TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

throwaway7145 Archive

View 7 posts and 185 comments by throwaway7145 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

A certain amount of social skills is just plain talent. Not just experience.
/r/MensRights04/01/19 02:18 AM
0

The reality is they are all starving. There is not enough food, even with charitable contributions, for everybody. If there was then everybody would be getting it. So there is not enough food to distribute and you want the most bang for your buck. Do you give it to the women who have been historically proven to be more likely to share it equitably with other family members including children? Or do you give it to the men who have been historically proven to be more likely to hoard it for themsel…
/r/MensRights09/08/18 11:07 PM
1

Yeah, no. Alimony stops if the ex spouse gets remarried. In every State. Nice try, though. /s
/r/MensRights08/08/18 09:40 PM
-3

Organizers say they are giving food voucher tickets almost exclusively to women because previous food handouts were sometimes disrupted by young men pushing their way to the front of the line or taking the heavy bags of rice and other dry goods away from women. They also say women are more likely to ensure that children get enough to eat. "Our experience around the world is that food is more likely to be equitably shared in the household if it is given to women," Marcus Prior, a spokesman for th…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 09:20 PM
3

One thing I'm unsure about: Her lawyer insisted to me that child support is based on a 40 hour work week whether you work 40 hours or not, and that expenses are not factored. This is correct. Expenses are not factored because it is up to each parent to budget their own living expenses. Child support is based on a statutory formula and will not be increased to make up a parent's gap in income or to otherwise support a previous lifestyle. That would be alimony which you are not entitled to because…
/r/MensRights08/06/18 04:18 PM
7

Back in December 2017, I posted an advert on the Random Act of Muff Dive subreddit. Well, now. That certainly seems like a good place to find men who are super respectful and not expecting sex at all. /s I started talking to this one guy in particular. We seemed to get along well and we conversed by text and video calling. We finally get a chance to meet up this past weekend. So he communicated with you by text and video for more than 2 months before you met him in person. Not to be snotty, but …
/r/MensRights14/03/18 08:16 PM
1

Thank you. Speedy trial these days seems to be about six months. You just have to sit there and wait it out.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 09:50 PM
–

This might have been a clearer case if he did not have such a very long history of mental illness issues. While I am not saying that a false rape allegation is ever easy, she withdrew it within less than 2 weeks. Who the heck knows what happened? Not you and not me. It's not a good reason to kill yourself. For a withdrawn claim. Ever. No reasonable person does that.
/r/MensRights20/10/16 02:50 AM
–

However, I want the real thing, I want my lever in that beaver, BUT on my terms, not theirs. LOL. Ha ha ha! Get used to jacking off for the rest of your life or paying some hooker for it. If she is not getting what she wants, then you are not getting what you want. Grow up and learn how relationships work. It's not all about you.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 07:05 AM
2

So very sorry.
/r/MensRights05/12/15 06:31 AM
–

http://wheatkings.blogspot.ca/2015/07/the-cross-examination-of-false-accuser.html "You were alone in the house and in her bedroom with her immediately before she called the police." Not so , her mother was there with me, I was never alone with her in her room. Fine, you were alone in the house with her immediately before her mother came home and Angel then called 911. Angel, who was crying hysterically, told the police that you raped her in her bedroom when the two of you were alone in the house…
/r/MensRights07/08/15 12:54 PM
0

I have read your blog which you post every single day. What you completely disregard is that Angel was a 14 year old girl who clearly had major social and emotional problems. She was not the daughter of Satan. She was the daughter of an apparently very low class neglectful single mother that you chose to move in with and then tried to adopt an unofficial step-father role to Angel. Don't stick your dick in crazy also applies to women with fucked up family situations. Yes, you had to go through th…
/r/MensRights05/08/15 06:03 PM
–

Did you see the recent "Spank a Feminist" post? Really? As in really? I agree he has brought attention to men's rights, but generally in a negative way, and at least fifty percent of that website is circle jerk fighting with random internet feminists. Which no one actually cares about. Plus the complete lack of financial transparency, as well as the complete lack of any actual actions to help men or to engage in the political process or to do basically anything except bitching, fighting, and com…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 09:41 PM
2

Yes, writing this embarrassing self indulgent drivel is definitely more important than hosting a conference. After all, actually accomplishing something instead of just fighting, bitching, whining and complaining would make them "tired" or something. Esmay and Elam are more interested in fighting windmills. Don't forget to send them money. They always need money to continue their very super important work of fighting feminists on the internet while living off donations.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 03:22 PM
–

CAFE was banned because of their association with A Voice For Men. Men's rights groups should avoid any such association in the future. It's far past time for MRA's to notice that AVfM has been pissing in the pool for far too long and will never lose their reputation as a hate group.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 02:05 PM
5

Me either. This explains why practically every other post in r/Relationships includes something like "I have had 3 previous abusive relationships". Often written by a teenager. These kids are professional victims before they even get out of high school.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 01:43 PM
6

It is a legit MRM issue. Divorced fathers strapped by alimony and child support payments can't afford the extra bedrooms needed for their children to spend significant time with them.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 12:18 PM
8

I don't believe the "we're tired" explanation. Many people complained about the price and the speakers. It seems a lot more credible that they didn't sell enough tickets to cover expenses.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 11:56 PM
3

See the site called Shrink4Men. Use the index because unfortunately this site is poorly organized, but it is a site where you can find lots of advice and other men who are struggling through the same situations.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 01:52 AM
3

Well yeah, when a frat sells minors $30. tickets to attend an "all you can drink" party, and some 18 year old falls 10 stories off a balcony and dies, there are going to be criminal charges. No matter what sex the dead person is. Especially when they have these idiots on video selling tickets at the door without checking any ID. What specifically did you see as a Men's Rights issue here?
/r/MensRights11/09/14 08:42 PM
7

WTH is foresexual and/or presexual contact? Holding hands? Tickling? Sitting next to someone on the bus? Without a better definition of the actual behavior, this isn't very useful. Also, coercion is not limited to force or threats. For the average 16 year old it could just be peer pressure.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 08:24 PM
1

Looks like every Cosmo magazine I ever read.
/r/MensRights09/09/14 09:32 PM
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid's_Tale Perhaps you were thinking of this. It is fiction.
/r/MensRights09/09/14 08:33 PM
4

Why does the CPS prosecute only 29% of the women who the police believe have made false rape allegations? Well, gosh, let's see. Begin with the fact that the police are not actually lawyers and have no experience in actually prosecuting cases. So what they "believe" isn't all that useful. Add to that the prevalent police habit of referring cases to the prosecutor's office for random reasons. To "make their numbers" that month, to pacify some local whackjob, to just get the file off their desk an…
/r/MensRights06/09/14 02:21 PM
1

The Police only refer cases where it is 100% certain the woman made a false allegation. LOL. You don't know much about police. The reasons they refer cases can be extremely random. Extremely random. Whether it is to "make their numbers", or to pacify some local whackjob, or just to get the file off their desk and onto someone else's, referring a case to the prosecutor doesn't mean squat. This author took a massive leap on that one, right into a pile of bullshit.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 01:05 PM
1

That study also shows that 1 out of 5 women have been raped, and 44 percent of women have suffered sexual violence. With all due respect, I don't believe any of these figures.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 12:46 PM
4

Get a roommate. You need to start leveraging the economy of scale without depending on a woman to do it. Since that hasn't been working out too well. There is no loophole on child support. If your ex-girlfriend actually signed the house lease, you have some legal options there.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 06:16 PM
1

I'm not a gamer and not following any news on it. I'm just answering your legal question. It's rare, but sometimes people are prosecuted for obvious lies tied to money donations. Here is an example: http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2014/01/14/michigan-woman-pleads-no-contest-in-cancer-scam/
/r/MensRights02/09/14 05:35 PM
1

HIV drugs weren't FDA approved either back in the 1980's and weren't going to be approved any time soon. It's called advocacy if you want it sooner. Begin lobbying.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 06:45 PM
1

I suggest you text her your suggestion for 50/50, instead of waiting for her suggestion and then fighting about it. That will make it clear to her up front that you expect the order to be followed.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 09:47 PM
1

http://www.ourfamilywizard.com/ofw/ Ask the court to order both parents to use this for all communications. Most judges will agree. It will simplify your life tremendously.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 12:10 AM
2

I guess it didn't occur to you that the children would starve to death long before you did. Apparently, women are more likely to insist on feeding children when food is limited. That's what they meant by the previous problem of unequal food distribution among household members when food is given to men. Not very flattering, but it is what it is.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 10:08 PM
0

You have equal legal reproductive rights. It just so happens that you don't get pregnant so you can't get an abortion. Abortion is not equivalent legally or morally to abandoning a living child.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 09:55 PM
-2

Yeah, condoms, vasectomies, choosing to have sex only with excellent birth control methods, sperm banking, hiring surrogate mothers --- none of those rights exist.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 09:06 PM
1

Bodily integrity has always been used to justify abortion. However, I'm done making my point. It is painfully clear that you are not interested in equal rights. You think that you deserve better rights.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 09:01 PM
0

Google deadbeat dads. There's your public opinion.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 08:56 PM
0

Put simply, making men jump through hoops to exercise their parental rights does not make the situation for women any better, so we don't argue for it. Sure it would make the situation better for women. More men would be willing to advocate for better abortion laws when their rights are caught in the same tangle. The justification for paternal surrender is that women have access to abortion. So the access for both should be equal. Saying, "Yeah, that sucks for women, but we deserve better treatm…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 07:04 PM
1

The government makes us all work for all kinds of causes we don't believe in and do not want to work for. Contributing to what the majority of voters believe is the greater good is part of being a citizen. Suck it up, Buttercup.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:40 PM
1

Apparently, whatever /u/oneiorosgripwontstfu wrote is what I was disagreeing with. That doesn't mean I endorse the entire prior comment.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:09 PM
1

Guess what? Most women seeking abortions don't believe in this crap either. They are still stuck with it. So why should paternal surrender get better treatment? Come on, I thought you just wanted equal rights. Since the whole argument is that women can have abortions, men seeking parental surrender should have to comply with the same laws and costs that women do to get an abortion. Then we can trade stories about how "easy" that is. Instead of just the current parental surrender narrative about …
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:01 PM
1

I don't have time to read the posting history of every comment on this thread.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 04:23 PM
3

You obviously are not aware of the ongoing huge battle for abortion rights in this country. For many women, the right to an abortion is illusory in actual practice. They can't drive the 600 miles to a clinic, can't afford the cost inflated by mandatory ultrasounds and insane "health" regulations imposed on clinics, can't afford hotel bills and days off from work for mandatory waiting periods, etc, etc, etc. In fact, I believe any proposed paternal surrender bill should state men can only sign th…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 03:55 PM
2

Hyperbole much?
/r/MensRights24/08/14 03:35 PM
-1

Still taking my advice. Wave your big red flag! Can't manage a rational debate? Just call other people names like a 4 year old. LOL
/r/MensRights24/08/14 02:31 PM
0

Be sure and explain in advance to all your future potential girlfriends that her choice is really only your choice, and your decisions are always superior. Subjecting a child to the circumstance the OP has described would have been a heinously irresponsible choice by the mother. Two college educated employed parents? OMG, the horror!
/r/MensRights24/08/14 01:52 PM
-1

Glad to see you took my advice.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 01:14 PM
-1

People who decide they are not suited for parenthood should get sterilized or use extremely effective birth control. They should also seek only partners who want to remain child free also. It will never happen. Not in America. However, it doesn't bother me if people actually interested in this waste a ton of time, money, energy and credibility pursuing it. Just like that GovernmentsGetGirlfriends dude. Show your true colors. It's not the people waving their huge red flags for everyone to see tha…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 01:02 PM
-1

Forcing men into parenthood against their will accomplishes nothing except to create an atmosphere of resentment, between the parents and potentially between the father and the child as well. Nothing else ever? You know what? Sometimes life gives you lemons and you make lemonade. Awesomely wonderful lemonade that changes your life for the better in ways you never imagined possible. I swear sometimes I think this is the Aspergers subreddit. If you think that anyone's life ever proceeds exactly ac…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 12:18 PM
0

I recommend he just stays away from women forever. For the good of humanity. At an absolute minimum, he should explain to every potential new girlfriend exactly what he did, so she can make a reasoned decision whether to have sex with him. Of course he will never do that since it would result in total chastity. Selfish, immature and unable to effectively communicate much? Something to hide? Of course. Oddly, that's not all that uncommon over here in Men's Rights. And you wonder why you have such…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 04:55 AM
-2

I hope you are infertile for life. You don't deserve a child and you certainly don't deserve to ever have a relationship with another woman. Just become gay or jack off. Forever. Go ahead, tell every potential new girlfriend what you did. See if anyone ever wants to have sex with you again. News Flash -- no woman with half a brain ever will.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 04:44 AM
1

No, it is not. You better completely communicate your lack of consent. Just "feeling it" is not the law. God forbid it ever should be the law. The courts would be overwhelmed with "morning after" regret cases.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 04:33 AM
-1

Not a shame that he won't be a father though. Not a shame at all for anyone. EVERYONE really ducked a bullet on that one.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 04:11 AM
24

The tragedy is that if he had had other options, this would not have come to deception. How about discussing it with her rationally? How about not automatically deciding to ditch her after a 4 year relationship, just because she got pregnant and considered keeping his baby? Still ditching her now even after an abortion. What a piece of ...
/r/MensRights23/08/14 11:23 PM
2

Wonderful idea, most of all because students don't have to make that first awkward phone call to mom and dad.
/r/MensRights23/08/14 08:17 PM
93

It won't destroy her. In fact, she will realize almost immediately that you are no one she would ever want to have children with. I recommend you tell this story to all your potential future girlfriends. Then you won't ever have this problem again. Win!
/r/MensRights23/08/14 06:47 PM
2

The guy looked really uncomfortable the whole time, smiling of course due to social pressure, but uncomfortable none the less. Anyways, couldn't this be considered rape? No. Smiling and going along with it, even if personally uncomfortable, is implied consent. He didn't object or tell them to stop. We need to maintain a hard line stand on the issue of consent for both sexes. Deciding it is rape if someone looked or felt uncomfortable is a horrifying slippery legal slope that we never want to go …
/r/MensRights23/08/14 06:35 PM
2

Go to the hearing. Tell the judge that you want a lawyer but have not been able to retain one yet. Ask for a continuance. The judge will give you one. In addition, if you are under court order to give her a check once a month, or once a week or whatever, ask the judge if it is permitted to mail her one with the no contact restraining order. If the answer to this is yes, mail her ONLY a check. No notes or letters or even a smiley face on the check. Only a standard check. If you are not under cour…
/r/MensRights23/08/14 01:47 PM
4

Lawyer here. Domestic violence TRO's are now a very common divorce tactic. A TRO will immediately kick a spouse out, result in the other spouse receiving full custody of all children, orders for child support, payment of household bills, etc. The (completely unsupported and one sided) allegations to get one can be extremely trivial. Mere harassment, like yelling and screaming threats, is enough. Very few TRO's entered actually involve any allegations of physical abuse in States where I practice.…
/r/MensRights22/08/14 11:46 PM
1

Your phone is the only phone that counts here. Your phone records are the only ones you need to access. If you have a prepaid tracphone, your service might be substandard. All that really means is you will need a subpoena to access the information, if they won't give it to you voluntarily. The information is still there. It will still be there for at least 5 years and likely much longer. The NSA is your friend here. Cell phones of any type in America today are a tracking device. For you and anyo…
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:30 PM
2

You know I have totally seen this. In my white, wealthy, suburban bedroom to a large city community. It's kind of a dumb little thing, but it is important to us. My husband died, and me and my teenage son and daughter have been driving his Lincoln truck. I never drove it before, but now it is emotionally important to us. We keep it exactly the same way it was before he died. Exactly the same way, with the same CD's, and these same stuffed dice hanging on the rear-view mirror. Both I and my (cute…
/r/MensRights22/08/14 02:24 PM
2

Troll, go away. Unless he had something from her in writing admitting she falsely filed a police report, there is not a snowball's chance in hell of winning. No attorney would ever take a case like this on a contingency fee, which means he would have had to spend more than 10K in litigation fees to obtain a civil judgment at trial. Which he then would have had to pay to collect. Your entire story reeks.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 01:54 PM
7

Dude. You had 3 children with this woman, never married her, and never went to court to establish your legal relationship with the kids. This is not a "glitch" in Florida law. This is your own failure to step up to the plate and legally take responsibility for your own children. To legally assert your rights as an unmarried father. Sorry to hit you when you are down, this is not so much directed at you, but this is a message many men need to know. If you are not going to marry the mother, then y…
/r/MensRights22/08/14 01:44 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2e1opz/exgirlfriend_is_pregnant_im_very_likely_the/cjvgesu This is an excellent example of a point I tried to make on a different post a few days ago. That post was about how to stop feminists from misrepresenting the MRA's. My response (abbreviated here) was to stop giving them so much ammunition. At some point, every movement to be successful must begin to police itself.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 07:01 PM
1

It is most likely this. Most doctors can't afford to take very many medicaid patients because the reimbursements are so low.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 06:33 PM
3

Six comments and not a single one encouraging OP in his stated intention to support his child and be the best father that he can. One comment suggesting he trick her into getting an abortion. Two comments suggesting he leave the country. Three comments suggesting that she is either lying about being pregnant or about OP being the father. I'm going to leave this thread now and go read all the other threads complaining about men being treated unfairly in child custody cases. How dare those judges …
/r/MensRights20/08/14 11:54 AM
1

Urine surprisingly is actually sterile. Who knew, right?
/r/MensRights20/08/14 05:27 AM
14

Dude, wake up. The authorities only arrest people who commit crimes. Selling urine is not a crime. People do all kinds of sleazy things to get back at their ex. People sell all kinds of sleazy things for that too. As an example, marketing with the slogan "Make That Bitch Itch" is: http://crabrevenge.com/ Yes, you can buy pubic lice on the internet. Sorry to dash your vision of humanity, but sleazy behavior is not sex specific.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 04:40 PM
2

Point being that you automatically assume that you are smarter and can think more quickly in any emergency situation than a woman can. That is not always correct.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 07:46 PM
-1

LOL. Reminds me of a story. Very sexist guy who was kind of an asshole announced after his last break up that he was done with women completely. My friend promptly said, "Women everywhere are grateful for your decision." Obey??? Definitely go your own way.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 05:43 PM
-1

the only reason a man would do something for a women is to sleep with them It is also misogynistic.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 05:07 PM
1

You are correct.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 03:03 PM
2

I think the real mumbo-jumbo in this thread is vague and self-serving definitions of "fundamental human rights" and "natural" human rights, etc. So much so, that I'm not really interested in engaging.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 02:50 PM
2

Got it. The remedy for noncompliance is to file a motion requesting that the court order your desired outcome. The other party is not likely to be held in contempt. Unfortunately, "consult and cooperate" is a loaded term that can't be specifically defined or enforced. The two of you could "consult and cooperate" 24/7 and still not agree that your child should be baptized, take music lessons, go to school X, see a particular doctor, take ADHD medication, etc, etc. So this part of your order is re…
/r/MensRights18/08/14 02:40 PM
2

Either respecting bodily integrity and the right to make choices about your own body is a fundamental human right for everyone or it is not for anyone.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 11:13 AM
2

The constant and continuing battle to protect abortion rights, including reasonable access to abortion clinics, focuses on legislation.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 01:48 AM
2

We are going to need more information. What duties are not being complied with? What does the order say about those duties?
/r/MensRights17/08/14 07:23 PM
1

The GLBT community is supported by the left and the mainstream media; and there are plenty of influential people that can and will call the bigots out on their bullshit. Sure, NOW. That most definitely has not always been the case, and it was not achieved without a great deal of work on the part of gay right's activists to reasonably advance their own rights. To reasonably publicize their own cause. To reasonably seek to over-turn discriminatory laws. They didn't just all wake up one day with su…
/r/MensRights17/08/14 06:16 PM
2

The men's rights conferences were able to proceed. It's going to take a heck of a lot more than a few radicals to shut down any free speech in America. I suggest that you consider the gay rights movement. Which has succeeded in the face of serious resistance, not by attacking that resistance, but by reaching out to reasonable people and consistently promoting their own rights. This sub has over 96,000 members. It is not in any danger of being shut down and muzzled. Elliot Rodger, like most sensa…
/r/MensRights17/08/14 04:00 PM
1

Point being, hands on care of the sick and dying is and has been far more widespread than your examples.
/r/MensRights17/08/14 02:41 PM
-1

TIL "achieving something" for men's rights is attacking feminism. Dude, you should re-think your priorities. Would you suggest we can achieve something for poor white men by attacking the NAACP and affirmative action for minorities? I would certainly hope not. It is painfully obvious that direct action to assist poor white men would be more effective. Consider a marketing campaign to gather funds for prostate cancer research. Or one to promote better legislation protecting the rights of unmarrie…
/r/MensRights17/08/14 02:31 PM
-2

http://healthcaretraveler.modernmedicine.com/healthcare-traveler/news/keeping-nurses-safe-0?page=full You might want to greatly expand your conception about what is a dirty and dangerous job. Nursing is both dirty and dangerous, historically and now. Especially historically before we had modern day infection control procedures and antibiotics. It's still dangerous now, and there is no way to claim that dealing daily with vomit, urine, poop, pus, blood and snot is somehow not dirty. Nurses have o…
/r/MensRights17/08/14 02:04 PM
0

Surprisingly, you know I think I would be OK with that. Having to kill someone, in a war I don't understand, would be a totally different issue.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 12:01 AM
1

Point being, for generations the (mostly male) medical establishment has felt pretty darn comfortable experimenting with new contraceptive drugs and devices on women, knowing the risk of death and serious injury. Asking men to sign up for that same risk - of cancer, infertility, death, or even loss of libido - is not really seen as acceptable for mere contraceptive purposes. The lack of decent contraception for men is not due to prejudice against men. It is due to men's perceived higher worth. N…
/r/MensRights15/08/14 11:39 PM
-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States#World_War_II Only 20 percent of the men who signed up with the Selective Service were actually drafted for World War II. Less than 10 percent of the men who signed up with the Selective Service were actually drafted for the Vietnam war. Note that this was during time periods our country was at war and the draft was in effect. Which has not occurred for a VERY long time. Claiming that signing up now for the Selective Service is "volun…
/r/MensRights14/08/14 09:32 PM
-1

Everyone knows that murder is illegal also. Still happens all the time. Claiming that every single affected man in the U.S. always registers for Selective Service, and that's why no one is ever convicted for not doing so is irrational.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 09:16 PM
-1

When it comes to contraceptives, women have overwhelmingly been the ones experimented on. Generally with drugs and devices found to be unsafe after mass release, so this affected many many millions of women. Not a handful of prisoners.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 08:07 PM
-3

When is the last time that anyone in America was actually convicted of a felony for failing to register for Selective Service?
/r/MensRights14/08/14 07:48 PM
-3

Let's go there. You know why women have "better" forms of contraception? It's actually quite simple. For generations the (overwhelming male controlled) medical establishment felt quite comfortable experimenting on women. Beginning with insanely high dose oral contraceptives, that caused countless numbers of deaths, cancers, heart attacks and strokes. Moving on to thalidomide -- another fairly useless drug that caused major limb absences and defects in infants. Moving forward to the Dalkon Shield…
/r/MensRights14/08/14 03:53 PM
1

Let's also not pretend that merely registering with the Selective Service means that you have agreed to die. The last person actually drafted in America is now at least 63 years old. There is very little possibility of any draft occurring in the foreseeable future. Even if it did, plenty of drafted men previously chose a conscientious objector status, obtained medical or other exemptions, were rejected by the military, or just failed to appear to be inducted. Sending in a post card is not agreei…
/r/MensRights14/08/14 02:37 PM
1

http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_25035043 ...he saw a shitty process railroading one of his former students and took a stand against it. Nope. He was seriously pissed off about this report and the top down mandatory changes the college was demanding from his department. So he decided to get into a pissing match with ODH. In which he is the one who got wet. Tenured or not, he has absolutely no right to be running around taking affidavits from his own students on a matter which is completely outside …
/r/MensRights11/08/14 09:49 PM
1

This is not the right case. Bad facts make bad law. See my other comments for the link about this particular department's abysmal history of sex discrimination. There are other much better cases moving forward.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 09:32 PM
-1

The only current student who supported him is the student who has him as her dissertation advisor. That's no big surprise. The other student specifically noted that he approached her. Apparently, he also saw fit to share with this student, (and likely many others), a copy of the CONFIDENTIAL board findings. Yeah, think about that. Think about that from a retaliation standpoint. Think about that as a Title IX violation against the female student who complained of sexual assault. (As a practical m…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 07:25 PM
0

The woman was paid over $800,000. because a professor retaliated against her and smeared her reputation, after she filed a complaint of sexual assault against another graduate student. Not for the initial incident. The school paid $150,000. to a lawyer to investigate the professor's 23 page allegations that the conclusions of the campus hearing were unfounded. The lawyer's investigation said that the conclusions of the campus hearing were correct. First, you cannot ever be a whistleblower if you…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 06:27 PM
-1

I have around 10 comments already on this thread, some of which respond to your other points. Please read them. I don't think it is respectful to other readers to keep repeating the same things again and again.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:39 PM
1

My account is just as real as your account. If the college violated the young teacher's rights, then HE can sue them. The college must comply with Title IX, and doing that is endlessly legally complicated. Who else at the college should be allowed to conduct a new investigation of sexual assault charges, after the official investigation is closed? The swim team coach? The director of the cafeteria? Maybe the janitors have an opinion.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:24 PM
0

Discovers? Or uses his position of power over students to manufacture new evidence? In secret, without telling his superiors or the college's legal counsel. That's his problem. Who the heck takes affidavits of witnesses without notifying legal counsel?
/r/MensRights10/08/14 02:59 PM
0

Cool or not, that is what lawyers do. Look at it from the college's perspective. Barnett dumped blood in the water when they are already surrounded by sharks. They are already walking a very complex Title IX legal tightrope, and a fucking philosophy professor who doesn't know jack about the law, acts like a bull in a china shop.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 02:31 PM
-4

I can assure you that no one pays $800K on a baseless claim without even a lawsuit being filed. That is an astounding amount of money. The entire point of tenure is to be able to speak the truth as he saw it without fear of retaliation from the university. No. The entire point of tenure is to secure academic freedom in research and teaching, with job security. This matter was unrelated to academic research or teaching philosophy. Tenure does not allow him to conduct his own campus witch hunt, on…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 01:08 PM
-2

They hired the lawyer to do damage control. The second Barnett sent in his unsolicited report which detailed his unauthorized investigation, the college was in big trouble if the victim sued. Also if any other student, accused or accuser, sued claiming the college's hearings were rigged and fraudulent. No one settles a case without litigation for more than $800,000. unless it is a very good case.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 06:06 AM
-1

Do you honestly believe that all these students just spontaneously came to Barnett, and no other Professor, and volunteered to write affidavits? How did they know Barnett was doing an investigation? Barnett's retaliation was conducting his own lone wolf investigation, with the sole purpose of saying the victim was a liar, after the college had concluded she was not. He was actively harming her reputation by "investigating" the matter further and spreading ugly rumors. Yes, when a tenured profess…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 05:45 AM
0

Lawyers are great at weasel words. Barnett, however, said through his attorney that he never investigated the victim or her sexual assault, In his report...Barnett described how the Office of Discrimination and Harassment's investigation mischaracterized or excluded information from witnesses....his client included sworn statements by nearly all of the third-party witnesses. Now then, if Barnett never investigated the victim or her sexual assault, what the hell did he talk to all these witnesses…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 05:01 AM
2

http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_25035043 Here is some context. Considering the reputation of the Philosophy Department, and the fact that the university's attorney most definitely flipped out when this unsolicited 38 page paper arrived, (as would any corporate counsel anywhere), tenure is the only thing that kept him from being fired the next day.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 01:02 AM
1

None of us, including Professor Barnett, really knows what happened. But let's assume you are correct. What are Professor's Barnett's appropriate and legal possible actions? He can help the man get a job somewhere else. He can privately express his concerns to the college administration, and suggest changes to the campus investigation process. He can ask to review the records of the official investigation and summarize his own findings for his employer. He can privately assist the man to find an…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 12:30 AM
1

I agree star chambers are the problem. Lone wolf untrained biased professors are not the answer. Due process, legal counsel for the accused, appeal rights to civil court, and a college decision making body with half a clue about the law instead of social theories is the answer. The cases are trickling in now to the real courts. Soon this will be a reality.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 12:05 AM
2

Moore, Barnett's lawyer, said his client included sworn statements by nearly all of the third-party witnesses cited in the Office of Discrimination and Harassment investigation. Barnett contacted all those witnesses and made them give him new statements. The fact that they had previously testified at the official college hearing makes his behavior even worse. How did that conversation go? A conversation between a tenured professor and his own students. "Hey, Ashley, I see you were a witness on t…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 11:54 PM
3

You honestly think that a philosophy professor, re-interviewing his own graduate students and demanding new witness statements, because he was angry the first investigation harmed his personal protege, is going to find any truth? Come on, this was a coercive power play. How many professors on campus should we let conduct their own personal investigations of sexual assault allegations, after the official investigation is over? One? Five? Ten? Surely you can see the problem.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 11:27 PM
1

The notice of claim would have been prepared by the woman's attorney, based on her own investigation results about Barnett's actions. As for the college, they paid more than $800,000. without any litigation, so they obviously thought the notice of claim allegations were valid. For Barnett, every single affidavit is a nail in his coffin. Remember, this case is not about the woman. That case is over. The employment case about revoking tenure is only about whether Barnett's actions were proper. See…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 10:50 PM
-1

Nope, what he did was re-interview student witnesses and make them give him new affidavits. After a conclusion was reached that he didn't like by the official campus committee. None of which he had any authority to do. His lawyer can say whatever he wants. Bottom line, the college paid over $800,000. to make sure Barnett's report was never seen by a jury.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 09:46 PM
4

The official college investigation was completed and conclusions were reached. Barnett had no business at all starting another investigation, interviewing student witnesses again, obtaining additional affidavits from students, basically telling everyone he didn't agree with the official college conclusion. If the official college conclusion was that there was no sexual assault, how would you react to a tenured professor just deciding to investigate all over again?
/r/MensRights09/08/14 09:36 PM
2

It wasn't Barnett's job to investigate. Especially a graduate student in philosophy when he was a tenured philosophy professor. Most definitely not after the campus committee reached a final determination. Absolutely not without any permission or notice to the college administration. That's the point. Barnett didn't have to believe her. He just had to do his job, which was teach philosophy, not play Perry Mason. Barnett going off here on a frolic of his own cost the university over $800,000. to …
/r/MensRights09/08/14 09:23 PM
5

Read it again. She made the claim of sexual assault within 2 months. The campus committee investigated and decided her claim was valid. Case closed as far as the college, the professor's employer, was concerned. After that, this tenured philosophy professor takes it upon himself to re-interview all the original student witnesses, (which it is highly doubtful they volunteered for), and had them prepare new affidavits, (again highly unlikely they volunteered to do). Since the complainant and the a…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 09:12 PM
2

According to the notice of claim, Barnett had discussions with university faculty members and students about the victim's sexual history, marital relationship... The document also said that Barnett told faculty members, university administrators and students that the victim was "sexually promiscuous"... Stop right there. Of course they are going to fire this piece of shit. Her sexual history and the status of her marriage had NO relevance to whether or not she was sexually assaulted. I object qu…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 06:41 PM
1

This belongs on r/conspiratard.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 12:05 PM
2

Not going to respond. Don't believe you.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 11:27 AM
2

Have an up vote for taking the high road. I personally have never met a father who refers to his child only as "it" and "that shit". Of course, it's also been my experience that condoms are tight, and removing one from a man mid-bang right before he comes without his knowledge presents quite a dilemma in logistics. On the other hand, his knowledge of drunken falls seems accurate, even if his personal experience with condoms, sexual intercourse and fatherhood appears sadly lacking.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 10:40 AM
3

Attorneys, like psychologists, are prohibited from having sex with clients. It's just considered unethical. After the case is over, the attorney can approach the former client. Just not during the representation.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 07:11 PM
2

Yes, but it is not true that "@Apligraf needs a nonstop stream of bloodied baby boys..." Each of the companies cited above is using a single foreskin from 20 years ago. The idea that there is some huge market for infant foreskins is an urban legend.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 05:30 PM
1

Yes. It is lacking any credible citation that infant foreskins are purchased in large quantities, or for large amounts of money, or that they are even purchased at all. A number of the links don't even work.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 05:07 PM
3

http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/article-7356-the-$140-million-foreskin.html Advanced BioHealing, a Connecticut-based company with a 70,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in La Jolla, currently uses ATS’s “Dermagraft” treatment, which is applied primarily to diabetic foot ulcers. Carlsbad-based SkinMedica also employs ATS’s fibroblast process but discards the cells and uses only the protein-rich culture in its skin-cream products. According to the corporate-analysis firm Hoovers, SkinMedic…
/r/MensRights08/08/14 03:39 PM
2

Dermagraft-TC which is an artifical skin created from harvested foreskins from infant circumcision.[1] It is made and sold by Advanced Tissue Sciences (ATS), which is a corporation based in La Jolla, CA. Dermagraft-TC is FDA approved,[2][3] and it sells for about $3,000 per square foot; one foreskin contains enough genetic material to grow 250,000 square feet of skin. This quote is from your site. I seriously doubt that anyone is paying a huge price for DONATED foreskins. Do you have a better so…
/r/MensRights08/08/14 03:27 PM
2

as Patrice Stanton pointed out: 15-day shelflife means @Apligraf needs nonstop stream of bloodied baby boys No. It's a very complicated process. The site you listed has pages for each of the 4 steps. The first step is to get cells from a foreskin. Then those cells are multiplied in the laboratory to create cell lines. Then they are frozen for future use. Once they have the cell lines, they can continue to replicate those cells. The finished product has a 15 day shelf life. The frozen cell lines …
/r/MensRights08/08/14 04:44 AM
0

I don't think very many domestic murders follow a similar course. Mainly because I think most domestic murders are spontaneous and not planned in advance. The "got drunk, got in a fight and killed someone" kind of murders. With a restraining order in effect, the possibility of a spontaneous combustion type of unplanned murder really doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 12:15 PM
1

You have sex with people when you don't want to and do sexual acts with them that you find repulsive? Seek help.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:02 AM
1

I finished the article. You don't know what it means to either be intimate or be a partner. You have this insane vision of women as Stepford Wives.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 03:28 AM
1

Claiming that women are obligated to engage in certain sex acts, even if they find them repulsive, because "it's not about you"... Dude, anyone who would write this is a sexual leper. You don't have the vaguest idea what the word intimate actually means.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 02:54 AM
1

Your claim to be ENTITLED to "robust sex" from someone who does not want to have sex with you is nuts. Claiming that refusing to have sex with you is somehow intimate partner abuse is even more nuts. Claiming that women are obligated to engage in certain sex acts, even if they find them repulsive, because "it's not about you" is just plain whacked. You are emotionally and mentally incapable of sustaining a long term satisfying sexual relationship, since you very clearly do not know or care about…
/r/MensRights06/08/14 02:21 AM
2

She tells me I can only call him on their home phone. It's been two weeks now and I can't get a hold of my son. I call the home phone and someone (probably the ex) picks up hangs up immediately. Call the police, explain you have been unable to contact your son for 2 weeks, his mother has some mental issues, and request they check on your child. The police do checks like this for children and the elderly, etc. An officer will go to her house and request to see your child. This will hopefully shak…
/r/MensRights04/08/14 07:42 PM
2

Was this written by Elliot Rodger?
/r/MensRights04/08/14 07:26 AM
6

Just trash being trash.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 01:30 AM
-3

The problem here is that you have not noted the number of perpetrators against men who are also men. Which is a very significant number.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 02:48 AM
1

http://www.lawserver.com/law/state/connecticut/ct-laws/connecticut_statutes_53-21 This is a Class C felony punishable by 1 to 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000. While "risk of injury to minor" might sound trivial, it is actually a significant charge. Look at the other crimes included in this same statute -- baby selling and sexual abuse of children. Different States have different titles for laws, so you can't just go by the title. Since the child was not injured, and there is no…
/r/MensRights31/07/14 09:14 PM
0

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4536 The U.S. Department of Justice study of data from 1993 to 2010 found that 4 out of 5, (80 percent), of victims of non-fatal intimate partner violence were female. http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4984 The U.S. Department of Justice study of intimate partner violence from 2003 to 2012, which included violence against children and other family members, (the above study only included romantic partners), found that 76 percent of victims o…
/r/MensRights31/07/14 06:23 PM
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowry_system_in_India You are being completely suckered here. The dowry system in India is overwhelmingly paid by the families of brides. When the families don't keep paying whatever the extortionate demands of the in-laws are after marriage, many wives end up being murdered, so the money-making scheme can continue with a new wife. This is why India made dowries illegal. As a result of this, "dowry law" is causing men and their families to be arrested for abusing and…
/r/MensRights29/07/14 10:51 AM
3

OMG! How about we take a look at why the law was enacted in the first place? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowry_death
/r/MensRights29/07/14 10:40 AM
3

All the major businesses left at the same time. Detroit has never recovered.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 08:25 AM
8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot The major Detroit riot killed Detroit. It instigated white flight at a level never previously seen. The city has never recovered. As for this judge, he is the scum of the earth. It is beyond insane that he can't be sued, but judges tend to protect their own. Bottom line, these are the judges that local politics is responsible for. Just one in a million things wrong with Detroit now.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 01:04 AM
3

Frankly, it is not the feminists you need to (further) convince. The medical field continues to support it. That is who you need to convince in order to achieve widespread social change.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 05:32 PM
1

Any place that complies with the licensing requirements can perform surgical abortions. Not very many places choose to do so, especially if there are no health risks involved.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 05:22 PM
3

This exact same issue is over on r/Relationship_Advice about once a day. It's pretty evenly divided on whether it is the man or the woman who has become overweight and out of shape. The comments don't really seem to vary much depending on the sex of the OP. About half of comments recommend counseling. About half of comments recommend losing weight.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 01:58 PM
1

It's actually very unusual for a 19 week abortion to be performed in a hospital when neither the fetus or woman has a significant health issue. OP has reason to be suspicious of her story. If there are hospitals doing elective abortions, there is no reason nor obligation for them to let anyone else know about it. On the contrary, the reporting requirements to States on abortions are pretty awesome. No legitimate medical provider does abortions in secret. OP can find out if this hospital does abo…
/r/MensRights28/07/14 01:40 PM
4

http://nation.time.com/2013/08/23/doctors-urge-more-hospitals-to-perform-abortions/ Only 4 percent of hospitals in the U.S. perform abortions. Call the hospital and find out if this one does.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 01:57 AM
4

"The lady didn't run as fast as the man, so I shot her in the back twice," Greer told the TV station. "She's dead ... but he got away. It doesn't matter if the person he killed was male, female, or pregnant with triplets. He shot her twice in the back as she was running away. Not self defense.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 02:18 AM
1

WTH does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights26/07/14 02:08 AM
0

Nothing stopped women from banding together to form a small army and then taking over from their male oppressors. Except that in history - the large majority women have never done this. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but over 40 percent of births in the U.S. are now to unmarried women. Making adult men obsolete for families in 1, 2, 3....
/r/MensRights23/07/14 10:13 PM
-7

Women trade sex for emotional intimacy. Men trade emotional intimacy for sex. That might be a stereotype, but it tends to hold true in most cases. So a man who wants to "hit it and quit it" is generally despised by women. It is a perfectly reasonable response, for women, when a man is complaining about not enough sex, to assume something else is wrong with his relationship. So, Dude, you made a spreadsheet about our sex life? Great, and now go fuck yourself. Do you think having sex is like takin…
/r/MensRights22/07/14 01:34 PM
1

I personally prefer Lucky jeans. I refuse to medicate and operate that preference away. :)
/r/MensRights22/07/14 12:42 PM
1

r/Divorce and r/ForeverAlone are both very supportive subreddits, if anyone is looking for one. I am particularly impressed with moderator LaTuFu in r/Divorce. He's a divorced man with sole custody of his children who gives consistently excellent and supportive advice.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 02:25 PM
1

This is such a difficult issue. It is easy to see how a pregnant heroin addict would choose to just skip all prenatal care, and take even more heroin when she goes into labor to give birth at home. On the flip side, babies are being harmed. There is no easy answer.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 02:12 PM
2

My ex-wife and her attorney believe that because I have not been in full compliance with the 2004 consent order, they can revert my child support back to the 1995 divorce decree, and that nothing I paid under the 2004 order applies -- they are doing 3rd grade math using 3rd grade logic. Under the 1995 decree, I was subject to a 4% per year cost-of-living-adjustment and the ordered amount was higher. If you do the math properly, there is a difference between the 1995 decree and the 2004 consent o…
/r/MensRights21/07/14 02:00 PM
2

TMZ reports that the former “The View” co-host wants a judge to rule that she “has no parental rights or responsibilities,” including not to be granted custody or named as his parent, because she believes that Sally sought to have a surrogate baby in order to eventually divorce her and get her to pay child support. What she wants a judge to do and what a judge will actually do are two completely different things. She might as well suck it up. She is going to be paying child support. Apparently, …
/r/MensRights20/07/14 05:47 AM
1

You base that on all those positive studies of the results of single parents raising children? /sarcasm You need to get beyond a high school definition of romantic ability. Stable happy marriages occur between two people with romantic ability. People who spend their lives endlessly "hitting it and quitting it" do not have superior romantic ability, because they lack the social skills to maintain actual committed intimate relationships.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 04:14 AM
1

When you teach your children that 50 percent of adults are so evil that you should never trust them or enter into a relationship with them, and the children interact with those adults all the time, people are most definitely going to notice. Mentally ill people have their children taken away all the time. Sit back and look at your post. A paranoid, ranting ramble based on the flimsiest of justifications and alleged evidence. By the way, do you know who your father is? Have you done a DNA test to…
/r/MensRights20/07/14 04:03 AM
1

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/science-proves-it-men-lie-more-than-women/ Your survey doesn't match this one.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 03:53 AM
1

I suggest you read it again.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 03:33 AM
1

A high level of social skills is needed to effectively raise children. OP is clearly not exhibiting that, and don't even get me started on his bizarre paranoia about women. Who are his nannies going to be? Who is going to be his children's primary school teachers? Women he can't talk to and think are dangerous to him? He would be a catastrophe as a parent. One step out of line, and with these crazy views, CPS will take the kids away from him. Which all things considered, would be for the best. S…
/r/MensRights19/07/14 09:45 PM
1

Once again, get back to me after you have raised a child from birth to age 6. You are just talking from sheer arrogance in the meantime about parenting.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 09:35 PM
1

..sick and twisted... Yeah, exactly the kind of people we want raising children. Seek help, Dude. Seriously, seek help.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 09:24 PM
-1

Get back to me after you have actually raised a child from birth to age 6.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 06:16 PM
0

OMG! Women are people. Children are also people. Small, often irrational, poorly communicating, constantly needy, extremely high maintenance little people. It's not like bringing home a gecko. Also, you can't imagine the pressure to conform to society that is placed on parents.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 04:28 PM
-7

Right, because Hillary Clinton was so much less qualified to be President than Obama. /sarcasm
/r/MensRights19/07/14 04:10 PM
-3

(not victim blaming here, but still, I do think that men shouldn't walk into these situations when they know that this is probably going to happen)....This has lifted a great weight off of my shoulders. I no longer feel as much pressure to conform to society and don't feel as bad about not being able to attract women. Dude, wake up and smell the coffee. You can't deal with half the adult human population. (I'm not even going to address your bizarre rationalizations for not attempting to do so.) …
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:35 PM
2

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/father-kills-molester-texas-no-charges_n_1610465.html Sometimes the law gets it right.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:17 PM
1

While I agree that domestic abuse allegations can be a cesspool of fraud, not every case is like that. She was a SAHM, and took the 3 kids and ran when she had him arrested for beating her up. A woman with a plan would have known right then to stay in the house. She would have known to grab some of the joint funds. This woman didn't. She just ran. leave your wife and kids homeless No, you do not only give your wife and kids $20. for many months, while they are homeless and live on welfare, tryin…
/r/MensRights14/07/14 03:04 PM
1

Really? Why don't these facts matter? Here’s what emerges from the court records: Madeleine White was not working because, five years ago, the family abruptly moved from Ontario to British Columbia to accommodate Darrin’s job, according to the judge’s summary of the evidence: “She says she was required, in short order, to cease her employment.” Since that time, she was unable to find more than casual employment. When she left the family home with the three children in January, police charged Dar…
/r/MensRights13/07/14 05:34 PM
2

http://www.fightforhonestjournalism.ca/LawsuitDocA/Article-Landsberg.htm#_Hlk744033791,3025,3028,66,,Per The facts of the Darrin White story are hotly disputed, and led to lawyers in Canada strongly stating that his legal problems came from being advised by a men's rights activist, instead of by an attorney.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 01:53 AM
1

No, just no. Sexual maturity in women includes floods of hormones which change genital tissue. The hymen, if it even still exists, thins and becomes friable. The vagina thickens and expands. Normal sex does not create lacerations, so also no scars, in a mature woman.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 08:13 PM
1

http://www.pathguy.com/abuseexm.htm Fondling is not going to leave scars. Penetration of the hymen of a four-year-old girl by an adult man's penis will surely rupture the hymen. The literature is divided on the question of whether the latter can heal without a scar. If this is true, then the most horrible sexual abuse can give a normal exam, and physical findings can never exonerate a defendant. As a pathologist, I don't believe this. It doesn't make sense, and I have been unable to find a follo…
/r/MensRights08/07/14 01:05 PM
-5

Dude, you need all the logic you can get. Start looking for wisdom in fortune cookies and cracker jack boxes. Every little bit helps.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 11:51 AM
1

http://www.irs.gov/publications/p463/ch03.html $25. limit per person on gift deductions.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 02:23 AM
-12

Blah, blah, blah. I already addressed the issue of her allegedly being unprofessional, and tweeting a picture of an actual exhibit and actual words spoken is not lying. A reporter is not required to put the "twist" on them that AVfM would prefer. We live in a "sound bite" world. Smart organizations don't hand out negative sound bites if they don't want to see them on twitter. What we are seeing here with this irrational heated over-reaction is that AVfM is the one with the feelz problem.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 02:09 AM
2

I didn't see any articles with more information. However, if a grown man repeatedly rapes an 8 year old girl, there is likely to be tearing and then scar tissue formed. An exam even years later can find scar tissue, and in an 18 year old who presumably has not given birth, that would be significant.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 01:54 AM
-11

Feelz? Funny, I didn't see AVfM objecting to these feelz from the husband of one of the speakers, who also wasn't just fucking reporting on the conference: But although the specifics were interesting, the thing that struck me most about the gathering was the palpable lack of gender tension. Men and women at this conference seemed to be on the same page, and the same team, in a way that seems almost surprising in these gender-divided times. Now of course that author's feelz are rather horribly un…
/r/MensRights08/07/14 01:25 AM
1

Business charitable deductions are limited to no more than 10 percent of net profits, and must be to a "real" charity, as in one with the proper legal structure.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 12:56 AM
1

If donations are going straight into his pocket, he is taking the income as an individual. Not as business income. Even if he claims it as a business, (tricky at best considering his post statements), any deductions for donations he makes to other MRA associations and activities are not really deductable. This is quite a tangled tax situation.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 11:49 PM
-11

Yesterday's AVfM post was about how Paul Elam refuses to reveal any information about donated funds, other than "the money goes in my pocket", and today's post is about barring reporters who made unfavorable comments from future conferences. So much for transparency...
/r/MensRights07/07/14 10:30 PM
-10

If the only favorable major news article about the conference was written by the spouse of one of the conference speakers, (which AVfM's post neglected to mention), insulting the other reporters is not going to be very helpful. Also, reporters today use twitter and facebook and email, for instant public updates. Jessica K. Roy was working when she tweeted out direct quotes and a picture of an exhibit. Lecturing her and Time magazine that she should have sat respectfully learning the assembled wi…
/r/MensRights07/07/14 10:19 PM
6

Every dollar donated goes right into my pocket. Considering the likely annual amount of donations, one third or more of that money then goes right to the IRS and State and local taxes. There is a reason people set up non-profit and charitable organizations, and that is a big one.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 08:22 PM
2

At least by saying typically a man, there is some remote suggestion it might not be a man. Why do I feel this is moving at the speed of glaciers? Is there any way to jump start public perception?
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:55 PM
2

I hope he sues her for civil damages. Thankfully she will never be a Barrister.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:52 PM
2

http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/01/texas_man_pays_child_support_debt_yet_still_headed_to_prison.html Really, how about this one? It looks pretty sympathetic to the father. Judge says he walked out of the courtroom and she found him in contempt. He is going to jail for CONTEMPT, not for over-paying his child support. Which was upheld by the Appellate Court.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:19 PM
2

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/childsupport.asp How many times is this fake story going to be repeated on this subreddit? This father was far behind on his support payments when the mother's attorney filed the original motion. After dragging it out, he paid up right before the last court hearing, then flipped out in court when the judge told him he also had to pay the mother's $3,000. attorney fees. As for the employer screwing up on payments, what kind of moron doesn't know if money is be…
/r/MensRights27/06/14 02:18 PM
3

http://www.bactrack.com/pages/bactrack-mobile-breathalyzer I hate to say it, but breathalyzing is an excellent idea. Along with keeping a record of the results.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 05:23 PM
1

Wouldn't a post with many positive and negative votes still be under the controversial section? So instead of filtering by top or new, you can filter by controversial.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 02:53 PM
0

Directly from the linked news article: At this point charges have not been filed. Police said pending the outcome of their investigation the father could face a charge of involuntary manslaughter. This contradicts the post title.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 02:38 PM
2

Explain it to me slowly. How the heck is anyone afraid of a statue?
/r/MensRights20/06/14 12:06 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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