criteria to prison because of their gender.
/r/MensRights05/12/09 11:50 AM
0

There are radical feminists who would, if they had the power. That makes them comparable.
/r/MensRights04/12/09 08:52 PM
2

The S.C.U.M manifesto promotes gendercide. I'm not sure what's so hard to follow.
/r/MensRights02/12/09 06:55 PM
5

You're most probably wrong, yes. There was a post here a while back asking that very question, and most of the responses were from lefties like myself.
/r/MensRights01/12/09 09:25 PM
0

So take the other interpretation: pay more attention. Edit: Seriously, you're getting upvoted for being unable to read. lol.
/r/MensRights01/12/09 08:42 PM
5

I'll compare radical feminists to the Nazis all I fucking well like. And if you're not perpetually outraged by the current state of affairs regarding the treatment of men then you're either a feminazi or just not paying attention.
/r/MensRights01/12/09 07:41 PM
2

I think there was a more recent example I saw here, but if there was I can't find it. The general pattern has been repeated recently with attacks on a UK University Men's Group (which I'd consider the logical precursor of a "men's studies" class). Here's a pro-men's-group article on the subject.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 08:47 AM
3

"Della" was dropped after a backlash of criticism that the site was patronizing (example from an article on the site: "You'll find netbooks can do a lot more than check your e-mail.") "Women found it insulting," he said. Er, wasn't that quote just fighting a common (mis)conception about underpowered netbooks? I think women were going to the Della site to be offended, not to buy computer hardware.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 06:59 AM
8

Of course not. The feminist hate machine purges men's studies courses wherever they find them.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 02:47 AM
2

A submission can either be a link or a self (text) post, not both. Trips a lot of people up.
/r/MensRights17/11/09 03:54 AM
-2

Rachel Stevens' testicular cancer PSA seems relevant.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 08:39 PM
5

The article is quite old, but I thought it was worth submitting anyway. Here are a few more recent articles, from the BBC: Prostate cancer screening 'hope' (Feb 2008) Prostate cancer services 'vary' (March 2008) 'Jury out' on prostate screening (Apr 2008) Prostate screening to be reviewed (March 2009)
/r/MensRights11/11/09 08:36 PM
4

What you quote her as saying indicates she has no interest in equality, but instead favours some kind of revenge against men. That being the case, anything you link her to that shows the sorry state of boys' education (and so on) will only make her happy. But I like making people happy, so here's one to get the ball rolling: The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers Edit: And here is a post I made a while ago with a list of various articles on men's issues.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 04:58 PM
0

I don't know. I'd like to think it was because I upset someone, but it may well have been due to a shared IP I used being compromised. Stealth bans suck either way.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 11:24 PM
10

At the same time, this law would discourage potential false-accusers from making their accusations in the first place. It's also worth noting that the rape conviction rate is quite low - it's (supposedly) pretty hard to get a conviction when a rape did happen, never mind when one didn't. I'd say most of the damage inflicted by false rape accusations occurs before the legal verdict is declared.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 11:22 PM
11

What's the problem with circumcision? There is a wealth of literature available that answers that question. I'd suggest you start here. Circumcision is, at best, an unnecessary surgery with a small risk of death. IMO, there are more important fights to pick. There's always a more important fight to pick. Some fights are easier to win than others, however.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 10:23 PM
6

Days? Pregnancy lasts nine months and less than 2% of abortions are carried out after 6 months, usually (almost entirely?) for medical reasons. It's perfectly reasonable to be pro-choice and anti-circumcision.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 10:07 PM
3

And who is protesting against it? Men's groups and not feminists. Stop bitching about being held down with family obligations, ladies. It's your own damn fault.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 12:45 PM
10

Articles like those are merely platforms for "men's rights" organizations (Isn't that an oxymoron?) Wow, what a cunt.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:51 PM
2

Fair enough, she did give evidence against him, though. (Source)
/r/MensRights28/10/09 05:19 PM
2

The last paragraph suggests she was actually raped and simply made an incorrect ID.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 03:07 PM
5

Women don't need evidence, they just need feelings. That's one feminine value the economy doesn't need.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 04:34 PM
20

It found that 74 per cent of women would be in favour of being allowed to take a six-month break Shocking. Why would anyone say no to such a proposal?
/r/MensRights16/10/09 04:09 PM
19

...and the comment right below denies the existence of feminazis. lol.
/r/MensRights10/10/09 01:05 PM
1

Title should read 17% for fathers, sorry.
/r/MensRights10/10/09 05:44 AM
2

That's what it is, JustJonny is mistaken. See here and here.
/r/MensRights08/10/09 09:13 AM
1

Your assertion that "sex doesn't factor in to it" is incorrect (not surprising since you seemed to pull it out of nowhere). Here is a better article. See here for more.
/r/MensRights08/10/09 09:12 AM
4

As far as alimony goes: alimony should go to whoever gets shafted financially. If one of you stayed home to raise the children and wasn't able to pursue a career, then you shouldn't suddenly find yourself on the street. At the same time "I looked after the kids" is not a reason to expect a comfortable lifestyle at someone else's expense for decades to come. Alimony should be minimal, enough to keep someone on their feet while they look for a job. This is in sharp contrast to the amounts that are…
/r/MensRights07/10/09 12:16 AM
10

Of course, they didn't rule out a raise in women's age, but it still speaks volumes that they'd target men first. I'd say I was wondering why they're so hesitant to raise the female retirement age, but that would be a lie. This is a blatant case of a political party pandering to the female vote, so whoever here questions the need for a Men's Rights movement should take notice. Edit: It seems this was already submitted with a slightly different URL.
/r/MensRights06/10/09 07:19 AM
32

But in reading the posts on the front page of this subreddit, most of them seem to be more about how women suck and are liars and bitches and less about actual gender issues. Screenshot of the current front page. You claim the majority of those stories are woman bashing, so you should be able to pick at least 8 from that front page that you feel meet this criteria. Kindly post the numbers here and explain your objections to each.
/r/MensRights21/09/09 01:28 AM
3

The problem that so much of these discussions have is it seems the MensRights Reddit looks at the most extreme feminists and wants them to change. Cute strawman, but here's what we actually want: "However, we'd like acknowledgement from the greater feminist community that these "fringe" crazies are just that." So you'd prefer the opposite? Be off the level, irrational and irate? False dichotomy. The guy who posted this, and you are far more into the "gynocentric" culture than I am. I'd never be …
/r/MensRights19/09/09 01:26 PM
3

Absolutely. Bad people don't feel guilt, good people deserve a second chance. They can't undo what they've done, the best they can do is try to stop others doing the same. Speaking out candidly is one of the best ways of doing this. I can't fault this woman, or your hypothetical man, for doing so. People change. I can hate who she was then without hating who she is now.
/r/MensRights19/09/09 07:47 AM
4

Let's not look a gift horse in the mouth. She committed a crime, but she is admitting to it when she clearly feels guilty about it. That takes courage even on an anonymous forum. Better than that, she's focusing on the harm such claims can do to men, rather than the harm they do to rape victims. While the latter problem certainly exists, it's not really the main issue and I don't think we should pretend otherwise to please feminists. People like her, the Johnny Lee Clarys of the feminist movemen…
/r/MensRights19/09/09 07:36 AM
15

There has been a lot of pressure on members of this subreddit to "call out" our more...radical elements. I think it's time feminists started doing the same. There are some good, balanced comments on that thread, it's dissapointing that this one got so many more points. I submitted a rather vitriolic reply, but that blog entry currently requires comments to be approved. I encourage everyone, particularly those with more a polite writing style, to respond also.
/r/MensRights19/09/09 02:05 AM
2

Direct link to the first comment. It deserves it's own submission, frankly.
/r/MensRights19/09/09 12:30 AM
5

You'e really going to emotionally and psychologically screw your kid because of money problems you have with someone else?! I'm under the (incorrect?) impression that Defining_Manhood is talking about a situation where he has little or no access to the child. In this situation non-payment is a valid form of protest, as it isn't particularly likely to fuck up the child more than his forced absence already will have. This holds true as long as you consider financial aid to be a small fraction of a…
/r/MensRights17/09/09 03:16 AM
3

As you say "Either the child needs me or not", but take it further. It is not your choice if she does or not. The need is there whether you accept it or not. The need for a child to be supported by two incomes does not exist, whether you claim so or not. Given that single men and women can adopt children (UK) it should be pretty clear that two incomes are not a necessity for child rearing. If the mother chooses to raise the herself she should pay for it herself.
/r/MensRights17/09/09 02:50 AM
2

Given the premise of the article I'd ask why there isn't one and suggest that one should be created. It may be true that the top male players in the most competitive athletic events outperform the top female players. But look at the larger pool and you see vast overlap in the athletic performance of males and females. That being the case there should be enough interested girls to start a girls' team in any town that has enough interested boys to justify the boys' team.
/r/MensRights13/09/09 04:26 AM
2

I assume that any sports entity that exists, has to do its own work to get funding, or the players fund it themselves. That's not a good assumption at all. If entirely self-funded teams are what the linked article is talking about then I'm not sure why they warrant a mention. Any group is free to kick a ball around a public field and always will be. The fact that female-only teams got a special mention leads me to believe that the author thinks they should exist more or less whereever the gender…
/r/MensRights13/09/09 04:20 AM
12

That's backwards reasoning. Whether a girls team exists or not is irrelevant, because there's no prestige for men to play on it. Why would men want or need to join the women's team? The only reason it exists, is so that women can play at all. Why fund a team for women who aren't good enough for the mixed all-stars team, but not one for the men who aren't good enough?
/r/MensRights13/09/09 03:56 AM
13

As Pierce said, the result is that girls get more opportunities than boys. If you have 2 teams (one male, one female) each with 11 players then the opportunity to play is equal. If you then allow girls to join the boys team but not the reverse then the girls get 22 slots, 11 guaranteed, while the boys still only get 11, now with 0 guaranteed.
/r/MensRights13/09/09 03:13 AM
4

Bottom line: girls get more spots than boys because of what men supposedly have done to women in the past. I agree that's a problem, and that girls should not be allowed to play on boys' teams, but I've never seen the opposing argument made the way you describe it (with an emphasis on past inequalities). * Edit: missed the last page, my bad. I'd say a large part of the reason is simply that boys who are below average athletically are less likely to want to play on the girls' team than above-aver…
/r/MensRights13/09/09 02:55 AM
1

It is an explicitly untrue generalization I don't think you understand the utter stupidity of what you just wrote. The only way the generalization "men are stronger than women" could be false is if the principle expressed in that generalization were false, that is to say that the majority of men were not stronger than the majority of women. Unless you have some radical new data you'd like to share it is fair to say that the generalization "men are stronger than women" is very much true a one. Pe…
/r/MensRights12/09/09 11:45 PM
0

I'm just not going to sit and listen to all the borderline retarded woman bashing, because that is all the Men's Rights subreddit is. Where, exactly? Is the link to two male-bashing feminist blogs "woman bashing"? Is the story about a man denied a job in healthcare "woman bashing"? How about the story on male contraceptives? The one titled "My 20 favourite things about being a father"? The problem isn't /r/MensRights, the problem is you and your delusions of self-worth. You keep posting as if lo…
/r/MensRights12/09/09 11:00 PM
6

We know that already. The only people that don't are women themselves ...and the legal system, which consistently treats women as "mad not bad". But yes, these submissions do make us look petty unless we're discussing the verdict or the sentence, neither of which are given in the article.
/r/MensRights10/09/09 09:27 PM
1

A while back the UK government was trying to screw over men in cohab couples as well. "You get these very sad cases where people have lived together for 20 years, the relationship breaks up, the house is say, in the man's name, and the woman is suddenly in a position where she is homeless. She has no recourse to maintenance, she has no interest in the property, she can't claim a pension share, and she could be literally out on the street."
/r/MensRights05/09/09 11:34 AM
4

Correct: Looking both ways before crossing the road may prevent you getting run over. Incorrect (or hyperbole): Looking both ways before crossing the road prevents you getting run over. This is a fairly simple concept, I shouldn't have to explain it to someone intelligent enough to type in bold. Your statement is missing a rather important qualifier and is most certainly not correct without one.
/r/MensRights04/09/09 10:58 PM
1

I'm also aware of those studies, but whatever the final percentage you can't remember was, it wasn't forty.
/r/MensRights04/09/09 10:01 PM
0

Circumcision does not prevent HIV from spreading from women to men. Please use the English language more carefully if you're going to post something in bold to appear authoritative.
/r/MensRights04/09/09 09:59 PM
1

The word "ideal" doesn't mean what you think it means, and I don't believe you on the latter figure. Circumcision most certainly does not cut HIV infections by 40%. Care to cite sources, or are you just trying to make yourself feel better about your sliced up willy?
/r/MensRights04/09/09 06:46 PM
0

It's well documented fact that circumcision does reduce the chance of getting certain strains of the AIDS virus by like 10% more than what the ideal AIDS vaccine would. The ideal AIDS vaccine would stop AIDS altogether. Ignoring the fact that circumcision doesn't even come close to that, what would 10% more than a total stop be? Can circumcised people cure AIDS simply by touching the afflicted? countries like Africa ...are you a troll? You are, aren't you. God dammit.
/r/MensRights04/09/09 04:29 PM
10

I'd like to know whether this statement was based on anything other than the women's word. But women were more likely to use a weapon, although this was often to stop further violence from their partners.
/r/MensRights30/08/09 04:05 PM
18

The article mentions that women are 3 times more likely to be arrested, but makes no attempt to explain this phenomenon and instead trots out unrelated statistics in an attempt to imply that the arrests were unjust. What the article does not mention is the possibility that women are proportionally more likely to be arrested because female-instigated abuse is only reported to the police in extreme cases, or simply that a greater proportion of female-instigated abuse warrants an arrest. This artic…
/r/MensRights30/08/09 03:59 PM
4

It's still available by the direct URL, if anyone's interested: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/974zy/i_was_wrongfully_accused_of_rape_charged_and/
/r/MensRights30/08/09 02:41 PM
8

Sorry, but she's a subscriber to /r/feminisms. I expect her to be well-versed in the wage-gap debate and if she isn't then she should be reading up before making those kinds of accusations anyway. The "errors" these people make are far too common and all too predictable. I think they know exactly what they are doing when they persist in painting anyone who challenges their ideas as a misogynist.
/r/MensRights29/08/09 11:17 PM
7

Our feminist allies currently seem to be on a mission to misrepresent /r/MensRights at every opportunity. Example 1 Example 2
/r/MensRights29/08/09 07:29 PM
13

The same lady is currently arguing that false rape claims shouldn't be punished so as not to scare off real victims
/r/MensRights29/08/09 05:44 PM
2

In the UK the general wisdom has been that mixed schools enhance boys' performance in everything except language studies, I'd be interested to hear theories on why this might be different down-under. For students attending single-sex secondary schools, there was a slight tendency for males to outperform females. How sexist of them.
/r/MensRights25/08/09 03:09 AM
-1

ZFY, DAZ1/2 and PRKY. Have fun, and note that even corresponding genes are not copies. Even other male mammals live shorter lives than their female partners, even domesticated animals. Correct. They're also more likely to try to kill each other, even domesticated animals.
/r/MensRights16/08/09 03:50 PM
0

Those are just copies of genes already present on the X chromosome You have no idea what you're talking about. A few have corresponding genes on the X chromosome, but the majority do not. By the way will male dogs and male hogs "close the life expectacy gender gap by 2035" too? I have no idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights16/08/09 03:39 PM
-1

The big white elephant in the Men's Rights debate is the fact that equality doesn't even make sense between people who have fundamentally different needs. Unfortunately the people making the laws either don't understand that basic fact or are trying to win the votes of our feminist 'friends' by ignoring it. For as long as the feminist movement holds the power it does there will be a need for a counterbalance, even if it does just mean fighting reality in the opposite direction.
/r/MensRights16/08/09 02:15 PM
0

The Y chromosome actually contains 78 active genes (though that's still a relatively small number compared to X), and there's insufficient evidence to make the claim that men are biologically destined to live shorter lives. While men living shorter lives is a global pattern, so is male risk-taking, war, and men doing hard, physically exhausting work. As this changes the life-expectancy gap is closing. Men 'will close life expectancy gender gap by 2035'
/r/MensRights16/08/09 01:36 PM
7

I bet he wishes he was.
/r/MensRights14/08/09 11:27 AM
2

Good riddance to you and all those who upmodded you. If you can't tell the difference between bashing the male-hating cult that is "Women's Studies" and bashing all women then it's doubtful you have anything meaningful to contribute anyway. I will say, though, that the fact you'd even call this "women-bashing" is a good sign. It means you've gone your entire life having never witnessed real misogyny. That is progress, even if it has turned you into a petty idiot.
/r/MensRights12/08/09 10:31 PM
10

/r/women loves to complain about the male instinct to fuck a lot, and men's "entitlement" to women's bodies, but that doesn't seem to stop them consistently making arguments that only make sense in the context of their sense of entitlement to men's lives. A drunk woman should always have a man to walk her home. Women should be at least 50% of all safe professions, but unsafe professions should be left for men alone. Women shouldn't be conscripted, even if men are. Sometimes I wonder if women are…
/r/MensRights12/08/09 04:23 PM
1

it's also quite common that fathers simply abandon their families A trend that's only going to increase for as long as feministas continue to argue that involved fathers are unnecessary.
/r/MensRights06/08/09 04:13 PM
9

She is currently trying to pass a bill through parliament that would legalize discrimination in favour of women. Amongst other things, she uses statistics that compare the pay of men working full time jobs to the pay of women working part time jobs to justify this. She claimed that the recession was hitting women harder than men, when in fact men have been losing jobs at double the rate of women. She is against fathers' rights and in her own words: "there aren't enough airports in the country fo…
/r/MensRights02/08/09 12:35 PM
9

Because I don't think men should bend over and take it from feminists? I assure you that my banning was nothing to do with my not being in to femdom. Whatever floats your boat, though.
/r/MensRights02/08/09 04:29 AM
11

This bitch is a fine example of what happens when you put feminists in positions of power. She is not qualified to be in the position she holds, and men are suffering for it. Get this cunt out of office.
/r/MensRights02/08/09 03:32 AM
2

We're trying to achieve equal rights, not screw over women. He's suggesting we hold women to the same standards we hold men. That isn't screwing over women, it's giving them what they're asking for. Or perhaps you think women don't know what they want? BestServedCold is being pragmatic. The quickest way to end injustices is to make them apply to an historically exempt class. Start drafting women and watch how quickly the draft disappears. It's your pussyfooting around that doesn't belong here, s…
/r/MensRights02/08/09 12:06 AM
5

So, woman gets disproportionately low sentence for killing her child. Nothing new there.
/r/MensRights12/07/09 01:44 PM
7

Er, so if everyone forgets a crime happened it's fine for it to go unpunished? Besides, a fresh trial would get fresh attention.
/r/MensRights12/07/09 01:15 PM
3

Perhaps that's why one of the leading researchers in to artificial wombs is a woman. And just to be clear on how far they've gotten: Japanese scientists brought goat foetuses to full term using so-called “uterine tanks” after removing them mid-pregancy from their mother’s womb.
/r/MensRights09/07/09 11:52 PM
4

Zombie Valerie Solanas? I knew it!
/r/MensRights08/07/09 08:45 PM
7

Can't say that I have, but I unsubscribed from this subreddit a while ago because I felt it was making me paranoid, and it's much easier to keep things like false rape claims in perspective when they're not on my homepage. YMMV, of course. It sounds contradictory, and maybe it is, but I think false rape claims are a problem that men as a group need to worry about, not men as individuals. Think about it too much and you're liable to catch the male equivalent of rape hysteria. Be aware that the fa…
/r/MensRights05/07/09 12:53 AM
12

it was my mom who said I shouldn't have sex with any girls b/c girls that age have no idea what they're doing But girls are more mature than boys!
/r/MensRights04/07/09 11:03 PM
0

The subreddits with 100,000+ subscribers are all default subreddits, and have been for a very long time. I believe you are automatically subscribed to the top 10 subreddits when you register, making them effectively self-perpetuating.
/r/MensRights04/07/09 04:35 PM
1

It's entirely possible to be pro-feminism without having to constantly denigrate men and men's issues, but that's what quite a lot of feminists do anyway.
/r/MensRights04/07/09 02:47 PM
5

The accident wouldn't have happened had they not been needlessly slicing off bits of boys' genitals to begin with, I'd say that's a perfectly good argument against it. Most estimates say that around 200 boys die each year due to circumcision in the United States.
/r/MensRights04/07/09 02:27 PM
1

/r/Feminisms is the more popular one. And the more ridiculous one.
/r/MensRights03/07/09 07:34 PM
4

He's Sacha Baron Cohen's cousin.
/r/MensRights03/07/09 12:52 PM
4

Why do you call women bitches? Why does this women deserve to die? So you seriously think this women should be killed? Why do you keep saying "women" when he's talking about one woman?
/r/MensRights02/07/09 08:29 PM
3

See here. The concept is mostly applied to public sector workers in (parts of) the EU, though I've seen it argued for more generally.
/r/MensRights01/07/09 05:41 PM
6

Follow-up article (still 2007)
/r/MensRights01/07/09 04:30 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbian_bed_death
/r/MensRights29/06/09 07:46 AM
1

The only reason claiming men are abusive abuses men is because men in power accept those claims. That doesn't absolve person making the claim of responsibility for the consequences, it just points out that men have two enemies rather than one. We knew that already. Your point is just as asinine as the ones made noting that women often discriminate against other women. It's already a known problem and we're already working to fix it.
/r/MensRights29/06/09 07:44 AM
1

Oh no, not claiming. That's worse than raping. Fuck off back to /r/women please. That's where the "men have no issues because rape" crowd is supposed to be quarantined.
/r/MensRights28/06/09 11:11 AM
5

See also the BBC Have Your Say discussion.
/r/MensRights15/06/09 01:06 PM
6

Published: February 27, 2005 :(
/r/MensRights15/06/09 02:28 AM
1

Maybe my reading comprehension is just too good. Factual: WM: "Do you feel comfortable hanging out with the moms or would you prefer the camaraderie of dads?" WM: "Do you openly accept moms into your dads circle?" Hypothetical: WM: "Would you feel comfortable hanging out with [the] moms or would you prefer the camaraderie of dads?" WM: "Would you openly accept moms into your dads circle?" Hyperbole (you dumbfuck): Prices so low it's criminal!!!
/r/MensRights13/06/09 02:44 PM
1

WM: "Do you feel comfortable hanging out with the moms or would you prefer the camaraderie of dads?" and WM: "How receptive is your wife to you regularly spending your days with moms? Both imply that he attends. But hey, maybe not. Maybe those are imaginary women he's being asked about. It's also a pretty clearly defined case of sexism as far as I'm concerned. They effectively accused him of being a pedophile, which should give you a hint as to where they're coming from. They didn't say "but the…
/r/MensRights13/06/09 05:00 AM
-1

The article implies he now attends the group, hence it is now an "ambiguous, gender neutral parents group".
/r/MensRights13/06/09 04:20 AM
0

Were it a more ambiguous, gender neutral parents group...then, yeah, it would be an actual issue...but that wasn't the case. It is now. Get it? Jesus.
/r/MensRights13/06/09 12:05 AM
1

It is now.
/r/MensRights12/06/09 05:20 PM
3

What issues do women face in today's society? Issues that men don't face in equal or greater numbers? Nothing. You're forgetting misogynistic photos of Oprah.
/r/MensRights12/06/09 12:41 AM
1

Oh I can't even remember. It was one of those bans that hides your submissions/comments from everyone but yourself and I gave up trying to get it reversed. I've added a few more links to the parent.
/r/MensRights11/06/09 12:14 AM
3

pn6 quit for personal reasons, I'm just passing through. Hi.
/r/MensRights10/06/09 09:49 PM
3

The /r/MensRights moderators, who currently consist of just kanuk876 (pn6 deleted his account).
/r/MensRights10/06/09 09:47 PM
11

Here's a few that come to mind. I'm slightly UK-biased, but hopefully this will still be helpful. Online texts: Wikipedia (obviously) Is There Anything Good About men? Warren Farrell on the 'Glass Cellar' How Women Were Taught to Hate Men Experiments in Living: The Fatherless Family News Articles/Op-eds: Equal Rights for Men Health: Sorting out the puzzle of male suicide Men's health shock Education: Male teachers 'help boys behave' Men 'out-performed at university' Family: Fathers 'powerless ag…
/r/MensRights10/06/09 05:01 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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