TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

vivadisgrazia Archive

View 0 posts and 477 comments by vivadisgrazia 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

I thought the MRM was against allegations without proof. (Hence why I came here looking for answers). I don't read comment sections, to me it's like reading YouTube comments, on twitter the general reaction doesn't seem negative towards feminism. I would assume people that already had strong feelings against feminism continue to have them and found a place to voice them in the comment sections of those articles, isn't that typically what happens in every comment section for anything? When the MR…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 06:48 AM
1

No there were a few commenters on this thread saying it may have started as troll but, the feminists started using the hashtag seriously, yet in every article I've read I've seen screenshots of the trolls and people calling them out (high profile feminist accounts calling it out as well) no feminists using it legitimately, I've gone through the hashtags twice on twitter (found nothing), since then one of your members found one teen that claims to be a feminist, is a legit account, and he did use…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 05:39 AM
-1

Well as I stated before in this very thread I would be happy to concede that they aren't leaders as much as prominent voices. BUT it seems a weird thing to take offense to, because you seem to have people within the movement who consider themselves various leaders of sorts, and I didn't see any complaints when the mainstream media has called these same people leaders within the MRM. May I ask why the offense?
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:55 AM
-2

Do you? FYI you don't need one to follow hashtags though :)
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:28 AM
-1

Why is that funny?
/r/MensRights14/06/14 03:59 AM
1

You might want to educate yourself about the subject matter this has to do with ... You aren't even close But thanks for the copy paste rant txt !
/r/MensRights14/06/14 03:47 AM
-4

It's cowardly to have personal guidelines and abide by them? Weird? I feel just the opposite. I'm guessing you didn't read any of the other comments or articles regarding the issue being discussed in the post either. Have a great evening!
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:59 AM
-3

JohnTheOther he goes by JtO as well.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:32 AM
-3

I think instead of misusing logical fallacies and thinking that proves something you should just read the articles or the comments in response to this post. Then we could have the discussion it seems you want to have. Until then the conversation is over because I don't have the time or the desire to spoon feed you (or anyone) the basic information. It's just not my thing, especially with unnecessarily antagonistic people on the internet. I wrongly assumed you were minimally to moderately informe…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:31 AM
-7

I think you might want to read some of the news articles or maybe just read the entire comment section of this post, it's clear you've done neither. I erroneously assumed you would be minimally informed about the subject you were attempting to discuss. Apparently you are here to discuss a subject you are not informed on in the slightest, since I am not interested in that I am going to end this discussion. cheers! ETA Please read the other comments in this thread which show the cursory analytics …
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:11 AM
-4

Did you read the news articles? Feminists helped expose the hoax. I feel like maybe you just want to be angry with feminists about this hashtag so you are holding on to this, when you should let it go. I'm sure we will do something real to piss you off soon enough.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 02:06 AM
-8

I did check myself. cheers!
/r/MensRights14/06/14 01:36 AM
-4

You can read the various news articles. They will answer a lot of your questions. Since it's you that made the allegations that feminists were legitimately using the hashtag don't you think you should have some evidence? And maybe read a few of the news articles on the issue? Pretty funny my opinions aren't informed enough when you are the one making pretty blatant accusations with apparently absolutely no actual knowledge of the issue.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 01:35 AM
-10

I'm using fact correctly. It was found out very quickly because the majority of people were instantly skeptical of it and did not participate in it. Making the hashtag easily tracked to the faked accounts, the planted "news story" and ultimately the 4chan post. This happened within hours so very quickly this means that enough people were skeptical enough to 1) not only not participate and realize it was a hoax but 2) find the hoax out and have it in several mainstream media articles. If you want…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 01:28 AM
-14

I'm sorry that's not the context of this conversation. It was someone stating that MRAs were blamed over the Occidental College False Accuse-Athon when 4chan started it, I explained the difference. I'm not going to get into a debate with you about the issue because it would be pointless. If you think it was appropriate behavior to address any issues you mentioned it will be absolutely futile in even trying. So, no thanks.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 01:18 AM
-8

You are saying people couldn't tell if they were trolls or not, the fact of the matter is it seems that the majority of the people could and did tell the difference... almost immediately they recognized the absurdity, didn't participate and looked into it. That is how the scheme was exposed and why it failed. It wasn't easily believable. It wasn't standard fare. That's why it was so quickly found out and recognized as absurd. The members and leadership within the MRM are the people who could not…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 12:09 AM
-9

I'm confused you don't consider JtO to be leader within your movement ? I guess then call them prominent voices ? I mean AV4M had the First Annual Occidental College Accuse-A-Thon
/r/MensRights13/06/14 11:36 PM
-5

I have to disagree it was long before 4chan was mentioned. I know because I was one of the ones that was there at the beginning, and I know what I was seeing in my feed. The majority of people started investigating because it was so absurd, the MRM and leaders instead believed it & began going on anti-feminist tirades.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 11:13 PM
-7

But you legitimately joined in and JTO and other MRA leaders supported you in doing so. That is well documented.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:59 PM
-10

Okay but, where is the actual feminist support you all seem to believe existed for this hashtag troll? Because as I've said so far it's non-existent, the only people who seemingly believed in this was the MRM and it's leadership and they went ballistic about it on twitter, everyone else (for the most part) managed to understand it was troll and/or didn't support it, this includes feminists. Your claiming you don't care about hashtags but, you are saying actual feminists participated in the use o…
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:53 PM
-3

I did do a search, can't post results in your sub (it isn't allowed because of your subs issues with doxxing) I didn't see any genuine feminist accounts doing it, I can say I saw some real people doing it but, they weren't feminists and they were very few ( teens who had absentee dad's type of stuff ) I saw a few feminist accounts calling BS on it (saying it had it be fake) or calling it a bad idea, and a ton of the fake trolls pretending to be feminists using it, and MRAs and their leaders thin…
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:41 PM
-9

A lot of people figured out this troll pretty quickly. So it wasn't as if "no one" could tell the difference. So far it seems to be that many members within the MRM and their leadership couldn't tell the difference, almost everyone else managed to figure it out.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 09:58 PM
7

Which legitimate feminists repeated it? Because the 4chan troll was to get everyone to believe progressives & feminists were the ones who started this hashtag and we're using it, they set up fake accounts and started using the the hashtag, and wrote a fake blog "news" article about it, the problem was most people were actually skeptical, real feminists called it out as fake pretty quick, the mainstream media and most people did the same, and soon the plot was figured out. In fact, it seems that …
/r/MensRights13/06/14 09:53 PM
2

She pulled the 80% number out of her ass
/r/MensRights13/05/14 12:09 AM
0

Already answered . The point is "date fraud" isn't sexual assault. You are wrong to call what Farrell coined as "date fraud" sexual assault. You. Were. Wrong. Your reframing in the form of the yes or no question, misses the mark mighty wide. I don't have anymore time to waste on your nonsense today. Enjoy your embarrassment of an "argument" alone.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 08:27 PM
-1

Already answered. I also believe you trying to reframe the conversation by ignoring what Sexual Assault is, is absolutely disgusting.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 07:17 PM
-1

Keep telling yourself "everyone else" is as willfully ignorant and incompetent as you if it makes you feel better but, it looks desperate and is frankly quite insulting to "everyone else". I've not quoted a legal statute btw. Once again words have meanings.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 06:45 PM
0

I've answered it. Your willful ignorance doesn't make me "squirm". When you don't like answers because they show your complete incomprehension of the subject matter you are trying to "argue" about, you pretend they don't exist...it's one of the many pathetically fatuousness things you do. When caught you try to reframe the discussion in more and more fantastical and frankly idiotic ways with "yes or no" questions. It doesn't fool anyone.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 06:25 PM
0

I already have.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 05:11 PM
1

I've already answered. If she can't figure out my answer and wants to play games of obtuse redundancy then the conversation isn't going move forward. I'm not going to humor her ineptitude and willful ignorance.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 04:02 PM
0

Your not interested in the definition of what sexual assault is ...and you think you are capable of tearing apart an argument? You are the butt of your own joke of an argument.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 03:58 PM
0

Sexual Assault statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat Find one freaking jurisdiction where refusing to or not wanting to have sex with a person for any reason is considered sexual assault. Words have meanings. Learn them and stop embarrassing yourself. I gave you the definition of what sexual assault is. Are you now attempting at redefining "date fraud" into a totally new term because you realize…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 05:21 AM
1

Sexual Assault statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat Find one freaking jurisdiction where refusing to or not wanting to have sex with a person for any reason is considered sexual assault. Words have meanings. Learn them and stop embarrassing yourself. I gave you the definition of what sexual assault is. Are you now attempting at redefining "date fraud" into a totally new term because you realize…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 03:17 AM
0

Noone is worked up. You might not want to tell others what they feel, it's as pathetic as your inability to use a basic definition to extrapolate an obvious answer. I don't try to guess where you arw going with your arguments. You are a reactionary contrarian, no guess work is required in which position you'll take.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 02:14 AM
-1

Sexual Assault statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat Find one freaking jurisdiction where refusing to or not wanting to have sex with a person for any reason is considered sexual assault. Words have meanings. Learn them and stop embarrassing yourself. I gave you the definition of what sexual assault is. Are you now attempting at redefining "date fraud" into a totally new term because you realize…
/r/MensRights14/04/14 12:08 AM
-3

I already did. I gave you the definition. Use some very very basic deductive reasoning. Now answer my questions. Oh and provide me a single jurisdiction.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 07:35 PM
-1

I gave you the definition of what sexual assault is. Are you now attempting at redefining "date fraud" into a totally new term because you realize how badly you've embarrassed yourself? Because nowhere in Farrell's explanation is there babble of a woman not knowing if she didn't not consent or whatever nonsense.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 07:13 PM
2

Sexual Assault statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat Find one freaking jurisdiction where refusing to or not wanting to have sex with a person for any reason is considered sexual assault. Words have meanings. Learn them and stop embarrassing yourself.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 04:42 AM
2

Seems fair enough! Can we get a threshold on what amount of notoriety is needed to be considered a public figure ?
/r/MensRights09/04/14 09:33 PM
0

You do have studies, you can get behind the paywalls with membership in certain professions ect... Or you can pay for the studies or you can do a Google scholarly search for yourself. Your choice.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 06:11 AM
0

You asked for studies you got them, mate.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 03:51 AM
0

As noted in the study the term relates to the ambivalent sexism scale. If you need more information Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. , Contemporary SexismThe Relationships Among Hostility, Benevolence, and Neosexism , & The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 03:43 AM
0

Hostile sexism was positively related to rape proclivity
/r/MensRights31/03/14 03:06 AM
-1

Do you even believe your own lies ?
/r/MensRights30/03/14 11:57 AM
1

Don't worry absolutely no one believes him.
/r/MensRights30/03/14 08:41 AM
0

/u/bartab is doing what he always does, telling obviously blatant lies and then being hostile when he gets called out on it.
/r/MensRights30/03/14 08:40 AM
1

You are getting downvoted because he did NOT support incest, he supported incestuous pedophilia.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 12:41 AM
1

I'm not a "SJW" but, that's cute that you think it's an insult to accuse someone of believing in social justice and engaging in activism. Why don't you see if you can't find the GitMo webpage comment section so you can spam it with false rape accusations against me...
/r/MensRights19/03/14 05:51 AM
1

I'm not the only one who has called you out on your inconsistent stories...you are rather infamous for them. Good luck. Let me know when your ready to get help.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 05:04 AM
0

You are the one who comes on the internet and makes up inconsistent "stories" and gets caught telling them repeatedly. It's not just me who has caught you. You've built yourself quite the reputation. I find it nothing more than a curious annoyance. You responded to me when the "stay-cation" I hated raising my child(ren) conversation was ongoing and you were absolutely not banned when we had the conversation. You corrected the parts of the story you wanted as evidenced in the screenshots ...now y…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:58 PM
0

You repeating your fallacious claims about me doesn't make them true. You are a desperate and pathetic liar. You've been caught by numerous people on numerous occasions. You play the part of "Trump" and " internet legal eagle" much better than you do of "grieving father". A "grieving father" that ironically stated in femradebates less than a week ago that raising his child(ren) was the laziest and most boring thing he had ever done, that it was a "stay-cation" and he "hated it". http://i.imgur.c…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:26 PM
0

Awh imagine a malignant narcissist trying to gaslight someone after their pathetic attempt at manipulation has failed... How totally unexpected /s If you think I'm a troll you certainly aren't demonstrating that. Everyone knows you "don't feed the trolls", and yet everytime I try to disengage you throw a fit and beg me to pay you alittle more attention.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 11:45 AM
0

Disbelief and refusal to be manipulated by a known pathological liar and malignant narcissist isn't rejoicing. No matter how you repeat the claim. I'm not surprised you are volunteering to "rejoice" in my pain given your nature. I don't care what you rejoice in.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 04:41 AM
0

Don't expect to get compassion from others when you absolutely refuse to give it. I have seen you make several contradictory statements in order to manipulate others, your pathological nature is apparent throughout your post history. My refusal to give you the benefit of my compassion is not me rejoicing in anything. It is simply disbelief and a complete unwillingness to be manipulated by the likes of you.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 04:19 AM
0

If you think our interactions involve me wanting a cuddle from you, then you are much more pathologically sick than I originally imagined. (this says a lot given how low I think of you). Please get help.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 04:05 AM
0

Awh, it's this exact winning personality that proves my points. Thank you. P.S. there are more effective treatments for malignant narcissist personality disorder so when your ready to get help let me know and I'll set up with some great resources.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 03:51 AM
1

Excuses.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 03:26 AM
1

Nothing presumptive about it. I put the failure upon you because of your previous statements and I know how family courts operate. Meaning you gave you child away either intentionally or by complete incompetence. Sorry, Trump ending a conversation isn't fleeing, seriously watching you literally doing this non-stop is below my pay grade.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 03:24 AM
1

Given your previous statements and the way family court operates I sincerely doubt your ex-wife had as much to do with your custody situation than you did. Sounds like you making excuses. BTW that "hand is waving" goodbye.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 02:58 AM
0

Poverty isn't an excuse for poverty? Oh you've really out trumped yourself there. I sincerely hope you aren't homeschooling those children you claim are boring and easy to raise as a stay-cation dad. I've already pointed out the facts which directly refute your pathological nonsense. Those links contain specific statistics about California. I'm not going to re-point them out to you because you are either too incompetent and/or too willfully ignorant to avail yourself of the information.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 02:19 AM
0

You don't. If you did you would understand the employment requirements and monetary contributions intrinsic to it and not ignorantly be claiming it's a refusal to support oneself. PS you aren't "disagreeing" with me, you are literally make statements contrary to fact which is as ignorant as it is pathetic.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 11:46 PM
0

Haha,Yes your singular experience and anecdotal pseudo evidence holds absolutely no value to anyone except maybe you. There are very few sources which aren't more credible and more accurate than you. Needing assistance isn't a sign of unwillingness or refusal to support oneself. You clearly are not familiar with how housing support aka section 8 housing works. I'm not surprised because you've demonstrated you absolutely have no clue about most of which you talk about and that you exhibit many ch…
/r/MensRights17/03/14 11:17 PM
0

It certainly is. 36% isn't always. The Frequency of and reason for women being arrested also refuted your specious claims. The facts don't lie. You do. And again you are caught.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 11:14 PM
0

The only situation where a woman gets arrested on a DV call happens is when both (or "all" when more than two) involved get arrested. Again this is not supported by evidence. Analysis of NIBRS data revealed the following information on the police response to domestic and non-domestic violence incidents. The important findings are highlighted below. How many incidents resulted in arrest? Approximately 37 percent of all intimidation, simple assault and aggravated assault incidents resulted in arre…
/r/MensRights17/03/14 10:17 PM
-1

You make a lot of claims about what you do. All of them are less credible and less accurate than the sources I provided. Housing is not "refusing" to support ones self. While I concede accepting assistance is a choice, requiring that assistance is not "choice".
/r/MensRights17/03/14 09:38 PM
0

A voluntary organisation that provides refuge for victims of domestic violence is turning away nearly six times as many applicants as it did six years ago amid a rise in the number of cases and a lack of shelter space.Harmony House was forced to reject 678 applications for its shelter for domestic violence victims in 2006-07, compared with 127 rejections in 2001-02, due to limited capacity.The number of shelter places had remained at 40 a day over the past few years, said Margaret Wong Fung-yee,…
/r/MensRights17/03/14 07:50 PM
1

If manboobz was shadowbanned over using GWWs name because it was doxxing then certainly this qualifies.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 11:46 AM
-3

"I don't really hate women, I just hate their autonomy. I don't really hate feminists I just hate everything they stand for." seriously ? That's not much of an argument. As for why is it called feminism... This question implies that one must be either one or the other. People and philosophies are far more complicated than that. A feminist may also be both a humanist and an equalist. There’s no law that says only one box can be ticked here, and it’s hugely important not to get sucked into thinkin…
/r/MensRights17/03/14 07:46 AM
2

Your username had probably never been more ironically appropriate than right now.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 07:08 AM
0

Yes, clearly saying that the policy and not the riot act is what was read is a contradiction. (/s) Keep fighting the boogeymen you've imagined.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 10:14 AM
0

People are read the policy, not the riot act. Again, ignorance isn't some inalienable right, so being informed of the policy is not punishment. You can imagine the "boogeyman" all you want that doesn't mean he exists.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 09:52 AM
0

Arguments through equivocation and semantics. The very definition of the word Discipline demonstrates it has many meanings. If you mean "the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behavior by using punishment to correct disobedience" in this situation, you would be saying that giving someone knowledge is punishment.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 09:35 AM
0

Making someone aware of a policy isn't discipline unless you think ignorance is your inalienable right and being given knowledge is a punishment.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 09:02 AM
-1

♥
/r/MensRights23/02/14 08:48 AM
2

Were the calls to falsely accuse back then seen as against the subs rules ? Because I thought the mods approved of it last time.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 12:39 AM
0

Redundancy of your error isn't proof of anything.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 04:36 AM
0

No, because I don't count the words in a response. I have already proven you wrong by already answering the question.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 03:58 AM
0

It wasn't lost in the shuffle. You are intentionally avoiding it.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 03:31 AM
0

I already provided my answer, then quoted my answer. Find it yourself. If you can't find it then that's your problem.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 02:51 AM
0

I already did quote it...that didn't work then why would it work now?
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:56 AM
0

Once again repetition of your error doesn't prove anything.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:55 AM
0

I already answered the question. This means you'be been proven wrong.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:55 AM
0

I did qoute it. and your asking me to do it again if it didn't work the first time why would it now?
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:53 AM
0

You don't get it. I have already answered the question. That proves I can and have answered the question. Your redundancy only repeats your error.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:43 AM
0

I have already answered the question that proves not only that I can but, also that I have. Your redundancy proves nothing other than your error.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:41 AM
0

You aren't proving anything. Your redundancy doesn't do anything but repeat your errors.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:40 AM
0

This is what you think is fun ? I've answered your question. Your failure to see or understand that it was answered doesn't mean I haven't answered it or am evading it. No matter how much you repeat yourself. You still haven't answered my original question. your accusations of "evasion" are just demonstrations of your projection.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:39 AM
0

a bit more Okay. I will give you that...all you are capable of is redundancy and projection.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:12 AM
0

Answering the question isn't evasion by definition. Words have meaning. Learn them.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:11 AM
0

You aren't capable of knowing what I think. You are such a projector you might as well just have conversations with a mirror. You aren't capable of having them with anyone who doesn't think or feel exactly like you do.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:10 AM
1

Typhoid you've lost the plot. I answered therefore I'm not being evasive about answering. You have now admitted I've answered.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:08 AM
0

Is redundancy is the only thing you are capable of?
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:58 AM
0

Already asked and answered
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:57 AM
0

You're answering the question Close. I answered the question and then reminded you of that.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:57 AM
0

I've already answered the question. That's not evasion. You continually asking me the same question to derail and not answer my question is evasion.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:54 AM
0

I'm not trying to fool anybody. The only fool is you.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:36 AM
0

The proof is in the thread and was already provided by me.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:36 AM
0

I'm not trying to fool anybody. You are a fool if you can't see my answer. The effort your putting in to not answering my question by derailment is hilarious.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:35 AM
0

Your failure to recognise an answer doesn't mean it hasn't been given.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:13 AM
0

Already asked and answered.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:13 AM
0

Stop projecting.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:12 AM
0

Given that I have repeatedly given it to you (even bolded the one word) , and you've been too ignorant to see it, me giving it to you "one more time" is pointless. I asked you a question which you are trying to avoid by asking me a question I've already answered and making completely unsupported accusations, the only one derailing is you.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 10:23 PM
0

I already did quote it multiple times ... If you were too ignorant and incompetent to see it then why would you see it now ?
/r/MensRights17/02/14 10:21 PM
0

No matter what you say oink oink This is true. However, the evidence in this thread clearly shows I have answered your question multiple times. It's not rational or logical to assume that just because you are too ignorant to acknowledge that and too incompetent to actually answer my original question in full to assume that that failure would be universal. In fact given that I read this thread and clearly see me answer multiple times, your assertion that anyone who reads it won't see it is patent…
/r/MensRights17/02/14 10:11 PM
0

My answer is in the thread multiple times, the only person who is incapable of seeing it, is you. Your ignorance is not universal, stop assuming "everyone"/"anyone" who reads this will be as ignorant as you. (once again you are projecting your failure onto others). Yet, you still have not fully answered my ORIGINAL question. If you can, please do, if you can't trying to derail isn't doing anything but, making your inability more obvious and pathetic. ARGUMENTUM AD NAUSEAM (argument to the point …
/r/MensRights17/02/14 09:59 PM
0

Try harder Typh, the only person who can't see my answer is YOU. The problem is yours not everyone else's.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 09:42 PM
0

Get some new material. Answer my original question in full.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 09:02 AM
0

Typhoon anyone with remedial comprehension skills will see I answered your question...not once but several times. No redundancy or revision on your part changes that.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 09:01 AM
0

Your fallacious games do not change the fact that I already answered your question. Multiple times. You still have failed to answer mine.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 05:45 AM
0

I can and have answered it. You are either too incompetent or too willfully ignorant to understand that. Your incompetence and willful ignorance are not a reflection of me or my abilities. Already asked & answered
/r/MensRights17/02/14 05:42 AM
0

Already Asked Already Answered.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 05:04 AM
0

I have quoted my answer numerous times For proof of that try actually reading my comments to you.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 05:04 AM
0

Already asked and answered
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:50 AM
0

Already asked and answered.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:50 AM
-1

Read the answer already provided multiple times.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:33 AM
0

Excuses Excuses. Already asked and answered.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:33 AM
-1

Already Asked and Answered.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:07 AM
0

Criticising the effort I'm putting into trying to have a discussion with you, is also a reflection upon you & your efforts isn't it ? When measured by your own stick how do you add up? Also, earlier you talked about how you didn't make very much money and only have 5,000 subscriptions to your propaganda on YouTube, essentially stating you "don't break even" (which is nonsense.) Maybe the time and effort your spending here would be better spent profiteering to your addicts ?
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:06 AM
-1

Seriously? Get a minder...you need one. Have them get you the help you need . Then after you have the ability and willingness come back and try to have a discussion.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:55 AM
0

Your presumptions here & here
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:54 AM
0

here
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:47 AM
0

Already asked and answered.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:10 AM
-1

Not only do you make presumptions you ignore it.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:10 AM
0

I still believe feminism is about opposing and addressing misogyny not men. I believe your question still demonstrates you don't understand the basic concepts you are trying to discuss because belief in rape statistics/patriarchy theory/feminism (and all your other accusations in this thread) does not revolve around a belief that men target women. I do not believe in the premises of your question, nor your belief of its conclusion. In the context of this exchange you aren't asking a question , y…
/r/MensRights17/02/14 02:04 AM
0

Redundancy will not change my answer or your error. You : "1+2= ant. You believe this !!?" Me: "again 1+2 does not equal ant. No!"
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:55 AM
0

I didn't ask you the same question you asked me. My question can't be answered by a simple yes or no. Again a bit simpler You "1+2 = ant ! You believe this !!?" Me "1+2 does not equal ant. No!"
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:50 AM
1

Then please explain in objective terms what you meant.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:46 AM
0

When you say society is only structured around "survival" are you saying to be a MRA one needs to believe in Evolutionary psychology ?
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:30 AM
-1

The question you asked was fully answered. You want to play games of equivocation and "tactful stupidity" as a distraction, which is transparent and rather desperate. My question required you to provide support ...you can't ... so far you've basically said "societal structure don't real because faith" It's okay it's become very clear you don't have the skill or knowledge to intellectually engage in a conversation about societal structure. Your question "do you believe men target women" comes fro…
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:17 AM
0

I've answered the question directly twice. Your lack of comprehension isn't a fault of mine. You however, have still not actually addressed my question Since it seems like you have the memory and cognition skills of a gold fish, here is my actual question: When did you decide that all women started targeting men? You don't believe patriarchy ever existed ? Then by what system do you believe society is structured? Matriarchy ? Egalitarianism ? What ? When do you believe this started and why? Prov…
/r/MensRights17/02/14 12:02 AM
-1

FFS Typhoon do you even reading comprehension ? What part of like myself Did you not understand ? No wonder you "couldn't find" when I originally answered the question.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 05:54 PM
0

Given that you don't think women target men but, are still an MRA. Why are you unable to recognize that feminists, like myself, aren't required to think men target women? Feminism addresses and acts against misogyny (ie. the fear, contempt, or distrust of autonomous women or women's autonomy) not men.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 06:15 AM
0

Answering to the likes of you isn't a requirement of me owning my beliefs.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 05:41 AM
0

It is incredibly hypocritical of you to fail to answer the question I asked you first, by asking me a question I've already answered and then try to lob that poor excuse for an accusation at me. It's clear you can't defend or explain your "faith".
/r/MensRights16/02/14 05:38 AM
1

Both are objectively "birth defects" that in my example have been medically corrected.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:14 AM
0

The fact that it exists shows you up. A link to it is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:11 AM
0

I don't have a problem owning my beliefs. I do have a problem when someone who is an admitted previous misandrist bigot projects her misandry and bigotry onto me. Why do you Femra badgers have such a problem explaining and substantiating your faiths ? Eta: grammar
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:08 AM
0

Asking you to explain and substantiate what you "believe" is not a deflection. I guess you could argue that you don't have an actual belief but, more so have a faith (which is belief without evidence) that society isn't structured and "exists" on psychological frailty. I still find it extremely disingenuous that you are unable and unwilling to explain or defend your belief faith.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 04:05 AM
0

I did.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:36 AM
0

I did. And I am not.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:36 AM
0

I did answer it. We had a whole discussion about you overcoming your previous misandrist beliefs, your psychological projection, ect ...
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:09 AM
0

Because I took the time to respond to it yesterday & I am not the one who doesn't remember it so I feel it's more equitable that you take the time to find it.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:07 AM
-1

About what you asserted. Which is that society isn't structured [I am assuming that was the motivation behind using quotations around the word structured because you failed to clarify why you felt obligated to intentionally do that and draw my attention to it] but "exists" (for lack of and other word again because you failed to clarify) around various psychological frailties. In the original question I also asked you to explain, when this happened, why this happened, and how it happened. Also yo…
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:05 AM
0

You already asked me that question about men targeting women yesterday and I already answered it. You are going to need to get some new material.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 02:12 AM
-1

I specifically required that you, Provide proper accredited citations and support of any and all assertions you make. I will wait on those before we proceed. ETA because I don't think you understand the terms being used and therefore failed to answer the question I presented to you. so·ci·e·ty: : a community that is a unit distinguishable by particular aims or standards of living or conduct ; community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective ac…
/r/MensRights16/02/14 02:10 AM
-1

When did you decide that all women started targeting men? You don't believe patriarchy ever existed ? Then by what system do you believe society is structured? Matriarchy ? Egalitarianism ? When do you believe this started and why? Provide proper accredited citations and support of any and all assertions you make.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:39 AM
1

Awe, you still don't know what a personal attack is ! A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. Not all ad Hominems are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's characteristics can have a bearing on the q…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 06:25 PM
2

Is this you trying to "win" by having the last word ?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 06:09 PM
1

No let's go over the "paradox" of you still attempting to involve yourself in this discussion when your premises, their arrangements, and conclusions,all are so divorced from facts and logic that even attempting to rationally engage with it gives it too much credit. , You have done far more than just made an argument leading to a wrong conclusion. Your premises aren't even related to the conclusion and are themselves completely nonsensical. In a way, a "not even wrong" argument is an extreme non…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 06:04 PM
0

Again you are asserting it would inherently be "unwanted" as if it were a fact. And again that is merely your willfully ignorant immoral and bigoted opinion based soley on the projection of how you would (or do) feel. Your feels aren't evidence of anything other than your feels. That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 05:37 PM
0

Most people do not consider you a woman. I'm sorry to be the one to break the bad news. This again is an assertion made without evidence. Stop misrepresenting this as anything other than your bigoted and willfully ignorant opinion. Also, stop projecting your "poop" as being shared by "most people" But gender identity usually extends beyond merely personal description but outward for prescription. No it absolutely DOES NOT. ONCE AGAIN: Gender identity is all about how you, in your head, think abo…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 05:18 PM
0

Because your comments are just so boring. /s (obviously) Seriously, it has nothing to do with you. I just don't like when any person is engaged in propagating blatant and harmful misinformation. I'm not interested in you I'm interested in fighting against transparently bigoted and/or ignorant opinions being asserted as facts. You sought me out by responding to my original comment in this thread, which had nothing to do with you, and then did everything you could to get me to pay attention to wha…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 04:05 PM
0

Making an assertion without providing any argument for why you believe the analogy is false while accusing others of nonsense ...seriously ? "That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence"...obviously Eta: a word
/r/MensRights14/02/14 03:43 PM
0

FFS they aren't lying about their gender identity you, ignorant angry monkey ... You absolutely do not have even a basic understanding of what gender is. Gender identity is all about how you, in your head, think about yourself. It’s about how you internally interpret the chemistry that composes you (e.g., hormone levels). As you know it, do you think you fit better into the societal role of “woman,” or “man,” or do neither ring particularly true for you? That is, are you somewhere in-between the…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 03:34 PM
0

Oh goodness not only do you have absolutely no clue what gender is or isn't ...you don't even know what an actual Ad hominem attack is This is priceless!
/r/MensRights14/02/14 03:26 PM
2

I provided you with a definition of what you demonstrably did. Rich that you are attempting to speak with any authority about the use of "opinions" given that you just admitted that you (mis)used the arguments of others in a ridiculous manner and when confronted with that fact justified what you had done by stating you knew the arguments you were making were ridiculous but, they were actually arguments other people used and not actually your opinion. Who seriously thinks that using the arguments…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 02:54 PM
2

o·pin·ion : a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. def·i·ni·tion : a statement that explains the meaning of a term (a word, phrase, or other set of symbols). I provided you with an accurate definition not an opinion. Are you throwing this tantrum for any other purpose that trying to get and maintain my attention?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 02:07 PM
1

Not even wrong refers to any statement, argument or explanation that can be neither correct nor incorrect, because it fails to meet the criteria by which correctness and incorrectness are determined. The phrase implies that not only is someone not making a valid point in a discussion, but they don't even understand the nature of the discussion itself, or the things that need to be understood in order to participate.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:08 PM
2

If my comment was "boring" you should have treated it as such, ignored it and found something you thought was exciting to comment on, instead of throwing a redundant fit which was not relevant to the point of my comment. You have not demonstrated that you understand proper terminology or the basic concepts of gender. I won't point out that if you actually believed that all aspects gender are only a social construct and therefore not real, then your whole argument that trans gender individuals ar…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:46 PM
2

Once again my comment made no mention about trans* people "lying"...it made no comment about anything of that nature. My comment was only about how hurtful it must be to have people (especially people who claim to be against ideas of what makes a "real man") deny that your experience and existence is not "real" simply because you happened to be born trans... So any opinions on what you think trans people should do or should not do, or which trans* people you want in "your" movement isn't relevan…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:12 PM
2

Your ableism and unsubstantiated opinions are tedious. I didn't talk about having sex... I talked about potential suitors/ first dates. Furthermore, as stated your argument holds no weight because your trying to say one wrong thing magically makes other wrong things somehow not hurtful. My comment was about people (apparently like you) calling trans people as not "real" men or women. You comparing it to people not fully disclosing their entire existence to any potential suitors does not address …
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:40 AM
2

Do you feel obligated to disclose every part of you on the first date ? If a woman is born in the "wrong" body, and has a penis which to them is essentially a birth defect, a defect they've had corrected ...why should they be under any obligation to disclose this to anyone they consider dating. Do you feel it's a requirement of someone who had Scoliosis to announce this to any potential suitors ? Or is a person who was born with a third nipple also obligated to report this to any potential perso…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:21 AM
3

Wow, I'm offended for you...that comment just referred to you as "not an actual woman"... Doesn't it wear you down when people constantly dismiss your experience as not being authenticate enough, not being "real" enough simply because your experience of womanhood is possibly less typical? That seriously has to be demoralizing and frustrating.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 03:12 AM
-1

I commented to another user that I had similar feelings about your motivations. Essentially, that this a manner in which you make money. You inserted yourself into the "conversation" and began arguing against positions no one held, engaging in the typical types of tactics you are notorious for (read: derailment, obfuscation, projection, etc). Meanwhile, you've absolutely not refuted or addressed what THIS "convo" was about and proceeded to parade around your previous misandry as some kind of def…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:56 AM
0

Here is what you don't understand ...you are the one who invented the analogy and drew the parallels... I'm the one who called it out as nonsense ...and then proceeded to use it as a example of your habitual dysfunctional behavior. I'm so tired of you pretending you are somehow retroactively Jonathan Swift everytime someone demonstrates the absurdity of your sophistry. You are more interested in pushing your agitprop than you are in genuine sincere communication. You "argue" through derailment a…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:41 AM
-2

So you don't profit from your propaganda ? So two wrongs DO make men's rights ? Are you capable of actually adressing the topic being discussed ? Because your constant derailments are rather tedious and if you can't maintain or engage in typical cogent communication, I am simply not interested in trying to help you any further. (it's the whole trying to teach a pig to sing concept ...wherein you are the pig)
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:11 AM
0

No I'm arguing that if people make money off of growing and selling cocaine then it's obviously wrong to make money off of growing and selling turnips. In fact it's even more wrong for people to sell turnips because turnips have little entertainment value, while cocaine has high entertainment value, therefore turnips are boring and waste people's time. In this metaphor it's clear you fancy yourself the drug dealer, your ideology is the cocaine ...but have you bothered to consider that that makes…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:01 AM
1

This is another example of that weird projection transference defense mechanism of yours. It's poorly executed given that you are presenting unsupported and subjective opinion as if it is fact while completely disregarding/dismissing empirically supported facts that refute your opinion. You do this habitually. I don't know if it's intentional and you are merely a profiteer or if you are a genuine bigot. Ultimately, it doesn't matter because in your case the results are the same.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:22 AM
0

I'm not really into the agitprop soundbite terminology you seem so fond of. I interpret facts as facts and when a fact indicates their is a problematic issue, I strive to proactively address and then resolve the issue, essentially my activism focuses on identifying and fixing problems (or trying to) and to be absolutely clear unlike you and your ilk expressly not in engaging in endless predatory proselytization and profiteering. You should give proactive constructive activism a try, you might li…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:00 AM
0

Are you suggesting you have made no monetary gains through your proselytization? Because if not, everything I have said still stands and you've done nothing but, wasted everyone's time. My opinion of Koss is irrelevant because you are essentially arguing that since other people do questionable things for profit somehow makes it okay for you to do something similar. And two wrongs don't make men's rights, now do they ?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 11:31 PM
0

Wow, you used to be a seriously bigoted misandrist, that must be really difficult to admit. I commend you for becoming a reformed misandrist and overcoming some of your bigotry. Given this recent admission it's interesting that you assume that anyone who believes statistics which support the idea that women are raped more frequently or in larger numbers than men or that more rapists happen to be men, somehow means they view all men as enemies. Have you heard of projection ?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 11:21 PM
0

Seems to me that you are more concerned about propagandizing than reality. TBF that is her job. (paypal donations and YouTube monetization require propaganda, proactive activism and making things actually better for boys and men simply isn't as profitable for individuals like Ms.Typhoid and her main concern is clearly the bottom line )
/r/MensRights13/02/14 10:19 PM
3

I think most people don't understand what a habeas corpus appeal is.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:46 AM
1

Please explain how saying one is more oppressed than the other is sexist ?
/r/MensRights08/01/14 08:09 AM
5

I took screenshots early on... BlueOak9 http://i.imgur.com/j19ohsp.jpg SIRskeptic &MRB2012 http://i.imgur.com/0chec5F.jpg WhiteThrone http://i.imgur.com/z1xABGB.jpg Froggymorning http://i.imgur.com/s0zBCyJ.jpg Thepigmanagain http://i.imgur.com/yra7tDr.jpg And bragging about it http://i.imgur.com/zoPhZ22.jpg Knucker2 http://i.imgur.com/4x817QG.jpg Muffinizer1 http://i.imgur.com/E9IImW1.jpg ; http://i.imgur.com/cynzFgT.png Even the mod admits regulars in the sub participated in the false accusatio…
/r/MensRights21/12/13 01:02 AM
2

I'm starting a sub that monitors the posts in r/femban and laughs at misters complaining about how they can't be openly bigoted or misogynist on certain forums, I'm calling it r/beardtears !
/r/MensRights21/12/13 12:17 AM
1

Thank you.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 05:34 AM
1

If his ex-wife is actually on food stamps and collecting welfare then his child support would be going to the OAG until the cost of the benefits she recieved for the child are paid in full. It also means it would not be his wife trying to enforce the support order it would be the OAG. Also if his disability rating with the military is high enough to qualify him as unable to work he should easily qualify for state disability and that income can't not be attached to a support order. The story you …
/r/MensRights20/12/13 05:29 AM
0

I didn't remove any screenshots. Stop being such a pathetic liar. See my comment here that screenshot is clearly still there. Funny you don't seem to notice it's that same effing screenshot that gives the list for the critical theory and social justice staff members. A comment which was gilded BTW. ETA : link
/r/MensRights19/12/13 06:00 AM
1

I didn't edit any of the screenshots I provided. You can see that clearly in the screenshots. Resorting to such obvious lies is pathetic and desperate. The screenshots clearly show the people reporting the feminists, college personnel, and random women believed those feminists, women and personnel would be charged and disciplined.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 05:42 AM
1

The purpose of the form is to allow rape victims to report the incidents. They are not even required to name their rapists... If they choose to name them the school conducts and investigation and depending on the results of said investigation can choose to counsel the accused, in the hopes of preventing further incidents of rape and sexual assault. The people making the false accusations fully believed that the people they accused would be "charged", "made to squirm", be subjected to "secret tri…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 04:59 AM
1

You don't have a legitimate argument given the fact that the people reporting the feminists, random women, and school personnel believed the false accusations would result in these people being "charged" or disciplined and decided to file the false rape accusations anyways. As demonstrated in the screenshots provided, http://i.imgur.com/0a4fwjt.jpg, http://i.imgur.com/JpNOIxp.jpg, http://i.imgur.com/z1xABGB.jpg, http://i.imgur.com/h4cYsrb.jpg Furthermore, you are intentionally misrepresenting wh…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 04:24 AM
1

JtO is still encouraging it I hope you will "defame" him as well.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 02:26 AM
1

I think the fact that those comments and the original post were so highly upvoted as well as the fact that originally sillymod1 (apparently the only active mod on that day) was supporting it in some fashion is why people are taking it so seriously. I commend you and the other MRAs that are now speaking out against this. Hopefully, your voice of reason will help prevent this type of thing from happening in the future.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 12:40 AM
1

"When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck."
/r/MensRights19/12/13 12:30 AM
0

BlueOak9 http://i.imgur.com/j19ohsp.jpg SIRskeptic &MRB2012 http://i.imgur.com/0chec5F.jpg WhiteThrone http://i.imgur.com/z1xABGB.jpg Froggymorning http://i.imgur.com/s0zBCyJ.jpg Thepigmanagain http://i.imgur.com/yra7tDr.jpg And bragging about it http://i.imgur.com/zoPhZ22.jpg Knucker2 http://i.imgur.com/4x817QG.jpg Muffinizer1 http://i.imgur.com/E9IImW1.jpg ; http://i.imgur.com/cynzFgT.png Even your mod admits regulars in the sub participated in the false accusations, http://i.imgur.com/f21AdQ6…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:59 PM
1

So you admit This This This and This is quite harmful and immoral ?
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:17 PM
0

You are mystified by proof that MRA's freely admitted they were participating in a raid with /pol/ ?
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:09 PM
1

Given OP stated this the accusations aren't "crazy" and there is no confusion.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 10:41 AM
2

More proof of that http://i.imgur.com/h4cYsrb.jpg http://i.imgur.com/LtIz1XI.jpg http://i.imgur.com/HH9eTYf.jpg http://i.imgur.com/z1xABGB.jpg http://i.imgur.com/s0zBCyJ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/j19ohsp.jpg http://i.imgur.com/0chec5F.jpg ETA but given that you are the author of the second to last screenshot you knew this already. Tsk Tsk.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 10:38 AM
0

Willful Ignorance; the state and practice of ignoring any sensory input that appears to contradict one’s inner model of reality. At heart, it is almost certainly driven by confirmation bias. Depending on the nature and strength of an individual’s pre-existing beliefs, willful ignorance can manifest itself in different ways. The practice can entail completely disregarding established facts, evidence and/or reasonable opinions if they fail to meet one’s expectations. Often excuses will be made, st…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 10:04 PM
1

You should read SCUM because as much as it is satire about patriarchal structures it also criticises and satirizes feminism. Solanas was "very much aware of feminist organizations and activism", but that she "had no interest in participating in what she often described as 'a civil disobedience luncheon club.'" Solanas "reject[s] mainstream liberal feminism for its blind adherence to cultural codes of feminine politeness and decorum which the SCUM Manifesto identifies as the source of women's deb…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:53 PM
2

Or the Kia fits like a glove commerical.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:33 PM
0

Marc Lepine is discussed in Women's and Gender Studies courses. 1 2 A year after the attacks, Lépine’s three-page statement was leaked to journalist and feminist Francine Pelletier. It contained a list of nineteen Quebec women whom Lépine apparently wished to kill because he considered them feminists. The list included Pelletier herself, as well as a union leader, a politician, a TV personality, and six police officers who had come to Lépine’s attention as they were on a volleyball team together…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:17 PM
1

SCUM is satire. Feminists recognize SCUM as satire. Several Examples which support this can be found here , here , here , here and here
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:51 PM
1

Jonathan Swift is a feminist who wants to eat babies !!
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:44 PM
1

[sic.] Still so mad you got caught. Keep up the NinjaNews and citations. {wink}
/r/MensRights03/12/13 07:20 PM
1

By some dictionaries, maybe. - Wayne "ninjanews" Dupree Esq.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 02:11 PM
1

You're right, I can't answer. I know.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 01:38 PM
1

In what way is asking questions as I did advocating for censorship?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 12:27 AM
1

How would I make anything clearer? I asked two questions that are very easily understood. It's clear you can't answer them. I'm sure others can.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 12:25 AM
3

What is the /r/newright ? I'm scared. I thought Misters were against traditionalism ?!?
/r/MensRights01/12/13 09:50 PM
1

Trumped also Trumps "Ninja News"Dupree's YouTube rant P.S. ( Thanks for linking Wayne "NinjaNews" Dupree's YouTube video where he claims Oprah and Jesse Jackson are liars because they are liberals, that was the most intellectually honest thing you've posted so far! )
/r/MensRights01/12/13 09:53 AM
1

[citation needed]
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:47 AM
1

What criteria are you pretending to use to support your claim that Obama is the most "hated" president in history, skin color ? Because once again your assertions are not based in facts...Since the adoption of its constitution, 43 men have been President of the United States. In January 2013, a New York Times journalist and statistician put together a composite list of presidential rankings based on previous presidential rankings by scholars (primarily historians). According to this, the worst f…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:06 AM
1

You can speak and spell this
/r/MensRights01/12/13 07:45 AM
2

ILY (ebonics 4Eva)
/r/MensRights01/12/13 07:38 AM
1

Trying to assert I was using "Ebonics" when I properly used and spelled a word which you mistakenly believed was misspelt is as ludicrous as your drivel that anyone but, you has been doing anything other than "pointing and grunting". Your posturing is transparent. There is nothing ethical about your pretense that your "Mock Ebonics" is anything but, linguistic racism. Your privilege isn't impressive to anyone but, you. Keep trying Trump.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:58 AM
1

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. isn't "ebonics". Your insinuated racism is noted though. Classy ! ETA\ Etymology The noun referring to one who takes an assumed identity in order to deceive is variously spelled imposter and impostor, Not only is it nearly as common as impostor, but it is also nearly as old. Impostor came to English fro…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:34 AM
2

I've given you citations of modern US Law. Your willful ignorance isn't a fault of my argument or refutation to the evidence. Stahp.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:32 AM
0

Impotence from the imposter... anymore flights of fancy or false accusations you want to tie to your humiliation? Surely, you'll want to further argue by equivocation. It's working so well./s re·vi·sion·ism (r-vzh-nzm)n.1. Advocacy of the revision of an accepted, usually long-standing view, theory, or doctrine, especially a revision of historical events and movements.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:24 AM
1

You've been caught imposter. [sic] snicker Impostor of what? im·pos·tor or im·pos·ter (m-pstr) n. One who engages in deception under an assumed name or identity. Before you snicker there chuckles you might want to consult a dictionary before you try to llustrate your linguistic supremacy! Another embarrassment you've created for yourself with your unique combination of ignorance and arrogance. Thanks though for illustrating this with such brainless bravado !
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:17 AM
2

I'm going to keep telling you that. You can take your impressionism and revisionsim elsewhere ...you've been caught.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:08 AM
2

You can repeat your lies as many times as you like, they aren't truths. You've been caught. Take your impersonations and attempts at revisionist drivel elsewhere.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:41 AM
2

Yeah citing page after page of current US federal law and every state statute isn't proof of your obvious dishonesty. The fact that you don't even know what a legal citation is says everything about your depth of knowledge. You've been caught imposter. And you continually begging me to "toddle off" because you've humiliated and outed yourself isn't going to save your non-existent "argument". You can repeat your lies as many times as you like no-one is foolish enough to believe they are truths no…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:14 AM
3

I called out "the perspective" of someone who makes blatantly false accusations and engages in willful misrepresentations to protect their ego because it is a complete bastardization of that poem. Your attempt to revise and corrupt astound. What you think you know, is of no consequence, when it has been proven to be contrary to fact. I presented facts you presented unsupported assertions. You've been asked to put up or shut up...you've done neither. Clearly not from lack of desire but, as eviden…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 01:17 AM
3

Sad when you don't even recognize the poem you quoted from. You bastardized the poem and I addressed why you are at fault for doing that. That is not a failure to recognize the poem. The difference between you and me... "I don't pretend to know everything; I just only speak on matters I know I'll win." -Criss Jami Now take your imitations elsewhere.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 12:56 AM
3

The fact that you suffer from the Dunning -Kruger Effect and failed to actually support any of your uniformed assertions doesn't strengthen your case nor is it authenticating evidence of the characteristics of "men". You make up false accusations in frenzied attempts to maintain intentional ignorance and then brag about how you don't question your character, the fact that you think that somehow makes you a man is abhorrent. "The liar's punishment is, not in the least that he is not believed, but…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 12:27 AM
3

" If you can meet with triumph and disaster, And treat those two imposters just the same." - Rudyard Kipling
/r/MensRights30/11/13 11:51 PM
3

You should learn the meanings of words. And stop making blatantly false accusations. Your ignorance is only triumphed by your completely undeserved arrogance. We both know you were wrong. You've back peddled, tried to move the goal posts, misrepresented my position, tried to redefine the meanings of words, are completely oblivious of basic terms of art and are resorting to outrageous falsehoods and false accusations all in the most transparently obvious attempt to cover up how you lost this "arg…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 11:33 PM
2

Words have meanings. Yes I did. You made blatantly false accusations. Go shame yourself elsewhere.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:54 PM
2

Do you know how absolutely idiotic your statement is. Do you honestly believe you attach an original document when you cite a source ? Have you ever written a school paper ? What did you do attach the whole book you got the information from to your paper or did you cite the source (like the rest of the world) with the information needed to find the original document. Also /u/BarTab Esq. citation has a meaning within law... you are just painfully ignorant. I feel sorry for you. Here are definitio…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:34 PM
2

Ga. Code Ann. 24-2-3(b) (Michie Supp. 1992). If the defendant wishes to introduce evidence under this exception, the statute also provides for an in camera hearing in which the judge is directed to admit the evidence upon a finding that the evidence "is so highly material that it will substantially support a conclusion that the accused reasonably believed that the complaining witness consented to the conduct complained of and that justice mandates the admission of such evidence.' Ga. Code Ann. 2…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 09:06 PM
3

Oh I have full ability to do that. As they say, put up or shut up. Once again, I reject any reliance on old data... I could find them myself, but I have no intent of pouring through 51 different legislative codes to find the proof you claim is there. So far your argument consists of you closing your eyes, plugging your ears and crying nuh-uh. As previously stated put up or shut up. Provide the specific legislative rule(s) you seem to find objectionable. You are either the most obtusely ignorant …
/r/MensRights30/11/13 09:00 PM
3

The sources are fully cited in the article I'm not responsible for your inability to understand how citations work or incapability to click a link. Law works on statutes, precedents, and constitutional "rights"... not arbitrary dates set by someone obviously seeking to move goal posts in a desperate display of willful ignorance. It's clear I vastly over estimated your basic understanding of law and you should start your adventure here Current federal laws and state statutes for every single stat…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 07:22 PM
1

The changes in Florida law are reflected in my previous comment. Are you suggesting the case doesn't exist? You can use the links provided the case is properly cited at the bottom of the article(s), as is indicated by intext citations and footnotes...I'm not responsible for your immense amount of intellectual laziness. Depending on the nature and strength of an individual’s pre-existing beliefs, willful ignorance can manifest itself in different ways. The practice can entail completely disregard…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 06:44 PM
2

RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT: CASE LAW Although there is no available data showing how often clothing is introduced in rape or sexual assault cases for the purpose of showing consent, it does occur.' In a 1978 sexualassault case, 2 the Montana Supreme Court noted that the 'defendant testified that the sexual contact was encouraged by the dress and behavior of the prosecutrix a fifteen year old girl who had come to the defendant's home to baby-sit his children.' In 1988, a man convicted of rape in Geo…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 06:15 PM
2

Feel free to still use the entire book which was referenced, and to which you were given a preview or the article which is specifically quoted for your convenience (read: intellectual laziness) and consists entirely of US law and cases tried within the US legal system. Or continue to be willfully ignorant . Either way my statement remains factual. ETA: Com. v. Joyce, 415 N.E.2d 181 (Mass. 1981). Com v. Gallagher, 547 A.2d 355 (1988). Com. v. Balodis, 747 A.2d 341 (Pa. 2000). Commonwealth. v. Bla…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 05:29 PM
2

I'm sorry but, the world doesn't consist only of America. Start with Addressing Rape Reform in Law and Practice By Susan Caringella preview Negligent Sexual Assault: Criminal Law Reform Pink Elephants in the Rape Trial: The Problem of Tort-Type Defenses in the Criminal Law of Rape This whole article addresses the issue rather well, here are SOME highlights, ... the role of extralegal variables in founding decisions.[276] After tracking sexual assault victims treated at a large urban hospital dur…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 03:49 PM
-1

I had a similar discussion with someone else earlier today. I want to correct you, defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of risk have been incorporated into the law of rape. This absolutely includes states of dress/undress. Also 40% of Canadian men admit to victim blaming based on clothing According to a survey of 1,040 Scots carried out by Cello MRUK in February 2010 for the Scottish Governmentfound that: • 23% think a woman can be at least partly responsible if she is drunk at the…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:00 AM
0

can you provide cite your sources? specifically which support the following claims you made; any given woman is actually more likely to have raped a man than a given man is to have raped a woman. female rapists tend to be "dabblers". Like alcoholics vs social drinkers--one is a pathological behavior, the other just "normal". [the female being a social drinker and therefore her raping being "normal"] I would like access to the studies if possible, but if you only have articles which reference the…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 04:17 AM
1

Opps I forgot... Thanks for reminding me.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 03:05 AM
3

There are hotlines specifically for men, I posted about this in /r/askfeminists awhile back... In the U.S. and Canada: Call Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women at 1-888-7HELPLINE (1-888-743-5754) and Gay Men’s Domestic Violence Project at 1-800-832-1901. UK ; ManKind Initiative at 01823 334244 or Men’s Advice Line at 0808 801 0327. http://www.mensline.org.au/Home.html http://www.mensadviceline.org.uk/mens_advice.php http://www.oneinthree.com.au/servicesandresources/ http://help4guys.org/si…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:25 AM
2

Bit hypocritical to live in the society, reap the rewards of doing so but, refuse any of the responsibilities. Also, your course of action does very little if anything to address the grievances you have. I personally believe in being proactive not reactive, it's obvious you don't share that belief. You've decided you are no longer going to be a "good guy" because it's too hard and thankless, I am going to be a "good guy" no matter how hard or how thankless because the world needs more heroes to …
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:23 AM
1

For the most part I agree with what you want however, I disagree with the manner in which you are trying to get it.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:02 AM
2

I prefer Ghandi's "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
/r/MensRights31/10/13 09:14 AM
1

Yes. Even Hitler. I would alert the proper authorities (and likely the press as an insurance policy) to save him, then have him arrested so he could stand trial. I strongly believe in the justice system, when the accused don't face trial and answer for their deeds it is very devastating on the victims.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 03:07 AM
1

I'm just saying if I saw that going on I would do everything in my power to stop it, no matter what your political or personal beliefs were. I would do that for ANYONE.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:35 AM
0

Tommy you sure you want to be in this boat ?
/r/MensRights30/10/13 05:45 PM
2

If you were being raped, abused, or hurt in any way I would do everything in my power to help you.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 05:07 PM
2

Tom do you considered March of The Penguins pornography ?
/r/MensRights15/09/13 07:42 AM
-1

Thanks for letting me know I guess you've met your activism quota for the next few years! Funny you missed the entire point of my comment though.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:52 PM
1

Interesting that you can't understand the concept of "accused" to mean anything other than "guilty". It's not me making a mistake you said How many days in jail did your friends spend for being falsely accused of that crime? Which is YOU insinuating they were CONVICTED of the crime and DID TIME for it. Don't confuse the stupidity of your statement with my beliefs. You brought up your friends who were accused of a crime (false accusations, while rarely enforced, are technically a crime). I asked …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 02:46 PM
1

You might actually want to look at figure 12 it supports my claim, in fact it's the basis for it and refutes your claim. The fact that you dismissed that claim as feminist statistics and then used THE SAME STUDY as valid, makes me very happy. Now that you've decided that my original question is based of a study you deem worthy of using can you actually answer my question instead of dismissing it a "feminist statistics" ? I'm not being hysterical. You stated; How many days in jail did your friend…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 02:17 PM
0

In reality of the rapes that have enough merit to go to court about half lead to a conviction, or roughly the same rate as for any other violent crime Please provide verifiable and legitimate sources which support this claim. And I can think of several men accused of rape who were sentenced to 5-10 years only to find out afterwards that they were innocent (with no compensation and their accuser never facing any penalty). Links please. How many days in jail did your friends spend for being falsel…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:12 PM
0

So you think that out of 100 rapes, 46 being reported to police and 5 leading to conviction, 3 serving actual time I prison is being adequately punished ? I can think of several rape victims who were accused of being false accusers, only later to be found out that they were telling the the truth.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 07:12 PM
1

Are you under the impression I'm raging against "the unfairness of it all" ? we let people know rape is wrong by punishing rapists, even if they're innocent Wait you think there is such thing as a innocent rapist ? Or are you saying the only way people will know rape is wrong is if we punish innocent people of it? I see a lot of posts here on R/mr where false accusers are punished when it is proven that their accusations were malicious and false. Is there a reason you can't give a serious answer…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:06 PM
0

So to be very clear, you think that in general women need to be taught not to lie about rape, but it's offensive to teach/remind men not rape?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:44 PM
1

I thought that most men's rights members found reminding/teaching men to not rape as unfair and wrong. So do you personally believe that men need to be taught not to rape ?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 10:38 AM
1

Like I said I'm not conflating anything. I'm talking about the fact that law enforcement classifies many different situations as "false" rape accusations. I'm not saying they should do that, I'm simply saying that they do, do it and given that they do you should keep in mind that not all "false" rape accusations come from maliciousness.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:22 PM
-1

I don't think anyone is making the claim that the accuser is always acting out of maliciousness, Did you read what Gieger wrote? they could have actually been raped, but if they can't identify the rapist, it's not like they should be able to just pick anybody at random and say they're it. Noone is saying they should be allowed to pick "anybody at random". I'm talking about how fallible and easily influenced our memories are, and how because of this, eye witness testimony is incredibly inaccurate…
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:05 PM
5

I'm not conflating anything, I'm talking about the classification of false rape within law enforcement; It is extremely difficult to determine what percentage of rape reports is intentionally false. This is due to many factors, including jurisdictional variation in definition, criteria, and reporting practices, as well as the fact that not all rapes are reported. Although the FBI had set 8% as the average rate of false (actually, unfounded) accusations during the late 1990s, there is remarkable …
/r/MensRights25/08/13 02:55 PM
6

I don't think that erroneous rape charges are usually the product of confusion. I agree with this part of your statement, but we do need to keep in mind that rape accusations can be deemed "false" when a rape occurred, but the victim mis-identified who the rapist is (eye witness testimony is notoriously inaccurate) so I don't think that the idea that the accuser is always acting of maliciousness is true.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 10:44 AM
8

Are you talking about the Kanin study? What about the study do you believe makes it more accurate than the other studies ?
/r/MensRights25/08/13 10:33 AM
8

I agree. There is a difference about thinking about or wanting to do something and actually doing it.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 09:28 AM
20

Were you confused about the difference between rape and regret sex ? Did you not know it isn't okay to make false allegations of rape to get back at ex-boyfriends ? Edit to add: I'm asking if the confused young woman was Feminist_MRA because I didn't know any young women who were "confused" about these things and I too am a woman.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 08:36 AM
2

Outrage? More like rampant corporate endorsement.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:11 AM
4

I'm sorry do you listen to the radio often? Because ... Howard Stern Rush Limbaugh Don Imus Chris Moyles Seriously.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 11:37 AM
2

Meant this one Stockholm police accuses two FEMEN sextremists in hooliganism in Sweden for a topless protest at the mosque. Sorry for bad link.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 07:07 PM
1

It's strange in a coutry where "force Fed feminism...is religion" there would be women getting arrested for feminist protesting in Sweden
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:31 AM
1

Suicide notes are strange things, a P.S. (or similar) isn't that unusual check out ...Or Not to Be: A Collection of Suicide Notes by Marc Etkind Suicide Notes: Predictive Clues and Patterns by Antoon A. Leenaars
/r/MensRights14/08/13 02:43 AM
-3

But in a bad neighborhood you lock your car door do you not? This is the same as women being safe by not going out after dark or drinking or being around strangers. What's the deal?
/r/MensRights25/07/13 11:23 PM
-2

No it's just your fault for not recognizing when your feeble attempt at sarcasm is sarcastically thrown back in your face. Which is delightfully ironic. RIGHT now
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:08 PM
-3

You presented a rape as something that was not called rape. Nope. But, that's the least specious argument you've attempted thus far. (that isn't really saying much considering the levels of fallaciousness present in everything you've tried to claim, but it's a little progress... As they say it's one baby step at a time when you are a baby). And once again thanks for your good sportsmenship despite losing! That's you making two whole baby steps in this very conversation no wonder you are worn out…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:17 PM
-3

I find it hilarious that you can only resort to labeling me a troll because you know you've been proven wrong. Well done... Run back to AMR and report your victory. I appreciate you congratulating and me admitting this was a victory for me. Being a good sport when you are the loser is tough for people like you so I want to recognize your achievement.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:07 PM
-4

And That absolutely was a serious question I asked you.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:04 PM
-4

I actually did read it. I answered your question. I used direct quotes from the article. Keep up the great work making yourself look worse and worse.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:03 PM
-3

The information I quoted in my reply is directly qouted from your source in your link. If you have the literacy and comprehension skills you should maybe read the information from the sources you provide. I feel really sorry for you. If you want help it's out there LINCS. I wish you th best of luck !
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:57 PM
-2

Serious question. Do you suffer from a TBI ? You already recieved the answer to this question here
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:42 PM
-3

FFS you are dense. Try reading your little source, it uses several of the same examples I did. Your link expressly says Most states choose to label the crime of rape as sexual assault. Sexual assault is divided into degrees: first-, second-, third-, and fourth-degree sexual assault. West Virginia provides an illustration of how rape laws are typically written. In West Virginia, a person is guilty of sexual assault in the first degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse or sexual intru…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:38 PM
-3

What part of Ms. Comins said her comments were printed out of context, that the men to whom she was referring are guilty of something in the first place, and so self-questioning is therefore beneficial. "[R]ape truly describes her or his sense of violation, and in fact it's an emotionally accurate label, but it may not be a legally accurate label... It's not that I have doubts that something happened. It's that I have questions whether or not it would be best to term it rape." Ms. Comins, who sa…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:29 PM
-3

No it isn't. You are the most embarassingly ignorant person I've met in quite awhile. In January 2012, the FBI updated its definition of rape for the first time in over 80 years. The former definition was carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will. The new definition has been changed to include oral and anal penetration, and it allows for the victim or perpetrator to be of either gender. It also no longer has the requirement of force. That affects how the FBI collects data and m…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:15 PM
-2

To bad the misqoute in time magazine isn't when Comins gave the original interview, here she is being misrepresented and criticised for the same misqoute back in 1992 The freaking retraction in Time magazine was June 25 1991, the link talking about the misquote is a PDF scan of the Vassar Spectator, Volume X, Number 1, 1 September 1991
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:11 PM
-3

She was talking about allowing any victim of non-consensual sex should be allowed to call it rape when talking about how they feel even if it isn't technically legally defined as rape. Once again those are simply examples of some laws which still currently only recognize rape when physical force is used by the perpetrator and physical resistance is required by the victim. So yes it's freaking relevant.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:07 PM
-3

No it isn't. No wonder the MRA gets continually lambasted and laughed at, it's thanks to people like you who need minders at all times running all over stating blatant falsehoods. Find a single state statute which defines "rape (for a woman): sex without consent." More examples Under New York state law, rape is defined as forcible vaginal penetration. While Forced oral and anal contact both go under the term criminal sexual act. If the same crimes had occurred elsewhere, they might not legally b…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:52 PM
-2

I've mentioned several. Numerous times. You are the one obviously trolling. TIL 1993 is decades or centuries before April 29, 1992 (which is when Comins made the statement)
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:31 PM
-3

That is the definition of rape (for a woman): sex without consent. That absolutely is not the legal definition of rape in many jurisdictions. You are too obtuse to function if you can't figure that out. Last chance: starting in 2001 in the western world what could be done to a woman that she would call rape but the law would not? Tell me Mr.ThinksHeKnowsItAll how many states recognize rape by intoxication ? ...The answer is ONLY ONE (California) New Jersey for instance only recognizes it if the …
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:29 PM
-3

Comins was talking about the various forms of sexual assaults which didn't qualify at the time under the legal definition of rape. You asked for current examples where any non-consensual sex isn't classified as rape so I gave you examples are now your pretending that since Comins didn't mention those they don't really count. You've made up several strawmen accusations and in doing so have absolutely embarassed yourself. The point is and remains that rape laws have evolved, there are things that …
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:11 PM
-3

I know this will blow your feeble mind But it wasn't until 1993 that marital rape became a crime in all 50 states, under at least one section of the sexual offense codes. It's not legally classified as specifically as rape in all states to this day. Although marital had become illegal in all states by 1993, in most states there were significant differences between the way marital sexual assault and other forms of rape were treated. Only in 17 states are marital rape and other forms of rape treat…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:57 PM
-4

Federal laws apply to every jurisdiction. And by federal law this is not true. You are obviously beyond ignorant. Federal law doesn't trump states rights you daft ignoramus. If it did all states would have the same freaking laws. State laws are only in effect within that particular state.They can be either superior to or subordinate to federal law, depending on the issue at hand. State law can never reduce or restrict the rights of a U.S. citizen, but it can afford state residents more rights. L…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:42 PM
-2

So you admit you were wrong when you stated sounds like it was "only" consensual sex
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:18 PM
-3

Are you seriously daft ? All of those things USED to be legal and not defined as rape. When Comins did the interview those things were NOT Commonly DEFINED AS RAPE. It was being debated. That is the whole freaking point. THOSE issues were viewed then as forced penetration is now viewed. However, TO THIS DAY there are jurisdictions in AMERICA which have the requirement of physical force for non-consensual sex to be considered rape. Just as to THIS DAY carnal knowledge is the common requirement fo…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:14 PM
-2

Sounds like consensual sex? But as they sat on the couch, she found herself falling asleep. "By now, I'm comfortable with him, and I put my head on his shoulder. He's not tried anything all evening, after all." Which is when the rape came. "I woke up to find him on top of me, forcing himself on me. I didn't scream or run. "I thought it was my fault. I felt so filthy, I washed myself over and over in hot water. Did he rape me?, I kept asking myself. I didn't consent. But who's gonna believe me? I…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 03:41 PM
-3

Like I already stated sex with a unconscious person is now seen as rape, non-consensual sex even without physical force is now seen as rape, non-consensual sex with someone you know is now considered rape, there is no longer a marital rape exception in this country. These are all examples being discussed in the original time article where Comins is originally quoted. From that article Women charge that date rape is the hidden crime; men complain it is hard to prevent a crime they can't define. W…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 03:12 PM
-3

Guess you should brush up on your legal knowledge. The so-called "marital rape exemption" has been embedded in the sexual assault laws of our country since its founding. In its most drastic form, the exemption means that a husband, by definition, cannot legally rape his wife. The theory goes that by accepting the marital contract, a woman has tacitly consented to sexual intercourse any time her husband demands it. The concept dates back to 18th century common law, and was articulated by English …
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:50 PM
0

Because now we readily accept that date rape is in fact rape, that spouses can rape each other, that rape is not only physically forced, but is a lack of consent (and understand drunken passed out people can't consent) ... However, it is still hard for many people to understand that women can and have raped men, basically it's one of our current "is it really rape" debate issues. I'm demonstrating how the legal standards don't always match social standards and social standards don't always match…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 01:48 PM
0

If you bothered to educate yourself, Comins was talking about sex with people rendered unconscious because of intoxication and acquaintance rape. This is specifically addressed in the original Time Article. There had been a local instance of this, and this caused a debate on campus. The perpetrator freely admitted having sex with a completely unconscious drunken girl but, felt it wasn't really rape because he didn't physically fight or threaten her, and legally at the time force was necessary fo…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 01:37 PM
-2

Not even close. If a woman forces a man to penetrate her it isn't legally called rape, that doesn't mean the woman was "cleared" of a charge. It means that for instance, lets say she was charged with sexual assault and found guilty of sexual assault, however her victim still calls it rape, because they feel raped, the woman wasn't cleared of the charge. She still forced him to penetrate her, was found guilty of forcing him to penetrate her, he is absolutely a victim. Comins feels the perpetrator…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 01:10 PM
0

Are you functionally literate ? "Ms. Comins said her comments were printed out of context, that the men to whom she was referring are guilty of something in the first place, and so self-questioning is therefore beneficial. "[R]ape truly describes her or his sense of violation, and in fact it's an emotionally accurate label, but it may not be a legally accurate label... It's not that I have doubts that something happened. It's that I have questions whether or not it would be best to term it rape.…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 12:50 PM
1

"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience. Catherine Comin, Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students.Source is from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,157165,00.html#ixzz29Nsxs92Z Time magazine, June 3 1991 interview Actual quote from Time article : "To use the word carefully would be to be careful for the sake of the violator, and the survivors don't care a hoot about him." Comins argues that men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 09:27 AM
2

There is help. There is hope. Please don't give up. Hidden Hurt Specifically for Male Victims of Domestic Violence men's center The Men's Resource Center helps men overcome issues such as domestic abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, ... [ this one is in Michigan, but they have locations in several states and some services that can be done by phone proof on the internet ] 1 in 6 Helping men who have had unwanted or abusive sexual experiences in childhood live healthier, happier lives. Jim Hopper Ph.D.…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 09:54 AM
3

You say you hate who you have become and hate the way you feel you are forced to act , but are encouraging OP to be and do the very things you hate. I would like to say neither of you deserve the horrible things that have been done to you and I can completely understand where your fear and anger is coming from, however it's not healthy to allow trauma to turn you into someone you hate. Here are some resources you might find helpful; http://1in6.org/ http://www.jimhopper.com/male-ab/ http://www.g…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 09:32 AM
1

You made it clear you didn't know what patriarchy theory is, so I provided some studies which explain it (not all by feminists). I also included some that contain the most common criticisms of it. Afterall, the starting point of forming an opinion is knowing the subject.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:03 AM
1

Opposing misogyny, racism, homophobia etc... isn't opposing rights for men. Unless you think all men are misogynists, racists, homophobics, etc...which unlike you, I absolutely don't.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 11:07 PM
6

Since no one else in this thread is providing you with what you requested I will get you started Theorising Patriarchy Surfacing the Structures of Patriarchy Debating Patriarchy - Reasonable Doubts Patriarchy has been conceptualized and analyzed by several feminist scholars in different ... Selected full-text books and articles on Patriarchy at Questia And a book The Creation of Patriarchy (Women & History) by Gerda Lerner
/r/MensRights20/07/13 07:49 AM
1

Could you name the several others please ?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:43 PM
4

But, you are a feminist so you are the creationist of social studies ✔ and No body gives a shit about damn science. People voted romeny and obama!!! ✔ [ for reference the ✔ lets you know that what was said is a verified fact. ]
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:32 AM
10

UNDER posting guidelines it says all arguments/discussions/materials that question or challenge the validity/necessity of abortion rights are strictly prohibited. The right to bodily integrity and autonomy is considered axiomatic.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:17 PM
-1

Warren Farrell isn't a prominent feminist, he served at a local chapter, the New York City NOW board for three terms well over twenty years ago.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 08:47 PM
1

srsly
/r/MensRights10/07/13 08:16 PM
1

So mad I said Good Day
/r/MensRights10/07/13 04:27 PM
1

Thought I recognized you I said Good Day
/r/MensRights10/07/13 02:31 PM
1

While I appreciate you spending so much time explaining how you misrepresented the meaning of the message in your translation. I said Good Day, Sir
/r/MensRights10/07/13 01:54 PM
1

Have your parent translate the last two sentences for you. Good day
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:52 PM
1

Yes. Your translation was wrong because it misrepresented the meaning of the message and your appeal to authority doesn't negate the fact that your translation was wrong, in fact it calls more into question. Good day .
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:51 PM
1

"Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm" The historian Richard Hofstadter addressed the role of paranoia and conspiracism throughout American history in his essay The Paranoid Style in American Politics, published in 1964 Psychologists believe that the search for meaning is common in conspiracism and the development of co…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:46 PM
1

Your translations are interesting the intent of the message is to be read as "whore more earn more". Strange you didn't seem to understand that since you claim to live in France and tried to lord your mastery of all things French over me.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:52 AM
2

The article and the comments are shaming her. You attempting to frame it as "snarky" is fallacious. The message is very clear. You attempted to explain away the article, blaming it solely on the association with the other feminist group. I tried to show you the overwhelming sentiment of trying to shame her by showing you it is being echoed in the comments. I did not know it was done by a political group. That honestly makes it more transparent. FEMEN activists to sue Ukrainian TV channel over 'f…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:47 AM
2

It absolutely has to do with shaming her for her sexual choices. Read the comments to the article. Bonjour Éloïse, vous êtes une pute indépendante, donc vous faire baiser pour du fric est un choix. Vous militez pourtant dans le groupuscule féministe FEMEN, responsable d’agression caractérisée avec violence et armes assimilables à la 6e catégorie, attentat à la pudeur et propos d’incitation à la haine antichrétienne. Tout cela s’est passé hier à la manifestation familiale pour le retrait du proje…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:01 AM
1

There were also conscription exemptions for men. Examples during the same time Men who were too old, young or not completely fit joined the Home Guard, known as Dad's Army At the same time a list of 'reserved occupations' was published. This listed occupations that were essential to the war effort and stated that those employed in those jobs were exempt from conscription. Not sure what your point is.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:34 AM
1

As of 2013, countries that were drafting women into military service included Benin, Chad, Cuba, Eritrea,Israel, Libya, Malaysia, North Korea, Taiwan and Tunisia. In the United Kingdom during World War II, beginning in 1941, women were brought into the scope of conscription but, as all women with dependent children were exempt and many women were informally left in occupations such as nursing or teaching, the number conscripted was relatively few. Norway's parliament has voted overwhelmingly to …
/r/MensRights09/07/13 09:31 PM
1

Isn't conscription for anyone outdated in this modern society ? I respect the rights of all men and women to choose if they want to fight and die in wars.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 09:12 PM
1

FYI: Their names were in the link originally provided by MRMmojoman But here Emmeline Pankhurst’s call for universal compulsory national service for both sexes It was Emmeline Pankhurst and her eldest daughter Christabel who rode the suffragist crest on the eve of the Great War. By 1914, Emmeline Pankhurst was the undisputed leader of the suffrage movement in Britain. As World War I began, Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst were able to utilize the “great emergency” to their own ends. Under the c…
/r/MensRights09/07/13 08:59 PM
2

Okay I see a source that says one protester was a escort. I guess I should have been more clear do you have any sources which prove femen protesters are paid to protest ? Because similar accusations from 2012 have been deemed unsubstantiated information by several news organizations and FEMEN. Also did you happen to read your source? Calling that woman a submissive whore and shaming her for her profession didn't make me have much confidence in their journalism or credibility.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 08:08 PM
3

It was two British feminists (a mother and daughter), they also felt conscription should be applied to British women, interestingly enough the other daughter who was also a feminist was a pacifist.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 01:47 PM
4

Sources ? Also escorts can't be feminists why?
/r/MensRights09/07/13 01:45 PM
0

Are you daft ? Please tell me you are being willfully obtuse. Why are you arguing against positions which I have never taken ? Your conclusions that the study found boys and girls have similar physiological reactions but, report/perceive their levels of empathy differently supports my claim that empathy is effected by gender roles. I've stated this difference isn't a biological innate ability it's motivation shaped by socialization of gender roles. You stated: Gender role development is not rele…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:18 PM
1

Herp Derp... Google: fight patriarchy, how to. NOMAS is a good place to start.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:33 PM
0

Please read all sources thoroughly. From source "the extent to which such sex differences are an artifact of self-report indices is unclear" Regardless, my point is You are wrong because socialization of gender roles do be real and Do effect empathy skillz.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:22 PM
-1

The same way women do.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:14 PM
0

Gender role development is not relevant to the existence of empathy between the genders. the research suggests differently Gender and empathy, The controversial empathy gender gap Behavioral research indicates that human females are more empathic than males, a disparity that widens from childhood to adulthood Are you going to argue these findings are a result of biology and not a part of socialization differences between boys and girls based in gender roles ? While many studies find women are ge…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:06 PM
-2

It's agitprop to say that you're saying "men oppress women?" Are you intentionally this obtuse or is this a lack of comprehension ability ? It is agitprop to continually reframe the idea that 'patriarchs are a small elite group of men, who enforce oppressive patriarchal structures, which while harming both men and women, tend to benefit men more' as "men oppress women" and then attempting to sell the idea that women who fight against patriarchy are labeling men the enemy and demonizing them. It …
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:41 PM
0

Patriarchs. As in some. Not all. Not even most. Men. Why are you so insistent on trying to skew this into meaning something else. Read what is there as opposed to reading into it. Your little "summaries" are better classified as blatant misrepresentations. You want it to be opposition between sexes when it absolutely isn't. A man has no choice over being born a man anymore than a women does over being a woman. The men benefit by accident of birth. Observing that on the patriarchal axis they bene…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:53 PM
1

You have to account for these features, specifically that there is a greater intimacy between men as a group and women as a group--just as a matter of course--than there is between tribal, ethnic, racial, class, etc. groups. Men are raised by women. That means men's initial experiences of intimacy, empathy and belonging are associated with women. Seriously? First off this isn't always true. Children by design have two parents. Child development. See: process of identification, Kohlberg's Cogniti…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:45 PM
-1

AKA. Men oppress women for their benefit. No. I mean unless maybe you are a sophist who willfully misrepresents others because you derive various privileges from creating sensationalistic agitprop. To everyone else it is merely recognition that men benefit more frequently than women strictly on the patriarchal axis. They are human terms with common definitions. You don't get to double plus good the language. Not even coherent. Sociopathy is a psychological diagnosis. You can keep attempting to l…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:25 PM
1

I don't really do YouTube especially to monetized accounts. I'm sure you are capable of a succinct basic summary. The simple version is this. Feminists posit that men oppress women in ways comparable to racism and classism, Nope. You can keep repeating the mantra but it doesn't make it true. different forms of supremacy on different axes are independent and interdependent. As in NOT the same. Patriarchy: one of the most misunderstood critical-theory concepts ever, often wilfully misunderstood. P…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 08:21 PM
1

Because that simple question is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. No. It's absolutely relevant. Your saying that anyone who believes men oppress women is demonizing men. Yet you've shared your beliefs about men being oppressed (in other threads), but somehow you don't think you demonize women when you do that. I'm trying to figure out your reasoning for the blatant hypocrisy. You believe men oppressed women. Yet you have spent how many hours arguing against me pointing out that feminists com…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:54 PM
0

I'm struck at how insistent you are on telling me what I believe. I'm struck at your continual misrepresentation of others which is pretty transparent projection. It's clear you aren't capable of communicating with anyone who doesn't think exactly like you do. Anytime anyone disagrees you accuse them of being guilty of thinking what you think.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:43 PM
1

Instead of continually misrepresenting others why not answer the simple question. Do you think men oppressing women is non-existent? Do you think only men are oppressed?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:39 PM
1

Already explained King as ultimate leader ... Father as king ...rule of father, hence socio-political hierarchy. You still haven't substantiated your claim, you've merely once again shown you don't have a understanding about what your talking about. Do you have any actual evidence that feminists are somehow using the term in a way contrary to it's meaning or purpose? I'm sure you are also aware of intersectionality and it's implications on oppression. In case you are wondering most feminists do,…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:36 PM
1

demonization because it posits that men use "psychological and physical terrorism against women" as a matter of course, as a part of a system they created Where are men called the sole creators? Doesn't it actually expressly talk about both sexes contributing ? What's baffling? Do you think oppression of women by men is non-existent ?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:21 PM
2

It's cute your trying so hard. From the same bell hooks (btw her name is intentionally not capitalized) ...like many visionary radical feminists I challenged the misguided notion, put forward by women who were simply fed up with male exploitation and oppression, that men were ‘the enemy.’ I stressed that feminist advocates collude in the pain of men wounded by patriarchy when they falsely represent men as always and only powerful, as always and only gaining privileges from their blind obedience …
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:13 PM
1

FFS it's a greek term, accusing feminists of changing the meaning from some sociological term is a uh interesting claim, care to substantiate that?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:59 PM
0

Seriously. Stop it. You seem to be intentionally misrepresenting what "feminists" believe patriarchy to be. You are also engaging in a huge amount of revisionism trying to misrepresent bell hooks definition of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:52 PM
1

No I didn't. I stated it would be bad for women but not men. Thus I wouldn't support it for the same reason I don't support the reverse. I've already addressed this. In a question asking how you felt about gendered dominance you answered, Depends on the type of "dominance", this is why I said you support SOME kinds of gender dominance. You've given an example of one type which you don't support. That doesn't negate the fact that you stated you support some forms of it. So you do think that patri…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:38 PM
1

Framing attempts to educate you as people trying to "shut you up" is not helpful to this (or any) conversation. Once again I already explained why I spoke up. I'm not into redundancy especially when it's a veiled attempt at derailment. If you would like to address the actual content I provided with substantiated opinions or arguments I'm happy to consider and address those.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:18 PM
1

Typhoon nothing you quoted from bell hooks contradicts my explanation of patriarchy. You wanted to know why it was specifically that word which was used. I explained why. You keep leveling accusations that the definition of patriarchy somehow "demonizes" men, yet you've not made a cogent argument explaining how. Projecting your ignorance of feminist theory and patriarchy onto others, particularly feminists, is bad form.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:09 PM
-1

You were asked, What if we had a system where women were dominating over men? Would such a system, which is something commonly alleged as an end-goal of feminism by anti-feminists, be wrong? You answered... Depends on the type of "dominance". AND then went on to describe a instance where you thought you'd make a point proving men are actually more repressed than women in a role reversal of patriarchal oppression, which is a philosophically and logically 'sound' as stating parents are oppressed b…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:58 PM
2

I'm sorry, but this is a rather extraordinary claim, it needs to be substantiated.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:14 PM
1

No. Patriarchy, the word was chosen for some very distinctive reasons. I've witnessed how easily you are confused so I'm going to make it as simple as possible. Patriarchy - Rule of father. Describing societies where hierarchical structures are mimicked/observed down to the most basic relationships, ie Kings rule kingdom mimicked down to fathers as kings rule family. Children (sons included) in submission to fathers. Women as eternal children. Power is passed in the same hierarchical way.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:47 PM
-1

Thanks for this I'm going to keep it, file it under "ignorance" and show it to my children in the future so they can have a laugh about how supposed MRA leaders pretended to care about equality and egalitarianism but supported "some kinds of" gendered dominance.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:12 PM
-4

Because SpermJackAttack actually knows what the word patriarchy means within feminist theory, and is likely also able to understand what intersectionality and oppression also actually mean.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:07 AM
7

"I have been to that park, and the rules are clearly posted. No passing without (i) clear signals and (ii) confirmation from the other vehicle. The "shocking" and "threatening" script plays out perfectly until the "pervert" inexplicably passes the feminist the instant that they leave the park trail (and he can legally do so):" What is considered a "clear warning signal" in pinellas county ? I'm not from Florida so I'm wondering is this a well known local custom for it to be excessively/prohibiti…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 03:30 AM
1

I did read beyond the executive summary. It's clear that some people didn't even manage to read the executive summary and instead decided to make several erroneous statements based in ignorance. I simply used the summary and table as examples which disproved the claims being made.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 02:26 AM
1

That citation is about prostitution, and says nothing about fathers not getting custody of their children.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 06:16 PM
-1

[Source Needed]
/r/MensRights27/06/13 12:02 PM
6

Not only does it not distinguish between serious and trivial intimate violence, but it also makes an irrelevant comparison between intimate violence of any kind and sexual attacks by strangers. Absolutely incorrect. Please See Page 2 under the executive summary. It clearly makes the distinction. It also doesn't make any "irrelevant" comparisons, it measures the various distinctions and then separately measures the correlations and differences between the health effects. It also made distinctions…
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:43 PM
2

I know in this instance you did.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 04:44 AM
5

Hmm maybe, I didn't have any issues with Reddit being slow today, either way I apologized for jumping to conclusions and most importantly the comment is there now!
/r/MensRights21/06/13 03:44 AM
5

I dunno what happened it was still showing up as 'removed' after you had replied. You can see that by the time stamps on the comments in the screenshot .
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:46 AM
4

When I signed out of my account and tried to view the comment on my laptop (to improve formatting) THIS is what I saw, since it was after you replied to my comment I erroneously assumed you had removed it. I'm sorry for that erroneous assumption and accusation. THIS is what I see now, Thanks for approving it.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:39 AM
3

On mobile phone. Did you want to offer substantial criticism against the argument or the numerous examples? ETA No? Just gonna delete I see. STRANGE because censorshipping others is supposedly totally un-mister like. sorry
/r/MensRights20/06/13 11:38 PM
3

that jokes about reproductive abuse on the internet. Cite your sources, give multiple examples and demonstrate why it is reproductive abuse. Also please explain why ●Making 'suitor fraud' illegal isn't reproductive abuse Endorsment by Misters 1 proof misters supported this before it was heavily brigaded 2 And in the ultimate demonstration of the renowned Mister Logic™ Typhoidblue adds her support, because take that SRS! ● Poisoning women to cause them a unwanted abortion isn't reproductive abuse…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 11:14 PM
2

You might be available to find this faster than me, but I was looking for data on the eco-challenge competitors because it might also be helpful.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 05:59 PM
2

You are talking about the speed have you considered that the speed difference wouldn't matter as much as the ability to continue ...ie the actual endurance.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 11:27 AM
0

That user screenname is manZboobz not manboobz...they are different users. You can clearly check it out and see it their user history.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 11:33 PM
1

Proof... Evidence ... Cite your source.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 08:07 AM
10

George W. Bush's Mom started the war in Iraq. ~teh misters Edit: Changed the to teh so misters would understand .
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:51 AM
1

My sources don't affirm your positions. That you think they do is proof of your lack of cognizance and comprehension. Clearly you either don't have the intellectual ability, you don't have the comprehension skills to even understand the most basic premises of the issue, or you are willfully ignorant to the point of delusion, the reason for your complete lack of understanding really isn't relevant other than it makes having a conversation with you completely pointless. Hence, my many attempts to …
/r/MensRights19/05/13 01:45 AM
1

Thank you for so zealously affirming that you have absolutely no rebuttal. You have fully demonstrated that this issue is well above your cognizance and that you lack even remedial comprehension skills, so you really don't need to further embarrass yourself. I'm sorry if you are confused, as it seems like a constant state for you, I will further clarify, when I said find a minder I didn't mean me.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 01:22 AM
1

Belligerent and willfully ignorant to the point of delusion... Why any organization which cared about men would enable you is beyond me, I'm betting it's pity. If you honestly believe what you say then your intellectual ability and cognitive skills are so impaired that they are essentially non-existent. Find a minder or a rock.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 01:03 AM
1

Keep telling yourself that...maybe you can convince yourself if you just keep repeating the same parroted talking points you somehow gleaned from your hostess turned gender theorist. Your circular nonsense is a waste. Being willfully ignorant isn't something to broadcast. It's clear you not only didn't bother to read the study, but you don't even understand the 'argument' AVfM tried to spoonfeed you. It's clear your stuck on reactivism, you are the exact reason why the MRA has failed and continu…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 06:16 PM
1

And FFS if you want to be offended think about what's actually wrong with calling it 'made to penetrate' ... it's saying being 'forced to rape' as if the victim is perpetuating the crime against the actual rapists, and yes a lot of feminists have a issue with that because it's a perverse form of victim blaming and essentially says that rape only exists by through penetration which is ACTUALLY where the argument 'only men can rape' originates from ...that is until halfwits and steakhouse waitress…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:28 AM
1

Keep telling yourself that measuring 'made to penetrate' isn't explicitly measuring men being raped. The people who (like me) actually what to stop all sexual violence will continue to use the information to help stop or prevent more men (and women) from being raped while you whine about semantics and do fuck all to actually help anyone other than yourself.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:18 AM
1

Here you go, rape and forced to penetrate someone else are put in separate categories - in other words, they are saying that when a woman forces someone else to penetrate them, its not rape. Are you seriously that uninformed they specifically talked about why 'forced to penetrate' or 'rape by envelopment' was given it's own category, it was to specifically measure an act that before that study had never been measured as rape, it was given it's own category TO BRING ATTENTION TO THIS FORM OF RAPE…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:47 PM
0

Are you intentionally obtuse? Or not functionally literate ? From the study Five types of sexual violence were measured in NISVS. These include acts of rape (forced penetration), and types of sexual violence other than rape. Rape is defined as any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal (for women), oral, or anal penetration through the use of physical force (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threats to physically harm and includes times when the victim was drunk, …
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:31 PM
1

They are. You should'nt be so quick to embarrass yourself. "On December 14th, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) released survey results on the prevalence of interpersonal violence and its impacts. The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) is an ongoing study of sexual violence (SV), intimate partner violence (IPV), and stalking ...Sexual violence (SV) victimization by any perpetrator, including rape (completed, attempted, and alcohol/drug facilitated force…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:09 PM
1

What part of Here Confused you?
/r/MensRights16/05/13 10:32 PM
2

Ok, if your point is correct and noone is doing that, you should be able to find me one feminist rape information outlet that is providing information and stats on the rate of rape by envelopment 'Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch! ... can you do that? Despite the absurdity of your request I actually can... Here It's actually more than just "one outlet" NYSCASA builds collaborations within New York State and across the nation to improve services for survivors of sexual …
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:21 PM
2

My point was no one is doing that. Your insistence that they are is either wishful thinking or fear mongering and either way is a complete work of fiction. With comprehension skills like yours the world must be a very scary place.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 08:31 PM
6

Humor against misters is so misandry ! Prepare for the MRA masses to start a conversation about gender inequality doxx you, harass you, and then un-ironically deny that they ever doxxed or harassed you .... Also, be warned deleting any threats of violence they make against you is totally a violation of their first amendment rights to free speech freely harass and intimidate anyone without repercussions !!
/r/MensRights16/05/13 08:21 PM
2

They are legal terms subject to jurisdiction. Specific legal jurisdictions and research often use highly technical or detailed definitions of the term. It's ridiculous that anyone attempt to frame the FBI statutes regarding rape as a feminist plot against men, especially when feminists have been fighting for rape law reforms for many of the same reasons MRAs say they want reform. The current legal model for prosecuting rape should shift to that of 'affirmative consent'... we need to change our u…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 08:00 PM
1

Question, not an accusation. Seriously? This is not a good way to obtain credibility. JAQing off - 1. the act of spouting accusations while cowardly hiding behind the claim of "just asking questions". The strategy is to keep asking leading questions in an attempt to influence listeners' views; the term is derived from the frequent claim by the questioner that they are "just asking questions," albeit in a manner much the same as political push polls...
/r/MensRights09/05/13 04:04 AM
1

Simply declaring something doesn't make it true or rational. Nor have I made that assertion. I'd go over the matter of you being against men's rights or not, but I don't care and I don't feel like digging through your posting history. It's odd that you 'cared' enough to make erroneous accusations, but feign disinterest when you are required to provide proof. Have you even bothered to look into it? Prejudices are more often than not a habitual and systematic practice of the lazy. Why would I? I w…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 07:17 PM
3

I'm curious do you have any experience of Indian culture?
/r/MensRights21/04/13 06:35 PM
2

From your 1st article: "A victim of molestation and indignation is in the same position as an injured witness and her testimony should receive the same weight," the judge observed." From your second article "It makes the position of a married woman almost as a property of her husband. But in terms of the law as it stands, it is evident from a plain reading of the section that only a man can be proceeded against and punished for the offence of adultery," it said this article was also from 2011 th…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 06:11 PM
1

Is irony lost on you? You engage in full scale prejudicial behavior in your assessment of me and then declare your exposing my bias? I was just making your bias known. Okay, irony is lost on you. Actually, you made erroneous accusations based upon stereotypes and your prejudices. You post in a sub called againstmensrights Your prejudices have hindered your ability to be rational. This subreddit is for exposing the hate and bigotry within the so-called "men's rights movement." We comb the interne…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 05:44 PM
4

Walks, quacks, swims. Stereotypes, prejudices, bigotry. Just making your bias known so that any unsuspecting commenters may not try to engage in good faith with someone who is against men's rights. Is irony lost on you? You engage in full scale prejudicial behavior in your assessment of me and then declare your exposing my bias? That's absolutely precious. I absolutely support actual men's rights. As is evidenced in my posting history. I ask once again: How do you feel about the digitally altere…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:52 PM
6

Indian courts had a backlog of 33 million cases as of 2011. In a small sign of the sluggish pace of justice, only one of the 635 rape cases filed in the capital last year has ended in a conviction so far. Sorry, but conviction rates suggest otherwise.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:30 PM
3

Are you in the habit of using stereotypes to label and judge people upon a first interaction with them? For the record I'm not a 'SRS'er and I am unsure why that would actually be relevant. I believe there are many reasons one might not support affirmative action, not all of them are based in racism. In the future I suggest actually asking me what my opinion is, instead of attempting to tell me what it is. How do you feel about the digitally altered photograph that he posted ? Do you not feel it…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:07 PM
2

He isn't opposing it, he is promoting it.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:50 PM
6

According to the wiki page you linked to, the objection of the Men's Rights Groups in India over 'presumed guilt' are in relation to the dowry statues not the statutes regarding DV. Presumption of guilt. The Dowry Prohibition Act (section 8-A) states, "Where any person is prosecuted for taking or abetting the taking of any dowry under Sec. 3, or the demanding of dowry under Sec. 4, the burden of proving that he had not committed an offence under those sections shall be on him." The objection to …
/r/MensRights21/04/13 02:42 PM
2

Do you think that possibly they used his picture since he was the actual gunman ? A former justice of the peace whose legal and political career collapsed in a hard-fought legal battle was accused Wednesday of killing the two prosecutors, who had been his courtroom rivals. And his wife not only named him as the gunman, but also confessed to having been the driver in both shootings as part of her role in the vendetta, the authorities said. "Kim Williams described in detail her role along with tha…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 10:53 AM
1

I was just about to post essentially the same thing.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 10:42 AM
0

For the record, there is unfortunately no penalty of perjury on filing a cease and desist (DMCA complaint), only a requirement of 'good faith'. For future reference the way a person actually gets doxxed using the DMCA is through a subpoena to the ISP or Safe Harbor provider which is contingent on filing a civil lawsuit, not from the cease and desist complaint, it's commonly known as John Doe Subpoena Abuse This is actually a well known criticism of the law. This is arguably one of the largest re…
/r/MensRights17/04/13 03:25 PM
0

Excuse me, but you are once again absolutely misrepresenting my position. All I stated was that you absolutely have no proof that anyone actually did what you allege. My main point was that despite you being a willingly public member of the MRHM/MRA you still didn't want to be doxxed and felt your safety would be put into jeopardy if your information was all over the internet. Furthermore, you keep erroneously referring to the person(s) who filed the claim as felons. On what legal grounds do you…
/r/MensRights17/04/13 02:02 PM
-5

Seemed to work, didn't it? No more false DMCA claims. hoc ergo propter hoc ? And here I thought you were the supposed 'enlightened voice of logic' for the MRA's, MRM, MRLMNOP's , MRHM(?). I keep wondering what your point is? I must say I prefer your response of wonderment over your usual response of postulations. Other than to be hostile and cunty. Oh, oops! I spoke too soon, it was more postulation merely attempting to masquerade as wonderment... At least you tried ? Seriously though it's reall…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 08:32 PM
-7

You threatened litigation when you had absolutely no cause of action, apparently retained the services of a rather Qualified Attorney at Lol and under legal advisement proceeded with threats of future litigation ... all based of off your superior gifts of 'knowledge' ™ And call me an idiot? That's absolutely precious.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 06:28 PM
0

How is he stifling free speech? Your only real hope is to keep your mouth shut and pretend AVfM and register-her.com does not exist for as long as you can. Participating in an illegal protest is a criminal offence I admit to not being an expert in Canadian law, however, I do know while it's a indictable offence to engage in a riot, it's only a summary conviction to participate in an unlawful assembly. Unlawful assembly in Canada applies to any group of three or more people who provoke fears or h…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 05:41 PM
-5

How exactly do you plan to get a subpoena when you admit you've got no grounds for a lawsuit. Why did you continue to threaten possible future legal action on the second video? It was created after your videos were reinstated. I'm surprised you ever 'wonder' about anything given your gifted ability in 'knowledge ™'
/r/MensRights15/04/13 05:29 PM
-4

You're right, my legal counsel said it would be a tough sell--not impossible, but difficult. NO CAUSE OF ACTION. Your claim would have been summarily dismissed. End of discussion. However, what he did suggest was that I could quite easily subpoena Youtube and Yahoo, find the person/people who filed the false DMCA claim, and either sue them, or press charges. Seriously, on what grounds? Even, if you actually could, why would you issue a subpoena to either Yahoo or YouTube? Your argument relies on…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 02:36 PM
0

Depends on Jurisdiction, strength of the case, the actual charges, mitigating vs aggravating factors, and previous criminal record.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:54 PM
-1

Do you not understand the difference between the overtly criminal acts of perjury, malicious prosecution, public violence and harassment perpetrated by those highlighted on Register Her As a matter of fact, I do...So let me ask you What criminal act, act of public violence or harassment specifically is Katherine Heigl guilty of? What criminal act, act of public violence or harassment is Jessica Valenti guilty of? What criminal act, act of public violence or harassment is the blogger at ChicagoNo…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 12:53 PM
-7

Scorched Earth, adjective : relating to or being a military policy involving deliberate and usually widespread destruction of property and resources (as housing and factories) during retreat so that an invading enemy cannot use them 2 : directed toward victory or supremacy at all costs ; ruthless I actually do know what it means. It was that knowledge that founded my assumption you were using the term to mean 'victory at all costs' ...you yourself stated the DMCA wasn't an attempt to censor you …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 11:51 AM
-7

You stated it was a 'scorched earth' campaign that's why I called it that. Your threatened lawsuit was against YouTube, what crime are you alleging YouTube committed? You made several accusations, basically stating that this “attack” was designed to “make [you] panic, and rush to save [your] channel” and thus put your dox in the hands of the nefarious attackers so they could "harass and stalk [you] and [your] family". Where did you get this knowledge from? When the videos were reinstated, you st…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:46 PM
-1

I'm not aware of any 'standards of evidence' being employed on RegisterHer. What are these standards? I've never used and don't know much about Hollaback, but what I found was; iHollaback allows victims the chance to upload words and pictures, and to literally indicate on a map, where they experienced harassment in public spaces. Victims can also discuss specific instances on online forums and share experiences. iHollaback then presents collected and mapped data in areas experiencing high incide…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 04:43 PM
-4

I already explained the worlds of difference. The feminists behaviour, attempting to doxx gww to destroy her life and the behaviour at the protests is criminal and victimizes innocent people. Register Her just reported some news on some criminals that were openly being criminals. And GWW has done nothing wrong. Before her identity was public, there was what looked like there was an attempt to doxx her. When feminists doxx mra's they try to destroy their lives when they have done nothing wrong. C…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:51 PM
-2

Are you serious? Please do then explain what these 'world of' differences are. Bigotry isn't in and of itself a criminal offence btw.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:55 PM
-8

What about the 'scorched earth' campaign that GWW intended to wage regarding her YouTube videos allegedly being flagged as an attempt to DOX her? She even admitted her proposed war against doxxing was well received and funded by her MRA supporters. Abuse of Youtube's copyright infringement claim process for doxxing purposes Tuesday, 14 August 2012; I am currently under attack from one or two individuals who are attempting to gain access to my name, address and phone number, through claiming my v…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:40 PM
-1

You should probably ask this question to a group of people who actually know. Patriarchy: one of the most misunderstood critical-theory concepts ever, often wilfully misunderstood. Patriarchy is one form of social stratification via a power/dominance hierarchy – an ancient and ongoing social system based on traditions of elitism (a ranking of inferiorities) and its privileges. Societies can be (and usually are) patriarchal, oligarchal and plutocratic all at the same time, complicated by current …
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:00 AM
2

It's not a men's issue MPC addresses that elsewhere it's based off of British Common Law. So you'll see laws that reference laws from 100's of years ago (carnal knowledge). That's why I said it was strange to argue MPC...MPC essentially it isn't used in anything other than law school, but I can't give statutes because every state is different every country is different... So I'm using the MPC to explain the statutes in a generality. This case is about a guy doing it to his SIL ...guy against gir…
/r/MensRights05/04/13 03:19 PM
2

Since most of what you linked is relating to the defendant who has been charged with a crime, does that at all relate to the ability to give consent as a victim/participant? Well we aren't going to charge the victim. However, if the victim is under 10 we are going to convict (strict liability). Under Model Penal Code- is guilty of rape if, acting purposely, knowingly, or recklessly regarding each of the material elements of the offense, has sexual intercourse with under any of the following circ…
/r/MensRights05/04/13 02:44 PM
4

Then why are you constantly posting on /r/askfeminists ? The posting guidelines for that sub clearly state ... "Come with an open mind and a willingness to consider another's perspective, and build some bridges!"
/r/MensRights05/04/13 03:09 AM
2

Rape by intoxication, would likely be the charge, the intent to intoxicate for the express purpose of rape isn't needed for conviction. The defense would be arguing that he 'reasonably' believed that the woman was capable of consenting to sexual intercourse despite the intoxication. Because the other defense, that he did know she was intoxicated, can't be raised given that he supplied the intoxicant to her. He could possibly face charges for Administering Drugs to Assist Commission of Felony or …
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:25 AM
6

Comm. v. Blache, 450 Mass. 583 (2008) in a rape case in which lack of consent due to intoxication is an issue, the prosecution must prove not only intoxication, but 1) that the intoxication rendered the complainant incapable of consent and 2) that the defendant knew or should have known that the condition rendered the complainant incapable of consenting. ETA Source
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:18 AM
6

These are actually matters of law, intoxication as a defense and Liability laws regarding consent ( which btw your argument that they are the same is nonsensical legally speaking). Issues regarding strict liability vs culpability (mens rea) vary from country to country and in the US from state to state. I'm using the MPC for simplification reasons. Model Penal Code § 2.08 defines the circumstances in which intoxication does or does not relieve a person of criminal responsibility. Subsection 2.08…
/r/MensRights04/04/13 10:45 PM
3

Unfortunately there is a lot of that. Sadly it's mostly impulsive people who swallow a bottle or two of tylenol. (usually teens).
/r/MensRights02/04/13 08:08 PM
0

She will not even give Adam her address I'm 99.9% certain this is a actionable cause for contempt. Because your final order specifically states http://i.imgur.com/YyEti77.jpg address changes require notification to the other parent. Here is the checklist to file http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/servicecenters/checklists/checklistfiles/Petition-for-contempt.pdf And the actual form http://www.courts.state.nh.us/forms/nhjb-2199-fs.pdf This also establishes some supportive evidence that she may no…
/r/MensRights02/04/13 08:17 AM
0

They cant send a return letter if they don't have the address of the child's home. Without having an address, it is difficult to document things by utilizing the USPS. Opps ! Good point. I wonder if he couldn't just get the information through the welfare department. If this 'mother' is all about collecting welfare checks she would almost certainly has her correct address on file with them. Also, if she is collecting child support she has to have her address on file with the court so he could po…
/r/MensRights02/04/13 07:36 AM
1

Obviously, no one on Reddit can give you actual legal advice. However, here are some educated suggestions. The child's needs need to be paramount always keep that in your mind. The issue shouldn't revolve around the wishes and dislikes of the parents ...If you always do what at heart you believe is best for the child you can be certain that no matter what the court or anyone else says you are being the best parent you can be. Honestly, I would get the child a neutral court approved counselor (if…
/r/MensRights01/04/13 09:23 PM
1

Comparing men with dogs ? Seriously?
/r/MensRights01/04/13 02:57 AM
1

Yeah, I go to some of the various classes they hold. They even have some specifically for children (soo much fun). Call ahead and reserve your spot, a lot of the classes fill up fast. And for the record they absolutely don't care about your gender. It's just horrible marketing, which should be called out ...but the classes themselves are fun.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:10 PM
1

Completely poor form to not cite and link your source. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the problem of using DNA data as "proof of false accusations" is throughly addressed, in the LINK I ALREADY PROVIDED __understanding per the link It seems almost incredible that trained professionals at the criminal justice coalface—the police and prosecutors who deal with rape cases on a daily basis—should get it so very wrong, and for so long. Nevertheless, it is widely accepted that false allegations of rap…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 01:45 AM
1

Hmmm, well, since you were nice enough to actually link something sorta relevant, Since the discussion is on the sources I USED as sources for the 2% statistic, and this is one of them its completely relevant. I'll have a go...136 students claimed rape over a 10 years period, at a single university, and formed the basis of this study. Totally incorrect. What part about "these results, TAKEN IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXAMINATION OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH indicate that the prevalence of false allegations is…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:17 AM
1

If you can't quote the relevant info, instead of linking a whole study without any reference to said 'evidence', I am either forced to take your word, or assume you're a liar. So far, all you've done is repeat long-dead canards as if they are truth, so I'm gonna go with 'fuckin liar'. When you can actually supply some context, I MIGHT revisit this opinion.... I used various sources none of which are from Susan Brownmiller. Had you used the NDAA link you'd know that. Had you used the lisak study …
/r/MensRights05/03/13 08:21 PM
1

Please see the The Lisak analysis which is one source for the 2% stat in my post, see the NDAA link for the myriad of others. Your instance on 'debunking' the Susan Brownmiller statistic is irrelevant to the argument. It's not where the statistic comes from and the honesty (or complete lack of) of the claims in your blog was already addressed in the NDAA's explanation.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:08 PM
1

Correction to serve as example of how truthful that whole post is...The 2% 'stat' was pulled out of a female Police Chief's ass, by Susan Brownmiller, when she was writing "Against OUr Will", and has absolutley no basis in fact, anywhere. As for the rest of this schlock, it's equally honest. Are you illiterate or just willfully ignorant? The NDAA states the false reporting of rape is between 2-8% . Not from Against Our Wills an Extensive Study conducted in 2010 collected prior studies that had t…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 06:23 PM
1

I've becoming more fluent the longer I spend in this conversation. I am glad you also noticed how your argument has been progressively getting more moronic. Immersion is the best way to learn a new language. Well you've certainly drowned this conversation in your moronicness. The biggest difference is, and this might shock you, women and their bodies aren't objects. A) Irrelevent in this scenario. Ahahahaha exactly why would it be irrelevant to the scenario? It's very relevant because your argum…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 05:13 PM
-2

You didn't know that because it's not true. Some MRAs would like us to believe there is a genuine statistical anomaly because they use studies with poor methodology to assert claims that false reports of rape are as high as 40-90% These claims and the studies have been thoroughly debunked ,but some people still insist on citing them. To put it into perspective the threat of false rape accusations vs. actual rape this inforgraphic is very powerful. The NDAA states the false reporting of rape is b…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 08:35 PM
0

does locking your car presume every person other than you is a thief? Now explain why that is totally different because LOUD NOISES! Oh and I thought you said you weren't fluent in moron. The biggest difference is, and this might shock you, women and their bodies aren't objects. So I ask again please explain how women who won't/don't act differently just because they are in the company of a man makes them cooperative in being raped isn't based on the presumption that women should treat all men l…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 09:19 PM
0

So the understanding is that you can't explain how women who won't/don't act differently just because they are in the company of a man makes them cooperative in being raped isn't based on the presumption that women should treat all men like they are rapists. (Also insult mimicry instead of original thought & legitimate content is a actual behavior of a troll. Someone disagreeing with you and asking you to properly answer their criticisms instead of falsely labeling them as strawman attacks isn't…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 08:34 PM
1

Well to be fair lawyers aren't known for being generous with information regarding on going litigation during interviews. I agree we need to see what the actual evidence is before coming to conclusions. Currently it's two sides with very different positions, one side is very sensational and grabs the headlines, but being sensational and being the truth aren't always the same thing. That's why I added that the woman's lawyer did deny Hardins claims.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 07:13 PM
0

I don't speak SRS. And you don't understand law. Or English. Fascinating google-search you copied here. Fascinating I'm sure to those who don't understand law. But what does this have to do with this thread since I never disputed the definition of premeditation or that it could be at play here? You did when you stated that a rape can be premeditated and opportunistic at the same time. It can't. You were wrong. Move on. Good thing I never said any of that. If you had a solid argument you wouldn't…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 06:54 PM
2

Devall's attorney, Lee Hoffoss, denies Hardin and LeBlanc's claims. "A lot of the allegations in the petition are not factually accurate and have no evidence to back them up," Hoffoss said. "A lot needs to be said."
/r/MensRights01/03/13 12:07 PM
2

How is premeditation proof that it wasn't also opportunistic? They seek out women who are likely to act in a certain way and create scenarios where they may. Inviting a girl to a party that you know will have lot's of alcohol on the hopes she will get pass out drunk (and then using that to rape her if she does) is both premeditated and opportunistic isn't it? Do you even law? pre·med·i·ta·tion : to plan or consider 1. The act of speculating, arranging, or plotting in advance; the cognitive proce…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 09:01 PM
3

4 in 10 take place at the victim's home. 2 in 10 take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. 1 in 12 take place in a parking garage within a mile of home. 33% of rapes take place between 6:00am and 6:00pm. So a minority of them then? Do you understand how statistics work? Because if so think about how silly your question/assumption is. Hint: 40% and 20% are both individually greater than 8%. Additionally it means 6 out of 10 rape victims are raped inside either their home or the h…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:27 PM
7

Number of states rapists can sue for custody and visitation ? 31. 4 in 10 take place at the victim's home. 2 in 10 take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. 1 in 12 take place in a parking garage within a mile of home. 33% of rapes take place between 6:00am and 6:00pm. source from U.S. Department of Justice. 2005 National Crime Victimization Study. 2005. In 8 out of 10 or 80% of rape cases, the victim knows the perpetrator . STUDY Overwhelmingly, rape/sexual assault victims were…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 09:30 AM
3

Some suggestions for finding help Really Good NIMH Guide on Finding help for Anxiety Entire Website Dealing With Anxiety ADAA anxiety and college students ADAA SPECIFIC guide for college students to get help The most important thing is that you find support. You don't have to, nor should you try, to deal with this alone. Untreated anxiety can effect your life and education in many different ways get on top of it before it gets on top of you.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 07:29 PM
3

So what is the reaction by the MRA leaders/groups to this VFX issue? please provide LINKS to the places we can learn how to support the MRA lead advocacy dealing with this issue. I liked that movie. I agree people should be properly paid. I will gladly support the MRA movement to correct this specific injustice.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 07:12 PM
4

Well here is some data suggesting half of your assumptions are correct bad for you even worse for certain demographics if we can find proof feminists are cats we can call this research done!
/r/MensRights24/02/13 04:15 AM
0

Please explain what you believe the correlation between your title and the link is.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 03:59 AM
3

I tried googling it a few different ways too ...so yes if you find please give a heads up. Doesn't really seem to be a good reason to be anti-feminist. Might be good for showing a need for court reform via fathers rights. Or maybe why judges be crazy. like here family court judges breaking laws or no kids still collects support
/r/MensRights24/02/13 12:04 AM
5

Family courts have a financial interest to grant sole custody with the man paying support over shared 50/50 custody without the man paying support. As I understood it, the court earns more money the higher the payments are. You have to excuse me, I don't have the link to that article at hand. Trying to find it for some time now. (If anyone can help here, please do so) There was an interview with a judge, who tells how he was reprimanded for granting shared custody. He quoted his boss with someth…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 09:56 PM
1

Glad to hear it's been resolved. Sorry you had to go through such a mess. Car theft is serious, that must have been frustrating. Sounds like the court eventually caught on to the manipulations though. Typically there has to be a change in circumstances to warrant a support modification if it doesn't meet the minimum time passed requirement. A substantial change in income should have qualified.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 06:32 PM
1

And in some states it is.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:00 PM
3

File for support modification (won't fix the past), but will give a more accurate amount if you are earning significantly less because your overtime is no longer available. Usually, for overtime to be included as income it needs to be both consistent and regularly occurring. Also in some states it's illegal to use overtime pay as 'earned income'.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 12:59 PM
0

just use this card
/r/MensRights22/02/13 09:35 AM
0

Are you upset because the 'his' birthday cards aren't also labeled with the green placards? Or do you think there should be an equal amount of 'his' birthday cards available? Or mad the bulldog card is labeled as a 'hers'? http://i.imgur.com/YoxYpmH.jpg
/r/MensRights22/02/13 09:16 AM
-1

I don't understand what you think the issue is
/r/MensRights22/02/13 08:24 AM
2

I just think that different laws should apply. If they can't work it out he could open a new suit for solely requesting for visitation... He filed specifically for parental and custody not for visitation. Arguably if he refiles for visitation different laws will apply.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 05:25 AM
3

To be fair though in the legal sense being denied custody (which deals with legal decision making ability) and parental rights (legal validation of parenthood in relationship to traditional issues of ownership of children) doesn't expressly mean the mother is denying him visitation rights. (example courts will allow grandparents visitation rights but, only rarely will they grant them custody rights) And the law being applied is based on the statutes created to deal with the legalities of sperm d…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 04:34 AM
2

Couldn't we just allow the parents to decide this issue and encourage the narrative that it's a parenting choice just like the choice of a child's first name and in cases of irreconcilable differences hyphenate both last names?
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:54 AM
2

Reddit isn't the place to get legal advice. You've got several legal issues which are further complicated with jurisdictional issues ... Please seek legal counsel http://www.illinoislegalaidonline.org/ http://www.illinoisprobono.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showPracticeArea
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:19 PM
-2

scented candles and wooden chairs Edit: I needed more than two words
/r/MensRights19/02/13 09:35 PM
1

The full report by Reunite is interesting; it should be made clear that the 70% statistic is the percent of children taken by their mothers (not the percentage of abductions with mothers as the abductor) and the sample size for this 'study' was 10 children (only 1 child was a 'only child'), from 7 families.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 10:17 PM
1

The person who asks another person out is the "host". The host should always pay, IMHO. If I ask out someone to dinner, whether a date, or family, or friends, I'll pay, since I'm the host. If I'm throwing a party at my house, I provide all food and drinks, since I'm the host. Same deal. Exactly.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 08:05 PM
2

Maybe it's a cultural thing? I ask I pay for friends, family, coworkers etc ... I don't feel like I'm bribing them. I feel like financially it ends up balancing out, if it doesn't I can honestly say I don't miss a single dollar.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 07:55 PM
16

On a official first date I followed the rule 'who asks also pays'. It worked well for me, guys who might be a little offended or confused seemed to be more accepting when I stated 'since I asked you out, it's only fair that I pay' Edit : Ask/Pay is used for friends & family etc as well, unless it's a special circumstance. After that I usually alternate who pays, unless it's a special circumstance.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 10:42 AM
1

He has no real defense; he knows that, we know that. Now he displayed it for everyone to see :)
/r/MensRights08/02/13 04:15 AM
1

Here is your sign http://i.imgur.com/H3auHsi.jpg
/r/MensRights06/02/13 06:09 PM
1

I sent YOU several links. You haven't availed yourself of them. You can't manage to understand I don't care about your conversations with other people. And the topper is you can't even define what you think Watson's views on rape culture are (beyond elevator gate)...and yet somehow you are sure that all mainstream feminists share them. Your constant argumentum verbosiuming is not only redundant and obtuse but, it's completely off topic. I refuse to deal with people who are maliciously and willfu…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 05:16 PM
1

So you still haven't availed yourself of the links provided that showed the examples you requested? You went on and on about elevatorgate. But my question to you wasn't about satire or your conversation with sigil. I asked you, what you believed Watson's views/theory on rape cultured is. Can you answer that question or not?
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:45 PM
1

Your clearly too angry to think coherently. You should calm down and then read your last response. It's beyond ironic. Your too busy trying to be right to even bother dealing with what I actually stated (and LuLzly your accusing me of misrepresenting you). This IS what you asked of Sigil Are there any examples of what you call "actual" feminists that actively and openly speak against the kinds of things that Watson says or Schrodingers Rapist promotes? Because all i see is a crap ton of feminist…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 03:00 AM
1

Oh dear, this is what happens when you don't have EVIDENCE (or a point). Are you "too stupid" to know that name calling is pointless and doesn't make you a tough guy? Stop acting like the conversation we are having involves anyone, but us. You wanted EXAMPLES of feminists denouncing Watson and SR... you had them in your own "examples". Now you are doing exactly what you attacked Sigil for, claiming "these feminists are the fringe"... I never claimed their views were mainstream, I claimed they ar…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:23 AM
1

Link 3 Women’s Studies Lecturer Diane L. Rosenfeld <----is this your definition of a prominent feminst leader? Then blathering on about Hoff-Summers, who calls herself a feminist, and is voicing a VERY different opinion... hmmm, of course NOW your going to argue that since Hoff-Sommers doesn't fit into your "box" of what a feminist is that she isn't a real feminist and so she doesn't count ect...(you know basically do what you are accusing/attacking Sigil of/for doing )
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:13 PM
1

Link 2 so many things stand out but, the most easily addressed is the fact that even the author of the blog/video states If you read the anthology Feminist Jurisprudence, which primarily features the work of Feminist legal theorists in academia; you will find a section devoted exclusively to Radical Feminism, where the ideology – which is widely regarded as one of hatred and intolerance-" In another academic publication Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence, which is taught in classes on legal …
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:02 PM
1

Link One Catherine Commins http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,157165,00.html#ixzz29Nsxs92Z[6] Time magazine, June 3 1991 interview Actual quote from Time article : "To use the word carefully would be to be careful for the sake of the violator, and the survivors don't care a hoot about him." Comins argues that men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from the experience. "They have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them.” I think it idea…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 09:47 PM
1

You have defended Sigil's position. I absolutely done no such thing. Don't be silly. Where exactly do you believe I did that?
/r/MensRights05/02/13 09:36 PM
1

Well that is the position you're defending, sweetheart. Maybe you should figure out what we're talking about before you butt in How intellectually dishonest of you, sugarlumps. I have absolutely done no such thing. I actually know what WE are talking about. It's you who is apparently confused, seeing as your the one who is consistently misrepresenting it. Given that it's your opinion that elevatorgate and SR are the summation of feminist views on rape culture/sexual harrassment, i suggest follow…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 09:26 PM
1

Bollocks. All you provided was a link saying there is some "disagreement". -You asked where to find the information. You were provided with sources. (more than one) What that disagreement is and to what extent they have that disagreement, is what is important. -Agreed. So why don't you actually use the sources provided to you and find out what it is. What is even more important is what is the general opinion of the well funded feminist establishment that is getting laws past, getting audiences w…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 09:09 PM
1

You made several assertations NOW BACK THEM UP. Your request to sigil was this "Are there any examples of what you call "actual" feminists that actively and openly speak against the kinds of things that Watson says or Schrodingers Rapist promotes?" You are claiming the opposite, now PROVIDE THE REFUTIVE PROOF IN THE SAME MANNER AS YOU REQUESTED OF SIGIL. Provide the requested Evidence coming FROM MAINSTREAM FEMINISTS THAT AGREE WITH WATSON AND SR. PUT UP OR SHUT UP. I don't have to DO anything. …
/r/MensRights05/02/13 08:42 PM
1

So the answer is no. You cannot provide any proof of your claims in the manner which you required of Sigil. If its dramatically different, then its only fair to ask for examples of how they treat the same issue differently. If the views, as you claim, are so prevalent in mainstream feminism how is it you can't provide some examples of prominent mainstream feminist leaders supporting Watson and SR? I dont need to find leaders literally supporting them saying "I support Rebecca Watson" Then why ar…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 07:25 PM
1

So the answer is no. You cannot provide any proof of your claims in the manner which you required of Sigil. You can find absolutely no prominent feminist leaders supporting Watson or SR, even though your claim is that feminism is awash in them. Sigil stated why the ban is in effect.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 05:55 PM
1

Sigil claims that Watson and SR's and their supporters arent actually feminists, or at least are so fringe they arent worth thinking about. Therefore there should be some evidence that they are fringe and their opinions do not reflect the relevant segment of feminism. She provided proof that 'vigilante' rhetoric like that of Watson is banned in r/feminism etc... Your asking her for proof in the form of feminist leaders refuting or denouncing Watson and SR. If that is what you require for 'proof'…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 04:52 PM
1

Are there any examples of what you call "actual" feminists that actively and openly speak against the kinds of things that Watson says or Schrodingers Rapist promotes? Because all i see is a crap ton of feminist support for people like Watson and Schrodinger's rapist. Can you provide examples of influential 'big' feminist leaders speaking in favor of Watson? Or advocating or supporting Schrodinger's rapist? You claim to see it all around so it should be much easier for you to find affirmative ev…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 04:13 PM
1

No. See S.A.F.E. And S.A.N.E. Forensic evidence for Rape on the http://www.aequitasresource.org/
/r/MensRights05/02/13 03:16 PM
3

Nothing could better show that what she wrote in the story reflects her views of what the world is. First off, do you even know what the story is about? Secondly, do you always disregard context and engage in flagrant qoute mining or do you reserve that for when you know you have absolutely no point?
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:48 AM
1

uses wikipedia as a source: accuses me of intellectual decrepitude and of needing an education. I know what different types of fiction are. Philosophical fiction included. You may critise her work on those grounds but, it is completely disingenious to qoute fictional characters and attribute the words to a the author without proper citation. Literature 101 "Attribute the quote to the character, then cite the work and author." edit: Since you like to use wikipedia as an authorative source...when …
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:37 AM
2

The Women's Room, French states it is "not an autobiographical work", however she says the character Mira's "trajectory mirrored her own" Despite the connection of The Women's Room to the Feminist Movement, in an interview with the New York Times in 1977, French stated, "The Women's Room" is not about the women's movement... but about women's lives today. The novel's most-quoted line -- "All men are rapists, and that's all they are," spoken by the protagonist after the near-rape of her daughter …
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:14 AM
1

Hillary Clinton has a speech about "As I have learned more about how the people of El Salvador have come together, from all walks of life, to support each other in the aftermath of this storm, I can’t help but think that the same courage and unbreakable spirit that is sustaining you during this terrible tragedy sustains you also as you also walk down a long and difficult road to peace. You have made remarkable progress. It is sometimes hard when you’re in the midst of transition and change perha…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 11:44 PM
2

"quotes from FICTIONAL texts represent the political and social ideas of the writer" Ծ_Ծ
/r/MensRights04/02/13 11:32 PM
1

You might find reading The Gift Of Fear by Gavin de Becker helpful. The book provides strategies to help readers to recognize and effectively deal with various types of dangerous people (stalkers included). http://gavindebecker.com/resources/book/the_gift_of_fear/ http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0440226198
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:25 PM
1

''When they kept you out it was because you were black; when they let you in, it is because you are black. That's progress?'' Once again from the same fictional book and same fictional character Val. Can be found in the FICTIONAL BOOK Women's Room in ch. 4, sect. 19.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:45 PM
1

http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/EOP/First_Lady/html/generalspeeches/1998/19981117.html Read the full speech please. She actually talks about the effects of DV on all of society. " In the United States, we have done a survey in our prisons, and what we found would not surprise you -- that the vast majority of prisoners are men who themselves were the victims of abuse at the hands of an older relative. The cost of domestic violence in shattered lives, diminished dreams, and weakened economies is devas…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:09 PM
-1

Not a great analogy considering you claim 'having blogs and videos on YouTube' is activism.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 10:50 PM
-3

Not really relevant. Just saying you can't call him out with the 'and what have you done' defense when what he has done is the same as what you do. EILIF: If what you do is actvism then what he did was activism too.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 09:18 PM
-1

To be fair he pushed keys on his keyboard and typed stuff ... Like his opinions ... Seems pretty similar to your brand of "activism".
/r/MensRights28/01/13 08:48 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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