TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

robotiger101 Archive

View 1 post and 162 comments by robotiger101 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)
0

robotiger101/r/MensRights20/01/13 10:36 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-14

I know you MRAs love to complain about how women provoke men into beating them, so allow me to ask this question: what if Depp provoked Heard's aggression? Also, was Depp's response to his supposed abuse disproportionate?
/r/MensRights17/12/20 01:31 AM
2

Acknowledging female strength does not deny male strength.
/r/MensRights23/08/19 02:21 PM
-4

If she was never in the room with them, how would she know that any physical violence occurred either way? The stomping, smashing, throwing, et cetera could have been committed by either individual, and do not necessarily mean that there was any violence between the two. There is nothing we can infer from her story which suggests that the violence was in any way desired by the person being physically assaulted too. Rather, all we can infer from Karen's story is that she heard something, interpre…
/r/MensRights28/10/15 07:40 PM
1

1) The sample size from Eugene J. Kanin's study is composed of 109 individuals from a single town, which is hardly scientific. 2) Eugene J. Kanin's study is invalid according to Francis Walker due to the fact that he clearly states in his blog post that the data compiled by Zerlina Maxwell in an effort to corroborate data to support the FBI findings is invalid due to the fact that the piece of data came from an isolated police department (which is a defining characteristic of the single police d…
/r/MensRights26/10/15 03:08 AM
2

Feminists actually DO cite the 8% statistic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdc1ZS188Ok The problem is that the notion that the numbers of false rape allegations are unprecedentedly high are unfounded. There is no evidence to suggest that it is any higher. Could it be? Perhaps. We don't know. The number of unknown false accusations could range from 8.01%, or it could be as high as 90%. We can't say either way, and it's silly to disregard statistics based on speculation which is deeply rooted in…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 10:13 PM
1

What evidence is there to suggest that this is the case?
/r/MensRights20/10/15 09:32 PM
1

I'm just asking for some academic citations to verify if what you're saying is true.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 02:48 PM
2

Can we see a citation for this?
/r/MensRights29/09/15 10:47 PM
0

If the texts are from him, then they are not accusations, they are simply threats. Rape and sexual assault perpetration is a likely motive for the threats, since it would help ensure that the victims would not come forward.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 08:50 PM
1

I was talking about factors that do not involve the involuntary involvement of another individual. Dressing a certain way in no way does this. I'm sorry this wasn't made clear.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 12:12 AM
2

There is a difference between maliciously exposing one's sex organs in an effort to harass someone and one's ability to express themselves via what they choose to decorate their body with. If you cannot stand the banal fashion choices of others, I suggest that you stay inside instead of selfishly demanding that everyone conform to your personal tastes.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 12:02 AM
1

or maybe you really do in which case fuck you for suggesting it's okay to bring loud music into the classroom to "express yourself" because we can't let the fact that it's distracting stop that. Auditory sounds are different than how one dresses. It's easy to look away from something. It's not easy to cease hearing something that the human condition enables you to hear, and it can even cause physical harm. It can also literally drown out the sound of the teacher's voice during a lesson, which is…
/r/MensRights21/08/15 10:25 PM
-26

No one is stating that. They are stating that those who are weak enough to be distracted by something as trivial as attractive women need to take ownership of that fact. People in this culture tend to express their individuality in part via the way they dress. The notion that one needs to suppress their individuality simply because someone might be offended, bothered, or distracted by it is misguided at best.
/r/MensRights21/08/15 05:23 PM
-6

Sargon's personal information was never revealed. Rather, images, which can be seen on his profile page, which was public at the time I might add, were presented in the video. Laughing Witch also says quite clearly in the video that all names have been redacted, and there are none to be found in the entirety of the video. There is also no evidence to suggest that Laughing Witch ever messaged Sargon's missus. I love how MRA's will listen and believe individuals who claim to have been harassed if …
/r/MensRights06/08/15 01:57 AM
1

Non sequiter. We have a right not to self incriminate, and with good reason. Police coercion in high profile cases is rampant, and even in other cases it occurs far to often. I never suggested that self incrimination was a necessary part of this, nor did I say that coercion was a necessary part of it. I'm saying that questioning them would be a good idea. This could include just paying them a visit at their house. Coercion is never established in my comment so stating it is is baseless. If coerc…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 10:52 PM
1

First, presumption of innocence means that not breaking the laws is the defualt assumption. I'm suggesting that questioning the accused is necessary in order to establish what happened in many cases. This does not make the positive claim that he is guilty. It makes the positive claim that reported crimes ought to be taken seriously, and that investigating crimes such as rape and sexual assault are important so that victims can seek justice for what happened to them. There are very few known ways…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 06:54 PM
1

I said that reported rapes need to be investigated unconditionally in order to ensure that the truth can be revealed, thus ensuring that justice can be served. Such investigations involve questioning the accused, among other things.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:18 PM
1

Say something constructive or don't say anything at all.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 03:55 PM
1

I am not misleading my readers, any more then any more then the author of "The racist tree" is missleading their readers. But if you are absolutely hellbent on an example, here, have one I stumbled across. What is normative is not necessarily valid. Nice try. There is also no evidence to suggest that said claim is true. Define "Unconditionally". Does this mean ignoring due process? No, it means that an investigation needs to be undertaken in order to ensure that justice can indeed be served. No …
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:46 AM
0

My story is not an acurate protrayal of anything, it is a story, it is there to illistrait a point. The point being, it is impossible to prove something occured if one person has a vested interest in lying. If it's not an accurate portrayal of anything, then why bring it up when we are discussing real world issues? You're misleading your readers. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence I'm talking about the American justice system and how individuals in law enforcement conduct t…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 03:02 AM
-1

suzy takes chad home, enthusiastic consent is given all around, and chad leaves the next morning. Reading comprehension is a good skill. There is no evidence to suggest that your story is an accurate portrayal of reality. This was made clear in my comment. Reading comprehension skills would do you good in this case. I have no idea what nation you live in, but as I live in the united states, and have been in EXACTLY THAT SITUATION, that is not remotely how that works. This is anecdotal. Please pr…
/r/MensRights14/07/15 12:50 AM
-14

These malignant perceptions of victims, particularly female victims, are what is being critiqued. An example would be what you are stating in your comment. You're making baseless assertions pertaining to the dynamics between rapists and their victims, claims that victims are lying harpies (which is baseless), trivializes actions that are non-consensual after consent was initially given, et cetera. You're merely positing that those who are accused of rape are necessarily victims of a scam, while …
/r/MensRights13/07/15 09:01 PM
1

The app is useless, mainly due to the fact that it fails to provide evidence for various relevant factors, such as whether or not the victim was drunk, whether or not the victim was coerced into giving verbal consent for the sake of acquiring a recording, whether or not consent was revoked after the recording was made, et cetera.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 08:15 PM
4

Is this commenter implying that gay men, trans men, and men of color are not men? Not in the slightest. U/euloglossa-watsonia is insinuating that there is no evidence to suggest that there is any activism, if you could call it that, on behalf of these demographics, leading them to believe that it doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 04:44 AM
0

My question did not pertain to this. It pertained to what your motive was when it came to mentioning it.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 05:02 AM
0

If your personal observations are in no way pertain to whether or not the perpetrator is guilty, then why mention it at all? What would you hope to accomplish by mentioning it? It seems rather anomalous if you ask me.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:48 AM
0

What your personal opinion, and if anything your evidence is purely anecdotal. You also failed to state why the victims must behave in a certain way in order to be taken seriously. If anything, you are anomaly hunting. When I said you were a conspiracy theorist, I meant that you were searching for anomalies in the behavior of the victims in order to claim that the entire case was based on fabrications.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 04:08 PM
0

What evidence is there to suggest that the criteria you listed is the typical reaction of a rape victim? Why do the actions of the supposed majority give merit to the notion that the individuals at hand are lying? The messages also do not exclude anger being a major part in the victim's actions. If anything, your reasoning is equitable to that of Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 03:23 AM
1

Read his previous arguments and you will clearly see a cogent argument pertaining to the defense's fallibility.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 03:12 AM
0

If the products are made to appeal predominantly to males, are made by a male dominant market, then wouldn't you think that There is also a difference between barbie dolls and video games. Barbie dolls are a specific product, while gaming is a medium through which creators can produce something whose goal is to entertain, experiment with human behavior, et cetera. Barbie dolls are a type of toy, and toys are not exclusive to one sex or gender, nor are the designed to appeal to one specific sex o…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 01:50 AM
1

That doesn't exactly mean that she is immune from criticism. It just means that her supporters will respond vehemently to criticism or an attack on her, I presume with the same level of vehemence of her critics. I presume you know how she probably feels in this case, given that you know what it is like to have anyone with a contrary opinion of your's to be responded to vitriolically.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 12:52 AM
1

I'm not saying she is immune from criticism either, and I think that some of her arguments are pretty weak. I'm just saying that the notion that gaming is a male space is something that needs to be challenged, because such a notion is exclusionary and creates an inhospitable environment for a demographic that possess the ability to enjoy it.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 07:33 PM
0

You're not providing an argument that suggests that what is occurring is necessarily vile or unworthy of being taken seriously. No form of art is necessarily immune from criticism, nor should it be exclusive to a particular gender.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:02 PM
0

I'm sorry that my tendency to be persuaded by concrete evidence as opposed to personal opinion offends you.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:51 PM
1

A blog post is not even close to evidence, especially when said blog post fails to provide any citations.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:33 PM
5

Just another example of womens natural urge/ instinct/ desire to: I'd like to see some scientific evidence of this, given that you've claimed that it's an innate tendency. 1) invade male spaces Gaming isn't a male space. If anything, you're proving that exclusionary attitudes are indeed existent within the gaming community. 2) then control those males/ Police their behavour/ turn it into a 'safe space' Criticism is not the same as policing behavior. If you cannot handle criticism, you and you al…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:19 AM
0

All of this is irrelevant. I defended it based on the fact that it is not an expression of a desire to see men placed in a disadvantaged position, which was suggested by the initial comment I responded to.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 07:49 PM
-6

1 - Do you consider yourself a feminist? You viewed my comment and stated that what I said was typical of feminists, thus leading me to believe that you were claiming that I was a feminist. It was stupid of me to do so. Whether or not I am or am not a feminist is irrelevant though. 2 - Do you agree that this bake sale has merit? Do you agree with the premise? I noticed that the motives of those holding the bake sale has been distorted, thus my reasons for commenting. Whether or not I agree or di…
/r/MensRights31/05/15 11:24 AM
-7

First of all, you're presuming that anyone who espouses anything that is contrary to your viewpoint is a feminist, which is baseless and prejudiced. Secondly, my initial point is that the differences in prices is a means of serving both a means of provoking thought as well as a means of conveying to an advantaged demographic what it's like to be disadvantaged in their worldview, which is different than desiring that sexism against men be institutionalized. This point of mine was made very clear.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 10:55 AM
-15

You're conflating a political statement with real systemic inequities. If you find yourself alienated from an ideology simply because you have to pay a little bit more for some baked goods at a single bake sale then how do you think the feminists who are holding this bake sale feel about society?
/r/MensRights31/05/15 09:19 AM
-13

Its trying to raise awareness for a cause by provoking patrons to think. In no way is reflective of a desire to see men placed in a disadvantaged state. It doesn't matter whether or not you believe in the wage gap. If someone believes that their demographic is disadvantaged, then what better way to get the advantaged demographics to listen to your argument than to have the experience of said disadvantage to a degree?
/r/MensRights31/05/15 07:27 AM
-4

The problem is that this thread and others are using this article to reinforce what their ideology dictates, which is that women are given preferential treatment in most ways, which is not in any way insinuated by the article that is provided.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 06:55 AM
1

The meme does not apply to my local area. It applies to the entirety of western society. With that said, it should be easy for you to find something to insinuate the women are advantaged on a local level, given that such advantages are found on local levels across the board. This of course presupposes that you are living in or have lived in the west.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 09:00 PM
1

The father's penis is also a "prerequisite" to both pregnancy and therefore breastfeeding. He helps ensure a pregnancy but he does not experience the same health effects, nor can he provide for a child in ways that are contingent upon their physical traits. So it makes sense to you that a single father with a baby deserves less welfare than a female single parent? This is a complete red herring. The argument pertains to the WIC and whether or not if there is a bias against single fathers. So far…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:35 PM
1

My point is that the mother's relevance is directly related to the child's welfare, given that their body is a prerequisite to both pregnancy and breastfeeding. The only real exception is that it also applies to postpartum mothers, though this exception is one that should be understandable since the physical effects of the aftermath of a pregnancy are exclusive to women.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:11 PM
1

The WIC is for pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers who earn a low income. It has nothing to do with gender discrimination. Rather, it has everything to do with the welfare of children. I did some research and could find no local organization whose goal was to give women a leg up when it came to gaining access to low income housing.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 06:06 PM
1

Let me clarify a few things. Earlier I misread a part of your comment and thought that you said that you had proven that the adult in question is innocent due to the fact that you had found a reason to not convict him. This was not the case and makes the illogical conclusion I came to dishonest, so I'm sorry.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:59 AM
1

Did you not say that you believe that the majority of rape cases are ones where the accuser is not lying? Do you not think that such a belief would not manifest in the form of a bias? Having a bias towards guilt or innocence is an integral part of both the prosecution and the defense. The defense is biased toward the notion of the defendant's innocence while the prosecution is biased in favor of the defendant's guilt. This is an intrinsic part of our justice system and it is foolish of anyone to…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:16 AM
-1

I tend to read more headlines about the death tole of a given war as opposed to the number of sexual crimes that are perpetrated at a given time.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 07:10 PM
0

Again, you are merely stating that your opinion is fact. There is no evidence to suggest that your worldview is in accordance with reality.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 05:31 PM
1

And what are there benefits? If you claim to have done your research ahead of time you would have been able to name a few explicit examples rather than simply allude to their existence. "Some local housing authority" is too nebulous a response for my taste as well.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 03:37 PM
-1

There is no evidence to suggest that feminism is to blame. If anything, feminists have been both opponents of the draft as well as supporters of the notion that women should be in combat.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 03:11 PM
-7

Did it not occur to you that the entirety of almost every military force is male? Did it not occur to you that men will of course by guilty of perpetrating these crimes since there aren't any female combatants anywhere so you are making a loaded statement? It is silly to say that men as a whole are an oppressed demographic if part of said demographic is inflicting suffering upon other parts of it, with both parties being combatants. Men are overwhelmingly the ones who are both waging AND fightin…
/r/MensRights28/05/15 08:32 AM
-8

I never said that the killing of boys is OK. To say so is a downright lie. I'm saying that men are the one's perpetrating violence, so it is silly to say that men as a whole are an oppressed demographic if part of said demographic is inflicting suffering upon other parts of it.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 04:31 AM
-1

Not focusing on one egregious act in favor of another does not mean that they are basing such a decision on the notion that one crime is more heinous than the other. If anything, it could be due to the fact that it has not been a well known fact that rape perpetration has been and still is a component of war, with various functional purposes. EDIT: When we learn about WWII, we do not hear about the people of all ages who were raped at the hands of the militaries on both sides. Such victims of th…
/r/MensRights28/05/15 04:14 AM
-12

Did it not occur to you that the entirety of the combatants that fight for ISIS are male? Did it not occur to you that men perpetrated these crimes? Did it not occur to you that both men and women are executed by ISIS? Did it not occur to you that the goal of ISIS is to impose what is demonstrably a patriarchal society? You also fail to understand the news on the grounds that you don't understand that the unorthodox is what makes the news, not the orthodox. Given that people are not normally bur…
/r/MensRights28/05/15 03:56 AM
1

My initial comment was obviously a satirical depiction of your reasoning. I established a vile connotation of the label MRA, found a source to confirm that it was the case despite the fact that it did not do enough to sufficiently do enough to do so, and then stated that those who did not meet the criteria for this criteria "did not exist", or in other words were irrelevant, which is clearly your line of reasoning in your letter. In your letter, you define a radical feminist as anyone whose ideo…
/r/MensRights27/05/15 11:04 PM
-3

I'm trying to point out to you that cherrypicking sources and mining a few quotes is not enough to justify the rendering of the majority of a demographic invisible, and instead apply the connotations of the fringe of said demographic to the majority. I provided a source that was radical, applied to MRAs, and used to to label all MRAs, regardless of whether or not it could, which is equitable to what you have done throughout this letter. Most of the articles and videos that you have applied have …
/r/MensRights25/05/15 11:53 PM
2

Radical feminists want to eliminate the burden of proof for rape cases. MRAs want to render the burden of proof when it comes to rape cases meaningless, because the accused is innocent by default. This is true for ALL MRAs becuase the article I'm going to provide supports this claim. Since I didn't provide any links to support the assertion that MRAs who do not believe in this exist, then it is perfectly reasonable to suppose that they do not exist, thus making my sweeping generalizations perfec…
/r/MensRights25/05/15 08:43 PM
0

Citations?
/r/MensRights25/05/15 07:48 PM
-4

What evidence is there to suggest that the housing development in the photo is reserved for single mothers? What evidence is there to suggest that this image is an accurate depiction of our society? If anything, this is baseless propaganda whose aim is to reinforce presuppositions that exist within this movement. If it isn't this, then it requires numerous citations.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 07:23 PM
3

Suicide is unfortunate, but it happens all the time. However, an occurrence where someone's first response to it is to make a cruel off-handed joke about it is not common, thus making it news. Also, the suicide probably made headlines at a local news agency, as opposed to one like the BBC. ALL of the passengers reacted negatively, not just the woman who was asked about the incident. ANYONE of ANY gender could have been operating the train too, making the fact that a male was driving it irrelevan…
/r/MensRights24/05/15 04:42 PM
1

And you're ignoring the rest of my arguments in an effort to feel a sense of triumph, all the while ignoring the arguments that you have failed to address.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 04:12 AM
1

I know nothing about the case, so I cannot comment on it. However, he is probably guilty, statistically speaking of course.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 03:48 AM
1

Yes, one is an act that is made upon someone else, while the other is a state of being where one is acted upon. I fail to see how that is relevant though. Choose your words differently next time. I wrote a comment that was paragraphs long, yet you only take the time to focus on this? So much for an interesting dialog. let alone any attempt to address the arguments that I've made against you.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 03:35 AM
1

I'm not going to keep going with this because your arguments are not thought provoking at all, you aren't saying anything about the case that is interesting or novel or would make someone reconsider. There is another poster above who disagrees with me, but had interesting things to say about this, and I was happy to have a discussion with him/her. Your personal opinion of me is irrelevant. But you don't seem to know what you're talking about - for example, by going on about the "burden of proof"…
/r/MensRights22/05/15 02:56 AM
1

I hope this is rhetorical. My point was relevant and explained clearly. Let me try again. The idea that a traumatised victim can act irrationally is being used again and again to pass completely illogical conclusions. If someone is acting along to cover over trauma or deny an experience, it is almost always evident in hindsight, because of their obvious discomfort. Not so in the case. I explained why that is irrelevant, because even if you take that into account you still have to deal with the f…
/r/MensRights22/05/15 01:34 AM
1

I see your point, but there is evidence to support my opinion. http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/jury-duty-at-a-rape-trial-acquit/ While it is unfair to generalize about any group, there is evidence to suggest that the one in question is a breeding ground for malignant bias.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 12:42 AM
1

No, I'm saying that the MRM as a whole has an innate tendency to view any female who claims to have been raped with extreme suspicion, and tends to gravitate towards the presumption that women who claim to be raped are lying by default instead of applying the same standard they apply to those who are accused of rape, which is that they are the victims of lying vindictive harpies.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 11:45 PM
0

I explained already to a commenter above that the oft-repeated trope that an irrational or traumatised person may act unusually after a rape, is being called on to discredit all circumstantial evidence based on behaviour. Yes, a person may "play along" after they are traumatised by a rape - however, they do so in serious discomfort, and that discomfort is evident in hindsight, especially if a violent rape has occured (a forced sexual encounter where there has been a struggle). Your point? All I …
/r/MensRights21/05/15 11:26 PM
1

I think you are denying something quite obvious because you have a compulsion to believe the girls, or distrust the boy, first. And the exact same cannot be said about you or anyone else on this subreddit? One of the girls who said she was raped, tweeted endlessly about the boy in a positive tone after the supposed attack. This explains to me that she fabricated her story. This does not prove anything. Again, what she said afterwards does not mean that she meant it sincerely, nor does it mean th…
/r/MensRights21/05/15 10:20 PM
1

I'm saying that there is no evidence that suggests an effort to fabricate stories that would result in his incarceration. Nowhere does it suggest that making up a story about being raped is on their agenda. It's never explicitly said. If this thread of comments is enough evidence to suggest that these women are guilty of lying, then so much for due process.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 08:31 PM
0

None of this suggests that the man in question did not rape them, because such vengeful acts could have been inspired by rapes that have been perpetrated against them. Also, a rapist does not necessarily have to rape every single person they come into contact with, rape his/her victims repeatedly, or rape every single person they become intimate with. Also, the fact that someone does not break up with someone after they have been raped by said person does not mean that such a rape even happened.…
/r/MensRights20/05/15 01:26 PM
2

The messages are not condemning, since they could insinuate a desire to retaliate by making him answer for crimes that have been committed. As for the Instagram messages, using them as a means of acquitting someone is nothing more than an act of anomaly hunting at best, and does not prove that the perpetrator in question is innocent.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 01:48 AM
-3

A single joke is different than sustained harassment that is consistently perpetrated by a particular demographic of people. If strangers constantly yelled things at men, such as how they are potential rapists and creeps, I presume that you would find it reasonable for one to become a little confrontational.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 04:41 PM
-1

A single joke is different than sustained harassment that is consistently perpetrated by a particular demographic of people. If strangers constantly yelled things at men, such as how they are potential rapists and creeps, I presume that you would find it reasonable for one to become a little confrontational. It's not just a joke about sex. It's a joke that establishes the destructive notion that a woman's capacity to sexually satisfy someone is what takes precedence over all else in a situation …
/r/MensRights14/05/15 04:19 PM
-2

It's interesting that u/newpaper_nerd is inclined to believe the defendant's account without evidence, and then claims that the victim in question is a lying money grubber without evidence. If what happened was true according to the alleged victim, then it's rape. Nothing transpired that constituted consent between both parties. Simultaneously, the accused has a good motive to lie about what he claims to have happened. You can say that their previous sexual history suggests that there was consen…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 04:57 PM
0

Otherwise you might have noticed that I mentioned that both marital rights and marital obligations are reciprocal several times in this thread. You stated clearly that you feel the woman is the one who should have their bodily autonomy revoked. If I was wrong, then provide me a few quotes from your previous threads that indicate that I was wrong, as well as show me where I went wrong with your arguments. Also, please address my arguments, which were not limited to the ones you personally address…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 07:27 PM
0

Indeed, responsibilities can ONLY exist in counter-point to rights. So, what rights do you have that correspond to your obligations? Rights are by definition entitlements. I do not need to earn them. If I need to earn them, then they are not rights. So, rights are exclusive from responsibilities. My position is one that is reciprocal AND beneficial to both parties. Both can refuse sex from their partner, while in your case both are obligated to submit to their partner on their partner's terms. T…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 05:38 PM
-2

"A marriage bestows rights and obligations on the married parties, and sometimes on relatives as well, being the sole mechanism for the creation of affinal ties (in-laws). These may include, depending on jurisdiction: This does not mean that a spouse can consent by default. Spouses deny sexual advances from each other all the time, as well as complain about sexual abuse from their spouses. Please provide an updated version pertaining to the legal connotations of one's bodily autonomy. I'd also w…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 12:14 PM
-1

I guess all of the men who have been raped by women were actually consenting, assuming that the women were attractive.
/r/MensRights19/04/15 12:09 PM
-2

i was married and divorced and according to you, I just raped my ex-wife a couple hours ago. requiring affirmative consent between a married couple?! I said I had a hunch. I never made an accusation. not just absolutely insane, but completely insane -and I'm wondering about you too, robotiger. I took care of my mother for the last two years of her life as she was slipping away with dementia. Sybaritic pleasures are sometimes all that is left. To take that away under the guise of inappropriatenes…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 12:00 PM
-2

You're putting words in his mouth. Also, you are ignoring the bulk of my argument. An individual can refuse sex from a spouse. u/OrangeAvacado seems to think that this is a violation of some sort of agreement made ahead of time, when there is nothing to insinuate this. Take a look at his other comments. He explicitly states that a spouse holds zero bodily autonomy at the hands of their partner.
/r/MensRights19/04/15 02:30 AM
-2

This is absolutely insane. First of all, marriage should be considered blanket consent to sex except in the most extreme circumstances, and this certainly isn't one of them. There is no way on Earth that "affirmative consent" should ever become a legal issue with married couples... EVER. He pleaded "Not Guilty," but even if he had freely admitted doing what he's charged with, no sane person should consider it to be a crime. Marriage is a union between two or more people. It is not a get out of j…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 01:25 AM
-8

I find it interesting that the MRM will be quick to illegitimize the wage gap by bringing up the fact that men and women are attracted to different job options, but simultaneously state that the issue of workplace safety is indeed an issue that oppresses men, even though men voluntarily take those jobs.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 05:38 AM
5

A false conviction is different than a false allegation. Being raped, reporting it to the police, and then proceeding to misidentify the perpetrator is not something that should be punishable. If this were the case, then the eye witnesses in a false murder conviction should be punished if it is proven that the convict was indeed innocent.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 08:36 PM
2

To quote her, "I don’t know what to do about the baby but I don’t think it’s sensible to continue with the pregnancy". In other words, an abortion is perceived to be a valid option.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 07:51 PM
1

Sooooo, She chooses to go to a party. She chooses to get drunk. She chooses to have sex with lots of men ... and your response is 'The men used you'. That was never insinuated. It merely acknowledges that it might have been a good idea if someone acknowledged that it was a good idea. The rest is reasonable advice that should be given to anyone after a sexual encounter. Regardless, it was never suggested that the young woman was not responsible. Rather, it states that it would have been nice if s…
/r/MensRights13/04/15 07:39 PM
1

How? It was a futile and fruitless war that did nothing to further the interests of mankind. How did anyone benefit?
/r/MensRights20/03/15 03:44 AM
-2

It matters when people tend to focus on the acts of one demographic with particular genitalia as opposed to another, especially when one is claiming that one group's behavior is more heinous than another.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 03:48 AM
-13

Those who waged the war were male.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 07:11 PM
1

It's the tool of someone who demands that someone meet their burden of proof in regards to their obtuse assertions.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 04:40 AM
1

Men don't generally peacock or walk around shirtless. The fact that you missed such an obvious point leads me to believe that you are cretinous in you intellectual capabilities. The point was that the use of makeup is not NECESSARILY used to captivate the opposite sex. Are you suggesting that there are women who use makeup simply to beautify themselves for the sake of their own self satisfaction? Also, looking for youthful partners is not exclusive to men. It has a strong cultural context. https…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:47 AM
1

Prove to me that you are not citation dropping via pinpoint where in this article that your point (that women are manipulative) is proven. This also does not prove that evolutionary psychology is a valid school of thought. Here is a better article: http://www.academischeboekengids.nl/do.php?a=show_visitor_artikel&id=842 You'll need Google Translate. The problem with evolutionary psychology is that it presumes that human behavior has been fixed, and that environmental factors have in no way playe…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 06:47 AM
1

Male hypoagency. You are claiming men are blameless for their feeble mindedness, evidence by the fact that they find certain traits attractive. You also fail to blame men for finding makeup use attractive, therefor incentivizing people to use it. You are also stating that women are NECESSARILY manipulative via conforming to gender norms. Saying that makeup usage in females today is exclusively to manipulate men is like saying that a man walking around without a shirt on is necessarily an act of …
/r/MensRights09/12/14 06:39 AM
1

Citation needed on your part to show evopsyche is pseudoscience. Red herring. Still, YOU need to provide a citation to back your assertions. http://www.dangerandplay.com/2014/07/08/the-social-evolutionary-psychology-of-dominance-is-a-joke/ When I speak of evolutionary psychology, I think of the products of google scholars such as yourself who fancy themselves experts on a subject after reading a wikipedia article. The drivel that you have posted is baseless, evidence by the fact that you have ju…
/r/MensRights08/12/14 07:24 AM
2

Its not misogyny, its just facts. Yet not a single citation is provided. You do realize that the vast majority of evolutionary psychology is pseudo science, correct? To top this off, the behaviors you claim women engage in seem much more sophisticated that those that you posit to be typical of men (pure belligerence). You also eliminate the fact that, in this world that you speak of that apparently exists, that it is the men that are so easily fooled by this female tactic that you speak of.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 04:44 PM
1

And here we are, full circle, girls and women feeling oppressed and seeking attention, lying for their own selfish purposes even if it destroys the lives of others, combined with a social hysteria and a call to aggressively attack the accused without a fair trial. This is a total non-sequitor. You are using a single theory (there are many) pertaining to one of the darkest periods in American history and am then projecting the rational of those responsible to it arbitrarily. You have no evidence …
/r/MensRights07/12/14 12:32 PM
1

Now, because you are dishonest and want to cover up abuse, you want to pretend that's not the case. Strawman.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 09:16 AM
1

Ah back again. You are using feminist pseudo scientific sources that cover up abuse and you are dishonest - you are a feminist. That's not a necessary part of feminism. In your source, read your sources arguments. Every time I have used your source to refute your own claim, I have been able to pinpoint where. Please do the same in this case to prove that you know what you are talking about. Its an important part of your sources argument you idiot, you asked how your source is debunked. In fact, …
/r/MensRights29/10/14 09:11 AM
1

But you are a male feminist, and as such you are driven to cover up abuse and cite other feminists that are like minded and so won't acknowledge that. Right, he uses studies that tabulate police reports Evidence? male victims are arrested as abusers 50% of the time This does not necessarily effect the rate at which they report. You need to understand that men are more likely to underreport the abuse that they perpetrate. The data that suggests this conveniently ignores the evidence garnered by p…
/r/MensRights28/10/14 11:03 AM
1

It says women initiate 70% of DV, so its more often men acting in self defense, which debunks Kimmels and your sexist claim that its a fact that women typically use DV in self defense. Not necessarily. You are interpreting evidence baseless to fit your presuppositions. This does not mean that most men act in self defense. Again, it negates that fact that female victims sustain worse injuries from their abusers. More than twice the amount of female victims sustain a physical injury than their fem…
/r/MensRights28/10/14 11:03 AM
1

No he hasn't. He has used unscientific , biased sources, like police reports and made unsupported claims that have been been been proven to be untrue by the real researchers over 13 years since he wrote that. You keep saying that, yet you have yet to discredit his sources. The CDC data I have already given you confirms women initiate 70% of DV, so contrary to Kimmels sexist, unsupported claims from 2001, its more often men acting in self defense. This is a red herring. This is a discussion about…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 11:57 AM
1

http://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf?repost Not once does this mention the results of the DV. A slap is not the same as a bruise inducing blow. It also does not compare how female victims are handled. This also does not negate the fact that men are still more Kimmel and similar - a small group of feminists try to undermine the much larger family violence research community - who are the consensus with dishonesty , pseudo …
/r/MensRights27/10/14 11:57 AM
1

Yeah, these are the sort of lies that kimmel is telling. He has provided more than adequate citations for all of his assertions, and has acknowledged your initial argument. He has simply looked deeper into the issue and has found that your assertions are incorrect. That there actually exists something as ridiculous as studies that measure slapping against stabbing. I'm sorry, but you need to do that. Equating the two is like equating being called an asshole by once by a classmate with being bull…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 06:06 AM
1

Its widely known that men report less often because of gender roles, its known that just over 50% of the time a man reports, he will be arrested and therefore be considered the abuser. Citation? If it is common knowledge then you should have no problem finding one. If anything, it is incorrect to make that assumption. Men who are assaulted by intimates are actually more likely to call the police, more likely to press charges, and less likely to drop them (Ferrante, Morgan, Indermaur, & Harding, …
/r/MensRights27/10/14 06:05 AM
1

You didn't read you paper. I have. You obviously have not. You posted a non peer reviewed paper in which he attacks gender symmetry all the way through and he says Despite the evidence that gender symmetry is largely a myth, He agrees that perpetration is equal. He does not mean that the results and damage that is caused is equal. Which is contradicted by real researchers at the CDC (Kimmel isn't even a DV researcher, he specializes in gender studies) - more often its men acting in self defense.…
/r/MensRights26/10/14 11:28 AM
1

I'd like to see some solid data to prove this. So far, there are plenty of cases where the gender of male victims have been mentioned. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2801471/british-man-60-murdered-bali-rice-paddy-throat-cut.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AG_-EXd9Es http://www.dailynews.lk/?q=police-legal/man-murdered-act-revenge www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25669206 http://wgntv.com/2014/09/21/south-side-community-honors-murdered-men-with-world-peace-day/ http://www.mirror.co.uk/n…
/r/MensRights26/10/14 09:20 AM
1

He acknowledged that there is gender symmetry in domestic violence. He also is in agreement with you in that protections for domestic violence victims should be extended toward males as well as females. If anything, you are proving yourself wrong via showing that a feminist is in agreement with you. You obviously did not read the data I provided. Either that or you are lying about it. Also, the articles that you have provided have deep ideological undertones, so complaining about a feminist rese…
/r/MensRights26/10/14 05:08 AM
1

What did the gender of the students have to do with anything? Yes, it might lead to the apprehension of the perpetrators, but if it had more to do with issues that were not related to gender why bother mentioning it? If anything, it is NOT due to male disposibility as many on this thread would like to suggest.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 04:50 AM
0

The attacks made by Boko Haram were motivated my a misogynistic world view. In the case of the male victims in Mexico, there is not evidence to suggest that it was gender motivated. The fact that they were from an all male college sufficiently explains the fact that there was no motivation based on gender.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 04:48 AM
1

You have simply proved that feminists cited a study that does not incorporate data pertaining to male victims. This does not mean that feminists are collaborating in an effort to attack men. Saying this is like saying that all environmentalists are conspiring to attack oil companies simply because they cited a study that was misleading. Not everyone has the time to check the methodology of every study they find. You also need to be aware of the fact that the harm caused by female perpetrators of…
/r/MensRights25/10/14 02:15 PM
0

I asked if you could show me where in the article it establishes that there is a cover up. The goal posts are still in the same place. You simply miscalculated where they were to begin with. I'm simply acknowledging holes in your argument. This paper simply points out an absence of information. It in no way proves that there is an active campaign to suppress data pertaining to male victims, but rather proves that there is a focus on female victims in our society and that feminists are focused on…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 11:02 AM
0

Just because feminists have a history of focusing on issues that effect women does not mean that they are actively and intentionally trying to ensure that men are placed in underprivileged positions in cases of domestic violence. The way laws are written are not necessarily a reflection of the intent of those who advocated in their favor. This does NOT mean that they aim to see the struggle of male victims to be ignored. Can you please pinpoint where the article mentions an active cover-up?
/r/MensRights13/10/14 12:36 PM
-3

Please provide some solid data. So far all you have done is repeat the same rhetoric over and over. I asked you to verify that data pertaining to male victims of domestic violence is suppressed, and so far you have provided nothing.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 12:23 PM
7

Can you please provide some solid evidence? So far your argument is the repetition of rhetoric that is baseless. Where in the article do you find feminists covering up female on male domestic violence? Also, how is this article representative of the entirely of the feminist movement?
/r/MensRights13/10/14 12:06 PM
16

Just because they do not focus on the male victims of abuse does not mean that their aim is ensure that they are ignored. It's like saying that someone supports Boko Haram simply because they are not writing dissertations about its atrocities.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 11:53 AM
1

What you are saying is the equivalent of saying that potential victims of abuse should simply stop being so abuseable. If you don't want your bigoted parents to beat you for being gay, then stop being gay. Hey, it's a behavior. You can change it, therefor the onus is on you to alter your behavior. This is what people who make arguments like these sound like. Think about it for a minute.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 11:55 PM
0

The photo provided makes it look like she is just yelling at him. That is why I mentioned it.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 11:17 PM
1

Yeah, I didn't realize the image was from a video's thumbnail.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:52 AM
-20

If it was verified that he was cheating, why would anyone feel bad for him after his girlfriend chastised him?
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:07 AM
1

I'm saying that you should not be surprised when someone calls you out for apologizing for the inexcusable actions of some assholes on the internet. I also love how you ignored the rest of my comment.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 06:06 AM
1

The situation is not at all similar. Unless you think Anita wants to get herself raped and killed. How does this make any sense??? How??? Why would Anita or the victim in the scenario I depicted what rape or death upon themselves??? The bastards that made such heinous comments on Anita's videos and the bastard in the scenario that I depicted for you both made statements that excluded them from responsibly. One can just say that was not a threat and the other can say that it is not a command. THA…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:56 AM
1

At the same time you really are apologizing for it. It's like defending someone who knows he will be held accountable for directly telling someone to kill them self (given there is a possibility it may happen), so he oh so cleverly beats around the bush by telling him the he wishes he would kill himself.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:19 AM
1

She probably has a life and doesn't have time to go through hundreds of comments just to make it possible for those who want to have a reasoned discourse about the points she made in her videos.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:09 AM
1

It still doesn't mean that they are acceptable.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:09 AM
1

It's still a shitty thing to say to someone. Don't apologize for that sort of behavior.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 02:52 AM
2

I would block the comments too if the comment section was just going to turn into a circle-jerk that would make ANY kind of reasonable discourse impossible. It's like trying to have a conversation about healthcare while being trolled by legions of Tea-Baggers.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:49 PM
1

Again, you need something a little stronger than your personal experience. Your personal experience is limited. Would you think it would be fair if I assumed that all or most MRA's were sexists who use the movement as an outlet for their sexism and based such an assertion on a few encounters with them? I doubt you would. You would say that I need a little more evidence than just those few experiences.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 02:23 AM
4

Why must we divide ourselves based on gender? There should be support groups that cater to both genders when it comes to caring for victims of rape.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 01:49 AM
1

Using fruity language doesn't make your argument any stronger. I'm just saying that you shouldn't make generalizations, because the data that you are using cannot be applied to all or most women (since you are basing it all on one person, your mother). You made the generalization, so the burden of proof is on you, and so far it seems like it doesn't hold up.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 02:22 PM
1

I guess that it would be for OK for a woman to call all men rapists based on her personal experience.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:32 AM
0

But how do you know that they're lies? How do you know that what you believe is the truth?
/r/MensRights12/02/13 07:28 PM
1

Here are some reasons why that is so in the fishing industry: http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/home/521720-female-observers-roil-some-alaskan-fishermen Also, there are women in the trucking industry. http://www.realwomenintrucking.com/ http://www.ladytruckdrivers.com/ http://www.salon.com/2011/11/08/the_female_trucker_you_never_saw_coming/
/r/MensRights12/02/13 05:47 AM
1

If you want to be taken seriously by anyone, I suggest that you stop being a total asshole. I meant away from home. That is what I mean by abroad. Sorry if my semantics were not perfect enough for you. My point was directed toward the majority of people. Last time I checked, most people did not have jobs that required them to travel for long periods of time, like fishing and trucking. What I was saying was that, in order to ensure equity between a mother and father in the same household, work mu…
/r/MensRights12/02/13 05:34 AM
-3

For someone who calls himself a skeptic, you seem to be pretty dogmatic about this whole issue.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 01:04 AM
0

I'm saying that there should be more couples out there who both have jobs and split the housework.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 05:12 PM
4

Obtuse; adjective; to be annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand. You were annoyingly insensitive when you called me an obtuse cunt. Also, you seem to be slow to understand that not everyone works abroad.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 01:14 AM
-1

If find it obtuse of you to be angry with me, given that most people don't have jobs that require them to be away from home for so long.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:33 AM
-1

It's something that we should take upon ourselves as a people if we are to fix it.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:11 AM
1

Well, show me the statistics that show that women tend to worry about minor details during housework. Correlation does not equal causation. If anything, the results study that the article was about are due to the fact that women are expected to be housewives, or that men are often not the ones who receive custody or take the most care of their offspring.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:04 AM
1

I love how you're making generalizations.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 11:41 PM
-4

If men did half the work around the house and did half the work in caring for their offspring, this wouldn't be an issue. Also, working longer hours does not mean that your work is harder than someone else's by default.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 08:51 PM
4

Longer hours do not make the work harder by default.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 08:48 PM
1

It's like a period joke. I wish everyone would stop being so sensitive.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 10:41 PM
3

I was snipped for medical purposes at the age of six. At least I was put to sleep before the procedure.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:27 AM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73hnG_JfJ_k
/r/MensRights02/02/13 10:05 PM
2

This seems more like an issue about e-begging, not feminism.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 11:26 PM
1

I'm just saying.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 11:11 PM
1

You might have experienced this, but your experience is limited and cannot be used to make such generalizations.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 10:30 PM
1

I think you are making generalizations about both genders.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 09:27 PM
1

Are you talking about benevolent sexism? One's feelings are their own responsibility. If one's feelings get in the way of the mission, it is on them, not whatever is making them feel that way. This can include things like friendships, race relations, et cetera. If I choose to help a friend and it compromises the mission, it is on me, not him.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 04:18 AM
6

"I'm not saying females can't do my job, I know a lot of them could. My opinion is that they shouldn't." Why would you want ALL women to be prohibited from seeing combat if you recognize the fact that many can do the some job you are doing?
/r/MensRights24/01/13 02:10 AM
1

Maybe you shouldn't make generalizations about people who receive alimony. While she did resort to name calling, she did make some good, valid points about it.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 03:55 PM
1

It's still a shame that happened. At least she backed off once she knew you didn't like it.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 12:00 AM
1

Men often rub their genitals on the buttocks of women, and it also goes uncared for. It goes both ways. Both are unacceptable.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 11:42 PM
1

Also, how is saying that a forum is a circlejerk mean I am against someone's rights? I was just pointing out some flaws with this subreddit.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 04:44 AM
1

I'm not a feminist, nor am I an MRA. I'm a humanist. Also, don't bring up old shit in order to discredit what I am saying. Yes, false accusations are wrong. However, I rarely see anything saying that rape is wrong, only that those who falsely accuse men of it are despicable. Some on here argue that the occurrences of false rape accusations are between eight and eighty percent of all cases, and base this on a few horribly flawed studies. For starters, the studies only encompass unfounded rape cas…
/r/MensRights21/01/13 02:43 AM
0

Based on my personal experiences with feminists, I find that the movement is different than what you guys perceive it to be. It's more about eschewing gender roles, rather than focusing on what effects them personally. They also share most of your concerns about gender issues, whether it's about domestic violence against men or gender discrimination in the workplace. You seem to focus on the most radical of them, instead of what the majority of them believe.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 11:32 PM
3

Everyone should be required to sign up for the draft, just as long as they're physically fit and can do their job.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 10:44 PM
1

From personal experience, I don't see how either sex has it easier. Both are expected to work hard and to make their own way in life. The burden of proof lies on you if you are going to assert that women have it easier.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 04:25 AM
1

It's more like misinformation than hate speech.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 04:22 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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