TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

somewhat_brave Archive

View 1 post and 116 comments by somewhat_brave 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)
12

Newssomewhat_brave/r/MensRights26/01/15 11:19 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

I know INCELs were always very stupid, but they seem to have gotten dumber over the years.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/10/21 03:31 AM
9

"Gay" isn't even an insult.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 10:27 PM
2

Legally a marriage is supposed to be an equal partnership. I'm curious to hear what you believe marriage is.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/20 02:07 AM
1

All you have to do is take one look at the US senate to know this jackass is full of shit.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/11/19 01:02 AM
-1

It's still toxic masculinity even if it comes from women. It's called "Toxic Masculinity" because it's how men are expected to behave.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 11:29 PM
-4

Masculinity is toxic “Toxic Masculinity” refers to ways men are expected to behave that are bad (either for men themselves or for other people). If there’s anything MensRights and feminism should be able to agree on it’s Toxic Masculinity. Toxic Masculinity includes telling men: Man up Men can't be raped Grow a pair I bet you have a small dick He's probably a pedophile He's probably a virgin Only men should be forced to sign up for the draft You still play video games? loser You still watch cart…
/r/MensRights12/12/15 10:33 PM
6

So wait for him to grow up then let him decide. There's no reason it has to be done while he is a child.
/r/MensRights26/05/15 07:14 AM
-1

MensRights could be arguing for fewer men to be locked up for non-violent offences. Instead we get this bullshit.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:10 AM
0

Any discussion about how gender roles hurt men is probably good. I don't think I've ever seen anything about it in the mainstream media.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 02:28 AM
1

Feminists aren't universally liked. For the most part they are liked by people who believe we should try to change society for the better, and hated by people who believe in traditional values and don't want society to change. Men's rights argues that society needs to change to address injustices against men, but manny prominent MRAs also try to discredit feminism, which alienates the people who would be most receptive to suggestions to change society. Men's rights issues like Alimony or the jus…
/r/MensRights22/11/14 03:11 AM
3

What I mean is that if I'm walking on the street in NC, even if someone doesn't look at me, it's not impolite to still say good morning or something. It is impolite to talk to someone who doesn't want to talk to you, and if they want to talk to you they will look at you. When I see this video I am reminded of going to the fair and walking by the booths with the games you play for prizes. If I don't want to play the games I look straight ahead because I know that if I look at the people running t…
/r/MensRights06/11/14 05:16 PM
0

From my upbringing, if I lock eyes or hold a door for someone, I make some idle chitchat, or at least nod hello to them. If someone looks at you or smiles at you it's ok to talk to them. If they avoid making eye contact (like the girl in the video) it means they don't want to talk to you.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 03:46 PM
16

This is the kind of issue MRAs should be focussing on. I agree. This is a legitimate Mens Rights issue and I would love to see more things like this here. Also the apparent immunity from prosecution of the mother in question. When she applied for welfare she said she didn't know who the father was, so I don't know what they would prosecute her for. I think the real problem is a conflict of interest within the government. The more money they get from child support payments the less money they hav…
/r/MensRights26/10/14 04:31 PM
1

Men are far more likely (page 9) to murder people than women are.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 04:05 PM
-1

Feminists do tend to blame everything on the Patriarchy, although that's not the same as blaming all men ("the patriarchy" is only the men who are in charge, not disadvantaged men).
/r/MensRights25/10/14 04:54 AM
10

The vast majority of mass shootings are carried by men. The way I see it there are two possible explanations. Either: men are just inherently more violent then women or society treats men differently in a way that makes them more likely to commit mass shootings In my experience men are not fundamentally more violent than women, so I tend to think gender roles are a more likely explanation.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 04:12 AM
13

The article she links on her twitter feed blames gender roles. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yRF8bBcnt70J:feministcurrent.com/6942/but-what-about-the-men-on-masculinity-and-mass-shootings/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
/r/MensRights25/10/14 02:38 AM
45

Is she blaming men or is she blaming the same gender roles MensRights complains about? I.E. Men are expected to be tough and not talk to other people about their problems so they're more likely to deal with their problems in unhealthy ways.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 02:20 AM
2

They're saying it's sad that police usually don't investigate on-line threats.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 10:43 PM
2

It sounds like all they did was read the email and decide that it's probably not serious. After a careful assessment of the threat, law enforcement officials determined that it was similar to other threats that Sarkeesian received in the past.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 08:05 AM
0

Campus police have confirmed that it is not a genuine threat already. Do you have a source for this claim? Unless they actually caught the person who made the threat there's no way they can confirm that it's not serious.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 05:08 AM
0

If you're not literally having acid thrown on you then you have nothing to complain about! I guess we should just pack it in and stop talking about alimony and child custody laws.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 07:06 PM
2

You don't think it was possible that after grabbing her, they exchanged glances or body language sufficient to establish that she was OK with him proceeding to a kiss? In the actual picture she's pushing her fist against his face and leaning back to try to keep him from kissing her.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 04:15 AM
2

Key is that the majority of the 1.4k cases admitted to having made a deliberate false report (this is further down the article). They use words like "many" and "often" to imply that, but they never actually say that the majority of unsubstantiated cases were proven to be false.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 01:41 AM
3

According the data, 1,466 of the 2,753 rape cases registered with the women's panel between April 2013 and July 2014 were found to be false. Of the total cases registered, only 1,287 cases have been proven to be correct. If you do the math that means every single one of the 2,753 reports was either proven to be true or proven to be false. There's just no way that's true.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 09:16 PM
1

She's a public figure so she probably has someone monitoring the tweets she receives, even if she isn't doing it herself.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 05:10 PM
3

Just so were all clear about this: It's not ok to physically force someone to kiss you.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:35 PM
1

Not really. If she has the twitter app she could get notifications on her phone whenever people talk about her. If she saw it and wanted to take a screenshot it would only have taken a few seconds to email a link to her computer and open it in a web browser.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 03:47 PM
1

How do you know that's the last tweet the account made? They could have been hitting the refresh button and taking a screenshot after every new tweet to make sure they got the whole message before it was removed by twitter.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 03:24 PM
1

It's not actually evidence that she faked the threat because there are many other explanations that are just as likely. It would only be evidence if "she faked it" was the most likely explanation.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 03:12 PM
1

They could have started taking the screenshot after they saw the first message.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 03:06 PM
1

as a citizen you have the privilege to vote Voting isn't a privilege it's a right. In order to have a healthy society it is absolutely necessary to have a representative government, and that can't happen unless everyone can vote.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 08:11 AM
1

According to that screen shot it was made three minutes after the first threat. She might have just logged out of her account because she didn't want people to see who she follows on twitter. [edit] Or the screenshot could have been taken by a supporter who didn't want people to start threatening them too.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 05:47 AM
3

The FBI and the police confirmed that she did contact them. there is evidence she may have issued the threats herself Do you have a link? I haven't heard of any actual evidence that she faked the threats.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:54 AM
29

There's something really fishy about the numbers in this report. They are saying that every rape report that wasn't proven to be true is a false rape accusation.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:40 AM
1

The ERA was proposed by and received most of its support from feminists. http://www.ushistory.org/us/57c.asp Feminist organizations are still trying to get the amendment passed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martha-burk/equal-rights-amendment_b_2592444.html http://action.now.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=3037
/r/MensRights05/10/14 11:03 PM
1

They did.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 10:08 PM
0

It's pretty misleading to say "feminists vehemently fought against it." when most feminists were in favor of it. It would be a no true Scotsman fallacy if I said "no true feminist would be against ERA" but that's not what I said.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 09:44 PM
2

That quote doesn't say anything about conscription being required for people who can vote, which explains why there were people who could vote but weren't eligible for the draft when the Supreme Court made that ruling. How is this not discrimination? I never said it wasn't. The injustice here is that men are required to sign up for the draft, which is not he result of lobbying by Feminists.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:44 PM
0

Critisising feminism is what has had the biggest success. So far the men's rights movement hasn't been able to make any significant changes in society. This is because the Men's Rights movement focuses on criticizing feminism instead of changing laws that are bad for men.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:30 PM
0

The ERA was stopped by anti-feminists and social conservatives. The major feminist organizations always supported it.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:25 PM
1

Having a national registry that men are compelled by law to sign up for facilitates the drafting of those men, in the incidence that a draft is ever needed. Making it easier is why selective service exists. Congress would have to amend the law to require women to sign up, but they already have to amend the law to make changes to who can be drafted. Congress can make two changes to a law with only one bill, so it's no harder for them to pass. feminists were quite aware of this when Phyllis Schlaf…
/r/MensRights05/10/14 07:38 PM
1

In the case above there would be 20 witnesses saying that the person is a rapist. If there were 20 witnesses to a murder it would be very strong evidence.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 03:07 PM
-5

We require them to sign up for selective service when they are younger. Meanwhile, we have another class of citizen who are never required to register with the state, because their gender exempts them. They're in the same boat because it would be just as easy for congress to change the law to conscript women as it would be to change the law to conscript older men. Whether or not someone has registered for selective service has no real bearing on how hard it would be to draft them.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 10:34 AM
-2

In order for older men to be drafted the law would have to be changed, which puts them in the same boat women are in.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:13 AM
-1

Argue against alimony and in favor of fair child custody laws, and if people disagree then explain why they are wrong. Just criticizing feminism isn't going to get those laws changed.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:11 AM
-1

Well in 1918 the Supreme Court ruled that citizens were require to support the government that they have a say in... The ruling doesn't connect voting rights to conscription. Women got the vote in 1920, but weren't require to sign up for the draft. Men over the age of 35 also aren't eligible for the draft but they are allowed to vote. During the Vietnam war men were eligible for the draft at 18 but weren't allowed to vote until they were 21.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:02 AM
-4

By gaining the right to vote, without the obligation to the state, sufferagettes created a new class of citizen, one that could vote to send men to die in wars without having to face that same obligation. Men who are too old to be drafted are still allowed to vote. Well off men also used to be able to avoid the draft by going to college. /Hi Typhon! :) Who's that?
/r/MensRights05/10/14 07:18 AM
-2

Feminists mainly work to stop the injustices what women face. That's why we need a men's rights movement that works to stop the injustices that men face instead just arguing against feminism.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 07:14 AM
1

Well tell that to feminist and women in general That's what I'm suggesting. If the goal is to get people to take men's rights issues seriously we don't have to prove men have it worse by arguing that women don't face injustice. We have to prove that men face injustices by talking about actual men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 06:24 AM
2

It doesn't matter who has it worse. No one should be subjected to injustice.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 02:20 AM
0

suffragettes successfully lobbied to have women granted the vote...without the responsibility of being required to sign up for the draft. Every adult should be able to vote, and no one should ever be forced to fight in a war they disagree with. The injustice here is that men are required to sign up for the draft, which is not he result of lobbying by Feminists.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 01:18 AM
0

Men's Rights is supposed to be about working to end injustices that men face. Feminism is supposed to be about working to end injustices that women face. There is no fundamental reason Feminists and MRA's have to be enemies. The focus on criticizing Feminism in this sub really distracts from actual Men's Rights issues.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 12:38 AM
1

As long as there are bigger problems in other countries Americans shouldn't worry about problems that effect them directly. By that logic Men's rights should stop talking about circumcision and custody rights because there are slaves in Africa.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 12:29 AM
4

This article seems to be suggesting that a person with two unsubstantiated sexual assault accusations against him shouldn't be able to go to college anywhere, which seems pretty unjust to me. I do think the justice system isn't handling multiple accusations against the same person properly. Suppose 20 different people who have no connection to each other have accused the same person of raping them. That would be strong evidence that the accused person is a serial rapist.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 08:50 PM
1

From the article: The report says that between April 2013 and July 2014, of the 2,753 complaints of rape, only 1,287 cases were found to be true, and the remaining 1,464 cases were found to be false. The article is assuming that any rape report that isn't proven to be true must be false.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 08:16 PM
2

It's less random because they actually asked people what happened to them instead of just picking a number out of thin air.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 12:29 AM
0

I'm not going to debate the presence of unreported offenses as I'm sure there are, but I'll be generous to the feminists and say there were 200 unreported cases. Just making up a random number doesn't prove anything. The best way to get an actual number would be to do an anonymous survey, which is where the 1 in 5 number comes from.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 11:30 PM
-2

The conspiracy theory qwertpoi is talking about doesn't seem plausible. The things he's saying only make sense if he believes that feminists somehow got to Dave Wong and forced him to start making videos about sexism. It seems more likely that his opinions changed or he just always believed that sexism was bad but didn't start making videos about it until now. I also don't see how 4chan and gamergate are evidence of a conspiracy. It sounds like you might be assuming that the people who run 4chan…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 05:44 AM
-5

The secret international feminist conspiracy strikes again!
/r/MensRights01/10/14 07:06 PM
6

Do you have a source for that? As far as I can tell allowing women to be drafted was never part of the proposal for the 19th amendment. It seems really unlikely that politicians would make this demand considering that women weren't even allowed to volunteer for non-combat roles in the military until World War 2 (21 years after the 19th amendment was ratified), and didn't serve in combat until the 1990s.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 01:17 AM
2

Yes. [edit] I'm not sure why you're asking this here. It seems like /r/AskHistorians/ would make more sense.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 12:21 AM
-5

Greg Hardy wasn't suspended until after he was convicted. Ray Rice had the charges dropped, but he was fired after video was released of him knocking his girlfriend out. She hasn't been convicted, and there is no video to show what happened. It won't be a double standard unless she is convicted and they still allow her to play.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 06:25 PM
1

There was coverage three months ago when she was charged and plead not guilty. Her trial's not until november. Do you really expect news sites to give five months of continuous coverage to a women's soccer player when nothing is happening with the case?
/r/MensRights19/09/14 06:01 PM
1

If a major companies ignore her advice she will probably keep making videos. If it's only a small number of developers she probably won't bother. The point is that in your original reply you said she was calling for content to be banned, and that's not true. If you don't believe me then watch her videos.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 05:28 AM
0

So if an indy developer or three decided to ignore everything sarkisian says, that would be completely acceptable and fine? One game wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that too many games are unfriendly to women. Game developers want to make money, so just informing developers about these issues may cause them to change future games.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 02:26 AM
-4

Sarkisian hasn't called for any games to be banned. She's basically just saying "If a developer wants to make games that appeal to women they should avoid these tropes." [edit] Did you mean to reply to this comment? I'm not sure how this relates to the article or my comment.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 09:00 PM
-2

No, but you see it in related articles. So post those articles.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 07:16 PM
-2

Either they're part of the secret global feminist conspiracy to control everything or they want the gaming industry to appeal to a wider audience. I thought the last paragraph was interesting: Just how did a small group of vivacious young women find themselves promoted by socially reserved male editors to upper echelons of gaming journalism so quickly? Gamers want to know. Accusing people they disagree with of sleeping their way to the top. Very classy.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:55 PM
-3

Using misandric portrayals of gamers to further a political agenda seems like a men's issue to me. I don't see anything about misandry in this article.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 05:06 PM
-5

So Breitbart got access to a mailing list for journalists and released this conversation to prove that journalists are corrupt. Wouldn't it be better if they released evidence of actual corruption, like collusion to promote or suppress games? Also, what does gaming journalism corruption have to do with men's rights? all discussion of a blatant case of nepotism among certain developers and the people reviewing their work was silenced. There was no actual evidence of nepotism. Her ex did say she s…
/r/MensRights18/09/14 08:30 AM
10

Is this proof of an elaborate conspiracy by feminists to control the world or is it a group journalists talking about whether accusations of infidelity against a small time developer are something they should be covering?
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:57 AM
1

Well considering that it was cited that Thunderf00t was banned pretty much for his criticisms of Anita, it's safe to assume at least her followers did. It wasn't "cited". He just accused her without any evidence. She's not known for supporting on-line harassment. If some of her "followers" got him suspended it wasn't because of anything Anita said. Good to know people like you support free speech /s I do support free speech.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:39 AM
0

misrepresents these games, when she actually doesn't Yes she does. The Hit Man video is a perfect example of this I already addressed this in my first reply: What happens is that she says that in Hit Man the objective in one part of the game is to kill the strippers. Or at the least you can and that you're encouraged to. She actually said that even though you don't have to kill the strippers, and the game doesn't incentivize it, people will still do it to try to experience all the functionality …
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:12 AM
1

I don't see anything about exposing game developers deliberate oppression of women anywhere on the kickstarter page or her website. Then you're not watching her videos. I did watch her videos and she never said it there either. Did you watch them? Yeah I read that report. Niche also did an article on it where she contacted the police but never filed an actual report. They told her to go to the FBI. What's going on? I don't know. Is she using it to her advantage? Yes. There's no evidence that she…
/r/MensRights18/09/14 06:02 AM
1

There's no evidence that she had anything to do with it.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 05:46 AM
1

Yeah, apparently you forgot the who point of her video series? From her kickstarter page: Help me create another successful video series that will contribute to and help amplify the existing conversations happening about female characters in games and maybe even get the attention of the gaming industry to start creating more interesting, engaging and complex female characters, that avoid the standard boring cliches. I don't see anything about exposing game developers deliberate oppression of wom…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 11:12 PM
0

GTA lets players get a prostitute then kill her afterwords to get their money back. When does GTA tell you that you have to kill the prostitute? Just because you can doesn't mean have to. No one said you have to kill the prostitute. Your argument is so horribly petty it's downright pathetic. Sorry, it's insulting, but I have to say it. It's pathetic that this is what people resort to in some desperation to cling onto false sexism. I've gone through GTA without ever having sex with a prostitute. …
/r/MensRights17/09/14 09:47 PM
1

I never seen GTA or Red Dead Redemption (I have never played RDR) give anyone incentive for killing prostitutes. RDR gives players a special achievement if they kill a women by tying her up and have a train run her over. GTA lets players get a prostitute then kill her afterwords to get their money back. In the video she complains that these games usually don't have serious consequences (such as loosing the game, or having to restart the level) for killing innocent people.
/r/MensRights17/09/14 08:59 PM
1

Maybe you can point to the part of the video where she says the creators of Starfox were motivated by the desire to disempower women (instead of marketing or lazy writing) because I can't find it. When she talks about how the female lead was pushed aside for a more masculine, male lead. But she never says it was done deliberately to oppress women. She always says it's done to provide a motivation for the main character or to make the game more appealing to men. The point is that she has lied bef…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 08:36 PM
1

And yes I do believe she does claim sexism to be deliberate in most of these cases. She clearly did so with the Starfox game. Maybe you can point to the part of the video where she says the creators of Starfox were motivated by the desire to disempower women (instead of marketing or lazy writing) because I can't find it. It was that she claimed to have filed a police report. If she was actually harassed there's no reason she couldn't file a police report about it. I don't see why she would not f…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 05:42 PM
0

What happens is that she says that in Hit Man the objective in one part of the game is to kill the strippers. Or at the least you can and that you're encouraged to. She actually said that even though you don't have to kill the strippers, and the game doesn't incentivize it, people will still do it to try to experience all the functionality in the game. I thought it was interesting that thunderf00t spent almost all his time talking about Hitman even though it's a pretty minor part (like less than…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 09:12 AM
1

Is there video of Peterson beating his son? People respond more strongly to things they see on video. That's why Ray Rice didn't get fired until the video came out.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 02:47 AM
1

What the fuck do you think Sarkeesian is advocating for? The article doesn't say what she's advocating for. That's the problem. It's an article about SJW's but it doesn't say what SJW's are trying to do or why I should be against it.
/r/MensRights15/09/14 04:27 PM
-1

OP is saying that liberals use Redpillers to discredit the Men's Rights movement the same way conservatives use Radfems to discredit feminism.
/r/MensRights15/09/14 03:33 AM
1

This article is just a bunch of hyperbolic nonsense with out any facts, information, or even logical arguments of any kind. I wish there was some way I could get back the time I wasted reading it. [edit] I suppose if you don't know anything about "gamer gate" it will inform you that Zoe Quinn is a person. It doesn't even attempt to explain why you should (or shouldn't) care though. It just makes some vague statements about "SJW's coming for your joysticks".
/r/MensRights15/09/14 02:59 AM
6

There are actual serious mens rights issues in America that need to be addressed. For example: the justice system's bias against men, or men being excluded from teaching and nursing, or circumcision. Is there a Men's Rights sub that focuses on real issues and not this "us vs. them" nonsense?
/r/MensRights12/09/14 05:21 PM
1

If you look at the references in the wikipedia article there are a lot of academic journals with articles that talk about this particular theory.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 08:40 PM
4

She doesn't believe the story. She's complaining because it's one of the most popular stories in the bible and it blames women for every sin on earth.
/r/MensRights09/09/14 03:24 AM
2

My friend, who is a fierce intellectual, pointed out that "[it is interesting that so many western women cry about how unfair their lives are, how oppressed they are- yet have never known true hardship themselves. Indeed, why do they not volunteer or even get one way tickets to Africa or try to smuggle people out of North Korea? Those are people, women, who are truly living under the worst conditions at the present.]" (paraphrase). I added to this saying "Were this privilege not extant, western …
/r/MensRights08/09/14 10:09 PM
-5

Calling for a women to be prosecuted for being the victim of a crime is going to make us look really bad.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 07:51 PM
1

There's a very big difference between "mostly" and "often". "Mostly" means more than 50% of the time. "Often" could be any number. From the article: A significant number of child sex abusers – estimates range between five and twenty percent – are women.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 03:58 AM
3

The people in the justice system can't read minds to tell who is lying and who is telling the truth, so they take her accusations seriously. The real problem is that it takes so much time and money to get a (somewhat) fair trial. Even if you win it actually costs you a great deal. On top of that the "corrections" system is geared towards ruining peoples lives instead of rehabilitation, so if you loose in court your life might be completely destroyed.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 02:13 AM
8

According to the article it was actually a man, a woman, and a teenage girl that tried to rob him. After a 2-hour car ride, they stopped at a gas station where a man asked if they'd give him a ride. The man got in the car with the two and that's when police say he started making threats to Faulkner. ... The identity of the man involved is still under investigation.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 11:09 PM
3

From the article it's not clear whether or not this was a plea bargain. It's possible the parents were allowed to choose which one would go to jail.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 07:37 PM
5

"First, we go to Gaza," recited Inskeep. "The health ministry there says more than 500 people have been killed – many of them women and children." Why, Larry Kalikow of Warrington, Penn, wrote, were women's lives being singled out? The real answer is that they are trying to get people to care about the story. Usually people are more upset about women and children being killed because they are perceived as harmless and innocent.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 06:13 PM
1

1 in 4 is the number they usually cite for rape. I'm guessing 1 in 3 is the number for sexual assault.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 07:01 PM
0

Why does it matter which one is worse? No one should ever be murdered, and no one should ever be raped. Neither rapists nor murderers have any place in a civilized society.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 05:03 PM
2

If the gender aspect of intersectionality is really based on the notion that being male only has advantages and no disadvantages then it should be easy to refute. I think if you use that argument feminists will say "it's not all privileges, but the privileges out way the drawbacks". I think the best counter argument is that which gender is more privileged really irrelevant, people should try to remove all the injustices without regard to gender. If you want to demonstrate judicial bias you need …
/r/MensRights25/06/14 09:22 PM
2

I'm not convinced that ideological discussions are important. In my experience people only really understand practical issues, and they just make up ideologies to justify things they already believe. That said here's my take on how to argue that Men's Rights are real issues based on ideology: gender feminism controls all discussion on gender in places where that discussion might bring change. The model used by gender feminism does not allow men's problems to be taken seriously. I did a bunch of …
/r/MensRights24/06/14 07:01 PM
2

Those are all real issues, and I don't see how anyone could argue that they don't need do be addressed. That's why I think Mens Rights should focus on the issues that affect us and not worry so much about ideological debates.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 07:14 AM
1

I'm pretty sure it's a way to deal with the argument that "some men are disadvantaged so the patriarchy must not exist". Intersectionality says society is controlled by rich white men, so the closer you are to being a rich white man the better off you are. Some white men still have problems, but it's because they are poor and the leadership doesn't care about poor people problems. I do think the lack of women in leadership is a real problem. People aren't good at understanding issues that don't …
/r/MensRights24/06/14 06:33 AM
2

I'm saying "Not all feminists are like that" so we should try to reason with the ones who aren't. It's a good strategy. Why make enemies out of someone who doesn't have to be an enemy?
/r/MensRights24/06/14 05:53 AM
2

I suggest focusing on the actual problems that men face, like the ones mentioned in my original post, and limiting criticisms of feminism to specific concepts or actions rather than feminism in general. Even if some feminists hate men, the majority don't. Those people can be convinced to support men's rights if we don't alienate them.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 04:41 AM
0

Most here argue that feminism is not the same as women's rights. This is the reason Mens Rights has an image problem. Most people think feminism is the support of women's rights. So when someone says "I'm against Feminism" people hear "I'm against women's rights". I'm a man and I want people to take Mens Rights seriously, so I'm trying to get people here to understand how they are undermining their cause by using a definition of feminism that most people don't agree with.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:32 AM
0

I'm using the definition I've always heard, which is also the commonly accepted definition. Suppose you're talking to a person who is a feminist because they support women's rights (which is the case for most feminists). You're not going to convince them that they shouldn't be a feminist by arguing that Patriarchy Theory is wrong. Patriarchy Theory has nothing to do with them being a feminist and feminists aren't going to kick them out of their movement for not agreeing with it.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 01:20 AM
0

According to the most widely accepted definition Feminism is about women's rights. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Feminism http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminism http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/feminism http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/american-english/feminism http://www.thefreedictionary.com/feminism If you're talking to other people you have to use the same definitions the…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:55 AM
1

Maybe my reply was unclear. I was explaining why your analogy is flawed. A person doesn't have to believe in "The Patriarchy" or "Rape Culture" to be a feminist. Whereas a person does have to believe in thetans to be a scientologist.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 09:34 AM
0

patriarchy doesn't exist any more for privileged western women That really depends on how you define Patriarchy. The most basic definition is a society that is run mainly by men. Every US president has been male 80% of US congressmen and senators are male the vast majority of CEOs are male The Catholic Church and Mormon Church don't allow women to have any role in the church's government. There may not be a global conspiracy among men to oppress women, but women are certainly underrepresented in…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 08:57 AM
1

The only thing that is essential to Feminism are women's issues. Concepts like Patriarchy or Rape Culture are attempts to understand where some of those issues come from.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 08:43 AM
1

Feminism isn't a religion. A person doesn't have to believe in "The Patriarchy" or "Rape Culture" to be a feminist. From wikipedia: Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, defending and the intention of establishing a state of equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 08:15 AM
1

Liberal Feminism is a very popular feminist ideology. Most people who consider themselves feminists don't subscribe to a specific feminist ideology, they just care about women's rights. When someone says "I'm against feminism" they hear "I'm against women's rights". It would be better to say "I disagree with Radical Feminism" or "I disagree with Patriarchy Theory".
/r/MensRights22/06/14 12:38 AM
0

Being against feminism means being against the METHOD of achieving it There are many different ways of dealing with the problems women face. Feminism doesn't use one catch all method to try to solve every problem. Are you saying you're against everything the feminist movement is doing, or are there specific things they are doing that you don't like? If you only disagree with the things Radical Feminists do and say then you are creating unnecessary enemies by opposing feminism in general.
/r/MensRights21/06/14 11:57 PM
-4

Being against feminism is not the same thing as being against women's rights. All of the feminists I know think feminism is entirely about women's rights. It sounds like you've confused Radical Feminism with Feminism. Most feminists are not radical feminists, so rebuttal of Radical Feminism is not a rebuttal of Feminism in general.
/r/MensRights21/06/14 05:58 PM
5

I try to see things in terms of problems and solutions rather than us vs them. Problems the Men's Rights movement is trying to solve: Fathers usually don't have equal custody rights to their children. Most boys in the US are circumcised without their consent. Some fields (like Teaching and Nursing) tend to exclude men. Men can have their lives destroyed by false rape accusations. Men in the US are required to sign up for the draft. Problems the Feminism Movement is trying to solve: Women are har…
/r/MensRights21/06/14 12:32 AM
2

How does this relate to discrimination or mens rights? Are you saying you got banned from a sub for posting this? If so which sub was it?
/r/MensRights20/06/14 10:45 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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