TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

samarye Archive

View 1 post and 192 comments by samarye on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
16

samarye/r/MensRights06/07/11 03:49 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

If someone else is taking charge of the situation, by all means gtfo. If you're in danger, remove yourself from danger and get help. It comes down to: I would feel guilty if I left a passed-out drunk person alone and they died, and I think there's almost always a reasonable way to avoid that situation.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 07:25 AM
-1

Aw, don't just walk away if you believe another person's life is in danger. You could: Record everything that happens. Grab a bystander. Grab a friend. Phone a friend - hers, yours, the friendly EMTs. You can help people and still CYA. Edit: I don't usually edit in response to downvotes, but this is a real WTF. I'm saying remove yourself from danger, then get help for the person you believe is in danger of dying. WTF is wrong with that?
/r/MensRights05/02/13 05:07 AM
1

Did I advocate for a system? I thought I was just calling you out on faulty reasoning.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 06:13 AM
1

Why is there emotional trauma in an abortion, if you thought abortion was okay to begin with? O_O
/r/MensRights02/02/13 05:26 AM
6

It says I doubt he raped her. She's had sex with everyone. He raped her. She's consented to sex with others, not him. GET CONSENT.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 04:39 AM
5

But that's not what the poster says either. People really do put forth the argument "she's had sex with lots of other men, so she wouldn't have said no to him." This is why we have rape shield laws. You can argue whether or in what cases an alleged victim's sexual history should be brought into evidence. That discussion would certainly be more useful than dismantling your own straw man.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 04:37 AM
-3

It works fine now. The commenter edited their post to not link directly to other reddit threads as requested by one of the mods over there.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 04:02 AM
3

There have been fake posts and deceptive editing, but there have also been extremist "MRAs." There still are; every movement has extremists. It doesn't help /r/MensRights credibility to deny that they exist. However, /r/MensRights has shifted its response to those extremists for the better. Even if misogynistic posts and comments were always fake (come on), it wouldn't always be obvious to someone reading these forums as an outsider. Sure, some of /r/MensRights' critics are biased and unreasonab…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:33 AM
14

The reason you're seeing /r/mensrights referred to as "woman hating" has nothing to do with women, hate or rights. There is some rational basis for people believing this is a woman-hating subreddit: older misogynistic content. When I started reading /r/MensRights, extreme, blatantly hateful comments often received upvotes and supportive replies. The subreddit has changed a lot since then. Hopefully the effect on MensRights' reputation will wear off and people will give MensRights a(nother) chanc…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 12:22 PM
13

The women who really have a true rape testimony shouldn't have a reason not to come forward if such a punishment was put in place. I said this above, but someone who had been raped but knew there wasn't much physical evidence might worry that they'd be punished for trying to pursue a case against the rapist. Edit: To clarify, I'm not arguing anything here. This is just one possible answer to a question multiple commenters have asked. In Havoc88's case, "why should she be afraid of whatever outco…
/r/MensRights23/11/12 06:07 AM
7

How would a punishment for false rape testimonies deter women who are/were really raped from coming forward? Someone who had been raped but knew there wasn't much physical evidence might worry that they'd be punished for trying to pursue a case against the rapist. Edit: To clarify, I'm not arguing anything here. This is just one possible answer to a question multiple commenters have asked.
/r/MensRights23/11/12 06:04 AM
2

I stated that it should be on the victim to prove that rape occurred because in this country you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Just another note about the US justice system: it's prosecutors, not victims/accusers/alleged victims (of any crime), who have the onus of proving guilt in the criminal justice system.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 03:40 AM
3

Cool. They have so many posters; that one seems like a particularly good choice for a college campus.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 08:36 PM
4

Why did you choose to advertise A Voice for Men instead of another Men's Rights organization? Also, which posters did you use specifically?
/r/MensRights16/11/12 08:21 AM
1

Take the electives you'll like, imo. If it counts toward your degree and you think it'll be fun for you, much better that than a useful class you hate. I needed that time to relax and enjoy myself whilst still doing what I was "supposed to," otherwise I'd feel too guilty taking a break. It's a good way to reduce the pressure.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 08:12 AM
5

"She didn't say [stop] forcefully" - does that mean she didn't say it at all? Or she said it but maybe he thought she wasn't serious about it? I mean hearing stop, especially with a new partner, that should be a full stop until both people are clear on what they wanted.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:47 AM
1

Real men don't captain Starfleet ships. Yet.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:34 AM
6

They're stating that they're afraid of or have been mugged or assaulted, as if these are things that only happen to women or that women should be more afraid of. Saying "this happened to me" or "I worry this could happen to me" isn't the same as saying "this only happens to people like me" or "this is worst when it happens to someone like me." I didn't read all 200 comments, but none I saw said those things. And then you just unabashedly put words in these people's mouths: "they will say that in…
/r/MensRights13/11/12 08:20 PM
2

One week later she comes on Skype. "Hurr dee durr dee hurr we have to break up sorry I can't give you any particular reason I'm just the most irrational person on the planet hurr dee hurr." Yeah, that kind of thing is fine when you're ranting to a friendly audience. However, it's obviously something that didn't happen. So in any context where your reliability is being judged, it would cast serious doubt on everything you said.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 08:01 PM
1

The girl and a few friends had been at a pub. The police station is also right there, and various businesses (in general the news said it was considered a "safe area"). The community was very upset about the police response to the violence, including that they took over half an hour to respond. So police station location was relevant, but it doesn't provide a complete picture without the other details that I deleted from my comment. Edit: edited my comment above to say "in a supposedly 'safe are…
/r/MensRights13/11/12 07:32 PM
15

Note "#guwahati tragedy." This is important context. It's when a mob of men attacked a 17 year old girl in a supposedly "safe area" of India in July this year (News Clip). Edit: shortened post, fixed link
/r/MensRights12/11/12 10:54 PM
5

Yes, it is a dangerous double standard. That's the focus of the paper overall: adult victims of juvenile rapists (by fraud, force, etc.) have no legal defense against statutory rape charges with the way US laws are currently written. They ask, "how are we to understand the situation of a juvenile, who cannot legally consent, obtaining intercourse by force that negates the consent of an adult victim? Both engage in intercourse, but neither is consenting. Is this a situation of statutory rape or f…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 07:22 PM
3

"Rape by fraud" or "rape by deception" is already a criminal act in some places. The Fundamental Overbreadth of Statutory Rape, a legal research paper, includes an brief section on rape by fraud in the US with excellent resources in the footnotes (page 44). The authors found that situations where a victim is tricked about the nature of the act they're consenting to (like a supposed medical exam) and where the victim is tricked into believing they're having sex with their lover (or sometimes only…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 08:42 AM
4

Talk to the other one, too, imo. Since you consider(ed) her a friend, I hope it's just that she truly doesn't understand. Explain to her that yeah guys, like girls, sometimes like attention. And it wouldn't be a huge deal if she was flirty and then moved on when you weren't into it. But if a person keeps hitting on you, and escalates to touching you, and to groping you, when you clearly don't want them to, that's wrong, no matter who you are. Also, OP, Jäger does not excuse the other girl's acti…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 07:58 AM
5

This Chicago Tribune article and this Chicago Sun-Times article (both linked from the Above the Law article that dam072000 already posted) go into more detail about the situation. Regarding Cynthia Brim being "deemed 'legally insane,'" it's a defense being put forth by her lawyer in a battery case. She has bipolar disorder, and they're arguing she was temporarily insane when she shoved an officer of the court. They say she was suffering a manic episode with inadequate treatment (sounds like she …
/r/MensRights09/11/12 05:15 AM
7

While we're on the subject of people being awesome, Auburn University Health Promotion and Wellness responded to my polite email (based on this comment) saying they will be changing their website's outdated copy of the local rape law. Yay for AHRC and AU! Yay for simple emails making things a bit better.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 06:29 AM
3

I recently watched "Journeys," an episode of QI where they said these things about "women and children first:" it's well known but has only been used twice, it's never been a part of maritime law, and it defies common sense (crew members, males at the time, would be needed on life boats to ensure that someone knew how to navigate). The "Women and children first" page on wikipedia seems to agree: "There is no legal basis for the protocol of women and children first — according to International Ma…
/r/MensRights07/11/12 06:13 AM
2

I'd guess you're facing two problems: ignorance of the Men's Rights movement and/or exposure to radical MRAs. A lot of reasonable people don't realize that some of the core men's rights issues are even issues. Sharing information and insights with these people will help them understand why you consider yourself a supporter of men's rights. Other equally reasonable people may have seen news articles about men's rights ads being banned or this subreddit being labeled a hate site. They may have goo…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 05:53 PM
1

You're absolutely right. I was trying to get information to someone who need it fast. I relied on my half-memory of what I read on "The List" over a year ago, and I failed to do the due diligence of rereading it before posting it. That's irresponsible. Though anonymous internet advice is notoriously untrustworthy, I aim to do much better than I did in that comment. I edited the commend down to just the advice link from the sidebar. Sorry OP for bad information, and thanks anaisf for bringing it …
/r/MensRights01/11/12 05:30 PM
3

Could you provide the title of the book and/or publishing information? I would like to see a copy. I'd appreciate a PM if you don't feel comfortable giving the information here.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 05:47 AM
2

MensRights has a list of Advice for Divorcing Men.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 05:41 AM
9

With reasonably priced food, that does come out to a lot of kids. s
/r/MensRights31/10/12 05:13 AM
1

Would you say that effectively an equivalent form of legal maternal surrender already exists, in addition to womens' right to chose to have an abortion?
/r/MensRights31/10/12 04:05 AM
-4

Super important to realize that child support is legislated and adjudicated with emphasis not on what the mother or father wants, but on what is in the best interest of the child. More information (from 2010) about how we decide what in the "best interest of the child" is available at childwelfare.gov.
/r/MensRights30/10/12 05:56 AM
154

Auburn Safe Harbor's FAQ emphasizes that they provide all of their services and referrals for male survivors as well as females. Also, the decision to include female-on-male violence in the campaign the OP spotted is certainly good. There are some problems with the Auburn Safe Harbor program's website. The "Definitions" page includes an old version of Alabama's first degree rape statute that says only men can be rapists; this law has been changed. Also, the site has a section entitled "Why Men S…
/r/MensRights29/10/12 08:35 PM
11

Auburn's Safe Harbor program doesn't seem to include a physical shelter or gender-segregated spaces. Those seeking shelter are directed to the National and Alabama Domestic Violence hotlines.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 08:28 PM
2

No, 2xc is not a feminist subreddit.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 08:04 PM
4

"Sexual battery" is just what Mississippi law calls all kinds of rape, so, to clarify, she was actually charged with rape (which the state happens to call "sexual battery") due to her position as the boy's teacher.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 02:29 AM
1

Right, this actually happened with a male teacher / female student relationship at my high school. The student was above the age of consent, but the teacher was charged with statutory rape. I tried to emphasize the difference with age-based versus "trust"-based statutory rape, but I'm glad you made it clearer.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 02:27 AM
3

I get so flustered by ignorant statements and attacks and deflections that I lose my footing on solid arguments. This is completely normal and can be combated with speaking practice. And hey, this incident does count as practice. I'm curious, what was the setting where this occurred? College class, hanging out casually with friends?
/r/MensRights10/08/12 01:54 AM
7

tl;dr: Mississippi law confusingly uses "sexual battery" to mean "rape," but there's no apparent gender discrimination issue in this case. From the relevant Mississippi law (here) it looks like "sexual battery" is that state's term catch-all term for rapes. The sexual battery definition linked includes penetration without consent, penetration with someone unable to consent, age-based statutory rape, and "trust"-based statutory rape. Definitions of terms as used in this law, like "penetration," a…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 01:43 AM
1

I understand that MaunaLoona wasn't being serious above; I just highlighted that it was the MRA counterpart of the radfem physics shrodingerstherapist wrote. I think that's what Mauna intended. The comment includes the idea that "every instance of sex exists in a quantum superposition of states: rape and non-rape until some time after the fact." This implies that in no instances does sex exist as only rape during the sex act. This is clearly false, since there are cases where a rapist and a vict…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 02:17 AM
27

The passport issue is the same for mothers or fathers. You can see the US Passport rules on the issue here. The medical/school records issue doesn't directly take into account whether it is the father or mother who is the custodial parent. In many parts of the US, both parents are allowed access to school and medical records unless their custody agreement or a court order says otherwise (one parent can't just tell the school/doctor not to give the other information). The laws on this seem to var…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 04:54 PM
8

^ (RadMRA theoretical physics) There are certainly clear-cut instances of malicious rape where both parties know it's rape while it's happening. Mensrights is justly concerned with cases where there are misunderstandings or malicious false accusations. However, an MRA loses credibility in completely denying that rape happens, the same way that a radical feminist loses credibility by claiming that all men are rapists.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 03:28 AM
1

The video above, "SCUM having fun!!!" was created as an advertisement for the play "SCUM," which showed in Sweden in late November, 2010. No one is actually injured in the video, and its creators claim that it is "marketing [...] not an incentive to violence" (bokascum.se). On November 1, 2010, the website bokascum.se showed performance times, ticketing information for the play, a brief statement about the show, and a list of cast and crew (wayback machine). The play "SCUM" was based on the "SCU…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:09 PM
8

I just want to clarify, some of these women do basically the same job as you do? If you're cooking food and they're at the cash registers, for instance, there may be differences in what gear the law requires. Also, as MaunaLoona says, it may be that you're the only one in the establishment that's currently complying with your area's safety laws. Still, your bosses' comments are disconcerting and should be addressed. Find a way to document the situation, including your boss's stance on long-haire…
/r/MensRights04/08/12 05:57 AM
3

I understand what you're saying about women like those the commenter describes needing to clearly show that they didn't consent. However, in the situations the commenter describes, he says he knew the girls didn't want to have sex. He got the message that these girls wanted to stop; he received it perfectly fine, and he went ahead anyway. We know how he interpreted their actions because he told us. We can prove intent because he provided the evidence. Problems about mixed signals can happen, so …
/r/MensRights31/07/12 06:23 AM
2

Do you have someone you trust to keep it together who can stay with you and help you through the next few days? I hope so, but either way, call (800)656-4673 - the National Sexual Assault Hotline - for further help. Also please consider looking for more advice and information in r/rapecounseling, including their sidebar links. The Hotline can help you find a hospital in the area that can perform a forensic exam to look for evidence on your body (yes she may have left evidence behind). The exam t…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:52 PM
4

The same kit is usually used for male and female victims. Swabs, etc. are not gender-specific tools, so the difference is only in where samples are taken from. Most hospitals will be able to perform the exam. The National Sexual Assault Hotline (800)656-HOPE can answer questions about rape kits and help find local hospitals that definitely provide them.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:01 PM
13

I recommend r/rapecounseling for their sidebar links as well as the very helpful people there. They do have experience advising males who have been raped.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 08:40 PM
9

My dad killed himself when I was five, after my parents got divorced when I was a toddler. When I was little, I wrote to him and taped the letters to my bedroom window so he could read them from heaven. Your daughter is going to learn how to write to you soon, and you'll actually be able to write back. You are both so lucky just for that. For years I blamed myself for my dad's death. I wondered what a monster I must be. And, just so many times in my life I needed my dad there, and he wasn't. You…
/r/MensRights29/07/12 12:07 AM
3

The level of discourse is already so low that I don't see you two having any productive conversations. It's clear you don't respect each other as thinking individuals. She's not going to change you, and she's not going to change anyone's mind on men's opinions with such blatant misandry and such flawed logic. And you know, you're not going to change her. Make your life less stressful by getting her out of it.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 02:56 AM
3

My uncle has sole custody of his son and was allowed to move him to a different state from where he was staying with his mother. The mother has visitation rights but scheduling is "left up to the parents." This could be good if she were a responsible and reliable person. However, she's currently kept my cousin for about a month after she was last supposed to give him back. I keep saying take it to court, but my uncle considers that a last resort.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 11:41 PM
2

I don't know much about Swedish law. It seems reasonable that if the defendant didn't commit rape (under the Swedish legal definition), he wouldn't be convicted of rape. In some places, in addition to whatever assault charges the defendant faced, he would also face a charge of "attempted rape." Attempted crimes only depend on the defendant trying to commit a crime; failing doesn't excuse the defendant intending to harm someone else and taking steps to do so. I highly recommend The Illustrated Gu…
/r/MensRights06/07/12 12:16 AM
5

It's fine to let readers of this subreddit know when relevant things are going on in other parts of reddit. Just keep in mind the MensRights policy on cross-linking (below). OP hasn't requested specific votes, though. Cross Linking: Cross linking to r/ShitRedditSays or r/AgainstMensRights is not allowed, and submissions will be removed. This includes the SRS offshoots (SRSDiscussion, for example). In addition, we ask that users respect the communities that are cross linked to, and refrain from s…
/r/MensRights21/06/12 02:04 PM
9

To be clear, this method isn't manipulative on its face; it's a perfectly valid way to handle these situations when the victim is telling the truth. So real victims should do this and not worry about some possibility that it's an underhanded or sketchy way to ensure their safety.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:55 PM
33

Here's a forum post from another man in a similar situation. Call the police to report what happened; they will probably tell you they can't do anything, but generally you want to document what's going on. You may also be able to file a missing persons report since minors have been gone for over 24 hours. Go to court ASAP (like, tomorrow) and get an order from a judge giving you temporary emergency custody of the children, which will mean she has to return the kids or face possible jail time. Ge…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 02:14 AM
1

The best way to get a correct answer to this question would be to consult your lawyer. If you have a Contact Agreement that your ex isn't living up to, you can notify the CSA of that. Also, your ex would probably have to formally petition the CSA to change your support arrangement, and I doubt they'd make you pay for a party. Check out http://www.childsupportlaws.co.uk/ for quite a bit of relevant information.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 01:23 PM
38

Absolutely. My dad died when I was little. We'd have Father's Day projects in school where we made cards, or juice box planes, and I gave them to my mom instead. So that's what I thought of when I saw this; I don't think it's meant for families with both a father and a mother.
/r/MensRights17/06/12 06:41 PM
12

You define "spermjacking" quite narrowly as "digging a used condom out of the trashcan to put your jizz in a turkey baster," but MR includes other deceptive tactics, like lying about using hormonal birth control or poking holes in condoms. It's a woman using a man's sperm to try to get pregnant, without his knowledge or consent, after agreeing to take reasonable steps to avoid pregnancy. Now, merely trying to stop one's partner from using birth control, which isn't necessarily deceitful, is also…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:11 PM
6

Full text of the decision the OP mentions is on Google Scholar, here. Daily Mail author Liz Jones claims to have secretly taken partners' used condoms on multiple occasions to try to get pregnant, here. (She tries to rationalize her actions by saying any woman her age would do it. She's wrong.) A bit off-topic: In an ongoing law suit, Joeseph Pressil claims his girlfriend stole his sperm from used condoms and used it for IVF that resulted in her having his twins, here. She has not admitted to an…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:05 AM
1

I don't know why Kanuk876's being downvoted so much for this one. If the situation were really just reversed, and a woman was going around saying "I just drank too much and made a devastating mistake - but in no way do I think I was being taken advantage of," the majority of people would take her at her word, too. Now if you and Female-Bizarro-You were both going around saying "I was taken advantage of," FBY would have better chances of being taken seriously (and that's wrong).
/r/MensRights10/04/12 01:25 AM
5

it's always the guy's fault in that hivemind because the guy should have known better One of the reasons this happens on 2xc and MR is because this type of poster comes asking for advice, so commenters act as advisers, not arbiters of truth. Both groups generally try to help when someone from the community claims to be dealing with a difficult situation, giving posters the benefit of our minor doubts instead of cross examining them. From what I've seen, the strongest bias in both subs when deali…
/r/MensRights10/04/12 01:18 AM
2

It could be a troll. It could also be a really dumb kid who's got himself into a dumb predicament. If it's the former, well, I've just wasted a little time. If it's the latter, he needs the help. This is the view a lot of us took on it (quoted from someone else in the original thread). I don't agree with some of the advice other commenters there gave, but I don't regret spending a few minutes trying to help someone who might be dealing with a crisis.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 06:12 PM
3

Do a search on this, because it's been asked here before. Also, expect a debate on the morality and acceptability of videotaping sexual encounters without a partner's consent.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:44 PM
0

Your link no longer goes to a discussion of the question in the title. It goes to a forum index instead, and I couldn't find the discussion through their search feature. Perhaps the topic was removed.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:43 PM
12

Unfortunately, that doesn't necessarily make it go away. His hitting her may not be considered justified based on the circumstance, depending on where he is, who the prosecutor assigned to the case is, what any witnesses say, etc. Assuming it's real, OP definitely needs his lawyer. :(
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:35 AM
1

Yes, good call. I actually meant to highlight that it was a visual inspection.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 01:43 AM
2

Any person should put himself or herself first in a relationship. To do otherwise is unhealthy.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 01:59 PM
2

This decision was based on a case involving visual strip searches, where the person arrested was closely inspected by an officer while being asked to move parts of his body, squat, etc. so the officer could get a better view. Still demeaning, still intimidation. You're still totally right, except there's no literal sodomy. Edit, from the article: “'Every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed,' Justice Kennedy …
/r/MensRights03/04/12 01:43 PM
1

string her along until her bruise heals then dump her Okay wait wait wait. She has a picture of the bruise. And if she's not an idiot, she's already told someone that you hit her. Waiting until it heals won't work. You can buy spermicide in lube-like tubes, but there is no way you should contact this woman again. Lawyer up. :( Please let this be an April fools 'joke'.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 06:15 AM
11

No, NO. Dear god no, do not falsify evidence. You need a lawyer right now. No joke. Right now. Use the American Bar Association's Guide to Finding Legal Help. There is no substitute for a lawyer in this situation.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:59 AM
3

Seconded. Here's the show page, but it doesn't seem to have full episodes. It looks like it only ran for 3 episodes, in Jan 2012. Edit: This situation was discussed previously on reddit here, though the video the OP there linked to is now a 404. Edit: Oh, and here's a previous MensRights discussion of it.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:38 AM
1

In fact if you want to post it here, I'd be happy to give it a syntax and grammar once-over.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:10 AM
1

The Mayo Clinic's guide suggests calling the National Domestic Violence Hotline: 800-799-SAFE (800-799-7233) for referrals. You could also start with your insurance company, looking for ppo therapists in your area.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:41 AM
1

Ah, right, my wording there was off. Since she plead guilty, she was automatically found guilty and thus convicted of the 12 counts without a trial. I should have said you don't take a plea bargain and then also get tried for the same crime. Thank you for that!
/r/MensRights29/03/12 11:04 PM
2

Get therapy. A trained professional can help you deal with the ways past abuse and general shittiness of your exes has affected your new relationships. He can also help you figure out how to make positive changes in your behavior (since you can't control anyone else's) to avoid these types of relationships in the future or get out after the early warning signs. Also, if you'd included these facts about being abused in AskWomen, instead of just saying your exes cheated on you, AskWomen might have…
/r/MensRights29/03/12 07:57 PM
2

Oh, definitely, not gonna argue with that. It'd be worse for 300, and "convicted of 300" was a factual error, so you know, just, facts.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:16 PM
6

McCallum, 29, was... convicted of raping the boy up to 300 times over a 21-month period. She pleaded guilty to 12 counts of child rape, one count of drugging a person for sex and one count of providing alcohol to a minor.... This didn't make sense based on what I know of the US justice system (you don't take a plea bargain and then also get convicted of the crime), so I did a bit more searching. It turns out the boy accused her of raping him about 300 times. Obviously this is an important distin…
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:05 PM
2

Exactly. As I said in my edit, this is its own very important problem. The bill adds to the list of protections available primarily or exclusively to women because of that underlying problem, but the bill is not written the way the article and title here imply it's written.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 07:11 PM
5

This is evidence! Clearly you have a lot of experience researching and talking about this issue, but the evidence is important because to the unitiated (like me and probably itouch) hurting people seems to contradict these organizations' stated goals of helping people. Thank you for taking the time to write this out.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 07:05 PM
1

Well TANF isn't just for homeless people, but I do see your point. That's part of the difference I tried to capture in my edit.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 06:50 PM
5

If all 'violence against women' was, tomorrow, directed against men, then the campaign to end violence against women would be successful. You've made the unsupported assertion that "ending violence against women" campaigners care only about the ends, but not the means, so to speak. You've predicted that campaigners would define a situation as "success" when ithouch argues they would not. The leap you make here is in conflating the end of violence against women with the goal of the "ending violen…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 09:02 AM
18

tl;dr: False alarm. The bill does not specify that only women in shelters will be exempt from testing; it says any individual in a domestic violence shelter is exempt. From the text proposed for for (Senate Bill 292): "(b) Not later than July 1, 2013, the Department of Human Services shall institute a drug testing program for applicants of TANF benefits who are 18 years of age or older, excluding individuals who are receiving TANF benefits based on being victims of domestic violence and are resi…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 08:36 AM
1

Do you have any idea of the (stated) reasoning behind these policies? Or, as eeph requested, perhaps a source we could read for more information?
/r/MensRights08/11/11 05:28 PM
7

Note that the blog defines itself as "advancing the radical feminist views of" its authors (emphasis added). The blog's guide for commenting states, "In order to be considered suitable for posting here, your remarks must proceed from within a framework of radical feminist theory. ... any comment that expresses views proceeding from any discernible male-identified perspective, even if it is superficially pro-feminist, is not suitable for posting here." These authors wouldn't consider themselves m…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 04:39 PM
2

What about medical care leading up to and including the child's birth, after the man chose to "financially abort" the child?
/r/MensRights23/10/11 12:07 AM
3

The thing that stuck out to me in the op was the (unintended?) assertion that "pregnancy and childbirth is... as hard as you make it." Damn biology.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 02:46 AM
1

Since they were sequestered, the jury didn't have access to the news during the trial. They weren't even allowed to talk to friends and family about the trial. They missed a significant amount of information and most of the analysis the "outside world" got to see. For instance, like many others, I watched hours of the court proceedings. So did newscasters and commenters like Nancy Grace. But the jury wasn't in the room for the whole time. The jury was not present for about 10% of the arguments I…
/r/MensRights07/07/11 02:41 AM
6

Edit: Audio now available. At 26:00 panelist Brenner (law professor!) says that a violent sexual assault occurred. She can tell because the prosecutor says so (27:10). The audio won't be on the web until later today. Until then, the comments section linked gives a pretty good idea what this radio show's callers think about recent developments in the DSK case. Listening to it on the radio (live) today I realized how useful this case combined with this format of show could be for spreading awarene…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 03:51 PM
2

At least two other articles posted on reddit recently about this type of prosecution claimed that the original purpose of the laws used was to punish adults who cooked meth around their children (the articles I recall reading were about the 15 year old coke addict). The articles are otherwise so similar they sound like they were based on one press release; I wonder where this guy got the "men harming women" thing from.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 07:12 AM
2

The comment below the one you linked to points out that it's unfair, but it's still true. Legally anyone who does not have custody of the children does not have standing to simply them from people who do. The comment you've linked to is factually correct; I see nothing wrong with it.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 07:05 AM
3

Not guilty; it breaks down the charges in the article.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 06:50 AM
2

Agreed. Often people watching trials forget that outsiders get a lot more information (and spin) than jurors. The jury acted on the evidence they were given, and it was insufficient to convict.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 06:49 AM
2

To get more toward the heart of the OP's question, there are multiple things you can believe while not believing the accuser: *There's too little information to make any judgement about whether either person is telling the truth. *Details of the accuser's account are wrong, inconsistent, implausible, or missing, but the accuser may still have been raped in a different way. *The accuser's story is false; the accused definitely didn't rape them. When you say you don't believe the accuser, most fem…
/r/MensRights05/07/11 04:48 PM
17

Seriously, OP, don't stay in this relationship. It's obvious you don't want to, and it's absolutely not healthy for you. Your wife may be dealing with a few separate psychological/biological issues. Many women (and some men) experience "baby fever," an intense but ultimately resistible desire to procreate. Miscarriages bring their own special kind of torment for the almost mother and father involved. You can search "baby fever" or "miscarriage" on reddit to read what some people here have said a…
/r/MensRights05/07/11 04:22 PM
1

It's not a false comparison. It's not the same situation, but to talk about that we'd have to use... the same situation. Due to society's reaction, false accusations devastate victims in a unique way. Any person of sufficient physical strength could theoretically murder other people if they were alone with them. People take precautions against being murdered, but normal people do not suspect they're about to be murdered every time they interact with someone else. Murder, like a false accusation,…
/r/MensRights05/07/11 04:01 PM
1

It's sunk, and I agree it's at least negligent to include the stat. Based on the responses I got when I called the hotline, I am still comfortable recommending calling - but not relying on the website.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 11:50 PM
1

I didn't find the 1 in 33 stat here, but while looking for it I found this page that says of sexual assault offenders "HE'S NOT WAITING IN THE BUSHES." Disappointing for one of the big orgs that I thought did fairly well taking female-on-male rapes into account. :( Edit: Found it.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 11:32 PM
2

The individual counselors should all be trained to deal with male victims raped by female attackers. The woman I spoke to on the hotline said they did have experience with this kind of situation and they do have male volunteers on hand to talk to. The national hotline actually connects to a local office, so mileage may vary. It seems worth a try. Edited to delete irrelevant stuff. tl;dr: Try that hotline; they say they can help. 1.800.656.4673
/r/MensRights04/07/11 11:18 PM
1

It is disgusting, and unfair, and unethical, and unjust, that names of those accused of sexual assault are regularly published (and all the life-destroying consequences of publication allowed to occur) in the US. But I want to address your interjection: "and women claim they have no power." You imply that all women have the power to ruin the life of any man plausibly connected to them. This is true on one level, but most women for moral, cultural, or other reasons would never intentionally false…
/r/MensRights04/07/11 07:18 PM
26

Please consider calling the National Sexual Assault Hotline at 1.800.656.4673. Their operators are trained to help male victims. They can provide referrals for understanding, experienced counselors in your area (so you can address the underlying problem instead of only using the meds), give you information about reporting the crime, and/or just talk if you need to. RAINN's site is a good resource in general; they have a Recovering from Sexual Assault page that you might find helpful. Also please…
/r/MensRights04/07/11 06:58 PM
1

Okay, there are a lot of separate topics being discussed here. Putting aside the "Real Men" ads and all of the Kutcher stuff, the Village Voice reporters did a poor job of refuting the study Kutcher referenced (which I haven't finished reading yet). I plan to read the rest of the study, and I won't be surprised to find its science lacking. It's apparent from the introduction, though, that the study and the Voice were counting two very different sets of people. So of course they came up with very…
/r/MensRights03/07/11 09:54 AM
6

When a girl is literally unzipping your pants, men can’t say no. We’re not built that way. Note that the above quote taken literally also implies "men cannot be raped by women."
/r/MensRights30/06/11 06:10 AM
3

Lopez's attorney for the initial trial failed to collect sufficient evidence to counter the prosecution's many "expert" witnesses. The jury rendered a reasonable verdict based on the evidence they were given, but they weren't given the evidence in this article. They didn't know enough to reach the "correct" verdict. The ME's bias towards findings of homicide contributed, but that's mostly the defense attorney's fault. The article doesn't make the case that Lopez's gender contributed to his being…
/r/MensRights30/06/11 06:04 AM
6

The seatbelt analogy isn't quite right. Seatbelts are only a safety feature; choosing how to dress is an expression of oneself. Consider if the perfect driver stuck a pro-Obama bumper sticker on his car in the deep South. Then when some belligerent Republican driver runs him off the road, the police say he was "asking for it." Now the police are the people who kind of sound like idiots. (Meanwhile, due to a good attorney and laws in the south that allow violent responses to "fightin' words," the…
/r/MensRights28/06/11 05:51 AM
1

You posted this twice. :)
/r/MensRights28/06/11 05:12 AM
10

Even assuming this is real, nothing's said about what happened after the woman reported it. The police might have laughed in her face. Or politely taken her statement, then violated both of them. Erm... given both of them a citation for violating the order, not violated them.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 07:34 PM
3

It's unfortunate that CounterFeminism sort of fell through, because that promised the sort of separation between obviously, strongly 'pro-mens-rights' leaning posts and 'counter-feminism' posts I think you would appreciate.
/r/MensRights19/10/10 09:23 PM
2

There's an apparently pretty popular myth among women that if you pretend to like it, the rapist will injure you less (and be less likely to kill you). This came up in the AMA that an admitted, convicted rapist did a few months ago, and it's exceedingly creepy... for so many reasons.
/r/MensRights11/10/10 06:00 PM
0

If it weren't (somewhat?) seriously intended to be read outside this forum, I wouldn't think it was a big deal. As written, it's vulnerable to being misread in a damaging way outside this context (MRAs THINK MARRIED PEOPLE NEVER COMMIT RAPE?!?!?!). Unfortunately, I don't know how to "fix" this without putting "if you are not raped, and" in front of most of them, which, as you point out, would be absurd. So I've pointed out a problem with no suggestion for a solution. I accept my downvotes.
/r/MensRights11/10/10 05:54 PM
6

I'm pretty sure tennis means to say that someone being rich or famous isn't sufficient to indicate they're a rapist, but he's actually saying that someone's being rich or famous is sufficient to indicate they're not a rapist.
/r/MensRights10/10/10 08:09 PM
0

The "How not to rape people" guide is misandrous and disgusting, and it doesn't even cover many of the ways men can "rape," let alone women (e.g., statutory rape). The list of reasons women give for falsifying rape claims turns my stomach. This guide is also flawed. I believe your point is that, despite actually having been used as 'justifications' for making false rape allegations, none of the items on your list is sufficient to mean that rape has happened. That's true, and it's good and useful…
/r/MensRights10/10/10 08:03 PM
13

This makes me really glad I've been dating one person -- who's nothing like that person -- since high school.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 02:03 AM
6

2XC has a post about this right now that you may find interesting. The prompt the OP over there received said Remember the game last year about what colour bra you were wearing at the moment? The purpose was to increase awareness of October Breast Cancer Awareness month. It was a tremendous success and we had men wondering for days what was with the colors and it made it to the news. This year's game has to do with your handbag/purse, ... Yeah as a supposed campaign to raise awareness for breast…
/r/MensRights06/10/10 01:58 AM
7

RAMIREZ, STOP THE PRESS! SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING STUPID ON YAHOO ANSWERS!!! and then someone else in capital letters! Seriously, though, while that question does reflect some shitty thinking, it's Yahoo Answers.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 01:43 AM
0

We've come to clearly see that "feminism is about equality" is great rhetoric, but it is nothing more than propaganda. Feminism has not in a single instance, anywhere, ever been willing to allow men to gain if it in anyway was a loss to women. What is this "Feminism" you speak of? Usually, when someone personifies an abstract concept word, I understand that as meaning people who embrace word are, for instance, "willing" to do something. But if you said "Feminists have not in a single instance, a…
/r/MensRights04/10/10 09:51 PM
0

I'm familiar with rage faces, but could this effect of the juxtaposition of the text and images have gone unnoticed by the comic's creator? Probably. I'm about 80% joking.
/r/MensRights04/10/10 09:31 PM
1

Unfortunately, some men have also stopped listening to people who genuinely advocate equality when those people happen to be women. Edit: Hmm... the crudely drawn caricature of a woman acting out sexist stereotypes and blathering on and and says she wants to change internet discourse "where women are crudely drawn caricatures acting out the worst sexist stereotypes and blathering on and on...." Is this comic a troll?
/r/MensRights04/10/10 01:23 AM
13

I can't read the article because I'm desperately trying to hold on to my initial "WTF she slept with his brother thinking it was actually a bear? How would that make it better?!"
/r/MensRights02/10/10 07:48 PM
2

The dictionary agrees: feminism has at least 2 meanings.
/r/MensRights02/10/10 06:39 AM
2

One of the reasons this case is so interesting is that no matter what the outcome, it will set a precedent that will affect whether more people pursue lawsuits like this one. So one can sue over any breakup where someone lied? This is one of people's main concerns with the case, taken to an extreme.
/r/MensRights02/10/10 04:02 AM
1

I doubt anyone will be jailed for this in the US. Still, if Akbar has to pay out in this lawsuit, that could mean civil cases brought against others who lie to their partners. Edit: I don't think the kind of scenario you give is good or right or should ever happen, but it goes to why I find the case so interesting. I also don't think it ever will (or should) become a criminal offense.
/r/MensRights02/10/10 02:27 AM
12

"Rape by fraud" has recently been considered a crime in some places, but since this is a civil case, I believe the idea would be to prove that Akbar's actions harmed the victim in some way. From the article, it seems her legal team is focusing on emotional distress. Edit: Note that this comment does not include any judgement about the validity of the concept of "rape by fraud." Some who have responded seem to think I'm supporting the law suit, but my intention was to draw the distinction between…
/r/MensRights01/10/10 05:39 PM
3

I'm curious to see how this plays out. It's a civil case, so unless Ontario is very different from the US, no one will be going to jail. Note, on the other hand, that "Mr. Akbar’s attorney... 'is confident that he will succeed in his very strong defamation claim against her.'"
/r/MensRights01/10/10 05:35 PM
2

Man, I am being a bit slow, aren't I? I blame Captain Morgan for trying to take over the ship.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 04:43 AM
1

1) Google "how to deal with deadbeat dad." 2) Reverse genders. 3) Profit.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 04:18 AM
1

our first project is to collect proof of men's violence against women from local newspapers As for this, I'd look for instances where men defended themselves against female attackers. It technically fits the assignment and provides a different perspective.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 04:14 AM
1

Who played a large role in your life? Why? Can you tell a story about this person? In English, the first part could be answered with a list of people, in which case the second part would have to be tweaked. Can you describe any instances in which someone treated you better than a man because of your sex as opposed to mistreatment for it? A more positive version might not even mention mistreatment. "Can you describe an instance in which someone treated you better because of your sex? Why and how …
/r/MensRights01/10/10 04:07 AM
1

I'm hoping "breastfeeding leave" is an unfortunate English translation of a slightly different Spanish phrase.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 03:52 AM
5

Ah, I thought the commenter might have meant 'that poor woman needs help dealing with that horrible man,' which ... not so much. I think the jail thing comes from the idea that punishments should be equal across genders and predictions of what the consequences of similar actions would be for a male aggressor.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 03:49 AM
5

Maybe they meant mental health "help:" lock her up in a psych ward where she can get some help. Keep hope alive!
/r/MensRights01/10/10 03:39 AM
1

That most people think women don't commit these crimes or even that women get lighter sentences has absolutely nothing (logically) to do with the idea that "all men are purely evil." Compare your specific, supportable assertions with the wild hyperbole in the article. The thread title does better, but it still makes a claim that, in its broadness, clashes with my (and my friends') experience of the real world.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 08:47 PM
2

Is there a marriage industry out there selling them the idea of marriage? Of course there is; it's promoted from romantic comedies to the "literature" at grocery checkouts. Weddings are big business, and propagating the idea that American women are broken if they don't get married (and that marrying always makes both partners happier) helps create and solidify the market for weddings.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 03:12 PM
1

Very helpful, thanks.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 02:52 PM
-1

That's good; I'd bet he's pretty attached to his dick. Edit: It's a pun, because to put her husband's dick on the end of a 15 foot pole you'd probably have to remove it. But he's attached to it. So you shouldn't mount it on a pole, as that would be very painful for him.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:51 AM
1

c.f., cougar
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:50 AM
1

Women are already educated about the danger and seriousness of being raped. Educating women at the same about the danger and seriousness of falsely accusing someone of rape could reduce the occurrence of false accusations, especially in cases where women or girls honestly don't realize how much damage they will cause to the person they're accusing. Edit: For example, formal education occurs in some sex ed classes and many programs for college freshmen, but the programs I've seen don't give much …
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:37 AM
2

equality is another subreddit to try
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:09 AM
2

We need PSAs to show that white men can be horrible drivers, too. Everyone already knows about Asians, women, and the elderly - no PSA required. /s Edit: Oh and steer clear of kids. They're basically meat-filled car magnets. And trains. Trains will fuck you up.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:06 AM
5

Basically, it is challenging the culture-wide notion that men are purely evil, and can only do evil things (unless guided by a female). What bothers me about the article (and the thread title here) is that, in my experience, this notion is not culture-wide and is not "the prevailing modern view." A majority of people do not think this way. Or maybe I am just very fortunate to run in the small percentage of social groups aren't populated by misandrous asshole. Edit: Assholes. Misandrous assholes*…
/r/MensRights28/09/10 11:32 PM
1

The problem I have with the argument that it was okay for him to film in this case because he was charged is that he couldn't have known that retroactive justification would be required. Edit: not charged. faced with possible charges. my bad
/r/MensRights09/07/10 01:11 AM
1

Hindsight is generally 20/20, but either this person makes a habit of videotaping people he sleeps with without telling them, or his foresight was pretty damn good. Those are the alternatives I see. If it's not a habit and he had reason to be sufficiently suspicious to make a video this time, it seems safer and easier just to not sleep with her. If it's a habit, that's just something I'm not comfortable supporting as a defense strategy, which a lot of commenters in this thread are suggesting. Th…
/r/MensRights09/07/10 12:27 AM
1

The fact that this person benefited (immensely) from breaking the law doesn't erase the fact that he broke the law. Being accused of rape - or charged, tried, and convicted - is absolutely a horrible, horrible thing, and false accusers should be punished under the law. I'm glad this man avoided that, and admitting to his crime was definitely worth it. However, he did commit and admit to a crime, which he should be (and has been, under diversion) punished for just like anyone else would in the sa…
/r/MensRights08/07/10 11:10 PM
0

Why sleep with someone if you think they'll falsely accuse you of rape? Also, if the goal is to deter false rape accusations, why not tell people you're recording them?
/r/MensRights07/07/10 09:35 PM
1

My confusion was mostly about the sequence of events. I thought you (and other commenters) were thinking he somehow knew when he made the tape that an investigation would follow, which would influence his decision to tape this particular sex act. Now I understand that the idea is to illegally videotape every casual sexual encounter in case one of the people you're with eventually decides to falsely accuse you. That's a dishonest, (I agree) disgusting, strategy with serious legal risks. What do y…
/r/MensRights07/07/10 08:54 PM
1

Acknowledged. I just chuckled that "rule 34" came up in my search.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:56 PM
3

The article also only says the woman claimed not to remember what had happened, which is a bit different from claiming to have been raped. Even knowing there's a video tape of the night before, do we have evidence to say she lied about forgetting it? Also, I agree the accused should have anonymity, but why do you say he had a good reason to videotape sex? Is it because they met in a bar? Was this woman just someone who "looked" like a false accuser? Was she wearing a "I'll claim you raped me" t-…
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:49 PM
1

I said this earlier too, so sorry for the repeat, but I thought the "guilt and shame" referred to in the quote is guilt and shame regarding having been taped, given that right before what you've quoted it says (emphasis added): Wellington Sexual Abuse Help Foundation general manager Helen Sullivan said the filming aspect of the case was unusual.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:42 PM
1

The article says the police were "investigating," and, based on the investigation, decided not to charge the man with rape.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:39 PM
1

Some of this kind of evidence would be available in US Federal civil cases through discovery, according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure #26 and #34. That's right, rule 34. I wouldn't think the "unless it's only for impeachment" thing applies (based on the contents of the article) because the woman only said she didn't remember what happened, not that she remembered being forced. On the criminal side - still US federal cases - Rule 16(b)(1)(A) seems to indicate that disclosure would be requir…
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:37 PM
1

I believe the "guilt and shame" referred to in the quote is guilt and shame regarding having been taped, given that the line before what you've quoted says (emphasis added): Wellington Sexual Abuse Help Foundation general manager Helen Sullivan said the filming aspect of the case was unusual.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:21 PM
1

2 wrongs make what now?
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:15 PM
3

This article is (and should be) the same advice given no matter what the genders of the people involved are. As you point out, it's definitely advice intended for those who want to support the victim, not for those who have a motive to discredit them. Even in a court of law, though, people who want to support the victim keep supporting the victim. It's an "adversarial system," and the support of family members etc. doesn't need to fall away just because the case goes to court.
/r/MensRights06/07/10 03:10 PM
5

I have to laugh; that's exactly what's so bad about the article. It's sexist and downright silly.
/r/MensRights06/07/10 01:31 AM
17

You called her a coward, a bitch, and an idiot, and you agreed with another poster who called her a "lying fucking slut" who deserved to have her teeth knocked out. Nitesmoke, I was with you on your original response about why you downvoted eth's comment, but once you started using ad hominem attacks and claims about a downvote squad (with convenient links) to... raise a downvote squad, you lost credibility in my book. I'm not saying the other person has credibility, just that comments like that…
/r/MensRights05/07/10 04:26 AM
3

Thanks for clarifying. I too found it a bit hard to parse in the original format.
/r/MensRights04/07/10 01:04 AM
7

Edit: By the way, it would be nice to include a link to the article you cross-posted, just to see what 2XC said on the issue. Edit2: Here it is. There are interesting points on both sides, and relevant/well-reasoned comments seem to have upvotes despite conflicting viewpoints. It's also the 5th highest post in 2XC so as of right now does not seem to have been effectively buried, yay. Its difficult to understand why women's groups don't vocally support prosecuting and sentencing false accusers. I…
/r/MensRights03/07/10 08:30 PM
4

A point about the opening. The article he cites in his youtube comment describes "extreme morning sickness" as a serious ailment that can require hospitalization (wiki here). This is not the specific case I would have chosen to illustrate women terminating pregnancies for "trivial" reasons. Edit: subject-verb agreement
/r/MensRights03/07/10 04:40 AM
2

You may need to fix it for the blogger, too. Actually, many of the top google search results for "french law psychological violence" mention that the law is expected to be particularly helpful to women. I wonder if that tidbit went out in an English-language press release at some point.
/r/MensRights02/07/10 11:38 PM
5

The OP's 20% figure may come from this article about female pedophiles in the UK, which was recently linked in MaleStudies.
/r/MensRights02/07/10 08:27 PM
12

A lot goes on with parents that kids don't know about. Your mom probably went through some incredibly hard times with your father when they were together and he was drinking heavily, but that doesn't excuse how she's acting now. I agree with kog13 that you should either talk to a lawyer the next time you're with your dad or ask your dad to make sure his lawyer knows the situation (what you've posted here). If you decide to see a lawyer with your dad, don't tell your mom you plan to do so (she ma…
/r/MensRights23/06/10 04:56 PM
2

Anon781 specifically said "in the case of rape," so you're already talking about cases where the unlucky penis does belong to a rapist. As I understood it, the hypothetical at this point is that the rape actually happened. I think you missed that important part of the parent comment. Given that hypothetical, saying "I would prefer the rapist experiences some pain than the victim gets HIV" is akin to supporting violent self-defense during an attempted murder.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 06:40 PM
2

I wouldn't anticipate much difference if the inmate were female or the judge male. If the genders were completely reversed, some women's rights groups might get upset. The judge does have a shady past both in decisions and ethics, but in this case the inmate's defense team may have screwed him more than the judge did. The real Men's Rights issue related to this post is the fact that it's hugely unlikely it could ever happen with a woman; men make up >98% of death row inmates (as of 2009).
/r/MensRights18/06/10 07:06 PM
1

compulsory abortion must not be allowed to reproduce Make excuses for his language if you want; you can pick and choose what to leave and what to take out of context. If an off-the-wall reinterpretation is all you have to offer to support your point, though, I'm done here. Good day.
/r/MensRights15/06/10 08:04 PM
1

The logic is specifically, if one is to be punished for dealing with a person of legal superiority then the best decision is simply not dealing with them. Gaspard said that all Western women should be subjected to forced abortions and not allowed to reproduce. Gaspard is not defining "abandon" as "not deal with," so saying that his comment is, at it's base, logical or possibly reasonable, doesn't seem justifiable. Is this what you're saying? Everyone should avoid the kind of situation you descri…
/r/MensRights15/06/10 07:51 PM
1

Honestly I thought Gaspard might be trolling that thread, the comment was so irrational. There's no need to justify it, though. The urge to vent is understandable, but venting usually isn't useful. As tomek77 pointed out, Gaspard didn't claim to be an MRA, which is good for MRAs. However, some MRAs have made similarly hateful and irrational statements, which are not so good for men's rights as a movement, imho. Posting a comment -- especially such an unreasonable one -- on an online article is n…
/r/MensRights15/06/10 07:22 PM
1

Inequitable laws and inequitable implementations of seemingly fair laws are part of the problem, but they're driven and supported by social expectations. Women who grow up in the Middle East and reject "traditional Middle-Eastern values" can probably find some men there who don't subscribe to those values either, and men in the Western world can find women who aren't 'typical Western Women.' Moving away from the "typical Western woman" is a great idea. It's very different from abandoning (and/or…
/r/MensRights15/06/10 06:48 PM
1

I don't like the idea of romantic relationships where one party is (or is expected to be) subservient to the other. Many people have said marriage has become a way to enslave men. It used to be a way to enslave women. Neither of those is okay. I still have some 'romantic' notions of marriage: it's a sign that a relationship is intended to be permanent; it leads to the couple having children (although this part is more based on stigma of having kids outside of marriage). I want those things for m…
/r/MensRights15/06/10 06:08 PM
2

I understand why someone would say "Western women must be abandoned," though I don't think it's true. He lost me at the second sentence, where that emotional bitterness takes over.
/r/MensRights15/06/10 03:12 AM
8

I say, with deep emphasis, that Western women must be abandoned. They must not be allowed to reproduce under any circumstance. I agree with compulsory abortion for them. Sigh at people who call themselves MRAs but say things like this... extremists make every movement look bad, I suppose.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 02:21 AM
2

Compare: As a tall person, I am still experiencing the negative repercussions of the doors in my house being designed for short people (hitting my head :/ ) even though the doors aren't being designed right now.
/r/MensRights27/05/10 03:26 AM
1

If you want to know why those feminists think those things are relevant, you could go ask some. MensRights isn't the best place for that view.
/r/MensRights27/05/10 03:25 AM
1

I see what you're saying, but since the OP really did make baby-killing a central part of his argument, I don't think you and he are saying the same thing. By avoiding that extremely polarizing issue, you've made an argument that has more widespread appeal. However, the OP makes a stronger, emotionally-charged argument for people who agree with his premise that abortion is murder. I don't agree with his premise, so his insistence upon it turns me off, and I am more likely to agree with you than …
/r/MensRights20/05/10 07:13 PM
6

Actually I think the baby-killing aspect was a significant part of the OP's argument. I would summarize that part as "women are allowed to torture and murder babies for the sake of their social lives; men 'walking away from' the same babies is surely no worse than that."
/r/MensRights19/05/10 03:56 AM
2

If there are 98 real rapes plus 2 false reports (100 total), but only 5% of these are reported.... This is 98 true reports plus 2 false reports. Anything going into that statistic is already a reported rape and therefore already part of the 5% that are reported. I think you may have confused accusations with attacks. So say there are 98 rape accusations that stem from real attacks and 2 that stem from ... whatever. These 98 true rape accusations are the rapes reported, 5% of the total rapes that…
/r/MensRights01/05/10 02:19 AM
1

Well, first off, I'm pretty sure Jim Crow was an African-American cartoon character, the victim of segregation laws. There's a little jump in your logic from people benefiting passively from unfair treatment under the law to people actively going out and breaking the law because they won't suffer as harsh of consequences as others. It's still not the best thing to do to passively benefit from an unjust situation, but each of us only has so much time/energy to fight injustice. We're more likely t…
/r/MensRights30/04/10 02:48 AM
5

Bleh. I do find it odd that none of the victims quoted were heterosexual men.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 11:34 AM
6

Amen.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 11:24 AM
1

I don't think it's reasonable to say the written law is completely irrelevant. It provides a standard to (try to) hold people accountable to. There is definitely a societal problem with the way the law is implemented (what you call "law as practiced"). The discrepancy in who ends up in prison is a gendered issue, but I think of it separately from prison rape. Prison rape is a gendered issue in that, for instance, it's more broadly socially acceptable to joke about men being raped in prison than …
/r/MensRights28/04/10 07:55 AM
6

You're saying: because under the current legal system, women can get away with doing something like this, they'll do it, and that that legal system was put in place by feminists? If this is your point, it's still a fallacy to say that all women are feminists (and particularly to claim that these women are feminists when there is no evidence supporting that). Not all men are men's rights advocates.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 04:23 AM
4

That would be a fun experiment. Not actually attacking someone, but posting identical stories with genders reversed.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 04:21 AM
2

I think it's a valid thing to do in that context (replicating the structure of arguments you believe are flawed in order to reveal their flaws), but outside of that context, it just makes your ideas look as weak as the ones you're arguing against.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 04:19 AM
6

On the other hand, you are assuming that just because of genders, multiple female attackers with weapons weren't a real threat to a male victim. I know it's probably not your intent to propagate that idea, but this attitude is one of the reasons why rape of men and domestic abuse against men have historically not been taken as seriously as violence against women.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 04:16 AM
-3

Honestly I think this statement would have fit right in with discussions of why Civil Rights activists or abolitionists were dangerous to American society.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 03:18 AM
1

Both forms are against the law, and both are de-facto parts of the legal/penal system.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 03:15 AM
9

another man “abused” by his wife physically and verbally, counsels battered men What're those quotation marks doing there? This is clearly abuse, straight up, no "quote-unqoute," no "so-called." Awareness that women can be domestic abusers is surprisingly low, like awareness that women can be rapists. Victims and perpetrators of these crimes should be treated the same way without regard to gender.
/r/MensRights27/04/10 07:50 AM
0

even if he wasn't raped The "legal abortion" idea Sandaasu mentioned sounds promising. Moving away from rape, each party is generally equally 'at fault' for unplanned pregnancies. Physically the immediate consequences of a pregnancy are obviously greater for women than men. How can/should the various costs of an unplanned pregnancy be split fairly? I appreciate the input.
/r/MensRights27/04/10 04:39 AM
2

Well, in the case of unplanned pregnancies, neither party actually consents to conceiving a child. Or do you just mean consent to the sex? I agree it's ridiculous for a man to have to pay for care for an unwanted child as a result of his being raped. Edit: I'd also have to say it's ridiculous for a woman to have to pay for care for an unwanted child if she was raped. I'm not sure how those situations usually play out, but I can't imagine anyone else (for example, the state) currently pays for an…
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:15 PM
1

I wasn't responding to your entire comment. I just think it's easy to justify killing a fetus when the option is two deaths or one.
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:03 PM
2

Well, health concerns can mean "both the mother and the child will die" versus "the child will die." That seems really clear-cut.
/r/MensRights26/04/10 07:39 PM
11

Yeah, check the 2XC thread again if you'd like. We're at about the 12 hour mark, and I don't see one comment supporting what the woman who wrote this article did. The top comment calls these women's actions "insane" and "irresponsible." Edit: As I'm looking at it, Maschalismos also has a fairly unreasonable comment sitting at -3 versus a comment telling him to take his man-self elsewhere, which is at -22. Women's rights isn't about bashing men, and men's rights isn't about bashing women.
/r/MensRights26/04/10 07:15 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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