TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

vonthe Archive

View 12 posts and 418 comments by vonthe 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)
1810

Social Issuesvonthe/r/MensRights21/01/16 01:29 PM
66

False Accusationvonthe/r/MensRights06/02/16 05:25 AM
44

vonthe/r/MensRights01/06/16 01:08 PM
42

False Accusationvonthe/r/MensRights10/02/16 01:33 PM
32

Anti-MRMvonthe/r/MensRights01/10/15 10:31 PM
29

Questionsvonthe/r/MensRights01/09/15 06:41 PM
25

Generalvonthe/r/MensRights10/07/17 06:50 PM
25

Feminismvonthe/r/MensRights04/05/18 04:08 PM
12

Social Issuesvonthe/r/MensRights23/09/15 09:30 PM
10

Social Issuesvonthe/r/MensRights23/09/15 09:45 PM
3

False Accusationvonthe/r/MensRights31/10/17 07:34 PM
0

False Accusationvonthe/r/MensRights24/02/16 11:10 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
8

She was only 68. A huge loss for reason in Canadian journalism. Her reporting on the Jian Ghomeshi trial was by far the best.
/r/MensRights13/02/20 12:55 PM
9

Note that these two sites are measuring different things. The Gender Gap one is measuring earned income. The BIGI is measuring how good life is relative to the other gender. The cliche about apples and oranges applies here. These are not comparable. For one thing, one is an absolute measure (average individual income) and one is a relative measure (how the genders are doing in relation to each other).
/r/MensRights25/01/20 01:01 PM
3

Definitely now, although that depends what you mean by 'watching TV'. In the 90's, network television was pretty much it, and at that time it reflected a much more traditional view of men, of providers and doers and protectors. Starting around then, men were almost universally presented as being stupid in commercials - or rather, if someone in a commercial was stupid, then it was invariably a man. But now, with Hollywood and Netflix and HBO pretty much having to write content that caters to the …
/r/MensRights07/01/20 12:54 PM
4

Initial quick research indicates that this may not be true, or at least that the central claim may not be true. I have some peripheral familiarity with this area, as I have worked with two people, one male and one female, who participated. The area of competition is so small that one athlete being injured, or sick, or having an off day(s) can affect things pretty dramatically. The linked article above on Wikipedia shows the standard 5-15% difference in performance, at least at ultra-endurance ru…
/r/MensRights04/01/20 03:01 PM
2

She never proposed killing men. And Hitler never proposed killing Slavs and Jews, at least prior to 1940/41 or so. The whole extermination camp thing came later. That's all, really.
/r/MensRights20/12/19 05:20 PM
2

At the risk of invoking Godwin, I will note that Hitler never proposed killing Jews or Slavs, either. It was all going to be deportations and slavery.
/r/MensRights20/12/19 01:00 PM
7

The truth.
/r/MensRights14/12/19 12:01 AM
1

He pulled it more than a bit - that was a sort of half-hearted slap, more a push than a blow.
/r/MensRights30/10/19 02:55 PM
5

I was more thinking of the rest of us. :) It's useful to know where this sort of thing is legal.
/r/MensRights29/10/19 09:24 PM
9

Don't dox yourself, but where in the world did this occur? Country, state/province/canton/region/whatever? I ask because what happened might be illegal, or it might be a new legal requirement, or it might be a teacher acting on their own initiative. Knowing roughly where this occurred is important.
/r/MensRights29/10/19 02:25 PM
2

That isn't a typical man. That guy is big, and built. Looks to be about 230, 250.
/r/MensRights29/10/19 11:24 AM
2

Lauer is, without question, a POS. However, there are two further questions: Is Lauer a criminal POS? Is this woman also a cheating lying POS, or is she an innocent victim? Lauer admits to being an ordinary cheating POS. Jury's still out on the rest of it, but I know which way the evidence seems to be pointing.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:09 PM
2

It's not for attention: there's a book to be sold. Lauer claims she's been shopping this claim for a couple of years now.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:05 PM
3

May I say - well done sir. Well done. I have bookmarked that thread for reference and further perusal.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:00 PM
3

Leuprolide Acetate I looked at this when this first appeared last week. I'll go beyond your 'very very large grain of salt' and state that this story is misrepresentation. Leuprolide Acetate is a powerful drug. It is most frequently used to treat advanced metatastatic cancers that are aggravated by andro/gynogenic hormones. In practice this is primarily prostate cancer, although it does see some use in cases of ovarian/breast cancer. The important thing, though, is that it's primary use in is pe…
/r/MensRights04/10/19 03:10 PM
1

I'm really interested in reading the study, but it's not up on sci-hub yet. I'll try to remember to watch for it.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 02:48 PM
3

Some (actually, most, probably) people define some of their self-worth through the partner(s) they are able to attract. Men and women. For women, it's a man of sufficient social status, usually defined by his wealth. And some women are so hungry for status that they will take the first man who expresses an interest, and he becomes their boyfriend. (Likewise, some men are so hungry for status that they will take the first woman who expresses an interest. This is no better, and probably happens ab…
/r/MensRights22/07/19 03:14 PM
2

60 days for vehicular homicide? Up here in Canuckland, that would be criminal negligence/manslaughter, and I've never heard of 60 days for manslaughter. 5 years would be more likely here, and a life sentence is possible.
/r/MensRights03/06/19 11:25 PM
4

Note that this is implicit bias, and implicit bias has been under some attack recently. Basically, implicit bias measures a difference in your reaction time when you're asked to associate either a positive or negative word with either a black or white face. As far as I know, nobody has been able to show that this difference in reaction time has any measurable effect in the real world. It's interesting, sure, but I am unsure what it means.
/r/MensRights11/04/19 05:25 PM
12

Well, she's dead, and thus beyond the reach of the court. So, yeah. She wasn't charged. She's dead. I have no problem with this conviction. He wasn't convicted of murder, but of gross negligence, and I have no problem with that. That's exactly what he's guilty of.
/r/MensRights25/01/19 01:41 PM
1

There's a People story from 1974 on Bob Stirm.
/r/MensRights14/10/18 01:42 PM
24

I commented on this in another subreddit, but I wouldn't read too much into this. Reading the full story on CNBC, it was clear to me that this was a failed project returning essentially random (IE worthless) results. What is interesting and sexist is the confirmation bias - out of random results, they picked the cases where women appeared to be disadvantaged and focused on those.
/r/MensRights10/10/18 04:50 PM
5

This is the more important of the two papers IMO, given an additional 3 years of data to assess. It is important to note that the Norway law is similar, but not directly analagous to the one in California. Norwegian law requires a minimum of 40% of either gender, where California only requires a single woman. It is possibly worth noting that the California law would allow a board to be 100% female, but not 100% male. At least that's how it is presented in the news articles I've read. A news arti…
/r/MensRights06/09/18 03:44 PM
12

That hasn't been my experience. I usually find that people either double down and get angry or close off, or they move the goalposts, going from 'women make less than men for the same job' to some variant of 'women make less because of childbearing which is wrong'.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 12:02 PM
1

I should note that this is commentary on a excellent paper published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences called Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Authors include Jonathan Haidt and Lee Jussim. Excellent find.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:15 PM
3

It's been legal in Canada for women to go bare chested anywhere men do for something like 30 years, since Gwen Jacob challenged the definition of public indecency. So if you're Canadian, women have the right to go barechested anywhere you do.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 08:25 PM
4

It means that the people exhibiting feminist bias position themselves and their arguments as if they were opposing bias. So, a feminist argument might be that women are paid less than men for the same job - their argument would be that this indicates anti-female bias. But their argument is ITSELF an example of bias, ie there is no evidence that women make less than men for the same work.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 05:55 PM
6

NOTE: what worked for Jian Ghomeshi was the fact that all three complainants were proved to be, at best, 'economical' with the truth. They all claimed things that were contradicted by 1. their own words and 2. their own changing stories. The judge never got to the point where he considered whether or not Ghomeshi's actions were criminal or not, because he found that all three complainants were untrustworthy, and so he discarded their testimony. The judge in the Ghomeshi trial did not decide that…
/r/MensRights03/08/18 10:07 PM
6

It will be interesting to see what happens the first time that is tested. It seems like a law that will go to the Supreme Court.
/r/MensRights03/08/18 09:56 PM
1

Have you graduated, and are you working now? If so, in what field? I'm just curious given the interesting combination of Statistics and Social Work.
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:38 PM
9

I'm one of those unreported cases, so there's at least 1. :) My ex wife used to assault me - not frequently or severely, but whenever she was frustrated and wanted to regain control of our relationship. She'd slap me, throw things at me, and mock my manhood, taunting me in an attempt to get me to retaliate. I never did, because we both knew that the second I lifted a finger to her, she would call the police and I would go to jail. I didn't report it because I am a large man, and I feared that no…
/r/MensRights25/07/18 03:05 PM
1

It's important to note that this story is out of Kenya. I'm not sure how applicable this report is to the rest of the world, given that Kenya is a very poor and politically unstable country.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 02:04 PM
8

It's a horrible title that misrepresents the video content completely. The actual video content is actually quite good, and no SJWs were even present, let alone schooled. The host was probing and respectful, and Peterson was allowed to provide full answer.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 01:54 PM
8

I hate videos like this. The title is false - in fact this is a respectful interview where the host asks intelligent, direct questions and Peterson is allowed to fully explain his answers, hopefully to the enlightenment of the audience. And there are annoying ads that pop up all the way through this, for products that are of interest to the sorts of people who like to watch videos where Full Feminist SJWs Get Schooled. I hate that so much JP content is presented this way. Also I hate that having…
/r/MensRights21/07/18 01:52 PM
4

Is there any way someone can copy the text of the article into a comment? penthouse links are verboten for obvious reasons, and I can't access archive.x links from work.
/r/MensRights06/07/18 04:10 PM
1

Yes - I believe most of the problem you are having with the difference is that (correct me if I am wrong) Mexico and most of Latin America uses law based on the Napoleonic code where there is not such a strong division between civil and criminal law. I understand that until fairly recently, Mexico followed the Napoleonic practice of 'accused is guilty and must prove innocence'. Also, under British Common Law, we strongly privilege the rights of the individual over the desires of the state, and t…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 06:39 PM
1

No. She is claiming that she was sexually assaulted. She isn't suing the nightclub for sexually assaulting her -she's claiming that they were negligent in allowing someone else to sexually assault her. She is claiming that a crime was committed, and that she was the victim. She is claiming that the nightclub, through their negligence, created the circumstances where this crime could be committed, and that she was thus damaged financially and they should compensate her. Since she also claims that…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 04:36 PM
1

You can sue someone for a "crime" that was never determined to be a crime? that doesn't make sense. First, I Am Not A Lawyer but I have read quite a bit. Technically, in the parts of the world that derive their law from British Common Law (Great Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and a whole bunch of other places I either don't know or don't remember), civil court is concerned with torts, not crimes. A tort is a civil wrong, when you do something that harms another person…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 03:54 PM
3

On average salaries in the 150k range, this is a pretty small difference, about 1.3%.
/r/MensRights20/06/18 02:34 PM
1

No. Read the comments.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 10:41 PM
42

If you can stomach Warren Kinsella (I usually can't) he wrote something interesting back in January. Bear in mind that Kinsella is 1. a lawyer, 2. connected and 3. a gossipy asshole. But he was a big player in the Liberal party during the Chretien years, and he knows things and people. And he knows what he can say publicly and what he can't - and that extends to the comments he allows on his blog.
/r/MensRights08/06/18 11:45 PM
4

No, I'd say you weren't the only one. If you haven't felt the blackness that can overtake you, you won't understand how powerful it is, and that it has nothing to do with who you are, where you live, what kind of car you drive, who makes your shoes... it has everything to do with YOU, the person living inside the meat machine you walk around in, and how you deal with the world outside. Depression throws a massive black filter between the inside of your head and the entire rest of the world, so t…
/r/MensRights08/06/18 04:49 PM
8

I cannot remember a time when I wasn't interested in females. Even prepuberty, I was interested, although not at that time in a sexual way. In some ways I envy you: for me, the desire for women, for the touch and the scent and the presence of them, was a relentless drumbeat. Now, as I am nearly 60, the hormones have subsided and I'm much less driven by them, but even now I miss that sweet, sweet ache for a woman's touch, the tremendous excitement and rush of her attention, the heartpounding exhi…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:33 AM
14

(4) Feminism was given massive support by the billionaire class (for reasons that remain somewhat mysterious), so most men didn't really have a say in the matter. Men in this class are the ones who have benefited most from the loosening of sexual mores: Peterson points out that men at the top of the dominance hierarchy have many more than 1 sexual partner, on average, while women at the top have, on average, 1. Rich men get more tail. Much more tail. And that alone is reason for rich men to supp…
/r/MensRights23/05/18 02:24 AM
1

I wouldn't think so, as these are not 'earnings'. Also, the widely touted figures don't even include the difference in hours worked, and if they don't include something as basic and important as that, they for sure won't control for something as difficult to pin down as child support.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 12:03 PM
31

Normally I'd agree with you, but OP makes a convincing case that there is a line that should be drawn. Ford, in addition to being a raging asshole, explicitly calls for violence against men. More importantly, she explicitly called on at least one occasion for men to commit suicide. To have such a person speaking at a suicide prevention organization seems... bizarre, at the very least.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 12:41 PM
5

Well, this is an interesting situation.
/r/MensRights08/05/18 02:52 PM
2

I don't think there's good evidence for that. For one thing, the numbers are very small. We don't know how 'threats' are identified and gathered, and the numbers are so small that a tiny adjustment in sensitivity is going to make a large difference in absolute numbers. For another, the total amount of communication has gone up dramatically over the last 20 years. More people have access to platforms that encourage 'communication', like Twitter and Facebook. Just from the perspective of sheer vol…
/r/MensRights05/05/18 12:55 PM
7

There's so much fuzzy thinking and confirmation bias in this article that it amazed me. First, what defines a 'threat'? Who decides? Second, with the huge increase in the torrent of public comment in recent years, we would expect that comment that can be construed as a threat would likewise increase dramatically. There's no mention of that in here, of course, and comparing Ralph Klein with Rachel Notley is ridiculous. Also, I despise the lazy writing that most journalists employ. Anyone who uses…
/r/MensRights04/05/18 04:19 PM
1

I was going to comment on the irony that often the most effective advocates for men's issues are, in fact, women. Three that spring to mind right now are Karen Straughen Dr C H Sommers Cassie Jaye I think that discounting an opinion automatically because of the writer's gender is precisely the sort of thing we are fighting against.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 11:35 PM
3

I used to watch 60 Minutes (US) pretty regularly, but haven't watched any form of network television in years. 60M(USA) used to be pretty balanced. Is 60M(AUS) related to the US show in any way?
/r/MensRights29/04/18 02:01 PM
0

I'm not willing to throw away the whole article because it didn't go into enough depth in some areas. It is only a short article, and an excerpt from a book at that. So it can only cover a limited range of material. For what it was, I thought the article was pretty decent, and much fairer than most.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:46 PM
3

And? Did you have a point to make? Does that make what she says invalid?
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:41 PM
2

First: my heart goes out to you. I wish there was something I could do to help you. Second: thank you for writing this. I think you've said some important things here. Can I ask (roughly) where you live? Which country/city? Third: I have failed almost all the interviews I have ever taken, despite preparing myself and having a lot of practice. I'll just note that I'm not burdened with Aspberger's and I too have failed the vast majority of the interviews I've taken. It is rare for there to be only…
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:38 PM
1

I agree - this piece misses the mark. But it is much closer, and much more thoughtful, than most articles like this. And unlike so many of these articles, I think I could sit down with the author of this one and have a real conversation. I think I may pick up her book.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:17 PM
6

The American Time Use Survey gives some information. In 2016, the average hrs per day, men/women, across the whole population was 0.57/0.81 hours per day. For people who engaged in that activity (personal grooming) on any day, the average hours (m/w) was 0.73/0.96
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:53 PM
8

So one of the reasons women are chosen less for jobs (and this comes from years of listening to various political/socially concerned YouTubers, NPR, and just personal experience) is that women are not aggressive enough in the job market. The experiments in blind hiring don't show that, though. The Australian experiment was stopped because, contrary to what was expected, gender and race-blind hiring reduced the rate at which women and POC where hired. People have fallen all over themselves (as OP…
/r/MensRights07/04/18 02:09 PM
6

Goddam. Now there's a 'son' in there. Newhuhuhuhuhudammitpergoddammitentity.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 04:32 PM
3

Hmmm... 'man' is still in there. Cathy Newhuhuhuhuhudammitperson.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 04:31 PM
1

Thank you. Coming from outside the field, trying to figure out where to start is daunting. What does Kent (or, since you know more than I do, you) attribute the change in the early 1800s to? That's during the Industrial Revolution, but there must have been something driving such a change.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 03:17 PM
1

I've long been suspicious of interpretations of history that require people to be fundamentally different back then from what they are now. And a history of patriarchal oppression is directly counter to how I and any man I know treat the women and children in our lives. Do you have any sources handy? I've not had much success finding information on this. I'm guessing that because it's not what is currently fashionable it's not getting online much.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 01:26 PM
6

Help him to get some counselling. He may be unable or unwilling to look for counsellors - you can help by doing some legwork. He may be unwilling to go, but as someone who benefited enormously from counselling at a critical point in my life, it's damned hard and it's damned well worth it. You can't make him go. But I suggest doing everything in your power to remove obstacles to his going.
/r/MensRights24/02/18 02:08 PM
23

As I understand it, in the UK women used to qualify for a state pension at age 60, men at 65. They have changed in phases, resulting in pension age for both being 65 this year, rising to 68 for both over the next few years.
/r/MensRights22/02/18 10:43 PM
8

Too bad the quality of this is horrible - it's really bad. I can't find a copy of this that isn't missing chunks of dialog. What's surprising to me is how surprised Milian is.
/r/MensRights20/01/18 12:41 PM
1

Basically, they claim he was fucking students. "The 111-page complaint alleges Jaeger used overtly sexual language with his students, used his influence to sleep with female graduates and even pressured a student to live with him."
/r/MensRights26/11/17 03:35 AM
2

She sounds like a complete... asshole.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 06:53 PM
1

I applaud you for trying this experiment. I think it has merit. I think you screwed up by just switching the genders and leaving everything else the same. This allows anyone to figure out what you're doing very quickly (some people search constantly for reposts, for example) and this renders the results suspect. This is still a valuable experiment, but they were on to you so quickly that it's not going to convince anybody who isn't already on the right side of history.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 04:18 PM
2

I'm not seeing the connection to men's rights here.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 03:34 PM
105

A likely contributor would be the modern push to protect women from the consequences of their actions. That isn't modern. It isn't new. Women have always enjoyed protected status - historically, for very good reasons.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 01:30 AM
4

I feel sick.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 10:19 PM
1

I'm going to copy/repost my own comment I made to a similar question in another sr. I don't think it's even that complicated - if you spend all your time hanging around with people who are prone to see absolutely everything as some form of violation or oppression, well, why are you surprised when they interpret your actions in that light? I don't think that these men are any worse than most other men. I think that the reason so many of them are getting fingered is that they have spent a lot of t…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 02:09 PM
2

We will see this in the next few years as there is a revolution in transportation. Self-driving vehicles are coming, and they are going to eliminate millions of jobs, the vast majority of which are male, largely because they are dangerous (cab driver) or unpleasant (long haul truck driver). Self-driving vehicles will probably all but eliminate private car ownership - why incur the capital expense of a car when you can just call one up from the car service whenever you want one? This has wider im…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 02:04 PM
1

Then there's the fact this account of yours is brand new, and the only thing you've done with it is post this story and reply to the comments. It's a member of the three year club. So, no, it's not a new account.
/r/MensRights20/10/17 06:44 PM
2

This is one of the best treatments I've seen. http://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/
/r/MensRights13/10/17 09:42 PM
3

I don't get it. What's arrogant about a guy with some gray hairs not wanting to decide yet? Further, not wanting to commit to such on a first date. If I were 30 again, there's no way I'd be pinned down on whether or not I want children on a first date.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 03:08 PM
3

(http://archive.is/8w92r best troll story ever, yet they ate it up because when you hate a group as much as they do, you'll believe anything said about it Wow. I would normally say that that is a poor troll story - it's just way too obvious. But you're right, they ate that right up. Holy shit.
/r/MensRights24/09/17 01:12 PM
1

I have worked as a senior DBA for big dollar companies for many years now, and I wasn't surprised. This is way more common than you'd think. I'll not go into any details because NDA and liability and professional ethics prevent it, but this level of laxity is actually common. Not excusable, but common.
/r/MensRights19/09/17 02:32 PM
1

Here's a link to the article by the author of the original study explaining things in more detail. It isn't an academic paper yet, but it will be.
/r/MensRights19/09/17 02:10 PM
1

Sure. I don't identify as an MRA, but I'm damn close to it*. And I'm pretty liberal. I'm Canadian, for one, and that almost automatically puts me well the the left of most Americans. I'm for socialized medicine, regulation of markets and social programs. I think public support of art and culture is a good thing. I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes as long as everybody else is paying theirs. I lean conservative fiscally. I resent how recent years have pushed me right - by that I mean that …
/r/MensRights15/08/17 10:29 PM
7

This is the second source I've seen for this story. So I'm inclined to accept it.
/r/MensRights11/08/17 03:20 PM
2

And Literally Who, Patient 0 in the Gamergate debacle.
/r/MensRights11/08/17 12:19 AM
7

This is the best take on the Google Memo in the mainstream media that I have read so far.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 04:37 AM
1

Excellent - thank you.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 07:46 PM
1

Can anyone get the original study? I don't want to pay $35 or whatever for it.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 10:09 PM
6

Plenty of women cite fear of men as evidence of patriarchy and rape culture. It is one of the central arguments of militant radical feminism, that all men are potential rapists. That rape benefits all men by keeping women subjugated in fear. And yes, when you fear something, you organize marches to take back the night and demand safe spaces and extra courts and special rules. Androphobia describes this much better than misandry.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 12:19 AM
10

Helen makes a good point: one of the central tenets of poisonous feminism is that women should fear men. Helen points out that this is an irrational fear and androphobia is a much better description of this than misandry.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 06:52 PM
2

Excellent find. This is the second article i've read in Aero Magazine, and I am impressed so far with the balance of the publication. The first comment is interesting, and we'll see how it plays out. While the article doesn't cover everything it could, I think it completely inaccurate to call it a 'feminist screed'.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 04:21 PM
4

I think partly it's that you imply that rape culture is an extension of many women's secret fantasies, which is only a bare step away from 'hey, they wanted it'. Yes, I know you didn't SAY that, but it's not a big stretch. While I found your post interesting and informative, I disagree that secret rape fantasies are what have powered the concept of 'rape culture'. The term was coopted from a description of the culture in certain US (men's) prisons, and I suspect its appropriation is based on the…
/r/MensRights05/07/17 07:50 PM
7

I don't think you're a troll. However, most of us here are a bit cautious - there have been cases where people will post something provocative in MRA forums just to harvest quotes. And in this sub (I think it was this one?) there used to be a bot that automatically copied every top level post, because certain people would post something provocative, get people to post extreme responses, and then edit the top level post to make us look like lunatics. Most MRA and MRA-adjacent (that's me) people l…
/r/MensRights05/07/17 06:24 PM
2

I have noticed the walking into men the street thing, I think that a lot of women do it out of habit because they used to men being "gentlemanly"about it but there are others for sure that are doing it intentionally. It's something I've noticed. Women and little kids act as if they expect me to grant them right of way. And I invariably do. In crowded places, or when streams of human traffic are mixing, women will walk out in front of me, even if I'm walking reasonably fast. Men won't, and if the…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:24 PM
1

Most of the women are portrayed in a sympathetic light. One of the best parts of the show is the exploration of their backstories. But most are portrayed as victims: of mental illness, of society, of poverty, of men. The men are not so treated: the one who could semi-reasonably be called a victim, the counselor with his Russian wife, is portrayed as a glaring stereotype. He is a weak and pathetic character, held up for ridicule. The vast majority of male characters fare no better - they're ridic…
/r/MensRights18/06/17 10:14 PM
3

Depends on the jurisdiction - I sat through many other people's dirty laundry waiting for my turn during preliminary hearings. However, when there was actually a hearing on an actual application (my application for a child support order), we were in a closed courtroom.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 05:53 PM
1

Well, /r/Feminism shitcans people who fail to support the party line, so...
/r/MensRights16/06/17 05:39 PM
7

I haven't watched past season 2. When it first started, it was interesting and edgy and different with well-drawn characters. But by the end of season 2 I noticed something: all of the male characters are shitbags. Every last one to varying degrees. Caputo is the least shit of them, but all of them use women poorly in various ways. All of them are pathetically weak at times. I realized that it is a profoundly anti-male drama.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 05:30 PM
1

Late to the party - thanks for posting this. I'm always interested in sources.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 04:31 PM
5

This doesn't have anything to do with Canada. This isn't a new thing that has suddenly appeared - other than the whole artificial insemination part. There is a very strong principle in British Common Law (on which the legal systems of both Canada and the United States are based) which states that a child born during a marriage is a child of the marriage. The law 'presumes legitimacy'. Yes, this is bad for men with cheating spouses, but in days when illegitimate birth had really serious consequen…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 06:19 PM
1

This is the original report. I haven't read it in detail, but what I have read confirms that the BBC report is pretty accurate. I'd like to know what questions were asked, because I find the number 1 in 5 a little high, at least when linked to the term 'revenge porn'.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:13 PM
7

I noticed something else a little while ago. If you're a taller than average man and you're sitting on seating designed to accommodate everybody, the seat is actually a lot too low. This means you're sitting with your knees higher than your hips, which stretches out the gluteal muscles. If you keep your knees close together, that puts all the pressure on your ass muscles. If you let your knees flop open, the outside backs of your thighs hit the seat, taking some of the pressure. I figured this o…
/r/MensRights20/04/17 02:19 PM
1

Yes, that's it exactly.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 06:26 PM
-5

If that money was earned during the course of the marriage, then I don't have a problem with her getting half. They were married for 20 years, together for 25. The original judge ruled that she is entitled to half the assets accrued during the course of the marriage, which I think is fair. Reading between the lines, it looks more like they're both unwilling to give up the fight. Neither is exactly poverty-stricken, and he's arguing that she should get 39% instead of 50%, which seems almost like …
/r/MensRights11/04/17 03:48 PM
5

This is one of the core mechanisms fueling the modern feminist movement - that of egregious confirmation bias. We know that there is still a gender-based division of labour. Women, as a group, spend more time working in the home than men do. Men, as a group, spend more time out of the home earning money than women do. However, under the feminist lens, the male/female differences are looked at as if there was an exact split in responsibilities. Women, as a group, earn less (because they spend les…
/r/MensRights17/03/17 06:18 PM
7

It isn't. The only reason he isn't paying is that he hasn't been in the role of parent to that child for the bulk of that child's life. If the couple had been living together, or if he had been paying support and had visitation, he would be on the hook for support. This is true in virtually all jurisdictions in North America.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 04:41 PM
16

I think one of the problems with sociology is that it's a subjective field with some objective data in it. I think it's mostly pretty useful stuff, but it does lend itself to abuse and convenient misinterpretation. In the hard sciences, things are much clearer - a thing is usually either true or it isn't, and speculation on what may be going on is usually a direct pathway to more experimentation. In the soft sciences, people can look at the same data and draw different conclusions from it, as ha…
/r/MensRights17/03/17 03:56 PM
2

Source? I don't think that's true. Testicular cancer is much rarer than either breast or prostate cancer.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 11:22 PM
2

I think you'll find that in BC (I live here) the threshold for a roadside suspension is .05. That is not a DUI - it is not a criminal conviction - you get an immediate prohibition from driving and lose your licence and your car for 3 days for a first offense. It's called the Immediate Roadside Prohibition program and it carries no risk of jail time. On the other hand, DUI occurs at .08, and that is a criminal conviction, with a minimum 1 year suspension of licence. If you blow .08, you may get e…
/r/MensRights12/02/17 02:28 PM
2

Father of three here, and survivor of a long and difficult divorce/custody situation. Don't go in without a lawyer. Really, seriously. I took some bad advice a while back and went to family court without a lawyer. It took two years and about 20k of lawyer time to undo that little mistake. Find a good lawyer, and then do everything that he/she tells you to do. DO NOT GO TO FAMILY COURT WITHOUT A LAWYER. Under any circumstances. Yes, they claim that family courts are set up so that lawyers are not…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 04:46 PM
1

All of this stuff is (as are many things in life) a massive case of Confirmation Bias. If a female actor makes less on a film than a male actor, this is held up as an example of discrimination. But if a male actor makes less than a female one, nobody notices. Why anybody considers the privately negotiated individual contracts of multi-millionaires indicative of anything at all is beyond me.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 04:01 PM
1

This looks like an interesting study - does anyone have access to it through uni? $32 for a single study is a bit steep.
/r/MensRights25/12/16 12:38 PM
3

Well, this is old now. I went to school when they still employed corporal punishment. I had one teacher (5th grade) who disliked boys. She displayed blatant favoritism toward her 6-8 'pets', all girls. She really disliked me, and I was beaten at least 3x a week in her class. I wasn't the only one - there were probably 6 of us (all boys) who got hit regularly. No girl in her class was ever physically disciplined. I only recall two girls getting hit in my 13 years of school - I can still name them…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 04:30 PM
11

Lawyering up is also not really an option at this point in my life. Yeah, that could be the most expensive money you ever save. You need to talk to a lawyer, one familiar with family law in your state/province/whatever. You really need to do this - it isn't optional. This can fuck up the next 20 years of your life. Depending on the state, you could wind up in jail for non-payment of child support. DO NOT FUCK AROUND WITH THIS. Talk to a lawyer.
/r/MensRights18/11/16 10:24 PM
1

Damn, I didn't move fast enough.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 07:58 PM
1

I'll just join the chorus and say that the 10k you don't spend on a lawyer is going to be the most expensive 10k you ever saved. There are a few things in life worth defending to your last breath/dollar, and your good name is one of them. The whole 'time served' thing sounds good, but signing something saying that you admit to being a felon and a sex offender? I'd die first. If he signs that deal, it is going to follow him for the rest of his life.
/r/MensRights06/09/16 10:14 PM
1

Interesting - I just skimmed the intro so far. I've put a link in /r/MRRef.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 01:22 PM
6

I'm going to go against the current here: you've got 16 years together. Sounds like communication has broken down - her response suggests that she's frustrated. I AM IN NO WAY CONDONING VIOLENCE. I left my first wife because of her violence. However, while you should (as others have said) keep record of her violence, I'd strongly suggest seeking some counselling. A halfway decent marriage counselor can cut through what is blocking you and help get you talking to each other again. Odds are that w…
/r/MensRights05/09/16 01:10 PM
3

The headline is confusing, and the story isn't much better. From what I can gather she wasn't charged with sexually harassing the student, just with regular harassment. While that was being investigated, it became apparent that the school district had removed a portion of the video recording showing her harassing a second student POSSIBLY sexually.
/r/MensRights02/09/16 01:26 PM
2

Wow. The writer is getting lambasted in the comments, and has now written a followup. Worth reading for the sheer mind-boggling degree of self-absorption and entitlement.
/r/MensRights30/08/16 12:26 AM
3

I think it could be risky for him. He needs to talk to a lawyer.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 09:25 PM
7

It depends on the law where you are. In (I Am Not A Lawyer) Canada child support is federally mandated, and a parent cannot waive receiving support. Support is supposed to be the child's, not the parents. That said, in Canada if custody is split 50/50, then no support is required. Laws in your jurisdiction may (probably will) vary. An important point - many US jurisdictions attach criminal penalties to failure to pay support. Your ex-partner needs - absolutely needs, it isn't optional - to conta…
/r/MensRights29/08/16 09:23 PM
1

Note that this study was done in New Zealand. While it is tempting to generalise to North America, we can't say that the findings will hold in, say, the US. I'd expect that they'll be similar, but until a similar analysis is done, I think it is risky to claim that this is true for all countries.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 01:21 AM
2

I'm not seeing the connection to men's rights. The driver in the vid is a jerk.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 12:24 AM
28

No, that's not what the original article said. The headline is misleading. The original article said that in cases where the violence was one-sided, in 70% of those cases the woman was the aggressor. That is an important distinction.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 12:38 PM
4

The comments, as usual, will give you cancer.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 11:19 PM
2

Yah, no. I disagree that this is any sort of social justice action, or even that she's wrong in any way. She is asking to be treated the same as any man, and she should have that right. She is right to complain, right to attempt to have this changed.
/r/MensRights11/05/16 03:24 PM
2

Interesting. I don't know how much we'll hear about what prompted this, but it sure smells like a deal, the crown thinking that they have to come out with SOMETHING in this whole mess, and after revisiting the complainant's testimony realizing that they weren't going to get a conviction.
/r/MensRights10/05/16 06:30 PM
6

You're doing the right thing. My ex-wife assaulted me at intervals during our marriage. Not serious assaults, really, as assaults go - throwing things at me, slapping me, pushing me. But I couldn't retaliate, because we both knew that the second I raised a hand to defend myself the police would be called, and I would go to jail (we split 18 years ago now). It was the usual pattern - she was always sorry, but I'd caused it by arguing or not seeing her point or trying to walk away or whatever. Thi…
/r/MensRights10/05/16 06:22 PM
1

It's under relatively good control in this vid. Prof Fiamengo seems to be a true academic, relatively unconcerned with things like personal appearance, and much more interested in the power of ideas and rational thought. You know, the sorts of things that used to be highly valued at institutes of higher learning.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 02:29 PM
1

IANAL. I believe that the judge's language is referring to Canada's Rape Shield law, which lays out what evidence a judge can permit in a sexual assault case. In the decision (which I invite everyone who is interested in this case to read, as it is well written, concise, and complete) the judge goes through all facets as they relate to this case. 'Listen and believe' is not law in Canada at this point. Rape Shield was brought in specifically to invalidate arguments like 'she was a hooker, theref…
/r/MensRights29/04/16 02:27 PM
1

It's possibly related to the way we form sounds when we are young - most languages have something related to the M sound for mother, and D or P for father. The hypothesis is that this is because the first consonant sound most babies are able to make is the mmmm sound, followed a little later with P. And some of our most basic words woudl be those for mothers, fathers, men and women.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:48 PM
3

They haven't been silent. There have been calls to change the justice system, among other things. It hasn't reached the frenzied level it did during and immediately after the trial, but it's there. Just this morning there is another article by Kevin Donovan with a new allegation against Ghomeshi, from someone who is going to remain anonymous and hasn't gone to police. Why are the Star publishing it? Ghomeshi is ruined. The story serves no purpose whatever, other than to fan the flames agitating …
/r/MensRights25/04/16 01:25 PM
1

When I was in high school there were two change rooms. The boys was about 20x30 and had ~120 cubbies around the walls where you put your clothes. At each end of the far wall there was an open doorway into a tiled corridor that had shower heads in it. It was about 5' x 20'. The girls locker room was about, oh, 60 x 80. There were no lockers. Instead there were about 50 individual shower cubicles, each attached to two change stalls. Each entirely private stall shared the shower with one other stal…
/r/MensRights12/04/16 09:04 PM
13

Something doesn't add up - they were married for 10 years but she has children aged 3, 6, and 9 that aren't his, and that aren't his dependents? Weird story all round. Edit: yes. there's more to the story. When they got together, he was 57, she 35, with three kids. He owned a house and had a pension, she was in debt. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/court-rules-lifes-a-lottery-when-a-divorced-couple-divides-assets/news-story/4f4fbf9feffb618d025c0cd563014e9b
/r/MensRights06/04/16 12:41 PM
2

It sort of looks like English... Yes, he said they are lying.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 05:55 PM
14

I am reading the decision now, and the judge has said in clear and convincing language that all three complainants are liars. I had initially thought that there would be no chance of charges against any of the complainants arising from this trial, but the strength of the judge's words has me wondering.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 04:55 PM
16

I am reading the decision now. Essentially the judge called the three complainants liars. He didn't say that, of course, but 'unreliable' and 'unconvincing'. 'Completely inconsistent'. 'It is clear that she deliberately breached her oath' That's judge-speak for 'you are a fucking liar'.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 04:30 PM
2

This is a pretty good summation: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/christie-blatchford-the-ghomeshi-sex-assault-case-started-falling-apart-right-from-the-start
/r/MensRights24/03/16 12:56 PM
1

The judgement comes down later today. Unless there is something very wrong, he will be found innocent. This is destined to become one of the best examples of feminists supporting false accusers simply because they are women, and it is also likely going to give rise to calls to make criminal law even more biased toward women. This case is important to the men's movement in Canada.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 12:36 PM
6

Read what I wrote. I was very clear. karen straughen talks at more length about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eqYEVYZgdo
/r/MensRights16/03/16 08:51 PM
3

The 'study' quoted takes apples and oranges to a completely new level. Unbelievable.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 06:59 PM
7

Emma Watson doesn't call it "misogyny" here, but what else would you call a systematic devaluing of women so severe that literally killing female toddlers is seen as an acceptable solution? There is a compelling argument that this isn't (as is presented in the West) the result of the devaluing of women, but rather the combination of a female privilege - women are not required to provide financially for their parents - with the single child law. People who want some kind of financial security in …
/r/MensRights16/03/16 05:30 PM
4

There has to be more to this story.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 04:39 PM
1

This story isn't going to go away. Kesha's request for a preliminary injunction was denied, and discovery is not set to wrap up until January, 2017. We might not see a trial until late 2017 or even 2018.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 11:14 PM
2

I don't know about the ho part, but she was either lying then, or she's lying now. So the 'lying' accusation is certainly accurate.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:21 PM
2

The core problem that Kesha has now is that she has told two different stories to two different courts. And that is going to sink her - there's nothing like lying in court (and she did: either she was lying then or she's lying now) to cause a judge to dismiss your testimony as essentially worthless. Kesha's problem is that she is getting bad legal advice - why in the name of god would a lawyer allow her to say what she's saying when there's a sworn deposition out there contradicting her words? P…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:18 PM
5

She doesn't consider the relationship "intimate" (does not mean sexual shit did not occur, just wasn't 'intimate') and her mother didn't know the details. "Dr. Luke never made sexual advances to me." - I would say that is evidence that in fact, sexual shit did not occur. Look, I mostly agree with you. Some people in this sub are too quick to label and deny. But this is starting to smell like other high profile sexual assault allegations made years after the fact. I was willing to give Kesha the …
/r/MensRights21/02/16 07:07 PM
3

You're not reading too much into it. It's straight up sexist.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 06:54 PM
1

Blatchford has been gold on this trial.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 12:40 PM
3

Anybody looking for a succinct explanation of the issues should read this column. Excellent work by Blatchford.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 11:27 PM
10

There is already a special law for women (they don't call it that, of course) - two of the complainants in this trial are anonymous, and the third could have been had she not waived that privilege. Now they want an even more special law for women, in which they don't have to ask any difficult questions, and in which the burden of proof is lower.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 07:28 PM
6

You are correct. It must be remembered that Ghomeshi is wealthy, and his defence was well beyond the means of most Canadians.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 07:25 PM
7

These loonies and people like them have already made it such that the complainants can remain anonymous while the accused is not. Not only that, they have made it so that a complainant's history and pattern of behaviour is deemed not admissible without some sort of special rules, which Ghomeshi's lawyer got round somehow - the details escape me at the moment. So yes, they will claim that the emails and letters have no relevance.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:49 PM
23

The trial isn't even over, and already the three complainants - who have been disingenuously evasive at best - are being called 'brave' and 'victims'.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 01:44 PM
1

He might be a rapist. But he hasn't been accused of rape, has he? He's been accused of sexual assault. I think we need to be careful of the language we use.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 12:26 AM
2

I had a girlfriend who liked it rough. I didn't really care for it, but I enjoyed how much she enjoyed it. I left that relationship when I found myself asking a lawyer friend whether there was anything I could do to protect myself if anybody were to see or hear us. Because she wanted it rougher and rougher - choking, hair-pulling, slapping... I drew the line at punching. Another girlfriend liked to be pinned down and spanked till she cried. I think rape and violence fantasies in women are way mo…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 12:18 AM
1

I never listened to anything that struck me as smarmy. He was a kiss-ass, for sure, but often good radio has that element in it. He was good at ingratiating himself with his guest and getting a lively, interesting conversation out of them. I think once the spectre of criminal charge appeared, the CBC was going to fire him. Even if he is completely exonerated, they won't take him back.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 12:07 AM
1

We tend to get labeled as conservative. It's a byproduct of the current American left-right dichotomy of thinking, where pretty much every sociopolitical position has to be labeled on either pole. I'm Canadian and thus pretty damn liberal by American standards - but I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 11:57 PM
10

Flirty? The day after was 'You kicked my ass last night and that makes me want to f--k your brains out. Tonight.' That's a little beyond flirty.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 02:00 PM
10

He was huge in Canada. And to be fair to Jian, he was (probably still is) a hell of a good radio host. But yeah, he catered the feminist line.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 01:37 PM
7

If all there is for Marie is just 1 credible witness left standing, I'm skeptical that Marie won't be able to successfully drape the unreliability of the other defendants over the whole case. And as for the third defendant: "Crown attorney Michael Callaghan called for an early adjournment at Jian Ghomeshi's sexual assault trial Friday saying that he had to disclose evidence to the defence related to the third complainant." One wonders what that evidence will be. Might the third witness, seeing t…
/r/MensRights06/02/16 01:33 PM
2

Well, Futrelle would, wouldn't he? Nobody should be surprised by this.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 01:22 PM
25

This is astonishing, frankly. I had largely accepted that the Ghomeshi allegations were at least credible. And now today, the star witness, actor Lucy DeCoutere is revealed to have left a few really, really important things out of her story.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 05:29 AM
2

Excellent video, and relevant.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 09:21 PM
4

A powerful piece, well worth the read.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 11:27 PM
1

Threats aren't protected under the 1st amendment.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 11:13 PM
1

In the first part of the video, he's recording in the office with her, and she takes him into custody at that time based on his behaviour - frankly, listening to the guy, I kind of agree with her. He needs help. The second arrest is really presented without context - he is arrested in his home, and they talk about bail and so forth, but it appears to be an entirely different incident. Is it really so difficult to believe that someone taken into custody for psych reasons might have uttered some t…
/r/MensRights26/01/16 06:11 PM
15

I'm not seeing the men's rights issue here. The person in the video is clearly distressed and suffering some issues, but there's no indication of any kind of bias that I can see, and we are very clearly not getting the whole story.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 05:45 PM
30

Yes, I know. I ended my first marriage because of my ex-wife's violence. It wasn't bad, as violence goes -slaps and thrown objects - but I could not retaliate.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 06:35 PM
10

Yah, this is one of the reasons that reddit isn't great for extended discussion - your point is a good and valid one, but it's being downvoted because it doesn't go with general sentiment. I agree with you - internet mobs are just as fickle as real life mobs, and they move faster.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 06:31 PM
5

The only reason she was even doing it was that she is female and knows she runs little risk of retaliation. If some 100 lb dude pulled the same shit, he'd get his ass beat.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 06:24 PM
10

Why not? The cab driver is being assaulted, and he has to respond differently than he would if he were being assaulted by a man. He should have the right to defend himself vigorously, as he would if his assailant were male.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 05:09 PM
19

Maybe, in your mind, he didn't do the right thing. But he did the smart thing. If he'd done as you suggested, he would have risked bystanders jumping in to defend her, and he would have risked arrest for assault. Even the limited defence he mounted, where he pushed her (pretty gently, all things considered) onto the ground - he risked other men jumping him.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 04:45 PM
56

I know a few people who work security (translation: they're bouncers) and they all agree that violent women are a greater risk to them than violent men, because they are limited in what they can do to respond - they can't take a woman down the same way they can a man. And a big risk, apparently, is that nearby males may come to her defense and then things get ugly fast.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 04:39 PM
16

The privilege to assault him without fear of reprisal. If that had been a man, the cabbie could have straight up laid him out and nobody would have blamed him. She even mocks him for it.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 04:28 PM
95

You need to be careful. You risk bystander intervention if there are other men around, and you risk arrest and conviction if the police get involved. That's part of the privilege that women enjoy.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 04:24 PM
323

I know it's a viral video, but it perfectly illustrates a huge privilege that female people have in our society - the expectation that they can be violent and abusive, and males will not retaliate.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 01:33 PM
5

Holy shit. Like HOOOOLY SHIIIIIIT.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 09:03 PM
2

Part of researching is asking people to point you to better sources.
/r/MensRights14/01/16 10:08 PM
6

Oh for chrissake, she's asking for links, not for you to write her paper for her.
/r/MensRights14/01/16 08:48 PM
5

Have a look in two of the subreddits linked in the panel on the right. /r/mrref and /r/mensrightslinks. Both contain many links to studies, some of which you will find useful. If you remember, let us know how you do. I suspect you will be met with a lot of opposition (variants of 'it's worse for women') and you may even find you get a lower mark than you would normally get.
/r/MensRights14/01/16 08:46 PM
10

What's funny is that if you look for articles on something like 'gender gap standardized test' you'll find all sorts of articles about the SAT and college scores. For years, women have lagged significantly behind men in the math portion of the SAT (and slightly ahead in the verbal component) but men's grades do not reflect this. The conclusion is that the blind, standardized test is somehow biased toward men, rather than that subjective grades are biased toward women. Some studies spend paragrap…
/r/MensRights13/01/16 11:25 PM
2

So, a bunch of men decided to rape a bunch of women en masse? Fucking hell. No. You are falling into the sex assault = rape trap. There were no mass rapes. In fact in Cologne there are, I believe, 2 cases of rape - and whether those are cases of what everybody thinks of when they hear the word 'rape' or not is anybody's guess at this point. From what I have been able to gather from the victim's stories that have been published, groups of men in the crowd would surround women and grope them. At l…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 02:47 PM
2

I think that most of this story is hysteria. Not that the assaults didn't happen - but it's been widely characterized as 'mass rapes' when from what I have been able to gather through all the bullshit, there were two cases that were alleged to rise to the level of rape. And further, a report I read from Germany in the early hours after this broke said that (at the time) only one case 'could be considered' rape (I don't remember the exact language - but the story implied that the one case they ha…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 02:36 PM
1

One of the things about a rant is that it will often engender interesting responses, and this is one of those. I would actually go further than OP: I don't think that men, given carte blanche to do whatever they like, would abuse women in the manner than women are now abusing men. It goes against our biological imperatives. Evidently women simply do not have the same degree of empathy toward males as vice versa (excepting close relations such as children). I'm not sure how much of this is due to…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 02:09 PM
1

Really good - I had expected it to be a bit softer. It got a bit dubious toward the end where even after all the data and conclusions they'd presented, they started talking about what would make things 'fairer' for women, when the entire point of the podcast is that things ARE fair for women, just different. Particularly when you try to illustrate your point using what are (at best!) edge cases like multi-millionaire private contractors like Jennifer Lawrence.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 10:00 PM
2

Dude, TRP is -> that way.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 07:12 PM
17

And it will made illegal again within the next 20 years. No it won't. I'm with you. I agree that abortion is the killing of a human being. But the problem is that making abortion illegal is that it makes everything worse. As abhorrent as I personally find abortion, it must remain legal. And I will fight to keep it so.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 06:59 PM
25

I'm going to get downvoted for this (what else is new?) but I don't care. This sub has been drifting closer and closer to TRP territory, and the kind of vitriol in I get that you're angry. We're all here because we're at least a bit angry about something: being treated like shit by the courts, or whatever. But letting that anger take over and spouting this kind of rage is completely counterproductive. Even if the hyperbolic claims in your post were true (they're not) it still wouldn't justify ca…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 06:54 PM
5

Archive of the complete article: https://archive.is/wnAe1
/r/MensRights06/01/16 01:52 PM
1

So just what does this have to do with men's rights? I'm not seeing the connection here.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 06:53 PM
1

This is more insidious than that. My sister expects the world to meet her expectations, and when it doesn't (because it never does) she finds an explanation for her disappointment and pain in what other people see as completely innocent words and events.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 10:33 PM
2

God I wish. No, she's not speaking to anyone in the family now. Part of the problem with this form of mental illness is that the sufferer thinks that everything, absolutely everything, is somebody else's fault. She's miserable, and she doesn't think she needs therapy.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 10:31 PM
11

I don't think so. She actually believes the story she's telling now. My sister is a similar sort of person. She'll create a narrative hours or days after something happened, and in her mind, it becomes the truth. She creates the narrative to explain the way she feels - to rationalize her feelings of abandonment, rage, and pain. And nothing, no rational discussion, no presentation of fact, can shake her belief. It becomes stone truth to her.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 01:07 PM
2

Lindy is great. Educational on all kinds of historical stuff, including why Hollywood gets sword-fighting so very, very wrong.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 06:42 PM
14

I don't owe women one motherfucking thing and with the way they are, that includes kindness and graciousness. Dude, you need to relax or you risk becoming bitter.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 09:45 PM
3

Holy shit, the comments on that article... We're in for a long fight gentlemen. It takes years to change prejudices as deep as these.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 12:42 AM
10

There's a subreddit for that: /r/MRRef. Full of lots and lots of information.
/r/MensRights15/11/15 01:49 PM
1

Just going through a few entries on that list, and... yeah. It's heavily sensationalized. There are several women in there counted as 'killed by police' who were killed in domestic violence incidents by their husbands/boyfriends who happen to be police officers. One died in custody after becoming unresponsive. And I only went through about 4 or 5 months, maybe 20 profiles.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 02:11 PM
12

You need to document this carefully. Do it now while the memories are still fresh. Get every piece of paper you can - presumably you have bills for the therapist, etc. Then you need to go to the press with this.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 02:00 PM
2

He certainly did engage in a pattern of behaviour, that of having sex with women attracted to his fame. However, the accusations against him go beyond that - that he did so against their wills. And that is altogether more serious.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 05:25 PM
18

This is my advice to anyone in your position: fight hard in court, but be prepared to be discriminated against, and be prepared to play the long game. Get a lawyer. Do what the lawyer tells you to do. No matter how much you get jerked around (and you will get jerked around) never ever EVER raise your voice or threaten her in any way. Not even once, not even a little bit. Play the long game. It's very important that you play the long game. She may win in the short term, but kids are smart and you…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 04:27 PM
1

A quick and snarky response would be 'No, because it's Jonathan McIntosh that's saying it.'
/r/MensRights07/10/15 03:19 PM
1

Two reasons: 1. Stuff rises and falls in subreddits based on upvotes and an algorithm that moves things off to keep things fresh. That means discussions are hard to find, and stop being seen in a day or two. 2. Comments can be up/downvoted. People use the downvote to signal when they disagree with something, not when it isn't useful. Means that unpopular or challenging arguments disappear and are not seen.
/r/MensRights03/10/15 12:53 AM
14

Prepare for round 2 of MRM/MRAs being equated with TRP/PUA/incels. I suspect that this time it will be worse.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 10:33 PM
2

I don't think everybody reporting on this do know the numbers. Really. I don't think anyone carrying the torch for this has ever looked.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 01:04 PM
1

I knew I was spelling it wrong. She's a feminist if she calls herself one, and her writings are where I first encountered the term. Is it impossible in your mind that someone can appear on Fox and still call themselves a feminist? Sommers, last I checked, was still terming herself an equity feminist. Now, Young may or may not term herself an 'equity feminist', but she very clearly champions gender equality - and that makes her one in my book.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 08:10 PM
2

I know she earns less money than her male co-stars and experiences sexism on a daily basis, Where is your evidence for that? Serious question.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:42 PM
3

Several quite rational people identify as 'equity feminists'. Wendy Macelroy, Christina H. Sommers, and Cathy Young are among them.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:41 PM
-1

Then they have the fucking gall to downvote me when I tell them to not go on about trivial bullshit in the face of much more serious sexism, that post about kangaroos being a classic example. I feel your pain. I regularly post saying 'hey, wait a minute here' and get downvoted. Reddit is NOT a discussion forum, unfortunately. It's not good at in depth discussion of things.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:32 PM
2

In practice I hope this means we don't regard either as disposable. Most importantly, that we don't regard one as more disposable than the other. I think that's the key thing.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:29 PM
1

Reddit is crap for in-depth discussion of things, sadly. I'm partly commenting because I want to retain access to your comment to think about it for a while. I'm also commenting to say that this is very well said, and it crystallizes things that have been in my head for some time.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:28 PM
0

There's a fundamental problem with all these words that most people don't get. You say it means "a hatred of men". Well the first problem is what do you mean by hatred - and that problem right there is insurmountable I don't agree. Words have meanings. Misandry and misogyny, like misanthrope, are or were useful words used to describe irrational hatred of someone simply because they are male, female, or human. Feminism has coopted misogyny - cleverly, as I noted - and now many within the MRM are …
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:16 PM
-2

Concern trolling is one of those terms that means whatever The Offended wants it to mean. Like the word misogyny, or patriarchy, it is effectively meaningless.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:27 PM
-3

It's like: "Look, they did X! That's outrageous! If we did X, they would be mad." You see that in this sub a lot. Every case where a female teacher had sex with a male student and didn't get the book thrown at her, for example. Anything in which the punchline is, essentially, 'reverse the gender roles'. I think that sort of discussion has its (limited) place, but I think (as you point out) that it risks devolving into self-parody.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:16 PM
4

It's not really a mistake, though. Or rather, it's more complex than a simple mistake. Feminism has successfully driven the word misogyny into everyday discourse, and it looks like misandry will go the same route. The point I was trying to make is that we should be careful about the way we use words. We should challenge the use of the word misogyny whenever we see it used incorrectly, which is the vast majority of the time. To go with that, we should not use the word misandry incorrectly, to mea…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 12:26 PM
2

It would be interesting to do an experiment: post in that sub as a woman whose husband was trying to force her to get a tubal and see whether there was even one person who said she was selfish.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 11:55 AM
39

Misandry is a blatant act, it's the discrimination against men because they are men. Well, actually, it means 'hatred of men'. That's what the word means, and it is a useful word. It goes with 'misanthrope', which is 'hatred of all people'. 'Misogyny', I'm afraid, has been perverted and all meaning is lost. We shouldn't do the same with 'misandry'. One can discriminate against men without it being due to misandry. In fact, the bulk of discrimination against men is not due to misandry, just as th…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 11:47 AM
2

This case is exactly like the Satanic Panic cases of 20-30 years ago. This isn't a men's right's issue. It's a fucking travesty.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:02 AM
3

This case is almost a word for word repeat of the satanic daycare cases of the 80's/90's. These people are fucked - their lives are ruined. I'll likely be dead or senile before these people are exonerated.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:00 AM
6

According to my doctor, the reversibility of vasectomies is usually overstated. He advised me, strongly, that if reversibility was important, NOT to have a vasectomy.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 12:23 AM
5

Yes, I think so. All I'm going on, of course, is what's written in the wikipedia article, but part of me believes that even in a he said/she said situation, conviction beyond a reasonable doubt requires some corroborating evidence of some kind. That evidence is not mentioned in the article. The manufacture of outrage in this case relies on the whole 5 second thing - it looks entirely unreasonable that someone could be convicted and sentenced to 10 years on those grounds. And if that were actuall…
/r/MensRights25/09/15 04:36 PM
1

It looks like a pretty fucked up situation all round - the boys maintain that there was no threat of force, and that Baby, the one convicted, did not actually have sex with her. However, the other guy was convicted of rape, and this case more or less hung on the withdrawal of consent not being rape, but if the sex was under threat of force, then withdrawal of consent is moot. I think this is a pretty thin case to hang a men's issue on.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 01:55 PM
3

If you haven't heard of this case, Laura Robinson is an 'activist journalist'. In this case, she more or less manufactured a story accusing John Furlong, the former head of the wildly successful Vancouver Winter Olympics, of abusing native students when he was a young Irish immigrant teaching in Northern BC. Robinson's story came apart on scrutiny, and the three lawsuits brought against Furlong were either not pursued, or were dismissed when it turned out that there was utterly no evidence that …
/r/MensRights23/09/15 09:51 PM
2

I'm unsure whether or not this is a good thing. An appeal would almost certainly have reinforced the original decision, allowing Pao to claim further persecution and reinforcing the narrative around 'women in tech'.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 09:33 PM
3

My advice to you is, first, get a lawyer. Don't wait, get a lawyer now, and do what he/she tells you to do. Second, no matter what happens, you have a duty to that child. This is hard, but never ever speak of the child's mother in disparaging terms in front of your child, no matter what she has done. Adults are nearly godlike in a child's eyes, even those that are severely flawed, and attacks on those nearly godlike beings usually result in confusion and anger in the child's mind. With children,…
/r/MensRights19/09/15 12:28 PM
1

I don't believe that it would, at least not in the jurisdiction in discussion in this thread, which is British Columbia, Canada. I may be wrong, of course. Can you provide an example of a service, paid for by an insurance plan, that is provided to men and not to women? My public health insurer, for example, pays for colonoscopies for both men and women, contrary to what you say. Here were I live mammograms are covered by public insurance. PSA tests are not, and I pay $35 every year for a PSA.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 08:41 PM
1

You also need to consider that the survival rates between HPV-related cervical cancer and HPV-related throat cancer are very different, 68% and 93% respectively. First, let me say that I appreciate your levelheaded discussion of this topic. Too often people let themselves go off the rails. Now, to your point: 68 and 93% are not 'very different'. They're actually pretty close. 6 and 93 would be 'very different'. In either case, the numbers who die from it are substantial, and within shouting dist…
/r/MensRights18/09/15 01:11 PM
22

I'm Canadian, and I've never witnessed catcalling in my 55 years of living here. I'm sure it happens occasionally, but it certainly isn't common.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 12:20 PM
-1

No. No it's not.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 07:17 PM
6

IANAL. But in Canada, as I understand it, a decision in a criminal trial is considered to be very strong evidence in a civil case. In other words, if Elliot is found to have criminally harassed the plaintiffs, and they could show some kind of damages, the plaintiffs would easily win a civil trial. (What damages? I don't know. Canadian law is pretty strict about actual monetary damage being required) On the other hand, if Elliot is found not guilty, and there is testimony in the criminal case ind…
/r/MensRights13/09/15 01:33 PM
2

No it isn't. It isn't insignificant at all. This type of commentary confirms what feminists and the press say about us: that we hate women. It makes us dismissable as woman-haters rather than people with legitimate points to make.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 01:13 PM
1

I think it's an important article on an important topic. If you're interested in or affected by the current gender wars (and you are), you should go read it carefully, because it explains much about what is going on right now. That said, the TLDR is: two professors of sociology publish a paper in which they argue compellingly that Victimhood Culture and the oppression olympics are here to stay, not a passing fad.
/r/MensRights12/09/15 11:36 AM
2

It's much more than that, if you read it carefully.
/r/MensRights12/09/15 11:31 AM
-4

You're not the only one. I agree that changing minds is often messy, but I think something like that works in opposition - yeah, people give stuff only to women on Mother's Day. They do the same on Father's Day - although to a much smaller degree. I think pointing out the blaring hypocrisy in Women in Tech events is fine, but when you mess with Mother's Day...
/r/MensRights03/09/15 02:20 PM
1

Interesting. I think that illustrates some of the difficulties of trying to compare earnings.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 06:33 PM
1

You're right, I did ask for instances. I wasn't clear. It's not just more money for the same work But that's the claim. Over and over again. Women make 78 cents for every dollar a man makes. And if it's true, then in order to explain the aggregate difference there would have to be millions and millions of examples. I'm looking for some documented ones.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 04:57 PM
1

Win the case or not these 9,000 women have properly documented wage discrimination. Do they? Where is the evidence of that? That a law firm known for huge discrimination suits solicited them to join a class action? That's a pretty low bar. I'm asking for documented cases of women earning less than men for the exact same job. If this problem is as widespread as people think it is, such examples should be all over the place. It should be trivial to find a case where someone is paying female parkin…
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:31 PM
2

Your anecdote aside, where is the evidence that women are discriminated against? That's what I'm looking for. That's what I'm asking for here: if it is as claimed, that women are paid less than men for the same work, then it should be easy to find documented cases of this. And yet I haven't seen any at all, other than sort of nebulous things like your story here, or a big lawsuit that hasn't been resolved yet.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:23 PM
1

Do you have the same job title and responsibilities, etc? The same hours, tenure?
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:12 PM
1

That's illegal, I'm sure she knows that. Anecdotes from anonymous people on the internets aren't really what I'm looking for: I'm aware of many claims of discrimination, but I have seen precious few actual documented cases.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:08 PM
1

I'm aware of all that. What I'm asking is if anyone has seen any documented cases of women being paid less than men for the same job, as is commonly claimed and believed.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 12:04 PM
1

Thanks for the link, I will see what I can find on this case. On a quick read of this link, I didn't see 9000 examples of anything. What I saw were some claims by a law firm representing the plaintiffs in a case which, presumably, has not yet been heard in court. The lead plaintiff's case certainly sounds like it might qualify, but again, it's written by an advocate looking to win a case in court. It reminds me, fairly strongly, of Ellen Pao's claims in her suit.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 10:27 PM
1

You are 100% correct: he was a dick.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 10:10 PM
3

But in order to account for the large aggregate difference in gendered earnings, there would have be millions of examples of women earning less for the same work. Millions and millions. And some of those would be documented, surely. Not anecdotes, or things people have heard from other people - actual documented cases. I am not aware of any. I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I'm not aware of any. And that's why I'm asking.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 08:43 PM
5

You're not understanding me. I'm not saying that finding examples is trivial. I'm saying that IF the 75 or whatever percent wage gap is due to women making less than men for the same job (as many people believe) THEN finding examples should be trivial, because there would have to be millions and millions of examples of men earning more than women for the exact same job. I have seen none that didn't have another explanation, like the person in this thread who acknowledged that it was because she …
/r/MensRights01/09/15 08:19 PM
3

I think there are always going to be these cases. I don't think your experience is limited to women: in my first ever job, back in the last century, I ended up being paid less than the minimum wage because I was so bad at negotiating. :)
/r/MensRights01/09/15 08:12 PM
6

Well, I'm not actually aware of any jobs that have an actual wage gap. That's why I'm asking. If the aggregate gender earnings gap is due to males being paid more than females for the same work, there would have to be millions of examples of this. Coming up with an example should be trivial.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 07:55 PM
7

THIS IS THE RIGHT ANSWER. The aggregate earnings difference is not going to disappear until men are allowed the freedom that women have to: * have someone else pay for them without losing social face * work in areas they find spiritually/personally fulfilling rather than financially fulfilling * stay home and take care of the kids * be awarded custody at something close to 50% * be valued as caretakers rather than breadwinners failed edits: stupid bulletted list formats failed. I am a n00b anoth…
/r/MensRights29/08/15 01:51 PM
9

This kind of calm, rational commentary is exactly what we need.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 08:05 PM
3

I wouldn't tout this case as evidence of anything to do with the current gender war. It smells an awful lot like the Satanic Ritual Abuse witchhunts of the 80's/90's. As far as I have been able to gather from news stories, the evidence against the adults is all testimony of children coaxed from them by social workers. If that doesn't set off an alarm bell, the outlandishness of some of the claims should - card parties? There is a men's issue angle to this, as you note. This stuff is almost unive…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 03:00 PM
3

I'm on the list for a comment that is skeptical of some slightly exaggerated claims made by another comment in /r/mensrights. So essentially for encouraging moderation.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 09:25 PM
2

The judge acknowledged that the receipt of this letter was highly irregular, and that sending a message to a judge regarding a case in which he was presiding was inappropriate to the point of unprecedented. But he adjourned the proceedings and ordered the police to launch an investigation of the women on the grounds of criminal conspiracy. I have no idea if that investigation is closed. But Blatchford wrote about it in a NP article months ago. Judges in Canada are highly restricted in what evide…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 01:11 PM
1

This is an excellent point. I think there are a large number of people on both sides of the argument (or, current widespread set of arguments) who long for a more reasoned approach. But we are divided by the language of extremism. There are some here in this sub who employ this broad brush: slapping all feminists with the 'radical' label to the point where I am immediately suspicious of someone who uses the label, even if it is appropriate. What do you suggest? For a while, the term Social Justi…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 12:44 PM
2

The choice between career and kids... is a choice only women can make and sometime will make. This choice is absent for men. Under current conditions, this is largely true, but only because it is a societal expectation. There is nothing whatever to prevent a man being the one to stay home and care for the kids... nothing other than societal expectations. That this is a choice that is currently absent for men is the problem. If it were a viable choice, more men (like me) would take it. And then t…
/r/MensRights09/07/15 09:28 PM
7

I'm a software developer with 25 years experience (and some big and successful projects behind me), and I still occasionally wonder when they're going to come fire me because they clearly hired the wrong guy...
/r/MensRights11/06/15 08:20 PM
2

In Canada, where he brought the action, the winner's legal fees are paid by the loser, so he wouldn't have been out anything. But also in Canada, you are far less likely to get a large damage award - you do have to prove your damages. I think it likely that Mr Murphy was entirely truthful when he said he was only looking to clear his name.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:44 PM
2

Also, Charlize Theron. Yeah. Been a big Theron maniac since Two Days In The Valley.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 09:23 PM
31

I knew the comments on that story would be bad, but man oh man. The first four: "Yes we all know it`s wrong but thinking back to when I was 16 or 17 if a teacher who looked liked that wanted to have an affair with me. I would of been more than willing and No I would not have been traumitized. BEST MOMENTS OF MY HIGH SCHOOL YEARS!! :)" "Much ado about nothing. When I was in school guys would have killed for a piece of that.' "Those three "boys" deserve nothing nice for the rest of their lives. Wh…
/r/MensRights28/04/15 03:52 PM
1

I don't know about 'proof'. It is quite possible that her father also passed away recently. Ms Sommers is not that much older than I am, and when one hits middle age, people seem to die in clusters - parents, uncles, friends spouses... There is a clue in her choice of names. She goes by 'Hoff Sommers'. This is customarily her birth name (Hoff) followed by her husband's name (Sommers). She is 65. It is entirely possible that she lost both her husband and her father recently.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 01:12 PM
1

Well, he's the one who actually committed the murder, so you know... There's plenty to be vocal about without manufacturing outrage. There's no outrage here - given everything I read, the sentences are entirely appropriate.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 01:36 PM
5

As I remember it, Richard Bradley was the first bit I read on this whole thing. And his concern was that the original RS article hit all his biases. Be careful of an article that seems to fit all your biases, he said. He didn't say it was fake. He said it set all his alarm bells, the alarm bells he acquired after being fucked over by Stephen Glass, ringing. The story was too perfect, and too sensational, and it fit the ovearching popular narrative ("rape culture") too closely. I used to be a box…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 10:36 PM
14

So my opinion of Merlan was formed when I read her original column, and then the quote where she acknowledges that she was 'dead wrong'. I hadn't read the comments on her original column. I thought, ok, maybe Anna Merlan is one of the reasonable ones. Just now, I read the first few comments including her responses to Souave and Bradley. What a complete asshole she is. I mean, she's a grade A asshole, top shelf, peak of the season.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 06:33 PM
1

This is an example of a thing that happens to everybody being tagged as sexism because it happened to a woman. I interviewed at a Big Software Company some years ago. I dithered and finally went with the jacket and tie (not a suit - chinoes/leather shoes/white shirt/tie/sports jacket) rather than the chinos and polo. I didn't get the job. Feedback was like one line 'too buttoned down - poor team fit'. An interview is an audition. They can reject you for any reason, or no reason. I reject people …
/r/MensRights17/04/15 06:16 PM
2

Razors aren't untaxed. They're taxed at 20%. Women's sanitary products are an exception, at 5%.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 01:58 PM
1

'disingenuous' being a nice way of say either 'wrong' or 'deceptive'.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 01:42 PM
4

So the original graphic is, then, completely wrong, because men's and women's razors are taxed at 20%, and women's sanitary products are taxed at 5%.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 01:40 PM
8

Yeah. There were a few things in there that caused my bullshit alarm to go off.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 01:58 PM
9

If the UVA 'gang rape' scandal taught us anything, it is that we should beware of stories that cater to our biases. This story smells like that - it's just too neat a fit.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 01:55 PM
6

I collected child support from my ex-wife from the time my daughter was 14. However, after I paid without issue for more than 10 years, it took 2 years, $10,000 in costs, and a court order before my ex-wife could be persuaded to part with her money. And there was the odd blip along the way as she would stop paying on some cockeyed legal theory.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 11:28 PM
3

The whole study is very interesting reading, even if you don't like reading theses.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 01:41 PM
10

This is definitely a thing. I'm a good-sized guy, not real tall but built like a dumptruck (240 lbs). It takes me a little while to stop if I'm moving at a fast walk. And women will step out in front of me, oblivious. They just trust that they can walk wherever they want and people will avoid them. It is rare of a man to step out in front of me. It happens, but it's rare. Women and little kids.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 12:58 AM
3

My daughter, at 13, decided that she wanted to come live with me. That feeling, that one you get when your children are finally with you and happy and safe and protected and loved, is about the best feeling in the world. Congratulations.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 04:42 PM
1

I agree - but the fact that so many more men kill themselves makes this a gendered issue. There is something going on - there is some reason that men kill themselves at a much higher rate than women do. You can't have a complete discussion of suicide without addressing it.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 12:07 AM
2

I think you have a duty to report this, and see it through. Administration of an adulterant like a drug is a serious crime in Canada. One of the problems with things like GHB is that fatal overdose is very possible. This person will do this again. It is possible that she could wind up killing someone. IMO, you have a duty to report this and take it as far as it will go. Maybe the Crown can't prosecute her, but I think you have a human duty to try. You need to do as much as you can to stop this p…
/r/MensRights18/12/14 01:35 PM
3

I disagree. Gamergate is a textbook case of a widespread smear campaign against an entire large subculture, and by extension, the male gender. It has been a largely successful smear. And in the midst of all of that, Gamergate activism has forced changes on publications like Kotaku. It has exposed corruption and lies and cronyism. It has furthered the exposure of the half-truths and blatant distortions of Anita Sarkeesian. Gamergate is important. It has legs. It isn't going away. And it isn't a f…
/r/MensRights30/11/14 03:51 PM
1

You know, the misuse of the term 'pedophile' is unpleasant when the victim is female, and it's equally unpleasant when the victim is male. Stop exaggerating, please. She is likely a statutory rapist, nothing more.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 01:03 AM
5

Yeah, I don't know if I'd hitch my wagon to this particular horse. Prematurely tagging these as false accusations could wind up making you look like a douche. I think that on balance of probabilities, he's likely guilty.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 01:00 AM
3

I think you have several problems, but the biggest one is: " i'm almost sure that she would lie to get me into deep shit." This is a much bigger problem than all the rest combined: you have just admitted that you can't trust her. And if you can't trust your partner, you've got nothing. I think you need to consider things carefully. Do you really not trust her? Or is it that your anger over the incident is coloring your opinion of her? For example, no matter how much my wife and I have been throu…
/r/MensRights11/11/14 02:13 PM
2

Make that two asking for a source - this doesn't reflect anything I've ever read.
/r/MensRights05/11/14 12:24 AM
8

Do you have a lawyer? Get a lawyer. Seriously. The only way she could legally get back support was if there was a court order or maintenance agreement in place and he hadn't been paying. If that is the case, then the back support is his fault, not hers. If his passport and dl were taken, it is because he hasn't been paying support. And that's his fault. If his paycheque is being garnished, it's because he hasn't been paying support. Children living at home and attending university are entitled t…
/r/MensRights01/11/14 01:11 AM
13

After my daughter came to live with me, it took me 2 years, $5000, and two court orders to start getting child support. This after I paid child support voluntarily, without a court order, for 12 years. I doubt that would have been the case were the genders reversed.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 12:57 AM
1

From what I can gather, Allen is friend of Brianna Wu's, and both of them have chips on their shoulders the size of small continents. Also, both are transgender females. Which makes Allen's professed hatred interesting from a psychological point of view.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:09 PM
4

One of the best and most balanced articles I have read on this whole thing. Not least because it places the controversy in context in which it belongs, which is the broader cultural gender war.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:05 PM
1

Well, no she doesn't. She says that there is still some chauvinism (a useful word that has been replaced by the inaccurate 'misogyny') in the gaming world, and she's right. There is.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:04 PM
4

You're in a pretty tough spot. If you have a lien and garnishment order against you, you haven't been paying. In general, I think that refusing to pay a court ordered payment is a bad idea, no matter how clearcut you think your position is. Your bill is 20k - are you likely to be able to fight this successfully for under that amount? It seems chancy - in BC, where I was clearly in the right, it cost me about 5k to get an order of support on my child's mother, and that was a straightforward case …
/r/MensRights26/10/14 01:19 PM
1

Gentle hint, that's why nnnfred said 'for extremely small values of 18'.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 01:07 PM
1

Never mind, you provided it further downthread. :)
/r/MensRights23/09/14 12:49 PM
2

Many countries in the world provide early retirement for women. Have you got a source for that? Not that I'm doubting you, but I've never heard this before and I'd like to read more about it.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 12:47 PM
1

I was astonished at how quickly the same tired old smears came out in the thread on \r\videos.
/r/MensRights17/09/14 03:41 PM
2

She's reasonable alright, but it has nothing to do with feminism. This has everything to do with feminism. Real feminism, I mean, not the panicky pearl-clutching we've been subjected to the last 10 or 20 years. A large part of the problem is that people on both sides will say this about Sommers, when all she has ever done is look for and present the objective truth. For a large number of people, 'feminism' is either a religion or a bogeyman. Hoff Sommers is a feminist. Just not one that most big…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 03:40 PM
2

When I clicked through to read it, the first thing I noticed was the book on terror camps in America! advertised on the sidebar. Oh, one of THOSE sites, I said.
/r/MensRights13/09/14 01:30 PM
5

What barbarians exactly does she see at the gate? If you look at the sidebar, it's a far right sight that has the vapors over the 'jihadists'.
/r/MensRights13/09/14 01:13 PM
1

I know what you mean about the cultural thing: I went past a kabbadi tournament at a local field and as I was watching I noticed that the crowd was 100% male. There were probably 3, 4 thousand spectators and there wasn't a single woman.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 06:06 PM
1

Yeah, I had it in Winnipeg in my head. My bad.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 04:38 AM
3

So, you want a sexual harassment claim in addition to a human rights one? Great!
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:12 PM
42

I found a similar but gender-reversed case in BC. In that case, a male tried to join a women-only fitness club, who refused him. He brought a claim before the BC Human Rights Tribunal, who ruled against him on the grounds that he was not discriminated against because he could go to other gyms. This is in BC, not Manitoba, but both provinces are subject to the Canadian Human Rights Code. I suspect that the barbershop will cave (I hope they don't) but if the Manitoba Human Rights Commission finds …
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:10 PM
2

I recall someone trying this near where I live here in BC. Let me see if I dig up something on it.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 05:20 PM
4

The furor over this is incredible, considering that date rape drugs are virtually an urban legend.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 12:00 AM
6

You're right. Strange story - if a doc asked for cash I'd be really suspicious.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 10:27 PM
2

I don't know why you've identified the doctor as 'Canadian': Canada has a single payor system and doctors do not bill patients directly for the vast majority of services, including circumcisions. Reading this, I think this occurred in the United States.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 08:13 PM
0

Williams was an alcoholic and drug abuser before he was married.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:17 PM
6

My father, who spent many years in AA and saw many (I don't know how many, but quite a number) people take their own lives, said that people who mean to commit suicide almost always succeed. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. That women attempt more and succeed less indicates that a substantial number of women, in a substantial number of attempts, don't mean to die.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 05:56 PM
6

Knowing what I know of drug and alcohol abusers (and that is a fair amount, given the family I was raised in) Robin's depression, divorces, money problems and ultimately suicide most likely originate in his substance abuse, not the other way around. Alcoholism destroys lives.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 05:48 PM
3

You really need to listen to your gut - it's telling you something. There are large numbers of women in the world who won't set your alarm bells off, and with whom you'll move naturally and happily into sex. This woman is not one of those. Move on.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 09:24 PM
3

Why would we care? I'm genuinely puzzled by the question. Why would a movement aimed at easing some of the societal problems men experience not welcome gay men?
/r/MensRights27/07/14 02:57 PM
2

I was raised that way too. It meant that when my ex-wife slapped and punched me, I couldn't do anything about it. Being raised that way is being raised as a sexist. Hard as it is, we (meaning 'humans', not 'men') have to give that sexist notion up.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 03:54 PM
6

I have difficulty accepting that a doctor would perform a circumcision against a 14 year old's wishes. Maybe I'm wrong, but your story just doesn't quite ring true.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 03:52 PM
1

You're probably right, but it's counter-productive.
/r/MensRights04/07/14 12:34 PM
15

Let's not manufacture outrage - his name was on the sign, after all. Nobody in that story looks particularly good, really.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 07:03 PM
2

It is beyond naive to equate anti-feminism with misogyny. While the 'and' construction can sometimes mean equivalence, it can also be used to indicate parallelism, like 'fruits and nuts' or 'men and women'. I think that this is what /u/iinventedthenight is doing here, ie: We need to exclude misogynists, and we also need to include anti-feminists. In other words, I don't think (he? she? xe?) is saying that the two are the same thing.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 04:40 PM
1

This is from a thread in /r/todayilearned here. There is some good discussion in that thread. (Mods: not very good @ redditz, hope my link is ok
/r/MensRights02/07/14 10:15 PM
5

Just want to note that your title is incorrect: the writer did not claim that he raped her, but rather that he assaulted her when she tried to end the date.
/r/MensRights29/06/14 01:55 PM
0

I'm not accusing anybody of anything. Merely pointing out that confirmation bias exists on both sides of the spectrum. As for the CDC numbers, that was probably deliberately done to meet a political objective. I doubt that those that made that decision did it with an intent to deceive. However they are not 'feminists' or 'the other side'. They are a government body. Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 09:31 PM
5

Eye opening stuff. I wasn't aware of most of this - I swallowed the standard anti-Arab western line of deeply misogynistic societies.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 09:09 PM
3

Part of why I felt off after reading the article is because it was so biased and sort of trying to equalize women's safety issues with men's. The numbers are good information, but the argument they're trying to make is quite out of context itself given everything else about the culture and laws over there. Interesting that you say that. Why do you say that the article is biased? On what do you base that conclusion? You do realize that the author is from Iran, don't you? I ask because before I re…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 08:24 PM
2

No - because getting it wrong the other way doesn't support their position. They are like most people. Numbers/anecdotes that don't support their position are forgotten (not ignored - forgotten) while those that do are remembered and focused on. This is a human problem. Confirmation bias is very strong even when you are aware that it is operating. Confirmation bias operates in this subreddit just as much as in the 'feminist' ones, but those biases confirm your own bias and so you don't think of …
/r/MensRights19/06/14 08:09 PM
3

While it's true that the husband killings and honor killings of men is under reported and should get some attention in their own right, I don't consider them the same thing as the honor killings that's been in the media. They are the same thing, though, and you are falling into the trap where the killing of women matters more than the killing of men. Does it ultimately matter who does the killing? You say yes, because that makes the killing of women more important. That kind of thinking allows A…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 03:28 PM
1

The number 1 rule of Youtube is 'never read the comments on youtube'. I think I lost a couple of IQ points just by scrolling down the list.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 03:07 PM
2

It's worse than that, it's counter-productive.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 01:52 PM
5

Honestly hate the Mens Rights stuff--I'm not sure why I'm even subbed here except to poke in and see what you folks are up to once and awhile--but I thought I should comment because this story hit a little close to home. Funny how that works. :) In Real Life, I don't identify as an MRA. I don't do this because some members of the MR movement say things that I disagree with quite strongly. I also don't do this because of the pretty successful smear job that Big Feminism (that industry that genera…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 01:46 PM
9

For me, that's the really telling point of this. He falls all over himself reassuring them that well, women still have it far worse.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 01:23 PM
3

Depends what you mean by 'just as bad'. Probably about the same percentage of the population was mentally ill in 1960, but they weren't on the street. They were in warehouses. Those warehouses were horrible, no question. Prisons. But whether those people are better off now, living on the street... I don't know.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 03:31 PM
1

The use of victimhood as a weapon has been building for many years. It will take many years to subside. All we can do is push back against it with reason and truth. You, sir, have done and continue to do that. Keep up the good fight.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 01:12 PM
4

The effect of "male privilege" is that if a man is winning, he wins more; conversely, "female privilege" is not being able to lose. That's.... profound. And exactly right, I think.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 10:15 PM
3

I am now a humanist. Welcome to the club. There are quite a few here.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 10:06 PM
1

It was written in response to the Racefail mess.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 08:05 PM
10

Our tone has little to no bearing on how we will be treated by feminists But again, we don't care how we are treated by feminists. Or we shouldn't. We are NEVER EVER EVER in a million billion years going to convince people like Big Red that we aren't so bad. She has her mind made up. The people we need to reach are those who aren't feminists, or at least not part of organized feminism. Ordinary women who make sexist jokes and expect to be catered to and who don't think or care about male death r…
/r/MensRights22/05/14 08:40 PM
3

I think I agree on femsplain - it's at least as useful as 'mansplain', and no more objectionable. Femsplaining almost always includes the words 'misogyny' and 'patriarchy'.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 08:33 PM
1

Oh, we agree. But this thread isn't about asking questions and questioning authority. It's about limiting the ability of those who oppose change to the status quo to paint us as kooks and troglodytes.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 08:26 PM
2

But why give them ammunition? You know you're not going to change the mind of a radical feminist. But it's not them you care about, not them we want to influence. It's the 98% of humanity that aren't radical feminists. And those people can be persuaded that we're all foaming woman haters if we give them cause. So don't give them cause.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 07:11 PM
0

Well, I do, for one. Because feminists have the ear of probably 90% of the women in my life, and 60% of the men. And if they proclaim MRAs to be misogynists long enough (which isn't long, really) then this will never be more than a fringe movement. Because when you drip hate, you come of as exactly like those raging man-hating feminists you rave about, and that makes you dismissable as a hypocrite.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 07:09 PM
6

First, I think Hoyt's point would be clearer without all the flashing, blinking GIFs. Second, it's been coming for a long while. Scifi fandom was the scene of giant ugly mess colloquially called Racefail about 5 years ago, in which people who had been ardent supporters of all forms of equality were viciously smeared as racists, mostly be a core of strident online 'activists' who I would now term social justice warriors. Their complaint has long been that sci-fi and fantasy publishing is racist a…
/r/MensRights22/05/14 06:50 PM
2

I like how the graphic for '13 Americans die on the job every day' shows 6 women, when the actual number is 1/2.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 01:20 PM
-4

First, god I wish there wasn't this kind of horrible shit in the world. That poor little kid... But really, they got the same sentence and she got a year off for cooperating with the investigation. Not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 01:09 PM
1

I think you and your wife need to hit some heavy couples counselling. She needs to understand the depth of your fear, and you need to understand her frustration. A good counselor will identify where communication is breaking down between you, and help you to fix it. Mostly, I think, you both need to feel like you are working on this together, rather than in isolated stacks.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 07:56 PM
8

And, in my experience, it is almost universally applied to men.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 07:36 PM
-17

Look, if you're going to say this kind of shit, could you at least do it somewhere that you don't smear reasonable men people by association?
/r/MensRights16/05/14 07:35 PM
1

There are many more ppl like the op and me who have been fucked over by a false accusation and gotten a short sentence. Not for rape. Not saying you didn't get screwed over, but you pled to simple assault. OP is claiming he was convicted of rape.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 08:43 PM
-2

Well - 'it tends to be'. I don't believe that extends to criminal conviction without any confirming evidence whatsoever, as would be teh case if what OP says were true. One of the big complaints of the stop rape campaigns is that women aren't automatically believed.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 05:15 PM
31

This story seems a little fishy. In what jurisdiction does a rape conviction yield a 6 month sentence? In most of North America, a criminal conviction requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. She said/he said doesn't cut it. There's either more evidence you're not revealing or...
/r/MensRights13/05/14 03:04 PM
1

She's clearly experiencing some sort of psychotic episode. Whether that's drug induced or mental illness is impossible to say. But she's clearly not in touch with reality.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 03:08 PM
1

Nobody did anything while either of them were being attacked by the other. Would it have happened another way, probably not. But this video doesn't show people treating either him or her differently because of their gender, and moaning on about it just makes you look like those rape-culture victims we're always confronted with.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 02:54 PM
1

Oh no. 'Topic policiing'. Is that like 'tone policing?' Will I be thrown out of the sub if I voice my opinion? There is nothing whatever discriminatory in this video, and those of you who are shrieking that there is look like that screechy wing of the feminist movement that you're always ranting on about as if it represented the whole movement.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 02:50 PM
1

But that isn't what happened: the cops arrived when he was assaulting her and had the upper hand. They subdued him, as they should. I'm not saying that you're not correct, just that this particular case is not evidence of that. Ranting about this video is manufactured outrage and we don't need that.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 02:17 PM
4

This has NOTHING to do with men's rights. The police reacted appropriately to the situation as they found it. Please stop doing this - it makes this sub look as petty and muckraking as the worst feminist stuff.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 08:02 PM
1

My test for whether something is sexist is to see if it sounds racist if you were to say it about black people. So, yeah. This is really fucking sexist.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 05:58 PM
-5

See, this is the kind of shit that gives this sub a bad name. This has nothing to do with feminism or men's rights or discrimination. The cops acted quite reasonably given the situation they found when they arrived. Stop doing this. There is enough actual discrimination without trying to manufacture easily debunked outrage. Raging about this kind of stuff only feeds the opposition.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 04:40 PM
1

This thread is where I first read it. The interesting thing is that the original article has been removed by the Guardian, but the headline remains. Down in the comments there's a link to a more detailed story that talks about what happened. Edit: I know I'm supposed to do something different with the link - something about NP, but I'm too dumb to know what. Edit2: figured it out.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 04:23 PM
1

I doubt that they do, considering Nigeria's general lack of infrastructure.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 08:15 PM
1

Don't know why you're getting downvoted - you make perfect sense to me.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 05:42 PM
1

My belief is that they don't give two shits about western outrage and hashtag activism. Why would they even be aware of it?
/r/MensRights08/05/14 05:33 PM
3

As I understand it, Boko Haram has been attacking schools for some months. In the most recent attack, they attacked a girls' school and kidnapped these young women. There were, as I understand it, no males present. Howver, there were other attacks - the group has been attacking schools for years. However, in most attacks, they kill boys but spare girls - I believe that in the one referred to upthread, the girls were admonished to give up education and let go while the boys were shot, knifed, and…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 05:22 PM
2

I LOL'd IRL.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 07:05 PM
125

First, you did the right thing. Second, if family peeps start smacking you around (verbally) because you 'destroyed Jen's relationship', Jen destroyed Jen's relationship. And Jen destroyed your relationship with her, too. The world is a better place because there are people like you in it. People who will do the actual right thing, not just the convenient right thing.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 06:52 PM
2

I think you're right. :)
/r/MensRights04/05/14 03:34 AM
3

Or First Nations people worse off than white Canadians. Uh, really? Poverty, corruption, alcoholism, massive unemployment? You might not see any reasons why they are legally disadvantaged, but I think it borders on insanity to suggest that First Nations people in North America aren't socially disadvantaged.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 02:55 PM
-20

Yes, there's a lot of stuff that women have that's far worse than what men deal with. Such as? What are these things? What things do women deal with that is far worse than what men deal with?
/r/MensRights03/05/14 02:43 PM
6

I see no assholes here. I see no trolls. All I do is see people pointing out the inequality in our system, on both the male and female side. There are assholes here - just not as many as you'd expect. :) There are some very angry men here. Understandably so, but it doesn't help our cause when participants here call women bitches and cunts. You will see such commentary here and its presence allows people like those you describe to dismiss this entire sub. I'll warn you now: if you start looking f…
/r/MensRights03/05/14 02:33 PM
2

Also, both numbers are likely inflated. The studies that gave us 1-in-6 men followed the same standards as the ones that told us 1-in-5 women... If either is wrong, both are. I'm inclined to think just that... Well, yes. I think that's actually the point. The 1 in 5 number that is widely touted as indicating an epidemic of rape is 1 in 6 for men if you ask them exactly the same questions. Since the number of 1 in 6 for men is clearly way too high, the 1 in 5 number for women is way too high.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 01:37 PM
1

As far as I'm aware, "she didn't tell me she was off birth control" has never worked as an excuse. In most jurisdictions, he will be stuck paying support whether or not she lied to him. Edit: And in at least some, he'll be paying even if she raped him.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 10:40 PM
1

You have to tell Charlie. Family be damned - someone is trying to deceive him into something that will affect the rest of his life in a HUGE way. You are morally obligated to warn him, in my opinion. You should be prepared to have Charlie, Jen, your aunt, and a bunch of other people terminate their relationships with you. In my opinion, it doesn't matter - I believe that you have a moral obligation to tell him and let the chips fall where they may.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 10:30 PM
1

First, I acknowledge that we are reading your account of this and so even if you think you are leaning over backward to be fair, you are probably (maybe unconciously) minimizing your own part. That said, you both used gendered insults in what appears to be a rather pointless argument. No matter what you think a person has done to you, descending to their level is NEVER a good idea. You can't control what other people do or think. You can only control what you do or think. You may not like my adv…
/r/MensRights01/05/14 02:40 PM
2

That's some interesting data. Thanks for posting this.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 12:44 AM
5

Well, I don't know about that. Scalzi's genius is in marketing, not prose, but he has never struck me as a bully. He's more a bit of a sycophant, as I suppose all good marketers must be. He knows his audience, and his audience are young left-leaning adults, those who are steeped in the rhetoric of 1 in 5 oh wait it's 1 in 4 oh wait it's now 1 in 3 and women are oppressed and a woman earns less for doing the same job and all men are potential rapists. Scalzi has been very successful selling books…
/r/MensRights30/04/14 01:59 PM
3

As I said, I was going from memory. And Scalzi wasn't clear - first he said tried to touch, then he later he said did touch. In either case, one wonders if the praise for Mrs Scalzi's violence would have been as fulsome had the genders been reversed. I suspect not.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 01:53 PM
0

I don't think she attacked him with a bat - as I remember he (the unknown man) was at a bar being a dick (or so we are told) and Scalzi's wife assaulted him. As is common these days, everyone was ok with her responding to words with violence since she was (presumably still is) a female.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 09:52 PM
2

Note that Scalzi is a relentless self-googler and if you mention him, he is likely to appear.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 09:50 PM
2

He knows his market.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 09:49 PM
2

To refine your point: affirmative action not only can be discriminatory, it necessarily is discriminatory. Because if it isn't, then it isn't action, it's just affirmative babble.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 04:44 PM
0

I wish I was smart enough to know where to find a rimshot gif.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 04:40 PM
1

Also interesting is that while the imaginary crimes were similar, he got twice the sentence that his wife and daughter got.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 04:12 PM
17

Just wanted to say taht phoning him at home is a really bad idea. Don't do it. Really really don't do it.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 03:47 PM
2

Your claims are persuasive. I'd offer to meet you in a parking lot but I'm guessing you're 6' 4" and have a black belt in something - or you are an ex-Marine. I'd offer to race you but I'd wager that you drive a Corvette ZR1. On days when you want to drive slowly. I'd offer to compare my sexual history to yours, but I'm guessing that you regularly pump and dump aspiring supermodels with your 8" dick. I'm sure your watch costs more than my car, so I probably can't compete there either. Your under…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:18 PM
1

Oh, so you're just a dick. Got it.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:00 PM
1

It says in the article The court heard Hutchings and her partner bought designer clothes, shoes, jeans, sunglasses and other luxuries. Which indicates to me that the court heard evidence that he had, indeed, spurred her on. Even if he didn't, he seems to have participated and not been charged/convicted. So it seems to me that branding this story as a men's rights issue is misguided.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 04:59 PM
3

People like you are why people like me don't claim the title MRA.
/r/MensRights02/04/14 08:11 PM
5

So, even though the female was the only one punished, and even though she was apparently a first time offender and got what appears to me to be an appropriate penalty for first-time nonviolent offense, it's STILL a men's rights issue because... because.... because why exactly?
/r/MensRights02/04/14 07:43 PM
1

Did you actually read the article?
/r/MensRights02/04/14 06:33 PM
1

This is trying too hard. There is no mention that the BF was punished - only that he 'spurred her on', which he may very well have done. Not a men's rights issue at all, imo.
/r/MensRights02/04/14 06:31 PM
2

My first wife was verbally, emotionally, and physically abusive. This is HER problem, not yours. When she says you provoked her, it ISN"T TRUE. She is the one who resorted to violence. She won't get better - my wife and I went to counselling (that's another story...) and still the violence got progressively worse. Over 2 or 3 years it increased in frequency and severity until I finally ended it. You will encounter people who don't believe you. People who call you a pussy. People who imply that y…
/r/MensRights27/03/14 10:34 PM
0

You know, at first I thought the same thing, but the more I thought about it, the less sure I was. I'm wondering whether some of my doubt comes from conditioning that men always enjoy and are lucky to get sex. Maybe the rage part is what made me say, waitaminnit this can't be real. Because we're conditioned to think that no man would be angry about getting a chance at some pussy.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 02:22 PM
0

FWIW, my next point won't be too popular here, but I believe that man-on-woman rape is more common than woman-on-man rape. Well, I think that you're probably correct providing we use the undiluted definition, which is that of violence or threat of violence. But two points: many people believe that it is impossible for a woman to rape a man. That 'rape' is 100% a male crime. And even under the undiluted definition, that is not true unless, like the UK, the definition is a gendered one. under the …
/r/MensRights08/03/14 02:14 PM
0

No. I don't consider either of them 'rape'. In neither case was forcible coercion used against me. Certainly in the case of my college prof, I quite enjoyed the encounters - leaving aside the shame that I still feel over it 30 years later. The case with my roomies GF was just paralzyingly awkward all round. I found her deeply unattractive - she was an unpleasant person. She had made it clear in front of him and our other roomies that she felt otherwise. They split up not long after, although as …
/r/MensRights08/03/14 01:58 PM
1

I think part of the problem is that some feminist groups have obscured (deliberately, I believe) the meaning of the word 'rape'. To most people, 'rape' is a violent act, in which a man assaults an unwilling or unconcious woman and penetrates her. And you're right, that is more difficult for the average woman to do to the average man, although not impossible. But the meaning of the word 'rape' has been distorted. Some groups have defined it as any form of coercive sex - even pleading. Some groups…
/r/MensRights08/03/14 01:50 AM
1

Yah, this whole thing is a mess. Sarkessian took an image of a copyrighted character that the artist in question does not own, and that may be covered under trademark as well as copyright. So the artist doesn't actually own the copyright she is trying to enforce. It reminds me of some of the ridiculous arguments in the fanfic world over who owns modifications to other people's copyrighted works. And this has nothing whatever to do with men's rights other than the quiver of delightful schadenfreu…
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:46 PM
1

It is possible that she might have a claim to support for a limited period of time - I seem to remember some rules around transition between 50/50 and full custody.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 05:05 PM
0

Yes. You're dead wrong.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 04:14 PM
7

Well said. This is the problem exactly: she expects that she should be treated with old-fashioned manners when she wants it, but not when she doesn't. And if she is treated as other than what she wants, it is the other person's fault.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 03:45 PM
0

And people wonder why the MRM is viewed as a collection of misogynists...
/r/MensRights24/02/14 03:38 PM
14

I've done those 6 AM flights too, and I've been the 50-ish engineer. It has been my experience that nobody talks or interacts much on those flights. She's right, the ratio is about 15-1 M/F. She sounds brittle. It seems to me that most of the women I encountered on the morning flights were like that. Hell, most of the people were - people keep to themselves much more than on later flights. It is difficult to walk that line - make eye contact and offer a smile and you're potentially creepy. Ignor…
/r/MensRights24/02/14 03:25 PM
1

Ok, cool. I'll see if I can track them down from this info.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 11:49 PM
1

I'm a big, masculine male and I carry a handbag. It's not a pretty one, but that's what it is.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 06:11 PM
1

This makes as much sense as Dworkin claiming porn "trains" men to rape, considering rape has decreased about 80% since the advent of the VCR. If you want to demonstrate causation, you should at least be required to prove correlation. I haven't run across this statistic: do you have a source for it?
/r/MensRights20/02/14 06:07 PM
5

I always paid support according to the guidelines, without fail. Never missed a payment, was late (5 days) exactly once in the 12 years I paid support. Always increased my payments when I got a raise. Never decreased them when I took a hit, which happened a couple of times. A few years ago my daughter came to live with me. I didn't get one cent out of her mother until I finally, after 2 years of fighting, managed to get a court order.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 04:36 PM
6

I just did a face count - probably the 'white' count varies depending on where you are. I had to really think about whether or not some of these people would be classed as 'white'. But 'whites' are in fact a minority in this office - 33 of 72. They would be a majority, though, if you counted Hispanic people as white, as there are 5 people with Hispanic names. I had a problem with some of the Russians, though - some look white and others don't. So I counted the ones that look 'white' as white, an…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 07:45 PM
10

Maybe where you are it is, but I'm in a highly technical area, in a major Canadian city, and I'd guess (without counting) that 'whites' might actually be a minority here. I work with people of African, Asian, South Asian, Eurasian...
/r/MensRights06/02/14 07:10 PM
1

Well, I don't know. If they refused to let a child sit beside me because I was black, I somehow don't think you'd claim that their motive was to save me a lynching.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 11:26 PM
1

This whole situation is polarizing. But I think looking at this case for any sort of clarity is a fool's errand. The whole goddam bunch of them are massively, completely fucked up. Woody Allen may be a great filmmaker. Mia Farrow may be a great actress. The fact remains, they're both fucked right up to hell and gone. Allen married Soon-Yi Previn when she was 25, he 62. Mia Farrow married Frank Sinatra when she was 21 and he 51. Farrow condemned Allen, but only after he'd taken up with her adopte…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 10:59 PM
2

This comment sucks as bad as the linked article. If Allen doesn't do whatever it is you think he should do, or what you state you would do, then this proves he is guilty?
/r/MensRights04/02/14 10:37 PM
3

About 10 years ago, I lost my $130k gig. I was unemployed for two months, and finally found a job in a small city 250 miles from my home at 50k (this was in the depths of the post-911 recession). My ex-wife had taken my firstborn and moved home to live with her parents, and this was 4 hours travel on the OTHER side of my home. On Monday mornings I got up at 3 AM and drove to work. I lived in a woman's basement throughout the week, with a 2 burner hotplate and a bar fridge, and on Friday nights I…
/r/MensRights31/01/14 10:12 PM
9

Preach it, bro. Upvote.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 02:20 PM
24

I disagree. The problem Torvalds refers to is one that most of us have had: that we are expected to modify our male behaviour to fit female ways of doing things. And that if we don't, we are victimizing them. I agree completely with what Torvalds says - I am rather like him. I am direct and strongly dislike bullshit terms and airy-fairy crap in a work setting. But I am sharply constrained in my ability to get through a meeting or a work day in an efficient and productive way because there is an …
/r/MensRights20/01/14 02:17 PM
1

Good thing you're only an intern, then. What part of 'numbers in millions' makes you think it's millions of dollars? It's millions of people employed. Are you suggesting that all the full-time men in the USA made a collective 83 million dollars in 2012?
/r/MensRights03/01/14 08:37 PM
1

You should probably read the graph a little more carefully. There are no monetary values on it.
/r/MensRights03/01/14 06:58 PM
1

I mean, let's face it, half a century ago women really did have it worse than men do today. Did they? By what standard? That's a serious question. This is part of the stuff that 'everybody knows'. Everybody knows that women were oppressed throughout history. As I've gotten older, I've become suspicious of things that 'everybody knows'. Were women 150 years ago really an oppressed class? 150 years ago, most people were on the poor side. Women as a group had a lot that was expected of them: they w…
/r/MensRights31/12/13 08:16 PM
1

a reasonable person Yes, a reasonable person. Because the people we are dealing with are reasonable people, yes?
/r/MensRights31/12/13 07:34 PM
0

On one level, I agree with you. An anonymous sexual offense reporting form is... well, it's not even one step removed from the sorts of tactics used by totalitarian states. However, if you(we) abuse this form to show that it can be abused, the point that SHOULD be clear likely won't be. The point that should be made is likely to be subverted by 'MRAs ABUSE WOMYN WITH FALSE ACCUSATIONS!'. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe it won't happen. But I think the risk is substantial.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 07:32 PM
4

Right, because those fringe elements of the feminist movement that drive so much of its rhetoric are such reasonable people, yes? They would NEVER twist something to their own ends, would they? I am adamantly opposed to just handing them a supply of ammunition to use against me.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 07:05 PM
5

If you're not stupid or foolish, then why care? I sure don't. Because I have a son.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 06:58 PM
4

I disagree. I think it's an issue. I think it's an issue because it both defines and reinforces acceptable gender stereotypes. My daughters, for example, will often roll their eyes and make a comment about guys being hopeless if I'm cooking something and have spilled in the process. They say these things even though I do the bulk of the cooking and virtually all of the cleaning in the house, and they see this every day. They do it because that's what their friends do, and their friends all do it…
/r/MensRights31/12/13 06:18 PM
-1

I disagree. I think this plays right into the hands of the noisy, hateful segment of the feminist power structure. They will spin it as abusive men mocking and perverting rape accusations. They'll do that because it is spinnable.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 05:58 PM
3

I don't think this is the way to do things. It just seems so high school: 'let's see how YOU like it!'. These are the tactics of the people we oppose, the people who have brought us to this point, and I for one do not want to embrace those tactics. Employing them risks alienating the people you want to influence, just as thinking men have been alienated by the tactics used against our gender. This kind of thing just gives the repressive side of feminism ammunition.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 05:37 PM
2

I don't believe I have ever seen a more beta beta. He's a beta's beta.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 10:00 PM
6

These are great. Thanks.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:38 PM
17

Not that we're there yet, but things are vastly improved. When I first had this argument (on Fidonet yet, if any of you are old enough to remember that) over 20 years ago, breast cancer got 10x the spending that prostate cancer did.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 05:28 PM
2

If I told you when you were 6 that your mother was extremely shitty and untrustworthy, you wouldn't believe me. You would have thought that I was the liar.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:50 PM
1

Do whatever you have to do to be in his life. Buy an older car. Live in the shitty part of town. Whatever you have to do to be in his life, make sure you see him as regularly as you can. If you get another girlfriend/wife, she has to understand that you will not compromise on seeing your son. Be the good guy. Play the long game. If you never talk shit about his mother and you are there, and loving, he'll figure out who's a bitch and who's not.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:48 PM
1

No, because it would make him look bad to the child.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:44 PM
2

Because a child cannot make that determination. A child loves his/her mother unconditionally, and when you say bad things about his/her mother, you only damage your own relationship with the child. In the case of a young child, up to maybe 6 or so, the child isn't capable of understanding that his parents have any flaws at all. My ex took my daughter 6 hours away. I traveled to see her every second weekend at least and I never spoke a harsh word about her mother. When she was 12 she had had enou…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:44 PM
31

Patience. If his mother is that much of a douchebag, he'll figure it out. The best thing you can do for your son is to be patient and never, ever EVER badmouth his mother to him, no matter what she does. Just be patient and loving to him and don't let him see you get angry at his mother, or let him hear you say anything nasty to or about her, and when he is older he will realize who is the good parent. My daughter came to live with me full-time when she was 12, when she figured out that her moth…
/r/MensRights19/11/13 11:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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