TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

s0nicfreak Archive

View 4 posts and 877 comments by s0nicfreak on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Shit, you got me, I'm just a delicate snowflake of a fag that can't handle a little mocking. Most people get out of the trolling phase once they become actual men, so I expected something else in this subreddit. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights02/11/18 05:22 PM
3

Okay, well I experienced not being accepted 30 years ago and saw things change after Ellen came out 21 years ago. The fact that a proclaimed lesbian went from having her weekly tv show canceled to having a highly successful daily show doesn't say to you that something has changed? Was Ian McAllen openly gay 50 years ago? I don't even know... but he was in theater back then where it was more acceptable to be an openly gay man. The question is why are you seeing so many 50+ gay men but no women. A…
/r/MensRights02/11/18 04:57 PM
7

The 50 year olds grew up with it not being acceptable to admit that you're homosexual. The world was a lot different when the 20 year olds were born. You don't see as many 50 year old lesbians because more of them are hiding it. Ellen is 60. If they were just horny, claiming to be a lesbian makes no sense because it reduces one's sexual options. Now if you wanted to say bi/pan sexuals don't exist, you'd still be full of shit but at least there would be some logic there.
/r/MensRights02/11/18 03:52 PM
9

Those actually are pictures of a younger her.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 06:08 AM
2

Bless your heart
/r/MensRights21/08/18 09:55 PM
0

Oh, you're just an idiot. Okay.
/r/MensRights21/08/18 09:18 PM
2

I'll share my link if you share yours https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feature/crossing-the-divide-do-men-really-have-it-easier-these-transgender-guys-found-the-truth-was-more-complex/
/r/MensRights21/08/18 09:10 PM
4

You must be looking at some different pictures than I am. The only possibly identifying feature would be the mastectomy scars, which are obviously only visible when their shirts are off, and you'd only recognize those if you knew what they were.
/r/MensRights21/08/18 09:02 PM
2

"Transition" isn't a surgery. Transition means to start living as your identified gender.
/r/MensRights21/08/18 08:42 PM
24

I didn't get angry/aggressive out of that. I saw something totally relatable, because testosterone has changed my attention span and ability to focus. I probably have undiagnosed ADHD (my sibling had it diagnosed and there were several signs throughout my life that I had it too), and testosterone can increase symptoms. I can no longer listen to a long backstory when I need an answer to a question, especially when driving. I just can't focus on it. I also can't explain all this while I'm driving,…
/r/MensRights21/08/18 08:39 PM
2

If women are so mentally weak that they can be turned into murderers, we can't trust them with adult responsibilities. They are going to need a male chaperone at all times to ensure no man abuses them.
/r/MensRights19/08/18 04:22 PM
9

It’s not harassment if it’s welcomed. How are you supposed to know if it's welcomed until after you do it and see if the person reacts negatively or not?
/r/MensRights08/07/18 10:17 PM
10

If I squint and blur my eyes I can see why you would think that. So I mean this with no malice and no sarcasm. You may need glasses.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:02 PM
0

marital rape wasn't a punishable offense until 1993 How is this oppressing women? Wives raping husbands wouldn't have been punished either.
/r/MensRights26/04/18 07:55 PM
4

Well, you can actually rent parts of most public parks. When my family use to have family reunions we would rent out a section of a park and have a barbecue there. But if that's not what's going on though then yeah.
/r/MensRights26/04/18 07:39 PM
1

I'm confused Doesn't the merry-go-round comment imply that sex with the same woman is boring? So doesn't the "I'm a woman not a merry-go-round" sign mean she wants them to have sex with her repeatedly and enjoy it?
/r/MensRights30/03/18 09:18 PM
5

"Common complaint" is not quite the same as "medical fact" though...
/r/MGTOW16/01/18 08:12 AM
3

I mean hell, even if she DID waste her fertile years she could still have kids! There's fertility treatment, there's adoption. Or at least, there would be if she weren't being a fucking psycho. Honestly it seems like she's just pissed that she doesn't get to have this guy's baby in particular (and if I were this guy, I would really be fearing for my future child's safety because of this).
/r/MensRights13/10/17 05:17 PM
2

That's ridiculous though. I get plenty of accidental bruising from consensual activities. Yes, even occasional boob bruising.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 04:58 PM
1

That's not what I asked. I'm talking about putting it up for adoption by someone other than the parents. Currently, mothers can do that against the father's wishes, but fathers can't do that against the mother's wishes.
/r/MensRights12/07/17 04:01 PM
1

If this is about bodily autonomy, then it would be perfectly fine if, after it is born (i.e. after it is no longer in the woman's body), the man put the baby up for adoption against the woman's wishes, right?
/r/MensRights09/07/17 01:39 AM
1

Its like saying I biologically have 2 arms but in my mind I'm a 3 arms person. How is that constructive to anything? Well, there are people that have 1 arm but in their mind they are a 2 armed person (Phantom Limb Syndrome). Admitting that is constructive because we can attempt to treat the pain, itchyness etc. that the person feels in the limb. Unfortunately the treatments we have so far for Phantom Limb Syndrome aren't very effective, and people suffer. Fortunately, we have figured out ways to…
/r/MensRights09/07/17 12:54 AM
1

I'm married, so I don't need a pill I'm not sure how that follows. There's plenty of married people that don't want to have children (or more children). I'm married but I still need some form of birth control.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 12:41 AM
3

It's normal human behavior to take non-consensual pictures and then circulate them on the internet? I don't think so.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 12:33 AM
1

For me, self-esteem takes a back seat to helping cramps.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 12:29 AM
-1

Good luck finding a teacher that isn't.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 03:27 PM
5

we were confronted with is that a hetero woman raping a man who has had too much to drink is more rare because dicks don't get hard as easily when men are completely housed. So as long as your idea of rape stops at penis-in-vagina sex, you're fine.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 03:24 PM
2

I was homeless ~13 years ago and mcdonalds had free wifi then, at least in major cities. Starbucks also had free wifi. Nowadays just about every fast food place, coffee shop, and major store (walmart, target) has it.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 12:11 AM
1

According to our natural instincts, it is the same. People (asside from a few crazies) don't kill and eat each other if there are legal ways to get food. People (asside from a few crazies) don't rape each other if there are legal ways to get sex. They won't stop eating if the legal ways to get food go away, and they won't stop having sex if the legal ways to have sex go away. Making sex illegal for teens just guarantees that teens will break the law. It doesn't reduce teen pregnancy, and it does…
/r/MensRights21/12/16 11:04 PM
1

... What? That's like saying if there was a strong ingrained want to eat, people would kill and eat each other all the time.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 09:01 PM
1

there is no strong ingrained need or want for it But there IS a strong ingrained want for sex.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 10:10 PM
1

arguably less people do it because its illegal Yeah, very arguably Just the same teenage pregs are less likely to happen with higher age of consent laws But we have seen that this is not the case.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 10:10 PM
3

The sperm and eggs don't know the laws. If it's illegal and your daughter gets pregnant anyway you're still going to be financially responsible - her teenage boyfriend isn't going to be able to get a job, and if if he's on the sex offender list he's going to have a hell of a time getting a job as an adult too, so enjoy being financially responsible for the full 18 years and just pray you don't become a great-grandparent before then. If a 15 year old knows her parents believe she shouldn't have t…
/r/MensRights16/12/16 02:39 AM
2

Not if the person was 16, it didn't. http://www.ageofconsent.us/state-laws/mississippi-age-of-consent-laws/
/r/MensRights28/10/16 06:41 PM
3

Normal. Being attracted to sexually mature people is just called normal.
/r/MensRights28/10/16 03:15 PM
4

This is why I never understand the "dress codes are misogynistic" bs that is spewed nowadays... I saw way more boys getting in trouble for dress code violations than girls when I was in school. It was usually because of sleeveless shirts (most often, basketball jerseys) and shorts that were too short. One day a girl wore a basketball jersey and the boys pointed it out; but the principal said it was fine because she had a basketball game after school!
/r/MensRights21/10/16 09:31 PM
1

You missunderstood.
/r/MensRights06/10/16 07:36 AM
12

A woman drinks and then decides to drive. The woman is committing a crime. A woman drinks and then decides to have sex. The man she has sex with is committing a crime. This is illogical.
/r/MensRights06/10/16 07:22 AM
1

Uh, but in most of those stories it was originally an evil mother, and it was changed to stepmother...
/r/TheRedPill05/09/16 06:00 PM
1

they are sexual organs What? I don't know how you're having sex but no, they're not. The primary purpose of womens' nipples are to feed their young. I get that (some) women like them touched during sex but that's like saying that if a woman likes her hair pulled during sex, her hair is a sexual organ.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 03:43 AM
8

Nevertheless, it's possible that girls are given a smaller allowance because moms buy them stuff. Then the parents compensate by giving boys a bit more money. As a mom of both genders I will say this is exactly what happens. My daughter wants to go to stores with me more frequently than the boys. She asks for things more often (both in stores and things she finds on the internet that she wants to buy), and she generally asks for more expensive items. The boys are more careful about their choices…
/r/MensRights06/06/16 09:07 PM
2

Maybe he's getting really crappy drugs.
/r/MensRights10/05/16 06:39 PM
6

What is most concerning about the case of Henry Peisch is that only one child currently lives with the Mother, yet Henry is ordered to pay his ex-wife support for four children plus $581 per week in spousal support.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 03:10 AM
1

But then YOU go to jail for talking a woman into doing something illegal.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 05:15 PM
10

So a lot of people... came to a store. This seems like a time to make a rule that you can't loiter in the store without buying things, not to fire your most attention-grabbing employee!
/r/TheRedPill28/04/16 03:45 PM
1

Well, any parent who is unwilling to take the child where they need to go 50% of the time certainly shouldn't have 50% custody; if that was the reason, I would be praising the judge. But I don't think that looking at it as "Demanding 50/50 implies the time spent belongs to the parent, not the child" is the way to go.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 03:45 AM
8

And a mother who has none of that rarely has to fight for the right to see her own children.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 05:31 AM
1

What? Mom drives the kid to activities 50% of the time, Dad drives the kid to activities the other 50%. It's not the kid spending 50% of their life with Dad and 50% with Mom. You're a lot more likely to let your kid sign up for an activity on Saturday if Saturday isn't the only day you get to spend with them. If distance is a factor, somebody moves, or the parent that lives further from the school and activities spends more time driving.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 05:27 AM
0

As a biologist, I need to point out that you're a kickboxing kangaroo.
/r/TheRedPill06/04/15 09:19 PM
0

Yep. Stress doesn't make much difference, but other things that are going on that would CAUSE stress (famine, bombs letting off toxic fumes or radiation, etc. etc.) does. I'm guessing this is where the misconception is rooted.
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 10:03 PM
-1

Okay. I'm sure it was stress and not bits of whatever the bomb was made of.
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 09:29 PM
12

No, don't ever give her money outside of tracked child support. If it's ever questioned, she could (likely will) deny you gave it to her. Don't ever deny her access without court approval. You risk losing custody completely for that. Give the kid enough food for himself for the weekend. If she is really homeless, she'll have to rent a motel room for the weekend or something. (How does she afford that? Her problem, not his.) Document everything (that she is telling you she's homeless, that you ar…
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 08:14 PM
-1

The idea that stress affects fetuses is 99.99% bullshit. Think of how much more stressful our lives would have been in the past- caveman times, times of war, or heck how stressful life is today in a 3rd world country - but fetuses were just fine.
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 08:09 PM
15

Send the kid to her house with enough food to feed himself, and only himself, for the weekend. If you can, get something the kid likes but the ex doesn't.
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 08:00 PM
0

forcing insurers to cover paternity testing saves no money for the healthcare system It could save/make more money for insurance companies though. They just have to say that if they aren't told the real father, they will not cover the kid. Once they are told the real father, they can say he has to put the kid on his insurance too. If this is a different insurance company, then the first insurance company pays less; if it's the same insurance company, they are now getting paid by more people for …
/r/TheRedPill02/04/15 07:57 PM
3

I'm just going to assume you are not really this stupid and are trolling.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:50 PM
6

No, you are confused. I understand that driving drunk is a crime. If that is the case, though, then why is having sex a crime on the other person's end? I understand that it is. But it doesn't make any sense. A woman is asked to drive while drunk. She says yes. The woman is committing a crime. A woman is asked to have sex while drunk. She says yes. The person asking is committing a crime. I know those are the facts, but it isn't logical.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:46 PM
7

She chose to commit a crime. And if she can choose that while drunk, then she can choose to have sex while drunk.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:36 PM
6

Yes, that's the point. Agreeing to one thing while drunk is a criminal offence, but agreeing to another is invalid because you were incapacitated. Something doesn't add up here. Should a woman be in jail for a DUI if a man asked her to drive?
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:27 PM
4

If you get drunk and decide to drive, you chose to potentially harm others. If you get drunk (as a woman) and decide to have sex, you couldn't really make such a choice while drunk and therefore were raped.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:09 PM
1

I will be there past age 7 Well it's a good thing you are watching out for them then! I don't know if I'll die tomorrow, but you'll be there, so they'll be okay.
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 06:01 AM
6

this is how kids die. they get kidnapped, they get attacked by dogs, they get hit by cars. The majority of kidnapping cases are custody related. Your kid won't get attacked by dogs or hit by cars if you teach them to function in a world that has dogs and cars. However they WILL be attacked by dogs and hit by cars as soon as they go out into the world at age 18 if you do not teach them (and allow them to practice) how to function in a world that has dogs and cars. Wtf are the parents thinking? Th…
/r/TheRedPill24/03/15 07:05 PM
5

Well they are also both ugly and have rectangle faces.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 06:39 PM
3

If he wasn't paying child support, she was able to raise their son without his financial assistance; obviously she didn't need it. There's no "raising a child" loan that she got then and is now paying back. Child support is suppose to be about the child's needs. Not about the mother wanting to get back at the father for not putting in years ago.
/r/TheRedPill11/03/15 05:44 PM
1

I suppose if I was recieving a few hundred dollars, rather than having it taken away as I am, I'd have a similar attitude as you about child support. So, while I don't agree with your view, I do understand why you have it. Have a great life.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 02:21 PM
1

Except he also has to pay those 10 years of back-child support. Depending on the state, they'd just take some of that in addition to the regular child support - requiring him to make double payments every month. And, even if he is only paying $80, if he makes $1050 and his living expenses are $1000 it still doesn't work out. And most states don't care how much they leave the payer btw. Sometimes it isn't even based on how much the guy makes. Child support laws and budgeting are hard, I know.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 02:09 PM
0

I wonder how big she'd be without the drugs
/r/MensRights16/09/14 02:02 PM
1

They WILL foreclose on his house if he can not pay for it due to that few hundred dollars being taken away every month. You said yourself the guy is poor. If his living expenses are $1000, and he makes $1050, and $400 is taken away every month, it's going to be damn hard to pay his living expenses.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 01:04 PM
1

I actually do know how child support works. Do you? The kid is over halfway through being a kid and he hasn't paid a dime. In my book that means the child support is not actually needed. But the guy will have to pay all that back child support eventually. 10 years of child support is more than a few hundred dollars.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 01:19 AM
1

I agree. But the problem comes when nearly every situation where the guy is older, he ends up in jail, labeled a pedophile, life ruined; vs when the female is older and nothing happens, or she even gets a reward for it (such as child support, as in this case). In this case the woman seems predatory. She waited years to tell the guy he had a kid, until he was old enough to earn money. This is exactly the sort of thing that statutory rape laws were designed to protect against - and there is a reas…
/r/MensRights07/09/14 03:54 AM
1

Thus if he wishes parental rights he must assume parental responsibilities. I agree! So give him parental rights first and then ensure he lives up to his parental responsibilities, just as would be done to a woman. Unfortunately that's not how it works, though - child support is not tied to visitation. Fathers are often given little/no visitation and then still put on the hook for child support. And when they ARE given visitation, the fact that they are paying for the kid to live during that vis…
/r/MensRights07/09/14 03:39 AM
1

In THIS case, yes, if she had been the same age it wouldn't be statutory rape. But she wasn't the same age and it was rape. So, we are talking hypothetically. Hypothetically, if a 14 yo female rapes a 14yo male, yes that is still bad.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 03:34 AM
1

If she were the same age and raped him it would be just as wrong. He may not "feel" raped but the law says he was. If she hadn't raped him we would be having a different conversation.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 02:38 AM
1

Okay. But "rape victim" and "sexual assault (spermjacking) victim" should not be synonymous with "parent".
/r/MensRights07/09/14 02:36 AM
5

So, wait, just because you have a penis you are responsible for whatever any crazy person does with your sperm without your consent? How about we instead hold responsible the person who could, at any point, stop the child from coming into existence, or dissolve all responsibility once it is born? A woman can take birth control, the morning after pill, she can get an abortion, she can give a baby/child up for adoption. Since she is the one with all that power, shouldn't she be the one expected to…
/r/MensRights05/09/14 01:20 PM
5

He didn't make the choice to get into it in the first place! He was raped into it. Maybe statuary rape isn't as "traumatic" as "regular rape" (or whatever you're conspiring it to) but finding out that you had a kid you didn't know about for years, resulting from that rape, are now on the hook for child support, and can never get those years with your kid back is pretty darn traumatic.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 01:02 PM
3

But in many states, you need a contract for the woman to be put on things like your health insurance, car insurance, etc. - she can't just pay for her own if she is going to stay home and raise that family. And you need a contract to say that you can each make decisions for the other should you get in some kind of accident. And to ensure that if she dies you would get your kids (in a lot of states, custody would default to the mother's parents rather than an unmarried father. And if those parent…
/r/TheRedPill31/08/14 04:56 PM
5

Are you required to cover your nipples while in public? Would you be arrested and labeled a rapist & pedophile for breastfeeding in public?
/r/MensRights25/08/14 05:41 PM
3

Other than the chick who pushed her husband out of the way of the car but stayed in the way herself - you could say that most of them were only protecting themselves and maybe their kids by saving their provider. And heck the one where the guy shaved his head and cancer was noticed, his wife didn't even do anything! Jumping on a man being beat up is not risking her life, because the assumption is that the perpetrators won't hit a woman (otherwise, she would try to fight them, not just lay on top…
/r/TheRedPill21/08/14 08:41 PM
2

Throw a woman in front of a bus with her own kid and someone else's kid and see which one she tries to save. I'll bet you anything a woman would grab her own kid with both hands while a man would try to grab both. Some women like all babies/children (and some hate all but their own) but they only love their own. How we act i society is not always in accordance with our natural instincts; Women making googoo eyes and men ignoring children are learned behaviors, not natural instincts.
/r/TheRedPill21/08/14 04:28 PM
5

I had no problem with them at all. But I'm sure they will be changed in Mirror's Edge 2, to supposedly make them more woman-friendly, but with the actual result of making the game less fun for EVERYONE. If I DO have a problem with the controls of a game, I don't say "Oh it's because I'm a woman and this game isn't made for me!" I also don't say "They'd better make it easier for me!!" I either stick with it, and learn - because even though I have a vagina, I still have the ability to learn, and d…
/r/MensRights21/08/14 03:52 PM
36

I'm a woman and have been playing games for nearly 30 years. I'm one of they very people they are supposedly advocating for, right? But Feminists are ruining gaming for me too.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 03:49 PM
14

At some point you have heal and move on. Well just as soon as that foreskin heals they will move on. Oh wait, it can never heal...
/r/MensRights10/06/14 02:57 PM
0

Yeah. Cuz getting mugged is exactly the same as leaving the ghetto. http://purplerays.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/970008_222383841249786_1192145603_n-1.jpg
/r/MensRights21/03/14 09:34 PM
0

I grew up in a ghetto. People that WANT to leave, do.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 03:43 AM
-1

I'm really this stupid that I don't believe anyone is permanently pinned to the place they were born. And I have no sympathy for people that are unwilling to take some risk, and/or experience some temporary unpleasantness to escape a shitty life. If you're already living somewhere that you can't walk outside at night and you have no heat, how is anywhere else going to be more dangerous?
/r/MensRights13/03/14 03:59 AM
1

It doesn't say they STAY married, just that they're married when they have the kid.
/r/TheRedPill13/03/14 03:55 AM
-2

Oh sorry, didn't realize you were in a third world country. Well then, just stay in the miserable town of your birth, believing the bullshit that you'll "end up dead or worse" if you try to leave. I'm sure you made the right choice in choosing to pay for the internet instead of a bus ticket.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 03:48 AM
4

Well she will only be hot enough to make $50K a year for a very few years...
/r/TheRedPill13/03/14 03:28 AM
-1

Once you turn 18, just leave. Walk, hitchhike, whatever. Go somewhere else and acquire funds once you get there. No reason to stay there if you don't have a job keeping you ether right? You can find odd jobs etc. once you get to a place, and get some money to go somewhere else, until you find a place that has a regular job you're suited for. I did that and, starting out with no money, managed to eventually travel all around the US and parts of Asia. I eventually realized that my unhappiness came…
/r/MensRights13/03/14 03:05 AM
1

I read it. There's a difference between "I think the roof is too steep" and "Do you think the roof is to steep?" At least, with my husband there is. The first would be advising, the second would be giving him a question to decide if it's worth answering. If he's busy, trying to get something done - such as fixing the roof - he may not think answering her questions is a priority. And please, stop trying to talk harshly to me. You aren't my husband. You don't decide when I stop talking.
/r/RedPillWomen13/03/14 02:11 AM
1

But by not giving him all the information you know, you aren't fairly allowing him to decide what to do.
/r/RedPillWomen12/03/14 10:17 PM
1

What if someone steals my sex toys?
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:33 PM
4

Because asides from kids with mental disabilities, "don't rape" will naturally come from those other things, when the child is developmentally ready to figure it out. Look around this subreddit for some guys that were DIRECTLY taught not to rape, and see how it fucked them up.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:29 PM
0

... Mr. Belvedere is still aired?
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:26 PM
4

If my son wants to rape my daughter, I'm pretty sure he'll just do it in the house.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:24 PM
1

There's no taxi service in your area?
/r/MensRights09/03/14 07:57 PM
1

I am aware that NYC is more expensive. Imo $2500 per kid is still lavish.
/r/TheRedPill09/03/14 01:39 AM
2

Why does someone always have to pick up the sister-in-law? She's 20, she should be responsible for her own transportation.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 07:15 PM
1

We are not talking about a family of 3 - child support is suppose to PARTIALLY pay for THE KIDS. Mom is suppose to get a job and pay for herself as well as help with the kids. So it is 5000 to partially cover for 2 kids. I live near Chicago.
/r/TheRedPill08/03/14 05:39 PM
6

It makes them emotionally unfit. They may take care of all the child's physical needs, but the subconscious attitude of a parent that doesn't want you fucks a kid up for life.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 03:43 PM
2

I have an upper-middle-class life with a 6 person family for about $4000 a month. $5000 for 2 kids is definitely lavish, especially considering that since it is child support and not alimony, it's suppose to (we all know it's not) be purely for the kids. I cant imagine spending $5000 per 2 people if I tried!
/r/TheRedPill08/03/14 03:35 PM
1

But my point is, you're treating children wrong if that's how you treat them.
/r/TheRedPill06/03/14 11:24 PM
1

But you don't delegate with children, particularly young children. You might value their opinions, you might conscript them to do some chores, and you might even ask their input. But ultimately, you're not discussing a decision on equal footing, like the president and his adviser or me and my man. I disagree with that. It's just that usually children aren't more of an expert on anything than adults (or, adults assume they aren't). My kids are actually more of an expert than I am on a lot of comp…
/r/TheRedPill06/03/14 04:10 PM
2

Oh believe me, I did not use that bank anymore after my mom cleaned out he account (well, the only time I ever used it again was when I turned 18, my mother had started using the account but my name was still on it - she's stupid, fortunately - so I withdrew exactly the amount she'd taken from me and left). But I was 13, it wasn't exactly like I was giving lots of people bank recommendations. The bank in question was bought-out, merged, whatever years ago; I don't know what their name is now and…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 11:00 PM
80

but you can't actually treat most of them like children. There's a lot more subtlety that goes into being dominant without being quite so obvious that you're dominant. It's like parenting a teenager, really. They still want a lot of the same things, you still need to do a lot of the same things, but if you treat them like a child it's just going to lead to resentment and rebellion.
/r/TheRedPill05/03/14 07:36 PM
5

My opinion on this is highly biased by my own experiences, but: This girl is still in high school. I don't know if this is still the case, but when I was in highschool, there were crazy laws about how much students could work. Basically, I could legally only earn $50 a week - nowhere near enough to support yourself. The college fund thing... it was money given as a gift to her, right? So legally, she should have access to it. That is how gifts usually work. When I was a kid, I had a college fund…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 05:41 PM
1

The problem is, this isn't exactly something mom can wait around on at this point. She's due 6 weeks after she wrote the letter. Most mental health professionals have a 2 - 3 month waiting list. That baby is going to need care and healthy human interaction from the moment it is born.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 07:18 PM
14

We can only HOPE this boy grows up not knowing this woman.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 03:45 PM
6

No there is not time. Due dates are just a "somewhere around there" date and it's common for it to be up to a month off. Also there's the possibility of it being premature. And I'm assuming this letter wasn't just written yesterday. So at any moment she could give birth to this baby that she doesn't want. For about 6 weeks afterwards she is going to be thinking completely irrationally (well, even more than her usual I mean). Maybe she'll change her mind and raise the boy with a subconscious atti…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 03:45 PM
11

due to poverty This is not due to poverty. Reusable "sanitary pads" and even rags are completely healthy if used correctly (changed regularly, cleaned and dried appropriately). Affording the disposable pads is not essential. It's due to women's ridiculousness. Women putting "what will the neighbors think" above all else, even their own health, to the point of costing their lives. And it's made even more ridiculous because it's "What will the neighbors think... about this thing that ALL OF THE FE…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 02:51 PM
4

The key is to teach a kid from the start to have a large comfort zone, not be afraid of failure, and the benefits of doing things like mowing the lawn or washing the dishes (which while young, they WANT to do).
/r/MensRights03/03/14 08:27 PM
3

The bargain, as he understood it, was that they have sex. She is trying to add other things in that he never agreed to.
/r/TheRedPill03/03/14 04:44 AM
7

Electricity costs money, cable or Netflix or etc. costs money. And usually when someone comes over to watch tv they grab a drink and/or snack too. Generally the way to pay someone back for this, is they occasionally come to your house and do the same. If that isn't happening, it's all take and no give. I'm pretty sure what is wanted is for a woman to not be surprised and bitchy when she is treated as the kind of person she acts like?
/r/TheRedPill02/03/14 10:44 PM
1

... No, not like that at all. Of course, the Lego company has to go by what is actually purchased. They are a business. It's just that I personally - as a parent, not as a business - wonder if what is purchased mostly lines up with what kids desire, or if it's mostly influenced by what the actual customers decide kids should want. It's interesting that the gender segregation of toys got strong at the same time that kids stopped being able to earn their own money and walk to a toy store without a…
/r/MensRights02/03/14 09:46 PM
1

At the point where it begins to have sexual intent.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 09:32 PM
5

Or if youre talking about scratching your butt. That really is more what it is like for a 6 year old. The key word here is intent. I completely agree with your second paragraph.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 07:17 AM
7

Six year olds will touch themselves, but it isn't with sexual intent. Yes many parents worry about it - but that's because they are projecting adult ideas onto a child. The rocking and anxiety only happened at school. The messy handwriting - not lack of ability to write - wouldn't have been noticed unless they were comparing it to the handwriting of his peers. All six year olds write messy - how messy is too messy? You wouldn't know unless you're looking at the handwriting of MANY six year olds …
/r/MensRights02/03/14 06:50 AM
5

The thing about toys, though, is that the majority of the time, kids aren't making the purchasing decisions. Sure, they can express desires, but ultimately mom and dad, grandma and grandpa etc. make the choice. So even if little Suzie wants Lego for christmas, Grandma decides that since Suzie is a girl, she needs a doll instead. Or maybe now, one of the pink Lego sets. Since Suzie can't just buy what she wants on her own, she is limited to playing with what is given to her. My youngest son loves…
/r/MensRights02/03/14 06:34 AM
14

it is disgusting that a child was treated this way. I don't understand why it got to the point that he was suspended - why the parents didn't pull him out of that situation long before! Let him get his social interaction from the after school programs where he thrives, and do his learning in a situation where males can actually learn! He has probably developed a life-long hatred (or at least anxiety) of learning now, and the best to hope for is that he manages to hide his anxiety well enough to …
/r/MensRights02/03/14 06:05 AM
3

A woman who does not work out and does not eat much -> a skinny woman -> pretty. Maybe a teenage woman. Get over 25 or have kids and that does not apply any more.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 06:57 PM
1

It may also show the teacher's ability to teach girls better than boys.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 02:05 AM
1

Oh god 40? I was thinking more like 60. Maybe it's just because I can't imagine a life with no libido, but it's hard for me to see the motivation to keep putting dinner on the table if I'm not going to get any sex. My husband eventually gets to retire and do the fun things he didn't have time for, but I'll have to make dinner until we both die...
/r/TheRedPill21/02/14 02:52 PM
1

Oops, he forgot for a minute that women can never be held responsible for any action, because that would be victim blaming. Why even bother putting "the preponderance" in there, we all know that when women rape, it's because a man used his strength to telepathically force the woman to do so.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 02:22 PM
2

I maintain a household, and if I didn't have kids, I'd STILL have to maintain the household, because I still need somewhere to live. The amount the bills go up due to a kid being here is negligible. It would be near nothing if the kid was at school all day on weekdays (and if they're at their other parent's house on the weekends, it's even less). Food and clothing costs go up, but it's easy to look at how much goes to each kid. I might choose to get a bigger place because of the kids, but that's…
/r/MensRights21/02/14 02:09 PM
8

And handing the mom the money only works if the mom doesn't have spite and hate and will spend the money on the child rather than herself...
/r/MensRights21/02/14 04:48 AM
9

"Emotional support" isn't a paying job, though. MAYBE - if you ignore the fact that you can't offer to do something for free and then charge for it later - you can argue that a wife acted as a nanny/chauffeur/etc. to the kids so that the husband didn't have to pay for one while he worked or built up a business - in that case she is entitled to half (because Mom should have been paying the other half) of what he would have paid a nanny/chauffeur/etc. for that time, minus her room and board. If we…
/r/MensRights20/02/14 09:39 PM
44

If that's what the Dad wants, then he should pay for it. If it's what the Mom wants, she should pay for it. If they agree, they should each pay half. There is absolutely no reason why the Dad's money has to be in the Mom's hands. Mom wants it, Dad doesn't, and Mom can't afford it? Oh fucking well. Mom deals with it just like all the Moms that didn't divorce a rich guy.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 08:54 PM
0

So what happens when Grandpa's dick doesn't work anymore and Grandma is wearing diapers? I am kind of afraid of what life is going to be like when we may live 20 - 40 years after having sex is possible :\
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 05:16 PM
1

Totally agree with this, I have seen it without the rose-colored glasses of childhood. My mom's parents lived across the country, my dad's parents died when I was young. So I only have a few vague memories of my own grandparents. But, I have seen it with my in-laws. My grandparents-in-law and parents-in-law are still like this. I think the key to my MIL being like this, is that she quit school as a teen to have and take care of my husband. Grandma didn't just take the kid nor help shuffle him to…
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 03:51 PM
5

If peeing standing up were easy, women would do it
/r/MensRights18/02/14 02:58 AM
1

Guess Jane couldn't buy an age-appropriate dress either
/r/MensRights18/02/14 02:58 AM
-4

OR she'll grow up to think eating healthy and being fit is important.
/r/TheRedPill13/02/14 10:10 PM
8

They can use their fingers, which they can even do while their dick is in the woman's vagina. At least my husband can... all that video gaming did help him out in life after all I guess?
/r/TheRedPill13/02/14 03:06 PM
1

Perhaps you should be working instead of posting on reddit.
/r/TheRedPill13/02/14 02:47 PM
1

I honestly don't care
/r/TheRedPill13/02/14 02:32 PM
3

In barbarian times, women would have always been pregnant or breastfeeding and wouldn't have noticed if they had horrible periods. In a lot of other cultures, women do take time off from everything while they're on their periods. Often, the women just stop going to school once they start getting them, because they get so behind missing a week a month. There's actually charities that go into such cultures and attempt to educate women so that they dont have to do this, in an effort to get them equ…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 02:21 PM
1

I spend my days raising my kids.
/r/TheRedPill13/02/14 02:13 PM
5

I wouldn't get too worried just yet, you may be reading in to this too much. I haven't seen the movie, but, it may be that he just lost his girlfriend and she doesn't want him to be sad. Also, the other guy is off the table, because he just got a girlfriend. I wanted to marry Goofy's son when I was 8. As I approach 30, I can say I am 99.9999% sure that ain't gonna happen.
/r/TheRedPill12/02/14 10:39 PM
3

Like some other kids their age. My point was, what she said was not true.
/r/TheRedPill12/02/14 09:55 PM
6

Yes. I would and I do.
/r/TheRedPill12/02/14 09:53 PM
5

Not the point I know, but I really don't think going to work sick should be seen as a positive. You're making everyone else at work sick. You're probably sending your kids (who are now carrying the illness) to school, where they'll make other people sick. If you have a job where you deal with customers, you're making them sick. Some people have immunocompromised family, babies too young to be vaccinated against dangerous-for-babies illnesses, etc. Work from home or take some time off. People wit…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 09:48 PM
-5

If they have homework, that means they go to school most of the day, right? That means teachers are helping your raise them. You aren't doing it yourself.
/r/TheRedPill12/02/14 09:30 PM
4

In addition I would think that fathers that manage to get their kids, are more afraid of losing their kids if they abuse or neglect them.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 08:31 PM
-1

The difference is, the MRM is logical. If a man was seriously fighting for dogs' right to drive cars, you'd think he had lesser mental capabilities than yourself. You wouldn't treat him badly because of it, you'd just think his ability to own a car and a dog should be limited, or at least supervised, for the safety of everyone else. Right?
/r/MensRights10/02/14 01:07 AM
0

You're assuming what sexual advances are, though.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 02:18 PM
2

Nope. There were also Native American, Asian, and even white slaves in America. The black slaves were just the cheapest and the easiest to rationalize ("look at his skin, he's not a real person") and so became the most common.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:26 PM
-2

Oh, please - other people knew the hand job was going on. But what are they going to do, yell out "HEY, TWO CONSENTING ADULTS ARE DOING A SEXUAL ACT OVER HERE! AVERT YOUR EYES CHILDREN! LAND THE PLANE!!" Children also don't always know what is happening to them is wrong If something is not bad/wrong to them, then it by definition is not molestation. When you stood up in class, it was because you were bothered - if a kid did that on a plane because a man was touching them, the man would be lynche…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:08 PM
17

Actually he cheated on his girlfriend with her adopted South Korean daughter who was 19. By what possible stretch of the imagination does that make him a pedophile? This very much belongs in MRs - men can't even fuck a 19 year old without being labeled a pedophile and attacked? That woman is now his wife and 40 years old and he's still being called a pedo and being attacked?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:00 PM
6

It isn't inconceivable that a predator could take advantage of these things over a long flight There's lots of other people around, a predator would have nowhere to run. Anyone stupid enough to do something in that situation, would have been arrested long ago. And they are completely crazy. If they think there are molesters on the plane, why would they put their child on the plane, even if there are a few seats in between them? It would be like putting your puppy in a box with a lion but putting…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 03:17 PM
2

I'd rather die quickly of a heart attack than slowly die of malnutrition (with all the associated depression, illnesses etc.) because I can't afford half decent food...
/r/MensRights01/02/14 05:32 AM
1

He'll if I know why. I don't understand girls even though I am one of them...
/r/MensRights15/07/13 04:49 AM
1

If you go under the assumption that these situations happen due to guys being stupid, and the percentage was actually reasonable, then yes it would be better that way. In reality, covering your pecker doesn't always work (it certainly won't stop a woman determined to screw you over) and the percentages are never reasonable. A man getting a set amount despite the number of children, would be resistant to having more children because child support is NOT the only way he pays for his children. In p…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 10:36 PM
2

No, but I suspect that if the amount of kids mattered he'd be asked to pay 120% of his income instead.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 10:14 PM
6

The other worry is it would be flat out the end of any sort of good relations between my wife's friend and her. This woman is toxic, you sure as hell should cut off the head and throw it in a fire pit
/r/MensRights08/07/13 09:53 PM
1

So married couple X goes into family court with two children. Mr X has 51 shares of "Family X Corporation of Y City in Z State" of which he is CEO, and Mrs X has 49 shares as well. What's the family court going to do? They'd simply do what they already do: force Mr. X to pay Mrs. X a percentage of his "potential worth" as child support. How he gets that money is irrelevant to the family court; if it's impossible for him to get it, he'll just go to jail. Mrs. X still holds 49 shares of his corpor…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 09:43 PM
4

No man would be in this position if no man got married. Not true, if women can't take what a man worked for via divorce, many of them take it via "child support". And with the cases of women actually stealing sperm and forcing a man into paying child support, you can't even say use protection, only get blowjobs, don't have sex - there is really little men can do to protect themselves from this, women like this will find some way. We need to end this whole idea of women taking what men have worke…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:00 PM
1

No. I mean it is easier to get girls to follow rules such as sit down and shut up all day.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:34 PM
1

I never said the flaws in education can be blamed on females alone. I said it is easier to get girls to follow rules that females make, and that was all I meant. Please don't jump to any other conclusions about what may be in my mind.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:07 AM
2

The whole sit down and shut up all day thing. It makes it easier for women teachers to controll the classroom, but it goes against the nature of children, makes them unable to focus, and doesn't really teach them anything (only allows some students to memorize things, not learn them).
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:34 PM
3

Something like ensure there is no one in the women's restroom and allow the man in there? Why is this not obvious?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:36 PM
1

But the staff should be equipped with an alternative for males.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:28 AM
1

Uh, no. Women make up the rules in schools. Schools are NOT education. In fact, schools in their current incarnation are detrimental to education.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:20 AM
2

I'm not understanding your point. My point is this is not a circumcision any more than giving a kid stitches for the heck of it is giving them stitches. This is mutilation, hands down. So parental consent does not matter (except to arrest the parents as well if they gave consent).
/r/MensRights04/07/13 01:48 AM
4

Uh, the way I'm seeing it has everything to do with it. This woman is not a professional and from what I see, had no excuse to be doing this (she was not a rabbi, it was not a life-threatening situation where a doctor was unavailable). Just because it is similar to something professionals do on a regular basis, does not make it okay, and does not make it the same as the similar legal thing. Let's think about something that isn't illegal... how about, giving stitches. It is perfectly fine for a d…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:23 AM
6

If they were infants or toddlers it would have said babies instead of young boys. Either way; if I gave someone consent to genitally mutilate my infant daughter, we'd both be in jail.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:11 AM
1

Because in general it is easier to get girls to follow the rules that women made up.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:57 PM
5

Why should parental consent matter? This woman genitally mutilated two young boys. No one can even argue that they are babies and won't remember.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:54 PM
3

A snake that gets caught by many traps is a dumbass. What is stupid about the analogy? Edit: Oh, wait, you can't see beyond it as a penis-going-in-vagina analogy, to what it really is; an achieving/capturing something vs being achieved/caught analogy?
/r/TheRedPill03/07/13 07:30 PM
7

"Powerful" does not necessarily have to mean old and rich. I would assume that lot of the people in juvenile detention facilities are there for asserting their power over others in the form of violent crimes. But I have quite an issue with this part encouraging male teens to understand such sex ... that its long term effects can be seriously harmful IMO the long term effects are not harmful (to either gender) until others convince them that it is. It is the encouraging that is harmful.
/r/TheRedPill03/07/13 06:58 PM
2

Nope. Breasts never shrink back to how they were before giving birth, human or other. With non-humans it's a little more difficult to tell because of the surrounding fur/hair, but the females have slightly more pronounced breasts, and a female that has previously breastfed will have what looks kind of like deflated balloons. For an animal that is safe to look that closely at, try dogs; look at the breasts of a female dog that is old enough to go into heat, compare it to the breasts of a male dog…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 09:48 PM
3

Human breasts shrink when they aren't breastfeeding too. We use bras to make them continue to look swollen.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 08:09 PM
1

It's not surprising that you don't know many people. Now excuse me as I put you on ignore, I have poor self control and so will probably continue this pointless, stupid "argument" as you call it (I'm not good at the difference between arguments and discussions) if I don't, but I should be getting to work instead.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:36 PM
1

Yes, I find putting down men offensive. I know it is surprising that some people can have empathy for people different from themselves. I also know it is surprising that you don't represent all of men, just as I don't represent all of women. But it's true, and since it is true I will not write off all men as assholes and idiots, and I will not give up on men's rights.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:32 PM
1

"I've run out of arguments, better pull out the old "he's afraid/envious of vaginas" trick!" I have a vagina. I don't fear them.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:25 PM
1

he's not you, some retard that thinks he can write games What? I am not arguing for myself here. I am not straight, white, nor male, and I am quite content with the job I have and have no desire to go into the game industry.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:23 PM
2

I did nothing of the sort. I simply described what happens. If you see that as cruel and barbaric, that is not my fault.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:14 PM
1

Yes I am totally ignoring you by replying to them.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:13 PM
2

This might be valid if straight white males had not experienced repression, or the word she probably meant to use here, oppression (they have). This is also quite hypocritical as most of the women in the game industry come in with no prior game experience. By your logic we should leave game making to the people that have experienced game making. But writing a FICTIONAL game does not require experience on the subject in real life. Do you think Stephen King actually experienced being a teenage gir…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:12 PM
2

If I strapped you down and ripped out a tumor with little or no anesthetic and without your consent, that would be a violent assault. Heck if I ripped a mole off your face, which is technically a tumor, it would be assault.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:03 PM
3

So, if you can't take a bath, it is safer to expose your sensitive, absorbent body parts to the dirt? Interesting. Seems to me it would be a better idea to keep those sensitive parts shielded.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:59 PM
1

Yes, but he isn't interested in actually learning about this, he's only interested in making it look like my opinion is wrong.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:54 PM
2

Uh, saying that some people are better means you are saying that the other people are worse. No one is worse or better at ANYTHING in the game industry due to their gender or sexual orientation.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:53 PM
1

While I agree with you that females raping males is much more accepted in society, I have seen several movies where a male teacher has a relationship with a female student. One that comes to mind because I watched it recently is "Daydream Nation". But it is always High School, the female student is always in the very late teens and the aggressor, I have never seen it with Jr. High. In the movie "Hounddog" Dakota Fanning portrays a 12 year old girl that is raped. There was a lot of controversy an…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:47 PM
3

The trouble is that people without a history of repression can only offer tokenism when it comes to discussing something other than themselves -- such as the gay characters in Mass Effect. "Token characters are not the result of queer experiences," she adds. "Games by queer people, people of color, and by women - because in 2012 women are still a marginalized group within the game industry," are difficult to find in triple-A games, she says. This is saying that straight white men are not able to…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:31 PM
4

If a game company has 1 position to fill, 10 men apply and 1 woman applies, the woman, even if she has just writing experience but no game development experience, has a better chance because they have very few women and have to fill their affirmative action quota. If the woman then puts down men as many women in the game industry are doing, makes games shitty by assuming what THEY want is what all females want, etc. then the end result will be less good games and less qualified people in the gam…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:18 PM
2

Read the article and the comments.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:02 PM
2

By few I mean in comparison to men. Your niece has a good chance at getting a job in the industry. The 10 males in her class that want the same, not so much.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 04:56 PM
3

As a mens rights supporter and gamer, I find this highly offensive. Few women want jobs in the game industry. Those that do, often seem to be men haters. (Posts speaking against these women are removed from reddit, so I won't name names.) This is somehow skewed by those women into repression and oppression of women when in truth it is the women oppressing the men! edit to be clear: My problem is with saying that someone is worth less as a game designer due to their gender or sexual orientation, …
/r/MensRights08/10/12 04:45 PM
1

Some people like do be educated just for the sake of being educated, even if they don't use that education to make money. Personally, I like to learn many things that I know I will never use to make money, and there are some things I learned that I didn't expect to make me money that I now use to make money while staying at home with my kids... Also, you never know what education your children will decide to use, so you should be "overeducated" in many things....
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:41 PM
1

Neither does a SAH mom need to do much work if a day care provider can watch thirty kids. Daycare providers do not watch 30 kids - there is usually at most 1 adult per 10 kids in a daycare. For infants the number is smaller. And "watch" in that case usually involves little more than ensuring the kid is still alive; not at all the same as what a parent that actually PARENTS does. Houses, cooking for many customers and taking care of many kids at daycare I know of some live-in maids that only clea…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:13 PM
2

You mean during the time that one teacher or day care provider takes care of dozens of kids at the same time while the kids interact with each other? Yes? Did I not make that clear enough? If someone else is taking care of/educating your kid, you are not doing it at that time. And I don't count sitting silently doing the same worksheet to be interacting with each other. All parents still have the responsibility of providing a good environment, cleaning, clothing, feeding, putting their kids to s…
/r/MensRights23/09/12 06:33 PM
-4

Because if people didn't have children the human race would die out? Because you need to be educated to raise educated children?
/r/MensRights23/09/12 05:41 PM
1

It's easier than doing both working and parenting 100%, but very few people actually do that.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 05:38 PM
4

All parents have to take care of their kids Parents that work are not taking care of their kids while they work. Someone else is; either a daycare provider/babysitter or teacher. And those are seen as jobs and work, correct? Stay at home parents that actually parent (not all do) work 24/7. Most working parents are not parenting ALL time they aren't at their job. So they work at their job part of the time, and at parenting part of the time, but at nothing 24/7.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 05:36 PM
1

Really I don't think we should be asking "How can we stop this endemic" before we ask "WHY is this an endemic and how can we stop THAT?" And usually what the answer to that question boils down to is lack of education. These people aren't mass circumcising in the first place, so they would have to be educated that circumcision may reduce chance of HIV. Instead of educating them about that, use the resources that would be put into that to instead educate about which bodily fluids transmit HIV and …
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:28 PM
5

and it won't hurt as badly as it would later in life. That's a myth stemming from the fact that until about 30 years ago doctors thought newborns couldn't feel pain. Actually it is usually MORE painful to an infant because they can't give them any or as much pain killer, and then the infant has to have a diaper rubbing against it as it heals. Have him watch an infant circumcision video. Then ask him if he can put his theoretical child through that.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:47 AM
2

Well, who is going to be looking at this child's penis? Mostly just you two, right? And you won't think the kid is a freak no matter what, right? When the child gets to the point that he is showing girls his penis, well first of all the number of uncircumcised boys in the US is going up, so odds are a lot of his potential mates will be used to uncircumcised penises just as much as circumcised. And, is he really going to want to be showing it to sluts that have seen a lot of penises to compare it…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:42 AM
4

Because we need to stop this bullshit and just tell people to not have sex with people that have HIV, regardless of if you are circumcised or not - and if you absolutely must, use a condom, regardless of if you are circumcised or not.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:35 AM
3

You just need to pray more
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:33 AM
10

This is about making children look like women. Pedophiles are not attracted to women. They are attracted to children that look like children. If anything this is fap material for midgetphiles.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:31 AM
1

Gasp. I haven't ever seen someone be a douche on the internet before. You're the most original thing since goatse.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 04:25 PM
2

Why? Can I not do it in the diaper isle either? Which isles are okay to photograph my children in?
/r/MensRights18/08/12 08:01 PM
9

Okay, you may not want to sit next to an unaccompanied "kid" (keep in mind that kid in this situation actually means anyone under 18), but this is a slippery slope toward not letting men sit next to their own children without a female chaperone, and toward having separate flights for men entirely, as well as being a symptom of a much bigger problem in society.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 07:58 PM
-1

According to the law, any sexual interaction with a woman that has been drinking is sexual assault/rape, because while under the influence a woman supposedly can not consent.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 04:00 PM
1

Women live longer?
/r/MensRights18/08/12 03:54 AM
-2

But by society's logic, shouldn't the women in that situation (aside from man-on-man sexual assault) be the ones committing the sexual assault, then? Because I thought that if the person was drinking, that makes it sexual assault/rape. Unless that only counts for women that have been drinking.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 03:52 AM
2

Yes, that would be preferable, but we all know it isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:50 PM
10

With this person I think the goal should not be giving her a severe sentence, but protecting the rest of the world from her.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:47 PM
19

Uh no she should get life, she is a danger to society, she had people thinking she was kind and gentle and then she cut off someone's genitals... in 20 years she will have everyone thinking she is reformed but I very much doubt that.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:31 PM
9

Actually, it is true that children hardly ever lie about sexual assault - because it's not something a child just thinks up. Think back to when you learned the facts of life - it was something like "You mean a boy puts his junk in a woman's junk?!?! EEEEWWWW!" It's not something you would just imagine up. Before that if you heard your parents getting it on you assumed they were jumping on the bed or fighting. If a child knows about the existence of sexual assault in detail, it's usually because …
/r/MensRights08/08/12 01:53 PM
1

It depends on a lot of things actually. Before I was married, I made under the minimum to have to file taxes. But after marriage, COMBINED income is what must be under the minimum. So my options are file jointly and pay taxes on the little I earn, or do the "married filing separately" thing... and still pay taxes on the little I earn. Either way, I end up paying more taxes, but it is either that or run the risk that should something happen to me, my family will contest the will and my assets won…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 06:30 PM
6

Shouldn't the government have some sort standard value (somewhat like there is a value for minimum wage), enough for covering a child's BASIC needs and use that value when settling child support cases? I agree with that 100% But the government DOES tell couples how they can raise their kids, though usually to a much lesser extent. You are required to provide your child with food, water, and shelter... and it must be up to a CPS worker's personal standards if you get investigated (which means it …
/r/MensRights31/07/12 06:19 PM
-2

I honestly think many people do not know #6
/r/MensRights17/07/12 08:27 PM
1

if I thought thought You do that with your brain. Get it? As I said, we can outsmart our natural instincts now and have sex without making babies.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 01:21 AM
1

That's all stuff from your brain. Your penis gets hard because of your natural instinct to reproduce. Sex feels good so that you will do it, so that you will reproduce.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 12:06 AM
1

If that is the case then I would think that someone involved in the process would think to make "No I am a real cop" the safeword...
/r/MensRights08/07/12 03:25 PM
1

Only because they were stopped before the attempt was successful. It's not so much the ripping off of clothes that is wrong (although good strippers tend to wear rather expensive clothes so actual ripping would be wrong for other reasons), it was the fact that they put their hands onto another person's body without consent and with the intent of ripping their clothes off.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 03:16 PM
1

Even when we don't want babies with our brains, our natural instincts tell us to make babies. We can outsmart those natural instincts now with birth control, but the drive to have sex still comes from the same place.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 03:13 PM
27

Hahaha, it's okay, they thought they were assaulting strippers not cops, it was all just a misunderstanding! Am I alone in thinking ripping off a stripper's clothes is not okay, no matter the gender of the stripper?
/r/MensRights06/07/12 08:51 PM
5

Why? Because a man can impregnate pretty much infinite women, but a woman can only be impregnated by 1 man, maybe 2 in rare cases, about every 9 months, and that's only within a relatively short span of years. Eggs are a limited resource, but more sperm can always be made. It is social conditioning based on biological aspects.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 08:49 PM
-2

Actually, it's perfectly fine to go without a period for 9 - 10 months - or any length of time, really. On birth control you aren't even getting a real period. It's just withdrawal bleeding, which is just there to make people feel better mentally. Lots of women with regular periods take birth control with no placebo week/no week off to STOP their periods indefinitely.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 02:25 AM
8

I agree with your sentiment, but how do we know those are all boys? They look about 10 - 13, and with poor kids in 1911, you would not be able to differentiate the girls (as they would not have boobs and such).
/r/MensRights12/06/12 09:10 PM
1

Which is why I said it's like the bs think of the children excuse. It's an utterly bullshit excuse that, if you speak up against, you are seen as a horrible person, and probably one of "them." You could easily take in a camera, and cams aren't done by a random American with his friends at a not-early showing anymore.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:39 PM
3

Piracy. It's like the bs "think of the children" excuse.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:21 PM
1

So you're saying that just the mere fact that someone IS a stranger is dangerous? You do know that whole "stranger danger" stuff is bullshit, and that if you are going to get beat or raped, it is more likely that the beater/raper will know you, right?
/r/MensRights27/02/12 01:22 PM
2

Yes, but I'm asking, what exactly am I being cautious of? Because without there being anything to be cautious of, it goes from being cautious to being ridiculous.
/r/MensRights25/02/12 06:33 AM
0

I'm not going to downvote you for disagreeing with me - that would be against reddiquette.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 10:03 PM
0

I never associated any look with any criminal behavior. I bought up a look that is very different than Mr Noodle's look in order to try to help you see that you do indeed see what people look like.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 07:44 PM
0

Of course he is harmless. He is on the tv screen. He can not reach out and molest my kids. Even if they met him in person I do not at all think he would do any harm to them. That doesn't change how he looks. If you had to choose him out of a lineup consisting of him and a bunch of Britney Spears look-alikes, I'm sure you could pick him out, because you have looked at him and saw which qualities of him differentiate him from others. Let's not pretend otherwise.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 06:37 PM
0

Are you honestly telling me you do not think Mr. Noodle looks creepy? Okay, maybe not in a rapist kind of way, but in a too retarded to know that playing doctor with kids is not okay kind of way?
/r/MensRights23/02/12 03:51 PM
2

New dates tend to be in a public area (restaurant, etc.) what is the "stranger" going to really do there? Sure I shouldn't going home with this stranger, or even getting into his/her car - but if I can't even trust the person enough to not drug my drink or club me over the head and drag me out of a restaurant, I really shouldn't be going on a date with that person.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 03:47 PM
1

To be fair, over there the police don't have much to do other than investigate shit like that...
/r/MensRights23/02/12 03:42 PM
2

For all of 9 months her partner never attended a prenatal visit with her, never felt a fetus move, etc. and then expects birth and postnatal care just takes a few hours? Seems pretty fishy. And where does it say that the partner was a man?
/r/MensRights12/01/12 05:49 AM
1

Although I do not approve nor agree with bojanglellevel's way of phrasing things, nor his choice to equate homosexuality with something bad, it has to be admired that men showing/admitting sexual attraction to women is one of the things that... this movement - shal I say radical feminists? - is/are trying to stamp out. It must be admitted that there is a double standard - a woman or even a man being sexually attracted to a man is fine, a woman being attracted to a woman will make women say "look…
/r/MensRights09/01/12 07:28 AM
1

I have 4 kids, but only got peed on once - after that I learned the signs to watch out for, and that you should always hold a baby over a toilet after taking off their diaper and encourage them to go in there instead.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 06:03 AM
1

So you're downvoting and upvoting me multiple times? Because some of my posts in this conversation have more than one downvote and upvote.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 07:21 PM
1

There's a difference between opinion and incorrect facts. It amuses me that you think you know who is downvoting you.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 11:00 PM
0

So you say to everyone you meet "Nice to meet you... hey, do you put poop in the toilet or in the trash?" You likely have met many people that do it and never mentioned it to you. To put poop in the trash just seems disgusting.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 10:58 PM
1

I'm aware that many people are ignorant of this, or too lazy to do it, but I am by no means the only one that does it. Why don't you go ask around?
/r/MensRights04/01/12 10:46 PM
1

You are very wrong.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 10:29 PM
1

I have 4 kids, so yes I have seen a pooped in diaper. Lazyness is no excuse to make a public health hazard.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 06:25 PM
1

The same reason adults poop in the toilet instead of in the trash. Poop spreads bacteria; baby poop does it just as much as adult poop. If it's in the trash, animals can get into it, eat it and spread the bacteria around the neighborhood, get it on their feet and spread it around the neighborhood, tear up the diaper and spread it around your yard, drag it into your neighbor's yard. Even if your trashcan is secure against animals, once it goes to the dump animals can get into it, or it can just b…
/r/MensRights04/01/12 05:40 PM
3

If they are working there and not speaking up against such bs policies, they are supporting it. I don't care about their reasons behind it. People need to start speaking up against bullshit sexual assault lawsuits, not punish men for being male in the name of protecting them.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 05:26 PM
0

I've changed many diapers, but I have never carried a bag full of poop outside (nor told someone else to do so).
/r/MensRights04/01/12 05:23 PM
-1

You are suppose to put the poop in the toilet, and then just the disposable diaper in the trash. If you're using cloth diapers, you then put them in the washing machine.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 05:22 PM
2

The women employed there also didn't make the policy You don't know that.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 02:42 PM
3

I think that women supporting this "men aren't allowed to touch children" bs count as bitches.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 02:41 PM
-1

Where do you think daycares put the diapers/nappys when they're done changing them? They almost always use disposables, and don't follow the basic logic of sanitation so throw the poop into the trash. The trash is literally, as the guy said, filled with shit. I'd rather deal with a few diapers than with a huge trashbag full of shit. What if you drop it, what if it rips? If an animal gets into it outside, does he have to clean that up? Ugh.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 02:41 PM
1

It applies even after a child is born whose birth was agreed upon by both parties. But I would say that there is no reason either parent should be forced into paying optional expenses. Mom may want the $3000 a week fancy daycare, while Dad thinks that's crazy when the neighbor's in-home-daycare is $100 a week or Grandma will watch the kid for free. Mom may want to buy the kid $100 shoes, but Dad may think that's silly and the kid should just have $10 shoes. Yes the real expense of raising that c…
/r/MensRights27/12/11 02:15 PM
1

And I would argue that it is wrong to force responsibility onto someone due to choices someone else makes.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 01:51 PM
1

That isn't true. In most places, circumcisions were (and still are) done out of the mother's room. When the mothers did see it, they were told that the baby didn't actually feel pain from it (which isn't showing them the truth). They are still mostly done without anesthetic.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 01:46 PM
1

This has no bearing whatsoever on responsibility. Yes it does. Pretending it doesn't absolves women of the responsibility that comes along with having sex. If they want all the choice when it comes to abortion and adoption, they have to have some responsibility. should a parent be able to opt out after agreeing to the birth? I've answered that twice now. Women can currently opt out 100% even after agreeing to birth. Men should at least be able to opt out 50%. Are you talking about giving a child…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 08:27 PM
1

If you want to change the system, shouldn't your change be a strict improvement on fairness Yes, which is why I said Default should be 50/50 custody . it seems to fall down when addressing the case of a parent who, at a later stage in the child's life (say 1 year old) decides they want to leave It will lead to people picking better partners to have children with. No person is a wonderful partner for a year, then a great parent for a year, and then just suddenly leaves. and disclaim responsibilit…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 07:53 PM
2

Yes, but the truth of the matter is that in the US, the mother decides, she has to sign for it or not, and the father can do very little if he disagrees. Not that I'm saying this is right or that men shouldn't be educated about circumcision too (everyone should be). But that's the way it is right now. I'd guess there's more men in the debates because a lot of men have the attitude of "I was circumcised and I turned out fine," "I'm circumcised and that's the right thing to be so my son should be …
/r/MensRights23/12/11 07:35 PM
3

Okay, well that is your opinion. My opinion is that taking the time and resources to drag an 18 year old back home in bullshit cases like this take time and resources away from the real missing person cases. Every case should be taken seriously, sure. But when it becomes obvious that the adult is not missing but rather just left, the case should be dropped and the people that knew this yet said she was missing should be punished. And as someone that left an abusive home when I turned 18, the ide…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 07:04 PM
4

Yes, I do. And in this situation I thought "this was not a case of a missing person. This was the case of an adult leaving home while still keeping in contact with people, and her family not liking it." Yes we need fair and equitable action - if an 18 year old male leaves home, no action is taken. The same should go for females.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 06:35 PM
1

Touching and sad if true, but as a parent and teacher I have a hard time believing this is the handwriting of a 7 year old. #1 is sized to actually fit and sized consistently, while everything else is written huge but still fits perfectly. Children don't judge space as well, and likely would have begun writing at one size and then realized it needed to be smaller to fit or could be larger and still fit. Everything is written so that nothing overlaps - #2 never overlaps with anything form #1, the…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 06:18 PM
1

It is wonderful that she was charged. But I find the previous story - that an 18 year old was "missing" (despite the fact that she was calling people) and had "run away," that her calls were traced and she was then returned "home" to be disturbing - acting as if an 18 year old woman is a child that can't be expected to make her own decisions nor held responsible for her own actions. It was only through this that her computer was looked at, I suppose, and it is surprising and great that she was h…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 05:57 PM
2

Agreed, but we all know a man would be in jail for doing that no matter how hot, so it's wonderful that a woman was charged.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 05:56 PM
1

Not that this makes it right (and there's a fuckton of things in there that they choose not to still do), but here's the Jewish logic behind it - 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner, that is not of thy seed.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 05:19 PM
1

That's his point. Show mothers the truth of it and it would end.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 05:09 PM
3

However, they need to be presented with the facts to make the choice, and many people don't know the facts. I have known several people with sons that had their sons circumcised and learned the facts later, and say "If I had known the facts then, I never would have done that to my child." Nephilim_Hunter should certainly present his niece with the facts. Edit: Perfect example of why. That may be a troll, but many people still believe this.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 05:08 PM
1

In a 50/50 custody situation, each parent would end up taking off about the same amount of sick days overall, paying for half the childcare, etc. so that's fair. If the child is only getting sick while with one parent, something is wrong. Even in a 100% situation, you can afford a lot more sick days if you're only paying 50% to take care of a child rather than 100% (in a 1 breadwinner household) or 150% (as many men paying childsupport are doing). And a lot of people could set things up so that …
/r/MensRights23/12/11 02:58 PM
10

Default should be 50/50 custody and each parent pays for the child when it is with them. With things like doctor's bills and etc. a bill for half the amount should be sent to the mother and half to the father. Child care, each parent pays for during what would be their time with the child. Rent should not be a consideration, since the parent would have to pay rent even if they didn't have a child, and paying more rent for a bigger place because you have a child is optional. As for other optional…
/r/MensRights22/12/11 08:16 PM
0

WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR PROBLEM?
/r/MensRights18/12/11 03:03 AM
1

Okay? Let's fight, petition, and vote against it then.
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:58 AM
1

I think we should talk to the people that grant women the ability to deny access to children.
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:41 AM
1

And I'll say for the however-many-times-I've-said-it time, it wouldn't be sad for men on either side if they were both given rights should they want them.
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:33 AM
1

Yeah, being a cheerleader requires looking up girls' skirts and putting your hands all over them, what kind of pansy wants to do that?
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:16 AM
0

I'm not saying biological fathers should not have access to their children if they want it. As I said, it's great for this guy that he won what he wanted. But I completely disagree that it's better for everyone if non-biological FATHERS that want to be fathers can't, and that it's better for children to be ripped away from what they considered their father for their whole lives. Of course, the pain in this situation is all caused by the mother's lie in the first place - therefore women's ability…
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:05 AM
1

I'm going to guess you don't have kids. This may be a win financially, but emotionally it is a loss all around.
/r/MensRights17/12/11 11:58 PM
2

The man who would have had to pay child support no longer has to. Okay, but is someone going to pay him back all the child support he already paid? Seems he's just screwed from all sides. It is sad that there will be some men who raised children that were not theirs and want them. It is also sad that other men wanted to raise children that were theirs but could not because the state decided that paternity was relegated to the non biological father "in the best interests of the child." There will…
/r/MensRights17/12/11 06:43 AM
3

While it's great that this happened because it's what he wanted, I don't see how this is a win for men's rights. Being on a birth certificate does not award a father the right to visitation, and in fact binds them to pay child support if the mother chooses to file (even if they were put on the birth certificate without being the biological father). I really think this will be used against men, in cases such as where the father did not agree to have a child and therefore refuses to sign the birth…
/r/MensRights17/12/11 05:16 AM
1

No, domestic violence, just like any violence between a man and a woman, depends on the MAN not hitting back. Huh? What about when the man hits first? What about when 2 coworkers are alone? Is the only thing that keeps you from hitting someone the fear of public outlash? It has nothing to do with getting hit back, it has everything to do with it being public and with huge repercussions. I don't think that's it, since as a woman there would be pretty much equal repercussions for me if I hit a man…
/r/MensRights06/12/11 10:28 PM
1

Why is domestic violence a thing while office-coworkers-violence isn't? It's because a coworker would have little problem hitting you back, and you know this, while a partner would have a bit of a problem. Domestic violence depends on people's natural aversion to hurting the person they love - the abuser knowing the abused has that aversion and therefore won't hit back, and the abused knowing that the abuser's goal is not actually to hurt them. Yes the offense is greater the more you love them -…
/r/MensRights06/12/11 08:40 PM
2

While that is true, it is a lot harder to hit someone you love than someone you don't.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 08:16 PM
2

I'm an adult and I don't even understand it. I'd take it as a pretty high compliment, especially as a teacher, because that means you not only still look good, you're also a good enough teacher that the kids like you.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 07:57 PM
3

I think there is a huge difference between hitting your partner and hitting someone that is trying to rape you, and someone's willingness or unwillingness to hit one has little to do with the other.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 07:46 PM
1

Maybe so, but the difference is that on reddit, people choose to give the person things or not.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 02:38 PM
2

I think you mean RU486.
/r/MensRights01/12/11 07:02 AM
1

With the "free food" part, probably welfare. Which means health insurance is free, rent is free or nearly free, and bills are either fully or mostly paid for her. Then the $800 a month would be all or mostly just spendable money.
/r/MensRights01/12/11 06:59 AM
0

Unfortunately for the child, that crazy woman is going to be his mother no matter what. Really the only hope in this situation is an abortion, which probably isn't going to happen. Wither op never meets the kid or has visitation, the kid will have that feeling of "why doesn't daddy love me/why doesn't daddy love me enough to have me full time?" And it's going to be even harder on the kid when the mother decides to not let the kid go for scheduled visitation, while lying to the kid that daddy doe…
/r/MensRights01/12/11 06:43 AM
-1

Uh, there is no child yet, just a fetus. I'm a parent, and agree that once he meets the child there's no way he would be able to just not have anything to do with it. He needs to get the gf away from him before there is a child. Otherwise, she will just use the child to make him miserable for the rest of his life. Not just for 18 years, but for the rest of his life.
/r/MensRights30/11/11 10:59 PM
0

And due to your further proof that you can not read, I am now blocking you. I wish you all the best in life.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 10:41 PM
0

"Sign up" apparently means "apply without any guarantee of approval". That one, you have correct. No one ever has a guarantee of approval; that is why people must apply. Whenever someone signs up, even if they are denied benefits at the time, their application will be kept on file, and should their circumstances change in a way that makes them eligible for benefits, they can take this new information and amend their application. However, you somehow read that I said "all poor people can get free…
/r/MensRights23/11/11 10:29 PM
0

You think it is fine, yet you keep saying things that show it is not.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 10:13 PM
0

Perhaps while you wait, you should attend a reading class.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 10:01 PM
0

Seems no matter what I say you will just hear your own thoughts on the matter, so I'm done talking to you.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 09:52 PM
0

Get the papers and fill them out.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 09:50 PM
1

including children So poor people can first get it as a child. Everyone starts out as a child, correct? And "child" in their definition means under 18. How common do you think it is for someone to start out rich and then end up poor when they turn 18? Usually there is either generation after generation of poorness, or someone that was middle class as a child falls on hard times while trying to support a family (where they already have kids). And with the generation after generation of poorness, …
/r/MensRights23/11/11 05:12 PM
0

pregnant women, parents of eligible children Hence why so few people take advantage of the free birth control.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 04:02 PM
1

Because someone has to pay for it. In the US, a lot of the poor don't work at all. Giving it to everyone for "free" works in a system where nearly everyone works, so nearly everyone is paying in. But in the US we have a huge problem where people feel they are entitled to money and free stuff simply because they exist.
/r/MensRights23/11/11 04:01 PM
0

Medicaid covers birth control. Anyone that makes under a certain amount of money can sign up for medicaid. Then they can have their prescription sent to any pharmacy they want. It will also provide transportation for doctors appointments and a certain amount of bus passes per month (so a person can ride the bus to a pharmacy if it is too far to walk).
/r/MensRights22/11/11 10:03 PM
0

Birth control actually is given to the poor for free in the US.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 09:31 PM
1

We really need to have some other phrase to describe parents taking possession of their own children against visitation or custody agreements/laws (yes the laws are fucked in the first place, but let's try to take babysteps). It's horrible to have a parent in a custody or visitation dispute to be equated with real abductors.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 03:07 AM
6

Trust and openness are a very important part of a relationship. My husband has told me that he broke his arm as a kid. Getting a vasectomy is quite a bit more of an occurrence than that. It's a pretty big life decision. Now I'm not going to say "I would be pissed if I ever found out that about someone I was with" because if played right a woman would never find out you got a vasectomy. But you would not be in a relationship of trust and openness if you did not tell a woman this. I would say that…
/r/MensRights22/11/11 02:58 AM
17

Even properly done circumcisions can result in complications. Infections (due to parents improperly doing aftercare, or in some cases, for no apparent reason at all), narrowing of the urethral opening (due to it being exposed and rubbing against the diaper), etc. etc. etc.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 12:35 AM
1

It's a RELIGIOUS commitment I disagree. It CAN be a religious commitment, but if you aren't religious, it can simply be a commitment between two people. Religion isn't the only thing that drives two humans to treat each other amicably. And by the way, most religions have a code of conduct on how you should treat your partner, and divorce is allowed if one partner breaks that code of conduct. Pretending your way through marriage may be common but that doesn't make it right. Children are usually b…
/r/MensRights17/11/11 10:37 PM
1

Is your point that American society is largely anti-man? I know that is true. However, that does not give all men the right to act like doucebags (and the things op has said he is doing - staying in a marriage he doesn't seem to want to be a part of, pretending to want to work things out when his attitude is against it, and having someone else without his partner's approval is acting like a douchebag). In fact, acting like a douhebag is only going to make the anti-men bitches go "See! I told you…
/r/MensRights17/11/11 10:03 PM
0

Well, my husband did not experience that when he went to counseling with his exwife. Maybe he found the one single counselor that is different.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 09:50 PM
1

Not every counselor is the same.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 07:51 PM
6

It seems you need more lessons in human decency than I can give.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 07:47 PM
0

I'm going to guess people are "interested" because the guy came here, posted about his personal life, and asked for advice. It is not really clear that he doesn't want the company of his wife any longer. The only clear way to say that would be to divorce her. He has not done this yet, so it seems there is something keeping him in the marriage. Maybe he has kids, maybe he still loves his wife and just wishes she would change in some way, or maybe he's just afraid of losing his nice car. We don't …
/r/MensRights17/11/11 04:57 PM
5

She may be withholding sex. She may have gained 100 pounds. She might be abusive. She might be a lazy sack of shit. She just might not be a very likable person at all. All of those are good reasons to leave. None of them are good reasons to cheat. There is no good reason to cheat.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 04:30 PM
1

So if one church decides this, do all churches of the same denomination go along with this? If someone joins a new church and then wishes to be married in it, will the church insist on knowing the previous church in which they were married and making sure the divorce was approved by them? Do the churches say that their approval/disapproval on this is the approval/disapproval of God? I.e. are people fighting for the approval of their God, or just the approval of their fellow church goers?
/r/MensRights09/11/11 07:14 PM
2

Why does a divorce have to be justified in either party's favor? Legally, you don't really need a reason for divorce. But I know that a religious divorce - a divorce "in the church's eyes" - is different from a legal divorce. If a church doesn't see a divorce as justified, can they say "Nope, you guys are still married in our eyes"? And what would that mean, other than the fact that they could refuse to do a marriage ceremony to someone else and give the new partner the stinkeye if they come to …
/r/MensRights09/11/11 04:37 PM
10

It makes me sad because usually the people that decide this are intelligent. Watch the first few minutes of Idiocracy.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:56 PM
-2

Women.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:55 PM
1

The family or a legally appointed person gives consent in cases where the person can not be waken to ask.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 06:41 PM
5

And only men in the picture...
/r/MensRights02/11/11 06:30 PM
7

So why are we getting a description of the foreplay rather than the results of a paternity test? And I hope this woman is punished should her claims be proved to be lies.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 06:15 PM
2

It's hard to believe how batshit insane some women are until you see it first hand.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 09:39 PM
1

Switch it to charming with others but a dick to me and you just described my MIL to a T.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 09:38 PM
1

Where's the photo?
/r/MensRights28/10/11 09:26 PM
2

Why would children be less likely to report abuse just because the abuser is female? Because many are taught that when a man touches them. that's bad; But when a woman touches them, there must be some valid reason for it. And when fathers are not allowed to help children go to the bathroom while women are, children are taught exactly that. For example, woman abuses a child while helping them go potty, child tells mom when he gets home "Mrs. Whatever touched my no no place." Mom says "Oh, she was…
/r/MensRights24/10/11 05:30 PM
1

That would make urinals illegal. Wait, what? Why are men legally allowed to pee in front of other men but not women?
/r/MensRights24/10/11 05:03 PM
2

That's just reported abusers. Women are statistically more likely to kill children, doesn't that mean she should be more concerned with the women being around her child at all?
/r/MensRights24/10/11 05:01 PM
2

Wow, it looks like someone actually learned something! I will remove this post if any further negativity is directed at me :/ guess not
/r/MensRights24/10/11 03:45 PM
7

... Just wow.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 05:17 AM
24

As a mother, first of all it makes no sense to me that some people assume all men are child molesters. But it makes even less sense to assume that helping a child go potty is going to make one of these child molesters unable to resist their urges - come on, helping someone wipe shit off their ass has to be a huge turn off. It seems to me that only the people in an uproar about it can see anything sexual about it, and they are the people I worry about having around my children! And then it makes …
/r/MensRights20/10/11 03:10 AM
3

It's more like swearing off of movies because it's getting very hard to find one that doesn't suck, and you've watched many people in the world be suckered into paying to see a movie only to have it completely blow. I'm a woman that refused to marry my husband unless he signed a prenup that protected him in the rare chance we divorce, but I have to admit, there are way more women that want to take advantage of the unfair-to-men system than that don't out there.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 12:43 AM
14

Everyone - the girl, the guy, witnesses - agrees that she kicked him in the balls. What more do we really need to know than that? Unless one of his balls was holding her down while the other threatened her with a gun, I do not see any valid excuse for kicking a guy in the balls.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:44 PM
1

factually valid ... opinion You truly are the king of debate. I resign, as there is no way I can ever win against your superior skills.
/r/MensRights22/09/11 05:03 PM
2

I'm not anti-medicine, I just think that, especially with children, it should only be used when necessary. I have seen many cases of ADHD solved by changing the education methods rather than medicating. I'm not saying that will work for all cases of ADHD, but people should at least try. I am however very anti-separate children by age and force them to sit in a classroom most of their waking hours, and medicate those that can't focus in this situation until they can. It may work for some children…
/r/MensRights22/09/11 12:00 AM
5

But in general, 14 year olds are deemed legally not capable of making decisions in their own best self-interest. Sex is undoubtedly one of those weighty decisions. There are a lot more places in the world where 14 year olds are legally able to make choices about sex than not. Secondly, lots of things were terrible in the past. Does that mean that present-day rules should account for the past? I did not say rules of the past should apply now, I was simply asking if all those relationships in the …
/r/MensRights21/09/11 10:12 PM
5

I think the question is more "should we drug these kids into compliance, or should we give them an alternate form of education that better suits their needs?" And my answer would be give them an alternate form of education. Tumors are natural, but all moles are tumors; we don't give people medicine every time they get a mole. I'm not saying ADHD doesn't exist. What I'm saying is that, for example if you take a bunch of animals away from their wild mothers when they are young and keep them in sma…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 10:08 PM
9

No, it makes them focus on what adults want them to focus on. ADHD meds may be valid for an adult that needs to focus on work, but focusing from 8 - 3 5 days a week is not natural for children.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 06:42 PM
6

I never said that this was a healthy relationship - nor am I saying it was an unhealthy relationship. All I know about this relationship was this news article, and that's really not enough to judge. The drugs and alcohol don't really decide it for me, I have smoked weed and drunk alcohol with my partner that is 6 years older than me, I don't feel the point was to lower anyone's inhibitions, and I feel our relationship is healthy. Are you avoiding my questions, or just not understanding? If not u…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 05:37 PM
5

Actually, in many states it is legal for a child of any age (also note that a 14 year old is not a child, as they have most likely begun puberty) to get access to alcohol as long as the parent supplies that access. And 14 is also the age of consent in some states and many countries. So this is only illegal in certain places. In places where all of this is legal, is it still impossible for a healthy relationship to result? If we look back at the history of this country, it wasn't too long ago whe…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 04:24 PM
7

It's used to get them to sit down quietly and focus on what is being taught to them and on book work, which is more like an adult woman than a child. Children naturally want to run around outside, be loud, and learn through play.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:40 PM
-1

Except the medicine is mostly used to make the children act like women.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:30 PM
5

BPA has recently been announced to be in many things that the public had no idea they were in. Canned goods, for example. And even fresh food may have been wrapped in BPA-containing plastic for transport without the public's knowledge. Unless you grow all your own food, it is actually pretty damn hard to avoid BPA.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:29 PM
2

Well those sure are some pretty percentages, but how about some actual figures? Because when you look at how some of them go from 0.00009 to 0.0003 and also consider the fact that infants are quite unlikely to have sex, those percentages get less impressive.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 09:01 PM
5

Not true, there are several time travelers on reddit.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 02:22 AM
1

After several generations of incest, yes; but women over 35 are more likely to have a child than an incestual couple. Therefore there are more children in the world with debilitating genetic disorders resulting from having a mother over 35 than there are children in the world with genetic disorders resulting from incestual relationships. So, if your goal is actually to reduce the amount of children being made that have debilitating genetic disorders, you would actually get closer to your goal by…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 06:47 PM
1

But by that logic we should make it illegal for anyone with a high likelihood of having children with debilitating genetic conditions to have children. Women over 35, etc.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 03:12 AM
1

No, incest couples have an extremely high rate over several generations of incest, and a low rate of having kids at all.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 12:52 AM
1

But the point is that homosexuals can have children with debilitating genetic conditions, and I'd be willing to bet that homosexual couples have children more often than incest couples.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 12:46 AM
1

Do sperm/egg donation facilities check for all possible genetic conditions resulting from combining genes?
/r/MensRights04/09/11 12:25 AM
1

My point was not that death "isn't as bad" as suffering; it's that women have the choice of ending a pregnancy if death is likely to happen. Even if they are past the point where an abortion is usually legal, there is a loophole in the law that says that if the mother's life is threatened at any point in the pregnancy they can get an abortion. Women have the choice of getting out of the situation without needing to die.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:24 AM
1

No, I'm saying that someone that dies is not suffering; they're not feeling anything, they are dead. Yes, it is the living that suffer; but for most people, the good feelings or the promise of good feelings in the future outweigh the suffering.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:21 AM
0

A hell that they have the choice of leaving.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:31 PM
4

I've been pregnant and given birth twice. I wouldn't call it suffering. I'd certainly take it over being a slave to a woman for 18+ years any day. And women that consider it suffering have the option of ending it. Sure there is a risk of death, but death is not suffering for the person that dies, death is an end to suffering for them - it is the people that miss them that suffer. And it's rare; think of all the women that had to survive for you and I to be here, all the women that had to survive…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:04 PM
4

The woman "suffers" for about 9 months, while the man suffers for 18+ years.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 03:42 PM
12

There have been cases of women keeping sperm from blow jobs or used condoms and putting it inside themselves, becoming pregnant and the man being forced to pay child support.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 03:41 PM
3

Go to facebook, /mommit, /parenting, or anywhere else women go online and watch the circle-jerking.
/r/MensRights22/08/11 01:25 AM
6

A woman can still ass rape you if you have kids but don't get married. Or if you act like a father towards a woman's kids.
/r/MensRights22/08/11 12:22 AM
0

Find a picture of a young pregnant woman making a sandwich. Put on there "It's what a WOMAN'S got to do." Print it out the same size as this brochure and put it in one of those spaces.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 03:24 PM
2

True, and as I said, that was wrong. But two wrongs don't make a right.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 12:45 AM
14

Both mothers should have been on the birth certificate in the first place, rather than the sperm donor. He agreed to be a sperm donor, not a father. He should have predicted that he would get attached when he decided to be involved. It's wrong that they took his money, yes. But the biomother's ex likely sees this child as her daughter as well, and should be able to fight for parental rights. And I would say the same thing if two men had gotten a surrogate mother and this situation were happening…
/r/MensRights10/07/11 04:01 AM
1

To save time I have learned to fuck while I run.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 03:50 PM
8

Men can get breast cancer.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 03:48 PM
4

I can see how that is different though, a five year old doesn't make their own medical choices, able to speak about them or not.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 03:48 PM
-2

It is disturbing to me that most of the US thinks nothing of permanently disfiguring male genitals. Any woman that supports kicking a guy in the nuts deserves a knife up her vag.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 04:21 AM
1

So get a job where the hours are at night. You can't expect to keep a job if you're not coming to work during the hours they want you to work.
/r/MensRights02/07/11 01:54 PM
1

I feel the same way about fetuses.
/r/MensRights29/06/11 05:16 PM
1

I can see children behind my car.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 08:24 PM
0

This whole side-conversation is irrelevant anyway, the scientific fact is that having a period means an egg is killed.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:57 PM
0

Okay, I'll be over here laughing at how idiotic it is to call abortion "killing a child." And the fact that you don't realize that having a period means an egg is killed.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:56 PM
0

They are both potential human life with the right circumstances, same as a fetus.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:46 PM
1

Every time you/your partner has their period, you are killing an egg for your own convenience.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:28 PM
1

Taking Plan B is not an abortion.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:27 PM
1

I would consider 15 years quite new.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:17 PM
1

She didn't just assume he'd hold the child, he WAS holding the child. She assumed he would keep holding the child. If making sure my children are not going to run behind the car is paranoia, then fine, I have paranoia. I don't consider it a bad thing as it has kept me from running over my children while this woman ran over her's. what about if your child is supposed to be at school? That situation would never happen to me, I would never send my children to a school (and that has nothing to do wi…
/r/MensRights28/06/11 06:12 PM
1

She shouldn't have assumed her husband would have kept holding the child, no. I'm not saying the husband was completely innocent in this; he should have parented better too. But would you leave the house leaving a container of poison within your child's reach and assume your husband/wife will put it away? When it comes to your child's life, you don't assume anything. How exactly was she supposed to psychically know that the father let the kid run off as soon as she turned her back? She didn't. T…
/r/MensRights28/06/11 05:33 PM
0

No, the parent should just know exactly where their children are, and know - not assume - that their child is not behind their car before backing out. I manage to do it with my 4 kids, it isn't hard.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 01:33 PM
1

She chose to drive a car where a small child would not be seen when she has 2 small children. She did not know where the kid was at the moment she pulled out. She only knew where the kid was before she pulled out and assumed the kid was still there when she pulled out. Both the father and mother were negligent.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 02:42 AM
1

The fact that gender reassignment surgery needs to exist shows that gender identity is separate from sex imo. It just so happens that for many people, their gender identity and sex match. I don't think David Reimer realized he was different from other girls because he would rather play with trucks than dolls; he realized he was different because puberty hit and he was attracted to women rather than men. I think it is the fact that he was taught that women are suppose to be attracted to men and m…
/r/MensRights28/06/11 02:37 AM
1

Good parenting can help even more.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 02:26 AM
1

But SUVs especially have blind spots everywhere a small child would be.
/r/MensRights28/06/11 02:24 AM
1

Safer cars are not a substitution for good parenting.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 06:57 PM
0

There have been numerous cases where parents try to get their kids to play with the opposite gender's toys, and almost always they end up trading them with toys made for their gender. But that is only after they have been taught that x toys belong to x gender, right? They were taught that and then the parents tried to get them to play with the "opposite gender's toys"? If you give a baby toys they will play with the toys and don't care if it is a doll or a truck. It is only once they get the inf…
/r/MensRights27/06/11 06:53 PM
1

But what she needs to do is get involved with better parenting activism rather than car safety feature activism.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 06:40 PM
1

As a parent I think it would be just as terrible and hard to live with to be the parent that let the kid run out the door. More interesting? I think it is horrible that this situation is turned into something "interesting" for people to read about.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 05:10 PM
1

Better google how to make your own bullets now
/r/MensRights27/06/11 04:56 PM
0

However, eliminating an aspect of their identity that is forming outside the classroom, while inside the classroom just sends mixed messages. I think many people must have said the same thing when religion was removed from public school. "We encourage you to be open about your sexual self... Oh, and don't act like a boy or girl because that's wrong." I don't think it is saying that, because it is not possible to "act like a boy or a girl," it is only possible to act like society's idea of a boy …
/r/MensRights27/06/11 04:53 PM
2

Both parents were at fault, both parents lost a child, yet this whole thing is focused on the woman with only brief mentions of the man and his feelings. She uses "kidsandcars" to cope, she is using her son's death as an example to push the safety features she believes should be in there, she is convincing herself that the lack of these features caused her son's death. That's personal gain, she's gaining a way to feel less bad about what she did. And you don't see the father joining some group t…
/r/MensRights27/06/11 04:03 PM
0

I have 4 kids and I agree. I always know exactly where they all are before moving the car and before my partner moves the car. I don't assume they are in the last place I saw them or that they won't go out the door. Especially if one of them wants to go along. I think both parents are at fault. The car does not need more safety features, parents just need to make better choices about cars - for example, if you have 2 small children don't get a car where you can't see small children from the driv…
/r/MensRights27/06/11 03:51 PM
0

No, her choice to drive a huge vehicle is at fault. She could have picked a much smaller car that would have given her a chance to stop after hitting the kid and/or better allowed her to see.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 03:40 PM
2

This is America, if kids want to keep their foreskins, let them. Who the fuck are their parents to say otherwise? It is mutilation by the definition of the word, and use to be a cultural norm but nowadays about half of babies are not circumcised.
/r/MensRights25/06/11 03:50 PM
0

Will it stop it completely? No. But it will certainly help, and every little bit of help is important.
/r/MensRights25/06/11 03:43 PM
1

Everyone saying female genital mutilation isn't the same; just because it is not quite as bad does not mean it isn't horrible in the same way! I could beat a baby to death with a shoe or I could beat a baby to death with a frying pan, they would be different degrees of pain but wouldn't they both still be horrible?
/r/MensRights24/06/11 11:01 PM
1

Green apples and red apples.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 10:48 PM
8

Since women live longer, it would make more sense to make them retire later than men.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 10:39 PM
14

Everyone against genital mutilation, and everyone that is now not going to have their genitals mutilated thanks to this.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 10:24 PM
2

I was being sarcastic. In truth I would like the breast cancer campaigns to be for everyone, the lung cancer campaigns to be for everyone, the prostate cancer campaigns to be for men and the equivalent for women to be cervical cancer campaigns. And I would like actual equal campaigns for men and women - the breast cancer campaigns for women far outweigh the prostate cancer campaigns.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 03:25 PM
2

Well then I would like to see lung cancer campaigns for men similar to the breast cancer campaigns for women.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 02:02 PM
4

This is why I wish there was an option to sign a legally binding contract about this sort of thing before having sex with someone...
/r/MensRights19/06/11 02:59 AM
4

Here's the difference: it would not be okay for either a girl or a boy to sacrifice a wild boar on school premises. It would be okay for a girl to wear a dress to school, therefore the boys should be allowed to do so as well.
/r/MensRights18/06/11 03:10 PM
1

I can understand why you want to fight this, and you should. But you've got to survive in the mean time. And no matter what you win, any overdraft fees and etc. will never be paid back, so if you're not earning while you're fighting you will end up in debt. Find some under the table online jobs. Then you can make some money while dealing with people only on your terms, only when you can handle it. If you get paid via paypal and don't connect your real bank account, she/the state won't be able to…
/r/MensRights14/06/11 05:13 PM
3

Ha! If her guy makes so much, why is she a grocery store cashier?
/r/MensRights14/06/11 03:05 PM
1

Their mother should half be supporting them, but... You can't get a computer job? What if you telecommute? You can't work in a call center? What if you telecommute? If you are able to post on reddit, there is some job you can do.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 02:59 PM
4

The problem is that if everyone chooses female nurses/doctors/student-observers, we end up with jobs only women can do. Women fought for a long time to get the rights to do the same jobs men do, turning things around like that would be wrong.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 02:44 PM
-5

That's what they get for sending their kids to public school.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 01:40 PM
1

What I'm saying is that most rapes aren't really rapes, they are just the assumption that the man wanted sex and the woman didn't, even when the woman said/acted as if she did.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 05:53 PM
1

Why? Most rape is based on the idea that men want sex and will do anything to get it, and women don't.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 04:00 PM
-7

The whole idea of rape is anti-male. If a woman dresses like a slut, gets drunk at a party, jumps on a guy and regrets it the next morning, society says the guy raped the girl.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 03:51 PM
-2

No one is going to flirt with that father.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 02:31 PM
3

How much do you want to bet that the boy will have to pay child support?
/r/MensRights08/06/11 02:46 PM
2

I have 4 kids, the youngest being 18 months, and I'm saying that it is definitely possible for a 14 month old to bite an apple and throw the core in the trash.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 02:57 PM
0

Most of this shit doesn't even need to be done at all.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 02:51 PM
2

Since with a guy/girl one night stand there is the risk that you will have to deal with the other person for the next 18+ years I think compatibility - even if just when it comes to opinions on birth control and abortion - is a little more important in that circumstance.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 02:34 PM
1

Do abortions ever happen with a fetus that could survive being killed in the womb? Yes. If you're talking about a fetus that is old enough to survive outside of the womb, then yes, (these are called late-term abortions) although not in the USA nor several other countries. In the countries where late-term abortions performed, the abortion will sometimes fail - the baby will survive for a bit and then die after birth, either from being too young to survive without medical care or from starving to …
/r/MensRights06/06/11 06:41 PM
1

No matter what is done, water completely breaking is going to lead to either birth or abortion (either natural, aka a miscarriage, or done by a doctor). I'm guessing you mean if the water breaks at full term? An abortion is basically when a fetus dies. This is done (when done on purpose) by either giving the woman a pill (ru486) that makes her body stop producing the hormones necessary to pregnancy and expel the contents of the uterus, or removing a fetus that is too young to survive out of the …
/r/MensRights06/06/11 05:59 PM
3

At least this woman is stupid enough to post online about it, many women do this and give the man no way to find out about it. Although, sadly, when he finds out and divorces her he will still have to give her half his stuff/money and pay child support.
/r/MensRights06/06/11 02:10 PM
1

The definition of born is "existing as a result of birth." So after it comes out of the mother via either vaginal birth or c-section.
/r/MensRights06/06/11 01:43 PM
2

It is not painless for babies. People do it to babies because they can't say no and won't remember the pain.
/r/MensRights06/06/11 01:41 PM
3

They are not suppose to do things that way, but that is often the way things are done; they do all the "standard" stuff to the baby (circumcise, feed cow's milk based formula, give shots, etc.) and have you sign the forms later unless you specifically say you don't want those things done. I just had a baby a year and a half ago and I made sure I knew what was happening to him every time he was out of my sight, but they still did some things that I didn't think about needing to sign for and had m…
/r/MensRights05/06/11 10:10 PM
5

Fuck forcing your opinion on others. Fuck every parent that forces the opinion that males should not have foreskins onto their children. If you like circumcised dicks, great. But every person should be able to decide if they want their dick circumcised or not, rather than having that choice taken from them at birth.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 10:00 PM
2

Seems perfectly logical to me; while in the womb it is a fetus, not much different than a mole or other tumor growing in/on a body. After birth it is a baby, which is a separate person capable of feeling pain, having emotions, etc.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 09:58 PM
1

If only men could become cock doctors, that would be a women's rights issue. It's not natural, but engrained into us by society, to be uncomfortable undressing in front of anyone, same sex or opposite, and a little more uncomfortable in front of the opposite sex. It's natural to be naked and be comfortable despite whom is around. Men and women should have equal rights to jobs despite this social trend.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 01:05 PM
1

This is a men's rights issue. If every male resident is kicked out of the room, no men will learn how to do this exam. Then we end up with a career that only women can do.
/r/MensRights04/06/11 04:24 PM
1

So when they are making decisions together the woman pretends she doesn't want something when the husband says no, so that way it's not that she is obeying him but that she decided she doesn't want it? Got it.
/r/MensRights01/06/11 12:33 AM
1

No, I am not seeing the difference because even when obeying a husband, if they both want something, it will happen, if one of them wants something but the other doesn't, it won't happen.
/r/MensRights01/06/11 12:16 AM
1

It seems to me that it is the same thing with an added delusion...
/r/MensRights31/05/11 02:20 PM
1

But the result is the same, she wants to buy it but the husband doesn't want her to buy it so she doesn't buy it. Isn't it the exact same thing, just with different words (saying they "made the decision together" rather than "she's obeying him") to make her feel better?
/r/MensRights31/05/11 02:04 PM
1

No, I can't, which is why I am asking.
/r/MensRights31/05/11 01:34 PM
1

But if when the husband says she shouldn't buy something for $400 she doesn't, how is that any different than "obeying" her husband?
/r/MensRights31/05/11 12:28 PM
0

So every week a husband and wife bring home their paycheck and put it into an envelope marked "ours." The husband puts in $75 a week, the wife puts in $25 a week (since it is rare for married women to make equal or more than their husband makes). After a month, the woman wants to buy something for $400. The husband says she shouldn't buy it. But since the wife does not have to "obey" her husband, she can take the $400 of "their" money that the husband mostly earned, and buy it anyway. Or she can…
/r/MensRights30/05/11 10:39 PM
1

So in "new fashioned" life the woman takes the man's money (since most major decisions come down to money) and pretty much says "screw you, I'm going to do whatever I want with your money"? Seems like men living a "new fashioned" life are pretty much slaves to women...
/r/MensRights30/05/11 08:40 PM
1

I don't wear heals (nor any shoes in the house) nor pearls and I fix leaky faucets myself (I wouldn't want to leave it leaking until he gets home), and the house isn't always totally immaculate (although I do straiten up the rooms he will be going into before he gets home) - he agrees that sometimes spending time with/educating the kids is more important than constantly cleaning. But other than that I do all of this. I didn't realize it was "old fashioned." What is a "new fashioned" life like? T…
/r/MensRights30/05/11 08:15 PM
1

Guilt trip? No. By the looks of things, he already loves them. I think he realizes that it isn't their fault that their mother is a crazy, evil bitch. He should not be forced into taking the children, but he should get the first choice.
/r/MensRights30/05/11 07:03 PM
6

So throw Mom in prison, but make her get an in-prison job and pay support.
/r/MensRights29/05/11 10:00 PM
3

The kids would (hopefully) end up with their father, who loves and cares for them despite the illegal method in which they were conceived. The father would pay a reasonable amount for their care with them living with him, rather than paying an unreasonable amount of child support. A sociopath bitch would be in jail.
/r/MensRights29/05/11 09:25 PM
4

"Would have been" but did not pay it, right?
/r/MensRights29/05/11 09:22 PM
0

Women outspend men 900 to 1 in the purchase of physical goods. With mens' money.
/r/MensRights29/05/11 02:04 AM
1

The most well-known case of penis loss due to circumcision is that of "David Reimer". Is it rare? Sure. But so is getting HIV. Which would you rather risk for your child? Especially since he won't be having sex until he is able to make the choice for himself? Well, lucky for Africa you're not in charge of public health. Yeah, lucky for them they get to have their genitals mutilated and not get educated. I strongly believe you should have the choice of educating your son instead of having him cir…
/r/MensRights28/05/11 04:17 PM
1

Keep in mind, that's only the most common complications. The less common complications include misscuts or infections leading to loss of entire penis (in the past people would raise such babies as girls, leading to a life of being fucked up) and urethral stricture (urethral narrowing, which can be caused from the exposed penis head rubbing against diapers). And there's a 99.9% chance of losing the foreskin. Seeing as condoms reduce the risk of HIV even more than circumcision, and not having sex …
/r/MensRights27/05/11 10:17 PM
2

Yeah
/r/MensRights27/05/11 08:07 PM
2

My name has been s0nicfreak for many years and I have posted my titties online (not really "all over," but when one posts something on the internet it does spread all over...) in the past, yes.
/r/MensRights27/05/11 07:14 PM
5

Also, since infants most likely won't be having sex, it is not really an issue.
/r/MensRights27/05/11 06:26 PM
3

How is that obvious? Well, enjoy paying child support.
/r/MensRights24/04/11 10:09 PM
1

This seems legit
/r/MensRights23/04/11 12:05 AM
5

Because everyone loves dicks, but no one wants to be odd smelling, high maintenance, and throw up blood one week out of each month.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 01:19 PM
2

The act of being what we consider a slut/stud may be there by default, but the idea that someone is a slut/stud isn't.
/r/MensRights19/04/11 05:59 PM
4

The ideas of sluts/studs is certainly not there by default, it is societal training.
/r/MensRights19/04/11 05:32 PM
1

Even given that context (which imo is completely irrelevant and should not be brought up), I am not seeing him as unstable. To say he should have predicted she had issues is just wrong, he is not a psychiatrist, and when you have all the information and aren't looking at things with love-googles, it is easy to see her issues. It is clear that the mother did something that (I think at least) we can all agree was wrong, something illegal, while the father only did something some people disagree wi…
/r/MensRights14/04/11 03:19 PM
2

Sure, it's a bit weird to date the daughter of a friend, but is that grounds for taking his child away? Fuck no. He waited until she was 18, so he is not a child molester. When/how he met his spouse has nothing at all to do with the situation.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 06:02 PM
3

What's wrong with that is the lady called the cops.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 01:15 PM
3

used a surrogacy website to find a single mother of two on benefits who was willing to carry the baby What could go wrong?
/r/MensRights12/04/11 05:24 PM
3

Today, the boy appears to have recovered, with no apparent permanent injury. So they were able to reattach the foreskin? Also, don't they need to wait until puberty to truly see if there was any permanent injury?
/r/MensRights09/04/11 02:31 PM
1

When two people have children, they both must give up a lot of social, personal, and career time to raise the children. If they agree that one person will stay home full time with the child, then sure, one must give up more than the other. But if those two people break up/get divorced, that staying at home full time agreement is also broken. Neither parent is responsible for paying for the other to stay home (full time nor more than the always-worked parent). Each parent should then be both fina…
/r/MensRights08/04/11 02:00 PM
1

So why not start a magazine - or at least a website - that realistically explains men?
/r/MensRights07/04/11 03:25 PM
2

Yes, that is what I meant. I realize now how it may have been confusing, sorry!
/r/MensRights06/04/11 01:16 PM
1

No, I can't imagine taking my children away from their father that isn't physically abusive, and lying to say that he is.
/r/MensRights06/04/11 01:13 PM
11

Fucking wow. ... Just ... fucking wow. As a mother I can not imagine how people can even conceive of taking children away from a fellow parent, even if that person hurt them. And I sure as hell can not understand how anyone can imagine doing this to their kids. I have seen people lie to keep kids away from their father (not lies of abuse, but other lies), and now that I read this rationalization of it, I realize that such people have indirectly used the same rationalizations. Wtf has become wron…
/r/MensRights05/04/11 08:07 PM
5

You know what else reduces the chances of getting hiv? Condoms and not having sex with hiv-infected persons.
/r/MensRights02/04/11 11:26 PM
-3

Further, this type of family structure can lead to a lot more stress for everyone involved, in part because the women need to juggle the demands and needs of more than one dad. That's why god gave them 3 holes
/r/MensRights02/04/11 11:23 PM
1

Moms should not be sexually attracted to anyone, that's just icky
/r/MensRights30/03/11 04:56 PM
1

No one complains because there are few women here. Try saying it in a room full of women.
/r/MensRights30/03/11 04:54 PM
1

They're not necessarily saying it is bad, many are probably just trying to warn you. You don't want to marry a huge boobed chick only to have them on the floor and giving her half your stuff being the only way to get out...
/r/MensRights30/03/11 04:51 PM
0

You have the choice to turn off the phone, to say you have to leave the meeting so you can sleep for work the next day (or that you will have to come in late the next day due to the meeting), to take a job where you set your own hours, etc. Making the wrong choice does have consequences - you may not get the bonus, raise, or promotion, you may get fired, etc. But what is the worst that happens from these things? You must continue living at your current income level, you may have to get a new job…
/r/MensRights28/03/11 07:49 PM
2

But would you say it is hardly as difficult or stressful? As I said, it is stressful in very different ways; ways that most people would prefer to deal with.
/r/MensRights28/03/11 01:29 PM
2

You obviously have no children. I have both been the breadwinner and stayed home to raise the kids. They are stressful in very different ways, but definitely equally stressful. There is nothing unrealistic about living without two incomes. A family only needs as much money as they make themselves need. A stay at home parent is dependent on the working parent, but the working parent is dependent on their boss, customers, etc. Unless one's ambition is living a self-sufficient life, everyone's ambi…
/r/MensRights28/03/11 12:10 AM
2

Do not give up. Do not let grandma think you will give up. Attempt to see and call your son often. Document every time grandma blocks you from doing either of these.
/r/MensRights28/03/11 12:04 AM
2

I know of the story, and I use it as a warning around here all the time. When I say "give them sperm," I mean in any way, shape, or form.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 11:32 PM
2

No, you can still adopt or get surrogate mothers.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 11:29 PM
7

And can't have kids unless you give them sperm.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 11:16 PM
2

Raising kids is far from doing nothing. I agree with you if they are just shipping off the kids to daycare/school all day, but for those that are actually parenting, it is a job.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 11:16 PM
3

That may be a form of harassment, but I would certainly not put it anywhere near groping on the harassment scale.
/r/MensRights25/03/11 06:00 PM
21

Shouting at women in the street and groping women in the street/on trains are two completely different things, and it is very wrong to even relate the two. The gropers aren't going to be the catcallers, the gropers are going to be quiet and try to not be noticed. Also, I do not see shouting/catcalling to be harassment. As a woman, I take it as a compliment; a guy thought me attractive enough that he wanted to take the chance and express the fact that he finds me attractive. He will probably neve…
/r/MensRights25/03/11 01:49 PM
1

Take an actual look at that, it is a market research project focused on males 11 - 17, it is not saying that this whole thing is only for males.
/r/MensRights21/03/11 08:42 PM
1

Where does it say it is for boys only? There are some places where "he" is used, but it is actually grammatically correct to say "he" when talking about an unknown gender. And in fact I see "son or daughter" used as well.
/r/MensRights21/03/11 05:34 PM
2

If a woman has a family business, farm, shop, etc. who runs it while she is in the hospital giving birth?
/r/MensRights20/03/11 04:33 PM
7

He is named because all rape accuseds are named. She is not named because it's illegal in the UK. And this is the problem.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 02:25 PM
2

Probably, at least until the male birthcontrol pill is on the market. Women bear the children, but men bear one of the ingredients necessary for women to bear the children. Currently, if a man is unwilling to give this ingredient to be used to make a child, the woman can lie or steal it. Once women have no way to get this ingredient unless they treat men with equality and respect (or have enough money to go to a sperm bank), things will begin to change.
/r/MensRights12/03/11 10:10 PM
1

But when women can't do A more/better because they have to take time off/spend mental energy to do B, they're going to claim you're paying them less because they are women.
/r/MensRights12/03/11 09:59 PM
2

I do not readily accept information from these media outlets. I have read the same information from many outlets. I linked to those because they are generally considered to be valid sources. Usually when I post a link about any subject online I get bombarded with "That's not a valid source! So I'm not going to listen to anything you say!" Then when I ask for a list of what the person considers valid sources so that I can find the information from one of those sources, they say "I'm not going to …
/r/MensRights09/03/11 08:08 PM
2

http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2010-09-01-single-women_N.htm http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi/index.htm http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi_paytable/index.htm\ Those articles mention that not as many men go to college and etc. As for education (which is vital to be able to progress to training): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704271804575405511702112290.html I think this is important to note (although from your replies I do…
/r/MensRights09/03/11 04:42 PM
7

I pointed out the lies from the quoted part, but here they are more directly, lies in italics with why they are lies in regular; That women make less because of discrimination. Those that do make less do so because of the fact that they work less and at lower pay jobs. That women make less period. Women that work an equal amount of time at equal jobs make more. That women are not getting education, training, and professional development. In fact it is men that are not getting these. That empower…
/r/MensRights09/03/11 04:27 PM
5

I don't just mean in the workplace, I mean overall. Do you think it is fair to say on average women have more rights overall in America? Just take a look around the rest of /MensRights. I'm not a dude, just a woman that wants equality for men.
/r/MensRights09/03/11 04:14 PM
5

http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2010-09-01-single-women_N.htm http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi/index.htm http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi_paytable/index.htm\
/r/MensRights09/03/11 03:59 PM
5

But this is not shooting for equal rights. Women already have more rights, and (for the most part) this is shooting for even more.
/r/MensRights09/03/11 03:56 PM
3

Nope. Things like this are exactly the reason why this "equality" we are suppose to be striving for has already put women above men. This brochure is doing exactly as the title says; ignoring men's issues, lying about statistics, and acting as if privileges for women do not hurt men. If we are ever going to achieve equality, we must stop doing these things.
/r/MensRights09/03/11 03:49 PM
10

Establish high-level corporate leadership for gender equality. Treat all women and men fairly at work – respect and support human rights and nondiscrimination. Ignoring the fact that women with families take more time off work and are often less focused on work, and that women without families already make more than men in the same jobs working the same amount of time. Ensure the health, safety and well-being of all women and men workers. Okay, that one is good Promote education, training and pr…
/r/MensRights09/03/11 03:20 PM
7

And when I was a 15 year old female I wanted to fuck one or two of my male teachers. But the point is not "Did the boy want/enjoy it or not" but that there is a double standard.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 05:57 PM
-2

Because even being a virtual male is an arrestable offense now!
/r/MensRights07/03/11 04:56 PM
1

You guys better agree with me or I won't be your friend anymore!!
/r/MensRights06/03/11 02:52 PM
0

A boy being oppressed will grow into a man used to being oppressed. Things would be totally different if the genders were reversed.
/r/MensRights06/03/11 02:48 PM
-1

Maybe if the girl was 3 years old this would be worth mentioning. But any 14 year old with half a brain is capable of saying "fine, don't be my friend then."
/r/MensRights05/03/11 03:04 PM
1

By definition, yes, he did exploit the mothers, although I think it is still a harsh word to use. He lied to them, sure, but if every person that lied was put into prison we would have more people in prison than not. I think he should be charged with possession of child pornography but that the mothers should be charged with the abuse.
/r/MensRights04/03/11 03:51 PM
1

Well to me, saying he exploited these children removes some of the blame from the mothers and implies that women are mentally children and can not be fully held responsible for their actions when a man tells them to do something.
/r/MensRights04/03/11 04:09 AM
1

Just because I persuade you to do something with my internet Casanova skills does not mean I too did whatever it was, in my opinion.
/r/MensRights03/03/11 09:37 PM
0

I'd like to know how many of these women had jobs and how many were living off of welfare and child support. I'm willing to bet the promise of a date with a psychologist could easily sway the latter type of woman...
/r/MensRights03/03/11 03:14 PM
1

I don't see it as this guy exploited children. I could say to you right now, "Would you go rape someone and show it on webcam?" but it is up to you to not do this.
/r/MensRights03/03/11 03:12 PM
2

I think the point is that feminism has never been about egalitarianism, despite the fact that many say it was in the beginning. Or if you look at who the submitter was, maybe not.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 11:37 PM
1

What? Please re-read what I said. I am saying there should be no baby in this situation, and that men should get paternity leave.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 04:59 PM
-2

So stop giving birth.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 03:19 PM
0

There was once a woman that kept sperm from oral (and admitted this) and used it to become pregnant. The man was forced to pay child support. There's also this. So I wouldn't trust jizzing on her face, she could easily move the sperm to her vagina, or get stabbed in the face and then the abdomen.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 03:02 PM
3

he took time under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act to care for his children and mentally ill wife. Woah wait, mentally ill wife to the point that she needs his care, and they're having babies? I support paternity leave - women get maternity leave, so it is only fair that men get paternity leave - but it kind of sounds like these people should not be having kids.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 02:45 PM
11

Is this implying that we shouldn't treat women the same as men? That women should not be allowed to become marines, police, etc.? A man could be killed by slamming his head into concrete just the same as a woman. There are some men that are bigger than some other men, just as there are some men that are bigger than some women. There are also some women that are bigger than some men. Men aren't all stronger just because they're men. A man that plays video games all day is going to be weaker than …
/r/MensRights18/02/11 06:54 PM
1

The person that seems to be the one to blame happens to be a woman, I don't see that as womanblaming. I'm thinking she is going to try to claim exactly what you said, that there was some accident and she couldn't face the blame (or didn't want to live without her child, etc.). Either that or she will claim she was insane, and use the suicide attempt to back that up. But think about it, it really isn't that hard to kill yourself successfully. If she really wanted to kill herself, it would have be…
/r/MensRights18/02/11 05:47 PM
2

It's possible, but as a mother I'd say highly unlikely. If there is an accident, as a mother one's likely response is to be in denial that the kid is dead/can't be revived, call 911 and have paramedics come out and try to revive the kid, no matter how futile it may obviously be.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 03:08 PM
2

They discovered the toddler's body and a woman in her 30s suffering serious injuries. She was rushed to hospital where she remains in a critical condition. Her injuries are thought to have resulted from a suicide bid.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 02:45 PM
1

I'm sure every parent signed a consent form before the school play since little Billy's mom was filming it...
/r/MensRights18/02/11 02:30 PM
2

We can say that all day, but it isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 11:27 PM
1

Countless, actually. And there is really more like a month range, when fertilization occurred can only be approximated.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 09:48 PM
2

An unmarried man? No chance. Edit: Okay, it may depend on if the state has common law marriage. I know that in states where there is not common law marriage, if one is an unmarried stay at home parent and there is a breakup, one can file for child support, but other than that one is not entitled to any of their unmarried partner's stuff/money. Even a woman would be pretty much screwed in that situation.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 09:08 PM
1

But what if a chick has sex with a lot of men (more than the maximum number) and truly doesn't know which is the father? And what if a chick claims that she had sex with a lot of men and didn't know which was the father, and couldn't name them all because of the limit? Just make the women pay the bill for the testing (not insurance, not their husband, but bill it to the woman directly) to keep down the naming of a lot of potential fathers.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 09:06 PM
2

I think the opting in/out would have to be done before sex takes place, because although it is easy for women to screw over men, it is also easy for men to say "If you have sex with me, I'll take care of you/stay with you if you happen to get pregnant" and not.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 08:59 PM
4

And the moment your partner gets pissed she can throw you out with nothing (you would have no rights to even half of the house and stuff if you aren't married) and take the kids away from you...
/r/MensRights16/02/11 08:49 PM
1

And the mother has to agree. So if she wants child support, it isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 06:37 PM
3

Probono lawyer, fight for more visitation. Btw, child support and visitation are completely separate issues, that "I'll pay if I get to be with the kid 24/7" stuff isn't going to fly (and is impossible anyway, unless you plan on taking a baby to class with you?).
/r/MensRights16/02/11 06:29 PM
1

In the case I am trying to find a lawyer for, the paternal grandmother has custody, not the mother, so the father is actually pretty likely to either get custody or enough partial custody that child support can be greatly reduced if not done away with (kids living with father 50% of the time = father is paying 50% of the kids' living expenses already). Any decent lawyer can get a father enough visitation that the child support can be reduced. It's just a matter of being able to get a decent lawy…
/r/MensRights16/02/11 02:29 PM
21

The worst part about this is that child support being taken out makes it pretty much impossible to afford a lawyer, but income before child support is what is considered to see if you qualify as having a low enough income for a probono lawyer. I have been trying to find a lawyer that will go on the idea that after the father has custody he will no longer have to pay child support and therefore have enough to pay the lawyer, but of course that doesn't fly.
/r/MensRights15/02/11 05:09 PM
0

So put roofies in your own drink and then dance with it in your hand, got it.
/r/MensRights15/02/11 04:43 PM
1

Actually as women get older (so as the years change) their probability of getting pregnant at all - no matter their birth control or lack of birth control - goes down.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 10:39 PM
3

Is it longer than her arm? If yes, I would be more concerned with the risk of knocking the IUD out of place than with feeling it.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:24 PM
0

Yes, it does.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:23 PM
2

2 months of constant bleeding, or 2 months of having periods? If it is 2 months of having periods, then being pregnant and then breastfeeding would do that. If it is bleeding constantly, being pregnant would lead to 9 months of no period and then up to 6 weeks of constant bleeding (8 weeks might be a bit of a cause for concern though)... it could be 12 months of no period if someone got pregnant, had a miscarriage at 3 months, and then immediately got pregnant again. Women have been not having p…
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:21 PM
1

Which means something completely different than what I quoted.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:13 PM
-1

That means its 96% effective over the course of the year. So 1 in 25 years of sex it will result in a kid. That is not exactly how it works...
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:46 PM
1

Woman here, it doesn't really make sense because we have not been having periods for 10,000 years, for a good chunk of that time women would have been nearly constantly pregnant or nursing.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:45 PM
6

The guy can check that an IUD is there, but it's not as casual as the way your guy checks yours.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:38 PM
4

Pregnancy has side effects, and they range all the way up to death.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:35 PM
0

Although it could be possible that they already had problems with their cycles and chose Implanton/Norplant because of problems...
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:25 PM
1

You are suppose to be able to feel it with a hand, not a penis.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:23 PM
1

The implanon did not necessarily cause that.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:21 PM
-4

This has got to be a troll, while it does happen, women don't say that shit outloud (/post it on reddit).
/r/MensRights07/02/11 06:38 PM
2

... You know what, I have never seen a female taking in the carts at any supermarket.
/r/MensRights07/02/11 02:46 PM
1

So crazy. I can't imagine leaving my child with someone that I fear may molest a child if left unsupervised.
/r/MensRights03/02/11 12:36 AM
6

How did they take kids to the bathroom? Did at least 4 people work at all times incase one kid had to go to the bathroom?
/r/MensRights02/02/11 03:42 PM
1

And no law can really stop you. Sure, they can put you in jail after you do it, but short of tying you down and removing your voice box, there is no way to stop you. Yes, what you say can have consequences, and you choose what not to say because you were educated about those consequences. See where I'm going with this?
/r/MensRights01/02/11 09:42 PM
1

I agree that any girl that doesn't know that a vagina cannot "heal over" has no business having sex, but I think that any girl that has began puberty and therefore is capable of having sex should be long since educated about what the vagina actually is. I never said kids should be told sex is a toy, game, etc. Suitable sex education will teach them that this is not what sex is. You actually can go around saying anything you like at any volume you choose. No laws, no amount of people telling you …
/r/MensRights01/02/11 08:58 PM
1

I agree the example you gave shows a major problem with society. Good and bad are relative, though. Whatever the reason for not educating young people about sex, I think it needs to be done, because no matter what we say is good or bad, no matter the laws, it ultimately will be left up to them to have sex or not, so if they choose to they need to know how to do it correctly, and they will not be swayed by things like fear of their vagina healing over.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 04:56 PM
1

Aggression and killing are different things, just as sex and spreading VD/getting pregnant are different things. You can't stop aggression. Self-restraint in showing no aggression works for very few people, usually people end up exploding and killing someone. Yes, it has to be taught to be done when appropriate and in appropriate ways. Just like sex. Showing aggression by killing someone is inappropriate, but saying "I'm angry" and then going for a run or something is appropriate. Having sex wit…
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:58 PM
1

Sex is taboo with most parents and older people. I suppose they (wrongly) think that if kids don't learn about it, they won't do it.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:55 PM
2

You can not stop teen sexualisation. You can stop them from acting like sluts, but not sexualisation, because the fact of the matter is that they are sexual beings. Teens having sex is natural; not having sex until 18 is a very new concept that has been unnaturally introduced. Abstinence does not work, we have seen that time and time again. Schools that preach abstinence only instead of educating about birth control end up with more teen pregnancies than schools that educate about birth control.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:17 PM
3

Laws against 16 year olds having sex does not stop 16 year olds from having sex, it just ruins additional lives when their slightly older partner ends up in jail, on the sex offender list, etc.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:06 PM
2

If sex was not so taboo we could educate teens about how to have sex without spreading venereal disease, getting pregnant, and acting like a slut.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:04 PM
9

Yeah, cuz pussy is pussy, who cares if it is attached to someone you love or not.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:01 PM
3

Of course, don't you know that on midnight of your 18th birthday the maturity fairy comes and bestows you with the maturity to make and deal with wise choices about sex?
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:01 PM
2

But still, even if it had been $5, a chick that steals money is not a chick even the richest guy would want to date.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 09:00 PM
8

I'm female too, and I really hope the writers were way off the mark in thinking many of the viewers identify with this woman...
/r/MensRights31/01/11 08:13 PM
31

When he asked her out I wondered what the writers must be smoking, because it is just insane to think that a man would ask out a woman after she has stolen his credit card and done sneaky vindictive shit over something so small.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 03:09 PM
1

So I'm suppose to walk to the childrens' section, grab a book, go elsewhere to read it, then if I choose to not get that book, go back and grab another and go elsewhere to read it? Screw that, I'll just go somewhere that doesn't have such bs policies.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 12:45 AM
1

So what exactly is an adult trying to buy a book for a kid without the kid there supposed to do?
/r/MensRights30/01/11 05:30 AM
1

No, people don't complain about women committing sexual crimes with anywhere near the frequency of men.
/r/MensRights28/01/11 09:37 PM
1

Did you miss the part where men outnumber women there? It is only when there are nothing but women men need to accommodate available that men accommodate women.
/r/MensRights28/01/11 02:52 PM
1

It is much easier to make less money.
/r/MensRights28/01/11 02:51 PM
-1

What kind of statement is that? An honest one.
/r/MensRights27/01/11 09:10 PM
4

Thus, the poor Jia woman finds herself unable to find a mate by virtue of her high income. Oh those poor women! Psh. How hard is it to earn less money?
/r/MensRights27/01/11 07:29 PM
1

What is the name of his book?
/r/MensRights21/01/11 04:13 PM
-5

Women have always had the choice to be a slut or not. It's just been made a lot easier to be a world wide slut.
/r/MensRights21/01/11 04:04 PM
-2

His point was women do not understand empirical evidence and reasoning, so using it against women is futile.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 05:30 PM
-1

TL;DR: Men need to stop asking women for permission to do things and start telling women that this is the way things are going to be. If one can manage to read past the sexisim, this post is quite true. Look at the signs when women were picketing for the right to vote. Did it say "Can I vote, please? I would be just as good at voting as you are." No. They said "Votes for women." They told instead of asked. At some point men lost the ability to tell instead of ask, and they need to get that back.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 05:30 PM
1

I do not have to agree to that.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 03:02 PM
-2

But don't you know that if both parties do not sign a consent form before every single time they have sex, it is rape?! It doesn't matter if she already signed a contract that says she will have sex with you for the rest of your lives!
/r/MensRights20/01/11 12:13 AM
1

Wives voluntarily becomes wives, slaves do not voluntarily become slaves.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 12:10 AM
2

Yes. Do not pretend a 13 year old is not sexually mature.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 04:09 PM
-5

Oh no, sexually mature people had sex and didn't complain about it! Put her in jail and throw away the key!
/r/MensRights19/01/11 03:47 PM
0

Not having a job does not automatically make one a deadbeat lazy leach; someone has to raise the kids.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 03:40 PM
0

Females want a provider, and they want the best provider possible. In the past that meant the guy that could kill the most meat. Today it means the guy that can make the most money.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 03:39 PM
1

Well, no crap. That and their parents are on it. But they should not be having more is my point. Currently a person is only allowed to stay on certain parts of welfare for 2 years. But that is per person, not per family; so what many people do is have another baby every 2 years. WIC and every such program that is paid for with taxpayer money should require birth control as well. Things like churches that help the poor, food pantries, etc. that are paid for by donations can set their own rules.
/r/MensRights15/01/11 10:23 PM
0

I say force everyone on welfare to be on some sort of birth control or they stop getting welfare. Preferably an IUD or shot (so that they can not be "forgotten" or etc.) for women, but those that truly can not use those (and has it proven by a doctor) can use pills or condoms and just be kicked off welfare if they get pregnant. If they don't want to use birth control, fine, they don't have to get welfare. And before anyone says that will cost money, people on welfare already get free birth contr…
/r/MensRights15/01/11 10:06 PM
7

I can not believe this is even being debated. If women don't feel the need to comment, we should not ban men from commenting until the ratio is better. What many women do not realize is that feminism has become about giving women more rights while men's rights is about giving men equal rights. Of course the majority of men's rights supporters will be male because of this. So when a men's rights issue is discussed, the majority of the people talking are going to be male, because few women are wil…
/r/MensRights11/01/11 04:04 PM
1

If the genders were reversed I would still be complaining. I say if there's grass on the field play ball, no matter the genders nor careers.
/r/MensRights11/01/11 03:06 PM
1

... Agreed except for the homosexual part.
/r/MensRights11/01/11 02:43 PM
10

16 is not really a "boy," and is less than a year away from legal in Illinois (17) ...
/r/MensRights10/01/11 04:52 PM
2

Maybe the fact that her (non-Chinese) husband disagrees with her methods, but she's a tyrant and a bitch to him too?
/r/MensRights10/01/11 04:37 PM
1

True, I don't really know your situation and am just going by what you said. But from what you said, and from seeing other fathers that dislike their exes for whatever reason, it is not about you/the kid but about the mother. You can hate the fact that you are stuck with a crazy and/or bitchy person in your life because of a kid while still loving your kid.
/r/MensRights08/01/11 06:24 PM
5

Why does "To My Wife" mostly seem nice while "To My Husband" mostly seems bitchy?
/r/MensRights07/01/11 09:07 PM
0

Yeah, for the good of the child, fathers should just magically stop feeling this way. Or maybe mothers could quit fucking over fathers? It wasn't about you, it was about your mom.
/r/MensRights07/01/11 08:47 PM
0

How many of you against this would love for America to make women lying about birth control to get a man to have sex without a condom rape?
/r/MensRights05/01/11 03:36 PM
1

While it is true that wrong and punishable by jail time are two very different things, we can disagree about what should be punishable by jail. What prevents people from sending homosexuals to jail in America is that enough Americans don't think it should be punishable by jail for it to be so. Apparently enough Indians think lying to get sex in this way should be punishable by jail. There are many things that are punishable by jail time that I don't agree with, and there are some I agree with.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 02:46 PM
-1

Everywhere. I have no problem with you having that opinion, no. So you should have no problem with me having the opinion that lying to get sex is wrong.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 02:52 AM
2

And what is wrong with prostitution? How is marriage itself not prostitution, when a woman gives sex in exchange for room and board? Yes, if she enters into an oral contract saying that, she should give it to you.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 02:51 AM
3

What straw-man argument? And how is a supposed straw-man argument in a different subreddit valid reason for a ban? The only time waster here is you wasting your own time, arguing something that I will never agree with and banning me from a subreddit I didn't even know about.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:43 PM
-3

Not going to jail for what is considered rape is a human right? Yes, women (and men) that cheat should go to jail imo. What happens to women that divorce? I would imagine they are treated and viewed much like women that have sex with a man before marriage and then do not marry that man.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:38 PM
-1

You banned me for disagreeing with you, and I'm supposedly the idiot or troll? You really hurt my feelings by banning me from a subreddit I was not even aware existed.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:32 PM
-3

So don't do the first wrong (lying in a way that destroys a woman's life) and the second wrong (a guy going to jail - not that I agree sending someone to jail for doing wrong is wrong) won't be done.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:25 PM
1

If they agree to have sex under the promise of marriage if they have said sex, yes. They entered into an oral contract, and both the man and woman should fulfill their ends of the contract.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:21 PM
-1

So it is not ok to destroy a man's life, but it is ok to destroy a woman's? Sure, the woman had a part in the action, but so did the man. And I don't even like women.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:08 PM
-2

How is that the other hand? Western gender equality makes women seem devoid of intelligence at times as well.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 06:05 PM
-3

If someone says "Have sex with me and I'll marry you," the assumption is that if you don't have sex with them they won't. Throwing guys in jail helps because people are less likely to do something if they know they will get thrown in jail for it.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 05:51 PM
1

Fought him every step of the way? Why the fuck? There are so many kids out there that need families and don't have anyone fighting for them, yet these people were dead-set on taking this kid? And potentially fucked up the kid for life because they thought that fighting for 3 years would cause someone to say "okay, he's been with you for the first 3 years of his life, might as well leave him with you." What is wrong with these people? I question if they should have any child now.
/r/MensRights27/12/10 07:30 PM
3

Could that poll be any more biased?
/r/MensRights26/12/10 07:49 PM
0

I don't know, it might depend. Was this a gmail account or an ISP-provided account from which he paid the bill?
/r/MensRights26/12/10 07:49 PM
0

Marriages don't go from great to divorced in 40 weeks or less.
/r/MensRights24/12/10 02:52 PM
1

Well I know that his wife is a woman and that she had a baby despite having a fucked up marriage. Him being a professional athlete has little to do with things, unless we want to assume even worse and speculate that she had another baby to get more money out of him after the divorce. I'm allowed to speculate about these things, nothing I say is going to affect their outcome in court.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 09:18 PM
3

Nice and rational only works with others that are willing to be nice and rational. This mother does not seem willing.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 06:45 PM
0

He said 8 year old, no need to pay for child care if she works while the kid is in school.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 04:54 PM
2

I'm going to guess the marriage was fucked and she thought having another kid would convince him to stay. Sadly, I have seen it several times. Not that I am saying guys are completely innocent in these cases, as it is pretty stupid to have sex with a woman you're planning to divorce and not take all possible precautions against pregnancy.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 04:51 PM
1

I have decided that this sort of thing is so important and so tied to one's morals that it is extremely rare for how they feel about the matter to change (well, pregnancy-hormone induced craziness aside - their feelings about the matter may change while pregnant but should go back once hormones go back to normal).
/r/MensRights17/12/10 03:21 PM
1

I really do not think your mood changes about this subject, and I have had a human "in my stomach" more than once.
/r/MensRights17/12/10 02:44 PM
0

Well if you want it, your Gyno can tell you that it will be more painful but she/he can not refuse to give it to you; if they do, I would find another Gyno. Well good for you, I did not mean it was based on your income, specifically, I meant "you" as in people.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 10:02 PM
1

IUDs are given to women that haven't given birth, insertion is just less painful if you have given birth. All other forms of birth control are priced based on your income at Planned Parenthood...
/r/MensRights16/12/10 08:42 PM
1

Condoms are about $8 for 10, so if you have sex once every day that is about $24 per month (+ the gas & effort of going to the store, and not getting any if you run out). The pill, shot, patch, etc. may be covered by insurance. An IUD (if not covered by insurance) is about $500 and last for 5 or 10 (depending on the type you get) years, which means it is about $4 or $8 per month.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 06:10 PM
2

I think the best solution would be not having sex with anyone that disagrees with you on this issue.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 06:03 PM
1

Well the only way this would work would be to force everyone to sign a contract that covers what will happen in the case of pregnancy before they have sex. Otherwise you will have people saying they won't ask for or they will pay child support and then changing their minds.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 06:02 PM
3

Maybe the next generation of women will understand that we don't have unlimited reproductive choices that last forever. I'm pretty sure most of this generation and many generations before us already know this. I'd say adopt, but she's such an idiot that she probably shouldn't have a kid at all.
/r/MensRights14/12/10 03:45 PM
1

Well since her kids are likely to be the only part of her left in the world after she dies, I think how she raised them is a fair way to judge her worth.
/r/MensRights14/12/10 03:43 PM
1

It is certainly possible for him to not know. I have seen this actually happen. The man gives the woman money or money comes out of the account, and he assumes she's paying the bills. The man hands the woman the tax papers and assumes she's taking it to a tax preparer. The man hands the woman the property tax papers and assumes she's paying. But in actuality she is bringing home clothes, shoes, etc. while he is at work. She has so many clothes/shoes that he doesn't notice when she has a new outf…
/r/MensRights13/12/10 03:18 PM
7

Yeah, black women get accused of rape all the time.
/r/MensRights13/12/10 02:43 PM
1

How is that logically impossible? She gives a logical example right there. There are many women that do go to college and have careers but also want children, and they need someone to watch those children while they are at work.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 02:38 PM
1

Because women are more likely to shop.
/r/MensRights05/12/10 08:13 PM
1

So you have never met a woman with a job?
/r/MensRights05/12/10 08:03 PM
0

No, women want equal pay for not as much nor as hard work.
/r/MensRights05/12/10 12:33 AM
3

No. It also does not take into account the fact that a woman working the same job as a man and scheduled the same hours is more likely to take time off when their kid is sick, their babysitter falls through, they're giving birth, or they have PMS. Also, young, single, childless women out-earn male counterparts
/r/MensRights05/12/10 12:31 AM
1

Why is it acceptable to put a child in a corner? I don't know, you have to ask society that one. You don't go on a tv show asking for help unless you have tried taking away his toys, sending him to his room, etc. etc. and it hasn't worked. His twin brother, who lived exactly the same life, managed to not get in trouble multiple times that day.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 06:05 PM
0

The kid obviously knows he was not suppose to do these things, so don't try to use that excuse. How can he learn right from wrong if he is not punished for doing wrong? If someone forced an adult to stand in a corner, that would be abuse, but it is acceptable to do to a child. Some things are acceptable to do to children but not adults.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 03:39 AM
1

Did I say it was malicious? If it seemed I implied that, I apologize. He may have spent the beginning of his life needing to steal food to not be hungry and protect his food from being stolen, not knowing if he would get to eat when the next meal was dealt or if a bigger kid would take his share. Or he may just be greedy and not realize that stealing is wrong. Whatever the cause, this issue is something that needs dealing with now, not a few years from now when he is a teen getting arrested for …
/r/MensRights30/11/10 05:58 PM
1

I agree with you about the school system. However, the person that could not get the child to stop doing what they did 3 times in a row was a teacher at a school. I am asking, if the teacher was "doing it wrong," how can they do it right?
/r/MensRights30/11/10 04:16 PM
1

You know what they say about assuming.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:45 PM
1

School cannot raise a kid. That's what I was saying, though. School can not raise a kid, yet most kids spend most of their waking hours there. While the children are there schools are trying to educate each child, which means each child must not act up, as that interrupts ever other childs' education. However schools have no way of punishing children when they act up. So what can be done with the current laws? Forcing the child to be homeschooled is not within current laws.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:44 PM
2

If one of my kids' friends took food without asking and without me having said "help yourself" at some point in the past, I would certainly consider it stealing.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:13 PM
1

While I think that public school should not exist, it does and is going to for a long time. So how can we deal with this?
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:08 PM
-1

Is anyone saying this is abuse actually a parent? These methods may be a little "old school," but they certainly do not seem like abuse to me. (Sure, the kid is crying as if he is being tortured. My kids do that when they are in time out. Yes, it tugs at my heartstrings. That's why kids do it.) I'm going to assume she has tried the things that are acceptable punishment nowadays, such as time-outs. If that doesn't work with a kid, what can you do? Just let the kid run wild, interrupt class and hi…
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:07 PM
1

That does not say "stealing from his house/his parents," it is probably being done at school, friend's houses, etc.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:02 PM
2

If you can't get a kid to stop doing what he's doing 3 times in a row you're doing it wrong. And how exactly are you suppose to do it when you can not spank nor in any way punish the child, and you're trying to keep 30 kids in check at the same time?
/r/MensRights30/11/10 02:45 PM
6

Yes, they sometimes do. Of course they suggest all other options first, but sometimes two people are just better off not being married.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 05:56 AM
5

If they have different life goals that can't be negotiated on (and another child is one of those things, you can't just say "ok let's have half a kid") then all the counseling in the world isn't going to save their marriage.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 05:07 AM
16

So then she has the right to get a new husband who does want to have more kids.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 04:56 AM
7

It will only become a non-issue when people stop forcing it upon minors.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 02:16 AM
13

Well the hope is that if you ever have a son, you will not keep him from having this pleasure.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 02:08 AM
3

Maybe the Disney stuff is girly, but the Pixar stuff has always seemed to be for boys imo. Think about it; cowboys and space men, bugs, superheroes, monsters... Then the Ghibli stuff that Disney translates is gender-neutral. It all balances each other out, imo. I'm going to guess Disney wants to stop the girly stuff because they ran out of fairy tales to rip off and ways to rehash them.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 04:14 PM
11

Nah, he's just an old gay guy.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 04:06 PM
1

I would take a stand only once my children are out of danger of being taken away. So I would move to the back of the bus or pretend to believe, and once I and my children are safely at home, contact the appropriate people and say "Hey, we need to change these laws that say I have to sit at the back of the bus/pretend to believe."
/r/MensRights24/11/10 02:20 PM
1

Well if my children would be taken away if I did not sit on the back of the bus, you bet your ass I would sit in the back of the bus. Yeah, I'd try to get the rules changed later so I didn't have to sit on the back of the bus, but I would move to the back of the bus.
/r/MensRights23/11/10 06:14 PM
1

This is wrong. But why didn't he just pretend to not be Agnostic? If it came to my children being taken away I would pretend to be whatever it took and go to whatever church they wanted me to.
/r/MensRights23/11/10 05:29 PM
2

It is rare that someone goes from stay at home parent to single parent financially on their own very quickly. If they divorce, they get child support, half of their ex's money, and sometimes alimony. If the working parent dies, they get his/her money and assets. On the rare occasions it does happen that they are suddenly single with no financial help, they leach off others. Their parents (or someone) watch the kids for free for a few years, and/or they get on welfare. This gives them time to wor…
/r/MensRights21/11/10 04:33 PM
5

True, he gets those benefits for a set amount of time, and they are stopped if before that time is up he gets a new job. Alimony, if we insist on it existing, should be done the same way.
/r/MensRights19/11/10 05:36 PM
1

No one pays me extra to cook my own meals and clean my own house and taking care of myself. There's a difference between cooking for and cleaning up after 1 person that is at work a lot of the time vs 3+ people, 2+ of which are home a lot of the time. And there's a huge difference between taking care of yourself and taking care of a child. It is certainly a full time job. Most of the day you are a teacher, activity organizer, chauffeur, etc. etc. etc. for the child/children on top of the 3 hours…
/r/MensRights19/11/10 05:29 PM
1

Um, yes we do. We give him unemployment and training to get a new job.
/r/MensRights19/11/10 05:00 PM
2

a job to survive. yes. As long as she has no kids, because she isn't going to find a job that pays for childcare, a home, and to feed herself and the kids.
/r/MensRights19/11/10 04:59 PM
6

It is standard procedure to assume all men are abusive.
/r/MensRights19/11/10 04:47 PM
4

When I gave birth to my son, I had to make sure they knew I didn't want it done. Technically you have to opt-in, but they just had the paper mixed with a bunch of other papers I had to sign, and they assumed I wanted it done. They also did several things I was suppose to opt-in for and had me sign afterward (even though I was suppose to sign first) so I was quite afraid they would circumcise my son and ask me to sign afterward...
/r/MensRights19/11/10 04:46 PM
1

Okay. You have totally changed my mind. I'm going to go buy 20 boxes of tampons right now. I think I'll let the boys use them too, if it makes people happy I don't want to deprive them.
/r/MensRights14/11/10 10:47 PM
1

I'm not familiar with courtrooms so I'm not sure about that, but during job interviews and pretty much every situation, yes, you can just stand and go to the restroom. It is social convention to say "excuse me a moment" or some such, but you are certainly allowed to go. Even while an airplane is taxiing, yes. The plane will usually stop and they'll say "well now we have to wait" and the other passengers will glare at you when you're done, but you can still go. And there's a key difference anyway…
/r/MensRights13/11/10 02:26 PM
1

I have never had my bathroom breaks limited as an adult, so I'm not sure what "real world" you are talking about. No, it was neither of our exes. My daughter's biofather does not want to see her nor pay child support. Since you can not force someone to love, I am not going to try. My partner is a loving father to her. I already admitted that many people disagree with the way I raise my kids. However, there is nothing that can be done about that as my children are happy and healthy.
/r/MensRights12/11/10 02:23 PM
1

I'd rather be a whore than a bitch that forces my children to have the times they are allowed to go to the restroom controlled. But to each their own.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 10:57 PM
1

Yes, he is my ex-fiance. Do you know the father of your children?
/r/MensRights11/11/10 08:28 PM
1

Basically, you're advocating toting around something which is considered the most hazardous of biological waste. By your children. No, as I said, this is not an issue for my family. I was simply stating how some people do this. Although the majority of people may not use cloth, some certainly do. I find it ironic that you say my children should be taken away, yet you do not allow your children to go to the restroom for long periods of time, allowing them only "short breaks." IMO that is abusive,…
/r/MensRights11/11/10 07:47 PM
0

That works too
/r/MensRights11/11/10 04:50 PM
0

Cloth is not nearly as absorbent that is why it is no longer used. Um, no, that is why you do not use it. Many people still do. As I said a diva cup is a valid alternative, which eliminates the need to "carry around a stinking wad." And there are bags that allow no smell (nor blood) to escape, such as "wet bags" used for cloth diapers. Since I do not lock myself nor my children away from the bathroom for hours a day with only short breaks, this is not an issue for my family.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 03:17 PM
-1

The shopkeeper -> "mother nature"
/r/MensRights10/11/10 08:35 PM
-2

This question is going to the people who are saying the other parent should help offset the cost.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 08:09 PM
0

Well since you feel the need to keep trying to make personal jabs at me, I had to respond. And you do realize you're not suppose to flush tampons, right? But if you are flushing your tampons, then yes both of our methods have the blood going into the sewer system; so what exactly is your problem with cloth pads?
/r/MensRights10/11/10 08:08 PM
1

Whine until he said yes.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 06:07 PM
1

And I think only a money grubbing bitch would say "gee, I'm paying for this xbox live and iphone just fine, and my ex is paying for half of my kids's needs, but I think my ex should pay for half of the iphone and stuff, since he was/is an asshole."
/r/MensRights10/11/10 06:01 PM
1

The man should have to pay half for emergency care, yes, but he should not have to send money to the woman for her to save for emergency care, because she can choose to spend that money on xbox live, iphones, etc. instead of saving it.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 05:58 PM
0

No, I advocate washing cloth, genius, so that the blood goes down the drain with the water. I'm going to give you a 9/10 for trolling; you're good, but I can't quite give you a 10 because cinnamongreen set the bar too high.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 05:53 PM
2

Nope, the women too.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 05:49 PM
1

Did I say CPS investigated me? I said CPS has been called. They said that there was nothing they could do as no neglect was going on. Cloth pads are safe to use. Yes blood is a hazardous biological waste, which is why it should go to the water treatment plant to be cleaned out and disposed of safely instead of the trash to seep into the ground and be spread around by animals. Please, for the sake of your children, educate yourself. I value my children, not with monetary value but with something …
/r/MensRights09/11/10 11:22 PM
0

I want our son to know his father wants to take care of him. Oh please. If it was really about that you would wrap half the stuff you give him and put his father's name on it. His son is not rotting, so don't say that is what he wants. Spending money on someone does not equal love.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:46 PM
2

I am not trying to be obstinate. I am trying to make a point. Yes the Japanese are a different culture but their needs are the same is my point. A child does not need their own room or even their own bed, but in our society we want each child to have their own bed and room. Legally in the us each child must have their own bed, but you can put as many beds in a room as you like. While health care is a need in some ways and in some situations, health insurance is not. I never said children should …
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:24 PM
1

I would say that anyone that buys disposable sanitary products when it is completely unnecessary (which means always) is neglectful to the Earth and therefore their children, as they are not doing everything they can to give their children a clean, healthy Earth and sustainable life. But we must agree to disagree on this matter as we have digressed much too far from the issue at hand. Good day to you.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:09 PM
2

Health care and health insurance are different things.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 08:21 PM
1

There is no neglect going on, simply a way of life and morals that many people disagree with. By the way, I think you should change your name.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 08:15 PM
1

I live near Chicago, and even if I were getting child support I would tell my daughter to use cloth pads or reusable devices. There is nothing barbaric about it. Feel free to report me to CPS. It has been done before by people disagreeing with my ways.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 07:27 PM
1

The kid didn't ask for the divorce and has a right to have his basic needs met. Basic needs, yes. The right to air conditioning, xbox live, etc.? No. Heath care and medicine is not a luxury any child should be deprived of Health care/medicine needed to survive, no. Things like headache medicine, cold medicine, etc. are. $10 - 15 taken out of the $250 can pay for regular health care. If there is an emergency such as an ER visit, a copy of the bill should be sent to the father and he should pay ha…
/r/MensRights09/11/10 07:07 PM
0

If I am ever in a situation where a court is trying to take more from my ex than enough for half of needs, I shall.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 06:28 PM
2

Sorry to break it to you; He is not responsible for acting as such. His only responsibility is paying for half of the child's *needs" as they would cost if you were paying a reasonable amount for them. $250 covers that.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 06:12 PM
-1

Those are luxuries.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 02:20 PM
1

Urban area, near Chicago. I don't think you actually asked me this before because I would have said yes; Yes, I think child support should be half of only the frugal needs. The parent paying child support can choose to pay for luxuries, but should be under no obligation to do so, and should not be regarded as bad for not doing so as long as they pay for half the needs.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 04:36 AM
1

Well I am not going to count that as my own personal premium nor would I take it into account if I were trying to calculate child support, because I could at any time choose to spend it on iphones and xbox live. This savings is not really a need, as we could survive just fine without it, it is simply a safety net. you have a decreasing level of medical costs you can weather every time you added a person to your household. How so? If little Johnny gets sick I can spend the same amount on him if h…
/r/MensRights09/11/10 04:19 AM
3

The father is paying enough for half the needs of the child, but he is not paying for half of the child's actual bills because of the lifestyle the mother chooses. What this is, imo, is a case of a mother getting a reasonable amount, a father paying, and the mother still bitching because she can not misuse child support nor get ridiculous levels.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 04:11 AM
0

If a friend is already going where you're going, it cost them nothing extra to let you ride along (and it's better for the environment too!). Walking is free. I think it is teaching them the wrong things if they get a job and a car they use to drive to that job but the job does not more than pay for the car + insurance.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:44 AM
6

Broken promises? You said he did not want the kid from the beginning. $250 pays half of the kid's necessities; the only reason the bills are higher is because of the lifestyle you choose. You can't force him to like a kid he never wanted. You can't force him to want to give someone an iphone. If you can pay for things just fine why are you bitching?
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:33 AM
3

My ex did not want our son. Yet you still had him, and are now surprised your ex doesn't want to buy him an iphone and pay for his xbox live?
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:29 AM
3

The fact that you put air conditioning in there shows that you can not tell needs from wants.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:26 AM
1

Um no, I wouldn't average the amount I save, I would average the amount I spend. $3010/6 people/24 months = (rounding up) $20.90 per month. So half of that is $10.45 (hey, that's less than the $15 I suggested she use!), which can easily come out of the $250.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:22 AM
-1

YOU were referring to how much she is currently getting. I wasn't. ShakeyBobWillis wasn't. Using my life and personal experience, having 4 kids and having lived all over the US, it is more than enough.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:14 AM
-2

I get medical care in the US without insurance. I have 6 people in a 3 bedroom house. In Japan, many families don't have any bedrooms at all.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 03:12 AM
0

So teach them how to get around without their own car. It is quite possible to enjoy yourself and be involved in sports and etc. without your own car nor your mother driving you around.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 11:06 PM
0

Sigh. $250 is how much she is currently getting, a reasonable amount. We are talking about a theoretical crazy amount.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 11:04 PM
5

That does not matter.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 10:21 PM
0

It is not luck. You're looking at things as if major illnesses are the default and we are lucky to not get them. This way of thinking is what the insurance companies are betting on. The truth is not getting a major illness is the default. Sure there are risks of getting a major illness. But as I said if one of us does get a major illness we will be able to negotiate costs down and (I didn't say this but) arrange payment plans. And it would be extremely unlikely that the whole family would get ma…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 10:16 PM
0

The $500 a month figure is from both parents combined No, it wasn't. Health insurance is not a need. An extra bedroom is not a need, rent would be paid whither the kid was there or not. Education can be free. Look we can argue all day about what is a need and how much it costs but the fact of the matter is this woman does not want more money for needs. If we were talking about a mother struggling to work and provide her child with food and shelter, that would be a different story. She said herse…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:46 PM
4

It's not so much that we have a problem with you buying things with money you have worked for. Our problem is that you think your ex should be required to help pay for these luxuries that you are choosing to buy.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:38 PM
-1

I am not trying to get out of paying child support and I am a woman, so leaving the country before the child is born would not really work for me. Some of the laws were established because women have this idea that they are owed an extravagant lifestyle without working for it. This is what I have a problem with.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:29 PM
3

Yes it is, each parent is suppose to contribute half; it does not take $1,000 a month to raise a child. Regardless, that has nothing to do with what is going on here; She is currently getting a reasonable amount of child support, and is complaining because she wants more.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:24 PM
2

And I'm just saying that if you can't afford your lifestyle on the amount you have to work with, change your lifestyle. Yes, I can definitely feed, clothe, and shelter myself for $500 a month. I have done so for less in many cities including Chicago, San Francisco and Phoenix.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:20 PM
0

We live just fine without it. Yes, that is what I am saying. Each parent can choose to buy luxuries, but they should not be required to give the other parent money to choose luxuries.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:16 PM
0

The kid has an iphone and xbox live and spends quite a bit on hair gel; I very much doubt he is living in an area with a school too poor for buses. But when schools don't have buses what tends to happen is the parents organize carpools; they don't just buy every teen a car. How did he get to school before he was old enough to drive?
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:15 PM
10

Then change your lifestyle so that you are not paying $5 per meal. If I go only to expensive restaurants where each meal is $100, meals eat up $500 in two days. When I use to buy all the food for my family (I grow it now) I spent $400 a month for six people, and we ate (and still eat) very healthy.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:07 PM
4

Unless they are living on a farm they are most likely not a two hour walk away from school, and either way there is most likely a bus that the kid could ride, or mom could drive him instead of having his own car. But this is not about the car, the iphone, or the xbox; it is about these things not being needs. It does not matter if parents typically buy these things. It does not matter if all of his peers have an iphone and an xbox. These things are not needs and therefore his father has no requi…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:03 PM
0

It is a want. I and my children live just fine without it.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 08:55 PM
1

There is one definition of "needs," people just use it incorrectly quite a bit. A teen's needs are food, shelter (/clothing if going outside), and water; anything else is a luxury.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:57 PM
8

If her ex disagrees with her unnecessary ways, there is no reason he should have to help pay for them. Yes, she can choose to pay for things, just as her ex can choose to not. He is not wrong or bad for choosing to not. He is paying for half of the child's needs as he should.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:40 PM
10

You are mixing needs and wants. $500 is enough to cover needs. There is no reason the father should pay half of the kid's iphone and xbox live, a car and gas when the kid could walk, etc.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:32 PM
9

You still need to; you have two sons you need to educate.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:26 PM
-4

I teach the plants how to get water instead of handing them water.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:25 PM
-3

Yes, that works now, but not while they were kids and he didn't pay the $30,000.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:14 PM
-11

Well the not being able to afford healthcare part is bullshit in the first place, if you "can not afford" health care in the US you can go to places that bill according to how much money you do have and/or arrange payment plans. I would hope that their mother pays if he dies, but I know that does not happen most of the time; taxpayers pay, but I would rather they pay only after a non-payer dies rather than while he/she was sick and after he/she dies (as that would reduce the total amount taxpaye…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:09 PM
-3

Yes but that does not change the fact that the guy actually owed the money, unlike the main guy the article is about.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 05:00 PM
13

When your child is a teen you will no longer need to pay for childcare. They also will not outgrow clothes as quickly. You may have to buy/grow a bit more food but not hundreds of dollars worth. And a teen can make their own money for luxuries. If the kid does not have a job that more than pays for the car insurance they don't need a car, imo.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:55 PM
-7

You should pay for half the support of your children. If you have nothing left afterward, get a better or additional job. It isn't the kids' fault that he had liver failure, they still have to eat.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:52 PM
10

You are the best troll ever.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:48 PM
20

Wow. I... just... ... wow. Your ex should pay more child support so you can pay for iphones and xbox live? I'm just going to tell myself you're a troll so that I don't have to go kill myself because of what society has become.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:43 PM
7

She was supposedly on two methods of birth control - depo and the morning after pill. I hope you have educated yourself about birth control since then.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:04 PM
1

No, read the article again. That part was about a different guy actually owing child support.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 04:01 PM
4

The title changed a word and is misleading. This article talks about a guy that payed child support despite the fact that he shouldn't have needed to do so, and still has it taken out of his check but returned a week later. The changed quote is about a friend that did not pay child support. But one of the worst cases I know of was a friend, owing $30,000 in back child support. Suffering from liver failure, they took most of his paycheck even though his children were adults. He couldn't feed hims…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 03:59 PM
90

Your ex pays half, you pay the other half. $250 a month is certainly enough to half feed and clothe a person. If you're spending more than $500 a month on one person you seriously need to change your lifestyle.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 03:50 PM
1

And by the way... if I have $20 to spend on the kids I spend $5 each on my 2 biokids and 2 stepkids, I don't spend $10 on each of my biokids and say screw the stepkids. I love and treat them all equally and anyone that doesn't do this is a shitty parent. edit: Anyone that gets with a partner that doesn't do this is also a shitty parent.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 02:45 PM
1

I'm advocating accepting the fact that this guy is not trying to replace biodad. As I said he is not a replacement, he is an additional person in their lives. It does not matter if he owns the house, if he is in a relationship with the woman of the house he is the man of the house. It has nothing to do with money nor ownership but with relationships... you for some reason seem to have problems separating those things. Also, a fathers role is much more than just fixing a leaking pipe or mowing th…
/r/MensRights08/11/10 02:39 PM
1

This is how it normally happens. Especially with guys who can't afford to take care of their second wives children because they can't afford the CS to their ex wive. Wow. No, it isn't. Money has nothing to do with how you treat children.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 02:18 PM
1

If she didn't expect him to wait she would say that she wanted to dump him. A "break" implies that she wants to get back together with him when the break is over. For that to happen, he obviously has to wait for her and not get a new girlfriend.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 12:57 AM
1

It's not about being threatened by female sexuality. She is being evil. She is using men for nothing but her own pleasure, with no thought of their feelings. If a man was doing this same thing I would call him an evil slut.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 12:55 AM
0

The problem is that she isn't dissatisfied in her relationship. She's saying everything is right about it but she wants to go out and be a slut for awhile and come back to this great relationship later, and she expects the guy to wait for her and take her back when she's done.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 05:09 PM
4

Well 33 is women's last chance to get a guy if they want to have a kid before 35 (the age where birth defect, Down's, etc. risks start going up).
/r/MensRights07/11/10 05:06 PM
1

I already photoshopped in some dicks myself... the more dicks the better I always say.
/r/MensRights06/11/10 06:03 PM
1

The man of the house = the father role. Period. The father role can be played by a biofather, a grandfather, an older brother, etc. In some cultures it is played by tribe leaders and such. It's not that the mother is grooming another man, it is that she has a man of the house. This guy is not a replacement dad, he is an additional adult in the kids' lives, an additional person to supply protection and care when biodad is not there. If op is looking at things as if the guy is trying to replace hi…
/r/MensRights06/11/10 06:01 PM
42

I grew up in a ghetto and have frequented several others, and this article is completely right. So how do we fix this? I propose more male teachers in ghetto schools, more male-led activities at YMCAs and such in ghettos, etc.
/r/MensRights05/11/10 04:57 PM
3

Why? What is going to happen if people see pictures of me? If I didn't want these pictures seen or this information known I would not have put them on the internet.
/r/MensRights05/11/10 12:31 PM
2

Never give women your real name nor address.
/r/MensRights04/11/10 05:44 PM
3

She's at all untrustworthy That one eliminates all women ever.
/r/MensRights04/11/10 05:44 PM
3

It's more like "Someone with a pack of matches in their pocket was in the same room as my couch, what do I do, Reddit?"
/r/MensRights04/11/10 01:36 PM
2

I don't get what there is to be livid about? I have changed the diapers and wiped the ass of my boyfriend's kids, is that something to freak out about? Would their mom call her lawyer if she found out the kid was laying in bed with you? Sorry to break it to you but this guy is playing the father roll when the kids are at their mom's house. The only thing wrong in this situation is that you haven't met the guy. For the kids' sake you are going to have to be civil to their mom and this guy. You ar…
/r/MensRights04/11/10 01:33 PM
10

She gets to go on expensive trips with, cuddle with, and talk with him, and doesn't have to have sex. That isn't a man women want to marry, it's a man women want as a gay best friend. I'm all for raising sons (and daughters!) to value compassion and take responsibility for their actions, but it really seems like this lady is trying to have her son fill the roles of husband and gay best friend for herself. It's a bit disturbing.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 08:09 PM
1

She could have had a kid without telling the family and sent it to live 1,000 miles away.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 04:28 PM
0

Yes, you're being sexist. And as a 25 year old female that would rape you if you were hot and I had the chance, let me say you are being silly.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 07:59 PM
2

The number of uncircumcised males in the USA is growing, nearly half of all infants born nowadays are being left uncircumcised. So that means when my son is 14, half of his friends will likely be uncircumcised. But if my 14 year old is showing his dick to people that have seen enough penises to tell the difference (they look the same erect, so don't try to use the excuse of internet porn), I have bigger problems than him getting made fun of for being uncircumcised.
/r/MensRights29/10/10 03:20 PM
0

Yeah, young boys show their friends their penises constantly, and make fun of each other for being like the majority of the world.
/r/MensRights29/10/10 02:56 PM
1

But if they have to do that, it means you were trying to get out of willingly letting them do it...
/r/MensRights27/10/10 08:55 PM
1

You could have a gene that is correlated with some disorder but you don't have the disorder yourself, and they use that as a justification to increase your insurance rates or deny coverage. I'm still not seeing the wrong part of this... They are a business, they have no obligation to let you use their services nor let you use them cheaply...
/r/MensRights27/10/10 08:25 PM
1

But how would insurance companies get your saliva without you knowing? And how would that be misuse if you're trying to lie to the insurance company (not admitting you have something that would cause you to be denied coverage)?
/r/MensRights27/10/10 06:19 PM
1

a person could obtain someones saliva sample and screen them without their consent. I'm not quite understanding why this is bad.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 03:46 PM
2

He should have stopped her long before it got to this point, when there were no camera crews around. Abuse does not just go from 0 to 60 in an instant, it builds up to the point where the abuser knows they can do something like this in front of a camera and not be stopped.
/r/MensRights23/10/10 06:06 PM
2

The woman is always considered like a weak child, she can't defend herself physically from the big strong man, she can't mentally make her own choices but men can (see cases of male teachers "raping" girls being punished and female teachers "raping" boys not, men being punished for rape after having consensual sex when both the man and woman have been drinking, etc.). Women are equal when it is convenient to them, weak mental-children when it isn't.
/r/MensRights23/10/10 06:04 PM
2

Almost hard to have sympathy for him when he's making $4790 a month working only two days a week. Almost.
/r/MensRights21/10/10 02:34 PM
1

I have. I have proof, I've given birth twice.
/r/MensRights19/10/10 01:00 PM
1

I was not expressing contempt for women's rights, I was simply stating a fact. When women had to depend on men, they were more choosy about which men they would procreate with.
/r/MensRights18/10/10 11:20 PM
-2

If not for the "privileges" earned by women fighting in the past, your mother would probably not have had a baby with a man that was going to run off.
/r/MensRights17/10/10 02:29 PM
1

Render yourself unconscious and then have your girlfriend to try...
/r/MensRights15/10/10 09:56 PM
1

who has little understanding of the (potential) consequences of sex People should be educated about the potential consequences of sex before puberty begins.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 05:43 PM
10

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU STILL SENDING YOUR DAUGHTER THERE??? They are telling you to hand over your daughter quietly and not question them, and you're handing over your daughter? If no other public school is an option, homeschool.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 05:36 PM
1

But she could have realized what they were by who they were from, and pretended it was the wrong address.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 05:28 PM
3

She has no idea this is even being argued. So you assume. For all you know she is purposely making the paperwork get "lost" so that she can say she never saw it.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 10:12 PM
-1

Statutory rape needs to exist (seriously - you can't see that?) No. If there's grass on the field, play ball. Forcible rape being illegal is enough.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 01:58 PM
-5

Well, I would say they do. But then again I know I have... unique views on "rape" laws.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 02:43 PM
7

No, it is more an issue with statutory rape existing.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 02:33 PM
-2

If he were single, there would be implied consent. Since he is dedicated to having sex with only one woman, there is implied refusal.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 01:53 PM
7

Wow, I want to smack these women. Because we are not as strong as men. And what does that have to do with anything? Because we have to wear heels. No, they choose to wear heels. Because I have children. So why the hell aren't you at home with them? I'm sure some of the men do too. And I'm sure some of the men are the only breadwinner in their family, and their partner & kids would be screwed if they died. The womens' kids are more likely have another breadwinner. Did your mothers raise you to be…
/r/MensRights09/10/10 03:44 PM
0

Women get paid less Women work less, even when they are in the same position. They take time off to give birth, they are more likely to leave work to pick up a sick kid, more likely to leave when something happens with their babysitter, etc. Women call off due to PMS more often than men. If we paid women the same for not working as much, that would not be equal.
/r/MensRights08/10/10 01:56 PM
2

I don't think it necessarily has to be a mom and a dad - it can be two moms, two dads, or whatever - but kids are obviously going to learn more if they have two parents that actually care about their education. No matter how "strong" and "independent" women are, no one can be in two places at once; no one can be at the office and educating their children at the same time, no one can be sleeping for work the next day and helping their children with their homework at the same time. So if you're a …
/r/MensRights06/10/10 03:31 PM
1

What do they do in cases where the male is too young to work?
/r/MensRights04/10/10 07:36 PM
8

You could have sex only with a woman you know and trust. But that's crazy.
/r/MensRights04/10/10 07:14 PM
0

I have no problem with her getting an abortion, my problem is with her not telling the guy.
/r/MensRights04/10/10 02:49 PM
-5

Let's pretend the rolls were reversed; he knew about the pregnancy and she didn't (nevermind how that could happen, he tested her pee in the toilet or something). He decides to get an abortion without telling her she was ever pregnant, so he slips some RU-486 in her orange juice or something. From a moral standpoint, would this be ok?
/r/MensRights03/10/10 10:16 PM
-1

Please read the whole sentence you took that quote out of. That is not what I'm saying. Grayswan is putting it much more eloquently than I can, my point is a combination of http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/dm8bq/redditor_getting_an_abortion_without_telling_the/c119rxg and http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/dm8bq/redditor_getting_an_abortion_without_telling_the/c119sfr
/r/MensRights03/10/10 10:03 PM
-3

Telling him would not take any more time... heck she could call him on the way to the abortion clinic.
/r/MensRights03/10/10 08:03 PM
4

Of course he can't force her to carry it to term, and I'm not saying he should be able to. He should at the very least be able to decide that he doesn't want to stay with her if she gets an abortion, and he should be allowed to mourn the lost potential child if that would be his reaction. Sure he has no legal rights but that does not mean he has no moral "rights", and she should be forthright with everything.
/r/MensRights03/10/10 07:31 PM
2

I thought /MensRights agreed that men should have the right to get a say in this? Should rights only apply to people that aren't jerks?
/r/MensRights03/10/10 03:58 PM
7

I'm not saying she should expect anything different. I'm saying he has a right to be told, period, even though the same thing is likely to happen.
/r/MensRights03/10/10 03:48 PM
13

It doesn't matter how much of a jerk he is, yes she should end the relationship, but either way she should tell him.
/r/MensRights03/10/10 03:41 PM
3

Even if she was an accessory, she bought the guy into the house/the kid into the house with the guy.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 08:51 PM
1

Imagine the case now. 18 year old mom with no financial support from the child's father. That's already the case; this is her boyfriend, not the child's father.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 08:48 PM
13

No, I thought "If this is how she abuses him on camera and in front of people, what must she be doing to him when they're alone?"
/r/MensRights30/09/10 08:52 PM
2

Of course, my life is currently framed by a healthy, respectful and loving relationship If I were 100% pro-female, at all costs, I would ignore my SO's needs and if he were 100% pro-male he would ignore mine. I very much doubt that the 100% pro-either are in a a healthy, respectful and loving relationship with the 0% gender.
/r/MensRights30/09/10 03:27 PM
1

Give it time.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 01:38 PM
4

So they say. But I have seen them not followed many times.
/r/MensRights28/09/10 08:50 PM
7

This is true if you are in your early 20s and haven't yet realized that sex without love feels good in the moment, but ultimately leaves you feeling empty. But once you realize that you want to love and build a life with someone - not for survival but for happiness and fulfillment - it's not true. Sure, some people never want that, but some do. Unless all the benefits of marriage are given without actual marriage, marriage isn't going away. I do not really see this as a MensRights issue, but as …
/r/MensRights28/09/10 06:49 PM
0

Yes, it is. It is their life, not yours.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 02:44 PM
3

Even in some states where you can't have sex until 18. You're allowed to control a 4,000 lb machine, but not your own genitals!
/r/MensRights27/09/10 02:43 PM
2

And if she's pregnant while legally incapable of consenting to intercourse, that proves that the law doesn't mean shit. Legally right or not, it sure is not morally right to force anyone to get an abortion, or to not get an abortion.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 02:42 PM
2

Get your daughter some birth control instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "LALALA MY DAUGHTER WON'T HAVE SEX IF I DON'T EDUCATE HER ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL LALALA"
/r/MensRights27/09/10 02:37 PM
1

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying the opposite. If we did what I'm saying, women would still be able to choose adoption or abortion. The women that were choosing to keep their fetus/baby would be doing so because they want to keep the child, not because they get a free ride for 18 years because of it. Less women would choose to have/keep a baby they can't afford half of.
/r/MensRights26/09/10 05:02 PM
1

Ok I guess technically he wouldn't be giving her more, he would just be receiving less. I don't know the real amount, but he was I think 27 when he got divorced, so I think there would be a substantial difference.
/r/MensRights25/09/10 03:42 PM
1

Huh? 50% of what the 401k is worth. For example, if the 401k was worth $100 at the time of divorce, she would be owed $50 and he $50. If he just gave her $50, the 401k is still worth $100 and when it comes time to cash it out, let's say it is worth $300, he gets $300. But if a QDRO had been executed (if I'm understanding correctly), $50 of the 401k is allotted to her, while $50 stays his. So when it comes time to cash it out, they each get $150. Sure he could have added another $50 and made his …
/r/MensRights24/09/10 04:28 PM
1

But the way he did it, she has gotten her 50% and the occurred money from what would have been her 50% goes to him. Why would he want to end up giving her more money?
/r/MensRights23/09/10 04:31 PM
2

Men get attachment hormones once they actually meet the kid. My whole assumption in this conversation was that we were talking about fetuses and newborns. If we're talking about kids that are already born and that have already become attached to these fathers that want to opt-out, that certainly should not be allowed because of what it will mentally do to the child.
/r/MensRights23/09/10 01:45 PM
1

Am I reading this correctly - a QDRO means 50% would be paid to her when the 401k is paid out? That just seems like a horrible idea for several reasons. And I'm guessing she wanted money then and would have found another way to get it if he hadn't agreed to pay her what he did. For 3 years his exwife had legal custody, she just didn't have the child in her physical custody. She no longer has legal custody.
/r/MensRights23/09/10 01:41 PM
1

It is not as though no men are attached to their children. If I had to pay support to continue seeing my son it would be no contest. But if you had left when your (girlfriend, wife, whatever) was pregnant and had never seen the son once outside her, you would probably not be attached. In some cases having no right to the child is a consequence for men, but in many cases where the man is trying to get out of child support (cases where the man is trying to get out of it because the woman is abusin…
/r/MensRights22/09/10 10:59 PM
1

See this: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/dh54a/user_argues_in_favor_of_a_male_opting_out_of/c108anz?context=3 If things were done this way, women would actually have to take half of the financial responsibility as well. The assumption is that women take on the responsibility of raising the child when they keep it, so they have risk too, but it is true that often that does not happen. We need to stop that, by removing the benefit to women of having a child they don't take care of, i.…
/r/MensRights22/09/10 07:58 PM
2

Make women take more responsibility, don't let men take less. Have the father actually buy and pay for half of the child's living expenses (and I don't mean, for example, half the mother's electricity bill, I mean calculate how much electricity the child uses and have the father pay half of that directly to the utility company. Have the father actually go to the store and buy half the child's clothes. Etc.).
/r/MensRights22/09/10 07:13 PM
2

What? He's not trying to hide her stuff from her, he's trying to get it out of his house. He's going to tell her where it is.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 07:08 PM
-2

If we allow people to get out of supporting their child by whatever excuse, everyone will just claim that excuse. There is a reason we must force people to pay child support; very, very few people do it willingly. If you take the risk of making a child and a child results, you must take responsibility. Arguing that the woman can give up the responsibility easily by choosing adoption or abortion is not valid, because women make hormones during pregnancy that make them attached to the fetus, and h…
/r/MensRights22/09/10 04:06 PM
1

Are we all actually in the real world here, or are you a mentally disturbed 15 year old that thinks she's living in a cartoon for pre-schoolers?
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:58 PM
1

He can talk to her after the annulment. If she is trying to test his love, sticking together after an annulment and getting therapy together would show much more love than taking her abuse.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:52 PM
1

Maybe this is true in arranged marriages, but in non-arranged marriages, all this is done during the dating and engaged phases. They've been engaged for a year. She should have decided if he was dominant enough to be her husband long ago, and especially before getting married. She's doing a bait-and-switch, plain and simple, and she's not even smart enough to wait until it's too late to get an annulment.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:47 PM
0

I would recommend talking to a lawyer first and talking to her second. After a long time of relationship therapy, they can get re-married if things work out.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:34 PM
-1

But you don't just pay once if you use the whore for 40 years. You pay her room and board the whole time.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:33 PM
2

Don't do it again and if she says she's pregnant after finding out about the annulment, carry on with the annulment and get a paternity test ASAP.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:25 PM
2

Even if so that only applies to divorce, not annulments right? He needs to do this quickly so it doesn't have to be a divorce.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:19 PM
3

There are some exceptions though. When my partner got divorced, they made him give his ex half of his 401k even though he had started it before they got married, because he had added to it and it had gained interest during the marriage. Rather than cash it out early and lose a lot (which would have meant he would actually have paid her more than half of what he actually received), he agreed to pay her the same amount as half of what the 401k was worth at the time. Add that to the child support h…
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:18 PM
4

Move it somewhere safe; a storage unit, friend or family member you're sure you can trust's place, or some such thing.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 01:57 PM
1

You have to discuss with that specific person what the date means in that specific situation. One date is quite different than "dating" someone and having your first date. Personally, I would assume the reverse, but I wouldn't date anyone that was dating other people nor anyone that would have sex on the first date.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 04:01 PM
1

That is up to the people involved in the particular date.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 02:18 PM
1

Only the mothers that are women. You can't steal something that is already yours.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 02:15 PM
1

My position is based on emotion, not logic. Unlike feminists, I admit that. I don't handle this as a matter of law. It has nothing to do with the law, it is just my emotion on the matter, and would never become legal. Yes, I would stone a guy (or girl) who cheats on someone he's been dating for a month. I would stone a guy (or girl) who cheats on someone he's been dating for a day.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 02:14 PM
1

I said married or not, and I said lying and hurting your partner was wrong. If you're in an open marriage, you're not lying about fucking other people. And never claimed my stoning belief was in the least bit logical.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 01:49 PM
0

I don't have to believe some guy in the sky will punish you if you lie to believe that lying to someone that loves you is wrong. Married or not, if someone makes the commitment to have sex with only one person because (I assume) you love that person and they love you, it is wrong to go against that behind the person's back. If that love fades, break up with the person and then have sex with whoever you want rather than cheat. Cheating not only emotionally hurts the person being cheated on, it ca…
/r/MensRights20/09/10 07:09 PM
-1

In a politico-religious context, dominionism (also called subjectionism) is the tendency among some conservative politically-active Christians, especially in the United States, to seek influence or control over secular civil government through political action. Fuck no. I am far from christian and not at all politically active. I don't follow the bible, it just so happens that one of my beliefs - that we should stone adulterers - is the same as one of the writers of the bible. A lot of the curre…
/r/MensRights20/09/10 06:54 PM
-31

Was the mom a woman? Then she was a crazy bitch. If the laws were actually fair to men and this guy could have possibly gotten his child without "taking" him, maybe he would have done it that way. No one takes a child and raises it for 17 years just to piss off their ex (unless they are getting child support).
/r/MensRights20/09/10 06:38 PM
-11

I always see situations like this (where a parent "takes" their child) as bullshit. The kid was not missing, he was with his father. The son is at least 17 years old now; putting Dad in jail won't give Mom those years back.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 05:26 PM
-1

No, I'm not making that assumption. I am simply stating what is "fair" to the child. I never compared fairness to the child to fairness to the man.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 04:37 PM
1

ultimately I think the mother should be held accountable for that, not her husband. I agree with that 100%. Unfortunately, that is not what happens in real life.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 03:17 PM
-3

Thank you for actually reading what I said instead of jumping to the conclusion that I'm pro-cuckoldry (which I am very much not). I agree, that would be a great solution.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 02:12 PM
-5

No, I did not say the woman's husband should just be deceived and everybody wins. I said exactly the same thing you said, it's better for the baby and mother.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 02:06 PM
-1

I have more sympathy for myself than I do for the man. He married a cheating whore, not me. Not that I'm saying it's right for the man to pay. It is not right for the man to pay (but he's going to pay either way). It's not right for me to pay either.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 02:04 PM
-5

No, I never said it was good. I just said it would, in most cases in real life, be the best situation for the child. Sucks for the guy yes, but as I said I'm taking about what's in the best interest of the child and what should actually be done is a different topic. Heck I think what should be done is that the cheating woman is stoned to death and the child should be given to a couple looking to adopt.
/r/MensRights20/09/10 02:03 PM
-13

Yes, but you're assuming she only had sex with one other man, she has his name and address (it could have been a one-night-stand, he could have given her fake info), she is willing to give his name and address, and he is willing to submit to a DNA test once found.
/r/MensRights19/09/10 09:42 PM
-15

That's a separate issue. I'm just pointing out how Frontierguy's statement that this is the best interest of the child is not true. However, I will respond to your question. In this situation there would be no "father" that was fooled into being a father to what he mistakenly thought was his bio-child, so we'll call those kind of people husbands. (And yes, it is wrong that some women lie to men in this way. There is nothing that disgusts me more than cheaters, so I'm not trying to defend such wo…
/r/MensRights19/09/10 09:21 PM
-15

Instead of having and being supported by a non-bio father (but a father none the less) the child will have no father. This would be in the best interest of the child if this would mean the mother would go marry the bio-father instead and the child would be loved and supported by him; but that's not what would happen.
/r/MensRights19/09/10 09:05 PM
1

What will be done if birth control fails should be discussed before having sex. If you don't agree on adoption, abortion, or keeping it, don't have sex with that person. However, if you agree to keep the child, you are deciding to financially support the child and you do not get to go back on that choice if your relationship with the child's other parent ends. That's why it makes sense. But of course that is based on the assumption that women are honest and don't change their minds based on horm…
/r/MensRights19/09/10 04:58 PM
1

This is more like you helping someone bake snickerdoodle cookies and gorging yourself alongside them. You should have discussed whether or not you would help pay for the liposuction before you helped them bake the cookies, because you saying no would have greatly effected their choice of baking cookies with you.
/r/MensRights19/09/10 04:42 PM
2

Don't pretend all men aren't being demonized by this and things like it. The whole point is to make women wary of men.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 06:40 PM
2

It doesn't matter if he was thinking about doing no good or not; he didn't. No matter how suspicious he acted, he did not do anything he may or may not have been considering doing. There is no reason to label him and all other 6'0" men with shoulder length brown hair potential thought criminals.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 06:30 PM
4

I don't care if the guy had a tattoo on his forehead that said "rapist" and had his hand down his pants. All he did was look at her from a distance and walk the opposite way. There is no impression that makes this illegal.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 04:58 PM
2

You did not say it directly, but if you're saying is a woman should report such an incident to the police, that means that every time a man attempts to talk to a woman it is a reportable incident.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 04:42 PM
4

So it's wrong for a man to even attempt to talk to a woman now? Sure, he was going out of his way to cross paths with her. So the fuck what?
/r/MensRights17/09/10 04:15 PM
3

In most states husbands are automatically added onto birth certificates, doesn't matter if they sign.
/r/MensRights16/09/10 08:27 PM
1

Yes, just as medical literature disagrees with your assessment of the benefits of male circumcision.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 12:49 AM
1

From what I got, he is going to follow procedure, he's just ranting about how he doesn't like the procedure or see the point. I see the point, which is that if his ex got pissed off at him she could take his kid and claim he hasn't been supporting the kid, but the guy has every right to rant about it on his blog.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 03:18 PM
1

Shh, don't give this misandrist society ideas...
/r/MensRights14/09/10 03:01 PM
1

The same arguments used for male circumcision are used for female circumcision in countries where female circumcision is common. Since the pleasure is taken out of sex for the woman, they are less likely to have sex with multiple men, therefore the risk of STDs is lowered. And it certainly does lower "vag cheese" and infections. All those same downsides you linked apply to male circumcision as well.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 02:58 PM
2

Yes, nevermind the fact that the amount of the risk being lower is so small that it isn't worth it and he's better off using condoms and taking an occasional shower. And he's now at a much higher risk of getting a urethral stricture from his urethral opening rubbing against his diaper, which could result in painful urination that may not be noticed for years, could cause bladder infections, could cause complete inability to urinate, and would require surgery to correct.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 02:54 PM
1

Sick people and doctors and nurses not involved will go to other hospitals. The doctors and nurses involved should lose their jobs.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 02:46 PM
4

There are WAY more uncircumcised penises in the world, and they look the same when erect.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 02:42 PM
1

I think his point was there is no reason he should have to do the procedure. I think. I couldn't really understand with every other word being "God" and the stupid pictures all over the place.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 09:40 PM
-1

women receive as much money after marriage as during... Not really true. It is the law in many states that women get enough money to keep the same lifestyle they are accustomed to living. The key is to not get the woman accustomed to living a lifestyle that takes most/all of your income in the first place.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 06:31 PM
-1

If you're not married and you have kids, you're at more of a risk of her taking the kids and financially ruining you. And she runs the risk that you'll leave her and she'll have been out of the workforce for however many years raising the kids (so have a very hard time getting a job), she'll have to find someone to watch the kids while she works/ a way to pay for daycare, she'll be older and stretchmarked and will have a hard time finding a new guy. Marriage makes it harder for these things to h…
/r/MensRights13/09/10 02:41 PM
1

She's just ignorant (hasn't been taught many things, but has the potential to learn), not an idiot.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 02:01 PM
1

I am a misogynist, not a feminist. But I'm also a realist, and until the reality is that women are held as responsible for the action of making a baby as men are, you need to take realist precautions against making a baby with a lying woman.
/r/MensRights12/09/10 03:13 PM
-1

Well then you need to fight for the right to get a vasectomy, or for the male birth control pill to be put on the market; not for a men's right to get out of child support by saying they didn't agree to have a kid. Having sex means you agree to the risk of having a kid, period.
/r/MensRights11/09/10 07:41 PM
-3

Men have the right to get a vasectomy or not have sex with a woman who they don't want to run any risk of having a child with. We all know women are crazy and often liars; don't trust them. I do agree that child support is ridiculously high. But if we give men the "right" to say they didn't agree to having a baby and get out of child support, there will be many men lying and saying they didn't agree when they did. It is true that there are many women lying and saying that the men did agree when …
/r/MensRights11/09/10 03:19 PM
1

Tearing apart their innards till they bled (note that even the slightest tearing apart of their innards would cause bleeding, you're just trying to make it more dramatic) is not rape, it's tearing apart their innards. It can be done with things other than a penis, it can be done completely unrelated to sex. I'm not saying that's ok to do, I'm just saying it's not "rape." My 9 month old hates having his diaper changed. I must hold him down and rub his genitals as he screams and tries to get away.…
/r/MensRights11/09/10 02:16 PM
4

Trying to ride on the coattails of the birth-rape submission?
/r/MensRights10/09/10 03:05 PM
2

One would have to eat such a ridiculous, heart-attack-inducing amount to get the same amount of vitamins as say a home-made serving of vegetables that it pretty much is devoid of nutritional value. I'm not going to read that whole page because the beginning is just so ridiculously wrong that we should never give pet food to pets, because its ingredients are not the ones they evolved to eat.
/r/MensRights10/09/10 02:31 PM
-1

Did the baby complain about it or did a parent?
/r/MensRights10/09/10 02:17 PM
-2

I know it is hard to believe that a child might want to have sex, but do you remember being a child? I do, and I wanted to have sex. I started watching porn at 7, I had a crush on a teacher even younger than that and wouldn't have complained if he had "raped" me. Kids "play doctor" and that might turn into sex if the kids were physically capable of it. Sex feels good, and kids don't think anything is wrong with it until society tells them it is bad. They usually don't attempt to resist, because …
/r/MensRights09/09/10 10:57 PM
-2

I don't feel like arguing about it today. We are each entitled to our opinions about the matter.
/r/MensRights09/09/10 07:48 PM
1

They get the parents' consent, although I do agree that the parents should not be the ones to give consent on that. If the doctors in question were getting the mother's parents' or husband's consent to do these things, that would be a different issue. I am very much against circumcision and when I was talking about the fiasco of my son's birth in that previous post, I considered mentioning that I was quite afraid that with their attitudes they would circumcise my son and ask me to sign the paper…
/r/MensRights09/09/10 05:56 PM
0

You too! :)
/r/MensRights09/09/10 05:50 PM
-4

Theft is "A criminal act in which property belonging to another is taken without that person's consent." So if the person gives consent, I would say that is not theft. I would say it is mugging, yes. Mugging is "An assault upon a person especially with the intent to rob." Rob is "To take property from (a person) illegally by using or threatening to use violence or force." Putting aside the fact that stranger "rape" is very rare, sex isn't property, and the "victim" is not deprived of sex. In fac…
/r/MensRights09/09/10 04:48 PM
-6

You can avoid putting yourself into situations where sex is the outcome. You can not really avoid carrying your wallet around. Sometimes you can avoid driving your car, and that should be done a lot more, but sometimes you can't. And you can simply kick or hit a "rapist" in the balls; they can't hold all your limbs at once. Or clench your vagina shut. It is true that often during rape, the vagina naturally lubricates, allowing the "rapist" to enter; I would say this shows that at least physicall…
/r/MensRights09/09/10 04:27 PM
-7

Ok... there is no "rape" there is only having sex, regretting it later, and saying it was rape to protect one's reputation. If one truly did not want to have sex, one would not put oneself into situations where sex is the obvious outcome (getting drunk at a bar, for example, severs little purpose other than meeting someone to have sex with, because if that is not your goal, it is much cheaper to get drunk at home). And in the few cases where someone says, for example, have sex with me or I'll st…
/r/MensRights09/09/10 04:02 PM
2

Do you really want to get into this?
/r/MensRights09/09/10 03:15 PM
8

Ok, is everyone reading this? Maybe I just think it's horrible because I can relate, but can you guys imagine your wife being in horrible pain and you being told to hold her down, only to discover later that the doctor was a huge dick and you should have been fighting for her rights instead of holding her down?
/r/MensRights09/09/10 02:41 PM
6

Did you agree to the colonoscopy, prostate exam, and trip to the dentist before they happened?
/r/MensRights09/09/10 02:17 PM
5

Except in emergency situations, doctors don't do anything to men without getting consent, and giving birth is usually not an emergency situation - sure, it can turn into one, but most of the time it is just a normal, natural process. Doctors don't come in without warning and do a prostate exam on a man without consent. Women should have the equal right to agree or not agree that procedures be done to them. As someone who has given birth, I know it is true that doctors and nurses strike when you …
/r/MensRights09/09/10 02:13 PM
0

Well no shit, your wife can't have sex for 6 weeks and when that is over, she's exhausted and you keep getting interrupted. You both keep getting woken up all night, so you're both grumpy from that too. You don't feel like going to work but staying home is shitty too and you have a baby to pay for now so you have to go to work. Heck I'm surprised more new dads don't go crazy and do suicide-murders.
/r/MensRights07/09/10 02:56 PM
2

You really think a woman like that is going to let a nanny raise her child? She's going to get the kid and make you pay enough child support (and alimony, if they have it in your state) that she can stay home and helicopter parent 24/7. Why not try getting her some therapy and making her read about "free range kids".
/r/MensRights07/09/10 02:52 PM
9

If having sex with a drunk person is rape, she is a rapist as well. SHE had sex with someone who may have been so drunk that they are "no longer able to remain conscious" (if we're considering drunk forgetting of things not remaining conscious). I find the fact that you can't understand this very disturbing.
/r/MensRights03/09/10 09:02 PM
7

If you mean the woman was being taken advantage of, no. They are not always physically weaker, and that is irrelevant in this case as he did not physically overpower her. If he was drunk too, she took just as much advantage of him as he supposedly did of her.
/r/MensRights03/09/10 08:54 PM
8

I'm a woman... a woman who wants to speak up against the things that are wrong with the world, so that hopefully my 3 sons and daughter will not have to live in such a world.
/r/MensRights03/09/10 08:50 PM
2

I'm saying that if the job requires a degree, employers are not going to consider a penis a valid substitution.
/r/MensRights03/09/10 08:45 PM
7

Bull, she remembers talking to him during the act. They were both drunk.
/r/MensRights03/09/10 07:26 PM
69

Was he drunk too? If so, how is it that she didn't rape him? I thought women were equal, not mental infants that need constant protection from their own actions?
/r/MensRights03/09/10 02:13 PM
1

Did a feminist tell you that?
/r/MensRights03/09/10 01:15 PM
2

If that was sarcasm, you're an idiot. Non-single women are less likely to work full time, and women with children take more time off (to give birth, to pick up sick kids, etc.). So what this shows is that the women who have put in the same amount of effort to get into their position and work the same amount of time at the same job are earning more.
/r/MensRights02/09/10 01:29 PM
8

And often their father isn't even in a position of authority.
/r/MensRights02/09/10 01:21 PM
0

He's probably a former digg user.
/r/MensRights02/09/10 01:20 PM
0

I recall feminists saying women should earn the same amount despite actually working less as women often take time off due to PMS, to give birth, and to pick up their sick children.
/r/MensRights02/09/10 01:18 PM
2

Yes, really. And the last one looks quite like your other pics. You are the one that needs to use reason. If you have seen lots of porn, haven't you ever wondered why, in porn from countries where circumcision is not common, everyone did not have your idea of uncircumcised penises?
/r/MensRights01/09/10 07:28 PM
3

It looks like the background was removed. Go watch a porn made in any country other than America; the stars will more than likely be uncircumcised. But you won't really be able to tell as it will look the same as a circumcised erect penis, and they don't show many flaccid penises in porn.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 06:17 PM
2

Those are all penises with partial Phimosos (either that or they just didn't retract their foreskins), a rarity. Normally the foreskin would be completely retracted.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 06:14 PM
3

Here's a pic of an uncircumcised erect penis for you - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Erection_Homme2.jpg/220px-Erection_Homme2.jpg If the flaccid pic wasn't there, we wouldn't know if he was uncircumcised or not.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 05:41 PM
3

Those are not erect. Care to continue showing your ignorance?
/r/MensRights01/09/10 05:32 PM
1

Um, you do realize I was sarcastically giving the excuse YOU were giving, right?
/r/MensRights01/09/10 05:25 PM
1

But she's just one out of millions, right? And from the ignorance in other things she has said, I very much doubt the honesty of her saying that she has been with many penises both circumcised and uncircumcised.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:56 PM
1

"Have you ever seen a dildo? Most of them are modeled after a circumcised man. That isn't coincidental." Uncircumcised and circumcised penises look the same while erect. Dildos are modeled after erect penises. Yes, I really don't think you know very much about the inner workings of your vagina (you're not some special unique flower, your vagina works the same as billions of other vaginas, regardless of how many penises has been in it) or of penises now. As I said I am not trying to tell you what…
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:46 PM
5

But you're looking at it as if the pluses and negatives of circumcision have the same value. What I'm saying is that, yes, the reduction of rates of infection is there, but it's nowhere near worth mutilating your child's genitals. Uncircumcised men can reduce their rate of infection just as much by washing and using condoms. And if they don't want to do those things, they can decide later that they want to be circumcised; most of the potential problems of being uncircumcised don't arise until pu…
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:40 PM
3

Ask yourself; what does s0nicfreak have to gain from saying circumcision is bad? What do Churches and the medical community have to gain from saying it is good? I have nothing to gain. Churches have, they believe, a reduction in masturbation and sex for pleasure (rather than for procreation). The medical community has the cost of the procedure and the cost of correcting any complications. And there are many complications that happen which are less extreme than this article, so you never hear abo…
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:12 PM
5

Again I use the hand analogy; if we cut off a babies' fingers, they'll never get finger cancer. But is the small risk of finger cancer, which can be reduced by healthy living, worth making that choice for the child and taking away their fingers? Sure, if we cut off boy's foreskin, they're a little less likely to get infections. But the risk can be reduced by simply cleaning the genitals. And I don't consider the small reduction circumcision makes valid.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:06 PM
5

You're not making any sense... you do know you're suppose to retract the foreskin when having sex, right? So the head is just the same for you. I'm not trying to tell you your preference, I'm simply stating the fact that the foreskin has a purpose for both the male and female, so removing it means that purpose can no longer be fulfilled. If I have a recipe for a cake that is meant to be sweet, and it calls for sugar, but I remove the sugar, will it still be a cake? Yes. Will it still taste good?…
/r/MensRights01/09/10 04:02 PM
0

Every woman here has said the same thing. I haven't seen a single woman here saying otherwise.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 03:51 PM
3

"there's no rashes or infections that develop ever" And you said I'M spouting bs. Circumcised guys can still get all the same rashes and infections that uncircumcised guys can get. Uncircumcised guys who wash their dick a healthy amount are no more at risk for rashes or infections than circumcised guys.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 03:49 PM
2

The only problems associated with not being have arisen because we (as a society) no longer know how to take care of uncircumcised penises. They can be solved with a little education about cleaning under and stretching the foreskin.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 03:42 PM
2

Well that depends on what you consider "better function." If better pleasing a female is "better function," then uncircumcised males do indeed have better function. It does NOT have a valid medical premise. The small amount that it decreases aids transmission? Not worth it, you're better off using a condom. Because it's cleaner? Not worth it, you're better off washing your damn genitals. Besides, these same arguments are used for female circumcision, yet we don't call those "valid."
/r/MensRights01/09/10 03:40 PM
2

I'm ignorant because I don't want people having their genitals mutilated? Look at it when you get home.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 02:36 PM
4

Well you seem to be projecting, because I am not at all trying to make you feel bad, in fact I am very sorry it was done to you. It is indeed a fact that foreskin makes sex better. Here are a couple of sites about it; http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/10F/Foreskin_Function.html http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ and you can find many more on google.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 02:25 PM
0

From what I'VE read, there is quite a difference, and being uncircumcised makes things a little better for the man and a LOT better for his partner. You can't change YOUR penis, but you can change things for other children by speaking up against this barbaric tradition!
/r/MensRights01/09/10 01:59 PM
7

Non-traumatic?! Just LOOKING at that PAGE is traumatic for me. I can't imagine doing that to my son or having it done to my genitals!!
/r/MensRights01/09/10 01:52 PM
0

Well except for the issue of how horrible it is that parents mutilate their childrens' genitals.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 01:49 PM
6

Not being able to survive parts of its body being chopped off is imperfection?!
/r/MensRights01/09/10 01:48 PM
7

But it may be even better functioning if you hadn't been circumcised, there is no way to know. If we cut off some of your fingers at birth, you'd learn to have a functioning hand without them, but would never know how much better your hand could be with all fingers.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 01:47 PM
1

Maybe. But growing breasts is a sign of maturity.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 01:13 PM
2

Well not acting like a feminist is probably a key part...
/r/MensRights30/08/10 04:28 PM
1

Uh, estrogen would make them mature faster.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 04:26 PM
1

But we don't have statistics for broken up boyfriends/girlfriends. Marriage gives in incentive to work things out and stick together.
/r/MensRights28/08/10 02:25 PM
2

Well I don't see shipping your kid off to daycare/school as being a Mom. Sending your kids to daycare/school and saying you're a Stay At Home Mom is like buying food from McDonalds and saying you're a chef, in my book. Guess I'm illusioned because most of the people I associate with actually parent...
/r/MensRights27/08/10 05:25 PM
1

Well if nothing else, in the majority of cases daycare would have to be paid for if the housewife was not home. That alone usually takes up the majority of a woman's income when both parents work, so I don't see the point of NOT being a housewife if one has children.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 02:07 PM
1

"the consent of the birth father must be obtained in all states for the adoption to proceed." So all the mother has to do if the father doesn't consent to adoption is not list him on the birth certificate. Unless married, this is completely optional and left up to the mother. "1.) A father cannot be listed without either his consent, or a paternity test." Never going to happen. Feminists will fight against it.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 02:02 PM
2

Not always.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 01:56 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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