TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

unexpecteditem Archive

View 40 posts and 2,238 comments by unexpecteditem 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)
264

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights11/10/12 05:26 PM
123

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights02/02/14 01:53 PM
58

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights14/01/13 11:45 AM
58

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights04/12/12 09:42 AM
57

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights14/08/12 10:59 PM
44

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights09/04/13 11:14 AM
38

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights15/01/13 11:19 AM
36

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:16 AM
35

Opinionunexpecteditem/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:07 PM
29

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights18/05/13 12:36 AM
27

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights18/08/12 05:00 PM
21

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights09/02/14 03:31 PM
21

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:53 PM
17

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights14/05/13 11:57 AM
17

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights07/04/13 12:42 AM
12

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights19/11/12 06:35 PM
9

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights18/05/13 11:50 AM
8

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights02/10/12 08:08 PM
7

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights20/01/14 02:30 AM
6

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights14/05/13 11:45 AM
6

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:01 PM
6

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights24/12/12 02:01 PM
5

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights31/03/13 01:14 PM
5

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights09/02/13 02:10 AM
4

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights09/05/13 07:08 PM
3

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights09/10/12 11:52 AM
2

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights22/04/13 06:03 PM
2

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights10/11/12 10:30 PM
2

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:39 AM
1

unexpecteditem/r/askTRP15/05/18 09:46 PM
1

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights02/03/13 01:19 AM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights07/03/13 08:07 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights08/01/13 07:15 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights25/02/13 01:56 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights14/05/13 09:41 AM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights04/10/12 02:11 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights19/05/13 07:46 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights19/11/12 06:14 PM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights01/11/12 02:54 AM
0

unexpecteditem/r/MensRights27/10/12 04:00 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,238 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Fantastic post. Thanks.
/r/MensRights23/04/21 01:05 PM
2

Pertinent and penetrating!
/r/askTRP16/05/18 02:31 AM
6

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30835245 Teacher Stuart Kerner's pupil sex sentence 'cannot be reviewed' 15 January 2015 Stuart Kerner had sex with the girl the same week his wife had a miscarriage The Attorney General's Office says a suspended sentence handed to a teacher, who had sex with a pupil, cannot be reviewed for being too lenient. Stuart Kerner, 44, from Kent, received an 18-month suspended sentence for two counts of sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust. The Att…
/r/MensRights30/09/15 10:41 AM
10

Didn't it turn out the man was wanted for something else? Interesting that they were panicked over people having sex.
/r/MensRights19/04/15 04:17 PM
2

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 02:40 PM
3

Howdy friends, I'm here to promote a dialogue between our two peoples, or at least better understand our differences, You're not banned. That's one difference.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 03:56 AM
4

Why did you completely change your comment? You had a long comment agreeing with mine, as I recall, and now, for some reason, you've changed it to a token of indifference: "Meh". What's that about?
/r/MensRights09/04/15 11:29 PM
10

Also of interest, men who, for whatever reason, are not attractive to women are often told they lack things like self-esteem and confidence, and should just have more of them. Although psychologists will bristle, it often seemed to me that this basically translates to what this article is calling "narcissism", or if you prefer, assertiveness and desire for power. From the article: The results suggest male narcissists are seen as high-status figures with “the ability to acquire resources, and tha…
/r/MensRights09/04/15 09:22 PM
1

Yes. It has become that way, but now we're moving from nature to culture. But you're right. Feminism has removed the stigma of single status from women and attached it to men, or was it always attached to men? I wonder whether it had developed along with the decline in marriage and the censure of pre-marital sex? Just wondering.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 04:22 PM
1

Yes. That is important for a man. But we are talking about single status. Without doubt, women have a natural drive, your expression, to find the love of their lives and be adored by him for her beauty, her cooking, her house-keeping and her femininity (Feminists: I'm getting this straight from de Beauvoir and have the quotes ready). I would only add...she also wants to be adored for her fine ass, and all this from girlhood. So why is she not equally susceptible to single-shaming, being left on …
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:44 PM
1

Doesn't really explain it.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 01:45 PM
2

But I have a penis. Very good for sexy times, no? /s
/r/MensRights07/04/15 01:45 PM
2

Yes. They do. Why does that only work when applied to men?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:25 AM
3

Oh, I see, of course. But you said it best at the end. "Have no girlfriends". So, just as I suspected, it's single shaming. Does that work both ways, or is it a man special? Shouldn't we be taking a look at that? EDIT: Any relation to virgin shaming? Research project by gender studies department at a university near you. Not.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:21 AM
6

"Basement dwellers" was interesting. What sort of shaming is that?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:15 AM
1

It's the reference to the amygdala that really seals it.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 12:54 AM
3

Me too.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 10:32 PM
2

I know. Complete with neurophysiology.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 10:32 PM
2

Karen Straughan's video on this topic is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9XDb0nxSO4 Worth a look.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 02:40 PM
3

No. I mean the idea merits more exploring
/r/MensRights05/04/15 07:32 PM
17

"I'm sorry you found this offensive, you pathetic little creeps".
/r/MensRights05/04/15 06:51 PM
6

Yes. I think the friend zone idea is interesting and pertinent. For one thing, it really upsets feminists. That's always a good sign. It contains an important truth. I think it could do with more exploring. OP: Google "Scott Aaronson". I've never been completely satisfied with Karen Straughan's analysis, though it's good. I don't think she's quite put her finger on the problem. Sorry my thoughts on this are vague. OP: Have you seen Karen's video on the "nice guy" phenomenon. Worth a look. When f…
/r/MensRights05/04/15 06:25 PM
1

Of course, some might say rules to protect women and children are justice. Say more.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 11:36 AM
1

In Saudi you can be arrested for talking to women. Also *faux pas Sorry.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 03:34 PM
8

"Your discomfort makes me uncomfortable".
/r/MensRights19/03/15 11:54 PM
4

I was made to feel uncomfortable and triggered, as a survivor.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 11:50 PM
8

Shocking case from a country that lacks our standard of the rule of law. However, let's not get too smug. Remember Bijan Ebrahimi, beaten to death and set alight in the streets of sunny Bristol, England, after being falsely accused, verifiably falsely accused, of being a paedophile. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10420713/Bijan-Ebrahimi-An-innocent-man-thrown-to-the-mob.html
/r/MensRights07/03/15 08:50 PM
3

Well, I thought that was just wonderful, beautifully written, and engaging. Splendid! The comments were good too. That book by Creveld looks worth a read.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 09:26 PM
1

Jeremy Hunt said more women should be promoted to senior positions to help bring an end to a “macho and bullying” culture in too many parts of the NHS. Quite. EDIT: Nothing could possibly go wrong there. /s
/r/MensRights17/12/14 09:45 PM
1

Hypergamy, hypoagency and self-objectification (narcissism?) come to mind.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 07:38 PM
10

http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting/2011/01/more_thoughts_on_trimet_seat_h.html Seat hogging, mostly prissy women, is the real problem.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 12:00 PM
5

Did I misread you? Sorry.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 12:19 PM
5

I have no sympathy with these norm-enforcing self appointed people and their criminal immoral violence, nor the police who neglect their duty to enforce the law out of their own motive of lazy conformity. What exactly did they do to you? The police need to act on this stuff. Assault is unacceptable. Also, it's a hate crime.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 12:12 PM
3

I agree. Violence will certainly stop you. I sympathize. Theoretically you have recourse to the police in such cases. Do they do anything? I didn't realize you were the target of violence.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 10:34 AM
4

No rights without responsibilities.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 08:38 AM
2

Maybe, but why not tell us what makes you think so? Then we can judge for ourselves.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 08:38 AM
5

Dudettes can't be douches, evidently.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 08:37 AM
10

What's stopping you now? Who cares what people think? When will they think something else? I don't know. That's up to them. Right now they don't feel so strongly about it to legislate, so go for it if you're so inclined. Muslims, transvestites and Scotsmen already do.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 08:34 AM
8

Just so you know, men are violent. Women are nice. Stereotypes? Don't be ridiculous. Men are subhuman scum and should suit down, shut up, and stop crying like men-children. /s
/r/MensRights14/10/14 10:29 PM
3

Postmodern feminists have always privileged empowerment over equality, and some feminists, such as Germaine Greer are now openly eschewing equality.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 11:00 AM
6

Women often resist acknowledging their own sexual agency.
/r/MensRights13/09/14 08:34 PM
8

Paedohysteria is nothing to do with preventing actual harm to children and everything to do with regulating male pleasure. Here is proof, if ever it were needed.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 12:17 AM
1

Keep your money separate from hers. If she wants something you don't, let her pay for it.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 10:20 PM
1

Yes. Why did I get downvoted?
/r/MensRights11/08/14 10:18 PM
-1

You want product p? That's fine. I see no need for it myself but I'm not stopping you paying for with your money. As a pro-feminist male I think it would be wrong, even patriarchal, for me to buy it for you... ...dear.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 07:24 PM
1

I don't believe it. I simply don't believe it.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 04:44 PM
2

...because men exist to please women.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 04:37 PM
-1

This is more ban the burka territory than men's rights, though it is also men's rights.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 04:29 AM
2

Well, well, well. There's a bot for that.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 05:36 PM
3

Good article, however men do seek help. Then they get hit in the face with a spade. Also, I wonder about this two women killed by their partners every week in UK business. With a background homicide rate of about 1000 annually, that's about 20 a week, I wonder what happens to the remaining 18, and how many of them are men. Note to self: look it up on the government web site.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 03:23 PM
3

I don't see that. If so, went are the harpies so apoplectic about it?
/r/MensRights25/04/14 09:43 PM
1

Young and attractive?
/r/MensRights25/04/14 09:41 PM
1

No harm at all. Thank you for sharing your understanding with me.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 10:33 PM
1

So they're trying to infect my mind. Starting to sound like Scientology. Those guys owe me the price of a book.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 06:28 PM
1

Programming? Sup with this?
/r/MensRights22/04/14 05:31 PM
1

Thanks. Will any of this damage my mind? :)
/r/MensRights22/04/14 04:58 PM
1

You ought to just forget about it.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 04:04 PM
0

Thanks. Indeed, those two are different. But "keep your money in your front pocket" has the same logical content as "you ought to keep your money in your front pocket". For my purposes, because it's an imperative, I'm happy to count it as an ought statement.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 02:54 PM
1

Thanks. In my book, telling you what to do just is making an ought statement.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:54 PM
1

Thanks. I can look at the subreddit if I get time.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:52 PM
1

Thanks. Might be interesting to look into.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:28 PM
1

So what's the point of it if it can't tell you what to do? Just askin'. I mean, you appear to be using it to inform practical life choices.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 12:28 PM
1

OK. That's the way things are, let's say. But does TRP have anything to say about the way things ought to be?
/r/MensRights22/04/14 12:02 PM
1

I would be grateful for some explication of that first sentence. I like "fart in a tornadoes bit of a difference". I don't know much about TRP.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 11:03 AM
1

Yes. It is funny. Thanks for explaining. But for me, anybody who comes up with: the 'nice guy' exemplifies what they say they 'want' in a man, and that level of blatant hypocrisy would damage their world view. ..gets my vote no matter what else they say.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 11:00 AM
8

Yes. I'm a feminist because I'm an MRA, unlike most current "feminists" who have become increasingly reactionary apologists for patriarchy.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 05:27 AM
1

Great comment. Are you a zoologist? We need you here. Where can I read some of your other writings? One thing though, you speak only about human nature. But what about human ought? Does anything follow from our nature about how we ought to be? You seem to imply that we ought to be just the way our nature constrains is to be. But isn't that a naturalistic fallacy?
/r/MensRights21/04/14 11:10 PM
5

100%
/r/MensRights21/04/14 10:51 PM
2

Downvoting? Congratulations. I think you've hit a nerve.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 10:48 PM
2

I'm just a little Wiesel and I'm terribly worried the fair and reasonable people from AMR and feminist bloggers may use this obvious satire to condemn us for being, well, just like Ms Gold, who yesterday openly enquired whether we should just get rid of all men if we can reproduce without them. Failing to see the point in challenging them blow for blow, I have now started biting my nails in anxiety.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 06:57 AM
5

You appear to have mistaken this "class" for an ordinary part of your education.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 02:26 PM
21

Are seriously letting that Harvard prof bother you? No, no, no. Wear her denunciations as a badge of honour. Start to lose sleep once they stop making them. You have to be kidding.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 06:52 PM
2

Everyone will have their own style. You might as well offer. He's been at this threatening to quit business for some time. Maybe he does need some support.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 06:48 PM
2

This could be just the tip of the iceberg.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 09:46 PM
1

Can you supply examples of the sort of thing you mean.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 07:27 PM
4

The state becomes a substitute husband for women like this. The option to live this way is a privilege men are denied in most cases. The result can be that the mother is the head of the house, with her name on the tenancy, right to buy, and the guy can be kicked out on a whim. Meanwhile, with men losing out badly in a depressed labour market, the mother may be earning more than him, sometimes believe it or not for similar work. And yes, child tax credit is still available for some working mother…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 05:24 PM
16

"Rape" is now an utterly meaningless term and we should forget it if we want to speak precisely about this business.
/r/MensRights12/04/14 08:20 PM
2

Exactly. I mean do we have a place for dentists?
/r/MensRights11/04/14 08:01 PM
1

Absolutely. Besides, are gays getting locked up for 20 years for being gay like g the guy on a false pedo charge.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 05:32 PM
5

Is this also a serious question?
/r/MensRights08/04/14 02:23 PM
37

Serious answer: because feminism is opposed to Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights08/04/14 11:42 AM
-1

I see. A dystopia with "betas" set in 2074. Is out really worth it?
/r/MensRights31/03/14 07:45 PM
1

That looks pretty bad, if true. Terrible to be punched like that by a stranger that knows your name.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 09:54 PM
1

The anti-Christ. And you?
/r/MensRights27/03/14 12:37 AM
4

Hold on a sec. "unwanted sexual experience" Isn't that what Mary Koss called "rape"?
/r/MensRights25/03/14 10:15 PM
2

"It is better to live in the corner of a rooftop than in an open house with a brawling woman".
/r/MensRights25/03/14 04:19 PM
1

How is it working out for you?
/r/MensRights25/03/14 02:16 PM
27

To me the really shocking thing is conspiracy to murder, and it was dropped. Don't get that.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 02:03 PM
3

Feminists, coveting social power, are blind to women's cosmic sexual power. PAGLIA
/r/MensRights25/03/14 01:57 PM
3

The advent of TV and the motion picture do not correlate with the advent of the public paedophilia preoccupation. Twenty years ago no one knew what the term even meant. For the cause of this hysteria we must look elsewhere.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 01:47 PM
9

Good for you. Watch you don't burn [in hell]. Two independent investigations are under way into the murder of an innocent man who was beaten and burned to death after vigilante neighbours mistook him for a paedophile. Guardian
/r/MensRights25/03/14 11:49 AM
12

In shocking news a grandmother was caught on camera attempting to groom a child. NSPCC chief Nora McBatty said, "no stone must be left unturned to clamp down on dodgy old ladies preying on vulnerable children".
/r/MensRights24/03/14 10:46 PM
15

Totally agree. This is a big problem.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 04:22 PM
2

What part of 'no' don't you understand.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 03:07 PM
2

..but it's illegal for men to look at them. Soon.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 02:50 PM
29

A new study says men find women attractive.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 11:23 AM
13

James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal wins hands down.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 04:05 PM
3

I think your response to this issue is a red herring. I mean, on the one hand you are absolutely correct. We don't need selective service any more. But I think there is something far more important that is getting entirely ignored when we have this discussion. That female privilege is a thing at all. Female privilege was created as a solution to the problem of protecting women. We don't need it anymore. Far more good would come out of us demanding an end to female privilege then demanding an end…
/r/MensRights23/03/14 12:33 PM
2

Don't you think it tells us something if the only way they can answer our case is by misrepresenting it.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 09:49 PM
0

A princess.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 01:23 AM
3

Perhaps feminist logic, please.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 08:03 PM
53

Never hit a woman. Do what the fuck the want with men. Just another example of the hazards men face for being men.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 03:23 PM
161

Men and women should be treated the same way. Either women should be punished equally or men should be shown the same leniency as this woman was.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:22 PM
1

That cuts against widespread assumptions I would require evidence, but yeah, I could well believe it.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 12:20 PM
3

"How much help would I get if I murdered him?", perhaps.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 12:18 PM
2

My feminist friend, we all have to have some, when faced with this statistic about women filing more than men, said almost without pausing, "Yes, but why do they file?" implying their husbands had cheated on them.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:29 AM
1

Women don't marry houseboys. Houseboys remain a uniquely distasteful preference. "Get a life", they will tell you. Anything but acknowledge the truth.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:25 AM
1

Very wise, both of you. Unconditional love. You don't hear much about that any more.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:23 AM
6

Sadly, this has been my experience too. But others doubt it, and it's nice to have some research to show them to back up the theory of hypergamy.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:19 AM
6

The female case worker flat-out told me that my son and I could get more help if I divorced my husband. I stare at this sentence and pause.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:15 AM
3

It perpetuates traditional sex role stereotypes that pressure men and women to behave according to their sex. This particular phrase imposes on men the expectation they will be stronger than women and so more capable of earning money, therefore they ought to provide for and protect their womenfolk. It's all part of am outdated package. I agree with you. I find this stereotype sexist.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 07:45 PM
3

Quite. Also, one might just as well argue, as was once the standard view, that women bear more responsibility because they have less testosterone, and therefore less sex drive, and can more easily resist, whereas men are helpless captives of their hormones. One might just as well argue this. I'm not saying it's any better. I'm just saying where she's starting from doesn't necessarily get her where she wants to go. She just decided and then went there.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 09:07 PM
14

"..in one of the school's introduction to computer science courses". Don't storm the ramparts just yet.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 11:46 AM
3

Excellent article. Thanks for posting it and thanks to Harry for writing it.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 04:25 PM
1

Oh I see. You're not like me. OK.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 03:09 PM
4

The post is trifling nonsense. It is precisely because men are viewed as big, bad sex monsters that do sex to innocent women who don't want it and just allow men to have some sex in exchange for provision and protection that rape of women is huge, rape of men is nothing, and false allegations are so readily believed.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 11:38 AM
1

This article trades in traditional sexist stereotypes of men. Age According to this article educated men prefer younger women. I've always been quite content with a woman my own age. Maybe I'm weird. More likely to share cultural references for what it's worth. Wage The male ego cannot cope with his wife earning more, evidently. I'd be perfectly happy to be a househusband. More time to read Chomsky. Intellectual It's important for your partner to get Chomsky references, evidently. It would be ni…
/r/MensRights18/02/14 10:40 AM
1

I was hoping I might get a response to my answer to the question you posted I'm out sub. Was it unworthy of you or are you too busy?
/r/MensRights17/02/14 07:20 PM
34

It's shocking when a woman had to face life on the same terms as a man.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 06:48 PM
3

Why do you only have two comments in your history, both within the last hour?
/r/MensRights15/02/14 09:21 PM
-3

Well argued and watertight, dood. What kind of slut takes a doosh anyway?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 03:58 PM
2

Male hypogamy is a myth to prevent women with success having to admit hypergamy.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 03:50 PM
1

Yep. What a bunch of bs from the femis. I actively look for a man who is willing to take on a more active family dynamic. She left out "but my vag forces me to select high achievers in a field I value, regardless". I offered my partner to clean house, cook, do the shopping in exchange for her paying for the groceries, because being out of work out, it would save me money. She changed the lock on the door and refused to give me a key, told all her friends I lack ambition and accused me of wanting…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 02:41 PM
4

I came to believe that the sex roles displayed by boys and girls were being socially imposed on us from an early age and felt instinctively that a life spent constraining my deeper nature by those cultural norms would be a life wasted to pretence and needless self-denial. From about the age of seven I wanted boys and girls to stop pretending and to be themselves so that they could truly live and truly love. I wanted women to be free from the constraints of domestic and child-rearing life role ex…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 09:21 PM
23

Excellent point. Why do we tolerate these utterly unselfaware feelwhiners for a second. First off, half this stuff causes them no harm. It just hurts their feels, to use a term the femis like to use against us. Secondly, even if it did, fine, go after the one who caused actual harm. I'll join you. Don't pick on me. I did nothing. Thirdly, it's the same old shit as ever, isn't it. Feminists simply won't acknowledge that the vast majority of women tend to like bona fide creepy behaviour as long as…
/r/MensRights10/02/14 03:42 PM
11

Yep. I've been doing these things all my life. Then I notice guys who don't get the girls. And then girls shame me for not having, I don't know, oomph or something. What a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 03:33 PM
1

the truth may be drowned out from lack of resources to spread it, and choked out by untruths and lies This assumes precisely the reverse of "the dissident voice may contain truth".
/r/MensRights09/02/14 11:04 PM
1

Notice that in your first paragraph you assume that your ideas are correct and you are promoting the truth. That's exactly the danger. It is natural to believe that, but you can't assume it. The rest I don't disagree with.
/r/MensRights09/02/14 06:55 PM
1

I'm not sure what your point is. Replying to an earlier comment from you: You seem to be under the impression that the truth, and the best argument inevitably win out, and on a reasonable time scale. I don't know how you gain this impression. Truth, whatever that is, will be disputed and may not "win out". The danger of censorship is that truth may be censored. As for a reasonable time, who knows. It may take a thousand years. I'd rather that than live as a slave. It's really that simple. I don'…
/r/MensRights09/02/14 05:31 PM
-1

OK then. Suit down, shut up, and do what I tell you.
/r/MensRights09/02/14 01:00 AM
1

Sorry. Missed that. Getting old.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 11:34 AM
1

Thanks. Now it's clear.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 11:32 AM
1

Yes. This is what Stalinists call "no platform". I can understand it too. I just don't agree with it.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 11:31 AM
1

There is a school of thought that says that if you provide a private platform for a perspective and specifically choose not to approve a post or comment for publication, you endorse it to one degree or another, if only in it's legitimacy as a perspective. Please consider editing out the word "not" in the first sentence. As it stands I'm not sure it's what you want to say.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 01:33 AM
6

Yes.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 01:07 AM
5

Yes. She is either not convinced her own arguments will stand the test, or she thinks they will but doesn't want to sharpen them against her adversaries, or she knows damn well she may be lose the argument but has no interest in the truth.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 12:57 AM
3

Exactly.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 12:54 AM
6

The same reasons for governments not censoring speech apply to private spaces, many of those reasons anyway, such as a concern for truth. The censored voice may speak the truth. That is one of the main reasons against censorship. Stimulation of thought to examine more closely one's own arguments is another, even if you wind up even more convinced you were right. And if the false is so manifestly false why not let its proponents make a mockery of themselves rather than censoring them.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 12:53 AM
1

Yes. But how would you moderate them on yours: disappear everything you dislike without compunction?
/r/MensRights08/02/14 12:50 AM
1

I see what you mean.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:07 PM
1

He was never charged or tried. How do you know he was any more guilty than William Roache. The police and the media had the nation convinced he was guilty too.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:02 PM
1

Who were you thinking of in particular?
/r/MensRights07/02/14 01:35 PM
1

Examples would be useful.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 01:33 PM
4

Was there something in woody Allen's persona from his early films that feminists find deeply threatening. I always found him a sympathetic male character who carefully observed some of the dilemmas men face in the modern world. Is there something going on like if nice guy's can be rapists then so can all the others?
/r/MensRights05/02/14 05:59 PM
1

Fair point. I stoop not. I keep my snot. [sniff] ;-)
/r/MensRights05/02/14 10:04 AM
1

is not one that is offered mutually Do you notice how he willfully misrepresents what you wrote. Knowing perfectly well what you meant, he takes advantage of your use of the passive voice and pretends to believe you meant he is not offering it mutually. what am I not offering you mutually? I notice this game a lot. Willfully misrepresent what someone says and then reply to that, instead of what they quite clearly meant. This is not an honest way of doing business. Two could play at that game.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 12:47 AM
1

I think I understand you now. So when /u/plasmatorture wrote: [T]he only reason you think they're dressed like sex objects is because you objectify the female anatomy. Women are allowed to dress however they want. Because you have decided to associate hips, breasts, and asses with fertility and thus sex your penetrating gaze is literally raping all the poor young girls you see in the mall. You sick disgusting pedophile, you should be locked up in jail. And you replied: [Y]ou're 100% correct: It'…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 01:04 AM
1

On the one hand women demand that they not be perceived as sexual objects, while on the other they dress in sexually provocative clothing that makes the exact opposite statement. What is your view of this sentence in general, independently of the context of the original post?
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:59 AM
1

My interpretation would be that you are trying to draw attention to your penis. Do you agree, then, that you can interpret my behavior independently of any knowledge of my intention?
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:52 AM
1

No worries. If it comes back to you let me know.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:44 AM
1

I don't think other attire would necessarily make anyone look less good. Do you think other attire could make anyone look less good?
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:44 AM
1

Are you asking why I think women in shorts look good? No. I'm asking what is it about the short shorts that make them "look good", rather than some other attire in which they look less good?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 09:25 PM
1

Can you see that Malaka was not asserting that "the girls wore nothing but a g-string and they were topless". Sure, Splendid. We have arrived at a happy vista where we agree at long last. Now, would you be willing to join me just for a second in imaging that the girls wore nothing but a g-string and they were topless? I'm not asking you to agree that's it's true, or ever would be. I'm asking you to join me in examining what would follow if it were true. Just let's say it is true for now and then…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 09:12 PM
1

Thank you. Do I get the book contract?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 09:03 PM
1

That may or may not be, but it doesn't answer my point. Can you see that Malaka was not asserting that "the girls wore nothing but a g-string and they were topless". Do you understand the meaning of the word "if"? This is important. If you don't understand the word "if" then things are going to be very difficult. You wouldn't understand the last sentence, for instance.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 09:01 PM
1

the only reason you think they're dressed like sex objects is because you objectify the female anatomy. What did you think this phrase meant? It is part of the comment you said is "100% correct". I notice you haven't answered the second question. I take it the answer is yes?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:58 PM
1

Thank you for that. I had no idea. Makes me want to rush off and read "Ten Days That Shook the Word".
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:51 PM
1

My interpretation would be that you are trying to draw attention to your penis. So you agree/concede that an interpretation can be make independently of the intention of the wearer, and that that interpretation can quite validly be that the wearer is trying to draw attention? I'll have to look at this more closely, but at first blush that's what it looks like, and it seems to concede everything the guy needs from you to support his case?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:49 PM
2

This is true. But if you notice, Malaka said "if" before he said "the girls wore nothing but a g-string and they were topless". In general, when some says "if X..." they do not mean to assert that X is true. Rather, they invite you to consider what would follow if X were true. This is quite different. Can you see that? It follows, then, that Malaka was not asserting that "the girls wore nothing but a g-string and they were topless". To reply that the condition was not satisfied, as you have done…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:18 PM
1

Fair enough, but would you totally reject the idea that women tend to present themselves as sex objects? Also, do you believe that a man's "penetrating gaze" can literally rape young girls?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:06 PM
1

I'd be interested to know what in your view it is about women dressing this way that causes them to look good. I'm not disagreeing with you. They do look good. And I'm not complaining. Perhaps also it's worth asking whether the way a man dresses to look good is the same as the way a woman does?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 06:37 PM
1

You are not a misogynist. Women's power over men depends on applying the twin torque factors of shame and desire. Desire is aroused through the visual presentation of the body. Next up men must feel ashamed of their desire. Oh wicked lech how could you. Then if the man is lucky enough to be chosen his shame is privately redeemed through the love of the woman, the seat of virtue. But all this can be withdrawn, and so woman effects her power. "Feminists, coveting social power, are blind to women's…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 05:53 PM
1

Interesting. I have a friend who works with glass. If I got him to make me a codpiece illuminated by flashing neon lights and wore it in public over my naked penis it would be nobody's business but mine and only a perv would suggest am trying to interject a sexual note into the visual field of onlookers? Is this correct?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 05:36 PM
1

This is interesting. Would you class yourself as a feminist?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 05:30 PM
1

Your straw man fallacy purports to refute an ad hominem imputed to me. Aha! A straw hominem, surely.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 05:01 PM
2

Surely not a perverse sense of humour? No. That would be quite unthinkable.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:53 PM
1

"Shitlord"? Is..is that you, Agatha?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:10 PM
24

My mind, sadly, does not boggle. When Lenin returned from exile in Switzerland (Oh, how i would love to be in Switzerland) the various revolutionary groups had divergent views on how to proceed. People were expecting perhaps a nuanced position that could encompass all the competing views. But when he emerged from his railway carriage he simply declared "all power to the soviets" and disappeared off to his hotel. And that became the standard Bolshevik way of working. Declare a line and stick to i…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 04:08 PM
7

Haha. Touché, you old ratbag. Hey downvoters, he's joking...I think [looks round nervously].
/r/MensRights03/02/14 03:12 PM
5

Fascinating. Can you explain the analogy with voting rights? I don't think I quite get it, but I can be a bit slow.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:05 PM
3

But don't forget we live in a society where more than ninety percent of beds are made by...men.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:45 AM
10

I was moved once but the way it was put was "would you like a window seat sir?". I sure would. Up to that point i had been getting friendly with the mother, perhaps as a preventive measure. Now that I think about it that could have dug me in deeper.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:34 AM
2

"Black Athena", Marshall Berman, wasn't it?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:23 AM
2

I agreed with your first post but your second is, I think, given his explanation unfair. We should nevertheless continue to insult one another. Your baldy head is shinier than silver. Edit: I've just noticed you post in AMR. Of course you are being unfair.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:21 AM
1

Thanks. Please suggest text I could place in the original post that would clear this up. I've lost faith in my ability to communicate. Would be most grateful. Thanks. How did people think I'm defending incest? Do you think they are serious? I think they probably are. It's all a bit disturbing. The context of the example is not meant to be a case of lust that is ok, just of lust referred to as perving. I can't keep repeating this. I told her twice already. She seems to just ignore me.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 09:52 AM
3

When did this come out?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 08:52 AM
1

Thanks. That's all I was talking about.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 07:22 AM
2

My point is that "perving" is now used in place of "lusting after". I am not trying to say the lust referred to in any instance is OK. I am not trying to defend a father lusting after his daughter? I was asked for an example. Any example will do. I gave two. I googled "perving" and one that came up was a girl saying she was worried her father was "perving on" her. This is not to say that that behaviour would be OK, if indeed the fear is well founded, which it may not be. It's just an example of …
/r/MensRights03/02/14 07:13 AM
2

My point is simply that people seem to use "perv" to mean "lust after". I don't think I can presume to say whether it is a misuse. Rather this is just how it was used. After being exposed to many such uses i start to understand what these people mean by it. Now, what interests me is what would make people take a word like "pervert", the noun, and turn it into a transitive verb meaning "lust after". Isn't that interesting. Why would they do that. I don't mean to say this is how it should be used,…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:26 AM
1

Exactly. You understand.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:15 AM
1

You introduced it in this sub-thread, or at least used it in this comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1wq85i/news_from_france_socialists_cops_thieves_and/cf4mfh3
/r/MensRights02/02/14 11:21 PM
9

Fascinating! You have such a derisory view of this sub as evidenced by your comment here: http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1w9nok/someone_asks_the_creator_of_xkcd_not_to_lump/cf04sbt?context=1 Yet you come here to join in on this topic in particular. I wonder why. Is it threatening to you?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:42 PM
1

I'm afraid i don't know precisely. If I should know then you should know even more since you are the one who introduced the term.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:28 PM
1

Well not only that. I googled 'perving'to find examples because people seemed to need them but there are plenty more. Try it yourself. I specifically want to foreclose any suggestion that the term is used only in the above context involving a father and daughter. I claim no authority over its meaning but as best I can tell in UK slang it is a synonym for lust as a verb. I posted another example as well.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:37 PM
1

Yeah but it was just ask example. I googled 'perving' and that's one example I found. There are plenty of others.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:31 PM
3

I don't see our hear it being used in a specifically feminist context though. It seems to have just entered the language as a synonym for 'lust'. Someone else said it's feminists but I really think it's broader than that.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:29 PM
1

Here's another. http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130424045911AABXwPV I'm starting to think this is a British thing. That may me the problem. Brits are a bit... perverse. Sorry. No offence.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:19 PM
2

They is just people. Here's an example. http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110805045900AAm4ZHk
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:14 PM
3

Numerous instances of use I have heard our read, I think, but I now suspect it's regional slang and varies in meaning anyway. Words are like that sometimes.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 07:52 PM
1

Yes. Pink for girls is a recent invention. Early twentieth century if I recall. It could have gone the other way. Pink for boys. This doesn't answer the question. Sorry.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 04:53 PM
3

Hmm. Interesting. Maybe I got it wrong then.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 03:20 PM
1

Yes. It is.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 03:11 PM
1

Your first paragraph appears to draw a distinction between sex and gender. Your second partially identifies the two. Neither tells me what precisely you mean by gender.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 03:10 PM
6

"We perved on them from a distance". Don't they talk like this where you are? Perhaps it's localised slang.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 03:02 PM
1

Correct. You clearly do not understand what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 11:56 AM
1

Everyone means different things by it and dictionaries define it variously. That's just the problem.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 11:54 AM
1

I wasn't looking for a dictionary definition, but rather what you mean by it in this context?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:20 AM
1

What do you mean by "gender"?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:39 AM
5

Why not get dog owners to talk about being cruel to dogs?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:30 AM
3

No. The analogy of blaming all dog owners for the cruelty of some. Nobody does that. Why not? Because nobody wants to gully trip dog owners for owning dogs.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:28 AM
5

I don't hate the cause. What I hate is being blamed for other fuckers' behaviour just because of my sex. Let's have a seminar on stopping the vilification of men. Let's stop the culture of false allegations, for example. Why don't you support that?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:25 AM
4

Yes. Vilifying men does infringe on my rights.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:21 AM
1

That Harry Styles is just adorable.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:15 AM
0

"Fedoras"?
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:12 AM
1

I'm terribly sorry. I thought you were a femitroll. Now I realise you are just someone who insults and make fun of us using the pejorative "fedora". I really must be more careful in future. Sorry.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 12:10 AM
1

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 11:51 PM
4

Toe nazis of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your tow ropes.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:24 PM
5

You dumb schmuck. You need to be diplomatic. Here's how to respectfully disagree with a femi. "Oh babay dear, I just lurv everything you say and feel your pain. Ooh. Ooh. Ooh". See? Simple.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:22 PM
0

AMR shill outed
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:16 PM
0

You're an extremist misandrist who calls us all "fedoras". Close your case. See if I care.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:08 PM
4

If you're so opposed to extremism why do you call us "fedoras"? I smell a rat! As usual.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:07 PM
1

If you're so opposed to extremism why do you call us "Fedoras"?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 10:06 PM
2

No I don't. The harm principle doesn't work that way. If there is harm then you can't do it. There is no harm so the rules can remain.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 08:03 PM
3

Not protected equally by the harm principle which is what matters.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:59 PM
3

Physical is given. Spiritual is chosen.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:22 PM
0

Jesus Marley read the thread.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:20 PM
1

Thank you.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:53 AM
1

Nobody demanding or requesting an equal mix here.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:52 AM
3

Your analogy with gays is a good one and it shows how this is not a men's rights issue but an issue of religious freedom. There is nothing wrong with the rules as they are. The university is not obliged to change them.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:51 AM
0

Fedora? Are you a feminist? Or just an angry sloth?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:37 AM
2

This is a disanalogy.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:36 AM
1

I notice you have not objected to my claim that he opted in, which was the question. I take it you agree with me.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:34 AM
2

Why the need for sarcasm?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:49 AM
-2

Some years ago all of Pakistan shut its doors to the internet because someone on Facebook set up a group for people to post images of mediaeval traders they claimed were the prophet, even though nobody knows what he looked like. They wanted Facebook to remove the group. They claimed it harmed them by insulting Islam. Do you agree?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:46 AM
2

He is allowed to do what he wants.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:40 AM
-3

By taking the class anyway.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:37 AM
1

If you're going to manipulate someone or something, surely you have to understand pretty well how it will respond to the various levers you pull. I don't understand your take on this. Sorry.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 10:02 PM
1

Men understand women perfectly well. Women understand men perfectly well. The problems start when each try to understand themselves.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 10:00 PM
7

Exactly. You have captured perfectly the spirit of postmodern feminism. And they have a word for this: empowerment. Get it? You can no longer call it equal rights, so you call it empowerment of women, and that includes everything. Postmodern Feminists really think this is just fine. Can't see a problem. Earlier feminist writers I think did have a problem with this. There are glimpses in their writing. But now they are just dismissed as outdated, evidently. I don't think so. The feminine mystique…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 04:02 PM
5

This is fascinating. Thanks for posting.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:52 PM
1

Biting my lip and not participating in that thread is taking just about all the restraint I can muster.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:54 PM
1

I like your spirit. You have nothing to be ashamed of, but have I then overestimated the risk of arrest or public torment unto possible death if suspicions arise? Paedohysteria will run you out of town, unless you like being abused in the street everywhere you go. Evidence there need be none.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:44 PM
-1

Culture? Disapproves? Umm..
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:30 PM
2

Would you like a glass of water?
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:37 PM
2

You're most welcome. I apologize on behalf of the English language. It resists the constraint of logic. England was invaded, first by the Anglo-Saxons, then by the Norse and the Normans, and finally, with the advent of modernity, borrowed heavily from Latin. This dumb language has at least two words for everything and no consistency in its spelling. Sorry about that.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:25 AM
1

Thedre ids nod "d" idn "privilege".
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:16 AM
2

Something may have been inferred by the changing room it was in. Of course, only a cynic would suggest there is a background assumption that paedophiles are male.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:51 PM
1

"A disabled man had innocently left it in his cubicle while he went for a swim."
/r/MensRights20/01/14 10:58 AM
2

Suitable satire on this story from the glorious Anna Racoon. http://annaraccoon.com/2014/01/19/the-leg-end-of-larkfield/
/r/MensRights20/01/14 02:58 AM
0

Well, here's one backup plan. I expect downvotes. Resign yourself. You are a member of an oppressive class of violent males. Or, translating, women have all the power. There is nothing you can do. She can and may take away your child. Here's how things will then stand. Your world will collapse. Everyone you loved and still love will as good as hate you. Your child will, as all children must, play the consumate diplopmat and identify with the person upon whom her survival depends: in this case th…
/r/MensRights19/01/14 09:11 PM
1

Fifty shades of fempocrisy.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 11:08 AM
1

My impression was that she framed women as having been placed, partly by biology, and partly by society, as acted upon, but that she was making a case for now treating women as subjects, ie actors, at least as far as biology allows. If that is the case, I begin to wonder whether we might be able to find common cause with at least that part of her message and pit her against postmodern feminists who represent the bulk of the current crop. I would like to read her again. No web summary seems to do…
/r/MensRights16/01/14 10:08 AM
1

In this video, would you agree that your notion of woman as "acted upon" is similar to Simone de Beauvoir's notion of woman as "Other" from The Second Sex? It's been a long time since I read the book, but I'm pretty sure there's a similarity. I think what de Beauvoir was saying is that women have traditionally been treated as merely acted upon. They should take up their subjectivity like men. That's more or less what you're saying. Or at least, that society, we, should view women as much as acto…
/r/MensRights15/01/14 01:49 PM
2

Yeah. Her publishers probably paid for this piece to be planted in the Daily Mail. Beware of booksellers.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 01:40 PM
1

Whether the proposition "men are privileged" is clearly or loosely defined, it cannot be both true and false at the same time. The question of what it means is quite separate. We do indeed require to be told by those who use the term. In that sense we agree. But here the problem is semantic, concerned with meaning, not logical, concerned with inferential validity. I tried to make this point earlier. Not sure you're with me? If you want to argue that semantics is part of logic then we have a case…
/r/MensRights15/01/14 07:50 AM
1

I've no idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights13/01/14 08:04 AM
2

If all he wants to do is ask, that's fine. If he wants to say, "you should..because of my religion" then not fine.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 09:14 PM
-1

In my religion, secular liberal democracy, forced sex segregation is obscene and offensive.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 08:55 AM
3

Yes. It's ok to think feminism has some validity and women are still not the social equals of men. That's what Warren Farrell thinks. He's our main man. It is not necessary to be oppressed to care about oppression. In fact this standpoint has the merit of impartiality.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 06:33 AM
15

We may deplore the inconsistency whilst at the same time deploring the segregation.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 06:17 AM
1

You mean they don't already?
/r/MensRights11/01/14 09:14 AM
9

Today, America awoke to a new epidemic of male violence against women who annoy them. All across the nation women are being strangled to unconsciousness for expecting men to pay for the dinner, calling men misogynists or even such inoffensive things as pretending to love them when they don't or falsely accusing them off being unspeakably vile sex perverts. "This year had only seen 22 unconsciousness stranglings across the nation", said police Chief Fred Sanguine, "but today figures shot up to 15…
/r/MensRights11/01/14 09:13 AM
2

Question. If body does not determine "gender", how does there come to be a bipolar scale of gender in the first place?
/r/MensRights11/01/14 08:25 AM
4

It may be a serious question, but it is also a leading one. Consider: Do you still beat your wife, or is that all in the past now?
/r/MensRights11/01/14 08:22 AM
14

Honour amongst thieves.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 08:20 AM
1

Shit! That was good shit.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 08:17 AM
-6

Brigade
/r/MensRights09/01/14 05:57 AM
1

Interesting video. Reading between the lines I had the perhaps foolish feeling she feels she isn't getting enough support from MRAs for all her efforts. That worries me. Hope I'm wrong?
/r/MensRights09/01/14 05:39 AM
5

Not quite. Is he serious or not? That's the question. Not is his most recent argument valid and sound. That may remain a question, but a separate one. To the end of answering the first, that he has previously claimed Asians should be exterminated, a manifestly pathetic and absurd position, is indeed relevant. To your question it is not. Granted. Being an ignorant fool I can only take my questions one at a time. Sorry. You may not be interested in whether he's serious. In that case please ignore …
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:50 PM
6

I checked through Ihaveahadron's history and at one point he appears to have been arguing that all Asians ought to be exterminated. Very strange.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:58 AM
1

I like to note, though, that all concepts and words used for the concepts in human interaction are fuzzy, and logic only goes so far. I'm not sure I follow this. Take concept 'c'. Let us leave it fuzzy. It is like the snark from Lewis Carroll. We don't know what it is exactly. We just know we're hunting for it. Now, take the proposition "c exists". Either it is true, or it is not. We need not precisely define the concept 'c' in order to precisely define the truth status alternatives of a proposi…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:54 AM
0

Notice how they hate him..for being hateful. Further comment would be superfluous.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 01:36 AM
1

Agreed. There is an odious whiff coming from somewhere in there.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 10:05 PM
6

Exactly. The teaching of research methods at Russell Group universities has evidently declined.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 10:03 PM
2

You old devil, you.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 09:56 PM
2

It turns out this fallacy has a name in Latin. A Reductio ad Hitlerum, also known as "playing the Nazi card", is a form of the fallacy of irrelevance that consists of trying to refute an opponent's view by comparing it to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler. It is a tactic often used to derail arguments, because such comparisons tend to distract and anger the opponent
/r/MensRights02/01/14 09:54 PM
2

Even if Hitler was an MRA (unlikely) it doesn't follow that all MRAs are like Hitler. Take Hitler's vegetarianism. Are all vegetarians like Hitler? Of course not. It's a pathetic argument. Further comment would be superfluous.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 09:42 PM
23

The logic escapes him because he is willfully blind. It's quite simple. The point was to show how vulnerable the system is to abuse, not to genuinely accuse anyone of rape. How silly this false outrage is!
/r/MensRights23/12/13 03:16 AM
1

Come in mercury. This is planet earth. Are we reaching?
/r/MensRights20/12/13 03:14 PM
1

Yes. That's the one I was trying to think of
/r/MensRights19/12/13 08:34 PM
11

As i recall, Mary Daly thought this. If you try, you can sort of see how it makes sense. Like trying to see those special photographs in 3-D if you squint the right. way I like the place it leaves your mind. It's like the Wittgenstein duck-rabbit. "Oh yes. I suppose you could see it that way of you wanted to". Bizarre.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 01:05 AM
-1

Very few redditors can read, seemingly.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:34 PM
-1

Read Roiphe, "The morning after". Might your friend's friend have made it up to give herself cache with the sisterhood? It is immoral to put fear of ridicule above public duty.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:33 PM
-2

Thanks for your output.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:21 PM
-6

Yes. You have been raped. Stigma and trauma are yours. Like all victims you may initially be in denial. It is important you find the strength to come forward. Fill in that form. Click that button. I know reliving the experience can be painful. Remember you are not alone.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:17 PM
1

Yes. I enjoyed that very much. Thanks.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:56 AM
3

And warren Farrell? What's wrong with Paglia? She seems to be getting better with age. What bugs me is supposedly sympathetic feminists showing up on this sub and flatly denying the validity of men's lived experience around issues like false rape, or harassment insinuations, or the "nice guy" and then getting upvoted for some reason. Are we scared to appear too extreme or just getting brigaded? It can be used to tell.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:45 AM
1

If you're not one of us, you're one of them. You can run but you can't hide. It's all pretty tribal. And Stalinist. Just get in line and do what the central committee says. Just as well these people don't have a red army.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:34 AM
3

This is where feminism was in the 1970s. Then one day we woke up and it was mainstream.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:23 AM
-7

Edgy.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:21 AM
-2

You must be smoking some good shit, man. Where did you get it?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:20 AM
1

Umm, age of consent in 1899? Probably about 13.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:08 AM
2

This is a shocking betrayal of the sisterhood. Where are the furies when you need them?
/r/MensRights16/12/13 10:30 PM
1

I'd say it may matter to Mathematicians, who will either be persuaded or not by each other's proofs and may look to the principles of logic to resolve disputed cases. Go ahead and suggest a title on the relation of formal to everyday logic if you happen to know any you can recommend?
/r/MensRights16/12/13 01:33 PM
-3

My experience has been that claims that sex is biologically determined are not well received in this sub.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:39 AM
-2

Rape!
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:30 AM
2

It all depends what you mean by feminism, which is to say, on semantics, n but you're not here for that.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 10:51 AM
2

My take on the implications of quantum mechanics for the view I'm trying to defend (let's call it naive realism) is that one has no bearing on the other because the problems quantum mechanics deals with are epistemological (concerned with what we can know), whereas naive realism is an ontological thesis (concerned with what there is). Just because you can't know something, doesn't mean there's no such thing as the way it is.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 04:38 AM
1

Yes. I'm off to die in a mountain too.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 12:57 AM
4

From the satirized article: There exist logics that handle contradiction as part of the system, namely paraconsistent logic. I think this type of logic represents the feminist idea that something can be and not be without being a contradiction, that is a system where the following statement is not explosive: (p && ¬p) == 1. What's interesting here is that there can be a relationship between philosophic world view and programming. For example, object oriented programming always struck me as strai…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 10:32 PM
1

Certainly interesting. Bookmarked.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:49 PM
3

Words have validity now? You want to legislate for "necessity or appropriateness"? Are you calling me unreasonable? I could call that childish. "Fempocrisy" is fine. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to. If you don't like it, use "feminist hypocrisy" instead. I don't see the point in word policing. Enough already.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:41 PM
7

Excellent explanation. Bang on. Thanks. Now I get it.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:38 PM
2

"have to"? Did anybody say "have to"? I must have been sleeping. I thought you were saying "have to not".
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:35 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:32 PM
1

Disjuncts can be inclusive or exclusive in both formal and informal logic.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:31 PM
4

"Infuriating", "polarizing", and "buzzword" are all examples of the same linguistic tendency and were once neologisms. "Buzzword" in particular, looks like a fairly recent portmanteau? Should we go back to Chaucer? Or Latin? How about ancient Greek? Or just shut up altogether?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 07:00 PM
3

Yeah. I know. But is there a specific target? This Arielle Schlesinger perhaps.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:53 PM
3

I don't think you quite got my point. Have considered applying for an MBA?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:51 PM
12

Or to be more precise it attempts to establish a formal system by which arguments that a conclusion must follow from a set of premises can be tested for validity. What I don't get is how this differs in principle from our ordinary sense of logic. Both depend on the principle of non-contradiction that postmodernists abhor. Formal logic merely aims to formalise our ordinary logical intuition, surely?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:49 PM
8

The femtyping of femporisy is very femophobic.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:38 PM
2

Fedora?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:32 PM
10

It's a kind of rape.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:31 PM
3

Python? Wicked. Do we have "original sin"? And then there's Apple. . . Hmm.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:29 PM
5

I thought that was the satire. What is its target in particular. Surely no one proposes such a language.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:27 PM
-2

Yes. "Fempocrisy" is good. We need more of this.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:23 PM
3

Femophobia.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:21 PM
9

That's interesting. Got any examples of what you mean? I wasn't even so sure women are socially excluded. Perhaps you mean in the past. But how did they build it themselves? Just asking.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:20 PM
6

Please explain how the specific concept differs from the ordinary one?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:16 PM
8

"This is a reactionary, sexist piece of shit". Exactly! That's basically why we are here. We are defending men and women from reactionary, sexist shit.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:14 PM
1

Because this is a domain in which da bitches be da boss, obviously. This is the big dark truth that "feminists" can't or won't acknowledge because to do so would undermine the legitimacy of so much of the correlate power tradition has endowed them and which they would urge women to relinquish were they true egalitarians.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:29 AM
2

Now they tell me. Sheesh!
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:23 AM
1

The word "helpful" is helpful, as long as it's used appropriately.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:22 AM
8

Exactly. As Camille Paglia puts it, "Feminists, coveting social power, are blind to women's cosmic sexual power".
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:20 AM
1

Not so much a favor, just manipulated into it and therefore a kind of rape, perhaps.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:17 AM
2

Yes. This really is an unregenerate system of tyranny and enslavement for women and they have every right to complain. You are my property. I own you. Discharge your sexual and reproductive function for your betrothed master alone. Enforceable by death. Muslims believe this makes women happier. Proponents of slavery argued it was better for the slaves. To justify male supremacy men must be seen as better in some way. Perhaps they are more spiritual or more rational. Women, meanwhile embody sex a…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 12:57 AM
1

Agreed. If you can escape, there's no defense. This also applies to men attacked by women.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 03:48 PM
3

Well I just think for some people, if not most, there would be a difference in moral intuition concerning killing your abusive sleeping husband and killing your sleeping husband, and for that reason it would have been better to put it in the title. Whether there really is a moral difference is another question. But the fact that the question is open is just why it would have been better to have "abusive" in the title. That's all. Just to be clear. I think the whole thing is outrageous. It's like…
/r/MensRights14/12/13 02:29 AM
2

Not an all. Some feminists are great. Warren Farrell, for instance.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 09:03 PM
56

That's all well and good but the word "abusive" is missing from the title and I just find that a tad click-baity and manipulative. As for the content of the article it reminds me of the old law in traditional Islamic societies whereby the man is entitled to beat, and even kill, his wife, only the sexes are reversed. I think that's what we are dealing with here: female supremacist violent domination of men by women. What's interesting is that feminists will say it is the men who are initiating th…
/r/MensRights13/12/13 08:59 PM
10

"Men complaining about the patriarchy and blaming it on feminists who collude with the patriarchy" might be a little more honest.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 11:02 PM
1

Yes. Sweet irony can be successful.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 01:19 AM
1

Well that's your new RES tag: psycho.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:43 AM
1

They are a funny lot, though, women. I once had the mother suggest we all trip off merrily to a nudist resort. Creepy! Next up, I had the daughter wanting to know whether i had a thing for her mother. Yowsers! She was giving me that sullen, accusing stare. What did I do? I was always told it was vital to be nice to mom. I guess I overdid it.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:41 AM
4

Sorry to be sycophantic, but you just nailed it again. What are you: some kind of carpenter?
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:28 AM
4

Exactly CK. You nailed it.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:27 AM
2

There's something wrong here. There's a sudden rejection of given reality done to avoid the real issue. Obviously we could unite on position 4, but that is to revoke the premise from which the dilemma derives. We need to press feminists to agree that if, and make a song and dance about the word "if"here, there is to be conscription, it should apply equally across the sexes. You are correct. This diminishes the status of women. That's exactly why it is the test of feminist purported principles th…
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:25 AM
6

The great fear is the fear of illicit and unregulated male sexual pleasure. Why not give it the name androphobia? This is what drove homophobia. It's what drives rape and paedo hysteria. And it's what drives the censoring of erotic imagery.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:11 AM
1

I know we are the biggest gender issue only sub but far. Wow! That's fantastic. I'd no idea. MRM is the future. Now I know why the trolls hate us so much. But surely this is a reason for reddit admins being wary of restricting us too much. After all, there's revenue in all those subscribers, no?
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:05 AM
1

They get used to it eventually. You just have to keep explaining you're tired. It can become quite horrendous being obliged to perform. Isn't that some kind of rape? I'm not saying it's traumatizing, but still.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 10:58 AM
7

Obedience.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 02:02 AM
7

Surely the onus is on him to justify his claims, such as they are. Right now it just looks like dogmatic attachment to a preference for feminism, unwilling to debate. In other domains I really like Corry Doctorow, but on this one he's just flying with easy convention. I see no future in trying to persuade those who refuse to listen.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 12:35 AM
6

Well yes of course, but wait, "your mom's hot"? What is this: mother envy?
/r/MensRights10/12/13 12:22 AM
5

"He was doing everything that looked like leaving me except the actual leaving part. "Men, evidently, don't leave". Disgusting! I vomit. Women leave men because men won't leave them, we are invited to believe. Lying, deluded, self-serving, self-pitting, contradictory, dissembling, precious little princess. Oh woe is you. The man won't leave. What is that: non-leaving harassment? The latest rape? When you want him gone he ought to just pack up and leave? Men have to initiate the leaving now, as w…
/r/MensRights10/12/13 12:17 AM
3

That's it. As long as the sex isn't great you're OK. I can't tell you what a relief that is.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 03:51 AM
13

Jesus Christ! I'm a psychopath. Or, wait. Maybe I'm the victim of one. I can't tell. Hold on. I've got it now. We're all psychopaths. Yikes! Humanity is C O M P L E T E L Y N U T S
/r/MensRights09/12/13 01:49 AM
6

Do you? Where?
/r/MensRights09/12/13 01:41 AM
4

The point is, if feminists want equality, why aren't they working to change the social expectation that men will do the asking, something that puts women in the driving seat where they remain throughout the relationship so long as the expectation persists. Alternatively, if it's part of our nature, why won't feminists acknowledge it, and the power that it gives them. "Feminism, coveting social power, is blind to woman's cosmic sexual power" --Camille Paglia
/r/MensRights09/12/13 01:32 AM
3

We're not playing the same game as each other. That's my point. Either this is nature, and the feminists, and perhaps women, should acknowledge it, or it's nurture and we can and should change it. This game is what gives women easy access to victim status and all its attendant social power, including false rape allegations, family law bias, male disposability, and everything else. Even if it is hard wired into our nature, we need to build social institutions that acknowledge it as our brute real…
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:55 AM
0

So they've decided the only thing men care about is sex, is the bias. At any rate the whole thing is tautological.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:43 AM
1

Women who say this, and it's always women, including those on this thread, are in denial about what they really want from men because it makes them feel powerless.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:40 AM
1

That's it. That's what I've been doing wrong. No more spitting in her meal. I knew I'd figure it out sooner or later.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:23 AM
0

Don't be ridiculous. I'm a man. How can I possibly deserve respect, especially when all I want is a warm loving intimate relationship with a woman? /s
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:21 AM
3

Would you argue that a lot of girls are afraid to approach men or escalate the relationship?
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:17 AM
1

Yes. And isn't that what is called confirmation bias?
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:14 AM
5

Initial rumination should start with, "Is it a woman's privilege to acquire a unique debating advantage with the imperative 'Check your privilege'"?
/r/MensRights08/12/13 10:55 PM
1

That's impressive. Can I see the link?
/r/MensRights08/12/13 01:26 AM
10

Is it possible you're full of shit and using multiple accounts to downvote anyone that disagrees? Just wondering.
/r/MensRights08/12/13 01:17 AM
1

Your karma is negative 350. How did that happen?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 09:04 PM
7

I'm sorry this happened to you. Sounds horrendous and grossly unfair. The one part I don't understand is where you say "and I don't want to" , with regard to seeing your sons. How do you know the mother will succeed without equivocation in contaminating their minds against you? When they are young, perhaps yes. But they may be intelligent enough to see their mom is crazy. In time they will weigh that factor in the balance. If they seek you out, painful of course, better perhaps to endure. Lay ou…
/r/MensRights07/12/13 08:57 PM
12

Are you fist fight apologizing?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 03:56 PM
2

I'm not sure the analogy goes quite far enough to do the job to which you want to put it?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 03:55 PM
1

She was looking to get laid So what? Is he a sex-slave or something? Whose side are you on? He wanted a relationship. What's wrong with that. I know you didn't say there's anything wrong with it, but you assumed he made a mistake. Why is it a mistake not to give her what she wants. Besides, what sort of person says, "I want to fuck you, but tomorrow I don't ever want to see you again". I'm not against casual sex, but if that's what she wanted, why can't she propose it. And how is it his mistake …
/r/MensRights07/12/13 04:35 AM
2

This video is bullshit and should be shat on by a bull.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 03:32 AM
2

"Five Oh, We've got him", into her jacket. Don't you just hate it when that happens. One guy sprang into action the moment she said it. I guess he gets 5 0'd on a regular basis.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 03:32 AM
3

Nice of you to be concerned.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 01:46 AM
3

Like what?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 01:41 AM
7

Most women just don't like sex Uh, no. Most women just don't admit to liking sex. Not quite the same. All you have to ask, really, is, if they don't like sex, how come they make so much noise?
/r/MensRights07/12/13 01:27 AM
8

You got off lightly man. She could have had your balls and your money. And remember, if we think of men as the sellers, it's a buyers' market right now. When you get older it will shift towards a sellers' market and things will get a little easier. Personally, I wouldn't argue about the big issues. Who cares who's a feminist and who's an MRA. Are we splitting the bill for dinner or what? That's the kind of stuff that really matters: practical stuff. And on, and on, and on. The other stuff, thoug…
/r/MensRights07/12/13 01:24 AM
4

Firstly it's just an arrest and knowing the legal justice system it would be wrong to jump to conclusions. Secondly, if she did murder him, that would only be the natural manslaughter every poor victim is driven to in self-defence, because, as you know, patriarchy and men are wired for violence and domination. No this is not confirmation bias. I am a feminist and I'm being completely rational. /s
/r/MensRights07/12/13 12:00 AM
1

Note to moderators. Please leave this up as an example of the lengths feminists will go to to defame us, and for the spectacle of the downvotes which will ensue.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 11:55 PM
2

Thanks. I thought this was s new case. Didn't realise it was ongoing.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 03:30 PM
2

Thanks for the links. I hadn't been aware of this case.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 03:18 PM
1

Well that's pretty extraordinary. Have you got a better source? And I can't help but wonder whether that sort of crime is not as bad as statutory rape? Are we allowed to ask?
/r/MensRights06/12/13 02:58 PM
2

You could do that too.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 05:55 AM
2

Ha! Well observed.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 05:07 AM
8

That was very hard to read. Just immensely sad.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 04:27 AM
2

Wait. Women like a bit of male gaze after all? Shouldn't we have been told? Or was I just the last to hear.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 03:56 AM
3

Don't you just love a bit of sauce, gander and goose from time to time?
/r/MensRights06/12/13 03:00 AM
2

This comment was hilarious: I very much like a your countrys England. Is lots often offensive remark from women suppress men. They says typical male cannot find object, is inferior, take one woman do job of two men, my husband he useless, he do everything for me, assorted pic and mix remark. Lots middle age ugly women get together, complain of husbands, publicly berate them, make them own men embarrass. Is often when man return remark, take portion of piss from woman, then woman get embarrass, w…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 02:58 AM
5

Imagine if the tables were turned and some bitter man penned a treatise on what constitutes a real woman Let's get down to work.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 11:31 PM
2

Fuck! You are so right man.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:19 PM
5

That's easy to answer. You tell women they can throw their partners in jail with s phone call and they come to feel all powerful. Then they start using violence when they can't get their way. They know it's ridiculous to suggest they are doing DV because only men do that.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 05:14 PM
1

And how did you find out about us?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:46 PM
2

Well that's a whole bunch of nothing. It has always fascinated me that in all languages we reserve certain words whose sole function is that they should not be used. Someone from afar examining the lexicon may ask, "What is that word for?" "That word is for never using," comes the reply. "Then why do you have it?" "We have it for those who want to use words they are not supposed to use."
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:42 PM
2

Personally I like women going around defiantly baring their breasts.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 06:07 PM
1

Oh it's Islam. Feminists are against it, at least some of them sure are. Google Ophelia Benson.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:31 PM
1

Is it just me or has the item been removed from facebook?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:59 AM
14

The structural problem here is that you are discussing with non-men how to be a man. This already begs the key question. Who gets to decide?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 11:16 PM
7

Dude! She is telling you how to be a man. This is a complex issue involving a problematic semiotics of hegemony and gender normative discourse. Exploring issues around social gender is challenging and counter-cultural. What does it mean to consider the hermeneutic ground that underpins our collective approach to the dominant other? After working through the range of emotional and intellectual strategies available by way of reply, one shines through as eminently preferable. Just tell her to fuck …
/r/MensRights03/12/13 11:10 PM
11

Which women? The ones who depend on men for their money or the ones that don't?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:52 PM
-14

Eugenics. Downvotes. EDIT: "some people shouldn't be allowed to have children", get's 22 points. I mention "eugenics" and end up with -9. Sometimes I wonder what company I'm keeping. But keep those downvotes coming. Libertarians one and all, we can't have state intervention round here, except when it comes to preventing "morons" from breeding.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:45 PM
3

It comes from feminism and the abuse industry and it's destroying human intimacy. Angry Harry explains: http://youtu.be/AIY5MH4OGR8
/r/MensRights03/12/13 09:03 PM
6

LMAO
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:18 AM
19

Sigh. In the comments section I find: I don't understand why the mother would let her go off with an adult man in the first place, unless it's a relative that you know very well it's not OK. Men try to gain trust of other people so that they can have access to the children. I'd rather the cops err on this side than do nothing and we all have heard of the thousands of missing and dead children. Just chilling, that, isn't it? Makes you want to give up altogether.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 05:43 AM
3

It may be worth remembering that what is usually called sexism, that is, malevolent sexism for women, is also benevolent sexism for men.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:22 PM
29

I'm sitting, staring at this comment . . .
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:18 PM
9

He shouldn't have given her any lip. Right then. Let's sit back and see how many down votes that gets.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:12 PM
2

Do you see a connection between this and male shaming?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:02 PM
-2

OMG yes. This is so good. It took me a few moments to get the irony. The last paragraph comes across as a tad bitter, though. Perhaps written by a man?
/r/MensRights01/12/13 06:01 AM
2

What's not to love? ..provided we extend "sexual violence" to include the violence done to men by the social power women hold over them by virtue of their perceived weakness and fragility and the feminist notion that men are hard-wired for violence and control.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:56 AM
2

"radical feminist notions that men are wired for violence and control" puts it rather well. Compelling documentary about the abuse of restraining orders.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 06:08 PM
1

One of the things that struck me was when Paul's opponent started talking about how women constantly face harassment and sexual assault every time they leave the house. Leave aside all exaggeration in the phrasing and accept life is not always a bunch of roses for the ladies. Still, there is a reflexive focus by society now on women's personal lived experience and no correlate focus on men's. I think it may be necessary to counter this as men by bringing the focus to our personal direct lived ex…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 05:19 AM
5

Actually, no. I don't think it is. Mostly just silly.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 08:51 PM
5

The real problem here is in construing these words as male-gendered, or even gendered at all. The binary is already assumed in the putative gendering of the adjectives. That's a serious bit of question begging.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 04:04 AM
1

Exactly. By the above principle no publisher would ever be liable. But we no in reality publishers are almost always liable, not authors.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 01:33 AM
2

This is a very good article. I'll be curious to see whether it gets upvotes or downvotes here.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 01:31 AM
4

Yes. I noticed that. It was totally ridiculous.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:57 AM
3

I certainly hope we don't misrepresent feminists as badly as this. The guy is a postmodernist. He thinks all racial categories are social constructs, that is, don't exist independently of their representation and have no basis in genetics or biology. That is, on my view, daft, but, it leads to an easy way of translating his willfully contrary and provocative formula "the white race should be abolished". It just means "stop imagining that there's such a thing as the white race". He seems to furth…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:35 PM
8

This of course is absolutely true. Just today I woke up, took a look at my vagina and said, hey, you know what, I'm gonna be a man today. Fuck it. I mean, who the hell thinks they can tell me what sex to be. Huh? Bring it on, schmuck. I mean business. But what he doesn't realize is that he is the one attached to the gender binary. See, I have no problem growing a mustache. Who does he think he is, telling me whether I have a mustache or not? If my faint upper lip hair is not a mustache to him, t…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:23 PM
-1

Yeah. He's talking about whiteness as a racial category which he thinks is inherently supremacist because he doesn't believe in biologically determined racial categories. The suicide bit makes no sense. Source is not authoritative. Anyone who thinks it represents liberal academia is an embarrassment to this sub and themselves. Don't be so stupid.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 06:03 AM
1

Just what exactly are you smoking?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:47 AM
1

There's room for further clarification on this issue.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:41 AM
1

A person could be offended by that remark.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:40 AM
2

Yes. I really don't know what's going on, but I've seen this pattern before on these types of issue. Down votes and no explanation why.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:08 AM
3

Yes. One wonders why. Is it because they are afraid this may make the MRM look bad, or is it feminist opponents threatened by this aspect of the MRM particularly and wishing to suppress it? Hard to say.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 09:17 PM
9

6 . Boys are as emotionally invested in relationships as girls Recent research shows that boys get every bit as emotionally invested in adolescent relationships as girls do — the main difference being that boys feel far less in control of how those relationships progress
/r/MensRights25/11/13 06:33 PM
1

I definitely think you're on to something important with this post. I hope it gets upvoted.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 04:06 PM
2

Fascinating! People care about us enough they think it's worth going to all that trouble to make fun of us.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 03:54 PM
1

Exactly. Say it clearly and tell it like it is.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 03:31 AM
0

Not everybody gets it.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 03:28 AM
1

Rape?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 09:31 PM
2

That all makes good sense. I think we need a good lawyer to bring a test case. Any volunteers?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 07:48 PM
10

Yet another woman telling me how to be a man. In case I forget, remind me to tell her to fuck off. If she wants to tell women to get back in the kitchen, that's up to her, but I don't appreciate being told to bring in the bacon. Masculinity is up for grabs. I'm through with women defining it. Do men get to define femininity?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 07:28 PM
14

No. They should sue the school authority that forced them out. This entity has more money and is ultimately responsible. Without its actions the false accuser would be powerless.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 07:06 PM
3

I think that very many women, some of them pro-MRA and posting here, simply do not understand male experience. On topics such as the so-called "nice guy", or male-shaming or the use of "creepy" or the male gaze or the interpretations of conduct said to be on the rape continuum they simply don't get the essential difficulty men face in having to be the initiator in something they are told is dirty and shameful and that women don't want, at the same time as wanting to love and be loved and be sexu…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 06:25 PM
6

I hazard a guess you are young. Even when feminism was a minority sport it was excluding men. Back in the 70s and 80s women were excluding men from meetings. Perfectly descent guys who only wanted to help out were told they were not allowed into women refuges. They were, after all, part of the oppressor class. No offence. Even now there are instances of men being asked to leave feminist meetings. I seem to recall a recent case of male ticket-holders to a feminist event being asked to leave witho…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 05:58 PM
1

Yes. Any movement for rights for a group is a movement for social justice for that group.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 05:21 PM
1

Yes. I am an evil troll come here to destroy your sub. Why else would I challenge the deductive validity of an inference you draw?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:42 PM
1

That's interesting. I have been having a discussion on this forum with a number of ardent MRAs regarding the viability of Feminism as its own movement. Some of them claim that there is no need for its own movement, saying that the MRM has room for everyone. Others claim that Feminism is intellectually dishonest, stating that many issues (such as rape culture and the pay gap) are not gender issues at all. Another group stating that misogyny and misandry cannot be compared. And yet others say that…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:21 PM
1

I was hoping you might have one.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:08 PM
1

Rather many exogenous assumptions.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:46 PM
1

Can you be sure they aren't flying lashists?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:30 AM
1

If P is uninformed, P is a moron. Explain how this follows? Thanks for the post. Very informative. I'm off to watch the video.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:28 AM
3

Actually Alisdair_, I've been a tad suspicious of you myself, but I think that (above) is fair comment. I strongly take issue with CosmicKeys. He's an intelligent guy who cites the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but calling someone a troll is not the best way to discover the truth status of the claim, and serves no useful purpose. Of course you are under no obligation to reply. If he wants to supply evidence, fine. I could lay out my basis for suspicion. If asked, I would say you probably …
/r/MensRights23/11/13 04:29 PM
2

I particularly like "men deserve to feel as though their sexuality is hot, awesome, delicious, valuable, and can be pleasurable for all parties in a consensual situation." Of only.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 11:24 PM
16

Yes. Interesting that. Not just an arbitrary misuse but a particular [ab]use to imply that what it denotes is obscene, deviant and immoral. The denotation has shifted from biologically abnormal sexual preferences to the expression of normal ones.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 10:35 PM
1

Feminists certainly seem to think so.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 07:42 PM
33

And in a disturbing new development, girls who post their faces on Facebook discover men are looking at them. NBC's Penny Page has the details . . .
/r/MensRights22/11/13 07:28 PM
3

Many thanks. Must watch this later. Juicy!
/r/MensRights22/11/13 03:42 AM
1

Oh i don't know. Everybody likes a bit of cannibalism from time to time. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes Can you honestly swear the thought never crosses your mind, Alidair_ old chap? Go on. Be a rascal.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 03:28 AM
2

Yep. Both current usage. Well spotted.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 11:51 PM
2

"Wild radish"? Careful now. Digressing with that one.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 11:19 PM
1

News just in. Words have colloquial senses. You heard it here first.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 11:11 PM
3

Wow! Nicemod is being nice to me. How nice! UnexpectedItem is unexpectedly flattered. I'll give the matter some serious thought. Thanks.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 11:01 PM
2

No, you have a nice day, you lily-livered boy. /s
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:56 PM
2

You're missing the point. If we had always applied your principle of adhering to literal formal usage, whatever that is, rape would never have changed its meaning to the modern restricted sense you insist on maintaining. That's absurd. Either stick to your principle or don't. Either way the meaning will change. And the context of use is not crime, but more generally wrong-doing. I'm new at this debating thing.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:51 PM
1

Do you or do you not think all of those terms damaged feminism in the eyes of its target audience and if so how? If not, then why should using the term rape in a slightly new way damage us? I'm new. I need all the help i can get.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:33 PM
2

You said the MRM will look worse for using "social rape". Confusing, you said. People will argue. People could have argued over some of the terms above, I said, but that didn't seem to harm feminism much. Your reply is we don't need to use a "batshit insane ideological dictionary". Rather than answer the question you resort to a cheap rhetorical trick. He who censors them, knows them best, evidently. Everybody agrees some of those terms are crazy. But you know very well I wasn't advocating using…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:25 PM
3

Sorry, should have been "the ellipsis fallacy".
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:00 PM
1

You are the one being dishonest. You raised the point about rhetorical success. Not me? The question is whether this tactic was successful or damaging for feminism. You have not shown it was unsuccessful. Nobody is saying we should copy feminism. You are saying using words in new ways is rhetorical unsuccessful. Do you want to say we should aim to rhetorically fail because to succeed would be copying feminism. You brought up debating strategy. I'm happy to stick to logic. You are changing the su…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:24 PM
3

The elliptical fallacy!
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:12 PM
2

Patriarchy, rape continuum, violence against women, intersectionality, the personal is political, sexism, oppression, domination, rape culture, misogyny, logocentric, phallocentric, empowerment, girl power, gender, performativity, deconstruction, sexuality, queer, postmodern, body, discourse, feminist, subject, other, objectification are only some of the neologisms and and familiar words given extended use that seemed to cause no such trouble for feminism, but we're not allowed social rape? Why …
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:09 PM
2

You are the one who must be new to this whole debating thing. Didn't you notice feminism has been using just such devices with great rhetorical success? Why must the MRM fight with one arm tied behind its back?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:51 PM
0

Feminism opposes traditional "patriarchal" notions of male only sexual agency and of sex as sin to affirm the female right to explore asexuality but uses them to support the shaming of men as an instrument of female power.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:23 PM
2

What is this: punch and Judy? Oh yes it is...
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:09 PM
1

What dishonest tactics? All seems perfectly honest to me. They're dishonest anyway. What confusion? Confusion between what? Sorry. Don't see it.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:08 PM
2

The phonetic fallacy.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:04 PM
3

Granted, but in this case it's spot on. If it was used this way in the past that shows it could be used that way again.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:29 PM
1

Formal definitions are derived from informal use. You have not explained how it is decisive. EDIT. Sorry. Meant "devisive".
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:27 PM
4

The terms could easily be used by a lawyer in court in closing arguments to the jury. Besides, this is not a court of law. This is a public discussion about, amongst other things, what the law should be and how the courts should work. We make laws any way we please. They don't fall from heaven. Same thing with the word "rape". I think feminists are very threatened by any questioning of its unique status as taboo topic and crime of crimes.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:24 PM
3

It is also to show that it is a gendered instrument of violence used to exert power over the other sex. In that sense it can be seen as the correlate of what feminists say about male on female rape.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:18 PM
2

Exactly. Assault or even murder by proxy by a vigilante gang on a false rape allegation is violence. Legal lynching by the state without proof is just the institutional correlate of that.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:09 PM
3

Feminists create a rape continuum that borrows from the opprobrium around rape and extends it into much that is relatively innocuous. "Social rape" makes no attempt to construct a continuum and merely draws an analogy between the violence done by rape and the violence done by false rape allegation.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:06 PM
3

To sum up, false rape allegation is an instrument of power society gives uniquely to women to do violence to men and can be seen as the correlate of rape as designated by feminists as the seminal instrument of male power over women.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:59 PM
7

The magic wand society gives females to wave over men's lives, on account of their real or imagined precious fragility and lack of sexual agency can be used to deploy a trump card of automatic victim status as soon as they start crying or show emotional weakness or vulnerability. It is just a social fact that victim status commands sympathy and hoists the bearer unto a higher moral plane. It is an instrument of power. Men possess no such instrument. They are seen rightly or wrongly as sexual age…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:31 PM
-1

I agree with framing false allegations as form of rape.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 04:40 PM
0

What people are idiots?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 11:44 PM
1

I'm sure you mean "sex education". Interesting about the porn parties. They certainly start them young these days. Not all kids though, surely. Some parents just don't care. Not sure what this has to do with sex education though. You mean they should be educated that watching porn is bad?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 11:43 PM
-6

You were in tears and shaking? I see. Why didn't you say so in the first place. I had forgotten you are a woman. Women are weak. Exposure to male genitalia leaves them shaken and crying. Even so, you sound especially fragile and precious. Perhaps he knew that and, being an asshole, just wanted to provoke a reaction. If true, you should realise he was vulnerable to being humiliated at that point. You could have yelled at him, laughed at him, reprimanded him in all sorts of ways. You need to learn…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 11:03 PM
-6

I'm not saying you're a paedophile. I'm saying we can't be sure until an investigation has been concluded. Children are innocent and incapable of sexual agency, as our feminist friends assure us. Can you prove that you have done nothing wrong?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 10:24 PM
1

Ah. New information. You were alone with him?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 10:14 PM
1

"sexual" ?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 10:12 PM
1

No. That was great. I laughed. And now i know you're for real. Hey. Apart from reading the fucking FAQ like a normal person have you checked out girlwriteswhat on YouTube. She's our main man. My personal view is that though men did and still do have a certain kind of social power over women, traditionally women have a different kind of power over men. Women try to hold on to that power while feminists demand men concede theirs. That doesn't jive. Women must abandon their privileges too or let me…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 09:38 PM
2

Because she's a man, TM dear, and men do that kind of thing. Can you be quite sure she's innocent in the absence of all the facts and before an investigation has concluded? Some weeks ago two ohio students had a tasty bit of oral sex right out on the street. Passersby video it. Girl grabbed his head. Smiles at camera. Poses. Talks to the audience. Walks home with the guy. Could we be sure it wasn't rape? Not according to MRA lokidemon731 posting here. She admonished us to await the drug test res…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 09:07 PM
-1

Um..quite, Alisdair. Why yes, I am a little angry. I commend you on remembering how to spell "sow". I struggle with that one.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:42 PM
1

Reverse the sexes and see what happens. Then add pedo hysteria.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:41 PM
0

No bad words?
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:40 PM
1

Seriously. Can't people just laugh at erect penises? Ancient cultures used to worship the phallus. What is up with all this phallophobia? Just thought I'd put that out there to see what happens. I know it doesn't answer the question.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:35 PM
1

You did realise the last two sentences were sarcastic? Should I put "/s"? Sorry. Not sure if obvious.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:30 PM
6

Just as long as you put it away and feel ashamed until we ask you to get it out, that's fine.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:25 PM
-2

Oooooooooh. You said a bad word.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 05:22 PM
1

Please stop making sensible posts. Boys are wicked and should be punished. We don't want to hear the truth and will just have to keep down voting you until it goes away.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 04:53 PM
6

I would hardly say crush on the teacher. More likely he just likes showing off. Expressions of male sexuality in teenagers are always concerning and this boy may be vulnerable to offending. A nice lady will need to talk to him in case he grows up unashamed of himself.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 04:32 PM
-8

An old guy I know used to work as a teacher and tells how in his first year some of the girls started exposing their breasts to him. One of the them even stood up, turned round and exposed her buttocks. (I got pretty excited at this point but I like sex). After that some pupils started trying to climb out of the windows. He lost his job. Never made it to the second year. We all have a good laugh about this story now, men, women and girls alike. How ridiculous that our ineffectual friend could al…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 03:25 PM
-10

Think of the harm done to this kid. You looked at his erect penis and may have obtained pleasure from it. Did you leer at him? Did you take a picture of him? I certainly hope not. But for the rest of his life this child has to live with the thought of you enjoying or masturbating to a mental image of his erect penis. Kids that age simply cannot foresee the consequences of their actions.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 03:02 PM
-2

A paedophile is going around in public taking pictures of kids takes them home for his own private enjoyment may not deserve death, but he surely deserves something. What do you think he deserves? Think of the harm done to the kids.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 01:04 PM
0

Deviant pleasure must always be disciplined. What counts as deviant changes, but the principle remains the same. If you have been saying this for years now, doesn't that mean you're a paedophile? Do you keep baby body parts in your freezer? Surely you must have been accused of these things?
/r/MensRights29/10/13 06:03 AM
-1

But he did do something. He took photographs of kids. The question is whether he later derived deviant pleasure from looking at them. What if he had?
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:58 AM
2

You're real quick with those one-liners.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:37 AM
1

No need to be like that.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:35 AM
1

You twawkin' ta me kid?
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:34 AM
1

I never called him a liar. He said "unless" when perhaps he meant "even if", but there's a huge logical difference. Anyway, he has now clarified.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:03 AM
3

He said he would like to just remove himself from the earth if people resort to witch hunts in this day and age. They do, so he would like to. I was merely obliging.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:01 AM
1

Yes. I agree. If this man had actually been a paedophile it would have been fine.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 04:58 AM
1

V/H/S the movie My personal favorite.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:35 PM
1

This is exactly the sort of thing the MRM needs to be focusing on. I totally agree with this. There is an understandable fear of being accused of being a friend of paedos. But really this is a total hysteria and that fear is a the hallmark of living in a hysterical bubble.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:30 PM
2

1) is too generic. It could apply to all sorts. Why don't they hate Jews, communists, gypsies, computer nerds or gays just as much? I know they used to to. But why paedos now? There used to be no such thing as far as most people knew. 2) It does affect children. That's a terrible thing, but everyone will not stick up for them. 12,000 of them died of starvation since this time yesterday. Nobody gives a fucking crumb. Most sex abuse of children is in-family. Nobody cares much about that. I say not…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:14 PM
1

I like you.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:08 PM
1

There's a name for that psychological tendancy, but I forget what it is.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:07 PM
2

Dude! You have to put "/s" at the end. You had me terrified there for a second.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:05 PM
-2

I don't really know what you mean by all that. Anyway, he has now clarified. He says he meant: the punishment for pedophilia isnt and shouldnt be death. In this case the punishment they enacted upon him does not at all match the supposed crime. Neither you, nor he, nor the downvoters have come anywhere close to convincing me that that is remotely similar to what he said originally: Even if he was a pedophile, the punishment is low unless he was acting on the pedophilia or distributing the photog…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 10:44 PM
3

That's correct. Paedophilia can cause harm in a way that homosexuality does not. But is that why people are hysterical in their hatred of it
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:34 PM
-1

You didn't clarify. You denied. Besides I'm still waiting for answers to questions.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:32 PM
0

Thank you rabbitspade. Well observed.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:29 PM
-1

That may have been what meant. Was it? If so I agree and I'm glad. It's not what you said. I don't want to punish you for a slip of the tongue but it's not what you said and it's not contained therein. Vote me to heck but you did say that the punishment is low unless he is a paedophile. But if you meant something else then you needed to clarify. Notice what you did instead. You demonized me by accusing me of manipulating what you said.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 07:32 PM
-4

The punishment is low unless he acted on the paedophilia. I've read it several times and committed it to memory. The punishment is low. What is that? Murder and burning. It's not low if he acted on paedophilia. Since there is no allegation of anything but taking pictures that can only mean getting pleasure from looking at them. You can down vote me all you want but if you want to persuade me I'm wrong you'll have to show me where. Sorry.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 07:13 PM
-3

Consider: Even if he was gay the punishment was a bit low unless he enjoyed looking at photographs he took in public or men or shared them with others. When are we going to start caring about not harming children and leave men alone. Notice that the children were actually abusing the man but the police were too scared to arrest them. What punishment would be too low for them? Does anybody think it's great for juveniles to be abusing, harassing and bullying a middle-aged man? Yet even I never tho…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:54 PM
-2

What you said was that even if he was a paedophile the punishment was low unless he was acting on the paedophilia or distributing the photographs? This implies the punishment was not necessarily low if he was acting on the paedophilia or distributing the photographs. Do you agree with that?
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:51 PM
1

No. It's not both at once. It's privilege based on the appearance of oppression.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:39 PM
-4

That's not what you said. Of course we all agree with that. But lurking in your choice of words was the prejudice that motivates this hysteria. Do you really think looking at clothed children is wrong? Why? What harm? In photographs or in reality? Is it wrong if pleasure is derived only? Is it harmful even if the child doesn't even know. What is the basis of morality and law? If not harm, what?
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:37 PM
-5

No. You revealed something about yourself you don't want us to know. It's people like you who really terrify me.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:31 PM
4

And with the complicity of the police in an atmosphere stoked by the gutter press. It's utterly sickening. What is wrong with this country? Twelve thousand children in this world suffer every day from something just a little worse than somebody enjoying looking at their fully clothed pictures: death by starvation or starvation related illness. Do we care? Not a crumb. Besides, most child sex abuse is caused by family members. Ten times as likely as stranger abuse iirc. Nobody cares about childre…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:27 PM
16

Excellent point. And the hatred of gays in the past is really no different to the hatred of paedophiles now. Please note I said the hatred, not the actions. Stay calm and carry on.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:19 PM
-2

So the punishment was not low if he took pleasure in looking at photographs he took of fully clothed children in public? Is that what you are saying? Fully clothed children. Sweaters and pants. He likes looking at them? Fuck off. Of course he doesn't. And who fucking cares if he does? Is your tiny head so full of paedohate you want to burn him?
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:15 PM
15

I blame the police for cowardice that stoked the flames of hysteria in an incredibly backward and stupid population. Yes. I'm looking at you Bristol. They had no need to arrest him. Breach of the peace is abused by police to arrest the innocent. The crowd was prejudiced against him. He was different and they were bullying him. This is very primitive but the police wouldn't stand up to it. To placate the crowd they arrest the victim. I blame the media for stoking hysteria around paedophilia most …
/r/MensRights28/10/13 06:06 PM
2

Remove yourself from the earth now. And don't come back. Witch hunts will always be with us.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:39 PM
1

Yes. The great irony is if you can persuade society you are oppressed it gets you privilege.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:30 PM
3

We had this one already. It was a genuine mistake.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:26 PM
1

Telling someone to see a therapist and telling them they are crazy are not always far apart. Neither is necessarily sympathetic. Both may tend to blame the individual rather than his situation and to demonstrate an unwillingness to listen and understand. This, in turn, encourages him to "hide and deal" with his feelings rather than to talk about them. You wrote: I have no sympathy for him. and If women are universally scorning this guy, he's putting them off in some way, personality wise or phys…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 04:13 AM
1

Men are encouraged to hide and deal with their depression You mean like this? He spouted off a bunch of half cocked "intellectual" bullshit, whining about how he can't get his needs satisfied. I told him in the beginning that's he's really pretentious and should dial that shit back About a man who wrote: am I, as a hopelessly cerebral individual, wasting my time pursuing the opposite sex (and, therefore, wasting my time living)? I love, love, love women, but all I ever get from them is violent r…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 02:27 AM
1

All the OP's comments have been deleted, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:23 PM
1

what women say they want and what they actually go for again and again seem to be the exact opposites Is this what you partially agree with? Or do you wholly agree with it? If partially, which part, precisely?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:34 PM
1

Thanks. I have to fix somebody's computer now, but I'll be back later, I hope.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:56 AM
1

Great! It's hard to read people on the internet. Try to stay calm when I tell you to "calm down". ;-)~
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:55 AM
1

The more experience I have with women the more I find that feminism seems to represent the attitudes and feelings of the majority of women extremely well. That's interesting. Care to say more?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:52 AM
1

Would you agree that this is one of the things that Warren Farrell says in Why Men Are the Way They Are? If so, do you agree with Farrell?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:48 AM
1

I fuck men, I befriend men, I love men. Sure. But you must know that's what all misogynists say about women, including the OP. Let's calm down and think about this for a second. Thanks for the quote. I'll have a look at it. I'm very keen to keep this civil. Are those posts on 2X still up? Perhaps I should have a look at them.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:41 AM
1

It makes you cringe that a guy might have difficulty facing life alone because he is having difficulty dealing with the societal pressure to simultaneously initiate sex and accept that it is bad?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:33 AM
0

Do you consider yourself a supporter of the MRM?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:29 AM
0

I came away from this experience with the distinct impression that wondering how to give women what they want and need is the first and last step towards being unable to do so. That puts the paradox rather well. Fractal_shark is an anti-mensRights troll who thinks the movement is "shitty and ignorant" and supports the "Don't be that guy" posters. Just ignore him.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:27 AM
1

Well said.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:23 AM
1

I like rough sex sometimes, but not always. It's also with someone that I know very well that understands my boundaries, and I've consented to sex with. There are billions of women. Not all want that. I would hazard a guess that almost no women want a random dude to roughly fuck them without care for their consent. Good. Agreed. I totally understand and accept that. It's nice to have a point of agreement.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:20 AM
1

He doesn't bend me over and fuck me when I don't want it. Do you really think that's what that guy was proposing? I'm afraid I'd need a quote before I'd be convinced.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:14 AM
2

Fractal_shark has now admitted he thinks the MRM is "shitty and ignorant" and supports the "Don't be that guy" posters. What puzzles me is how we allowed ourselves to get mugged by these people.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:09 AM
1

Yes. I was checking through your posts. You wrote: "We should work together, but the extremists on both sides make it difficult." Look, I want to say something. You are female, right? That guy you had a go at. I don't know. There may be parts of male experience it's just difficult for women to empathize with. You described something I said as "galling" in a private exchange with someone who later turned out to be an AMR troll who called the MRM "shitty". At some point, mens rights have to come d…
/r/MensRights01/10/13 10:57 AM
1

Would you consider yourself an MRA?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 10:21 AM
1

No. Thought not.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 07:41 PM
0

Would you consider yourself an MRA?
/r/MensRights30/09/13 03:43 AM
49

While feminists claim that a rape culture exists which ‘normalizes’ rape, I insist that a feminist culture exists that ‘rape-ifies’ normal sex. Here we go.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 01:43 AM
-2

It's become clear that you're willfully misinterpreting (or simply ignoring) everything I say and using it to fuel the insults you obviously revel in hurling. Very well put. He did that with me too.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 01:32 AM
0

colleges go through so much expense and effort trying to educate students about date rape? It's because so many people don't realize that what they are engaging in is in fact rape. They believe stupid myths like "women say 'no' when they really mean yes" and it leads to rape. Do you support the "Don't be that guy" posters?
/r/MensRights30/09/13 01:29 AM
1

Well, I didn't see all of that, so I can't really comment. One thing I did see was the ants comment. I think you're being unfair on that one. He was not using the ants analogy to say all women are the same. He was making the subtly different point that just because there are many of something doesn't mean they are all different. Somewhere else he may have been saying all women are the same, but not with the ants analogy specifically. I can't be entirely confident you're being fair with the rest …
/r/MensRights30/09/13 12:48 AM
1

I'm sorry you can't read.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 12:39 AM
1

He spouted off a bunch of half cocked "intellectual" bullshit, whining about how he can't get his needs satisfied. To me that just reads like "man up". I concede I have not read as much of his comments as you have. Perhaps if I had I would agree with you. I wonder why his sexual needs should be such a source of derision. I have always, since childhood, supported the right of men to be homosexual. But in a sense, there we have a whole movement based on how men can't get their needs satisfied. I'v…
/r/MensRights29/09/13 11:53 PM
1

But even you admit you like rough sex with your boyfriend. A man comes on here making himself vulnerable and asking, "am I, as a hopelessly cerebral individual, wasting my time pursuing the opposite sex" and you try to shame him. I know you suspect he's a troll, but sometimes a man really does just want to know the answer.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 03:43 PM
1

No warning necessary, PigTroll. Good riddance to bad rubbish. How can we have a rational debate on this sub if regulars accuse questioners of trolling simply for asking a question? The worst thing about this sub is the failure of its culture to tolerate dissent, and the principle vehicle of its intolerance is demonstrated no better than in PigMan's dismissal of all inconvenient questions with the claim of "troll". Stop being such a bigot and leave us in peace. Good bye.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 11:03 PM
2

I agree with all of that.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:53 PM
0

It's just as important to have a critical eye for movements that you're sympathetic to, however, and it's quite silly to be hostile to that happening. To my mind, this is by far the most off-putting thing about this sub: people calling you a troll any time you challenge standard view. There are certain very outspoken types who just jump straight into troll-calling the moment anyone asks them an awkward question. I now add Alopizgg to their number. You are the great Dakru, who can easily point to…
/r/MensRights08/09/13 12:55 AM
3

Yes. I like killing. Let's kill people. /s
/r/MensRights08/09/13 12:38 AM
-7

I think you're missing his point.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 12:36 AM
5

From the article: The message says women who work the night shifts in Juarez’s enormous maquiladora industry repeatedly fall prey to the bus drivers on whom they must rely to get home in the dark. For now, at least, there is no way to verify the veracity of the message, whether it was written by the actual killer or killers of the bus drivers, whether Diana the Huntress really exists, or even whether she is a she.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 12:34 AM
0

Thanks for posting this. Quite fascinating! Perhaps it's time we stood up to this bully.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 10:48 AM
0

When someone says "I feel that..." instead of "I think that..." they have manipulatively removed your ability to disagree with them. They may have tended to remove your ability to disagree with them but they need not have done it manipulatively. It could be just a turn of phrase. Unless, of course, you possess the power to read minds. Do you?
/r/MensRights06/09/13 09:06 PM
1

And that is a huge weapon for the left right now, calling anyone who disagrees with them on any issue a bigot. That one word, used wildly and without any real consideration for it's actual meaning, has destroyed careers. And that is by design. It is a form of intellectual fascism that I find rather terrifying. You mean, like calling someone a troll for posting an article on MensRights?
/r/MensRights06/09/13 09:03 PM
2

I just had an idea. Why not compare countries which have a more advanced feminist influence with those which are more traditional. Then see how male / female suicide ratios compare?
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:09 AM
3

Pertinent point. Agreed. It tells you something about the wider society.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 03:37 AM
0

That's actually what the effect of fluctuating demand on price looks like.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 03:32 AM
1

Well, irony can be a form of satire, but anyway it was what I would call reflexive irony. Everyone tends to think they alone are right. That was the point. But then, I might imagine something like, "Everyone thinks they alone are right, except me. I, alone, have the self-awareness to know I am not right". You have to think about it.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 11:19 PM
1

Accepted.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 12:07 PM
0

I was being ironic.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:28 AM
1

Sounds to me like they committed the "I'm upset and you don't seem to care" fallacy.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 10:04 PM
2

it's a total hassle and i'm starting to think isn't worth it Absolutely. Far better re-reading Aristotle's Rhetoric, or watching the Foucault Chomsky debate or reading some Quine. Taking to idiots just makes you stupid.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 10:02 PM
-4

It's not just feminists. Everybody does this sort of thing. Except of course MRAs. They're infallible.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:58 PM
3

It’s “very rare” to see victims of alleged sexual assault found liable for defamation, said Elizabeth Grace, a lawyer who specializes in sexual abuse, but was not involved in this case. It took me ages to see what she meant here. She meant alleged victims of sexual assault. At first I thought it was a misprint and should have read "false accusers".
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:51 PM
3

Perhaps not. But there was certainly an implicit one.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:45 PM
2

Brilliant!
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:43 PM
4

You call everyone a troll.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 01:03 AM
-1

Once again ThePigTroll shows his superior analytic mind.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:41 AM
4

By this logic you would "never take to" Reddit. Maybe somebody is reporting these videos, thinking they are trolls, the same way you called me a troll for asking for evidence feminists attack male sexual preferences.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 09:16 AM
1

Oopsie! Sorry.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 02:13 PM
8

Dude! If you want us to take you seriously ask them and tell us what they say. Also, I'd like to know did you just post the article verbatim, or did you add some stuff of your own at the bottom. The screencap is cut off at the bottom so it's impossible to tell. Don't misunderstand. On the face of it this is outrageous, but we have to get the facts straight. Then, and only then, can we step into action.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:27 PM
-12

The left? Stop trolling this group. You are obviously trying to cause divisions and undermine our unity. This is a classic text-book tactic. Get the fuck out!
/r/MensRights07/08/13 08:36 AM
0

I take it you live in a forest and eat bees.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 08:07 AM
1

You did realize I included a link in my comment, yes? http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/nlhqf/what_the_hell_reddit_enhancement_suite_why_would/
/r/MensRights07/08/13 08:06 AM
1

I am familiar with your posting history. That's just the problem. You are routinely sarcastic and obnoxious and it's not clear what side you're on. On top of that you like to call others trolls just to sew the seeds of confusion.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 08:05 AM
0

I'm quite certain this post is a troll post designed to stir up fear of using RES and diminish its value to MensRights subscribers. The issue is not new.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 11:58 PM
8

"Woman jailed for sex with lad of 14" Pervert jailed for rape of lad of 14 FTFY
/r/MensRights21/07/13 02:53 PM
2

Every word of this is gold. I don't understand the downvotes. This is a great summary of what I've long felt but been unable to put into words.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 12:46 PM
1

Bingo!
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:22 PM
9

From the article: “I just want to note that what he’s being charged with does not involve any forcible compulsion. It involves an alleged incident with a minor, someone who is just under 17 years old.”
/r/MensRights15/07/13 02:39 PM
1

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1d9_1369807910
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:27 PM
1

Steady now. Don't get carried away. You had me up until "..that has intellectual debates on recent news topics."
/r/MensRights15/07/13 11:16 AM
2

Not once have I ever read that a woman can't consent when she is drunk. Interesting! I'd like to see what others have to say about this. But of course I'm a dirty troll and everyone should just call me names and ignore me. You know, I ask for supporting evidence and stuff.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 10:23 AM
5

Thanks! I didn't know about that. The Hayden Rider says it all. Some are to be more equal than others, evidently.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 10:14 AM
1

"Phenomenon" is the Greek singular. Please put a penny in the naughty box and don't make me tell you that again.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 10:01 AM
11

Will there be anything on toxic femininity?
/r/MensRights14/07/13 09:58 PM
1

Thanks LB, Younger women, slim women. My first thought was also submissive women. But now, could you help me further? Could you cite some instances of feminists attacking these preferences as dirty and wrong? That would help. The reason I ask is that I have a feminist telling me a woman's preference for bad boys is perfectly dandy. It's just a personal thing. I'm anticipating he will say men's preferences are just that too. I want to find some counter examples where feminists condemn male prefer…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 08:32 AM
-1

Can you give me some examples of male sexual preferences they attack as dirty and wrong, please?
/r/MensRights13/07/13 11:35 PM
2

"I need feminism because men and women are still bickering over petty issues instead of working together as equals for a more complete society".
/r/MensRights13/07/13 03:55 PM
2

"I need feminism because being a man isn't a bad thing; being a woman isn't a bad thing"
/r/MensRights13/07/13 03:52 PM
1

"I need feminism because society tells me to take a lickin' and keep on kickin'"
/r/MensRights13/07/13 03:48 PM
1

Yes. I knew that. But never mind...
/r/MensRights13/07/13 03:01 PM
3

"she told me "that is utter bullshit" as to how I was detained and she is putting a call into the police chief." Oh dear. Doesn't she believe in the rule of law. It's not utter bullshit, it's criminal. Lawyer. Big money. Happy happy.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 01:34 PM
1

"I need feminism so that women will offer a life of comfort, not only to their children, but also to their children's father, supported by their often substantial salaries".
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:58 PM
2

"I need feminism so that women will stop turning themselves into sex objects, stop expecting men to pay for them, and start initiating sex and relationships".
/r/MensRights09/07/13 05:17 PM
2

"I need feminism so that I will have the option to let the woman will go out and earn the money and I can stay at home".
/r/MensRights09/07/13 05:14 PM
2

"I need feminism so that if I have sex while I'm drunk the woman will go to jail for rape, if I want".
/r/MensRights09/07/13 05:11 PM
2

"I need feminism so that women will initiate sex as often as men and if I don't like it I can accuse them of harassment".
/r/MensRights09/07/13 05:10 PM
1

"I need feminism so that women will ask men out as often as men ask women out."
/r/MensRights09/07/13 05:01 PM
1

"I need feminism so that rapists will go to jail for having sex with me when I'm drunk" !?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 08:38 PM
1

Exactly!
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:47 AM
3

Nebu. You're idea is fantastic. It has a kind of Socratic beauty about it. Go for it and ignore the nay sayers. You may be condemned to death by hemlock, but your spirit will prevail in the fullness of time.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:45 AM
2

I Need Feminism Because I Don't Want To Be Arrested When I Call The Police On A Woman For Assaulting Me
/r/MensRights02/07/13 09:10 PM
2

Interesting that you omitted the preposition twice there.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 09:02 PM
4

"don't quite understand how things are done" does not equal "must be a master troll". In fact, the two seem inconsistent. But then, I may have been pretending not to know, the better to appear not a troll, the better to troll. You are nuts. Oh, but wait. That proves I am a troll. There is no way out. Ah, why do I bother. BTW: Do you have any evidence for your preposterous claim or are you just mad?
/r/MensRights19/05/13 07:39 PM
3

Sorry Giegerwasright, you write: Also. That little "fuck you Israel" "I'm an israeli MRA" thing with Sucupira, radrier, and OP is a manufactured argument that this thread was posted to "incite" so that this sub and this movement can be conflated with anti-semitism. I find this comment highly offensive. As the original poster of this comment, I claim privileged knowledge of my own motives. I posted this article because I thought it may be of interest to this sub. I was frankly disappointed by the…
/r/MensRights19/05/13 01:18 PM
1

He's not a reporter. He's an occasional commentator. http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/glen-poole
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:47 PM
2

lol
/r/MensRights16/05/13 02:26 PM
3

Enough! Now you're getting me excited. (Sheesh!)
/r/MensRights16/05/13 02:16 PM
3

I totally agree with you. Turning back the clock is not what I'm interested in. I never liked the clock the way it was in the first place. This guy Dench is actually arguing for putting women slightly closer to the kitchen. Just the stuff everyone assumes the MRM is for, but it's not. It's for equality, for men as well as for women. I see it as actually quite progressive, rather than regressive.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 01:58 PM
2

Egads! You are a woman? [wipes brow]
/r/MensRights16/05/13 01:55 PM
2

For what it's worth, I found this: "Geoff Dench "Returning to some traditional gender roles, such as allowing men to be the primary economic providers, would better society, argues Geoff Dench in the following viewpoint. He asserts men cannot become more civilized unless they feel responsible for the well-being of others; therefore, Dench argues, women should not seek full equality in the marketplace because that will marginalize men. Dench maintains that women should instead return to their rol…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 12:13 PM
2

No one except me. But it's telling you mistook satire for the real thing. It shows where the real thing is at.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:55 PM
2

lol
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:54 PM
3

I didn't read it that way at all. He is connecting masculinity with morality and saying men have been robbed of a place of value from which they can consider themselves worthwhile and good.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:52 PM
3

Fuck 'em, let the disaffected youth burn the whole fukin' country to the ground... Thank you. Although not a hell-raiser by nature, I sympathize with this sentiment.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:50 PM
6

"There is a crisis of femininity. Hypoagency and hypergamy are rife. The dildo is to blame." You mean, something like that?
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:49 PM
1

From her article earlier that is definitely not the message i thought she was going to spread. It is if you read between the lines.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:47 PM
1

Exactly! The professor broke ranks by raising the alarming juxtaposition of men and altruism. Who would have thought the two could be connected? Certainly not Diane Abbott, card-carrying member of Harriet (Harpie) Harman's party.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:41 PM
3

I think a lot of socially regressive women find this troubling, because traditionally sex has been a lever to get men to do what women want. Whoop-de-do! Jolly_mcfats wins the jackpot.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:36 PM
1

A pox on both their houses. Stop shaming girls, but let body parts be as sexual as anybody wants them to be.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:07 PM
1

Thanks for posting. We've been here before. The "unwelcome sexual advances" definition of harassment reminds of the "unwelcome sexual attention" definition of old which demonises initiators of sexual attention in general because none can know in advance how welcome it will be. That's the whole point about initiating. This in turn demonises men, because men are told they alone must initiate sexual advances or remain alone.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 10:28 AM
3

evidence?
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:36 AM
18

From the article: My suggestion to feminists who want to make the political personal is to flirt ferociously with garbos and ask one on a date. Now we're talking. That would certainly take care of "enthusiastic consent".
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:32 AM
0

The fact you'd selectively ignore context to avoid responding to what was actually wrote implies the relative lack of strength of your viewpoint.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:24 AM
12

Believe me, in ideological fields, truly doctrinaire practitioners do not invite students to take their classes to challenge them. They threaten to fail them if they don't obey orders.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:17 PM
2

OMG this is good.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:14 PM
1

I think the fact you feel intellectually superior after using such a flawed and child like logical argument speaks more of your own intellect than hers.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 01:04 PM
0

The UK media appears to have used the call for a lowering of the age of consent to 13 as a strap line to hang the author by. The reaction to the article has been one of sheer hysteria at the thought that we might even debate the matter! In Spain, however, the age of consent is already 13. Is there any evidence that Spanish girls are traumatised for life by having sex at such an age?
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:04 PM
2

Why on earth do eejits like this one in the Indie think they're being so terribly clever by trying to cast the MRM as 'feminism for men'. It's puerile. They are selling readers to advertisers. The writers just do what can to please their sub editors so they can keep their jobs. The sub editors reckon this copy will get attention. As usual, the chief interest lies in the comments.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 09:02 PM
3

"Don't pathologize masculinity." Yes. This one is fundamental. It's why the first two problems exist. I notice that someone posting as "NoveltyTroll" is saying you look like an asshole. Don't you just love it.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 11:35 PM
1

Yes he would. Do you think he would be believed?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:51 PM
2

You are under arrest for a crime against grammar. The greek term phenomena is plural. The singular is phenomenon. Please memorize this now. If you plead guilty and appear suitably contrite, and above all promise NEVER TO DO IT AGAIN, you may get off with a warning.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:45 PM
16

Muscovite begins hunger strike to protest daughter rape conviction A Muscovite sentenced to 13 years in jail on charges of raping his seven-year-old daughter has begun a hunger strike to protest his innocence, his wife has said. Vladimir Makarov was charged after dead sperm were found in his daughter’s urine when she was taken to a Moscow hospital after a domestic accident. He was sentenced on Monday. But Makarov and his wife - supported by independent experts - maintain the analysis was faulty.…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:49 PM
5

Moscow man says he didn't rape daughter Published: Sept. 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM MOSCOW, Sept. 6 (UPI) -- A Moscow man has begun a hunger strike to protest a 13-year jail sentence, saying he's not guilty of charges of raping his 7-year-old daughter, his wife said. RIA Novosti reported Vladimir Makarov, who was sentenced Monday, was charged after his dead sperm were found in his daughter's urine when she was taken to a Moscow hospital after a domestic accident. But Makarov and his wife, Tatiana Makaro…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:43 PM
3

Suspects may have been falsely jailed in Russia over pedophile cases Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s plan to chemically castrate convicted pedophiles and introduce other austere measures for those who molest minors are under greater doubt after a recent string of articles in Komsomolskaya Pravda exposed allegedly false expert testimony in pedophilia trials in Moscow. The newspaper articles, which indicate that a single center licensed only to support young victims of molestation proffered ev…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:39 PM
5

"Among the evidence that convicted Makarov was his daughter’s drawing of a cat with a tail that Leila Sokolova, a psychologist at the clinic, called phallic. Her testimony played a key role in establishing that a rape took place, argued Tokareva. With many already skeptical of the verdict, bloggers unearthed a series of photos of Sokolova in tight fitting black leather outfits brandishing a whip; her comments on online forums exposed her as a dominatrix, lesbian and “inclined toward sadism.” Whi…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:34 PM
2

http://en.rian.ru/society/20111028/168196934.html "Suspects may have been falsely jailed in Russia over pedophile cases"
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:32 PM
5

This post received 6 downvotes. Why? No one has explained in the comments.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 04:30 PM
2

Thanks. I get it now. More tomorrow. Here the sun has set and Hypnos calls.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:59 PM
2

Thanks. I'll work on it tomorrow. Thanks for answering all the questions.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:57 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:56 PM
1

Thanks. I think I may be getting somewhere. "Scotty, do you have the co-ordinates. ?"
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:18 PM
1

"Lastly what the program does is generate a list like that and that list contains all the usernames of the users in that subreddit for as many pages in as you like." So the program generates a list of SRS posters for the first n pages so I can paste them into Reddit Enhancement Suite and have their names show up in color here on MensRights? Is that it? But then why don't you just post the list here?
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:17 PM
1

I have installed Reddit Enhancement Suite. I'm guessing that is what RES stands for. I'm slowly making progress.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:10 PM
1

When I click on the instructions on how to add the list to my RES tags, whatever they are, the first thing I discover is that I have to have Reddit Enhancement Suite installed. This conjures up an infinite regress of dependencies each one as complicated, or perhaps more so, as this one, and perhaps involving the payment of money, or other stuff I don't have. I feel you should have made it clear from the get go what is involved in this.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:05 PM
1

The pastebin link gives me many lines of formatted text data. Each line looks something like: {"tag":"SRS","color":"fuchsia"},"SRScreenshot":{"tag":"SRS","color":"fuchsia"},"reddit_sux": What am I supposed to do with it?
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:02 PM
1

I have a very slow internet connection. When I click on the dropbox link I get Sign in screen after some time. I don't have a dropbox account.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:00 PM
1

You could show us a screenshot of what this program does. That would whet my appetite.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:58 PM
1

OK. Dumb ass here. Stuff I don't know includes: What is a pastebin? What does the program do? Does it tag the names of SRS posters if they post in this subredit. Does it, like, highlight their names in green or something? What is a tag? Is it a username? There are also HTML tags. I'm confused. What are RES tags? What does RES stand for? Sorry to be so hopeless, but I'm just a simple country lad and I thought you may like to know where I'm at with this right now. I'll work on it.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:56 PM
7

Shut the fuck up.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 09:38 PM
1

There does seem to be an element of this, yes.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 09:45 AM
2

Yes. And they should be pleased that the rate is falling so rapidly.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 09:19 AM
4

Ah! In that case, much of what I said may have to be adjusted. I thought it was a series of classes or lectures running weekly for the entire term.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:44 AM
5

Yes. This is the best suggestion so far. Go the the university with a demand for sex equality in the title and content of this course. Perhaps stage a protest outside the class. The challenge needs to be political because the offence is political. The academy is closed to dissent so dissent needs to be taken outside.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:39 AM
7

They have no trouble keeping inconsistent ideas. They show dynamism and plurality within the field. Also, your insistence on consistency is a characteristic feature of an essentialist, male dominated, patriarchal, phalogocentric (yes it's a word) discourse. This is what they will say.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:36 AM
8

"I'm sorry. That is beyond the scope of this course." Also, "heteronormative", "patriarchy", "backlash" and "unhelpful" inflected with a high rising terminal.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:29 AM
17

And they may ask you to leave if you're not enrolled. Otherwise, certainly worth a try. But remember, it's a crime to make people feel uncomfortable unless they have an appendage between their legs, and this covers polite questions too. /s
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:27 AM
21

Perhaps you have never been a dissenting voice in an ideological field. Firstly, they may not let you in if you're not on the course. You will stand out a mile. It's likely a fairly small group of mostly women. Secondly, asking tough questions is fine, but you will have to produce work for grading. This work must toe the line or risk failure. You must draw on sources which will be given to you. You will have to read these and base your writing on them. Challenging all this in the incredibly limi…
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:23 AM
42

First, the ideas have to be open to question. There is such a thing as a discipline's being ideological. Dissenting ideas and pertinent questions are simply not allowed. Practitioners do not press them and students who do are failed. Now the field as a whole has to be challenged. That challenge is political, either within academe or outside it.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:15 AM
58

Not quite. They're blithely assuming that male sexuality is pathological. So in a class like this, to question it simply gets you looked at in disbelief, told to go somewhere else, and, if you persist, threatened with academic failure.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:11 AM
1

Wait. Are you trying to say there really is no such thing as witchcraft? I'm stunned.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:07 AM
2

In one deft move you destroy the master/slave binary. /s
/r/MensRights12/04/13 02:04 AM
3

Ask her if racism against Jews by blacks exists. That should move things along a bit.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:58 AM
1

Actually, the term "gender", in this non-grammatical sense, is the same. What was wrong with "sex"? The idea is that sex-role has no necessary connection to sex, so that sex-role is independent of sex.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:29 AM
2

When I type "neurotypical" into the google search box I get "neurotypical disorder", "neurotypicals are stupid" and "neurotypical syndrome symptoms" as three out of the nine autocomplete suggestions. I am not not signed in to google, so these reflect "the search activity of all web users and the content of web pages indexed by Google" only. What do you get?
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:18 AM
1

The use of "cis" in a pejorative context is common and widespread. To see this, try typing it into a google search box. Some claim that "cis" is not a pejorative, but when I type "cisgender" into google the word "scum" appears in the first four autocomplete suggestions (the suggestions google offers before you've even finished typing). This strongly indicates a common and widespread pejorative sense to the term across the community of its users. The results appear to vary with geographical regio…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:09 PM
2

There's a useful description of the three waves of feminism in here. The author then writes: I would argue that third wave feminism has moved away from gaining equality and overall equity issues that were the goal of first-wave feminist suffragettes and second-wave feminists influenced by the civil rights movement.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 11:54 AM
1

These are fascinating. Thanks for posting. Downloading as PDFs to read later.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:26 AM
11

Yes. One of the things that seems to be missing from the literature is "It's such a delight reaching 50. Men no longer objectify me." I've always found that odd.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:38 PM
2

Thanks Demi, I think you've made a good case. I withdraw my glib suggestion to co-opt the term. Better to insist on our own.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:31 PM
1

Point taken. I change the original.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:12 PM
2

When I said "mirror" I meant lexically, not semantically.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:11 PM
1

Thanks for the suggestion. You're right. Choice of terms is important. It was an off the cuff thought loosely framed. I switch "patriarchy" to "traditionalism".
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:09 PM
1

I drop "masculism". Sorry I invoked it in the first place.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:06 PM
1

I agree. But I think the real question men and women need to resolve together is in what way they are different and in what way they can be regarded as the same.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:06 PM
1

They pay me?
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:04 PM
3

'patriarchy' is actually a proper word, with a proper definition. It is the passing down of inherited wealth, property, and titles to a (usually first-born) son. Actually, that's not quite correct. What you describe is called patrilineality.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:00 PM
3

Let's all have a gendered "ism" together. /s
/r/MensRights09/04/13 03:20 PM
1

OK, forget the terms for now. Just try to get the ideas behind them. We can finesse the lexicography later. I chose masculism (not a term I normally use) to mirror "feminism" in this case.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 03:19 PM
4

Why not co-opt the term and interpret it as "traditionalism", just as you say?
/r/MensRights09/04/13 03:18 PM
2

this memory -- nearly 4 years old at this point in time -- still haunts me today when I'm going out on dates or when I'm in a situation where I could be in a place alone with someone. It's been four plus years since I've let anyone get close enough to me to feel confident enough to let my guard down. Yes. Having dealings with the police can do this to you. It's something to do with feeling vulnerable and helpless in the presence of an overwhelming power that can just swoop in and do what it want…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 10:29 PM
10

I keep thinking, '"shut the fuck up" is OK, but dongle jokes require smelling salts?'
/r/MensRights06/04/13 08:27 AM
2

What you've got here is a very conservative backlash against equality. I'm with the feminists this time. Perhaps posters missed the details. On March 11, Amina Tyler, a 19 year-old Tunisian posed for Femen. Marking the organisation's presence in the North African country, Tyler posed semi-nude with the words "My body belongs to me, it is not the source of anyone's honour" written across her torso. Adel Almi, leader of the conservative religious organisation Moderate Associate for Awareness and R…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 08:21 AM
1

Dear Detective Sergeant Ian Langridge, Nelson Police, I write after reading a news article on stuff.co.nz which attributes to you the statement "the law is there to protect young girls from older men". http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8494755/Youth-sex-a-life-term I find it puzzling. You may have been quite careful in your choice of words, and really believe that girls stand in need of protection from men and not from women, and that boys stand in need of none. If this is indeed your view, I wond…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 10:13 AM
2

I'm lost. Sorry. Urban dictionary for "Fair dinkum"
/r/MensRights31/03/13 11:09 PM
11

Violence against women? Yes. At a stretch. A prime example thereof? If you like. The problem with this sort of thing is it's strictly correct, just so grotesque. You have to try to get your head around why somebody in the feminist paradigm could allow themselves to think like that without recoiling at the absurdity of it. If they were to deny that it is violence against men too, then that would be absurd. The big question is whether they think men or women are the primary victims as in the notor…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 10:09 PM
3

Fair dinkum. We each make our private risk assessment.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:56 PM
1

Yes. There are different types of feminism. There's marxist feminism and liberal feminism, both of these broadly rationalist. But the most popular form now, I believe, is postmodern feminism, or what you might call "empowerment" feminism. This is emphatically anti-rational. Under the rubric of feminism many a dog can find a corner. The Marxists will often tend to Stalinist repression of free speech. They simply declare freedom in general to be a bourgeois privilege. The postmodernists, on the ot…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:55 PM
2

Very subtle. You are a crafty one, aren't you?
/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:46 PM
2

Well, I'm not saying all feminists are Stalinists, but Stalinist women will almost certainly be feminists, and many on the left seem to be fairly Stalinist in orientation, or something.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:16 PM
1

Well, why not downvote me for this as well. Stalinists have long taken the view that it is tactically unwise to share a platform with the enemy. This is part of it as well. EDIT: Sorry, SF, I didn't mean to suggest you were the downvoter.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:07 PM
1

Downvoted? For that?
/r/MensRights31/03/13 04:06 PM
18

I don't know about pedophiles, but children are everywhere. They're almost impossible to avoid. I cross the road if I see them coming the other way.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:24 PM
45

For the "What does this have to do with men's rights" crowd: This relates to our cause because pedo-hysteria is what drives men away from teaching, as well as keeps us from taking our kids out in public. Thank you.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:19 PM
6

They seem to think it lends them a certain radical caché or gritty street cred.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:14 PM
6

I just don't understand this censorship mentality. It comes from a sense of us against them. We know better than them and must impose our collective will on all for the greater good. It is then a short step to using debate as an instrument of persuasion the better to advance the cause, rather than as an opportunity to pursue knowledge and understanding in the company of others within the constraints of evidence and argument.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:09 PM
8

I'd call it rape culture culture.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 01:07 PM
10

It's pretty hypocritical to live in a society where men are expected to initiate relationships, then characterize attempting to initiate a relationship as wrong. Uh oh! It's another one of those bingo moments.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 10:27 PM
2

Suddenly it hits me. Elsewhere in the thread I'm being lectured on not using the word "tranny" because people find it offensive. The principle at work here is don't use a designator that the person designated finds offensive. Applied uniformly, this would result in "cis" being proscribed if the persons it designates find it offensive. Hoisted on their own petards!
/r/MensRights29/03/13 11:43 PM
1

lol. Sounds Marxist. Groucho tendency.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 06:15 PM
1

Exactly. Good comment. Very true and pertinent. Thanks OC.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:16 PM
1

You're freaking me out with those glyphs.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:15 PM
0

I'm not sure why you're duding me. I'm very sympathetic to your position.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:14 PM
1

Thanks Makomk, I'm afraid this issue is not at the top of my list of concerns right now. Best Wishes, Unexpected
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:13 PM
2

Thanks. A grand compliment. I blush.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:31 AM
1

That's one day so far. Give it one more. No matter how abusive she may have been, and I've no doubt she was plenty, after three years devoted to her it will be hard not to feel a sense of loss, I suspect. I don't wish it; I fear it.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:30 AM
4

That's an interesting question. Personally, I find it offensive to gays when used in that way, yes, though when pressed, those who so use it deny any intended offence. What's interesting is how this particular use arose. As I'm sure you know, before it meant homosexual, 'gay' meant jolly, colorful and cheerful. From the famous 1951 Dylon Thomas poem: Grave men near death, who see with blinding sight, Blind eyes could blaze like meteors, and be gay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light. It t…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:02 AM
0

Well, I would have thought so, but I got it from a tranny. I live in a very gay-friendly area, and the term is just standard among the community, so though I hesitated, that's why I used it. Also, I didn't want to have to choose between 'transvestite', 'transgender' and 'transsexual'. Things were getting difficult enough as it was. But maybe it's one of those co-opted terms. "You can't say 'nigga' unless you is one". I'm afraid I don't have much patience with that. Then there's the club called T…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 08:55 AM
2

If there is a settled view on this, I think it's that we call ourselves MRAs, short for "Men's Rights Activists." Other candidates include "Masculist", "Gender egalitarian", "Equalist", "Men's Human Rights Activists" and "anti-feminist".
/r/MensRights29/03/13 01:05 AM
1

Ah. Well, you can't stop her doing that if she wants to.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 01:01 AM
7

Read The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell (or watch the youtube video) and then come back with questions.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:59 AM
2

Spartacus
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:58 AM
3

"But can you persuade us, if we refuse to listen to you? he said. Certainly not, replied Glaucon." http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.2.i.html
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:56 AM
1

So is there something in the neurophysiology of the Japanese brain that makes it possible there, but only there? Or is there something in the Japanese soil that makes things possible there, but not possible further round the Pacific rim in, say, Russia, or Alaska? What about South Korea? Could it happen there? Indonesia? Australia?
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:51 AM
2

You cannot persuade those who refuse to listen.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:49 AM
4

You are welcome to post here any time you want. I, for one, will not attack. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure how to objectively define "attack," but I digress. I would encourage you not to be put off by several people coming at you all at once. Sometimes packs of feminists show up here and have a go at me all at once. I'm always grateful for the opportunity to learn what I can from them. Sometimes I ask them simple questions, but they refuse to answer. That's always disappointing, but it…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:47 AM
3

Surely the best argument is that men and women are human beings, possessed of minds of their own, and should be free to do as they please as long as they do no harm. The onus is really on your friend to provide reasons for legislating to keep women in the kitchen. Press her for details and then deal with the arguments she makes.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:28 AM
2

Sorry CC, Thanks for asking. I had no idea it was unclear. I'm stating the position that society takes. It's not my stance at all. Best Wishes, UI
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:23 AM
4

I don't think it is pejorative. To discover whether this is generally true I would suggest googling the term or one of its composites and just looking at the contexts in which it occurs. EDIT: I've just tried this; the first autocomplete suggestion for cisgender is "scum".
/r/MensRights28/03/13 11:57 PM
1

That's better.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 11:42 PM
11

To my limited understanding, cis means non-trans. It is used because "normal" is thought to have pejorative implications for trannies. "cis" itself has acquired pejorative connotations from widespread pejorative context of use.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 10:17 PM
1

O you beast! I'll so maul you and your toasting-iron, That you shall think the devil is come from hell.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 10:09 PM
1

WTF
/r/MensRights28/03/13 09:21 PM
2

Maybe the original wasn't the original.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 09:17 PM
1

"Fukasawa contends that while some grass-eating men may be gay, many are not. Nor are they metrosexuals. Rather, their behavior reflects a rejection of both the traditional Japanese definition of masculinity and what she calls the West's "commercialization" of relationships, under which men needed to be macho and purchase products to win a woman's affection." [..] "[I]n the postwar economic boom, men became increasingly macho, increasingly hungry for products to mark their personal economic prog…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 09:06 PM
6

Which is why feminism comes to seem like a giant shit test.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:59 PM
1

Well I think this ought to, all the same. Recall how Japan used to be the home of the macho male?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:55 PM
1

Just on a point of curiosity, marriage is both a religious sacrament and a civil institution. Why would gays want to participate in the religious sacrament part of it after years of being condemned by religion as an abomination in the eyes of the lord? Just asking?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:52 PM
1

That's a very good argument. But it's an argument for gay rights in general, not necessarily gay marriage in particular.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:51 PM
1

And..?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:44 PM
1

Thanks! Saved!
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:40 PM
7

Needs a bit of tightening up, to say the least. I would give it a big fat "citation needed".
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:38 PM
1

Would you have seen it happening in Japan twenty years ago?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:33 PM
18

All this comes from the idea that sex is something dirty that men take from women and women sometimes give to men. Men want it. Women don't. Harassment is on the rape continuum, but is something only men can do to women. It's harassment when women don't want it. Sexual harassment is defined as unwanted sexual attention. Women, on this view, can't do it to men because men want it anyway. At worst it would be a case of a woman offering a gift he didn't want. EDITED for clarity.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:11 PM
3

"not OK" is the new "inappropriate".
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:10 PM
2

Normal size of the testicle as a function of age Age Width(cm) Length(cm) Volume ±SE(cm³) at Birth 1.0 1.5 1.0±0.14 1-3 months 1.2 2.0 1.9±0.11 4-6 months 1.7±0.11 1-10 years 1.6 0.7±0.9 11-12 years 1.7 increasing to 1.9 1.5 increase to 2.0 13-16 years 2-3 increasing to 3.5 5.0 increase to 13.0 Adult 2-3 3-5 15-20 Source: http://radiologic-technology.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/normal-size-of-testicle-as-function-of.html
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:06 PM
2

It would take a massive cultural change involving all men everywhere. It's already happened in Japan after 20 years of economic stagnation. Google "grass-eating boys".
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:01 PM
3

Well, apparently I've been corrected. Harrumph!
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:00 PM
6

Well I never. Nobody tells me anything.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:38 PM
3

"should be" ?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:26 PM
2

So actual fucking is like serious fucking but not actual serious fucking?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:09 PM
4

Will there be any inactual fucking?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:05 PM
1

How can it be serious and fun at the same time?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:04 PM
3

We should start collectively withholding until they have no choice but to pay us for sex.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:02 PM
13

heroine, surely.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 05:46 PM
6

What do you folks think? I agree with every word. Sex is seen as something women give to men and men take. This is exactly the problem. Also sex is seen as dirty. This may be due to the fact that it is the stuff of original sin.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:45 PM
2

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:34 PM
0

Normal size of the testicle as a function of age Age Width(cm) Length(cm) Volume ±SE(cm³) at Birth 1.0 1.5 1.0±0.14 1-3 months 1.2 2.0 1.9±0.11 4-6 months 1.7±0.11 1-10 years 1.6 0.7±0.9 11-12 years 1.7 increasing to 1.9 1.5 increase to 2.0 13-16 years 2-3 increasing to 3.5 5.0 increase to 13.0 Adult 2-3 3-5 15-20 Source: http://radiologic-technology.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/normal-size-of-testicle-as-function-of.html
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:33 PM
2

Ironic, sardonic. Let's call the whole thing off.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:32 PM
1

You really need to ask?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:58 PM
2

Give it a couple of days.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:22 PM
7

I've noticed there's a lot of "actual" fucking going on these days. What's with that?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:16 PM
32

Yes. I have often noticed this. It's the more outspoken feministic types who tend to be more demanding and hypergamous. And the irony is, of course, utterly lost on them.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:15 PM
2

Why [are] men are told to "grow some balls" at the moment they actually start to display strength of will? I'm not sure that's quite true. What happened in your case is you were told to "grow some balls" the moment you neglected to perform your slave duties.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:10 PM
9

Why do we say "Oh you poor dear!" to women no matter how petty or unprovable their claim.. Because we are their dutiful slaves, bound to serve out of a motive of shame for what we are and a desire to be redeemed through the love of a sweet, beautiful, innocent woman. EDIT: This comment may contain traces of irony (and sardony).
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:08 PM
9

..she called on the phone and demanded I "get the fuck down here and pick this up". You know what they say. "'No' means no". Always worth remembering.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:04 PM
1

I'm not a fan of "studies" at all though, I think "studies" should be banned. Is there a correlation between this and liking boobs?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:57 AM
2

Two downvotes, but no replies. That's disappointing. I'd love nothing more than to be shown by superior minds where I have gone wrong in my reasoning.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:50 AM
1

Why don't you address PierceHarlan's excellent post point by point instead of persisting with this puerile line of reasoning?
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:16 PM
1

Does your mother know you're at the computer?
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:08 PM
1

I'm sure that's true, but I suspect the manhood101 link is what explains your 7 downvotes so far.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 08:25 PM
0

Thanks Mr_Rivers, It's starting to become clearer. You are suggesting that most feminists are liberation feminists, but that the empowerment feminists, being stronger in their convictions and more forceful in method, have risen to the fore. I tend to think, however, that both liberation and empowerment feminists will have their stronger and weaker members. I see the current predominance of empowerment feminism as connected with the coming to prominence of postmodernism on the left, tending to re…
/r/MensRights27/03/13 08:13 PM
2

Aha! Now I think you're onto something. I was too hasty. Sorry.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:57 PM
2

OK. I think I may have missed the point. I posted hastily too.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:56 PM
1

Seems like a pretty weak analogy to me. Everyone agrees if you are forced to, you will hand over your money. Likewise, women will hand over sex. So far so good. But what follows? Do we turn round and tell women they are to blame if they hand over sex under threat? Your interlocutor requires to show you this. I would press for details.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:35 PM
1

Sorry Mr_Rivers, I'm interested in your reply but I don't think I get it yet. Could you say a bit more? Perhaps you could suggest how I might have phrased my last sentence better. Best Wishes, Unexpected
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:30 PM
2

Start another one. Call it "AdaInitiative". They're all connected, and this one will most likely slip under the radar.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:10 PM
15

Aha! You've discovered that feminism is patriarchal. This is a key insight. My view, strongly disputed, is that it was not always so. Feminism is not a single body of systematic thought. I count two kinds: liberation and empowerment. Liberation feminism argues for radical social equality for women, and by implication, for men, though historically it may have failed to attend duly to men where they are weaker. Empowerment feminism, by contrast, does not purport to be concerned with equality. It w…
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:03 PM
1

It looks as if this came from the WomCam campaign reported here, though they have omitted this particular image.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 06:15 PM
20

That's the Radcliffe Camera in Oxford, btw. Empowerment feminism goes Victorian to teach us "All sex is dirty. Men want sex. Women don't. Men ought to be ashamed of themselves." It really doesn't matter what we do. They will never be satisfied.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 05:53 PM
1

I find that on the cusp of murder my emotions so overwhelm me that I forget to even look at my wrist watch.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 03:09 PM
2

And where will you tattoo "Don't forget to look at your forearm?"
/r/MensRights27/03/13 03:01 PM
5

Yeah, I murdered like 50 people the other day. Don't you just hate that!
/r/MensRights27/03/13 01:05 PM
14

The fallacy is as follows: The total number of male rapists is greater than the total number of non-male rapists. The total number of male rapists is greater than the total number or male non-rapists. (1) is the premise, (2) is the conclusion.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 01:02 PM
2

The OP (nobodysothername) has been a redditor for 9 hours, has 1 link karma and 0 comment karma at time of writing.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 12:06 PM
5

This is not really a men versus women issue. It's a modern rational egalitarian versus traditional anti-rational issue, and self-described feminists are on both sides of the divide.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:58 AM
3

Thanks 123Simone28, how can women approach you in a way that you will not respond to in a defensive or dismissive attitude? Like this: http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat Men, how can women engage in an ongoing, effective and persuasive dialog with you towards gender equality in a non-accusatory or negative way? That's really quite simple. Talk to us without accusing us of anything or implying we are bad because we are men. Best Wishes, Unexpected
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:53 AM
1

Umm. Maybe not. People are rarely the best judges of themselves. Wikepedia's worth a shot, but people are entitled to ask here too.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:46 AM
1

So 2nd wave is about equality, and 3rd wave is about empowerment, or something? Is that it? I'm genuinely asking because I'm still not familiar with these terms myself.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:44 AM
1

From the linked page, right at the top: "Check out our free ebook, The Principles That Govern Social Interaction: hxxp://manhood101.com" These guys regularly spam this sub.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:41 AM
17

We should remind ourselves that "benevolent sexism" is men being nice to women, by, for example, not making dongle jokes in their presence because they are too weak to take it. This is benevolent sexism. Seems like they've got you on one horn of the dilemma or the other.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:38 AM
69

I keep forgetting not to murder.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 12:06 AM
40

An analogy.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 11:51 PM
2

From the article: There are no widely advertised government sponsored support groups for men in emotional pain. Now there's an idea!
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:59 PM
3

I have often felt like a horrible, unattractive man who serves no useful purpose and might as well be dead. EDIT: Don't worry. This has now changed, but for most of my life I think this was my predominant feeling.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:57 PM
20

I'm sorry. This comment is making me feel uncomfortable. /s
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:50 PM
-2

I would cross out "friendly" and write in "bitchy", but I'm a bit of a rascal.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:49 PM
1

Amen to that.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:39 PM
1

That's fine as long as you give me the credit. [fnar]
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:37 PM
2

Today kerning theory, tomorrow the world.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 12:47 PM
3

Haha. Mens Rights. Leaders in Kerning theory since 2013.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:37 AM
12

This sign is not even directed towards women.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:33 AM
1

You may be right about the audience in practice. But here I will run the risk of contradicting myself. Strangely, I find myself uninterested in persuading the actual audience in practice, whatever it may be composed of. I am interested in persuading the audience in principle. That is to say, I'm interested in what ought to persuade, not what just does persuade. To this you may say I am at best a weak contributor to the cause since my words with have little effect. I would reply that though this …
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:22 AM
1

Is that your theory?
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:14 AM
1

The Orwell essay is available here
/r/MensRights26/03/13 12:13 AM
1

Enough tenants. More tenets, please. My mother warned me about people like you.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:36 PM
1

Thanks RIC, you ask: You mentioned liberal feminists, or libertarian feminists, or some such term. I think that's closer to the group I want to be identifying with. Could you elaborate on this versus the mainstream brand of feminism that we've all grown to despise? I've written about this on comments elsewhere. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/173sn3/ive_always_thought_i_was_a_feminist_until_i_took/c822us5 http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/17er2f/the_only_thing_that_sometime…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 10:43 PM
6

Fucking communist banking international capitalist Jewish feminist middle classes are the same the world over. Fucking, fucking shit. Assholes. More shit. And so on.. I'm really angry about this.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 09:51 PM
2

You see a woman putting the bins out. You say she's well trained. Yeah. That would about do it.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 07:18 PM
1

While we're on the topic, your comment is just hot air, as is this one. By your own standard, then, I should ignore you.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:24 PM
3

If you think ideas are just hot air then you dangerously underestimate their power. Um..dude!
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:24 PM
4

We differ on strategy. Referring to a feminist author against a feminist is more rhetorically forceful, on my view. Consider how you would feel if, say, I were to quote Warren Farrell against you? Assuming you admire him, wouldn't you sit up and think? Now, imagine if I quote Mary Daly against you? Would you not be less likely to sit up and think? Do you see my point? Please note, we don't have to support any of them lock, stock and barrel. I think proceeding in this way would be really threaten…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:08 PM
2

Thanks JabCross, It is a shame. Perhaps you could explain it to me. Best Wishes, UnexpectedItem
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:05 PM
3

Consider omitting "about it later". I waffled on that one, but left it because It's a 'changing of minds' you didn't feel bad about it when it happened, you felt bad about it later. That's true but you still feel bad. Firstly, consider changing "didn't" to "don't". I'm torn on this one. I see your point, but I'm looking at it as a past tense situation. The situation may be in the past, but the definition is not.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:41 PM
1

It does seem open to interpretation. Maybe I've got it wrong. I took it to mean if you don't get a "yes" you're a rapist. That's going backwards. On the other hand, she might be saying women should start asking for sex themselves. They should start taking the initiative and see how that feels. This I agree with, but then describing it as "consent" doesn't seem quite right. If what she means is that we should all want our sexual partners to want to be sexual with us then I agree. But if she means…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:38 PM
1

Thanks RIC, you write: You get lots of points of view and lots of stories from personal experience. From people who don't necessarily live in the same area, or country, or on the same continent. While each story individually doesn't mean that much to the entire issue, they are interesting, and the conclusions people draw from then are informative. Subreddits are kind of ultimate forums, in the sense that I can both shape the conservation with my own posts or just read other people's, and know th…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:30 PM
1

Yep. That would explain it.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:26 PM
1

Thanks BH. I do try. best, UI
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:25 PM
10

Letter space needs to be increased. There should be space between the letters. See "REGRET SEX". Consider omitting "about it later". Consider omitting the paragraph beginning "don't make a..". It repeats. It is better to keep things short. Look at "RAPE IS WHEN YOU DIDN'T CONSENT" "RAPE IS NOT A CHOICE YOU MAKE". Firstly, consider changing "didn't" to "don't". Secondly, the font size on this pair of lines should be the same. The word "rape" appears vertically stacked and the difference in size d…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:20 PM
1

You're welcome, Buffalo.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 04:55 PM
1

I feel that forums are useful because you can examine more fully the theory vs the practice from several points of view, culturally and experientially speaking. What in the world does that mean?
/r/MensRights25/03/13 04:37 PM
3

Sorry AC, Now I'm totally confused. There's no hope for me. best, UI
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:58 PM
7

Oh, OK. Fair enough. But the reason I replied as I did to hugolp is that he had replied to me, and appeared to think we disagreed, though I wasn't sure.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:55 PM
5

Sorry AC, I still can't see how your original quote equates the two. You have now offered a second, but before I consider it, I wonder whether you would clear up for me whether you still maintain that the original quote does the job on its own? You write: She equates them by lumping them in together Lumping together need not imply equation. I might say, for example, "a raven is not like a writing desk." Here I lump together in a single sentence two unlikes without drawing an equation. More needs…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:50 PM
4

Thanks Arguecat3, It's good of you to provide the quote. Now, before you go, I wonder whether I could prevail upon you to do one thing more. Help me to see how it serves to equate Steunbenville with her own case. Fool that I am, I cannot see it. Best Wishes, Unexpected
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:34 PM
12

Feminism is not a single body of systematic thought. I count two kinds: liberation and empowerment. Liberation feminism argues for radical social equality for women, and by implication, for men, though historically it may have failed to attend duly to men where they are weaker. Empowerment feminism, by contrast, does not purport to be concerned with equality. It wants to say that no such things exist as equality, justice and truth. All that exists is socially constructed. Furthermore, power is n…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:25 PM
9

I find nothing to disagree with here. EIDT: I find myself immediately downvoted for simply agreeing with a comment that was upvoted? How strange!
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:17 PM
6

Sorry ManLoving, Shouldn't that be "'fucking' grammar"? But I digress.. What have you read? Best Wishes, Unexpected Item
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:16 PM
2

Thanks arguecat3, you write: I stopped reading after the point where she equated what happened in Steubenville to poor decisions she made when she was younger. You are quite right about what happened in Steubenville. I am really interested in your comment, but I do genuinely believe it could be improved by the inclusion of a carefully selected quotation showing in the author's own words where and how she equates Steubenville with her own case.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 02:10 PM
6

Sorry Manlovingfeminist, you write: If this is the first time you have seen feminists say something you agree with, then you definitely haven't seen much of feminism outside of this site. And that's SAD. What? I totally fail to understand how this remark replies to anything I said, where its assumptions are coming from, or what your point is. I genuinely have no idea. I've re-read my comment above. Nope. Nothing there about all feminists being wrong. You suggest this may be the first time I have…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 01:49 PM
4

You write: There is nothing wrong with feminism and the actual goal of feminism Actually, that's not quite correct. I would say there is nothing wrong with liberation feminism in its stated objectives, if not its practice. But empowerment feminism has very much wrong with it and has openly and absurdly abandoned equality and justice for women and men. This is not just a theory versus practice problem. It's also a theory versus theory problem.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:30 AM
3

At this point she becomes confused: It’s important to individually adopt the practice of enthusiastic consent and then teach it to others so it can become a standard value. [..] It would shift the focus when someone is raped from whether or not she effectively said “No” to “ What did you do to make sure she wanted to have sex?” There is little practical difference between not saying "no" and saying "yes", other than one of emphasis, and to make it a crime to be sexual without an emphatic "yes" i…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:24 AM
115

In truth, although she borrows from the lexicon of empowerment feminism, she strikes at its heart as much as any MRA. She is what I would call a principled liberation feminist and an egalitarian. For women, claiming our sexual power is an integral piece of ending rape culture, not to mention realizing our own sexual fulfillment. We must support these feminists against the rest. Feminism is not a uniform church.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:17 AM
40

This paragraph answers well the "rape is rape and men need to be taught to stop doing it" people: We expect society to do what we are not doing on an individual level: establish clear boundaries and guidelines, show men what is right and wrong, etc. I don’t believe that any amount of cultural messaging is going to ultimately be effective in combating what we all know to be true: that people give conflicting messages, that much of sex is a negotiation, that not everything either side does is done…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:09 AM
25

I agree with so much this feminist says. Sex is conventionally seen as something dirty men do to women, that men want and women don't, though sometimes they allow it. This traditional patriarchal sex negativity lies at the root of rape culture culture. Instead, sex should be seen as a shared experience to be enjoyed by both. From the article: Sex should be discussed in terms that describe a shared perspective rather than as something that is done to a person by another person. I start to wonder …
/r/MensRights25/03/13 11:03 AM
19

At last a feminist who allows for gradations: It’s a pretty short walk from trying to “talk a girl into” sex to taking the sex, from cajoling to coercing to forcing. Let’s rewrite the story by respecting women’s sexual choices — even when those choices lead to sex that makes us feel bad, pretending that we enjoy things we don’t.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 10:56 AM
57

It's interesting that she is given the men's rights treatment for advocating female sexual agency and told she needs to talk to some actual survivors, even though she herself has been a rape crisis activist. Discussing these issues over the past week, I have been reminded of how fraught with divisiveness they can be. When I shared some of my opinions – in both real-life discussions with friends and Facebook conversations – I was told that I needed to “talk to some actual survivors,” that I didn’…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 10:50 AM
13

Very much of what this self-described feminist says I think we could wholly endorse. Our culture needs to make space for young girls, as well as young boys, to safely explore their maturing bodies and initial erotic longings. It’s critical to allow for sex roles that are broader than the ones that we have been clinging to for generations. Women and girls need to be able to make mistakes. Emerging sexuality needs to be approached honestly and openly, and not as a pathology. Sex should not be seen…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 10:45 AM
-4

You may think that, but I'm not sure you understand. /s
/r/MensRights24/03/13 04:19 PM
0

Thanks Ilorin, Your conclusion does seem to suggest itself from the facts. best, UI
/r/MensRights24/03/13 04:17 PM
1

I've been talking to my Sudanese friend again, and he now tells me things are not as I described them. I take back what I wrote. sorry.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:35 PM
1

What kind of plumbers do you have that give you a week long window and just come right into your house.. I agree that this would be very puzzling behavior in US or UK, but just to give you some idea of the variety of cultures, according to my Sudanese friend, it's quite common in Sudan for people to just walk into their friends houses. He was explaining this because, much to his annoyance, and my incredulity, one of his Sudanese friends just walked into the house without even knocking. My mind w…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:11 PM
2

The following case tells us something about the unique cultural attitudes of Americans on this particular issue. In 1992 Yoshihiro Hattori, a Japanese student, was fatally shot in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, after mistakenly ringing the doorbell of Mr. Peairs. He had been looking for a halloween party. Acquittal in Doorstep Killing of Japanese Student A jury today found a local meat market manager not guilty in the fatal shooting of a Japanese exchange student, ending a case that exposed major diffe…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 02:35 PM
1

Are you asking what makes PunchingBob think they want this, or for what reason do they want it?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 02:16 PM
2

It counter instances the feminist theory that patriarchy doesn't care about preventing rape.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:46 AM
12

[M]ore needs to be done to identify and treat children at risk of sexually offending. What a curiously Orwellian tone this form of words produces!
/r/MensRights18/03/13 10:13 AM
5

Claire Lilley, policy adviser at the NSPCC, said Britain needed to do more to shield children from an “increasingly sexualised society” amid growing problems with online grooming, harassment in chatrooms and so-called “sexting”. There is something very odd about this state of affairs. At the same time as denying child sexuality, and condemning it when it exists in boys, and condemning those who sexualize the underage, society itself in involved in what it so vocally condemns: the sexualization o…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 10:09 AM
21

The whole premise of the statutory rape of children is that they lack either the sexual motivation or the maturity to be fully responsible for sexual acts. To prosecute children for sex offences presumes they possess both the sexual motivation and the maturity to be responsible. We must decide whether children are sexually motivated and sufficiently mature to judge for themselves. If they are, then they can be prosecuted, both girls and boys equally, but then statutory rape of children must be r…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 09:35 AM
2

Thanks Wrez, I'm afraid I have no idea what you are talking about. Would you please explain it to me as if I were 5? Then, as soon as I understand, I'll do what you say. Best Wishes, UnexpectedItem
/r/MensRights18/03/13 09:21 AM
1

I'm not convinced. If your explanation were correct they may not give workshops to gay guys about being victims of rape so as not to appear unPC, but they would give workshops to men in general about being victims of street violence. There's nothing unPC about that. After all, more men are victims of street violence than women of rape, and street violence is just as capable, if not more so, of being construed as animalistic dominance seeking.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 02:20 AM
14

Yep. Looks like it.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 03:12 PM
30

Because they can't make men feel ashamed of themselves, and the dirty little things they do to women, by talking about something men do to one another.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 03:04 PM
1

I think this just about sums it up. It's another one of those "it's a not a gender issue; it's a human issue" types of things.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 10:07 AM
2

Ah. Now we're talking. And I'm sure there are some, somewhere, who have or would have objected to this image for just that reason, but plainly they are a minority. It would be interested to test the reaction to calling this benevolent sexism in one of the feminist subreddits. I wouldn't expect much support for the idea.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 10:05 AM
4

Congratulations, you SUCCEED.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:15 AM
2

Reminds me of the Speech of Diotima from Plato's Symposium.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:01 AM
4

The devil is in the details, but your framework is correct. Men and women are fundamentally equal as human beings, endowed with human rights and human capacities, freedoms and responsibilities. Within that we must build an ethical system of how they should behave towards one another, both publicly and privately, in a way that takes account of given facts about them and their relative strengths and weaknesses as men and women.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:55 AM
3

This is entirely correct, though it's very hard do see at the time. I'm not even sure you need to hit the gym either. I think the problem is that you made of this woman your whole point in living. When she rejects you, and the children reject you out of loyalty to the de facto parent, there no longer seems to be a point. And indeed, at that moment, there no longer is. Except there is, and you must find it by first returning to the simple business of continued living. Sorry for going on.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:47 AM
7

What a pathetic, judgemental, pretentious little statement.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 02:48 AM
4

Yeah. It's pretty simple really. You put this person's happiness first and foremost in your life. Then suddenly you have no life. What is the point in continuing to live?
/r/MensRights17/03/13 02:47 AM
1

Yes. Heteronormative = making a norm of difference, believing their ought to be difference. It took me a while figuring that one out when I first heard it.
/r/MensRights16/03/13 08:00 AM
1

Ah, sorry. I didn't realize that.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:04 PM
2

[T]heir language isn't structured to just include rapists, but puts the onus on all men. Not only does it put the onus on men, but it broadens the definition of rape and then places it on a spectrum of sexual abuse going all the way through physical and verbal abuse to things like just looking. The result is to incriminate, vilify and demonize all male sexual desire for women, almost all of which, of course, has nothing whatsoever to do with rape, as anyone with a titter of wit can see.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 06:45 PM
1

You do realize i'm not saying i believe this, don't you? But yes, that is exactly what conventional wisdom would preach. Women are sluts for wanting sex. And here lies a major contradiction. You women must be prevented from being sexual by the application of coercive pressure. At the same time we are told that it is unnatural for women to want sex.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 06:41 PM
-2

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 06:36 PM
8

Better yet amend the sign: remove the first two letters from the one on the right.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:37 AM
2

Men are bad because they like to do dirty things to women. Women don't like to do dirty things to men. Consequently, only women need their own toilet. So conventional wisdom seems to go. EDIT: I do not share these beliefs. I attribute them to conventional wisdom.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:32 AM
-4

I don't know. I just can't get worked up about this one.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:29 AM
5

Of course, they may upvote them because they like and value them.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:16 AM
2

The OP is, of course, welcome to post this and any future facebook screenshots /r/mensrants, and Lecks is entitled to request he should do so, but I, for one, will be unlikely to read it if he does. I enjoyed this post and found that it contained a pertinent point: how to respond to the use of rape as an instrument of male shaming by observing that it is a gender neutral crime we can all oppose as human beings. Spread the word.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:15 AM
5

I don't think this is actually about changing the subject, though. What I suspect has happened is that he has stymied her attempt to use rape as an instrument of male shaming by observing that the issue is gender neutral. Suddenly it is no longer just about the dirty sex men do to women without permission, but about a violent crime we can all oppose as human beings. Then it simply doesn't work as an instrument of gender shaming. The fact that she would find this development so irksome shows that…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:09 AM
11

"It's not about men raping women, women raping men, it's about us raping each other." What a sense of relief comes over me when I read that. Now, at last, I think we have the answer to this persistent problem of rape and its use as an instrument of male shaming. Now we can be against both rape and male shaming at the same time.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:59 AM
3

I think there's a rape culture culture, at least on campuses, where women are encouraged by feminists to come forward. Read feminist insider Katie Roiphe's The Morning After. She spills the beans.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:05 PM
3

I get it. Femanon: Anonymous female. Is that it?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:02 PM
1

Then I would say it is definitely the first. The problem with the second is it depends on the identity of the victims. We care greatly about our own soldiers in way, well, more than about our victims, anyway.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:01 PM
1

That was different. Who is this Femanon? Where did you get this? Why should we believe it? It was great if true, but we would need some provenance.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:58 PM
2

Is this an exclusive or an inclusive disjunct?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:52 PM
1

I got mugged and almost killed. Does anyone care about that? Do you? Do you care about male victims of violent street crime? They are far more numerous than female ones. But even if you do care as much, and campaign against it proportionately, is anyone telling you it's your fault? How is rape any more my fault that violent street crime against men? Why so much more concern for rape victims than, say, homicide victims in general. They are far more numerous. This is what's called male disposabili…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:45 PM
2

Details, details!
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:28 PM
2

It's worthless. It tells us nothing.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:25 PM
2

Maybe.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:23 PM
0

No doubt in your mind? That's wonderful. Can you tell us how you can be so sure?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:23 PM
4

Mens Rights need to speak out against men and women committing these horrible crime The thing is, I'm not that bothered about getting raped. There's more chance I'll get mugged, isn't there? I don't put my life on hold for that.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 06:25 PM
5

How is attempted or completed rape defined in this 1 in 6 figure? Regarding "marginal", have you read my other comment from 3 hours ago: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1a7kop/rape_investigations_should_proceed_with/c8uujgc ?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 05:47 PM
13

dating back to ancient Romans.. ..with a brief interlude for burning at the stake and trial by fire.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:47 PM
1

I just want to say how terribly sorry I am that this man has decided to apologize on behalf of you all. I apologize on his behalf. WARNING: This comment may contain traces of irony.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:44 PM
4

UN statistics suggest that 1 in 3 women will be beaten or raped in their lifetime. Citation needed. In any case, even if every woman under the sun is raped, blame the rapists, not me. Furthermore, non-consensual sexual experiences exist on a continuum spectrum. EDIT: Choice of word
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:28 PM
3

Could you, like, summarize this?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:22 PM
0

Thanks Cyridius. A measured reply.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 02:56 PM
-1

Thanks Cyridius, "Marginal" wasn't a very good choice of word. I guess I meant marginal to me, or very far from my experience and concerns. I mean, it's not as if I want or care about having the freedom to commit rape. I also think there may be a case to be made for calling it "marginal" in terms of the frequency of its occurrence. I can't help thinking most women don't get raped. Feminists seem to think it's all over the place. What do you think? best, UI
/r/MensRights13/03/13 02:18 PM
1

Yes. I noticed that.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:04 PM
10

You know what gets me about this rape stuff? I have never in my life raped anyone, nor had the slightest inclination to do so. All I want is to live my life and be treated equally as a human being, along with women. Then all of a sudden I get hit over the head with all this rape stuff, which I'm somehow supposed to feel ashamed of, when in fact it is a relatively marginal crime committed by a tiny minority who the police and courts are trying to stop, quite rightly. None of this has anything to …
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:53 PM
12

Quite right. And notice in the BBC article Rape Crisis are now conceding 5% false allegations, that is, proven false, not merely insufficient evidence.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:35 PM
7

This was downvoted? Is the pope catholic? Deansdale, you are bang on with this and we need to keep banging on about it.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:33 PM
5

[E]ven though the victim has to prove he/she was raped, the system seems to work just fine if 9 out of 10 cases end in a conviction. Bullseye!
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:32 PM
9

If you are, or think you may be, a victim of rape you can get help and advice from Rape Crisis on 0808 802 9999 and in Scotland on 08088 01 03 02. What if you're a victim of, you know, what the headline says the report is about: false allegation?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 11:05 AM
4

What angers me is the line "the number of men wrongly accused is small compared to the number of women who are actually being raped" as if that is some kind of justification. Yes. This is a subtle, but important point. The contempt for modern legal justice and innocence until proven guilty behind this quote is huge.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 11:01 AM
2

Thanks for posting this, SM. From the article: "There is a difference between 'false accusations' and 'not enough evidence'," said Dianne. "False accusations account for only 5% of all reported cases." Rape Crisis admits 5% of accusations are false. Isn't that some kind of record? Best, UI
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:59 AM
1

OK. Fair dinkum.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:52 AM
1

Yes. There is much nuance often overlooked and conflated. If we're going to be serious about this we need to appreciate the nuance.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:50 AM
1

Sorry TBFR, I'm not impressed by: [T]hese types of dudes are just fucked in the head. This is the kind of comment that takes credit away from the entire subreddit, it's just nothing close to substantial. Best wishes, UI
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:48 AM
1

Thanks TextBooksForRent, I can't help suspecting you are saying this to make a point of your own rather than to explain the downvoting. I'm grateful for it all the same, but I disagree. The point that women only shame unattractive men is right at the heart of the hypocrisy of feminist women. It can never be said too often. It is this hypocrisy that puts men in a double bind. It is right at the heart of hypoagency culture. It harms men greatly, many of them anyway. It now has 81 votes, btw. best,…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:38 AM
1

Quite! Or, as I prefer to put it, "I'm a man; I like to fuck women." People find that outrageous for some reason. I find it just obvious and the outrage quite outrageous. OK, I used a bad word, maybe. But I used it for rhetorical effect. So maybe I should have said "have sex with."
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:34 AM
2

Thanks Bhorzo, on this we are in total agreement: Men are fully withing their rights to look at whomever, and think whatever, they want. A woman has no right to be upset at this, whether she is dressed provocatively or not. At times like this I wonder where we differ. The next paragraph I also agree with except perhaps for the last sentence: If women don't like to be looked at, however - something men have a right to do - they should reconsider how they dress.. I'm not sure about that. Maybe. Or…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:32 AM
1

I'm sure you think your dick is great... Disingenuous! A man with a "V-shape" generally does mean that he will have better offspring... just like a woman's hourglass figure suggests that she will be more reproductivly successful too. Haven't we been here already? It all depends on where you live. Maybe you don't live in the USA or the Middle East... but in such places, men are often shamed for being "virgins". Women, however, are culturally and socially encouraged to look and express their sexua…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:26 AM
1

Thanks Bhorzo, Now it's clear. No matter what people take from what I say, however, what you allege is not contained in it, and they simply should not derive the implication you suggest. I would simply ask them what I have asked you. What have I said? How does it imply what you allege? I cannot prevent them from thinking what they please. To clarify, women do look good to get male attention, though not just for that reason, and not always intentionally. Responsibility and power of choice are equ…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 02:26 AM
1

Thanks B., A large phallus doesn't show sexual fitness? But I digress... On your second paragraph, what empirical evidence do you have that men are condemned less for looking than women are condemned for provoking? Have you counted up the instances of condemnation? In any case, what does it matter? The original post condemned men for looking. This is what we were talking about. We don't need to condemn women. We just need to argue that condemnation should be equal and impartial in analogous case…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 02:18 AM
1

Thanks B., you write: Lips, breasts, and buttocks are sexual because they are signs of sexual (child bearing) fitness. That is why the hourglass is sexual. Similarly the V is sexual because it shows sexual fitness as well: it is the sign of a healthy and physically fit male that can take care of a woman and her children. This may be true but now we've strayed completely. Men don't walk around with codpieces. Men are condemned for looking at women. Women aren't condemned for dressing up to attrac…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:23 AM
1

The man is controlling his actions, yes. But likewise, the woman is controlling hers: wearing revealing clothes, in this example.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:15 AM
0

;
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:09 AM
1

Thanks B., Broad shoulders, full chest, flat stomach. Just as the hourglass is the standard female shape, the V-shape is the standard human male shape. You've got something here. But shoulders, chest and stomach are not primarily sexual. At the very least they are not sexual in the way lips, breasts and buttocks are. Look around in the street. Women wear stretch pants everywhere you look. Buttocks and thighs everywhere. How many male buttocks do you see so clearly outlined? And women attract mor…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:54 AM
3

I would say contemporary masculinity is non-sustainable. That's why we need men's rights to be different.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:41 AM
1

Thanks Bhorzo, I don't accept that suits in men accentuate sexual or erotic characteristics. Can you point to some details? Further, I find no necessary contradiction between the motives of conforming to cultural expectation and looking sexy. I remain to be convinced that the relevant parts of men's and women's attempts to look good are sufficiently alike to be analogous in the way your argument requires. With regards to the last paragraph in your comment, I'm confused. Which assumption do you b…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:29 AM
4

Thanks Grapeban, you write: But "getting her tits blown up" doesn't do any harm to people around her? It's a personal decision that doesn't involve anyone else Either: a) You are quite right. Big tits do no harm. But then neither do eyes functioning to capture the light they reflect. Or: b) You are wrong. Big tits disrupt the visual field of men simply trying to mind their own business and disturb the peace of their thoughts. With this option the good news is you can continue to bitch about men …
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:19 AM
9

I do like to keep my audience entertained.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:01 AM
2

Thanks Bhorzo, To assume that women "take care of themselves" for the sole purpose of attracting men is a bit silly. Would you mind not calling my assumptions silly, please. It doesn't contribute to my understanding and risks causing offence. With that out of the way, I find your analogy insufficient to your task. You liken my taking care of myself in general (brushing teeth, cutting hair, dressing and washing etc) with her painting her lips red, enhancing the appearance of her breasts or dressi…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:59 PM
3

You did? I'm not sure I do.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:48 PM
-1

Why not?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:47 PM
1

This probably isn't a good line of reasoning to pursue. Could you say more?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:04 PM
1

Sorry Bhorzo. I wasn't being serious. I have a strange sense of humor.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:04 PM
13

Yes. Women parody women very well. Thanks for sharing.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:51 PM
23

My god! You ask women about it? EDIT: This comment may contain traces of irony.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:48 PM
1

It's perfectly reasonable for a woman to get breast augments and get annoyed at men staring at her. This is because men are capable of self-restraint. So you are saying the man can restrain himself from looking at the augmented breasts in the same way that he can from looking at a physical deformity? In both cases good manners require restraint. Is that it? To that I would say the woman is capable of self-restraint too. She is capable of not getting her tits blown up at great expense to her wall…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:44 PM
18

Exactly! Why was this downvoted? Trolls are out tonight.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:29 PM
325

It's only traumatic if the guy doing the staring isn't attractive.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:27 PM
10

She's 31 ass.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:23 PM
14

I'm not good with sarcasm. Could you just explain what you're trying to say as if I were a child and then I would know whether I agree with you, please?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:20 PM
2

It's quite simple really. Men are only going to stop looking at women when women stop looking so incredibly good. Men don't have to look, but women don't have to spend so much time with clothes, make-up, hair and so forth.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:15 PM
98

I'm sorry for all the women who invest their entire life in looking good and then try to make men feel ashamed of themselves for wanting to look at them.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:12 PM
10

I apologize for being disposed to want to fuck women.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:10 PM
1

Thanks SN, I think you're making a very good point here that I may well agree with. I'm just not sure. To make it easy for me, could you say more. I'm just not clear in my mind which of my points exactly you are replying to and what exactly you are saying. Sorry about that. I like your first sentence. It reminds me of drunk driving. The punishment is always far worse if you kill somebody. But is that morally as it should be? The point is in driving drunk you take the risk of killing someone. Is …
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:07 PM
1

I also have problems drawing a neat correlation between the crime of rape and the crime of false reporting of rape. For one thing, what happens if the false report is not acted upon; is it then less liable to punishment? If so, then it would seem that the extent of the punishment depends on the actions of others, which is counter-intuitive to most people's sense of fairness. If not, then you end up punishing false accusers even if no action was taken as if they had committed rape. But why should…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 06:42 PM
1

I don't think that should be our focus. The main problem, as I see it, is that if you get all worked up about punishing false accusers, you tacitly accept that the institutional power surrounding them is just fine, though their abuse of it is not. The problem, as I see it, is the existence of this power in their hands, without which they would not be able to abuse it in the first place.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 06:42 PM
1

Thanks SN, We are talking at cross purposes, I'm afraid. I'm not advocating letting them get away with it. I'm advocating removing the instrument with which the can do it. Best, UI
/r/MensRights12/03/13 05:00 PM
16

Of course she's the victim. She's a woman. Women don't like sex. Only men do. Sex is bad. Men are bad. Men do sex to women. At least so conventional wisdom goes.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 03:36 PM
1

Thanks SN, you ask: Proxy violence is still violence. You disagree? We are acting to change the system. What do you want to change: the propensity of persons to falsely accuse or the power given to persons to send others to jail on a false accusation? All other questions are irrelevant. As for your question, I don't even know what proxy violence is. If white knights do violence for someone else they are directly and personally culpable. If a contract killer kills for someone else the same applie…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 03:18 PM
1

OK. Maybe I got you confused with somebody else. Need more coffee. Sorry.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:33 PM
1

Sure. Prosecute them for wasting police time, but change the law so that no one can be sent to jail without proof, and witness testimony alone should be barred from counting as proof. There will always be liars and crazy people. No one should have the power to imprison others at will. The problem is systemic, not individual.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:28 PM
1

The crime is wasting police time, not imprisoning the victim. The state does that. The state is the criminal. It should not be persuaded to convict without proof. Eye witness testimony alone doesn't count. The victim in this case would have remained innocent under the principle of innocence until proven guilty, if normal principles of modern legal justice were applied. It is better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent man is jailed, or something. I can't quite remember the exact qu…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:26 PM
1

I certainly don't like this. I wonder what feminists think of it?
/r/MensRights11/03/13 08:53 PM
0

There shouldn't be any accountability for false rape accusers. There should be no crime in accusing. The wrong is in the violation of the principle of innocence until proven guilty in the legal justice system in sex cases. In such cases the standard of proof is lowered to allow witness testimony alone to convict. This is the systemic problem at the heart of all these cases.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 06:03 PM
1

How can you be expect to be taken seriously when you won't acknowledge opposing views?
/r/MensRights11/03/13 12:11 PM
25

What’s valuable about this study is that it proves: False rape acusations are not rare Rape is not difficult to prosecute Rape has the highest wrongful conviction rate of all violent crimes These are all in direct contradiction to what feminists would have us believe. Exactly! This is a very important post. DNA testing shows 8 - 15% rate of wrongful conviction for sexual assault, an order of magnitude higher than in non-sex-related homicide cases. It's hard to see how this can be answered.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 12:08 PM
1

This is not a happy story. It is evidence of a shocking wrong in our laws and our system of justice. There is something to rejoice in that one man has been pardoned. There is much to be mourned in that all remain slaves. Power lies with women, whether they abuse it or not. Let us be quite clear about this. Call it extreme. Call it paranoid. Call it what you like. The evidence is clear. A man can go to jail because a woman lies. Montgomery's accuser, 22-year-old Elizabeth Paige Coast, recently ad…
/r/MensRights11/03/13 01:18 AM
1

You think everything is troll bait.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 12:45 AM
64

Either it should exist, or it shouldn't. But if it should, it should exist for both, and if it shouldn't, it should exist for neither.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:02 PM
1

No. The context was the wider context of society in which influential feminist ideas prevail. For an example of the rape continuum just take a look at this sub today where this item appears: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/19uq7a/boys_scream_at_a_girl_but_do_nothing_remotely/
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:09 AM
5

bingo!
/r/MensRights07/03/13 11:47 PM
1

And in a surprise development, Observer journalist Elizabeth Day discovers that men have been human beings all along.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:03 PM
3

I heard it in a coarse Dublin brogue, but valley girl is a close enough substitute. There is no death penalty in Ireland, I'm glad to say.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:58 AM
11

I particularly enjoyed the addendum "if you know what I mean like."
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:47 AM
14

Sorry PrinxTiger, I honestly don't see what's appalling about it. The Sexual Offences Act, 2003 may be appalling in its definition of rape, but the relevant section is merely being summarized here. I'm quite willing to believe that the majority of sexual assaults are indeed committed by men against women. This allows for something like a 60:40 ratio. That "both women and men may experience rape" is something we would want to advocate. Perhaps it's the specific mention of the importance of suppor…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:44 AM
6

Thanks Gicstc, you ask: [I]n what context is "abuse" only referring to sexual abuse? Good question. I argue that sexual, physical and emotional abuse together form a single relevant sense in the context of the term "abusive relationships" used the Psychology class within our broader social reality of prevalent feminist ideology. You are quite correct to suggest that there may be two pertinent senses here: "forced sexual activity," and "physical maltreatment". In the context of feminist theory, h…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:14 AM
6

Oh yes, I knew. Violence is intrinsically masculine. Women are weak. Men are strong. Historically men have dominated by force. That domination continues today through domestic violence and rape. Women cannot commit violence. OK, maybe they can, but the incidence is so small it's more a case of the exception proving the rule. /s
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:40 PM
1

Well, there's a chance he faked the whole thing. There is a chance. There's a chance the sun will not rise tomorrow. Remember that one for when you're under cross examination. "Yes, it is possible I faked the whole thing. It is also possible the sun will not rise tomorrow."
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:41 PM
3

Thanks. I hadn't thought of that until others pointed it out here.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:25 PM
3

Thanks ANB, You write: Indeed, he is probably making the whole thing up. On balance I find it highly unlikely that he's making it up. In any dispute there will be two sides. One side may have anomalies but still be judged far more likely to be correct. Best Wishes, UI
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:23 PM
5

That explains it. Thanks.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:02 PM
3

Thanks for reading it more carefully.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:58 PM
1

"misogyny," "sexism," and "objectification" are propaganda terms used to demonize men and male sexuality. As with all propaganda terms translating them into plain english to make some sense of what is being said is helpful. Returning to their strict definitions is not, particularly.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 08:55 PM
3

He did say she was breaking the door down. The absence of forced entry then becomes an anomaly in need of an explanation.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 08:50 PM
-2

27 downvotes for this question? Shame on this sub. If the sexes were reversed this is exactly the question we would want to ask. Can this question not be asked? This is just the sort of cult hysteria that plagues feminism. Oh dear.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 08:48 PM
17

The appropriate definition in this context is Abuse: To force sexual activity on; rape or molest. (thefreedictionary.com) It is generally assumed that men like sex and women don't. Sex is something that men do to women. When women don't want it it's abuse. This implies women cannot abuse men by definition. "Abuse" is a milder term than rape but is more useful because it sits on the rape continuum and can be more widely applied. For this reason it must be especially galling for those attached to …
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:31 PM
1

A person does not need permission to feel ashamed.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:11 PM
2

We are a rare breed, sitting on high, watching the madding horde below.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:09 PM
3

One of the major differences between men's rights and Feminism is that over here in MR we do not believe in using the term "inappropriate" as an ersatz term of opprobrium. Therefore, it's quite inappropriate to say it's inappropriate to "apologize for women" here here.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:00 PM
5

Thanks IAB, [T]he friend laughed and said that if he ever pissed me off, I could just tell the police he'd hit/raped me, and they'd believe me over him. It offends me that people can think like this. The real problem, however, is that the law and the legal justice system give women this power. It shouldn't surprise anyone that some abuse it, given what we know about human nature. As William Pitt said, "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." Best Wishes, UI
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:58 PM
1

You subtle, perjured, false, disloyal man!
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:46 PM
1

Have less confidence in yourself!
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:44 PM
3

Thanks Inkamybrat, This is a case of the difference between shame and guilt. You feel ashamed of your sex, but you are guilty of nothing, at least nothing you've told us about. Take it easy. Best Wishes, UnexpectedItem
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:39 PM
56

In a final interview she denied planning the killing, saying: "I didn't completely plan it, if you know what I mean like." This is going to be a tough one to prove.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:30 PM
9

Also note, he didn't actually enter her nebulous personal space. He "came within several feet of it". That leaves several feet plus personal space radius between them.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 02:44 PM
6

fuck her personal space! What, literally? "Today in Conneticut a man raped a student's personal space, sending shockwaves throughout the community and causing local police to be placed on high alert."
/r/MensRights06/03/13 02:40 PM
3

I read this quite obviously as sarcasm. Do I win the prize?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 02:36 PM
-1

It's not a rape incident report though is it? I mean literally, the word 'rape' is nowhere on that report. No but it's on the continuum.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 02:35 PM
1

What, the service charge? I know. Outrageous!
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:46 AM
1

Excellent. Deep down I'm a lesbian.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:41 AM
1

Sorry Sil, I'm not sure. I was confused. Sometimes a person can have only a dim perception of the meaning of a word, as if he were just beginning to recognize a form in the mist. Best Wishes, UI
/r/MensRights05/03/13 09:25 PM
1

Sorry Silgrenus, What did I think what meant? I'm not sure what you're asking. Best Wishes, UnexpectedItem
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:28 PM
1

Umm, no, that is not implied by my comment, though I was in fact mistaken about the meaning of "cis-gendered."
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:09 PM
0

Thanks TracyMorganFreeman, That puts it very elegantly. Best Wishes, UI
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:07 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:06 PM
4

Thanks SteelCrossx, Much of what you say is interesting, but for now I would like to confine myself to replying only to one point. You write: People that use 'abnormal' to describe others who do not fit into traditional gender binary.. Nothing in the existence of transsexuals violates the traditional gender binary principle. This is because the existence of transsexuals is consistent with the existence of a gender binary, where "gender binary" means the existence of two and only two sex-roles: m…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:01 PM
0

Thanks KalChoedan, We like to spot these little inconsistencies. Best, UI
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:52 PM
0

Thanks Makomk, First of all, what is obvious to you need not be obvious to me, and in this case is not. Secondly, you have a fair point that there is a term other than "normal" for normal handedness. Furthermore, this term, "right-handed" is more common than "normal" for denoting right-handed. I am grateful to you for this point. I upvote. However, there is no correlate term for the opposite of cis-gendered, with which cis-gendered was supposed to pair. Furthermore, we already have the simpler "…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:42 PM
1

huh?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:26 PM
2

Ah.. [googles "Nietzsche ress.."]. You are quite correct my friend. A subtle but important spelling detail. Thanks, Rocketman0739. May the road rise up to meet you. May the wind be always at your back. May the sun shine warm upon your face; the rains fall soft upon your fields and until we meet again, may God hold you in the palm of His hand. Best, Unexpected
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:22 PM
1

Gravity is an instance of force. I don't see how it could confound the two.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:17 PM
1

OK. So how about you say you identify as a woman? You don't have to dress like one, do you? Just say "Deep down I'm a woman" and see how that goes. I like to test things to the limit for sake of clarity.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:50 PM
3

Thanks. I get it not now, I think. EDIT: spelling.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:49 PM
-1

Can't we be a little more passive aggressive, please?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:37 PM
-1

..assuming "non-trans" would be too simple. Latin negating prefixes just weren't quite their thing, evidently.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:34 PM
13

And just while we're on the topic, I'm sorry but, for me at least, "cis-gendered" has a negative connotation, if only because of the repeated context of antagonism towards those it denotes.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:33 PM
20

trans people..wouldn't really appreciate being referred to as "abnormal." The correctness of a designating term is not determined by the preferences of the one designated.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:30 PM
9

Thanks Cold, you write: "Abnormal" has a negative connotation, do you have a problem with transsexuals? In its statistical sense, "abnormal" is not pejorative. Consider: Lefthandedness Person's whose annual income is above average Abnormal returns on investment By resisting the use of "abnormal" in its statistical sense to describe minority identities we risk colluding with those who want to connote them negatively. Best Wishes, Unexpected
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:26 PM
9

Exactly. Worth remembering. But they really don't like it when you say that.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:18 PM
3

It's certainly a tough one.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:17 PM
2

I think perhaps the motive is resentiment ressentiment. EDIT: sp.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:10 PM
11

Ahem..quite!
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:09 PM
-7

"Off limits to cis-gendered men?" So gays can go. Hmm..why not tell them you like to fuck a duck and go anyway and then see what happens?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:09 PM
4

Great story. Makes me feel like I'm flying through the Alps on a sunny day. Thanks!
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:06 PM
1

Not necessarily. What confounds acceleration and force, for example?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 11:57 AM
1

That's a very good point. Excellent! There, I think, you have our answer.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 11:46 AM
2

I really can't see how Longstaff's piece gets us anywhere. She assumes that alleged false rape accusers are innocent without any support. Everything else operates under this headline assumption. Those who doubt this tendentious assumption are left without an argument for not prosecuting false accusers.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 08:53 PM
2

Pertinent!
/r/MensRights04/03/13 08:40 PM
2

Being poor, being black, being white, having a large nose, or having a last name that begins with the letter "d", to name but a few.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 07:27 PM
2

What is your view on women who do suffer from equality differences in other countries? Complete sympathy. Most of the world remains hidebound by a traditional system of male dominance in the social sphere and female dominance in the domestic one. It reaches the point where women in parts of Pakistan, for example, simply never leave the home. In other cases they are permitted to leave but only in the company of their husbands. Girls are killed for going to school, in one recent case. The stories …
/r/MensRights04/03/13 11:06 AM
3

There could, of course, be a confounding variable. Just sayin..
/r/MensRights04/03/13 10:57 AM
2

Yes. I concede this point, upon reflection. Thanks.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 10:21 AM
1

Thank you. Great post.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:20 AM
1

At last. Someone who gets the point.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:06 AM
4

You left out the rich. In any case women are not above the law. The law is biased towards them. This is not the same thing.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:04 AM
1

The guy's wife did nothing wrong. There is no law against calling the cops. Sorry about that. The problem here is the behavior of the cops, no matter how daft the wife. They had no business white knighting for her and taking the law into their own hands, if that's what they did. If not, the can't control their dogs. Either way something is wrong.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:03 AM
-3

Another reason to bang up killer cops and their lickspittles.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:00 AM
-5

Yes of course. He's an immigrant from Latin American. They reckon they can get away with anything. Maybe they had talked to the wife and sympathized and wanted to punish the miscreant male.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 12:57 AM
-1

It's not so much irony as contradiction, potentially.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 12:46 AM
-1

The entire focus of the article is on the principle of freedom of speech being constrained by the principle of offence. It is about men's right to be straight, to be proud to be straight, and to say so. It is about the repression of and vilification of conventional male sexuality. Therefore it does very much belong here.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 10:21 PM
-1

I think it's a man's right to say he's proud to be gay. Don't you? I think it's a man's right to say he's proud to not be gay. Don't you? What part of this doesn't belong in men's rights?
/r/MensRights02/03/13 05:18 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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