TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

spagma Archive

View 2 posts and 840 comments by spagma 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)
1007

spagma/r/MensRights26/08/11 02:29 PM
18

spagma/r/MensRights06/02/12 02:28 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
12

Glad to see they denied her the pass.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/02/17 07:57 PM
4

I see your point, but the entire movement isn't based on revoking the merits of others. We definitely promote our own merits, but I do not see how we can strive for equality, but ignore blatant inequalities, simply because another more successful movement put them in place. That would seem akin to admitting defeat on those fronts.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:56 PM
5

Again, I disagree. Some points of feminism have set the bar unattainably too high. It's not always a zero sum gain, but sometimes it is, sometimes men's and women's rights can be in direct conflict. Right now women have the "right" to hit men without reprisal. In order for men to have the right to not be hit, some unfair rights, or in other words, privileges, have to be revoked in the spirit of equality. But I do appreciate the thought provoking conversation.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:52 PM
6

I couldn't say, what you believe is unclear.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:17 PM
6

I read them, I simply don't agree. Like it or not, deterrents are somewhat effective. If there is no social deterrent for a woman hitting a man, there is little if anything to keep them from doing so. Basically what I am saying is that to achieve a society of non-violence, all violence has to have a social stigma, woman on man violence included.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:14 PM
8

Of course that would be ideal, but until then, the playing field requires leveling.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:02 PM
11

Anyone who believes that "violence is never the answer" hasn't been put in a sufficiently extreme situation. Sometimes violence is the answer. Where that threshold begins, is however, up for debate.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:00 PM
5

Wouldn't feminism in theory require we treat women equally in these situations? So in the name of feminism, beat down the next woman that lays a hand on you. Show them you truly respect their equality! /s
/r/MensRights26/11/12 01:55 PM
3

And Mrs. Claus is sitting on her ass at home.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:02 AM
5

Unfortunately that is also part of the price of freedom. It sucks, but I am sure most of those same men would agree.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 01:58 AM
1

You are unlikely to balance a scale by only ever adding more and more weight to just one side. That is along the same lines as that saying, if the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat everything as if it were a nail. That is the problem with feminism, no matter what flavor they come in.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 01:53 AM
2

I had mine, just over a week ago, went to work that evening. Nobody but reddit knows.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 10:15 PM
2

good to know, I usually just hit the salad bar at the local grocery store, and use my own dressing.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 10:05 PM
3

I have to agree with you there. I have switched to eating salad for most of my meals, and I get odd reactions, as if that makes me less manly.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 05:04 AM
10

Maybe we just need to start referring to it as Infant Genital Mutilation.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 09:24 PM
14

The reasoning behind most of those is garbage. How is going to bed earlier an advantage? Some of them are indicative of the biases men face. More women with degrees, women are more likely to go to the doctor.... It's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 09:11 PM
3

I like how they pointed out he was in the difficult situation of proving a negative, though it would have been nice for them to expand upon the lack of being considered innocent until proven guilty.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 05:25 PM
4

usually it's "its just the MRM trying to make us look bad"
/r/MensRights20/11/12 06:05 AM
3

Considering its feminism that says all men are rapists and whatnot, so much for holding that men are "more than that".
/r/MensRights16/11/12 07:13 PM
2

I wish someone told me this 20 years ago. My son's are going to be so much better prepared for adulthood than I was.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:06 AM
3

Poe's law is in effect.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 02:57 AM
3

So where is the 2nd white night to scold the 1st for swooping in and not letting her stick up for herself? ... and the 3rd, 4th and so on down the line.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 02:53 AM
17

Isn't slutty outfits due to feminism, due to female empowerment?
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:03 PM
2

It's hard to say. During the consultation the very first question was whether or not I already had kids. Had my answer been no, I am sure there would have been further discussion. I have seen other posts on here where men were told to get their wives permission, but I was not instructed to do so.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 06:08 AM
1

No, I am 100% certain and comfortable with my decision to father any more children. If for some unforeseen reason I change my mind, I would have no issues looking into adoption. Along with my boys, I am raising a girl, my niece, that has no blood relation to me. I love her as if she was my own, and I find it just as rewarding.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 06:00 AM
2

LOL nice.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 07:30 PM
2

Perhaps unproductive or nonproductive rights. IDK
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:24 PM
1

Because, one it is my right, two if one is not mine, the state enforced child support amount will be lower. That amount I will have no ability to get any accounting for. Any additional amount I give will be on my terms. Either way I will be making sure my kids are taken care of. I make sure my kids know I love them no matter what. It's not about getting out of child support, its about knowing that the child support is going where it is supposed to be going. It is sickening that there is no requi…
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:18 PM
1

It never hurt like hell. I only had a small bit of pain when he was pulling out the 2nd vas deferens. I only had a small bit of discomfort, which is completely gone now. I feel no different than I had before the procedure. It's quite amazing really.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:05 PM
1

yeah, other than the kids climbing on you, I would think you will be fine.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:01 PM
1

I never said I would refuse to support them, I am not sure where you got that from. I am however completely against everything else that comes along with state enforced child support. Where if I can't pay enough, I go to jail, or where she feels she can do anything she wants with the money. Like I said, whether I am their biological father or not, I am their father.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:01 PM
2

Yes, it was the no scalpel. It wasn't bad at all. It took about an hour, a couple quick injections with minimal pain for those. Plenty of pulling and pressure, which was a bit uncomfortable. I only had a felt some pain when he was pulling the 2nd vas deferens out. Another shot or so and all was good. Recovery is going really well. I went right back to work after the procedure, and even went to my 2nd job as well. Both are desk jobs so not a lot of moving is necessary. I was a bit slow for a few …
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:41 PM
2

Mine was fully covered by insurance, with exception to the copay. But I have pretty good insurance.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:08 PM
3

Yup, was given the sample container and an order to get it tested in 3 months. That's gonna be a bit awkward. I hope they don't expect me to fill it up. :D
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:07 PM
4

Yeah, I was told 3 months and ~20 ejaculations to work out the left over swimmers after which I should be sterile. I go back in February to get tested to be sure.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:05 PM
1

It was part of the post procedure instructions. 20 on 20 off. A bag of frozen peas actually worked really well as a coldpack.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:03 PM
2

I have a follow up appt in 3 months to get tested to make sure it took. They did not provide any options to store any sperm, but I am sure I could have made those arrangements on my own if desired.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:02 PM
3

Diapers aren't too bad. You get used to it pretty quick. But yeah, good on you for considering adoption.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:00 PM
3

Thanks, I will keep that in mind.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:00 PM
15

Certainly, and I still plan on using condoms, as I still have to worry about STDs and what not. The vasectomy is really just my security blanket, or perhaps my ace in the hole.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:26 AM
7

Response meant for a different post perhaps?
/r/MensRights13/11/12 05:01 AM
8

It's a valid question that has to be asked. I believe they are. I am as sure as I could be without an actual DNA test, which I have pondered as well. My youngest looks exactly like me, so no question there. My oldest looks like a cross between their mother and I, and has many of my features. The timing of the pregnancy puts her at 5 weeks in before the event, we had just moved back into the state in which the event took place, which also means conception occurred when we lived 400 miles away. It…
/r/MensRights13/11/12 04:58 AM
10

So far we have decided to share custody and to work it all out amongst ourselves. How that will work out down the line, I don't know.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:34 AM
5

In my situation vasectomy was in my mind the best option, as I have no intentions of ever having children again down the line. However I would have been all about male birth control as an option in my younger days.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 03:33 AM
9

Hahahah, I guess I could have left that out.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 02:39 AM
20

That was beautiful.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 01:30 AM
44

Some background: I am 38 years old, and have been married for 12 years. We have two children of our own, and are raising my niece as well. My wife is unable to have more children due to having a partial hysterectomy. Since this was the case, there was no need for any further contraception. A year after we were married, my wife was caught orally pleasing my best friend, by his wife. She told me about it immediately after it happened, and apologized for it. I decided not to let it destroy our marr…
/r/MensRights13/11/12 12:46 AM
12

I am in my 30s. The doctors didn't give me a hard time at all, but did ask if I had children. I do, I have 2 boys. I did not have any sperm frozen, I have no plans on having any more children. I got the procedure mainly for piece of mind. To know once and for all that I will not have any more children. I will soon be getting back into the dating pool, once I feel I am ready that is, and I wanted some security in knowing that I won't be someone else's meal ticket.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 12:07 AM
6

Thanks, so far it isn't that bad at all.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 11:30 PM
8

sure, if you are never looking to have kids at any time past that point. However it's not recommended for guys in their teens trying to avoid having a child before they are ready.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 03:16 PM
2

yeah, really I should have just linked the video, the rest of it was pretty much garbage. Interesting over all considering the same image was posted to r/ladyboners
/r/MensRights08/11/12 03:47 AM
5

Well if you take a look at: http://youtu.be/NdIAa6gnaco I don't know how representative it is, but it shows that women tend to check out men's biceps. Which tends to make sense if they are attracted to men's utility.\ Edit: Updated link direct to the video.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 02:55 AM
1

I am pretty sure that's already a given.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 01:51 AM
1

Probably court ordered visitation, which gets ignored and never actually enforced.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 11:50 PM
5

The town park where I live has one. Its only about 6 foot high, but it has one.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 09:40 PM
6

I am ok with it so long as the converse is also true.
/r/MensRights30/10/12 04:32 AM
6

I would venture to say most here are for equal rights and equal treatment for both men and women under the law. This does not mean equal outcome but equal opportunity. With that said, we will focus mainly on issues that are specific to men. The reason you see many anti-feminism posts is because the pendulum has swung too far. In many instances feminism directly advocates against equality and seeks superiority for women. This, of course, we oppose. Unfortunately for feminism, this sort of radical…
/r/MensRights30/10/12 04:06 AM
3

Relevant: http://www.reddit.com/r/againstmensrights/comments/1216dn/this_months_cirlcjerk_over_strawrebeccawatson/
/r/MensRights26/10/12 04:19 PM
5

I view it like an over-hyped movie never lives up to the expectation. It doesn't mean it was a bad movie, just that the expectations were unreasonable.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 08:33 PM
2

to paraphrase Ron White 'I don't know how many it would have taken...but I know how many they were gonna use'
/r/MensRights22/10/12 11:44 PM
1

try anonymously.
/r/MensRights20/10/12 09:15 PM
1

That certainly is a loaded question.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 11:27 PM
1

I simply don't agree, but nothing says we have to.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:49 PM
2

^ Independent I tend to believe you are republican because you seem to think only the left engages in such activities, even in the face of evidence.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:08 PM
1

Well there is what feminism is supposed to be, then there is what feminism has really become.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 03:10 AM
12

yeah, because republicans would never manufacture outrage over something that is completely untrue. Does muslim Kenyan socialist ring a bell? Silly partisan thinks his party is special.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 12:32 AM
8

Both sides thrive on false outrage. FTFY
/r/MensRights18/10/12 12:12 AM
1

Well then lets be honest about it. Its more than being about buying the guy a beer. It is full on fundraising, and if you want people to contribute their hard earned cash, they should have certain assurances up front. It's just the right way to do it. Outside of that, it is commendable that you are looking out for others in need, and actually doing something about it.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:37 PM
1

I never said nor implied that. I am currently at my 2nd job and I work hard to earn what I have and earn for my family. I am very careful on how I spend my money, I have to be. I simply read the thread, and posted the first thing that came to mind. If that makes me a "concern troll" in your mind, so be it. TBH I don't think I even have enough of the details of the situation to even make an informed decision or hold a complex stance on the issue. Though I can tell you I would never donate blindly…
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:37 AM
3

I didn't/don't want to cause trouble, but man I would hate to see someone pull one over on everyone and walk off with a boatload of cash for doing it. Overall that would cause people to be less giving in the future.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 12:09 AM
3

its not about not being able to spare the money, but keeping others from exploiting the situation.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 12:00 AM
13

Wondering if the paypal account that everyone is submitting to is not really his, and was created by the person that created that thread? If it can be confirmed it is his, then i'd say go for it, if the spirit moves you.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 10:58 PM
1

how long till they spam their preferred definition 100,000 times?
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:35 AM
1

Considering that men have very few current options for birth control, I highly doubt this would be the case.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:01 AM
2

It is ironic that the use of accusation is their weapon, while it is one of the things we are against. It really goes to prove exactly why it is a problem and a Men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 09:38 PM
9

Where is it we are supposed to go? Is the line already forming?
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:42 AM
2

Nobody said he was asking for it, but once you put it out there, you are giving everyone access to it. You can hope, but can't expect they wont do anything with it.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 08:54 PM
8

Probably not according to them, to them, families are women and children. Men are only good for their contribution to the family, not actually part of it.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 03:54 AM
9

Considering they are just being honest about how sales and marketing and customer retention works, I would not say the video would be considered offensive. The concept of it could be, but not the explanation.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 01:02 AM
9

80% are women and children. Men are 20%, women may only be 20-30%, who knows they don't provide that number, purposefully.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 12:48 AM
0

It's a complicated question as it's hard to criticize rape law without being open to the argument that you're "taking the rapists side" That in itself is a fault of mainstream feminism. Accused rapists are no longer innocent until proven guilty, and merely questioning that makes you a rape supporter. This flies directly in the face of mainstream feminism's claim of rape culture. I say mainstream feminism, in regards to the brand of feminism most prominent in the US, has the most weight, and ther…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:34 PM
23

I agree, this is the rule in my household, that way nothing falls in accidentally. However public or communal toilets usually don't have lids. Why can't everyone just adjust the seat as needed?
/r/MensRights26/09/12 03:10 AM
6

I wouldn't say equal, as men still have no choice if a woman gets pregnant, but it does provide additional options for men the same way invitro does for women.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 02:06 PM
11

They would say that no crime occurred because men can't be raped. I'd say no crime occurred because drunk sex does not mean rape.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 02:24 PM
14

This needs to be upvoted, this is excellent advice. Record the call if possible, with all legal notifications of course. Depending on what they say, it can be used against them in a suit if need be. There are certain things they can and cannot say, and it doesn't sound like they would stick to them.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 10:25 PM
3

yes but it is men that "force" women to bare their children.... Edit: to be clear, this was tongue in cheek.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 12:22 AM
14

I am an atheist, and an MRA, I didn't know the two were mutually exclusive.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 09:22 PM
1

Teaching rapists not to rape, may help people not get raped (maybe) Teaching people to take precautions will help them not get raped. After all, isn't it in their best interest to do everything they can to make sure it doesn't happen to them? No amount of "its not your fault, there is nothing you could have done" after the fact is going to reverse time and remove the event from having occurred in the first place. No, they shouldn't have to, but with the world we live in, it's just a good idea.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 02:05 PM
1

Cali appears to be a sausagefest. :D Realistically though the % difference in population is probably very very low. 50,00-100,000 in a cities with multiple millions of people you are looking at just a few percentage points.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:58 PM
80

and they would never understand the pain involved with getting hit in the nuts, or having blueballs, or the embarrassment of having an erection that will just not go away.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:51 PM
9

You should probably be prepared to have someone video record you, as you will be a prime target for their aggression. After all, they already feel they are not responsible for at least some of their actions and choices.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:57 PM
2

I definitely like the kidnap one. That really drives home the point, imo.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:55 PM
4

some women might actually go for that.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 01:38 PM
4

If you write a letter, make sure you add a CC line and specify those that have been CC'ed. This tends to force people to respond. If they think they are the only one that received it, it is much easier for them to ignore it.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 01:34 PM
2

To be fair, this idiot, troll or not, labeled themselves as feminist.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 01:20 PM
6

Justice was not done by the courts He was convicted, sentenced to 9 years and was serving his sentence. She performed vigilante justice, thereby breaking the law herself. Was he a piece of shit, most probably yes. But she does not have the legal right to do what she did and she will need to face the courts herself. If you're really an Men's Rights activist, you wouldn't be pissing and moaning about some scumbag getting what he deserves. Fortunately you don't get to tell me what I am and what I a…
/r/MensRights04/09/12 02:46 AM
1

WTF, how about just any domestic violence is 2 many, or hell just any violence. Why are we only concerned with protecting women?
/r/MensRights04/09/12 12:18 AM
1

I recall seeing that in a movie, though I don't recall which.
/r/MensRights03/09/12 11:54 PM
3

That's premeditated murder folks, regardless of the reasoning. He was serving his time for the crime he committed, now she should do the same.
/r/MensRights03/09/12 11:52 PM
-2

I will post when and where I like, its awful presumptuous of you to tell me or anyone else what to do. If you don't like it too damn bad, feel free not to read it or respond. I agree she was probably just coming on to him, I agree that he seemed to be clueless to it as well. My point, which seems to soar well over your head, is that just like you say I am imagining what is happening, you are as well, except that I am not stating it as fact, and am merely saying it could have happened that way, w…
/r/MensRights31/08/12 08:49 PM
2

Its an assumption on both sides. You are hearing the story after the fact, after judgements have been made. You are assuming he made those judgements on the spot. Those "quotes" were all made after the encounter, and therefore are proof of nothing.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:00 PM
5

Except take responsibility for their actions.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 01:11 PM
4

So police officers are raping drunk people when they force them to take a breathalyzer test?
/r/MensRights29/08/12 08:00 PM
8

One thing should be added. If he is not notified of the pregnancy, or more specifically his role in the pregnancy until after the deadline, or within a set period of time (say 30 days or whatever is fair) before the abortion deadline, it would be his choice to opt in to his parental rights. This would need to be in place, as the first trimester can be hidden from the biological father with ease, to protect him from the "oh by the way, I am pregnant and you are the father, but it's too late for y…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 03:05 PM
16

That's encouraging. Normally I take my kids to the local park on Sunday, and I am usually the only guy there, occasionally there may be another guy, but almost always accompanied by a woman. I am almost always avoided and by the mothers, and in some cases get strange looks. I try not to let it bother me. It's good to hear you have witnessed such a rare event.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 02:08 PM
1

Just guessing here, but you are probably late teens or very early 20s. It is not unreasonable for someone that age to have a job that works around children, and therefore less of a blip on their radar. Now I am sure these people that consider all men to be perverts are in the minority, but fast forward 10 years or so, and you may begin to see it become more evident. If the man going down the slide with kids on his lap was 30, do you think the parents would have the same reaction?
/r/MensRights27/08/12 01:58 PM
1

That can either be a very scary statement or a very sad statement.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 05:20 PM
3

yeah not sure how asking for a paternity test after the fact is somehow forcing a woman to carry the man's seed, or has any effect on whose child she chooses to bear. A test after the fact only establishes the truth.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 08:00 PM
1

I agree, I was referring to the link that was supplied, that you had commented on. Just wow.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:48 PM
1

wow, that's nuts
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:28 PM
2

Content aside, this video was painful to watch. I agree with the message he struggles to deliver, but damn.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 09:55 AM
4

I imagine you are referring to Bill Burr; You people Are All The Same. http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Bill_Burr_You_People_Are_All_the_Same/70245034?trkid=2361637 Is this correct?
/r/MensRights17/08/12 07:19 PM
27

I am curious as to what data people have to back them up to make the statement that if the world was run by women, we wouldn't have war. Why is that statement always getting a pass?
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:32 PM
4

Well worth the watch.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 12:24 AM
40

I would like to know the context in which the comment was made. It appears to be in response to a dispute, but it is unclear.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 03:46 PM
0

we have no proof Welcome to the internet. Let us know when you become part of the proper authorities, so that providing you with the proof you seek will actually accomplish something other than appeasing your curiosity. Outside of that, nobody really gives a shit whether you believe them or not. I knew what was happening, but because I was young, I didn't understand that it was wrong. And yes, you specifically were/are laying blame on the victim, quite literally victim blaming. This conversation…
/r/MensRights26/07/12 09:39 PM
1

At no time am I attempting to show a pattern other than it does in fact happen. I am not saying all do this, not saying most, just saying it happens. You seem to be saying it does not happen, due to your anecdotal evidence, and are using that as a pattern to show it does not happen or would not happen. Ironic huh? As for I being just as much to blame, funny how that works, because that would be the essence of victim blaming now wouldn't it. I was much younger then and was not old or mature enoug…
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:15 PM
1

yeah, and no teacher would ever do that, nobody ever does anything they are not supposed to do, and all is well and right in the world. And I guess the teacher that I had that was openly hateful of males, and bashed and blamed them for everything on a regular basis, that was all in her curriculum and was approved as well... Tell me again, I must have forgotten, what color is the sky in your world?
/r/MensRights26/07/12 04:06 AM
1

That's a pretty weak reason. Not attacking you by saying that, but its very easy for them to say one thing yet do another. Unless they have someone supervising the class, they can teach it any way they want. It was a history class, so the lesson might have just been on a broad range of things, but they ended up spending a lot of time covering feminism. There is nothing saying the teacher submitted the curriculum with hours of discussion on feminism.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 09:03 PM
1

My teacher sure did. I am not sure what evidence you would accept, but then again, I am not sure it really matters if this particular exchange took place or if this was forged somehow. It happens, and that is what matters.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 06:34 PM
2

I am amazed, I sat and watched the whole thing. I was captivated.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 03:36 AM
3

Very good find, thanks for the link.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 02:02 AM
2

As someone who had a very feminist / anti-male teacher in school, I find it quite plausibile, and that was 20 years ago, when society as a whole was a lot less anti-male.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 01:46 AM
1

Considering the screenshot did not have downvotes on any of the other threads in question, I think that clears him.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 01:06 AM
-2

whooosh
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:08 PM
9

I can't agree with the title. Chivalry is not the issue, he left his own kids, who were not able bodied enough to get out on their own.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 03:34 PM
4

Just because you plead guilty does not mean that everything the prosecution/accuser says is true. Sometimes its just better to cut your losses. As it is they can get a conviction with nothing more than an accusation. The defense attorney likely thought it was their best option. That said, it is quite possible it is true. Only they know for sure.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 03:19 PM
4

I agree with everything you said except the no jail time. She should get leniency but not a get out of jail free card. She still participated, and should get some jail time, even if it is a couple of months.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 03:07 PM
3

She attacks him, you seem to be saying " he must have done something to deserve it" Let me ask you, when you see a video of a guy beating on a woman, do you think she must have done something to deserve it?
/r/MensRights22/07/12 01:37 AM
15

There are little to no societal repercussions for a girl hitting a boy, and I would say most know that the boys wont hit back. There is simply no deterrent to this behavior for girls.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 02:45 PM
5

It would be a joke, if the disposability of men wasn't true. Just look at the homeless and suicide rates of vets. Disposed of once they have outlived their usefulness.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 02:16 PM
13

There are plenty of other ways they could dress up as Leia, but the opt to do so in the skimpiest of her outfits. I can't see how they could make a case for not wanting the attention they get.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 04:18 PM
5

The intake of alcohol does not excuse any other behavior, or decision making, nor does it remove accountability / responsibility. It should not for consent either. You can't get drunk and steal a car, or kill someone and not be held accountable for your actions or choices after the fact. With that said, I had always avoided having sex with anyone that was drunk or drinking, until I got married. It's not worth the risk. I have, however, agreed to sex with my wife, when she has been drinking. I sa…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 02:10 PM
20

Just because men aren’t screwing the mom anymore DOESN’T mean the kid’s standard of living should change. Except the kid doesn't get the money, the mother does, and there is no accounting for it, she can spend it on whatever she wants. It benefits her far more than it does the child. I HAD YOUR KID! Pay up mother fucker Pretty telling right there.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:01 PM
3

Court records are public information, at least in my state. You can search court cases for people. 100% legal. They even have a website for it.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 06:52 PM
2

Onions man, onions!
/r/MensRights15/07/12 06:17 PM
3

He needs to work on his delivery and use of language if he is looking to be taken seriously. I agree with most of what he said, and I still couldn't stand to listen to him.
/r/MensRights15/07/12 04:08 AM
3

It is also sad that it can be looked upon as a great victory.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 01:52 PM
3

I hesitate to call it MGM. Why? FGM used to be called Female circumcision until the 80's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation#Background There is no reason not to do the same for male circumcision. They are similar practices, both with varying degrees of severity, but from which only one gender is legally protected.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:56 PM
2

Thanks for the link, however its not exactly relevant, as this is referring to unwanted sexual attention and sexual assault. The former being a huge gray area. These bluntly told men to know the difference between flirting and crossing the line to unwanted sexual attention and sexual harassment. Rape, especially forcible rape, which prevention of such is the goal of the device in question, is not a gray area. If you commit this crime, you know you are crossing the line. I do not think there are …
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:01 PM
2

Yes, because one cannot be anti-genital mutilation without also being pro-rape.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 08:13 PM
1

I don't believe this will deter rape, if anything the rapists will just begin to check first. Secondly I think it will escalate the severity of their attack. Of course, this is just my belief, but it seems logical to me.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 08:07 PM
-1

places like sudan "don't rape!" doesn't work. I'd argue that doesn't work anywhere. unlikely scenario I am so glad you weighed in on that... even less likely. this isn't feminist rhetoric. men are not punished for raping women Then I guess that negates one of it's intended, and advertised purposes. men's rights: you're doing it wrong. i hate when MRAs use this logic Again, so glad you weighed in on that. News flash, not everyone does things your way, and your way isn't always the right way or th…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 07:52 PM
3

A device whose sole purpose is to mutilate a penis, and to identify the man as a rapist, regardless of any other circumstances. All it takes is someone forgetting it is in there and having consensual sex, or worse, putting it on a man as a practical joke, or some sort of revenge. Any man that shows up with this device at an ER will be immediately labeled a rapist and likely arrested. This will deter any man from seeking medical help to get it removed resulting in further damage. Now flip it arou…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 03:28 PM
8

Probably only because she used a weapon.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:01 PM
8

So the judge sided with the father so long as it does not infringe on the mother's time with the kids. At least that is how I read it, it is not very clear, as it does not come right out and say.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 01:34 PM
5

Funny, I read the headline as "This Onion piece has to be a joke", and of course I thought, well aren't all The Onion pieces? Of course I didn't realize I had misread it until the page loaded and it wasn't The Onion, and that they are serious.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:35 AM
1

I don't necessarily agree, they say they want equality, but their actions reek of wanting superiority.
/r/MensRights30/06/12 08:50 PM
8

Might want to get the bot set up there as well, just incase.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 11:47 PM
3

Good to hear. I have been married 12 years now, it took me too long to realize this, but once I did I was happy I had. She either loves you for who you are, or she doesn't. Don't let her manipulate you into anything else.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 02:28 AM
27

Let her get mad. Tell her that while you are married, she does not own your mind and body. Stop apologizing for your actions, you have done nothing wrong, especially if she withholds sex to manipulate you. If you don't nip it in the bud, it will only get worse.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 12:19 AM
2

Make sure to follow your state's laws on call recording as well, so they would be admissible if need be.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 12:07 AM
13

15 combined with 20 paints the picture of if she is mad at you, you have to apologize, if you are mad at her, leave her alone until you get over it.
/r/MensRights23/06/12 08:10 PM
4

Blatant misandric statements such as, "All men should be killed" are covered by free speech as well, btw. Nobody is asking the government to step in a limit what they can and cannot say. Free speech isn't the issue. The issue is that if roles were reversed, the ad would never have been made, or it would have been blasted as misogynist and immediately pulled down. The point is pointing out the double standard. To be clear, I am not referring to scantily clad men, I am referring to the portrayal o…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 10:08 PM
3

Sure they can post what they want, and we can react the way we want. Nobody is saying they can't post this, they are saying its a shitty thing to do, especially as a Fathers day message.
/r/MensRights17/06/12 04:16 PM
5

That and society bends over backwards to make sure they don't fall too hard on bad times.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 03:40 AM
3

Except for as a wallet, as evidenced by Wife - Well u could alwys get a second job too. and Its one of the only things in my life that makes me happy. So u can kiss my ass. So her happiness means more to her, and he should foot the bill for it, working two jobs if necessary. OP ride it out for a few more years, till the kids are 18, then dump her ass.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 08:18 PM
5

Seriously though, as a Dad, if my wife were to do anything nice for me, it would end up coming out of my wallet. She only works part time, and all but outright refuses to work more than part time, while I work two full time jobs to make end meet. So yeah, anything we do on Fathers Day would still pretty much be me footing the bill.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 07:46 PM
1

Pretty good, though I would have liked to see something about "It is not OK to unilaterally decide to have a child, or trick your husband, or boyfriend into father a child by lying about or sabotaging birth control."
/r/MensRights10/06/12 05:14 AM
13

height shouldn't be a concern Sure, it shouldn't but that doesn't mean it isn't, and simply because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Now I agree, it may not have been a factor, and the OP doesn't even know that it was, nor claimed that it was. I just think that you don't need to outright dismiss it as a possibility simply based on your experience. For a long time I was morbidly obese, but I was always employed, should I deduce that because I always had a job that discri…
/r/MensRights08/06/12 04:28 PM
12

Everywhere you go, men are enabling—and compensating for—female incompetence in work to which women are unsuited. It was a pretty heavy implication.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 04:17 PM
15

Well since it hasn't happened to you, I guess all is well in the world.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 03:50 PM
0

I wouldn't go that far, but otherwise yes, the average person is far more distrustful of men than they are of women. They shouldn't be, but they are. I am not sure if you are trying to argue that I feel that way, I don't, but it doesn't take much to identify that society leans that way. Simply take a look at this video about physical abuse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks Most assume the man did something to deserve it and it was his fault. So yeah some "people do think that women are…
/r/MensRights08/06/12 01:46 PM
0

I am saying that if a cop pulls a man over, and he starts bawling, they are going to assume he is trying to manipulate them, or he is hiding something, because "men are supposed to be strong". If a woman started crying, it would not be considered out of the ordinary. I am not saying I would assume that, I am saying that many people would. The man would not get the benefit of the doubt.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 01:33 PM
8

Read the comments to the article. Every one I read was basically "it's his fault for having sex, he should have known sex makes babies". And I'd bet every one of those commenters are pro-choice.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 01:21 PM
3

'cuffed and breathalised' if you were speeding is ridiculous. He was referring to if he started crying uncontrollably to get out of a ticket, not just from speeding or whatever. While it is not likely that this would happen, but I would argue it is far more likely that it would happen to a male than to a female that does this. If a man started crying due to getting pulled over, the cop would immediately suspect him of manipulation, or suspect he is hiding something. However if a woman cries, it …
/r/MensRights08/06/12 01:12 PM
43

exactly, in their eyes, he doesn't factor into the equation.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:50 PM
13

How can different prices based solely on gender even be legal?
/r/MensRights29/05/12 07:22 PM
4

This appears to be the story related to the poll: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/47563628/ns/today-today_news/t/jilted-groom-suing-k-i-tried-be-nice-guy/#.T8FY4FI6Nro
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:29 PM
10

Sounds like she was just pushing an agenda.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 10:49 PM
7

probably the part where she felt it was completely ok to slap him first, then fell to tears when he slapped her back.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 10:48 PM
1

I am not disputing that at all. I am simply saying had he been alive and divorced or something all that would have mattered was that it was his DNA. But since he is dead, it's only then that matters how, where and when and why she got pregnant.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 03:10 PM
3

This lady has mental issues.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 01:29 PM
5

Funny, though had he not died, and the rest of the situation stayed the same, he would have been on the hook for child support. Of course, when its up to someone else to pay, the rules change.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 03:37 AM
2

Well there is a chance of those things regardless of who she is. Asking for a prenup can result in many undesirable outcomes, but does not mean it will. Some women believe they are above or outside of the law and the rules do not apply to them, and sometimes they are right. These women then may react as the OP stated, but nobody here knows either of them enough to legitimately guess at what the actual outcome would have been, so it is all just speculation.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 06:31 PM
2

I didn't attack anyone, and that is true that you cannot predict the future, but you can take steps to protect yourself. After all, a prenup would only go unused if they do not divorce. What is the harm in protecting everything you have worked for in a "just in case" scenario? Hope for the best, plan for the worst.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 06:12 PM
1

But what about left handed pitchers in their home stadium, on even numbered, overcast days? :D
/r/MensRights21/05/12 04:25 PM
2

That is irrelevant. She could at any time decide she wants out, and take half or more of everything he has worked for. The past and present does not matter, only the future.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 04:22 PM
1

Well to be completely honest, there isn't too much to discuss on the topic of being an atheist, however providing support for those in need it is good. The rest is just filler there.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 04:10 PM
2

Feminism only wants "Fair Weather" rights, and their members are happy with it being a circlejerk.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 10:42 PM
1

The need is there, not every issue that men may want to discuss has to do with Men's Rights, so the need is there, its just that what that place has become is redundant, but it also does not need to become another MR, just be all inclusive of things men wish to discuss.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 07:52 PM
3

Sounds like they need a real alternative to oney. One that is not moderated by feminists.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 02:12 PM
1

Or perhaps after hearing the city name thousands of times, and it being commonplace, one tends to not hear it in a childish way, not that it was relevant to the article or funny in the first place. It wouldn't even be funny if this took place in Intercourse, PA.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 01:22 PM
5

hmm I guess if its the first time you have heard of the city, and you are 12 years old you might giggle, but I can't really see anyone that calls themselves an adult (and isn't high) finding it funny. But thanks for the clarification.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 09:56 PM
5

The best line on the page, was in the comments, IMO: Plenty of good women find good men; the rest of the harpies seem to hang out in places like this to moan about why being an entitle bitch doesn’t seem to attract a partner.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:32 PM
57

This is the part I don't get: (don’t laugh) What part of statutory rape by a school teacher is funny? Oh right, because it happened to a boy, its hilarious....
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:22 PM
2

I agree its a cumulative effect, like a death by one thousand paper cuts, each one in itself not very harmful, but we can't make a big deal over each one, either.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 05:54 PM
59

Meh, if we were to pick our battles, this probably wouldn't be worth it. They could have done it more gender neutral, given each one a brother and sister, but I am not sure I would go so far as to say it is really offensive. Perhaps I am just giving them the benefit of the doubt, but not every casting of a male figure as a bad guy should be considered sexist and/or offensive, as in this depiction someone has to be cast as bad and someone has to be cast as good. If we were disgusted with every ba…
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:23 PM
11

I've not gone back to that mall since. Perhaps you should rethink this, as they were not only not at fault, but also backed you up, and with their video surveillance. They had to investigate the altercation. It's the people that were being dumb asses.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 03:38 PM
2

I was banned for respectfully disagreeing with a moderator.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 05:20 PM
3

Those exactly were my favorites.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 04:46 PM
5

But rapists don't want to stop rape. So saying "Men can stop rape", will somehow change that? Nope, not at all. By saying "men can stop rape" it then puts the responsibility of stopping rape on men, all men. Men, all men, are then to blame for rape. This is not the case. 90+% of men do not rape, and will not rape. The actions of the few should not be generalized upon the whole. Not to mention it removes any and all accountability from women. Women rape as well, and women can stop rape, and stop …
/r/MensRights03/05/12 02:18 PM
3

Only when they decide it is, and it suits their narrative. It isn't when it has potential financial benefits to it.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 01:47 PM
1

Seriously has there been any actual threats issued, or they just assume it will happen? Sounds like they have an over-inflated opinion of her importance to compare her to such historical figures. I really doubt anyone is even considering assassinating her. More likely they are trying to make such a big deal of her "bravery" in order to gain the spotlight.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 01:45 PM
12

Well, if she had sex with him, how about statutory rape, depending on when and where it took place.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 04:27 PM
0

And stating that somehow also means that I don't read or expose myself to any other sources? Simply because I don't have a link up my ass to provide to every asshole that demands one. If you don't want to believe me don't. I have wasted enough time on this conversation. Don't spend too much time coming up with some snappy comeback or insult, you'll probably be the only one reading it. I sure wont.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 09:23 PM
1

Yeah, you got me, reddit is my only exposure to the world, and happenings there within including the entirety of my life before joining reddit. You totally got me, boy is my face red.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:34 PM
1

I am certain I could find you some if I cared even remotely about doing so. There have been many threads here on this subject, and I have witnessed it myself. If you care about the truth you will find it, if you don't you wont bother looking. I really don't care one way or another.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 03:44 PM
1

Whatever, believe what you want. I have witnessed it myself multiple times, there have been countless threads here on it.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 03:40 PM
1

The determination of a court is not "innocent or guilty", it's "guilty or not guilty" This is because you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. the court is saying we have to treat you as if you're innocent, even though you may not be. Which means, they likely can't prove him guilty, and his status defaults back to innocent until they do so. However he is still being labeled as guilty without the benefit of a new trial to actually prove him as such. He probably doesn't want a new trial anyw…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 02:19 PM
1

Feminists generally believe that women cannot rape men, that if they have an erection, they want it. Therefore their actual spoken consent doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 02:13 PM
1

The countless claims by feminists that men cannot be raped by women, and that men always want it.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 02:10 PM
1

The fact they do not think men can be raped by a woman is proof enough. Thanks for playing.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 02:03 PM
8

Its because feminists only think the woman's consent is all that matters, and that the man's consent is a given or not necessary. This leads them to believe that they alone control whether sex happens and that the man should be thankful.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:37 PM
3

But no new trial is taking place, because they don't think they would win, so instead they are leaving it be and saying he was not found innocent. However, if you are not found guilty you are innocent. Without a second trial he should be considered innocent until proven guilty in a new trial. It is a cop out on their end, not giving him the credit of being innocent until proven guilty in a new trial, but not proving him guilty in light of new testimony. She admitted she lied, but only now that i…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:24 PM
1

On the off chance that this is legit, there is nothing you can do. If she ends up being pregnant, you can discuss with her the option of abortion, but outside of that you have no recourse. If she turns out not to be pregnant, learn from it. Unless you want to take a chance at having a child, take control over your own fertility. Wear a condom every time, and wash it out when done. The fact that men have no actual reproductive rights is one of the main issues discussed here. It should come to no …
/r/MensRights06/04/12 08:38 PM
0

I don't disagree that they are different, was just pointing out that it should hold true in both or neither, and I was not post the initial comment that you are referring to.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 08:02 PM
3

well if the response was If you can't handle the answer don't ask the question. Then that should hold true in both situations. But it all comes back to the games people play, they want to be lied to and believe its the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 06:30 PM
1

No problem, I have nothing further to say to this troll anyway.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 03:02 PM
1

Being a condescending prick is no way to go through life, son. Pot meet kettle, and I am not your son, and you can go fuck yourself for your attempt to belittle me and condescend to me as if I am a child, i.e. not a man. Hell I am probably older than you, in the very least well old enough, making it ridiculous that you would refer to me as such. You might want to rethink your reasons for being within this subreddit, as you appear to be an offender with that sort of response.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 02:49 PM
5

TIL having a menstrual cycle makes you superior
/r/MensRights04/04/12 02:26 PM
7

Hence the use of the word 'should'.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 02:14 PM
4

It should be to find the truth.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 02:11 PM
3

The reaction was horrible, but this is a poor example as it is later revealed he lied about it.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 04:30 PM
2

Ah gotcha
/r/MensRights29/03/12 11:52 PM
1

but legally its not.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 11:52 PM
2

There is a serious lack of explanation, in the article, of how or why that supposedly worked.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 07:31 PM
11

That may be the case, but that doesn't change the law. I am sure many of the underage girls that get into sexual relationships with older men were willing as well, but those men are still arrested and tried for statutory rape. The point is that at 15 you can't legally give consent, desire has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 06:13 PM
9

Did you read the story, the headline is a synopsis of it. The aunt makes that claim. There is nothing misleading in the title. The article also states that it was reported over two months ago, and is only now that she has been arrested. That doesn't exactly scream that they are taking it seriously. More likely the continued pressure and exposure forced them to act.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 06:08 PM
1

I realize this is likely fake, but this shit can happen. However, what would be somewhat funny if a guy senses this, is to pocket his used condom, and throw out one with something else in it, possibly something that can cause irritation. Or swap used condoms with someone else, and leave them there. When she gets herself pregnant, and he is not the father, and has no idea whose semen she put in herself, she will have no idea who to go after for child support. Of course this would be completely wr…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 11:26 PM
0

I simply do not agree, because even if it is accidental, or the condom breaks, he has absolutely no recourse once the act has happened. She still has all sorts of options, such as morning after pill, abortions, adoption, legal parental surrender. His options consist of see what she decides, help her raise the baby, pay court ordered child support or go to jail. You might make a case for close to 50/50, but only in some circumstances on just getting pregnant, but its 100/0 on actually bringing th…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 11:07 PM
2

I am not saying this is the work of MRAs at all. I am saying as an MRA we would not want more unwanted pregnancies to occur due to the lack of contraception. It would hurt men as well as women. I know it is christian fundamentalists doing it, I wasn't stating otherwise, and I agree that not many people here would want that, unless they actively want to "hurt" women no matter the cost.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 08:26 PM
1

I never claimed that republicans hate women I was simply rebutting your claim of: the question isn't whether Jane Doe can get the abortion she thinks she needs on demand, it's whether J.Q.Taxpayer must fund it. Simply put more its about more than just taxpayer funded abortions, some people ARE actually trying to turn back the clock.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 08:23 PM
4

I simply don't recall the sites I had read about all this at this point. A couple of seconds of searching came up with these, and if you are looking for a link to the actual bills you will have to find it yourself. There are also plenty of links over the past week or so on Reddit about this very thing. If I have more time later, I will see if I can find more and better articles. http://gothamist.com/2011/10/26/latest_threat_to_womens_right_to_ch.php http://foolocracy.com/2012/03/arizona-contrace…
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:56 PM
2

Lets not forget, it was INTERNATIONAL women's day. There are plenty of countries where women do not have equal rights, or any rights at all. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a fake day. With that said, there is an international men's day as well, so I don't see the problem. Equality is what we are striving for.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:47 PM
6

Yeah.. all those laws the right is trying to pass banning contraceptives, and allowing companies to terminate employees for using contraceptives isn't at all an attempt to turn back the clock. Read more.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:28 PM
3

It looks like the latter, but the former makes it all confusing.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:21 PM
3

Most people I have discussed it with, in person mind you, object at first, but after making reasonable arguments and giving them facts and sources are surprised at how bad it is for some men, and just simply didn't realize it. Society has whitewashed the hardship and discrimination men face, and if you can get people to really open their eyes and minds, they will see it too. The problem is just getting them to do so, and some never will.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:14 PM
1

The channel of the person that threatened him appears to be closed.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 03:27 AM
2

You are fucking retarded. Slavery is not something that is only done to black people, throughout history there have been many examples of people of all color being taken as slaves. People taken from Africa to be sold as slaves was only the latest example. Indentured servitude is a form of slavery. I made the comparison to indentured servitude, its right there in black and white. My reference to slavery was that it was outlawed, yet forms of slavery, i.e. court enforced indentured servitude, stil…
/r/MensRights12/03/12 03:18 AM
3

No idiot, slavery was more than black people. Look up the history of indentured servitude, which is what I compared it to. It has nothing to do with color. Educated yourself. Most white immigrants arrived in Colonial America as indentured servants http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
/r/MensRights11/03/12 10:16 PM
1

When they combine to create a full and unique DNA sequence, embeds itself onto the uterine wall, and begins cell division. At this point it is a new life, and has what it needs to live and grow, unless something acts upon it.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 05:10 AM
4

No indentured servitude = slavery, and being forced to work for 18 years to pay for a debt you had no choice in creating is indentured servitude. Now if the man chose to have the child, by all means he should be held responsible for that choice. For example: Court Rules Boy Must Pay Child Support to His Rapist http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2063855/posts
/r/MensRights11/03/12 05:03 AM
1

Taking the discussion to a ridiculous extreme is absurd and serves no purpose. By that logic menstruating would be killing as well as, nocturnal emission, and if you push it just the mere production of sperm would be construed to be so as well, since there is no way all those sperm could ever become a child. Get back to me when you grow up and can continue the discussion as an adult.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:50 AM
1

At least make some sense. If you don't feel that men should have any reproductive rights at all, just say so. I will be inclined to disagree, but you have the right to your opinion, no matter how dumb it may be.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:08 AM
2

That's her choice, if you don't recall, she does have that choice, and if she makes that choice, she should have to deal with the repercussions that come from it. Nobody is forcing that on her, unlike the forced indentured servitude that men get, without a voice, and without a choice. We outlawed slavery ~160 years ago, yet it is still rampant.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:00 AM
2

I realize its an option, I am simply saying its not one I agree with. I view it as killing. As far as limiting the population, we could choose to kill anyone that is a burden, or unwanted, I see that as no different than abortion. You say while the brain is not yet developed, again how is this different from killing off the mentally disabled, or deteriorating elderly? The focus should be more and better contraceptives for both genders, and more/better sex education. I am not saying abortion shou…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 03:54 AM
2

Now you see, if one is against abortion, then one should offer an alternative solution to the problem. While an all encompassing alternative solutions is needed, simply not having one does not mean that the current course of action is the correct one, and that we should not dissent. After all what do we do with any other human life that is a burden on society? Do we kill them too? I don't recall the last time we rounded up all the homeless, welfare and/or social security recipients and eliminate…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 03:42 AM
2

Whose body is it again that will have to labor to fund the child 25x longer than its gestational period?
/r/MensRights11/03/12 03:33 AM
1

1 how many have you? If I had the means I would probably have more. But simply because one does not have the means to do so, does not negate their belief. That's like saying only those that pay a specific amount in taxes should get to vote.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 03:09 AM
2

I am anti-abortion, though my belief in equality trumps being anti-abortion. If abortion were illegal then yes, both parents should bare the cost, and responsibility of the child. If abortion stays legal, then both parties should have the right to choose not to be a parent. These views are somewhat in conflict, as by men choosing not to be a parent it makes it more likely the child will be aborted, but other measures can be taken to reduce abortions and unwanted pregnancies, there are no valid s…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 03:09 AM
4

If you think women choose to get abortions on a whim The point isn't what they choose, or how hard it is for them to choose, it's that they have a choice. Men don't have a say, men don't have a choice. While the OP painted a crude yet colorful image, the concern is valid, and you have not show any evidence to the contrary.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 02:45 AM
9

Once I had read it as not using that account, I probably dismissed it as that, and that he wasn't going to be participating as an MRA anymore. I guess I should never work for a suicide hotline.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 07:02 PM
4

I didn't take it as that, but as he was done fighting the fight. He did specify it was "probably his last post with this account".
/r/MensRights09/03/12 03:54 PM
10

And manage all the other "men's work" around the house, like repairs, and maintenance. I am sure you could make a comic in the same fashion with a woman asking how to change the oil on the car, or how to replace a broken light switch. In half of the cases shown here, he is just unfamiliar with the situation, tell/show him once and he likely wont have to ask again.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:19 PM
3

The issues are separate. Simply paying child support does not gain you access to your child, and many times while child support payments are enforced, visitation rights are not. That is not even taking into consideration child support not actually going to support the child, there being no accounting for how that money is spent, child support being paid when custody is 50/50, and a man being forced to be a dad and pay child support to a child he never wanted and had no part in the decision to br…
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:08 PM
2

The federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, prohibits employers from discriminating against job seekers and employees on the basis of race, religion, sex, pregnancy, and national origin. Private employers with less than 15 employees are not subject to the Act Are gamestop employees employed by the corporation or the individual stores?
/r/MensRights08/03/12 03:56 PM
2

All she wanted to do was get away. He had nothing to fear Like I said, we have no idea what she was going to do, we includes you. it was perfectly rational for her to try to get away from him. Yes I agree She was completely done with fighting with him after he punched her. He had no reason to restrain her. Again, you don't know this That wasn't a movie! He wasn't in a fight with a villain! No shit, it's called a comparison. He got into a fight with a supposed loved one. A supposed love one that …
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:19 AM
2

This guy is a hot head. Being out of control is probably his norm. Again, you have no basis for this. Especially like you said, you don't hit hotheads and expect them not to react. She didn't expect him to react the way he did. That leads me to conclude that his behavior is outside of the norm. I could speculate about her behavior that we do not see in the video as well. I could say that well since we see she is angry with him that she is always angry with him. Since she yells at him, she verbal…
/r/MensRights08/03/12 03:12 AM
1

What exactly was she doing in a parking garage alone with a guy that wasn't her boyfriend? This sounds like: Got drunk, had sex, regretted it in the morning. Of course her excuse is she was drunk and therefore he took advantage of her, but if he was drunk too, then she took just as much advantage of him. Maybe she doesn't know she is a rapist. This is all speculation of course, but its not like her sign, with all its words, painted a clear picture of how it happened. My guess is she is avoiding …
/r/MensRights08/03/12 02:06 AM
2

A reactionary hit is something that occurs without a lot of thought, it ends up being an open hand slap, a push, a shove. Now you are just making shit up. Here are a few examples of reactionary punches that I found within minutes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26uEZHm7prY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT-KEL7Uwlk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA_m7yMjV1w In either case, neither should have been hitting, I fault both of them for doing so. Do you admit that her hitting him was wrong?
/r/MensRights08/03/12 01:39 AM
2

you still suggest there was no provocation That is not correct, I simply stated he did nothing physical to her. From what I saw in the video, she didn't look like she wasn't defending herself, she was defending the TV. He didn't back her into it, she intentionally kept herself between him and the TV. As you can clearly see at the 0:39 mark she extends her hands out across the TV to block him from it. This was after she attempted to hit him the first time, and only a few seconds before she went a…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 09:47 PM
2

This is why I stated physical provocation. He physically did nothing to her. I would now be terrified So logically at this point, would you decide to escalate it to physical violence? Hell no, if you think he is out of control then, if you hit him, you should expect it to ramp up, not down. She expected him to take her hitting him and not hit back. She expected to be able to hit him without recourse, she was wrong. Notice as soon as he hit back, she was shocked and started crying, and was no lon…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 07:57 PM
6

Except that in this society it is also expected that the man ask the woman out on the date, which leads into the whole problem. That is sort of changing, ever so slowly.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 05:49 PM
2

You really think he wouldn't have hit if she didn't swing at him We have no evidence suggesting he would. It's one thing to get and be angry, it is quite another to hit. He did not hit her until she hit him. Unless you have some evidence of past abuse, or where he initiated harm, your assumption is unfounded. Simply because he hit her back, does not mean he is an abuser. If anything we have evidence she assaulted him without physical provocation, which could go to show that she may have done so …
/r/MensRights07/03/12 05:35 PM
1

Actually it means he had no right of domicile You do not give up your rights simply not verbally asserting them. You assert what he would have done, and I assert that it would not make sense for him to do so. If he was already planning to leave, he would not say No I wont go, just to spite her for commanding he leave, especially when it appears he is packing things up to take with him for when he leaves. This is a cheap shot This is not a cheap shot as it is well documented that women get prefer…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 05:13 PM
1

It could be but also could be the post to the effect of: A successful man is one who earns more than his wife can spend, a successful woman is one who can find such a man. With a fixed panel, that stated, No a successful man is one who keeps what's his and can afford what he wants. Or something to that effect, I don't have the exact text.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 04:44 PM
1

he could have engaged that right, Correct, he COULD have. Simply because he did not means nothing. Like I stated if he was already leaving, which it appears he was, there was no reason to do so. Therefore he probably would not have, debunking your entire argument. It would make no sense if he were to say something to the effect of "Even though I was already planning to leave and packing my things, simply because you are commanding me to leave, I have now chosen not to leave and assert my right t…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 04:09 PM
1

She should not have attacked him like that, PERIOD. That is unless you believe a woman should have special treatment? I agree that his reaction was too much, but I do not go so far as to claim abuse. I fault her for being there. Fault her for hitting him, it is very likely he would not have hit her, had she not hit him. She should not get a pass for this simply because it wasn't as hard as he hit back. Would you still given her a pass for this if he didn't hit back? What if she just kept on hitt…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:53 PM
1

No. Look up hypocrisy. hyp·o·crite noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\ Definition of HYPOCRITE 1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion 2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings We don't know it's "their" house And we don't know it's not their house. Yet while chiding him on making assumptions with a lack of knowledge you proceed to do the same. I think that falls pretty well under acting in contradiction to your belief. You seem to believe he should …
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:36 PM
-1

First if that is the law in some places, it is retarded, but it is not the law everywhere, and you assume that it is. Second, you base your entire assumption that it is her place not theirs on the fact he did not protest when she told him to leave. When it is quite obvious he was planning to do so anyway, and had no reason to protest. Leaving you with your faulty assumption.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:11 PM
2

Would you go up to a guy in a bar twice your size and hit him and expect not to get hit back with his full force? Would you expect him to take it easy on you because you are smaller than him, even though you were the one that initiated the violence? Just asking, but I will tell you, I wouldn't, and if I did I would expect to get pummeled. It is clear she was relying on him not fighting back at all, and as soon as he did, her attitude changed real quick. She didn't want to play anymore. I am not …
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:40 AM
-2

I fault her for hitting him and escalating it to physical, and I fault him for following suit.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:31 AM
-1

Considering he was already packing things up, it is clear he was already planning on leaving, therefore her telling him he needs to leave, and him not protesting means nothing. You can suspect all you want, though I suspect you are wrong.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:28 AM
2

So your point is he has no proof that the house is theirs, so therefore he is wrong, all while you have no proof that it isn't theirs and claiming to be right. That is the essence of being a hypocrite. Considering that they are husband and wife (at this point), not exhusband and exwife it's safe to assume that the property is shared (legally for that matter) unless some evidence is given otherwise. Not to mention following your logic, him claiming the TV and her not disputing it means he would h…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 03:24 AM
3

When men stop being white knights.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 02:07 AM
1

Give it a watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZAuqkqxk9A
/r/MensRights07/03/12 01:43 AM
2

Even though I do not agree, it's not a contest, where whoever has it worse, gets attention.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 04:46 PM
6

The claim is simply complete bullshit. First there could be many reasons a man or a woman is insecure about their relationship that has nothing to do with how they treat their SO. For example, they may be insecure if they are not physically attractive, or if they perceive they are not as physically attractive as they should be. It may also just be a low self esteem issue. Second, the claim implies the man is purposefully not treating his girl good enough, or that she deserves better treatment. I…
/r/MensRights01/03/12 03:54 PM
2

For whoever downvoted this, it is simply a question. We do not all blindly believe what is told without questioning things. We should not assume he has had drug issues in the past, but I see no problem with asking to be certain.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 03:22 PM
0

going on about how it's not worded perfectly is an asinine battle. So is going on about how it is a valid phrase, when it is not. I was simply clarifying the OP's statement, when that clarification was questioned, I responded with further clarification and pointed out that when you use terms that don't exist or make grammatical sense, it makes you look uneducated, and therefore easier to dismiss. If you have to shorten it into a questionable catchy phrase to get your point across, you are not co…
/r/MensRights29/02/12 03:00 PM
1

To be clear, the men are the fish refusing to take the bait the women are providing. Even if the fish don't know about the hook, you can't blame them for not wanting the bait.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 02:50 PM
5

Again, I get why he is using it, but that doesn't make it a real thing. Having an overly long phrase often makes it less funny and referring to it as reverse discrimination makes it funny? Again, a more plausible analogy would be if person A punches person B, when person B punches back its not a reverse punch, its still a punch, or you could call it a counter punch. Perhaps counter discrimination would be a better term.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 04:09 AM
1

5 sentences is too long to read, um ok. Feel free to move on, nobody is keeping you from reading other posts. TL;DR: If you have nothing to add, stay out of it.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 04:03 AM
3

Yes I get it, its really not that hard to understand, however misusing the words makes one look dumb. Think of it this way, you have an apple, you see it from one side, its an apple, and you call it an apple. Someone else sees it from the other side, you don't call it a reverse apple, no its still the same apple, just from another perspective. It does not require an adjective. If you want to point out the hypocrisy, be blunt about it. Say that its hypocritical to counter sexism with more sexism.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 03:08 AM
17

well it could have just said: true equality cannot be reached through more discrimination or true equality cannot be reached through more sexism
/r/MensRights29/02/12 01:37 AM
58

There is no such thing as reverse discrimination, just discrimination, just sexism. Those terms are gender neutral, and omnidirectional. That is what he means.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 12:36 AM
20

When you go fishing and the fish aren't biting, do you blame the fish, or do you blame the bait?
/r/MensRights28/02/12 07:22 PM
4

yeah, but that's how it starts. People will slowly get more and more exposed to it, and realize the truth. Then eventually things will change. Changing peoples (invalid) core beliefs can't be done with a flick of a switch.
/r/MensRights28/02/12 03:00 PM
2

They are comparing apples to oranges. They are making the comparison as if forcible rape is the same as date rape, and that any woman would ever get those questions in a forcible rape scenario. If the scenario played out that the man had money missing but couldn't recall what happened, or was pressured into giving money, and later thought he shouldn't it might be closer to being valid and even reasonable, but then their shock factor would be lost
/r/MensRights28/02/12 12:02 AM
18

engaged in sexual conduct with him almost nightly between March 14, 2009, and March 14, 2010 sexually assaulted another 13-year-old boy at the same time Elliott will be able to serve her sentences concurrently, making her eligible for release in three years. So this lady supplies drugs and alcohol, and sexually assaults two barely teenage boys for a year, and is eligible for parole in 3 years because she can serve the time for both victims at the same time. And to top it off, she claims it is he…
/r/MensRights27/02/12 03:32 PM
6

Seriously a screenshot would do, no need to send traffic their way.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 02:51 AM
3

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jv4z2/this_about_sums_it_up/ Edit: I guess I should have just linked this: http://i.imgur.com/iHnr6.jpg
/r/MensRights22/02/12 12:10 AM
3

That was exactly my take on it.
/r/MensRights11/02/12 03:44 AM
1

You don't have to tell me, I have 2 jobs and still do half the work.
/r/MensRights11/02/12 03:33 AM
1

This all assumes she would have worked otherwise. I know plenty of women who stay at home because they don't want to work. Not because they want to take care of the house, simply because they do not want to do anything at all. These women should not get rewarded after the fact for wanting to be lazy.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 04:53 PM
4

He said the Government would consider amendments to ensure it applied "as it was originally intended, and is not able to be misused by offenders to escape full responsibility where they deserve to be convicted of murder". Uhhh, that was its original intent. The commission had recommended the change to prevent unreasonable murder convictions of women who killed after years of domestic violence or abuse, but who had not faced an immediate threat to their lives. If there is no immediate threat to t…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 03:10 PM
4

I did that job for a bit less than a year, before we had kids of course, it really isn't that hard. It sounds like a lot of work, but spread across the days of the week, it ended up being just a couple hours a day. All bets are off once you have kids though, some kids require constant monitoring, and even the clean ones end up destroying a house somehow.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 02:24 PM
5

When kids come along, things change dramatically, but until then you are correct. I was a homemaker for shy of a year, I cleaned house, paid bills, did all the dishes, laundry, made dinners, and anything else that needed done around the house. I only had to do maybe an average of 2 hours of work each day. It was very easy, but of course that was before the kids came along.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 02:18 PM
6

yeah, better to not do anything and just let them fuck up the rest of their lives, that is so much better parenting.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 08:21 PM
4

I wish I was good at photoshop, and could reverse the genders in so many of these types of ads, and stories, post them on fem boards and let them rage about it before letting them know the truth.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 07:00 PM
12

Giving someone else equal rights does not infringe or take away rights from you While this is completely true, here's the rub. It does not take rights away, but it may very well and likely take privilege and special treatment away, and this is what they get angry about. For example, give men equal access to custody of their children after divorce, and the special treatment of getting full custody in the majority of the situations goes away, not to mention the privilege of receiving free money fr…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 06:39 PM
1

I just not sure I could bring myself to pee in a sink, let alone pee in the same sink I brush my teeth at. In either case, I am certain my boys couldn't/wouldn't so they would still have to deal with the seat issue anyway. So far my resolution works well, nobody expects the toilet to be pre-configured for their duties, there is no fighting about it, and best of all, nothing ever accidentally falls in from the cupboard above.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 06:33 PM
3

I think mere hygiene wont allow me to do that, but if it works for you, more power to you.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 05:39 PM
14

TIL disagreeing with logical rebuttal = trolling
/r/MensRights09/02/12 03:54 PM
12

I solved it at my house, everyone needs to put both the seat and the lid down. They have lids for a reason after all.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 02:45 PM
6

Yeah, it can't just be to end violence, or end violence against people, it has to be specifically to end violence against women, by men. Hey I got a great idea, lets start a campaign to end hunger only for people over 5 foot 9 inches tall with brown hair. It's on the same level of absurdity.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 02:08 AM
3

That's exactly what I took away from it was that women are prostitutes and men have to barter for sex.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 07:47 PM
19

The implication that the man must buy the woman material goods in order to for his significant other to put out. I find it offensive, to both genders. Edit: I hadn't seen the other post about superbowl ads, my apologies.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 02:36 AM
1

She has every right to make her own decision, and it is between her and her husband alone. This goes for either spouse, man or woman, in this situation, nobody should be judging them for their decision, its their life, nobody else's.
/r/MensRights05/02/12 02:35 AM
1

I love his response to the angry woman at the 8:50 mark, "it doesn't tale a majority to prove you're right".
/r/MensRights04/02/12 11:50 PM
2

I don't hate feminism, I hate some of what feminism has done, and continues to do.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 10:44 PM
5

That's understandable so long as the same applies to you, which in the context of this comic the woman did not think it did.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 09:36 PM
2

This isn't fat shaming, its hypocrite shaming.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 09:34 PM
8

Unfortunately the options for male birth control are severely limited. Insisting on wearing a condom can easily cause a problem in the relationship, and be evidence of lack of trust, where as women do not have to supply such evidence. I realize that sounds bad, but CYA is not necessarily a lack of trust, but just ensuring an outcome or lack of an outcome for that matter. It would just be more a more realistic option if men had a similar level of birth control available.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 03:12 PM
1

and be accused of cheating for not wanting sex with his wife.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 07:46 PM
1

Not that I disagree, just pointing out a fact. Manon Rhéaume (born February 24, 1972) is a Canadian ice hockey goaltender. An Olympic silver medalist, she achieved a number of historic firsts during her career, including becoming the first and only woman ever to play in a National Hockey League exhibition game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manon_Rh%C3%A9aume
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:26 PM
4

you can learn something new without coming to an agreement, also a conversation on a forum isn't only between the two people actively doing the discussing.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 01:47 AM
6

While I agree people should have an open mind, it is not required in a discussion. A discussion does not require compromise or agreement, besides, I tend to believe that they are being hypocrites, as they are just as likely to be closed minded.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 01:35 AM
8

But they're not discussing, they had their minds made up before they got here. TIL you're not discussing anything unless you change your mind to match the beliefs of those you are discussing with.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 01:10 AM
3

I agree lets not assume anything, and lets begin by not assuming he did something to deserve it. Absent assumption, accusation or proof, he is innocent of wrongdoing until proven guilty, just as everyone should be.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:53 PM
2

The default assumption should not be he did something to cause it, that would be victim blaming, therefore the assumption must be that he did not.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:33 PM
2

I agree a better example of its ridiculousness could be used. If this is supposed to be a serious response, then I guess I completely missed that.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:24 PM
2

No I am not, I am not endorsing that ad. I am arguing they are both equally ridiculous. Note also in that, it is another woman that is portrayed as the one blaming the victim.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:23 PM
19

According to a later post, it was not consensual. http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/ourzc/if_a_child_conceived_by_rape_is_a_blessing_from/c3kixgt
/r/MensRights26/01/12 02:01 AM
9

Not to mention it was his fault the accident occurred.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 03:42 PM
7

I think adversaries would be a more appropriate term.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 03:41 PM
5

In general, and in any case, where it is expected. Don't be obtuse, of course not all women, that would be an easily countered absolute.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:07 PM
3

Thanks that was a good read.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 09:16 PM
20

Hahah Benevolent sexism ceases to be benevolent sexism when it is expected or demanded by the gender it benefits, after that it is female privilege. Women expect you to give them your seat on a subway, that's privilege. Women expect to be evacuated first in an emergency, that's privilege.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 08:14 PM
2

Someone should take stories like these and photoshop them to change the genders in the stories and post them to feminist places, only then after the outrage inform them of the gender swap.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 03:35 PM
6

Sounds like a religious thing, and like most religious things, it is stupid and ineffective.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 03:26 PM
39

Girls can swim in a pool without a shirt as well, a shirt is not required, just a proper bathing suit is required for both genders. That aside, I see what you are getting at. Some states have already made it legal for women to go topless.
/r/MensRights23/01/12 10:24 PM
2

The only reason I could think of: _ Back in the days of chivalry before condoms were invented (white) knights put socks over their cocks to keep themselves protected
/r/MensRights23/01/12 03:20 AM
8

It is also bitching about women being defiled by sex, meaning that male sexuality is inherently bad for women. It has a couple of degrees of sexism, and is a horrible t-shirt in general.
/r/MensRights22/01/12 10:43 PM
-3

Seems to me that women then should have no claim to reproductive rights that affect a mans body, via his wallet. His body is the one that has to work to earn money to pay that child support, but I am sure you are ok with her having rights over his body.
/r/MensRights22/01/12 09:54 PM
1

Yeah, but a big difference between being pissed and it being rape.
/r/MensRights19/01/12 10:37 PM
0

I came here as well to make the same comment. Possibly add the line "So you don't think men can be raped huh?" Of course if he is referring to being raped by women, any link from a search will do: http://www.newzimbabwe.com/news-5040-Women%20rape%20man%20at%20knife%20point/news.aspx http://rt.com/news/hairdresser-turns-robber-into-sex-slave/?fullstory
/r/MensRights19/01/12 09:58 PM
1

Ahh thanks I didn't see that.
/r/MensRights19/01/12 04:20 PM
2

I don't see anything illegal here unless she actually forced them into something. Getting consent by pretending you are something you are not is not sexual assault, at least not here in the US. Imagine the ramifications if that were the case. A woman could charge a man with sexual assault for not being rich, as she may have been lead to believe, or any other stupid reason. I agree its a shitty thing to do, its immoral and wrong, but shy of being illegal. The article doesn't state, so its probabl…
/r/MensRights19/01/12 03:15 AM
7

If they want to remove these images from our games and stuff, then all the guys in their romance novels need a healthy taste of reality.
/r/MensRights19/01/12 03:08 AM
2

Thanks, I was just shooting from the hip on that one. Of course that doesn't excuse to stupid spelling error.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 07:23 PM
13

Well of course class played a part, but not as much as you think. A small percentage of men in first class survived, 34% as opposed to 97% of first class women. Take a look at the numbers yourself. Men in each class fared poorly when the titanic sunk. http://www.ithaca.edu/staff/jhenderson/titanic.html
/r/MensRights17/01/12 02:45 AM
4

Actually I wasn't stating they should, just using that as an example of a "perk" men get that feminists don't fight for as its not advantageous. However with that said, I do not feel that selective service will be abolished until it applies to both genders. I do not see a law getting passed specifically for that purpose, however it is possible that a law/amendment could get passed equalizing the genders and making them interchangeable, applying to all existing laws including selective service. T…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 12:25 AM
3

That's preferable, but I'd never expect a feminist to lift a finger to remove a negative consequence to being a man. Either way, the point has been made.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 12:07 AM
4

I think its more to the point, she would scoff at the idea of spending so much, and it might open her eyes to your point of view. I discussed this issue with my wife, well girlfriend at the time, and we settled on a much much less expensive ring, it is real, but it is small. I told her I flat out refuse and cannot afford to spend so much on vanity, and she accepted it. We have been married 12 years now.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 11:33 PM
14

People shouldn't be expected to die simply for having external genitalia. Did you know only 19% of the men on the titanic survived, compared to %72 of women that survived? Hell only 50% of the children survived. I guess when they say women and children first, the really meant it in that order.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 11:03 PM
1

there more guidelines really :D
/r/MensRights16/01/12 10:56 PM
10

I think the two overlap more than you would think. Sure it may not be the ones that get angry when a man holds a door open for them that push for chivalry, but what about the average working woman, that complains about the supposed pay gap, feels oppressed by men, but still wants the man to pick her up on a date, and pay her way, hold her door open, give her his jacket, wants a random stranger to give up his seat on the subway, or let her get off the sinking boat first. This is still expected by…
/r/MensRights16/01/12 10:53 PM
4

It is in quotes, because you can't have both equality and chivalry at the same time. One requires equal treatment regardless of gender, the other requires special treatment based on gender, therefore what they are getting is not actual equality.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 08:38 PM
0

What that goal is, is what is debatable.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 08:36 PM
-1

third-wave feminists are definitely not okay with inequalities like this and are very egalitarian Then they should refer to themselves as egalitarian, rather than after a movement which is not only named after one specific gender, but whose actions soley goes towards benefiting that gender under the guise of equality. IMO feminism is named perfectly, it's the definition that is wrong. Definition of FEMINISM 1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 2: organized a…
/r/MensRights16/01/12 08:12 PM
3

I wouldn't go so far as to claim rarely. In either case, some women want equality, some want chivalry, and some want both, but all get the benefits of both "equality" and chivalry.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 07:51 PM
2

I don't think anyone is blaming feminism for the current system of selective service. However, I do see, and agree with people, who blame feminism for claiming to be for equality, while being perfectly okay with inequalities when they benefit women.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 07:10 PM
52

Women are no longer living up to their end of the social contract, I see no reason for men to do so either. Sometimes equality has it's downside, they need to accept it, or admit they don't really want equality, but the upper hand.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 07:05 PM
1

I got banned from One Y as welll, for supposedly being hateful, but simply not agreeing with one of the mods. The subreddit is a joke.
/r/MensRights10/01/12 11:00 PM
7

Her body, her choice, her responsibility. If she alone makes the choice to keep the baby, then she alone takes on the responsibility. A woman would not want a man making decisions for her, so do men not want women making decisions for them. It's really that simple. Women do not want to be forced into motherhood. Men do not want to be forced into fatherhood. Only one of the above is legally acceptable in today's world, can you guess which?
/r/MensRights08/01/12 03:40 PM
26

A woman has the right to abandon her baby at any hospital, and hold no further legal or financial responsibilities for the child. Doing so does not take into consideration the rights of the child. Why should men be held to that consideration when women are not? Men should have the same option to walk away. Especially since they do not have the same myriad of options and opportunities to end the pregnancy before the child is born that the woman has.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 03:37 PM
1

Why do successful men settle for lazy lumps?
/r/MensRights05/01/12 09:35 PM
2

There is currently little to no downside for women to file a false rape charge in retribution to a perceived slight. It doesn't even have to go to court for trial, and the man's life is fucked up. His name will get publicized and the public will enact their own social justice on the man, so much for innocent until proven guilty. Even if proven to be a false claim, most women and white nights will still believe her and continue to harass the man, and she will likely not even face any charges or m…
/r/MensRights21/12/11 04:34 PM
3

I did this with my wife once, about 10 years ago. She tried using sex as a bargaining chip. I explained to her that sex should not be used as currency in a relationship, and to prove my point, cut her off for about 4 months. She never tried it again.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 07:06 PM
1

I had rabbit ravioli once, it was pretty good.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 07:02 PM
9

hmm would that not mean she was with the other man before the divorce? I sure hope she gets nothing.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 04:50 PM
2

That would actually be a very good comparison, because nothing was done to an uncut penis as well. Refusing to have sex with a woman with exposed inner labia is exactly like refusing to have sex with a man with an uncircumcised penis. Both are naturally that way and neither were surgically modified to the other parties preference.
/r/MensRights14/12/11 01:21 PM
4

Your post history speaks for itself. Good day.
/r/MensRights13/12/11 03:34 PM
3

It's good to see you can admit it, even if you are hiding behind faux sarcasm.
/r/MensRights13/12/11 03:31 PM
6

The point, is you likely made an additional account specifically to troll here, rather than doing so under your main account. Really, it wasn't that hard to figure out.
/r/MensRights13/12/11 03:14 PM
1

Women who make unilateral decisions (such as becoming a parent) would take on the unilateral burdens of those decisions. You are my hero.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 05:41 PM
2

So if you have any ways in which we can be more respectful to male issues as we fight for women's issues, please share! In your words, this is exactly the problem. Feminism claims to be for equality for both genders, but as you mentioned, only fights for women's issues. If feminism only fights for women's issues, then they need to stop referring to themselves as for equality, because that is not the case. This is why feminism needs to be abandoned for egalitarianism.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 05:03 PM
1

I think this is really telling about your feminism and feminism's actual core beliefs. Egalitarianism is what feminism claims to be. It is all inclusive, it is for equality, by definition. You claim feminism is for equality, but it is only for improving women's situations where they do not have the upper hand. When suggested you embrace actual equality, you recoil. If you were truly for actual equality between men and women, you would at least consider yourself both.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 04:51 PM
0

How long till she gets on registerher.com. While not as bad as most on there, she is an abuser.
/r/MensRights09/12/11 02:24 PM
6

Thank you for this information, I had wondered the same thing. Fortunately I am not divorced, but unfortunately my state isn't on the list either.
/r/MensRights02/12/11 09:39 PM
3

Freeze sperm beforehand. Good idea. I second this. That way you still have full control over your ability and desire to procreate.
/r/MensRights02/12/11 09:34 PM
2

I would say you don't have to say anything until the topic of children comes up, or until the relationship is moving into the long term phase. They should probably know you either do not want children, or are incapable of fathering a child before things get serious, but specifically telling them why is up to you.
/r/MensRights02/12/11 09:33 PM
155

Woman attacks man, must be his fault.
/r/MensRights01/12/11 09:03 PM
3

good point
/r/MensRights28/11/11 08:36 PM
6

Justice is supposed to be blind.
/r/MensRights28/11/11 05:36 PM
3

Only if we had their genitals as well.
/r/MensRights28/11/11 05:35 PM
2

Well at least it is good to see so many people posting that she is wrong.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 02:33 PM
3

count me in as well
/r/MensRights22/11/11 12:25 AM
6

That one is horrible. Also a bit further down the line, there is one that says: "Secretly I think men who are afraid of my herpes are wusses". Are they wusses, no, should they be afraid, damn right, they should be. It's an incurable disease they they would have until they die. It should be avoided like the plague.
/r/MensRights21/11/11 09:53 PM
2

I think being clear from the get go that you do not want children, and will not change your mind is plenty. How you went about ensuring you cannot father children is probably not necessary. Congrats on taking your full control over your reproductive abilities. I have 2 kids of my own, and my wife is no longer able to have children due to a partial hysterectomy, and even though she is completely unable to have children, I have been tempted to go get snipped as well, just so I know I am in control…
/r/MensRights21/11/11 09:15 PM
18

This is getting far out of hand, next thing you know people will start wanting to file charges for being bumped into. People need to lighten the fuck up.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 06:59 PM
4

ephebophile
/r/MensRights17/11/11 04:00 PM
8

Yeah I call BS on this. You could possibly believe once, but by the 2nd time, you think she would report it, or avoid him, but not 5 times. Sounds to me like she is just trying to cover her ass.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 03:58 PM
1

Count the jackass out, and get the other 3 on your own.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:57 PM
9

I don't think there is any reasonable way around it, as no woman should be forced into giving birth. The right to opt out, or financial abortion is about all we can ask for at this point.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:51 PM
1

And if the chosen form of birth control fails, you are duped into believing she is infertile or on birth control, she takes the condom out of the trash and uses it to inseminate herself, or you are raped? Women don't hold themselves to the standard that sex implies consent to conceive, there is absolutely no reason to hold men to that same standard. Women have multiple options after conception, men have 0. It says a lot that a man can be drugged, and raped against his will, and then legally forc…
/r/MensRights16/11/11 07:25 PM
3

Half of congress has impaired mental abilities, its pretty clear that its no reason to replace them.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 03:45 AM
7

If you have sex, you are accepting the fact that a pregnancy might happen. No birth control is 100%. This kind of shit comment pisses me off. These hypocritical bitches throw this out there, but then stand firm by their right to choose. Fuck everything about that.
/r/MensRights15/11/11 11:17 PM
3

source?
/r/MensRights15/11/11 10:03 PM
2

I guess then she must subscribe to the idea that if a woman has an orgasm or even self lubricates, then it must not be rape either, because she wouldn't do those things if she didn't consent, right?
/r/MensRights10/11/11 05:28 PM
1

I would say average.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 11:04 PM
1

Yeah, but a big difference in the aiming mechanism.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 10:37 PM
3

Its not true. Taking a select few and using them to represent the whole is far from the truth. Sure some men are like that, the majority is not.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 02:13 AM
10

They think they are so funny.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 01:04 AM
8

standing up to pee. Its useful, but overrated.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 10:45 PM
5

Start by getting a DNA test to be certain the kid is yours. If you have any evidence, or receipts of purchases you made for baby items, get them to your lawyer. If you don't have a lawyer, get one.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 06:01 PM
9

Her story makes no sense, not that she has provided much on detail. She states the police wouldn't even collect evidence unless she knew the full name of the attacker, and claims that is why they have no evidence. You can go to any hospital and have a rape kit done. Sounds like bullshit from start to finish.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 03:54 AM
3

and he went to jail for it, and is servinig his time. It does not negate alimony from the divorce.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 09:56 PM
2

I agree.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 04:04 PM
3

Unlikely, as the guy/company that invented it would have to pay to have it tested here, or make an arrangement with another company to do so, in exchange for the rights to manufacture and sell. I am not sure how a petition would help.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:50 PM
3

Yeah, we had an article about it in here a few months back. Probably wouldn't hurt to resubmit it, especially if US testing begins.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:29 PM
5

if you live in India.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:17 PM
7

A 2001 survey revealed that 42 per cent of women would lie about using contraception in order to get pregnant in spite of their partners’ wishes. The act itself may not be common, but the notion sure looks to be.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:14 PM
4

A 2001 survey revealed that 42 per cent of women would lie about using contraception in order to get pregnant in spite of their partners’ wishes. Wow
/r/MensRights03/11/11 03:13 PM
1

Kind of seems dumb if she is lying because what she is asking for will prove beyond a doubt whether or not he is the father. She can't really be expecting a payoff, when a quick DNA test will show if she is lying. Maybe she is just hoping to meet him or something stupid. He shouldn't have to deal with it but if he did the DNA test and he is not the father, end of story. If he is the father, or he even admits they had sex, she should get charged with statutory rape. Quick, someone call Maury.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 02:46 PM
13

But only a handful of extremists would extend laws against sex discrimination to forbid chivalry or ban a time-honored tradition like Mother’s Day or an innocent custom like ladies’ night. This article is way to biased. They dismiss the sexism by referring to ladies night as an innocent custom. What is so innocent about sex based pricing? Evidently if you think the price of things should be the same regardless of your gender, you are an extremist.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 02:27 PM
2

I watched that movie, Fireproof, it was horrible. They stacked everything up as being the man's fault. It was just tired stereotypes meets religious salvation.
/r/MensRights01/11/11 10:30 PM
1

That's My Job - Conway Twitty http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pbO76rmBpc Cats in the cradle - Harry Chapin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUwjNBjqR-c The night I called the old man out - Garth Brooks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JHxfr4NABs&feature=related Patches - Clarence Carter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_LQ4_MhDu4 To a lesser extent Giddy Up Go - Red Sovine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw4v9wMvTwA Daddy's Hands - Holly Dunn (country song and from a girls point of view though) http:…
/r/MensRights01/11/11 06:53 PM
1

This
/r/MensRights01/11/11 06:40 PM
7

I would say anyone slighted by the system has the right to be bitter. That in no way should diminish the value of their input, in reality it should increase its value. I know you are just trolling, but at least try to make a valid point.
/r/MensRights29/10/11 09:24 PM
6

I see what you are saying, but the point is, that its the people who have been through it and seen first hand how bad it is that are the most qualified to say where the problems are. Instead they are being dismissed as being bitter. Its great that people such as yourself are involved as well, but its ridiculous that others are being dismissed so easily. I am happily married 36 yr old and I haven't personally been affected by much of the inequality, but I have seen it happen to friends and family…
/r/MensRights29/10/11 09:20 PM
2

sadly the same cannot be said for men
/r/MensRights27/10/11 06:19 PM
1

This post is work of art, and instant classic, imo.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 06:16 PM
2

These women should try being a man some time. The few that have tried, have a completely different view afterwards.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:04 PM
3

Yeah, and and all those homeless men making up the 90% majority of homeless people, they sure did benefit from it as well.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:02 PM
5

Sounds like someone needs to look up the definition of equality.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:51 AM
6

Feminists are like the pigs in Animal Farm. They are perfectly happy with some being "more equal" than others.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:29 AM
8

Any culture that loses sight of the importance of children or women or men is doomed for failure. FTFY I simply do not agree that men are of any less importance. The only thing a woman can do that a man cannot is give birth. If increasing population is not an issue, then that becomes irrelevant. The main point I am making is that these types of things are just as important. The contribution of men is important. It may not be as big a deal as false rape, but it is important nonetheless. IMO anyon…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:05 AM
0

I was being sarcastic. As if there is such a thing as insubstantial violence. Violence by its definition makes it substantial.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 01:38 AM
9

I agree with the children, but not necessarily with the women bit. We are in no sort of low population crisis. Why would being able to provide more children be a deciding quality. Now if the number of breeding capable women in the country were at risk I would agree, but that argument holds no water. Finally I agree that false rape is a far bigger issue, and it happened almost 100 years ago. I am no so sure we would see the same outcome today.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 01:12 AM
0

Or simply because the abuser has a vagina. However you want to look at it.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:55 AM
2

TIL there is a class of violence that can be considered insubstantial simply because the victim is male.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:54 AM
2

Reinforces the idea that once men decide they are done having children, and are sure, they should get snipped, just to CYA.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:52 AM
3

That would make more sense as the mother has the larger portion, the other would include either a new husband or boyfriend.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:39 AM
0

I expected this to have been in r/circlejerk. Not interested, and I certainly hope nobody else is. This submission should be deleted as well.
/r/MensRights22/10/11 06:12 PM
1

Take your own advice, you asked a question, I gave you an answer based on my interpretation of the FAQ, you were a douche about it, then continued your argument into the realm of retarded, and followed it up with correcting grammar. It pretty much speaks for itself, tbh. Feel free to get your last word in, then STFU, I am done with you.
/r/MensRights22/10/11 03:13 AM
12

It would be equal if the woman's evolution was reversed, but it's not. Men Monkeys to men to pigs. Women Cows to women It's saying men evolved into pigs but women are women. It's dumb and it's sexist.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 03:41 PM
2

I can agree with that, but would also say that divorce laws and rulings also undermine the value and meaning of marriage. This is because the women can exit a marriage with little to no penalty. They generally get out, with the kids, most of the stuff, child support and possibly alimony. Basically they kick the man out, but keep the fruits of his labor, why should they not divorce, they don't lose anything. If it wasn't so beneficial for them to get out, and more even, then you would not see ads…
/r/MensRights20/10/11 07:56 PM
3

Thanks, I have had multiple male friends and family who lied down and let their wives take them to the bank during a divorce. I couldn't talk them out of it. They took on all the family debt, and let the wife walk off scott-free along with half or more of the possessions, because they felt they were supposed to, then got hit with child support/alimony on top of it. It really speaks to the "she sees 70/30 split".
/r/MensRights20/10/11 07:26 PM
10

I see your point about implied DV, but there are plenty of ads that already imply man on woman DV, its good to see some that reverse it, even if it is that subtle. Much of the time, it seems commonplace, and acceptable for a woman to be portrayed with rolling pins or frying pans to beat their husbands, and it's not viewed as domestic violence in the least.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 07:21 PM
3

It's because of shit like that, that this sort of ad is good. It's the ad that you reference that should have been posted by the OP, in my opinion, not this one.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 07:11 PM
18

Why? It seems like this is a good thing. If anything it might inform men to protect themselves. Why does it piss you off?
/r/MensRights20/10/11 06:19 PM
1

If you know I am being sarcastic, what was the sense of the reply? The people whom do not give a shit about anyone other than themselves, are not going to care what this type of PSA has to say, it will fall on deaf ears, and serves no other purpose than to identify all men as rapists, or potential/eventual rapists. I am sure women would be quite offended if men alluded to them as prostitutes or potential prostitutes. They have all the equipment necessary, they only need to decide to do the act, …
/r/MensRights19/10/11 03:02 PM
1

I have personally never done this, but there is a small group of people that come here and downvote everything, its not a stretch that they continue in to do so to everything people have submitted.
/r/MensRights19/10/11 02:44 AM
22

I do these already, why in the world does rape still happen? This is how you stop rape after all, right?
/r/MensRights19/10/11 02:35 AM
2

Eh its fine so long as the women cant get in the other cars, there are just as many men only cars, and the women are treated the same if they try. But that's not the case now is it.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 10:15 PM
3

I thought it was mocking the people that say those things but then realized they were being serious. Sad, indeed.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 05:40 PM
2

Good point.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:53 PM
26

....but, but, but, she has a vagina.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:22 PM
14

The problem is that while he is being sarcastic, its the exact same response that would be given by an actual feminist, with the exception of the word scary at the end. So it makes it hard to distinguish sarcasm from an actual reply, especially if you don't take the login name into account. It really just goes further to show how off base feminism really is in their logic, that a sarcastic comment, can be so easily mistaken for an actual comment.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:21 PM
9

This is because there is no downside to a woman deciding to leave. She gets the kids, most of the stuff, child support, and possibly alimony and the home. The only thing being removed from the equation is the man, not the fruits of his labor.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 02:27 PM
1

I get what you are saying and I agree to a point. As it is now, its "He got me pregnant", as if the woman had no say in the matter, as if it is something that was done to her, that she was helpless to prevent. Which is not the case by a long shot. Women have more control over their reproductive abilities than a man does, but he still gets blamed for impregnating her regardless of her birthcontrol situation. Now depending on what birthcontrol if any was used, some of that blame is shared or passe…
/r/MensRights17/10/11 06:12 PM
5

yeah, but at 0:15 she states she is not a comedian, and talks the same way about men (non-comedy), as this comedian does about women.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 01:32 AM
1

Thank you, that was great.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 01:24 AM
4

She may not say she is a feminist but she indicated she talks shit about men in her act or whatever. Whether or not that qualifies her, I have no idea.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 01:15 AM
2

The question that should be asked is 'Why do men marry?' I did because I thought it was what I was supposed to do. It was what was expected of me. The laws for divorce are stacked in women's favor. As a woman, if you want out, you can get out, generally with the kids, child support and possibly alimony. As a man, you can get out, generally with giving your ex half your net pay, so she can live in the lifestyle she is accustomed, but now you can't.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 01:07 AM
-1

Considering half of all marriages end in divorce, its not an unlikely possibility. And in this world where women feel they can have the best of both world, where they don't have to have a father for their children but still get a good portion of his income to do so via child support and alimony, what exactly is the downside from the female perspective to not get divorced when he is down on his luck. She (women) have nothing to lose, men can only lose. In my opinion men can and should have commit…
/r/MensRights17/10/11 01:03 AM
1

yeah, some day, maybe. Women have had birth control for decades, men have yet to have anything other than the barrier method and abstinence. I hold out hope, but its just not getting done.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 12:23 AM
1

Sure will do, so long as they agree to do the same, I will disclose my tendancy to do so, if they disclose their attempt to trick people. Problem solved, and I won't have to assault anyone. We don't have to agree, and I bare you no ill will for disagreeing. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 09:17 PM
10

Rosanne Barr can go fuck off. Its not about gender, feminists shouldn't try to make it about gender.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 09:10 PM
1

I thought I heard this was scrapped due to some lame side effects, perhaps I am mistaking it with something else.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 08:58 PM
1

Well a possible problem then would be that if there were any accidental pregnancies, it would be viewed as the man's fault, even if something malfunctioned with whatever device that restricted seminal flow. To put into contrast, women are not held accountable if a woman's birth control failed, and can even use that as an out when it fails by design. Men won't have that luxury so it had better be 100%, otherwise the blame would be ours. Outside of that, that would be great. As it is, women, throu…
/r/MensRights16/10/11 08:56 PM
1

ZOMG a grammatical error on an internet forum, you sure showed me! BTW, I didn't start with a snippy attitude, that only came after your snide remark below, when I was trying to be helpful. Thanks for not clarifying. After that I just didn't give a shit, still don't.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 08:46 PM
1

if they attempt to purposely deceive you, and take advantage of the reasonable assumption, then they would be getting what they asked for. Is it okay, who the fuck knows, its just what would happen. You want to sleep with some trans genders have at it, they are all yours. Excuse me for having a preference, and not wishing to taken advantage of. If they can't respect other peoples stance on it, then other people shouldn't respect theirs. I am just being honest and forthcoming about the truth, the…
/r/MensRights16/10/11 03:06 AM
1

Those are published works, I would say it wouldn't apply, and not in the spirit of the rule. Are you done sulking now or do you want to come up with something else? Just use your best judgment, oh wait, your a retard, and can't seem to grasp the obvious. Well, good luck with that.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 02:45 AM
2

This is it exactly. Every other write up about what happened paint the women's actions as innocent, and he was just being a big bad man. They attacked him, they jumped the counter and paid the price. If it were a man in the women's place, he would have been arrested after being beat down.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 12:46 AM
1

What could be more feminist than having your cake and eating it too.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 12:38 AM
2

I am just being up front and honest about it, you know, what they should be doing as well.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 11:59 PM
1

You are a fucking retard. This includes links It is not limited to facebook. Facebook was just the example. Personal information is information that can be used to identify the person. It isn't really a shocker that their full name would fall under this category, especially when it specifically states names still legible If you can't understand this simple thing, I am sorry but I can't help you.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 11:55 PM
1

Assuming someone who appears to be a woman is not an unreasonable assumption. It is not in any way outlandish. However assuming every woman you meet might used to have been a man, that is an unreasonable assumption.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 11:52 PM
2

So I guess its not just men that can stop rape, but its women that can stop creating rapists.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 03:53 PM
1

It's pretty clear to me with the names still legible Thanks for being willfully obtuse.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 03:46 PM
2

The person isn't the person I would have been lead to believe they were.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 03:43 PM
3

You are basing your opinion off your friends anecdotal evidence, I am basing mine off how I know I would react, and judging by many of the responses here, I am not alone, and it seems foolish for you to believe otherwise. So in reality, what I am telling you, is how a trans-woman can keep herself safe.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 02:51 AM
6

My opinion needs no citation. However I find it hard to believe assertion, with the same lack of citation, is true. If a man is going to beat up a transgendered woman just for being, he most certainly, in my opinion, is going to do it if he finds out while his penis is inserted, and full of anger of the betrayal. Their gender identity means so much to them they changed genders, they simply can't assume it means nothing you anyone else.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 02:27 AM
4

Well if that person beats them for telling them before hand, imagine what that same person would do if they found out during. It's a lot less likely there will be any beatings if they are up front about it, before anyone has put any time into the courtship.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:48 AM
6

Its not sexual history, that would be past sexual partners. It would be gender history, and it is relevant. If it mattered so much to the person to change genders, you think it might be at least important to mention to the person they are looking to have sex with. If it is no big deal, then why did they have a gender change in the first place? That's right, because it matters.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:43 AM
1

"it" was their gender identity, not the person themselves.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:33 AM
15

My posts ooze conditional respect. Respect is earned not demanded.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 04:28 PM
4

I do respect it, I just prefer to not be tricked into sticking my penis in it. If they can give me that respect, then I can and will give them all the respect they need. If they can't respect my preferences then they do not deserve my respect in return.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 03:59 PM
22

If they want us to respect their sexual identity, then they had better respect our sexual preference. horror stories of batterings and murder This more than anything is why they should be honest up front. The way I see it is if the person the trans is looking to have sex with has no problem with it, then there is no harm in telling them, however if the person does have a problem, its better they be told before than to find out during.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 03:37 PM
9

Are groups of people from other subreddits downvoting them? Yes, a dedicated few who come in and downvote en masse all threads, and many if not all of the comments.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 12:38 AM
1

Here is the ad they are referring to It's cheesy but I like its focus.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 08:20 PM
1

From the FAQ: Is posting personal information ok? NO. Reddit is a pretty open and free speech place, but it is not ok to post someone's personal information, or post links to personal information. This includes links to public Facebook pages and screenshots of facebook pages with the names still legible.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 07:02 PM
2

circleschlick maybe
/r/MensRights11/10/11 04:05 PM
3

I see no problem with this. It is a decision left to those being wed, if that's what they want, more power to them. I had considered this when I was younger as I was often teased about my last name, but embraced my surname as I grew older.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:22 PM
2

DADT was initially a good policy, as in a step in the right direction. Keep in mind, before DADT, they used to be able to actively search out gays in the military to get them kicked out. DADT was put in place to stop that. Of course it was not as progressive as simply allowing gay soldiers in the military, but by disallowing people from witch hunting (Don't Ask) and recommending that gay soldiers keep quiet (Don't Tell), it did begin to allow them to remain in the military.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:12 PM
0

You are still required to blank out the names.
/r/MensRights10/10/11 05:57 PM
3

Only rapists can stop rape. Fuck this all men are potential rapists shit. They would have a hissy fit if we said all women were potential prostitutes.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 01:41 PM
4

The problem is you can only either upvote or downvote and you are saying that it applies only to that one line. Where as the other 90% of the comic is legitimate, and deserving, in my opinion, of an upvote. Simply because there is a small part that you do not agree with, does not mean that you can't agree with everything else. It is not enough to negate the upvote. The world is not black and white, but our voting system is. You seem to think people cannot have a nuanced opinion of anything. To b…
/r/MensRights06/10/11 05:46 PM
1

Last month, it pledged to spend billions of dollars during the next five years to train female workers around the globe and support women-owned businesses. How is this not prejudiced against male workers, and male owned businesses? Just another example of female privilege. Female business owners get preferential treatment simply because they are female. If it read like this: Last month, it pledged to spend billions of dollars during the next five years to train male workers around the globe and …
/r/MensRights06/10/11 05:35 PM
8

It is one line in a comic from another site, full of many other quality points, I think you are overreacting.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 03:35 PM
6

He should have gone for a moderate interest as well, but good news either way.
/r/MensRights05/10/11 02:36 AM
2

I don't rape, why is rape still occurring? I am preventing it, aren't I?
/r/MensRights04/10/11 08:05 PM
2

Vote
/r/MensRights03/10/11 10:25 PM
3

I agree, the other one is horrible. If it helps at all, I vote for the one currently in use.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 10:22 PM
2

If women want to fake an orgasm they are only hurting themselves. If they are not sexually fulfilled, they need to communicate that to their partner so they can fulfill them. If they just want to fake it to get it over, then that's their prerogative.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 10:06 PM
1

grunt a few times, and then pull out, much easier with a condom on.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 10:01 PM
0

all in all, its just a logo. As others have mentioned, after the month is over, keep the logo design and just change the color black. I think its a kickass symbol as it is, and the color is simply representing the inclusion of the gay community. If we had had a logo like this, but solid black for months, and just now changed it for October, I don't think people would have had much of an issue with that.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 09:38 PM
3

I can't see a reason why gay-related discussions would be needed to be had in /r/mensrights. If they are male, I see no reason to exclude them. This place isn't to bitch about how women treat us, though a lot of that happens here as a direct result of the rights we have lost. This is a place to discuss, and call attention to the inequalities of men, when men and women are supposedly equal. I am not advocating bringing up solely LGBT issues that are not related to mens rights, that would be silly…
/r/MensRights03/10/11 09:34 PM
3

If it was up to people like you Now it's somehow my fault. Thanks! The discussion is over.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 07:00 PM
5

I don't think anyone is making the claim that women do no wrong, so submitting this as evidence of it accomplishes nothing. If anything it makes us looks spiteful of women in general, to the point that we point out every wrongdoing a woman ever made. In my opinion, that is not what we should be doing here.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 06:07 PM
1

The only reason I stated to still make the payments is because he is legally obligated to to so until the legal arrangement is voided. I wouldn't want to recommend otherwise and have him risk penalties.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 06:01 PM
1

For those that are saying he deserved it, I have a question for you. Do you feel that women that have sex with underage boys should die a horrific death as well? You don't see this sort of thing happen in a woman's prison to female pedophile/ephebophile prisoners. Why are we holding other men accountable to a higher standard than that of women?
/r/MensRights03/10/11 05:42 PM
40

Why the fuck is it a big deal that the logo has changed? Straight men's rights and gay men's rights overlap. Just because a specific men's right doesn't affect you does not mean it doesn't belong in men's rights. Men are men regardless of their sexual orientation, and their right's matter. They get shit on by society just as much as the rest of us, if not more so. I don't see any reason why we can't be inclusive. As far as I am concerned, if you can't handle it, the button to unsubscribe is ----…
/r/MensRights03/10/11 05:17 PM
4

Porter says all men are facilitating domestic violence by allowing disrespectful behavior toward women to continue. Blaming all men for what some men and some women do outside of anyone else's control is idiotic. Why not just add murder, theft, and adultery to the list. What is it that makes all men responsible for the actions of a few, while that few includes both genders? Would that not also mean that all women are facilitating domestic violence by allowing disrespectful behavior toward women …
/r/MensRights03/10/11 05:02 PM
6

I don't see the men's rights relevance. People steal, both men and women do it.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 04:36 PM
9

This My wife, whom my daughter is very close with, has told me that the best thing I can do at this point is to just let her know how much I love her and care about her well-being. We have also let her know that she is near the age in our state (Indiana) where she can decide who she wants to live with. And this We’ve told her that she always has a place to stay with us. Outside of that, you can speak with both the daughter and the mother to see if they are willing to have her come stay with you …
/r/MensRights03/10/11 04:32 PM
10

Unless she is lying to excuse why she isn't sleeping with people currently, and pretending to be traumatized about it. But yeah, otherwise, it doesn't make sense.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 02:05 PM
1

Far better than my comparison.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 12:59 PM
6

Fads come fads go, preferences change. Back when I was a kid it was all about having a hairy chest, like Burt Reynolds or Tom Selleck. Now its all about having a bare, hairless body, with facial stubble. Who knows what's up next, but it will always change.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 02:50 AM
16

I completely agree. For feminists consent from a woman is a sacred thing, something you can't question, she is empowered by it, and it is up to her how, when and why she gives it, no matter what the reason. However if a man withholds consent, he is a misogynist, because he is expected to just serve it up.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 02:27 AM
-1

When your penis is covered in latex and you don’t have to taste it, look at it or touch it, no apologies So what she is saying is what you don't know won't hurt you? I am curious if she feels the same way about a woman that is passed out being taken advantage of. When she wakes up, she will have no idea of what took place. What she doesn't know won't hurt her, right? Yeah, some how I doubt that. I am sure that if the tables were turned, and he whipped out a bleeding penis, and told her, don't wo…
/r/MensRights03/10/11 02:23 AM
6

From one of the comments there: The mother chooses to have the child, but it's the child that suffers if the mother can't afford it. The woman makes a choice, the child suffers because of the choice she made, it must be the man's fault, and he should pay for the child she chose to have on her own, by herself. What kind of logic is that? The mother needs to take that into consideration when she chooses to have the child. She needs to be responsible for her decision. If the man doesn't want any pa…
/r/MensRights01/10/11 02:30 PM
1

Do you have any way of seeing the people that only downvote things, or have a 95% downvote to upvote rate?
/r/MensRights30/09/11 07:52 PM
1

Relevent posts about the lack of protection for male victims of domestic violence are being driven underground with 20+ downvotes I noticed this as well, and had contemplating posting on it. Topics that are quite valid and prime examples on how men are victimized end up with as many if not more down votes. I am not sure if its possible, but if the mods can see what users, if any, are just coming here and downvoting the posts without any other interaction with the group, and ban them, or make the…
/r/MensRights30/09/11 07:45 PM
5

interesting then that it is referred to as sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault instead of sexual battery and aggravated sexual battery, as each of those refer to the act not the threat.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 11:11 PM
5

Aggravated sexual assault sounds a more likely fit, and was what I was referring to.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:40 PM
2

No substance, its simply a mockery of the lists he is contrasting.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:37 PM
1

This!
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:14 PM
4

Men are male. Men are born with penises and do not have natural breasts. Under patriarchy all men are born and raised with male privilege, and all men are potential rapists within our rape culture. They expect to be served by women from cradle to grave, because patriarchy is built upon the back of every woman. I have never read a paragraph so full of self serving bullshit in my life.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:09 PM
33

Not only she assaulted him, but I don't see why it wouldn't be considered sexual assault. She was attempting to hurt his genitals.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:41 PM
4

Wow I have never seen that before, I would have love to seen her facial expression when he slapped her back. Sucks that he practically got a beat down after that, but I say he was right to slap her back.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:30 PM
11

Being kicked in the genitals should be considered sexual assault. How different really is it to ramming a foreign object into a woman's vagina? Both can cause massive injury.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:29 PM
1

I am not sure what position you might be referring to where a man cannot fully withdraw at a moments notice, and withdrawing is the only act being discussed. Unless you put a number on it, you are basically saying he can continue as long as he wants, and that doesn't sound very fair either.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 07:30 PM
1

I agree, like I said, no jail time. However, at what point does it become assaul?. If they are causing you to be in or remain in severe pain due to their actions, at what point is their refusal to move considered intent to cause harm? One way or another, a number has to be put on it, and that number needs to be a realistic expectation for both parties. I think realistically keeping someone in pain for 30 seconds because you are trying to get off is far past the 'I was still caught up in the mome…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:36 PM
2

I understand the reasoning behind it, and 30 seconds is a long time for someone to be doing something to you, that you no longer want them to especially when pain is involved. I only bring up pain, as an example of a valid reason why someone would be told to stop mid coitus. Cramping or tearing for example. I have been in that very position, and had to interrupt my wife who was on top, because I had excruciating pain due to a cramp in my side. If she didn't get off, I would have had to throw her…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:06 PM
2

I am curious to which part you are referring. Each act here on its own isn't really a problem. Smoking, drinking having other men over (the article doesn't state she was having sex). People do these things every day, and there is no information on whether or not the boyfriend would be smoking marijuana and drinking with them. The only issues here was he was assaulted by someone he believes stole a gun, and that the house was considered uninhabitable for children. Simply having male friends over …
/r/MensRights28/09/11 04:36 PM
2

Not so much where you haven't already made the decision to stop or keep going. 30 seconds is short in every day life, but its a long time during an intense situation. Put your hand on a hot stove and see how long 30 seconds is. With that said, I don't think 30 seconds requires jail time.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:46 PM
1

Absolutely not, and withdrawing consent should not be considered rape unless it escalates further and falls under another category of rape, such as forcible, or under duress.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:40 PM
2

I would say it was just as much misogynistic as it was misandric, possibly just a bit more misandric since everyone started beating the guy, but it wasn't simply because he was a guy, but because he was being a misogynist.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 01:29 PM
4

15-30 seconds is a long time. I think maybe 5-10 seconds is more reasonable amount of time to take in the information process it, and decide to stop or not. 15 seconds I would say is in a gray area.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 01:22 PM
6

I take it this was the ad being discussed?
/r/MensRights27/09/11 11:08 PM
0

If you are going to have number 8 Alice and Bob have sex that Bob thinks is consensual. Alice does not. Alice accuses Bob of rape. You need to have Alice and Bob have sex that is consensual. Alice regrets it in the morning. Alice accuses Bob of rape. & Alice and Bob have sex that is consensual. Alice wakes up next to Bob, and can't remember anything that happened and assumes she was raped.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 06:04 PM
2

If you are going to have number 8 Alice and Bob have sex that Bob thinks is consensual. Alice does not. Alice accuses Bob of rape. You need to have Alice and Bob have sex that is consensual. Alice regrets it in the morning. Alice accuses Bob of rape. & Alice and Bob have sex that is consensual. Alice wakes up next to Bob, and can't remember anything that happened and assumes she was raped.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 06:04 PM
1

Bleed once a month for a week This is pretty much the only legitimate claim in the list. Everything else is either self inflicted choice or something applicable to both genders. Even having a monthly period can be alleviated by some forms of birth control. My wife didn't have her period for over 2 years while she was on depo-provera.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 03:12 PM
2

I agree
/r/MensRights26/09/11 03:01 PM
4

I don't have exact figures and didn't want to appear to be exaggerating.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:46 PM
1

While more of a racial thing than a mens rights issue, it would be funny to see native american women show up and clean them out at no cost.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:45 PM
3

I think they should be charged when there is evidence of them falsely accusing, when there is a lack of evidence either way, I think they need to let it go.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:34 PM
3

For every man sitting on top of the world, there is another sitting in the gutter.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:31 PM
5

So what you are saying is its OK for the transgendered to assume that nobody they will be having sex with needs to know, or cares, but its not ok for men to assume the woman they will be having sex with is actually a woman and always has been. Retaining your gender is the norm, changing your gender is not. It is far more logical to assume the person was born with the gender and genitals they appear to have than it is for the transgendered to assume it doesn't matter. Besides, if it really doesn'…
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:28 PM
1

I didn't know it was required that we decorate the office with our own personal beliefs assuming we all agree. Oh that's right, that sort of thing is discouraged in the work place. As far as I am concerned, if the person I am interviewing has a problem with a neutral environment, they are going to be a problem, and I don't want to hire them anyway. The last thing I need is someone who can create sexism out of the lack of sexism.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:05 PM
2

he doesn't have all the legal obligations and rights of a parent This is far different than No "I still love you, but because your mom cheated on me 8 years ago, I don't have any obligation to take of you anymore. We're friends, but I don't have to help pay for your braces.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 01:49 PM
14

Hope you have more luck fishing then you will when you get home .... But you know I can hold out a lot longer than you can And I feel a headache coming on And I think this one’s a migraine It might last all year long You can read the lyrics here if you can't listen to it at work It's pretty clear use of sex for manipulation. Now granted the guy supposedly said he would spend the day with her and she has the right to be upset about that, but it doesn't sound like it was for some cuddle time. She …
/r/MensRights26/09/11 01:42 PM
6

bzzzzzzt Incorrect.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 12:47 AM
3

I agree with this almost completely with the exception of the following: But walk means walk - no rights, no access, no contact. No "I still love you, but because your mom cheated on me 8 years ago, I don't have any obligation to take of you anymore. We're friends, but I don't have to help pay for your braces." That's just child abuse. This I think is a choice for the mother to make, but yeah don't expect any say about it.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 12:15 AM
12

You didn't answer the question. What happens to the guy who wants to be a daddy to his genetic offspring, but is duped into believing the child his his, lets say, long enough to sign the birth certificate? He wanted to be a daddy, he thought he was, instead he was a wallet. He should be able to walk away. Being duped into signing the birth certificate shouldn't be a point of no return, and this is anything but rare. Men should be able to choose to be a father, no different than women can choose …
/r/MensRights25/09/11 10:24 PM
11

If you goes into a situation where the sperm is from a donor, he is (or should be) releasing the genetic father from rights and responsibilities for the child. Now lets say in this situation the father is completely unaware the baby is not his, only to find out later, should he still be on the hook for it?
/r/MensRights25/09/11 09:53 PM
25

If they can pin paternity on a man who had his sperm from a blow job used without his knowledge by a woman to impregnate herself, and say it is does not matter because he is genetically the father, then shit like this has to end. You are the father if.... pick one and stick with it, not whichever is more convenient at the time.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 08:49 PM
20

I guess she hasn't heard of the slutwalks, and how what you wear doesn't cause rape. They need to make up their damn minds.
/r/MensRights24/09/11 08:12 PM
4

Amazing, just amazing that this is the world we live in.
/r/MensRights23/09/11 02:15 PM
21

More nightclubs saying, 'No blacks allowed' - The Globe and Mail You think they could hide behind your reasoning?
/r/MensRights22/09/11 01:41 AM
8

I tried to get through it, I really did, though I just ate lunch, and didn't want to lose it.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 05:19 PM
4

I have to admit, upon first click, I looked at it and TL;DR, but after reading the couple of comments here, I decided to go back and read it anyway. Thanks for the critique that spurred me to give it the time it deserved.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 04:46 PM
3

The age of consent in West Virginia is 16, so it is not statutory rape. She was charged with incest and sexual abuse by a parent. Considering that she is his step-mom, its not really incest, and he was a consenting adult so I imagine the sexual abuse by a parent charge was pretty weak. Not to mention The victim’s father agreed to the probationary period. It is really hard to say if there really is any MR issue here. I would say an example of similar circumstances would have to be provided to sho…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:55 PM
3

He may not have seen it if he uses adblock. I didn't.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:20 PM
1

I didn't say he did, but once it is established that he has the right to refuse, it only comes down to how and why.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:13 PM
3

I am sure many of us are dealing with our own men's rights issues and focusing on working those out, and getting educated as to what they might expect, and in turn educating others.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:39 AM
7

What is the point? Innocent until proven guilty. You can't be pissed about the treatment of accused rapists, and be pissed that this woman is out on bail. If you want to make a point about the amount of bail, start with some supporting facts.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:34 AM
1

That example was only to show that even in the face of an 'agent of the mother', he could refuse if he did not feel his child would be safe, which is subjective.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 10:28 PM
1

if women have lower libido than men and don’t want sex as much then From the post. Are we done now?
/r/MensRights20/09/11 10:24 PM
1

No I am not the original commenter. That comment makes the claim that women have far lesser libidos than men No, the original commenter supposes this, it is clearly an if/then statement, to which he/she then goes on to submit a theory as to the case. However I would suppose that if female's libido was naturally higher than that of male's, the proportion of prostitution would be reversed. I am not saying a female can't ever want to have sex because she wants it. I am simply stating the evidence p…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:31 PM
2

I guess it depends where that line is drawn, but I think it depends on the agreement in place. The new husband isn't just delivering the child to the mother, as the mother is not there. It is listed that she is working late. So its not a case of him withholding the child from their mother. If the mother sent the babysitter over to pick up the kid, and she showed up strung out, I am sure he could refuse. That makes the whole thing a bit more gray, and subjective. Under what conditions can he refu…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:17 PM
2

Meh, I think you have it about right, just like many men look at breast size. Shallow is shallow regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:02 PM
1

Therefore, you have absolutely no grounds to claim that the female libido stems mostly from trading sex for stuff. Again, I didn't say it stems from it, but it is incorporated into their behavior. Saying that because they have sex because they sometimes want to therefore there is no other reasons they have sex is just as dumb as saying because they have sex for trade there must be no other reason they have sex. I am saying it is part of their behavior to also have sex for other reasons than want…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:51 PM
1

That is a good point. After fighting long and hard for it to be her body her choice, they have no grounds to start questioning her reasoning.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:40 PM
2

Considering the step-dad has no rights to the child, I don't see why he couldn't refuse to allow the child to go with anyone but the mother, but I am not a lawyer.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:28 PM
0

Not saying that, but have male prostitutes been observed in the wild?
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:20 PM
2

While far from proof, there is evidence to back up the theory as female chimps have been observed using sex to barter for food/things.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:07 PM
1

This is going a bit far. Sure their example was a man abusing a woman, but that shouldn't spark such outrage here. It's not as if they used 20 examples of men and none of women, they only used one. The headline here leads one to believe that there was more to it than that. How about you cut them some slack, and quit putting words in their mouths? If you have any actual evidence of them stating that "it's always the men causing domestic violence", then get with the linking, otherwise you are over…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 03:39 AM
10

You forgot to end it with the officer saying "word", it really brings the piece together.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:40 PM
3

Carrying the kid is completely fine, and should be expected to share in the childcare duties. Wearing that awful baby carrier is a different story.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 04:05 PM
3

Consent isn't conditional.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 12:50 AM
1

And that is exactly the problem with the law.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 12:49 AM
4

Consent isnt conditional, therefore its not rape. Its a dick move, but its not rape.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 12:46 AM
2

No worries, it will fall off into obscurity once they realize it is dumb.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 06:24 PM
1

when these preferences are expressed as a societal obligation on men, as in "men should be such-and-such", then I agree, it's misandrist. Are they not?
/r/MensRights15/09/11 06:12 PM
2

Desired maybe, but expected, I think not. Like you said nobody is perfect. Expecting them to be perfect is a stretch. They are bombarded with the idea of having the perfect guy, and they deserve nothing less, and when the guys can't live up to that, they are losers. If perfect was easy, we would all be it.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 06:08 PM
3

It is exactly like being a chameleon. They want him to change based on what they need from him at any given moment, desiring character traits that are completely oppose other desired character traits. You say this is being well-rounded, healthy, I can infer from that, than not being this is unhealthy and flawed. Well I guess most men are flawed in your eyes, or maybe you just bought into the fairy tale entirely too long.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 04:58 PM
6

They go full speed into the nice 'guys = insecure', after deriding the 'women want assholes' assumption. Both are generalizations and both are faulty. People have different personalities, not all of them jive well with each other. If you have one bad relationship after another, the only common denominator is YOU. This may be true in some instances, but to assume this is the rule is precarious. The problem, in my opinion, is most women want the Renaissance man, the jack of all trades. They want h…
/r/MensRights15/09/11 03:47 PM
2

The overall theme of the article may not be wrong, but the initial postulation is no more correct than that which is being dismissed.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 03:43 PM
2

You can get off your soap box now. The point that was being made is that she did something illegal, and is receiving no punishment, where as a man in the same position would receive punishment. She committed a crime against an under age child that should have restricted her from working with under age children, yet because she receives no punishment, she is able to continue working with underage children. Something, again, that would not happen to a man in the same position, or even lesser posit…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 06:36 PM
3

In many states their relationship would have been legal what matters is whether or not its legal in the state it took place in, not laws from other states. In a world where a man peeing in public, completely non sexual, can get on the sex offenders list, a woman having sex with someone who is legally under age, will still be allowed to work with under age children.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:14 PM
3

Yeah, you stick your dick in it and see how they react afterwards :D
/r/MensRights14/09/11 02:34 PM
2

Here is a link for the same image in the 2nd link
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:49 PM
2

She deleted herself from the initial post, but here is the headline: I was sexually assaulted in the early evening while wearing jeans and a t-shirt in a "safe" residential neighbourhood in Toronto. This is what he did to my face. Only rapists cause rape. [Link removed] The post was not even a story of 'this is what happened to me', it was a politicized point.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:26 PM
3

It is my belief that once it passes from personal story into the realm of political statement, it goes from true until proven otherwise, to presumed false until proven. Once the submission is politicized there is an agenda at play, which is far more than just sharing a story or asking for help. It is looking to prove a point, using the story as a back up to their claim. Because a personal story can be so hard to corroborate or refute, it is gold for those that want to push an agenda. If you make…
/r/MensRights12/09/11 06:22 PM
1

While the headline is a bit off base, the discussion is noteworthy. While the post in question is correct that it is not rape, it does go on to say that by not asserting his right to not be sexually assaulted, that it implied consent, which is false.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 05:02 PM
2

I think people need to realize that when submitting an accusatory story, that people will be skeptical. The problem with rape, is that its supposedly not ok to be skeptical of the accusers story. This presents enough problems. Furthermore, when the story then goes on to editorialize about the politics related to the story, it is no longer a 'here is my story' submission but now a political assertion. In the case of the rape story aforementioned, the moment she posted the portion that included th…
/r/MensRights12/09/11 04:17 PM
6

Here I thought the OP was editorializing in the headline. Nope, its exactly as written in the article.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 03:30 PM
3

I agree, If we can't be bothered to help stamp out misandry in our own communities, how can we even think we can do it on a larger scale.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 03:04 PM
5

People do odd things for imaginary internet points. So much so that we are lied to on a regular basis. If you post something, you have to expect a good bit of criticism. If you can't handle that, then don't bother posting. I suggest that perhaps that people do not post rape stories, or maybe someone make a separate subreddit for that as on one hand you have people who make things up for points combined with it being taboo to not instantly believe a rape accusation. Especially when there is addit…
/r/MensRights11/09/11 03:46 PM
1

They deleted it again, but not banned yet.
/r/MensRights11/09/11 02:54 AM
1

hahahahaha - Reposted it.
/r/MensRights10/09/11 02:08 AM
1

Not a single post here has agreed with his assessment. Not only is the submission not discrediting men, as it gives credit to men, but his claim that by crediting women, without interviewing them means that there are no women fighting wildfires in Texas, that is somehow taking credit away from men.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:24 PM
3

Again, you are making the claim that no women are battling wildfires 16 hours a day, the burden of proof is on you.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:16 PM
3

Asking for you to prove your statement is not trolling. You are making a claim, back up your claim.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:12 PM
3

Female firefighters exist in Texas If you are looking for prove they aren't actively fighting the fires, you will need to dig that up yourself, if it exists.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:07 PM
3

A faulty assumption Proof required
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:50 PM
3

The reporter doesn't need to prove it, its an assumption that both genders are involved and they are just erring on the side of caution. You are making a mountain out of less than a mole hill with this one. Yes I know that men make of 95% of the dangerous job market, and make up 90% of the on the job deaths. But you are discounting contributions by women simply because you don't see any.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:35 PM
3

My point, is there was a story posted a few months ago where someone was bitching that women got proportionally more coverage on a story. That the press went out of their way to make sure they interviewed a woman. While you might have been pleased, someone else would have been pissed. Hence, damned if you do damned if you don't.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:27 PM
4

Posted a couple of links in there of women serving far less time if any for sexual assualt convictions, I am sure I will get downvoted to all hell for it. Edit: Changed rape to sexual assault, as they weren't actually convicted of rape, even though a man in the same situation would have been charged with it.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:59 PM
2

Well if that is the case, again, proof of the claim would be needed. As another poster stated, if at least one woman or you could argue two women are involved they should say men and women, or not refer to gender at all. If they only referred to men, because they only saw men, then they would be discounting the women they didn't see. If anything they erred on the side of caution.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:58 PM
0

"that make our arguments seem legit" Um, what kind of phrasing is this? How about: that support and show proof to our claims. With the way you phrased it, it sounds like you are not really interested in the issues, but just looking for mud to sling.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:33 PM
3

And if they had interviewed a woman or multiple women, would we then hear how proportionally skewed their interviews were since most firefighters are men? Sounds like a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't. Men aren't being discounted here, but it seems like you are attempting to discount the contributions of women firefighters by saying there are none, with no proof to back up your claim. That is not what we do here.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:23 PM
16

That's what I took away from that.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 04:34 PM
6

For years I have been sick of seeing men portrayed in TV shows and commercials as the bumbling idiots, and women the complete opposite. Whenever there was a dispute between the man and woman, the man was always wrong, and it was always the man, that was kicked out of the bedroom. This merely opened my eyes to the issue, but I had no idea there was a MRM. It wasn't until a friend got me into reddit, and I saw articles hit the front page did I become aware of this place. Now it is my top reddit.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 03:07 AM
2

So if you continue with the math and divide the 75% earnings by the 78.57% work contribution, you get a 95% comparison to what men make. The wiki article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States This states that the wage gap works out to be 77%, which then when factored into hours worked, comes out at a wage that is 98% that of men. So there you have it, a 2% wage gap that only takes into account total pay vs hours worked. Add the other factors…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 02:51 AM
11

Well then I guess all those make up companies went out of business due to having no customers. Oh no, that's right, they didn't. They have plenty of customers, its a multi-billion dollar industry. So because you and your experiences are outside of the norm, then facts be damned, he must be wrong. How about, your logic doesn't make sense. Besides, its a fucking joke.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 02:31 AM
1

Yes I realize she was attacking him, and that is as wrong as every attack a guy perpetrates on a girl. What I am referring to is relevance to MR, or are you saying that ever attack a woman does on a man is relevant, if so then every attack a man does on a woman would be relevant to feminism, but that's not how it works. When I stated he didn't defend himself or hit back, I was referring to men being taught not to hit women, which is relevant.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 12:08 AM
12

"You guys stereotype feminists" say the person stereotyping MRAs.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 08:53 PM
5

Good info ↑
/r/MensRights07/09/11 08:42 PM
14

OMG the Cosmetics Gap!!
/r/MensRights07/09/11 08:41 PM
7

There is far too little information in her sign to make a judgement on whether or not she is to be believed. She doesn't give any actual information about the encounter, but only about reactions. To me that speaks volumes on two fronts. She is expecting everyone that reads the sign to believe her accusation as fact, and feels no need to provide any context. Second, her friends were in the best position to believe her claim, but they do not. If her friends, the people that most closely have an em…
/r/MensRights07/09/11 08:36 PM
1

But thanks for that, its the thought that counts.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 07:41 PM
2

I was referring to from her girl friends.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 07:38 PM
0

Well, I took it to mean, exactly as stated. What complications could arise if one develops feelings that are unrequited. I am not so jaded as to believe they meant to accuse anything with that question. I could be wrong, but prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 04:08 PM
9

I was waiting for the "Aren't you afraid they will rape you?" I am glad it wasn't one of the questions you were asked.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 02:55 PM
3

I would have to say I agree with you.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 02:31 PM
3

cj rossi said: "The consent was conditional upon the payment. If the payment was not given, then neither was the consent. It's still rape." This brings up a good question. Can consent be conditional, and as such can it be retracted after the fact? If so, is conditional consent any better/worse than coerced consent? Both of these are giving sex in exchange for action/inaction.
/r/MensRights07/09/11 01:35 AM
2

6: How can I keep the doctor from amputating my penis at his will without my consent, without giving me the facts, or allowing me to get a second opinion?
/r/MensRights06/09/11 11:29 PM
1

The only thing relevant in this video is that he didn't defend himself or knock her ass to the floor.
/r/MensRights06/09/11 11:24 PM
2

It is pretty clear he is taking advantage of her, but I see no reason for this to be posted here.
/r/MensRights06/09/11 11:18 PM
4

Even after being told that she recanted, even after being cleared by the police, most of the audience didn't believe they were innocent. They were operating under the suspicion that they forced or threatened her into recanting, and that they were/are guilty all along. No amount of proof was going to get in their way of what they already determined to be the "truth".
/r/MensRights06/09/11 10:34 PM
3

I have read this headline multiple times now, and finally opted to click the link. After reading the headline, I had assumed it was a joke. After reading the article I am floored. It kills me that the "proof" for the conclusion was based off a transgendered study. All this talk about the wage gap, they say they want equal pay for equal work, but in reality they want equal pay for less work, part time, more time off, and safer easier jobs.
/r/MensRights06/09/11 04:47 AM
23

I guess it's not gender discrimination if its not in the ad.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 06:11 PM
2

yeah, its pretty stupid. An action done by a man, lets call it a manction, that way we can use it in a derogatory way when we bitch about men.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 09:00 PM
3

I dated a girl in my early twenties that was pretty sure she was gay, but felt compelled to date boys. She informed me of this a few dates in, and I could see why she felt that way. We stayed friends for a while, and continued to "date", but it was really just us going out and checking out other women together. It was pretty cool, and neither of us got hurt from it.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 08:54 PM
3

Especially since woofoo didn't say "all women". I wouldn't take that as a generalization, but as the plural form of woman, simply meaning more than one.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 08:29 PM
6

If its to raise awareness, then why is it such a secret in the first place. Wow this is totally gonna cure some cancer.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 04:01 AM
5

All this talk about guys not being able to adapt, when society is actively kicking us in the face at every turn, and giving women a helping hand. Take away the rules, laws and system in place that are designed to give them the advantage and men the disadvantage and we will see where it settles out.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 03:56 AM
2

Thats only because they teamed up and attacked when men were ahead in the game. We assumed they were just going for the tie, but instead kept going till they pulled into the lead, now we are scrambling to get back into the game.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 03:52 AM
6

Definitely sounds like misandry to me.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 03:46 AM
10

Sorry but blood is not sexy not to mention sanitary. Misogyny? She needs to read the definition of the word before tossing it around so easily. She talks about how its natural, well so is poop, and I am pretty sure I don't want to have sex with someone while they are pooping either. Heaven forbid we have preferences. Fuck this Bitch.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 03:40 AM
3

Like I said it's sleazy, but that doesn't make it rape. If he had went in for a kiss and she slapped him, or fought him off, I think he would have left. In either case, its highly unlikely that it ever happened in the first place.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 03:23 AM
3

This is where we differ. I don't think it is fairly obvious as you state, that she didn't want to have sex with him. If this was the case she would have rejected his advances which she did not seem to do at all. There is no basis for your claim that she reluctantly capitulated. We have no information on that she may have enthusiastically capitulated, it is simply not stated how into it she was. But we do know that according to the story, she was 'making out' while she was on top of him pinning h…
/r/MensRights02/09/11 08:25 PM
5

He was being persistent, and she was being inconsistent. She told him to leave, he kissed her, then they made out for a while. Nothing says "I told you to leave" like making out with them. No means no, except when it means yes, or when it means try harder, I am playing hard to get, because I don't want to look like a slut, while reserving the right to allow no to mean anything else at any given time, until it means no again, maybe. Yeah, that's pretty straight forward, I can't imagine why people…
/r/MensRights02/09/11 04:56 PM
3

Genetics is not the question, its about the legality of everything else that comes into play. Real life isn't black and white.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 02:36 AM
0

You are confusing the right to charge whatever you want with being a douche, they aren't mutually exclusive. Edit: Please do not take that as me accusing you of being a douche, that was not my intent. I just reread my post and wanted to clarify.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 02:02 AM
4

If it is true and happened word for word as he described it, I would say no. Lack of force, or coercion, as for her being drunk, that's a gray area. How drunk was she? What is the legal point in which she is no longer able to give consent? This doesn't even take into account that in all other actions, being drunk is no relief from responsibility, but somehow consent is different. All this while it might not even be true. Now if she came forward and accused him of rape, and had a different story …
/r/MensRights02/09/11 02:00 AM
-1

So you are saying you would do it if you were in great need, desperate, and absolutely needed to have it done. Otherwise you wouldn't, unless you make far more than $75 an hour yourself. That is called being taken advantage of. It is not reasonable to charge that amount. That is why it is insulting.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:46 AM
0

Would you pay someone $75 an hour to shovel snow?
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:20 AM
0

It is insulting when you are soliciting for it. If someone just asked you what you would charge it wouldn't be, but that is not the case.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:13 AM
4

How do you feel about the woman who got child support from the guy she gave a blow job to, and then used his semen to inseminate herself without his knowledge? Is that so black and white?
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:11 AM
1

Social security benefits are given to children under the age of 18 after the death of a parent.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:07 AM
1

Labor is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Manual labor jobs don't pay big buck because anyone can do them. While you might not do it for less than $75 an hour, it does not mean the job is worth that until you can find someone to pay that amount.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:00 AM
6

What happens when the kid turns 18 if this charade goes on that long, will he be able to stop paying her? Seriously this is crazy.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 09:25 PM
13

I guess that goes to show that child support isn't really about supporting the child after all, but an entitlement to the mother.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 09:20 PM
6

The problem is you can replace the word husband, or man, with the word slave and it wont change the context of the story.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 09:18 PM
3

The problem is you can replace the word husband, or man, with the word slave and it not really change the context of the story. She is only raising the question because she needs something done for her, and that's the whole point of the article, "what can he do for me".
/r/MensRights01/09/11 09:17 PM
0

It definitely doesn't sound like just an hours worth of work, but $150 is just as insulting, unless it would really take 2 people 3-4 hours to clear. But, yeah, $20 an hour per person is more than fair, in my opinion.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 09:09 PM
1

I gotcha I misunderstood the use of "you".
/r/MensRights01/09/11 07:07 PM
3

I am absolutely all for men's reproductive rights, and it's great that they thought ahead and she decided to go through with having his child after he died. His reproductive rights aren't in question here, its his SSI benefits that are in question. Reproductive intentions seem to be what this is all about. I mentioned estate, or inheritance because you can't set a precedence for SSI benefits without it affecting everything else as well. If the child is deemed to be legally his and entitled to be…
/r/MensRights01/09/11 06:56 PM
2

They became not his, upon death.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 04:59 PM
5

I don't see a problem with this. In my opinion this would be the same as agreeing with the legality of the woman who got child support from the guy she gave a blow job to, and then used his semen to inseminate herself. Both instances should have been denied. To clarify, once the semen is extracted from the body, it is in my opinion that person(s) involved in consented use of the semen are solely responsible. Whether that be a couple trying to conceive by artificial insemination or a lonely woman…
/r/MensRights01/09/11 04:50 PM
4

Half of the article seems to be guys making small talk with her which she refers to mansplaining. Yeah, the guy in the gym, he is likely trying to break the ice to ask her out, but that's mansplaining evidently. I love how through the other half the article she pits his "mansplaining" against what she should be calling her "womansplaining". She chastizes men for believing they are right, then goes on to believe she is right.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 04:06 PM
13

ZOMG problem A is so much worse than problem B, we should never ever ever talk or do anything about problem B until we fix problem A. As for still having to use soap and water, you are waltzing right over the point. Women have far larger genital hygiene concerns, but they can deal with it simply with soap and water, but guys, well they need to be cut to ensure proper hygiene.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 01:42 PM
5

Grow up.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 02:08 AM
12

Proof that there is a wage gap. I make almost 4 times as much as my wife, and we both have the same amount of schooling. Of course, she works about 30 hours a week at a job she has had for 1.5 years, and hadn't worked for the previous 7 years. Where as I work 40 hours a week at one job that I have had for 12 years, and 30 hours a week at a 2nd job. But that's all besides the point, she must be getting discriminated against. It's the Wage Gap, I tells ya.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 08:36 PM
6

There we go using research and facts to disprove what they know in their hearts to be the truth.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 08:25 PM
1

What is the connection here to Men's rights?
/r/MensRights31/08/11 02:48 PM
6

Nice, I am sure a few of them need it to be explained to them like that.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 12:34 AM
2

I agree it's not a very good example, and I am sure the points total will reflect that.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 06:20 PM
2

Because this lie is supposed to not exist, ever, and because it supposedly doesn't exist, every woman that claims rape should be believed and every man should be treated as guilty upon accusation of rape.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 05:27 PM
0

Lets not forget that many women objectify men by treating them like wallets.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 04:56 PM
1

Holy shit, anything really is possible.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 10:53 PM
1

I think this is where the disconnect is: A painful existence < non-existence < a happy existence. I would see non-existence as worse, and death sentence is worse, and I would be willing to bet most would agree, since so many criminals fight tooth and nail to avoid the death penalty.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 09:14 PM
1

My point is when a man chooses not to be a father, the child can still have a happy life with its mother. When a woman chooses not to be a mother, the child ceases to exist. Given the choice, the child would prefer the former, yet it is the former which is looked down upon, while the latter is praised as empowerment.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 05:53 PM
1

Where in the OP is this admission?
/r/MensRights29/08/11 01:26 PM
9

With that reasoning, if the man wants a child and the woman doesn't she should be forced to have the child, hand it over to the father and then pony up the child support payments. After all, her having an abortion would deny the father the right to raise his child, and stalls his right to fatherhood. Somehow I don't think they would like that.
/r/MensRights28/08/11 08:14 PM
0

No that would be man, or mankind, not men.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 08:56 PM
2

I couldn't get through the whole thing. This guy is overboard. There is a point to be made there, but he is coming off as bitter and spiteful, to the point of misogyny. As part of the MRA community, I would not let this guy speak on my behalf.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 05:01 PM
1

I do not agree with this, but I bare no ill will to those who wish to identify themselves differently.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 03:59 PM
-4

This
/r/MensRights27/08/11 03:57 PM
1

I am glad you see my point. You would prefer to be a child of a single mother than an aborted fetus. A woman putting her needs above the fetus' needs = abortion A man putting his needs above the fetus' needs = single mother
/r/MensRights27/08/11 03:47 PM
1

He should have the choice to opt out, just like she has the choice to opt out. They both did the same act, they both took the same risks, why is it only her that gets a choice to do anything about it, and its his "duty" to abide by her choice. You wouldn't want that the other way around would you; the man getting to choose whether or not she has the child or has an abortion?
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:17 AM
1

I can agree with the rationale of making it equal. Whether it be give both the choice, or remove choice from both. People may not like it, but it would be equal.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:15 AM
3

Tell that to women who have abortions.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:13 AM
1

"its bigoted attitudes demonize and alienate women" Explain what about this comic is bigoted. How dare men want the same choice a woman is afforded. If that is an offensive to women, take your privilege and go.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:11 AM
2

A man and a woman, both engage int he same act, she gets pregnant, and somehow it's all his fault. She has all the choices, he has all the blame. That is not logical at all.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:02 AM
2

This is a failure of society to properly educate young WOMAN that when you have intercourse with a MAN you have to be 100% OK with a child being a potential result. Wow, see how that works? Why do you feel the rules should be different based solely on gender? They should have been able to opt out of having the child. If the mother decided then to bring the child into the world without the financial aid of the father, its her choice. She is not forced to have the child, he should not be forced to…
/r/MensRights27/08/11 10:57 AM
1

poor vs dead? You choose which is worse. Let me make it easy for you. There are plenty of happy children with one or no parents, there are 0 happy aborted fetuses.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 10:51 AM
2

It is ridiculous to allow one sex the ability to opt out after the fact and not allow the other to do so. If the father opts out and the mother chooses to have the child anyway, that's up to her, and she is deciding to put her child through that. Remember, its her body her choice, she needs to take responsibility for that choice.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 10:49 AM
2

I guess we should ban abortions then, since women are also "accepting the possibility that that might result in a child" no need to allow them to choose. As a woman, don't allow a dick to be stuck in you. But oh wait that's different, right?
/r/MensRights27/08/11 10:47 AM
1

On one hand women can put their needs above that of the unborn child by removing it's entire existence, but the father, while not doing that, can't choose to not have anything to do with it If you were to choose, between poor and dead, which would you choose?
/r/MensRights27/08/11 10:43 AM
1

Tell that to the guys in jail for not paying child support.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:31 PM
1

Legal issues is the point.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:22 PM
0

The comic is stating that its all well and good in the world for a woman to choose to not be a mother, and by doing so she is glorified. However if a man chooses to not be a father, he is ridiculed and disgraced.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:19 PM
3

Well by that reasoning the man did not help create a child, he only helped create a fetus. He then chose to have nothing more to do with the fetus. It was the mother and the mother alone that chose to create the child from the fetus and therefore the father should not be responsible for something he did not create. If she chooses to have the child she does so knowing the father isn't involved, and if she cannot provide for it, she was neglectful for having the child.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:11 PM
0

Go get abortion banned then come back to me to discuss this. It falls under: can't have your cake and eat it too.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:05 PM
2

This is the problem, than people automatically assume a friendship between a man and a woman, has to involve him trying to sleep with her.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 07:29 PM
4

Edit: sorry read that wrong. I agree.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 07:18 PM
1

That's the point, at the time the father chooses it is still a fetus. Why it should magically change because she chose to have it born?
/r/MensRights26/08/11 07:12 PM
-1

True, but you would also have to take into consideration the times when the father isn't aware of the pregnancy at all and the child is 3 before he finds out.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 06:38 PM
-7

They are right, abortion is far worse. :D
/r/MensRights26/08/11 06:35 PM
-2

Rights of the child certainly do not supersede the rights of the mother, in cases of abortion, why should it be different for the father? Right?
/r/MensRights26/08/11 06:34 PM
3

one million times, this!
/r/MensRights26/08/11 05:24 PM
26

This picture depicts both making their choice before birth. She can choose to abort, he can't choose not to be a father at all, he doesn't get that choice.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 04:31 PM
16

I saw this a few years back and saved a copy. I haven't seen it here, and didn't find it on a search, so I figured I would share it.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 02:30 PM
9

Line of the century paraphrased: Don't expect to get special treatment for having a pair of tits and a vagina, unless you want to be treated like a pair of tits and a vagina.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 04:08 AM
7

I regret that I have but one upvote to give. That was great, simple, and to the point, and light enough to get people thinking. Thanks for linking it.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 03:58 AM
3

Personally I am against abortion, but as for my stance on this, I would choose equal rights. I would be ok with it going either way, so long as both parties have the same rights. Either they both get a choice, or they both don't. Outside of that, it doesn't matter to me.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 02:50 AM
2

Religious concerns should not dictate law. If she is religious and believes she should not have an abortion, that is her choice. If he is not, he should not be bound by her religion.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 02:47 AM
5

If women get to choose to not be a parent after conception, men should also have that choice. The woman can take that into consideration when she chooses. Saying that he should have thought of that before he had sex, then why couldn't she think of that before sex, after all its her body her choice, her responsibility. Point is, it is sexist to let one gender choose to be a parent or not, while the other one is forced into it. You wouldn't want women forced into being mothers, then why would you …
/r/MensRights26/08/11 02:44 AM
1

You seem to have a problem understanding a patients rights. It does not matter what happened after, or whether or not it needed to be done. Get that through your head. People decline "necessary" procedures every day, it's their right to do so. Given the information he may have decided to decline, or may have decided to go through with it. The problem is that he wasn't given the choice. Everything else is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 06:27 PM
3

equalist sounds like it would be the most fitting term, but FRA, and MRA when only focusing on their own issues
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:56 PM
5

That was the entire context of the exchange. Someone asking for advice on why their man doesn't hold the door open for them, and her responding with how to reprimand their man, and train him like a dog. Ask Laskas is a section in Readers Digest where people request advice. After this entry, it begins on another submission for advice.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:49 PM
4

She was not joking, it was not "tongue in cheek". She was being clear and concise on how to reprimand a man and train him like a dog. As others had posted, if roles were reversed it would have been misogynistic and the writer would have gotten some personal time off.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:46 PM
0

This does not belong here, its not a Men's Rights issue. Yes I know the story behind it, take it elsewhere.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:40 PM
0

He consented to a circumcision, that is all. It doesn't matter what happened after the fact. He was not in imminant threat of dying, he could have and should have been awoken to make an informed decision. He had the right to make the decision, they stole that from him. Is it worth 16 million, likely not, but it sets a precedent.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:34 PM
4

This sort of joke is not acceptable here, Sharon Osbourne.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:02 PM
1

I don't agree. It doesn't matter what its condition, he did not agree to have it done, they did it anyway without his consent. How it looked, and his educational level are irrelevant. He still has rights. Now if you want to claim that he is incapable of making an informed decision, thats besides the point, but that also should have been done before they removed it. In fact, if that is the case and it looked that bad, they should have had that discussion well before surgery. The only possible exc…
/r/MensRights25/08/11 04:00 PM
3

Wow that was a whole lot of BS for one website.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:50 PM
4

They simply need to not publicize rape accusations until after conviction if at all.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:15 PM
2

I don't care how depressed you are, it's no excuse for killing a child.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:09 PM
1

Fuck everything about that. I guess this means from this point forward, if you are going in for any procedure where you are unconscious, you need to specify that you do not consent to the removal in part or whole of any other organ without further consultation with yourself or next of kin, short of immediate imminant death.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:05 AM
3

I see your point, please see mine. They do not feel they are inferior, as they see it as an outside force that is putting them at the disadvantage, and that the disadvantage is not coming from within. For example, employment in a warehouse. The employer prefers men, as they can be expected to carry heavier loads due to their general larger size and muscle strength. This is a situation where the average woman does not have an equal chance of being hired as the average man. W/=M However the femini…
/r/MensRights25/08/11 02:50 AM
3

Disadvantage does not only affect women, nobody said that, but since we were discussing the mind of the feminist, we weren't taking into account disadvantage for men. But to pretend that women are > or = to men in all facets is as ridiculous as saying men are > or = to women in all facets. D goes both ways, yet G has only really taken to stepping in and helping when its W-D, regardless if they are ~, <, > or = to M. This is what we hope to change, but we need not exaggerate and lose credibility.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 02:35 AM
3

Don't be obtuse. If you are saying that women are only equal or advantaged in any given situation you are being willfully ignorant. Just like men are disadvantaged in some areas, women are as well. The issue is not where G evens things out, its where G or G+D sustains the advantage.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 01:57 AM
4

As for my comment, that doesn't matter. I am speaking in general. When anyone in any context says a man got a woman pregnant, it implies it is his fault, he did something to her. Unless she is raped, she had just as much fault as he does (if not more). It needs to be stated differently to avoid the implication. As for what the OP is referring to, I didn't know what he was referring to, so I had asked in a previous post, speculated that it was about contraceptive sabotage, and was downvoted to th…
/r/MensRights25/08/11 01:53 AM
3

I asked that and got downvoted. Only thing we came up with was if you lie about vasectomy, or sabotage contraception. Otherwise she is accepting the risk.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 09:04 PM
17

It's simple, men are considered perverted, pedophile, woman beating, rapists until they prove otherwise.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 08:49 PM
10

I agree, exposing a hypocrisy or double standard is a mens rights issue, simply pointing out something bad that someone did that happened to be a woman is not.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 08:43 PM
1

Ok, as requested. The original story does not belong in this sub, neither does this one.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 06:03 PM
3

I agree, but the point, I inferred, was to try to simplify for ease of understanding.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 06:01 PM
1

:D I wondered about that phrasing. ↑ for civil discourse
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:32 PM
1

A man and a woman both equally drunk have sex, she regrets it in the morning, he is charged and convicted of rape. Anyone who finds his actions acceptable means they support rape. The law is not infallible, especially in gray areas such as this. In either case, the poster you are referring to is not advocating child abuse, he is merely dismissing the whole story as not a men's rights issue, which it isn't
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:29 PM
6

"I just think that women should not all as a group be forced to go from the extreme of housewife in the 50s to lifts her own heavy stuff-CEO-holds open the door for men -power woman." I can agree with this, but you also must agree that men have to deal with the wide array of everything in between, and are expected to adapt at a moments notice, otherwise be labeled as a social neanderthal, or an oppressive misogynist. Men have varying preferences as well, and are judged by them, yet when women ar…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:18 PM
3

"I just think that women should not all as a group be forced to go from the extreme of housewife in the 50s to lifts her own heavy stuff-CEO-holds open the door for men -power woman." I can agree with this, but you also must agree that men have to deal with the wide array of everything in between, and are expected to adapt at a moments notice, otherwise be labeled as a social neanderthal, or an oppressive misogynist. Men have varying preferences as well, and are judged by them, yet when women ar…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:18 PM
1

The article in question was not about schools, find an article about that, post it then make your comment in that thread. Furthermore, not everyone agrees that it is considered child abuse. Take into account that people consider spanking your child abuse. I do not agree with the actions taken by the adoptive mother, but there is a line between parents rights to discipline their child how they see fit and that discipline being overboard and abusive, and that line is wide, gray and blurry.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 05:08 PM
16

I would like to submit that Men do not get Women pregnant, but that Men assist Women in getting pregnant. The former assumes women are helpless victims of the act and that men are responsible. Unless we are talking about forcible rape, this isn't the case.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:56 PM
8

That is not true, men as a whole is commonly expected. Such as, men as a whole are expected to pay for a date, and open doors. There is 0 problems with having a couple decide to have the woman stay home and bare children, while the man supports her. My wife stayed home with our children for 7 years while I supported the family. Nobody is saying this option is closed. That isn't even an issue, well until divorce comes along, or she begins working and can't seem to understand why she isn't making …
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:41 PM
6

Classic
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:31 PM
2

It's a parenting issue not a men's rights issue. It just as easily could have been a little girl. There is nothing specific to this child having a penis that is being referenced. The only possible thing to make this a Men's rights issue, is that if roles were reversed and it was a man that did this to a child, the punishment would have likely been worse, but that is merely speculation. You are whining about the use of his term "little bastard", when technically it is likely 100% a factual statem…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:30 PM
11

The problem here is identifying only as a woman, while enjoying the equality and advantage that feminism has brought you. You can't pick and choose to not support feminism when it would put you at a disadvantage, all while enjoying its other advantages. Look at it from the other side. We Men, are being told that women are equal in every aspect, but must still treat them special by holding open doors and paying for meals, but then better not expect anything for the specialized treatment. it comes…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:18 PM
6

I believe they are referring to another variable absent in your equation, in which the G would offset. For the sake of argument lets call that Disadvantage. The equation would then be. W-D+G = M, where M=W and G=D. I am not saying I agree, I am just clarifying that for you. The issue that comes into play, and where the real problem is, would be when the disadvantage is not present or swings the other way. W+G /= M and W+D+G /= M
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:04 PM
7

Feminism is not about equality from all angles. It is about resolving inequality only on issue where women are at a disadvantage. The dictionary may say one thing, but their actions speak otherwise. Until there are feminist rallies for equal rights for men in areas where women are severely advantaged they are not truly about equality. This is not the case. Some feminists may believe they should, but the feminism movement is and has been only about removing disadvantages for women. Any true equal…
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:01 PM
3

Oh you mean like I originally mentioned, sabotaging contraception?
/r/MensRights24/08/11 03:47 PM
0

Edit: Nice edit after the fact, btw. I would guess its possible that a man could lie and say he had a condom on, and she just be oblivious to it. I however think she would be more involved in the act to know for sure. It's hardly comparable to a woman being able to lie about being on the pill, or having used a miriad of other undetectable birth control options. I guess the only real way would be if he swore he was sterile or had a vasectomy.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 03:33 PM
0

I would have to assume this has to do with sabotaging contraception? Outside of that, I am honestly not sure how a man can get a woman pregnant without her consent (without raping her that is).
/r/MensRights24/08/11 02:42 PM
2

Don't you know, its offensive to have preferences. How in the hell dare you, you untamed beast!
/r/MensRights24/08/11 12:17 AM
1

That is true, it has its pros and cons.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 03:23 PM
23

If you are gonna post a story anonymously on the internet you have to be ready to have people not believe you. If they can't handle that, they shouldn't post their story. Only an idiot believes everything they read.
/r/MensRights22/08/11 11:43 PM
3

Sorry but "no" just doesnt cut it. But it is clear you are sexist. Both the man and woman are drunk and have sex, why is he the rapist. She had sex with him and he was not able to consent, why doesn't that make her a rapist as well? She had sex without consent, by your earlier definition that would make her a rapist.
/r/MensRights20/08/11 10:43 PM
6

you are a sexist idiot. In your words, if you are drunk you cannot consent to have sex. Therefore if both parties are drunk, and had sex, neither party could consent, meaning both parties had sex with someone unable to consent. Either both parties are guilty or both parties are innocent. The woman does not become the default victim and the man the perpetrator unless you have an agenda, which is clear you do.
/r/MensRights20/08/11 10:35 PM
5

Yeah, well atleast there you would get argument. Here I think you would just get agreement. Any argument against it would likely revolve around trust, cost, and it being nobody else's business.
/r/MensRights19/08/11 03:01 PM
1

I think this is the wrong subredit for this question. You are not going to get the sort of discussion you are looking for here. This question should be posted in feminism or 2x.
/r/MensRights19/08/11 02:34 PM
4

Simply comes down to; why does everything a woman does have to be about empowering other women?
/r/MensRights18/08/11 07:36 PM
2

Relevant: a must see. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98f3IavuEgQ
/r/MensRights17/08/11 01:04 AM
4

perhaps a hint
/r/MensRights15/08/11 09:02 PM
1

I am sensing some sarcasm.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:04 PM
6

I am sensing some sarcasm.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:02 PM
2

Sensational maybe, but what part is unreasonable? Expecting women to be accountable for their actions and decisions while drunk, just as a man is accountable for his actions and decisions while he is drunk? Please do explain.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 02:41 PM
7

Because of the way the post was phrased being raped was like having your chocolate forcibly taken from you without your consent, but also could be construed as being force fed chocolate against your will. Considering the post mentions only one gender has the chocolate, it would be dependent upon which gender is being raped.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 02:38 PM
2

That's a whole set of mixed emotions there. I hope you all appreciate it, lol.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 02:17 PM
3

If I could get my wife to be money-savvy and stop her damn wreckless spending, it might save our personal economy.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 02:59 AM
1

She should have gotten her money back from the sounds of it.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 08:42 PM
3

That was my take from this as well.
/r/MensRights14/07/11 06:35 PM
13

But but but , false accusations don't happen, ever.
/r/MensRights14/07/11 06:26 PM
6

"Men sleeping around is looked at as an achievement because that man has convinced or attracted many women." That's why it's called 'getting lucky'.
/r/MensRights09/07/11 03:29 AM
2

I simply could not read it passed this line: "live her life as long as she can before her first sexual assault, or to increase the amount of time spent between her last sexual assault and her next one"
/r/MensRights09/07/11 03:07 AM
2

I was thinking the same thing up until it said she confessed to it.
/r/MensRights03/07/11 04:54 AM
1

I am not sure I would agree, I guess it depends on what you mean by majority. 95% vs 5% and 51% vs 49% are both majorities. One gender or the other will make up the majority, its just whether or not its a vast majority. After that being said, I do not think it would be a vast majority of men if as you state "we got rid of every other reason". But there is hardly any way to prove either point.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 06:21 PM
9

Could it be due to there being far more support available for poor women? No that can't be it at all.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 03:51 PM
3

They should be treated the same as if it were 3 boys doing it to a girl. Arrested, thrown in jail, charged with assault, sexual misconduct and attempted rape, and put on sex offender list. They should have made an example out of these girls, instead they made it an example of what is ok to do to boys.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 08:58 PM
1

Same one.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 08:55 PM
2

This makes me sick every time I see it.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 08:52 PM
19

Waaaah, I am being treated like the men, and not special like a woman should be.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 06:41 PM
14

It is a sad state of affairs.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 04:45 PM
3

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Women do not want to be forced into being mothers, but the sure don't have a problem forcing men into being fathers. They see it as her body, her choice, his fault, where it probably instead should be her body her choice her responsibility.
/r/MensRights22/06/11 07:34 PM
1

I shouldn't have, but I laughed.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 03:33 PM
6

Probably bit down on them and just ripped the sack off with her teeth. Not a very pleasant thing to think about.
/r/MensRights16/06/11 04:51 PM
2

I am not saying that people can't lie and screw up your life. Rape is probably the biggest thing you can claim with absolutely no shred proof, and everyone will believe you, and ostracize the target.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 02:05 PM
1

if
/r/MensRights14/06/11 02:02 PM
3

How about we keep your story straight? We were talking allegations of not giving meds, vs allegations of rape. Not nearly the same no where close to the same. Now you are changing it up. If you think these allegations are similar, you need meds. Even if you actually forgot to give meds, and someone died, you may lose your job, but I don't think you would see the inside of a prison, rape, yup, you will, and you will probably get raped as a bonus.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 02:54 AM
5

If you are comparing a rape allegation to a "I didn't get my medication" allegation, as if they are somehow in the same ballpark, you are nuts.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 01:54 AM
7

It all comes down to covering your ass. Just like there are some men out there that will rape women, there are some women out there that will falsely claim rape. As a woman there are things you can do to minimize the risk of being raped, as a man there are things you can do to minimize the risk of being falsely accused. The difference for a female nurse, is the likelyhood of being falsely accused of rape, or sexual assault. As it is men are far less likely to report being raped and when they do …
/r/MensRights13/06/11 05:22 PM
4

because "so and so didn't give me my medication" wont land you in jail, on the sex offenders list, fired from your job, and your life ruined.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 04:41 PM
9

When I was a volunteer fireman, every time we transported a female patient in the ambulance and we did not have a female EMT on board, we had to make sure we called in the mileage from the scene and again at the hospital. We did this for a bit of CYA because there had been publicized cases where female patients (elsewhere) claimed that they were taken elsewhere and raped.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 04:39 PM
2

It's not that they can't be alone, its that they aren't covered when they are, and if the patient claims anything they are screwed.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 03:50 PM
8

yeah but remember, she wasn't the one that got tossed out.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 05:22 PM
2

That may be the case, but then why is there no all you can drink cups for men? Simple, because they want to attract more women to the bar which would attract more men (who have to pay full price). The problem is that based on gender alone, there is a price difference. If you went to a restaurant and saw in the menu that a steak dinner was $10 for women but $20 for men the disparity is a bit more obvious.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 05:21 PM
5

Actually I do not think they are entitled to the same lifestyle in both homes. With a 50/50 split no money should be changing hands.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 08:38 PM
1

It is because by our nature we are all in competition with each other. So when we see another man beaten down by the system, we see it as one less competitor.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 06:49 PM
3

That seems silly, 50/50 split and child support still getting paid one direction or another.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 06:08 PM
3

This is why the porn industry does so well.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 02:42 AM
1

Its more like 0.003% transgendered compared to 3-5% breast augmentation, but have at, I have made my point.
/r/MensRights10/05/11 01:11 AM
2

I personally do not care for breast implants. But I think it has to do with expectations. I wouldn't expect that I would ever find myself in the position of dating someone who is secretly transgendered. The % of the population that are transgendered is such a small amount the odds are unbelievably against it. It wouldn't even cross my mind as in the realm of possibility. Because of this, it wouldn't make sense to put the burden on the extremely high majority to ask. However with breast augmentat…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 09:06 PM
1

Funny I had the same exact thought.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 04:36 PM
4

Nice strawman there, setting up that if they don't sympathize with you, they must be dumb. I understand your plight, but you do not seem to care how they might feel about the situation, and instead choose to be selfish. Unfortunately this is your situation, they didn't make you this way, they didn't force it on you, you should not through deceit be forcing it on them. I have no problem with your right to choose who you want to be, or how you want the world to see you. I really don't, but if I we…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:53 PM
0

No. Its not about rape, it's like you said, if they would have otherwise not known, what is the big deal right? Well the truth is a big deal. It makes a difference. If you go through life thinking you can do whatever you want so long as nobody knows the truth, you are an asshole. And that is what we are talking about here. We are not talking about legal obligation to someone about a sex change, because there is no legal obligation. We are talking about a moral obligation to. If they do not want …
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:41 PM
0

I don't feel it is anything like breast augmentation, because they were female before and after the surgery. I simply do not feel that transgendered surgery changes actually changes ones sex, only the appearance. A transgendered woman is still a guy in my book. That is how I feel, and I can bet I am not in the minority.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:34 PM
5

"I have more faith in men than that." Don't, because I am willing to bet that it matters to most, besides if you really do have that faith, then there is no harm in telling them.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:30 PM
-1

So basically what you are saying is what you don't know won't hurt you. Think raping a woman that is passed out at a party. When she wakes up she won't know it happened, so nobody should tell her, she "would have never otherwise known - what's the big deal?"
/r/MensRights09/05/11 03:19 AM
1

who is to say they do not find out during. And simply being attracted to someone before you find out, does not make it ok. Think of it this way. A transvestite at a bar, has spent a great deal of time and/or money to look like a girl. A guy may be attracted to him, assuming he is in fact a girl. He gets him home for some sexy time, finds the package, and what, should be ok with having sex with him because he found him attractive before knowing the truth? I don't think so. The deception is simply…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 02:37 AM
1

I wasn't comparing it, I was simply stating multiple things I would not like to do with my penis. I would also not like to stick it in a pickle slicer or slam it in a car door. The reason I stated it as I did, is to point out that I don't have any other issue with the transgendered, because every likes to say that if I don't crave sex with transgendered I must be a bigot. That is not the case, it just isnt for me. I don't want to have sex with gay men either, does that make me a homophobe?
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:39 AM
2

It does not make more sense for 2 reasons. Not being transgendered is normal, and people are assumed to be this way. The 2nd I would argue that the truth matters to more people than not. If it did not matter to the majority of people, then there would be far less risk of discussing it up front. But there in lies the problem. They know this, and don't want to chance telling anyone due to how they might react. It more than likely matters to their partner, and they are willfully hiding the truth. Y…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:33 AM
1

We simply have differing opinions then.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:27 AM
10

I am glad that you found a way out of the situation you were placed in, and it takes guts to come here and talk about it, so I commend you for that. You were not comfortable with having a mans body, so you made a decision to change that. I however feel that while informing your sex partners about your situation before the encounter may be hard, if you do not, you are placing your sexual partner in a position that may be the worst day of their lives when they find out. Nobody is asking for sympat…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 12:48 AM
3

You are not me, you can no more assume how I would feel about it, than I can about how you felt/feel about it. We are not the same person, we are not alike. I however have a good understanding of how I feel and how I would feel given a specific situation.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 12:18 AM
1

What he doesn't know wont hurt him, was your whole point of the transgendered not having to tell their sex partner. You may not have stated it directly but that is what you are getting at. I don't recognize that a transgendered woman's status is that of a woman. Can I make that more clear? Not you or anyone else is going to make me believe differently. Put an orange peel on an apple, its still an apple.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 12:09 AM
2

Nowhere did I state they do this for the sole purpose of having sex, with me or anyone else, but while sex is not the motivation, it does happen. Be sarcastic all you want, but it does occur.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 12:04 AM
1

I can't help if you are not able to understand how closely related they are.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 12:01 AM
3

I am saying I do not want to have sex with them based on their body parts alone. Get it through your head.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 11:59 PM
1

I just took your reasoning and took it to the next step to show you how foolish you sound.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 11:57 PM
0

If you say so. I simply do not feel that a transgendered woman is in fact a woman. Therefore I do not want to have sex with one. My preference if you don't like it TDB. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 11:56 PM
2

I don't care if you think it is offensive. I consider it the be the truth. And yes, all the fake pickup artists are just as bad. Look up rape by fraud, and it covers exactly that. I am not afraid of them, I simply don't want to stick my penis in them. I don't want to stick my penis in a cat or dog either, but that doesn't mean I am against them existing. Simply put, if they cant respect allowing others to make that informed decision, they don't deserve any respect from others. They are being hyp…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 03:21 PM
2

Thats the whole point. They are applying the value to the work the mother does. What you do for one, you have to do for the other.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 03:17 PM
11

I do not concede that a preference makes you bigoted. I prefer that the women I have sex with have a vagina. Simply because I am fooled into thinking what they have is a vagina, doesn't mean that I wanted it to be that way. It simply means that I was attracted to what I believed to be true, and not the actuality. No different than a transvestite seducing a man. He is all for it until he finds the package. Should he just say ok and continue to go through with it, because he thought the tranny was…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 07:39 AM
3

If their own gender mattered so much to them they would go about changing it, you would think the would believe should matter to the person having sex with them.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 07:23 AM
2

I do not concede the point that if she is reptilian alien inside yet self-identifies as a woman, that she is not duping anyone. Dupe tr.v. duped, dup·ing, dupes To deceive (an unwary person). See Synonyms at deceive. It is pretty straight forward. If on the inside she is not what she appears to be on the outside, she is infact "dupping". Do you believe on Halloween all the little kids are actually ghosts, zombies and what not as well, so long as they identify themselves a such?
/r/MensRights08/05/11 07:20 AM
3

Here I will help you understand this. A transgendered woman has sex with a man without him knowing her gender status, what he doesn't know wont hurt him, right? Say a guy has sex with a girl while she is drunk and barely conscious. She doesn't know what is going on, physically she might even have enjoyed it. She doesn't remember anything, as far as she knows, nothing bad happened, she is not traumatized in the least the next day because she doesn't have a clue. Now tell them both the truth, simi…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 07:14 AM
10

They are omitting the fact that they still have a penis, although surgically altered. They are omitting the fact that they are a man, that has been hormonally, chemically and surgically altered to look like a woman with the expressed intent of tricking the world into believing they are infact a woman. No different than a man pretending to be rich, or caring or pretending to be whatever he needs to to get laid. Is it legal, yes, is he an asshole for doing it, yes.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:54 AM
7

"Yes, it is a dick thing to do to not tell someone you are trans. Yes it is wrong to do so." That is the answer to the question posed, that is all. I am very glad to hear you would inform your partner. I would also imagine that most transgendered people would do this. I am not automatically assuming the worst, nor prejudging based on this. As for the rest, I simply am not comfortable considering transgendered women as being women. I bear you no ill will otherwise. I just don't see it that way. T…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:45 AM
8

It actually falls into what is called rape by fraud. This is deemed by the court not to be illegal, but that doesn't make it moral or ethical.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:37 AM
18

How is it bigoted? If it is, then wouldnt any preference be bigoted? Being a bigot implies that I would view them subpar in comparison with other people. I don't, I just don't want to be tricked into having sex with them either. I personally believe that being transgendered doesn't actually make you the other gender, but just makes you appear that way. I therefore view all "transgendered women" as men. I would no sooner want to have sex with a man, than a transgendered woman. I don't hate men, a…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:35 AM
5

Funny, I view it as different, and relevant. I would want to know that the person I am looking to be with, has a surgically inverted penis. I would no more want to rub my penis up against another guys penis as I would want to put my penis inside another mans penis. This is my preference and my right. If they want to be recognized as their own sexual orientation, fine. I bear them no ill will, I just don't want to have sex wit them.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:28 AM
5

Its not an analogy, its an actual case. The issue is she consented to have sex with him and his penis, not knowing he wasn't her husband. He didn't tell her otherwise. It is because of this the rape charges were dropped. She assumed he was her husband, just like someone would assume a transgendered is a woman. She gave her consent based on this assumption. It is very much a similar situation, the arguements line up. Was she harmed, no, if she didn't find out, would she have been upset? no. What …
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:24 AM
10

So you feel its ok to willfully deceive someone into having sex with them. While it is just shy of being illegal, does not make it right, or moral. As for informed consent it has to do with having all the relevant facts before providing consent. You simply don't see it as relevant, where as I do. You feel its the same as in your analogy. I do not. I do not feel that simply surgically inverting your penis turns you into a woman. If it did, there would be no such term as transgendered woman, as th…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:19 AM
5

You see, your bigot theory falls apart because I am not against them having their right to their orientation. I just don't want to be tricked into having sex with them. Just like I wouldn't want to be tricked into letting a gay man give me a BJ. For you to say I don't have that right, is surprising coming from a "rape survivor" The reason I would rather be raped by a woman than be tricked into having sex with a transgendered is because view them both as rape. I would rather be raped by a woman t…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:11 AM
4

I am not the one pretending to be something I am not. I am being deceived. This is just shy of rape by fraud, and only because the law in its current form doesn't cover it. Simply because its not illegal does not make it moral or ethical. Every other "contract" law is subject to fraud in the inducement, which can negate the contract. This states that if one party is deceived of the facts the contract is null and void. Consent can be viewed similarly. So again, it comes down to whether you are lo…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 06:03 AM
7

The only thing I am worried about is my right to informed consent.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:45 AM
6

I recognize there is a difference, but you wont recognize they are both important. For example, there was a case where a man swapped out for his brother in the dark. The woman believing it was her husband consented and they had sex. It was only afterward, she found out it was not him, and then had him arrested for rape. She consented right? She enjoyed herself right? Was he wrong in having sex with her without informing her. Yes.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:44 AM
9

"We all keep our pasts secret when dating" Ah yes, there you have it. The question isn't whether people do it, the question is whether or not its wrong, immoral or unethical to do. If it doesnt matter then telling them wont matter. If it does matter then they should have the information. If it does matter and they are not told, they are being deceived, and disrespected. The transgendered person is being a hypocrite for not respecting other peoples orientation and preference.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:32 AM
5

I am siting them both. If they have the right to their orientation and preference, then I have the right to my orientation and preference. If I do not want to have sexual relations with someone of a different orientation, that is my right. If they cannot respect that of us, why are we expected to respect that of them?
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:23 AM
3

Probably because at every turn men are being portrayed as stupid, bumbling idiots, and they don't want to become a "man" and be viewed that way. Unless you want to have children, there is no reason to get married, commit to and/or support a significant other. The negatives far outweigh the positives of doing so. They shouldn't be surprised that it is being avoided. Lets see, be single, and retain all the wealth you worked for, be free to make your own choices, and do what you want to do when you…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:19 AM
3

The problem there, is she expected his attention at the moment she wanted it. No excuse me, or can we talk a minute. She just walked in, sat down and started talking, assuming what she wanted to do takes precedence over what he was already doing.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:10 AM
2

My wife was a SAHP for 6 years, until the kids started school. During that time, I actually did most of the household chores, because she was tired from having the kids all day. As they got older, we moved it back to about a 50/50 split.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:06 AM
1

My wife was a SAHP for 6 years, until the kids started school. During that time, I actually did most of the household chores, because she was tired from having the kids all day. As they got older, we moved it back to about a 50/50 split.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:06 AM
2

Yeah, I love how the mom's contributions all get added up, but supposedly dad isn't worth shit.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:04 AM
2

Don't forget to factor in that, she being the mother would be responsible for half of that. So divide by 2. Then add up all the additional stuff the father does in the household, and apply a salary to that, divide by 2 and subtract from the wifes. Then you have the actual value.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:03 AM
20

If the transgendered community can't respect other's sexual orientation and preference then they do not deserve our respect. To not inform, to lie by omission is a blatant disrespect of other peoples orientation and preference. It is not up to them to decide what matters to others. They cannot, should not assume it doesn't matter. If it doesn't matter then saying so won't matter. If it does matter then they should respect that. By not saying anything, you are assuming it does matter to them and …
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:58 AM
5

If they have no respect for other peoples sexual orientation (and preference of not wanting to have sex with the transgendered) , then they are hypocrites.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:52 AM
4

They have the right to be their sexual orientation, and I respect that. I have the right to be my sexual orientation, which does not include sex with the transgender, and they need to respect that. If they cannot respect that, then they are hypocrites. Plain and simple.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:47 AM
12

Evidently more than you think
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:41 AM
6

Actually lets say you are infected with an incurable STI, but are under medication which makes it so that you cannot transmit the infection. They are not at risk but you should still tell them. Lets be honest about it. A simple surgery does not a woman make. They have to take a regimen of drugs to stay that way. It is more like an incurable noncontagious STI than not.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:39 AM
10

So should we ask every woman if they used to be a man, or does it make more sense that those that used to be a man, disclose it?
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:34 AM
4

Because misrepresenting yourself in order to have sex is wrong, possibly even illegal in some places, and that makes it the trans individuals problem. "I understand that people get emotionally traumatized when they find out, but it's not the same as rape" How do you know? Personally I would view this as worse than rape. Just my own personal preference. I would rather be raped by a woman (so long as I wasn't physically harmed) than to have consensual sex with a woman that I later find out used to…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:33 AM
8

Very good example.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:23 AM
25

Because its still your right to choose. It's immoral. Lets say you were a look alike to a famous movie star. So you pretend to be them. Someone else is fooled into thinking you are that movie star, they are attracted to you, saw you naked, had sex it was great, then they found out you weren't that movie star. They would feel violated, and humiliated.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:21 AM
4

Yes most definitely. While I don't have a problem with the transgendered community itself, I don't want to have sex with someone who used to be a guy. You have your right to look the way you want, I have the right to choose which actual gender I want to have sex with. If that makes me shallow so be it. I however feel if they are hiding it from others they are doing something wrong, and they know it. Simply because they chose to change their body and genitalia doesn't completely make them the oth…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 04:16 AM
2

I love how everything they determine is bad is due to the "same ill-advised, obtuse, greedy and prolific way men have been behaving". Outside of that I sort of see their point about cocacola, but I don't think its all that bad that a corporation should look to gain a little in return for their investment either.
/r/MensRights05/05/11 07:28 PM
11

You wont make it past the mod. They will never see it.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 03:03 PM
3

I posted there, but I am sure it wont make it through their moderation, as it is not in line with what everyone else is saying.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 03:01 PM
2

"I may have just been born an extreme horn-dog, or pervert; but, unless the woman is just hideous, I cannot imagine a time when I could be raped by one." I have been in a situation where I was afraid I was going to be "attacked". I went out to a bar after work with a bunch of friends. Too drunk to drive, and this woman was all over me very aggressive like. Even with beer goggles on I was not interested, but I was very impaired physically. She was about my 5'10", went about 200-250, had crazy die…
/r/MensRights15/04/11 03:32 PM
1

I do no think he is implying that. I took it more as the kids should be oblivious to her dating scene until she has settled in. At this point they are seeing guys (possibly presented as new father figures) come and go from their lives. The kids should have little to no interactions with her dates or men in her life until/if she settles down with one. It is not fair to the kids, and it is not fair to the father.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 06:57 PM
4

The goal is no more than egalitarianism, but MR just focuses on MR issues. That's my take.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 06:40 PM
2

I can attest that females do it too. My wife resorts to punching me when she is angry. For the most part I fend it off, seeing as she is about half my size, but very feisty. Unless she came at me with a weapon I wouldn't ever report it, for fear of being laughed at. I don't hit her, I don't reciprocate, at most I grab her arms and wrap her up with them so she stops trying to hit me. So yeah, this woman can kiss my ass.
/r/MensRights09/04/11 03:54 PM
4

He lost me at "knock em around"
/r/MensRights06/04/11 03:43 PM
1

Double standard, that's the point
/r/MensRights02/04/11 04:13 PM
1

Same can be said for women, don't want a baby, don't have sex. So why is it ok to say that to a man but not a woman.
/r/MensRights02/04/11 04:10 PM
8

This makes me sick.
/r/MensRights30/03/11 04:45 PM
1

You are missing the point. A woman can choose ( and has multiple paths) she doesn't want to be responsible for a child after she has become pregnant, the man cannot. Here is a quick image drive the point home. http://www.spagma.com/stuff/deadbeatvprochoice.jpg
/r/MensRights29/03/11 07:38 PM
3

That answer doesn't work when you apply it to women, and that's the point.
/r/MensRights29/03/11 07:35 PM
1

I ask a similar question on every pro-choice forum story I have read. Its funny, just about all the pro-choice women are all for their right to choose, but completely against the man's right to choose.
/r/MensRights29/03/11 07:29 PM
1

I cant speak for all, but I was taught to hold the door open for the ladies. I have, on many occasions, done exactly as you stated. At this point it is second nature to me, it is how I was raised. A few times I have walked through a door being held open for me by a woman, but only if it is someone I do not know, and I am sure to thank them for it.
/r/MensRights29/03/11 06:55 PM
1

I agree with much of what she is saying and have been saying similar things for a while now. It seems men have become the butt of all jokes. If you look at the TV programs that are out, it is always the man/husband/father than is a bumbling idiot, and needs the strong woman/wife/mother to straighten him out. It has become socially acceptable to shit on men for being men.
/r/MensRights29/03/11 06:12 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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