TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

wanna_dance Archive

View 2 posts and 486 comments by wanna_dance on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Pull out if you don't want to cum inside. The statement was that IF SHE LIES STILL, SHE'S RAPING YOU. that's ridiculous
/r/MensRights29/03/22 01:58 PM
1

Not rape, asshole. If you don't want to cum in someone DON'T BE INSIDE THEM.
/r/MensRights29/03/22 01:22 PM
0

Fuck yourself, misogynist disinformation peddler. EVERY statistic from govts and health organisations agree. EVERY one. 6% is utter trash. We also know that 12-18 % of men are sexually assaulted/ raped and you are an idiot of you believe that rape of men and boys is 3 times more prevalent than rape/ sexual assault of girls/ women. YOUR OWN MRA INCELS SUGGEST RAPE AS A WAY TO GET SEX. What, they're only kidding?
/r/MensRights24/02/22 01:16 PM
128

Yeah. That was pretty stupid of her.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 01:04 PM
-27

List one war that was started by women.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 01:01 PM
0

Probably resist because most wars are bullshit and we don't think you should die for oil companies either.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 01:00 PM
1

Your misunderstanding of the written word is incredible; your deduction is hateful and bigoted. Feminists did NOT lobby to support female rapists, they lobbied to not change the wording in the specified fashion, in order that an accused could not simply throw back an accusation. I'm not saying the wording or law shouldn't be changed. It needs to be changed. Rape of males is not acceptable and India does not even define this as a crime.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 04:28 AM
0

No, we don't. You MRA misogynist bigots keep insisting it's zero sum. It isn't. Excerpt that you interpret every gain by women as if it victimized men. There is a pro men's liberation feminism, but you despise us all so much, you can't even hear the words.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 04:21 AM
1

You don't care about male on female rape because MRA are hateful misogynist deniers that it even exists, despite thousands of reports. Because it threatens your privilege. Deplorable. You folks are incorrigible and don't believe in equality. You think equality means you're victimized.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 04:17 AM
0

Yes. They are. You MRAs have been lying for years. Ignoring ALL reliable research and pushing repeatedly discredited bullshit that claims virtually all rape reports are false (up to 5% are false, and only half of rape are reported). We cannot have equality if you're unconnected to reality. And you don't like the stats because men might be called to account. By the way, most murders are done by men too, but you don't deny those stats because men are the victims and you don't despise men like you …
/r/MensRights24/02/22 04:09 AM
0

6% is not the average percentage of women who have experienced a rape in Europe. The number is at least 35%. Don't puke propaganda. It makes you hateful.
/r/MensRights23/02/22 08:40 AM
1

In some areas you expect to be dangerous, women never travel alone and are safer than you expect. Also, in strict Muslim countries, rape could be considered adultery on the woman's part and she would be punished by her family, so it's probably extremely underreported.
/r/MensRights23/02/22 08:31 AM
2

I think life is all about learning how to heal our shitty childhoods. Keep picking up those pieces. The failure isn't in hitting bottom. It's in giving up and staying there for "too long". (Resting for a minute is valid, too.) 30 is just a baby 😀😉 Hopefully you'll get another 30 and 30 more after that.
/r/ExRedPill23/02/22 08:24 AM
3

Make more money than he does.
/r/ExRedPill22/02/22 01:31 PM
2

Happily married for 20+ years now, but when I was young I found that most relationships lasted about 2 months, at which point we figured out we weren't compatible. Every so often one would click and we'd date for years. (I met my husband at 33.) I am going to commit the solipsist fallacy ;) and assume my experience is typical. So if you're having a couple of months and then it falls apart, that might be the standard time for these things. HOWEVER.... relationships fall apart if the interest isn'…
/r/ExRedPill22/02/22 07:40 AM
11

Did you ruin it? If you like this woman, you could call her and have a "deep and meaningful" and expose your doubts and etc etc. If she's awesome, she'll listen and forgive you and .... since you already think it's ruined, you can't make it worse. 22 is young and this stuff (getting close to people) is some of the hardest stuff to do in our lives. When I met my husband (of 20+ years), he was jobless and had no prospects and I was older and in grad school... it isn't what you earn.) Best of luck.…
/r/ExRedPill22/02/22 05:40 AM
7

I disagree. I think dad is more mature than mom here.
/r/MensRights21/02/22 11:50 PM
0

Why is posting it wrong? Did you even read it 'til the end?
/r/MensRights17/02/22 03:01 AM
1

I agree that without irrefutable proof, the man should walk free. But the point of this story is about consent, not some alternative factoid that the woman is a false accuser.
/r/MensRights17/02/22 01:07 AM
1

Covid isn't a cold. And we're not dying in the streets because modern medicine has oxygen and ventilators. But 900,000 deaths in the US and ~6 million worldwide over 2 years isn't trivial.
/r/MensRights15/02/22 10:42 PM
-2

"Sexism because men kill women." "But men kill men, too!" The question is whether they are killed for the same reason. Some men murder women because they hate women. That's misogyny. You're arguing that this doesn't count. It's probably a very very small number, agreed. Also, all the fucking down votes and not one of you addresses the actual point of men's violence, which proves that NONE OF YOU GAF ABOUT MEN'S LIBERATION. You DON'T care about men's deaths. You only care about backlashing the wo…
/r/MensRights20/01/22 03:32 AM
-12

Your response ignores that men perpetrate violence, not simply experience it/intervene. You state it like there are no actors. Men's liberation needs to consider how to address this, while being loving and thoughtful about men who have been hurt enough to become perpetrators. The vast majority of men don't commit harm, but some have been put into the positions through economic issues or mental health issues. All of our liberations depend on this.
/r/MensRights19/01/22 10:00 AM
-18

Women are mostly killed by men. Men aren't mostly killed by women. (The response is to address the roots of men's violence, but in a thoughtful humane way - no blame.)
/r/MensRights19/01/22 01:10 AM
-9

I don't know any feminist that doesn't know that. I think this is a straw(wo)man argument.
/r/MensRights19/01/22 01:04 AM
1

You are against "feminism", a movement whose one tenet is that women are fully human. This belief of MRA that "feminism == bad" (yes, there are bad actors. Yes, feminists aren't 100% on board with ending men's oppression, but I see that less and less). As long as MRA is about being anti feminist rather than pro men's liberation, there's going to be a conflict, where the two liberation movements can't work together. Men and women's liberation from oppressions can work hand in hand. Men's oppressi…
/r/MensRights17/01/22 10:22 PM
-5

Do half the labor, and stop bitching that women complain when we both turn 60 and you own twice the wealth, because she raised your children. Men's liberation includes being equally involved with the family. Either you want men's liberation, or you're just a right-wing backlash movement.
/r/MensRights17/01/22 09:07 PM
-11

Mostly because numerous studies show that women spend several more hours than men weekly in chores. You MRAs keep HATING on feminism because of your MRA indoctrination. It goes both ways. Feminism is the idea that women are equal. You keep hating on that, and MRA will keep being seen NOT as a liberation movement, but as a reactionary backlash movement. You want to be a liberation movement? Stop standing in the way of others' liberation.
/r/MensRights17/01/22 09:04 PM
0

Men's oppression predates feminism and the way men are oppressed is more and more recognized, but it isn't men vs women, as you're summarizing. Men's oppression is societal. And as long as you make your liberation ANTI WOMEN, you won't get the support you deserve.
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:31 AM
-1

Garbage. Feminism is knowing that women are equal. Period.
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:20 AM
1

That sucks. A large proportion of their ads are at least 50% men (both shown and being listened to). Their website shows 50% men's stories. They market themselves as being multicultural as well. Why did they do that....
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:19 AM
2

Murdoch propagandists and disinformation peddlers.
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:03 AM
1

Men are oppressed by the greater society in some very obvious ways: over responsibility, put in harm's way, being discouraged from expressing their feelings, being belittled for being deeply involved with their children's lives, etc. (Eg, Pete Buttigieg was dissed for taking paternity leave for him infant. FFS! Wouldn't it be great if ALL dad's got paid leave!) MRA are sometimes regressive and sexist, when there is a right-wing backlash to women's gains. There is a pro feminist men's movement th…
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:02 AM
-3

That's pretty sexist, implying that men only think with their dicks.
/r/MensRights11/01/22 01:31 PM
-7

That's a terrible saying. The male CEO dates models, not the cleaning staff.
/r/MensRights11/01/22 05:01 AM
-11

Only if you make assumptions that all women are gold diggers. I've always earned more than my husband. I have a professional degree and I'm older. (I paid his way when we dated because he didn't have money and I did. I also took friends out a lot, for the same reason.)
/r/MensRights10/01/22 11:44 PM
1

Two points: 1. Not all women expect a provider mate. Certainly it's an antiquated notion. Women are expected to work, and most work through pregnancy and go back to work shortly after giving birth. 2. Less men going to college might be an effect of the following: college no longer guarantees the higher standard of living it did in the 70s and 80s (when a degree was still rare and grants and financial support were offered). If so, entering the workforce early may provide the same benefit that hav…
/r/MensRights10/01/22 11:37 PM
1

Could be that it isn't clear he's even confirmed she has kids. Could be tone of voice, unless they're typing. Could be he doesn't give a straight answer ("I have custody.") Sure, she made an assumption that he didn't get custody, but there's a way that he didn't just let that be a mistake, but pushed back in a challenging way. It's fine, but don't assume she's wanting him to take care of her kids. She might want him to be a great dad because she may think he's a happier human being that way.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 02:36 AM
0

Maybe she unmatched him because of the snark.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 12:46 AM
1

but applying mental gymnastics for the reason women do it is new. Yeah? Evolutionary Psychology is actually a newer discipline than Feminist Theory. (The relative ages of the two doesn't imply which is right, of course. But it does negate your statement.) It is actually more likely that the NEWER theory (evo psycho) trumps the older one (feminist theory), but feminist theory is about changing how women relate to one another. You're just bashing it in defense of Patriarchy. (WHY the fuck would yo…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 08:03 AM
1

Thanks! Dick.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:54 AM
1

in their poor little brains Sure. You're not misogynists. You respect women! Just not a fully congnitive human beings.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:50 AM
-6

It IS internalised misogyny. Why are you blaming feminist theory for something that's NOT the product of feminist theory, but that's also critiqued and rejected by feminist theory? It's fine to notice that this is something ugly that women do, but it wasn't like we were unbelievable angels who didn't compete for men prior to feminism... In fact, men here have rightly criticised Feminism for its occasional excess in rejecting men.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 09:51 AM
3

culture which values the well-being of women I think the culture very clearly values how women look, in terms of youthful attractiveness, rather than other measures of well-being. Otherwise, plump would be valued more than underweight, which is less healthy.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 09:45 AM
0

Why did you then end the header with "bitches"? Misogyny, by men, not women. Right there.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 09:42 AM
1

You have no sense of history. Traditional roles have been around for at least the last several hundred years. Feminism wasn't about this. Who am I? One of those people who see how the two oppressions commingle and who thinks that both can be worked against for the benefit of both sexes. (Sorry this thrad is so old. I don't visit reddit often. I find it a cesspit of misogyny.)
/r/MensRights19/11/13 09:39 AM
1

You needed to be strong and toughen up from a time loooong before feminism. NOT a feminist issue.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 12:40 AM
1

You do know that feminism rejects traditional definitions of "femininity", right?
/r/MensRights19/10/13 07:38 AM
-2

that traditional "men are strong, protect the women" does NOT have an overlap with feminist thought. That's traditionalist through and through. Feminist thought is that women are strong and don't need protecting. (Feminist thought also includes that men can be protective and strong but that men can ALSO let themselves be supported when they need.)
/r/MensRights19/10/13 07:34 AM
1

I think they're trying to steer a conversation to defining a positive masculinity that doesn't bash gays, and that doesn't treat men as numb automatons. The stuff that boys are taught is very oppressive: that to be masculine is to be tough, strong, never cry, not be a girl, not be a sissy, etc.... It might be a powerful conversation to have.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 07:29 AM
-10

This. Because anything that's AGAINST treating women like shit is clearly indoctrination. edit: I'm downvoted, because this group hasn't yet realised that you can be both supportive of men's liberation AND against oppressing women. As soon as you mention misogyny, you're suspect. Case in point, THIS event, run by a pro-men's rights leader, is "indocrinated" because he's pro-women, as well.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 06:30 AM
1

I absolutely disagree with that equation. The best aspects of masculinity are: brilliant, and loving, and kind, and protective and having integrity and strength of character That's my definition, anyhow, as a pro-men's liberation feminist.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 04:03 AM
3

They aren't saying 'masculinity = misogyny'. Hill is evidently looking to deconstruct the hyper-masculine traditional approach to masculinity that says "men need to be tough, men can't cry, men should be dominant and in control" etc... In fact, that very narrow hyper-masculinity hurts men and hurts boys and hurts gay men as well as women. Go with an open mind. :)
/r/MensRights19/10/13 03:55 AM
11

suicide rate, Men traditionally seek help at a much lower rate. Encouraging men to be more aware of their feelings rather than to 'toughen up' is a men's issue (although this oppression is done to men by both men and women). work-related injury. By allowing opening "men's jobs" to women, injury actually becomes lower for both men and women in the role. For instance, when women started serving on submarines, because they did not have as much upper body strength, heavy lifting became a 2-person jo…
/r/MensRights19/10/13 03:45 AM
-1

My Norton did no such thing.. By the way, some of the blogs are "hate groups".
/r/MensRights10/05/13 09:41 AM
1

To play the devil's advocate, I would say that the issue is that children are hard to raise and every child should have multiple close trustworthy adults who are responsible for them. (E.g., two dads is a valid parental grouping.) I think the nuclear family is simply a fairly recent experiment that's proven to have failed, and its failure looks like single isolated parents raising families. The previous incarnation of 'family' contained a primary pair and a lot of aunts, uncles, cousins, grans, …
/r/MensRights10/05/13 09:39 AM
1

Depends on what acts they performed. Might not have been rape. And not every hears "sexual assault" as if it's less important than "rape".
/r/MensRights22/07/12 10:51 AM
2

No, he's not correct. It doesn't work like that in either the US or Australia. It's a strawman argument.
/r/MensRights22/07/12 10:47 AM
4

"The point is that if the genders had been reversed, then the names, photos, addresses, parent's names, practically every single piece of identifying information about the two boys would be splashed across the headlines of every news outlet imaginable." That's blatantly false. Where the perps are underage, they cannot be identified. Look at the recent case of Savannah Deitrich, in which she's been charged with tweeting the names of her attackers (despite them publicly exposing her). Their names …
/r/MensRights22/07/12 10:45 AM
-2

Wow. Strawman up the fucking wazoo. Equality is equality, and this isn't equality, but hey. MAY AS WELL BASH FEMINISTS!! It wouldnlt be the men-hating-women subreddit, I mean mens-rights, if you couldn't at least spread one bogus piece of absolutely horseshit about feminists daily.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 04:37 AM
4

I think there's a distinction you might be missing. Date rape isn't necessarily the plain old criminal rape of the first scenario, otherwise there wouldn't be a different term for it. The argument is that normal guys and girls can get our signals crossed, especially when we're not always confident communicating with one another, and additionally when people are under the influence of alcohol. Here is why the line is blurred and why it matters: If a girl goes home with you and she's drunk and she…
/r/MensRights11/06/11 02:15 AM
1

The REAL story is that you have no evidence for your claim except for a knee-jerk reactionary misogyny. Most women in Australia work. There's no evidence that she isn't earning as much as he is and that she didn't contribute as much as he did. Blinded much?
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:40 PM
1

Yeah, because it would blow their myth that women are always the evil perpetrators.
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:38 PM
1

No, he needs you to not patronise him. The article said "their family home". The $395,000 would have been a windfall since the cost of the house in Aus 20 years ago probably would have been around $80K. The prices of houses here have tripled in the last 12 years alone.
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:32 PM
1

Depends whether he tried saying that during the marriage. Afterwards is a bit too late.
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:25 PM
1

Out of curiosity, what percentage of combined earnings do you perceive each partner has a right to (assuming that the couple both gave 20 years to a marriage, bought property, raised children, etc.)? Do you think they should contribute evenly to the pay the bills, and each keep a separate account with their own leftovers, despite an imbalance in earnings? Or do you think they should both contribute everything to a shared pot? What if the imbalance was due to a combined choice that she stay home …
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:24 PM
-1

Unsubstantiated claim. HE testified to a court that he gave all his money away. What part are you claiming is unsubstantiated? I was simply claiming that it isn't impossible that some guy who goes and sells all the family property might just be an asshole, but since he's MALE, in your fantasy la-la-land, he's some kind of hero (and the female is always wrong, and always lying). Men's rights is about liberating men, not writing up some kind of fantasy crap where men are automatically on some kind…
/r/MensRights11/04/11 02:05 PM
-5

... because a man with such extreme control issues enough to spite his ex and his children couldn't possibly have a violent bone in his body. By the way, this type of control is violence.
/r/MensRights10/04/11 02:56 AM
14

she was 17 and she already had two kids I would hazard a guess that a white trash girl with 2 kids by age 17 has no clue about being "daddy's little princess." I hope she wasn't speaking of her own experience. I too had a fantastic dad. Sounds like you'll make a great one.
/r/MensRights24/01/11 11:02 AM
0

I don't see it. Women are not in power. The owners of everything are predominantly men. The people pulling the strings behind the large majority of it all? Men. In light of this, I see the insistence of the conservative backlash branch of Men's Rights that women are in control, is just a way to further youir agenda of women back in they kitchen popping out babies between giving blowjobs. (Please don't read this as meaning that men aren't badly oppressed in this world - you are. But it's most oft…
/r/MensRights20/01/11 11:27 AM
2

Meanwhile, the really important issues like boys failing in school and child visitation enforcement are quietly ignored. You don't know if the supporters for relaxing social mores on clothing support this or don't (although I hear your point about relative importance and it's a good one). Thanks for the (superficial) support. Well, gee wiz. Why are you assuming that my support is superficial? What was the last thing YOU did to forward men's rights aside from sitting in your chair bitching about …
/r/MensRights19/01/11 09:30 AM
3

You wrote "I don't advocate violence, unlike feminists" Sorry, in terms of propositional logic, if you'd intended to state an Existential ("There exists some feminists who advocate violence") instead of a Universal ("All feminists advocate violence"), you ought to have stated some. But that would have weakened your argument, and so now when I call you on it, you're back pedalling. Yes, I agree. Not all feminists advocate violence, and there are many many male supremacists who do. You haven't yet…
/r/MensRights19/01/11 09:16 AM
2

/yawn
/r/MensRights18/01/11 12:31 PM
1

I don't need to prove anything to you. And what is this shit that male supremacists have where they think their cock is a big deal? *yawn* (Non-supremicists have lovely cocks too, and they are happy to play, instead of having to control women to prove their manhood.) Cliffor, not only are you not a big deal, but you've already shown that you have absolutely no concept of how great and wonderful and sublime sex can be. You're just as happy fucking a molded piece of rubber. Why the would I want to…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 12:10 PM
2

And what would lead you to conclude that? I pretty much love sex and I love cock. I'm not afraid of losing it. If you prefer to fuck a rubber doll, or even a high-tech robotic rubber doll (I gotta say, they are cool!) that is your choice. I think deep down it's an empty lonely choice, but that's your prerogative.
/r/MensRights18/01/11 10:54 AM
6

feminists own words and ideologies. Why do they want men to be househusbands and to cook and clean when they have spent decades claiming it oppressed them? We don't. We want to share housework since 1) it needs to be done and 2) everyone benefits from it. It's only oppressive if it stops you from being a fully expressed adult with a meaningful life. (Coming home from a hard day at work and having to spend hours cooking/cleaning while one's partner relaxes, reads, catches up on news, catches up w…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 10:47 AM
9

How does it fit into men's rights to insist that all men conform to a rigid masculine dress code? Most men will want to, but some won't. To twist this and say that parents who allow their sons freedom of expression are oppressors might be, forgive me if I'm wrong, a way to avoid your own discomfort about things that don't fit in the narrow stereotype of allowable masculinity. great majority of men don't care for that No one is insisting that the great majority of men look, act or dress like wome…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 10:41 AM
6

Is every single interaction with a woman rape now? No, nor has it ever been. Straw man argument. Where the hell am I supposed to put my penis? Where you want to, as long as your partner is willing. Enjoy :-) If this goes on for too long we will have to make woman like robots that will take it in every single hole with a smile, just like women used to Come on, be realistic. Do YOU always want sex in every fashion at any time that YOUR partner wants? Calling for women to go back to the attitude wh…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 10:26 AM
2

yes. All feminists advocate violence in all circumstances. No, wait. they don't. Another factoid pulled from thin air? ADDED: I conclude that you are a troll. Above in this thread, you wrote that feminists' attitude is "let's create peace on earth and then we can sit around and sing kumbaya in a drum circle". Yet now, you seem to be claiming that feminists advocate violence. You've also stated that while men have differences of opinion, feminists are all of a like mind (which is where the contra…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 07:29 AM
1

If you read literature on the subject of masculinity from male Men's Rights Activists, they will talk about this subject as well. I'm not suggesting anything that isn't already in the literature. I also might be older than you and perhaps things were different on the sporting field 30 years ago. But since the ages of men isn't limited to the average age of Reddit men (24), your experience may vary from theirs.
/r/MensRights18/01/11 07:25 AM
-1

For a troll king, you're kinda bad at it. If you read any number of my posts here, you will find that I'm in fact not misandrist. I'm fairly men-centric, in fact. My mother was a witch and my father was an amazing guy. His love was what kept me sane through a bad childhood. Make of that what you will. I have a great husband who I adore... The list goes on.
/r/MensRights16/01/11 08:55 AM
4

The tender years doctrine may have been passed by men but men don't work together Women don't either. We aren't one hive mind, much as you try to portray us. The NOW has repeatedly fought against shared custody NOW has fought against certain father's organizations for a variety of reasons, but have never come out with an anti shared custody platform as far as I've ever heard, nor could I find one when I searched. Please Provide evidence for this claim. Hell, women and their entrance into the job…
/r/MensRights16/01/11 08:51 AM
4

Women are the tool the government uses to oppress men. Huh? Women aren't oppressed? Gee, nice to know. I'd trade places for some of that male privilege. Would you?
/r/MensRights16/01/11 08:10 AM
2

WOMEN control 57% of the vote 14 states ban anyone with a felony conviction from voting for life; 2 states allow incarcerated individuals to vote. This is a definitely a men's issue, but haas nothing to do with "feminists". You see boogywomen everywhere. ... and 100% of the political dialog. Paranoid much? PURGE all feminists from government Since you think women control 100%, that must mean every woman should be purged. Just curious, how would you go about doing that?
/r/MensRights16/01/11 08:06 AM
1

Yes, I did. I was making a side comment on the concept that women have been winning rights for a century.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 04:49 AM
5

Are you denying that feminism has worked to get women UNJUST and UNDESERVED privileges since its beginnings as an effective political movement? Don't confuse all "privileges" that women may receive with feminism. For example, the ideas that "child care is a woman's job" and "therefore custody should be awarded to the mother" pre-dates feminism and has never been a feminist request. On contrast, feminism's concern was that childcare be shared and that women should have other options. Note that th…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 04:28 AM
1

There are a number of reasons she might have bled. The triage nurse even put down bleeding as the only sign of possible trauma (didn't mention lacerations, swelling, coloring, etc). I have to admit you're right. The bleeding supports the claim she was being hurt, but isn't conclusive evidence. By the way, although you didn't need to, thank you for your expansion of your ex-gf's condition. It sounds like there were other issues rather than vaginal tearing at work.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:56 AM
-2

I'm a feminist and I don't think you're trolling. In fact, I answered you above and agree with virtually everything you said.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:18 AM
6

I believe ENTP is using the term "special privileges" in the legal sense of certain rules and clauses being grandfathered, and thus hard to change. For instance, women don't have the right to get unconditional child support from men who aren't the father, even though it has happened in certain cases. There is at last one famous case in which the court used the argument that "the support arrangements were already in place and since it's in the best interest of the child, the court will not change…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:13 AM
2

the privileges they've accumulated over the past hundred years Excuse me? First wave feminism won the vote. The next wave was only about 40 years ago. You trying to take the vote away from us wimmins or something?
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:02 AM
1

I'd be curious to find out from her whether she enjoyed the sex and whether she would orgasm (independently of what you believe, since men aren't always told the truth - and please don't feel put out by my questioning, men can/do/have faked orgasm too). Vaginas are pretty stretchy, and the fact that you didn't fit suggests to me that she wasn't aroused enough and that she would have been in pain. Excuse me if I'm incorrect. By the way, aside from the above, I owe you an apology, I was sure you h…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:59 AM
1

I agree with much of what you say except for: If she had a complete memory I would find her more credible. But her spotty memory destroys her credibility. Her memory of "I didn't want to, he was hurting me" seems very intact. That she was abused enough so that her vagina was bleeding is evidence that she was hurt. I think your a priori conviction that rape is extremely rare makes it hard for you to interpret the evidence in the same light as others.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:45 AM
1

I agree. And I wouldn't convict someone on what little evidence we see in the article. However, you already concluded without one shred of doubt that "no rape occurred" (you posted earlier). You based your assumptions on your interpretation that her giving a BJ means she's keen for sex, but let me point out that sometimes a BJ can mean "I'm not into this, but maybe he'll leave me the fuck alone if he gets off". (Note that this isn't rape either, nor am I implying it is. It's just a very obvious …
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:41 AM
1

And a "no" to some people is heard as a "I don't care, gonna take what I want anyhow".
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:34 AM
2

It's a huge question: how do you change societal attitudes? And how do you make them stick? I couldn't begin to tell you. I know that some good "libertine" thinking came out of the 60s (sex is good, powerful, fun, etc, men aren't perverts, women aren't sluts) but it hasn't stuck :-(
/r/MensRights13/01/11 09:39 AM
4

Double standards across both age groups: With respect to the adult involved, women are "lonely", men are "predators. With respect to the youth, boys are lauded for having had sex, girls are condemned (as a gross generalization, of course).
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:40 AM
2

I think there is still a huge stink about priests molesting children. Do you have any statistics that show that women molesting teens is more common? I assume you mean per capita? Also, let's not call it "seducing". "Seduction" implies consent, and if these teens were too young to consent, they were molested.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:36 AM
2

This isn't really a Men's Rights piece. I disagree. While we are over-protective of children to a fault, we also couple it with our paranoia about men, which is the oppressive shit that gets layered on. Further in the article, she talks specifically about the mistreatment of men working in child care, and goes on to give examples of how men are immediately suspect wrt children.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:27 AM
1

Wow. You might want psychological counseling for this disorder you have. You are certainly projecting quite a lot onto me. I'm finding this rather humorous, while you twist yourself in knots trying to define me (incorrectly, I might point out.) Anyhow, it's more and more clear that you're simply trolling. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:17 AM
1

I do agree with you on this.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:12 AM
1

I'm saying its not sounding like there is enough evidence to prove it was rape. I concur that there might not be enough evidence to conclude it's rape, but I see NO evidence to conclude it wasn't. For starters, you've got one guy who walked away (Pugh) because she said "no". I would have thought you trusted a man's analysis.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:12 AM
2

Oh, so men are incapable of deciding NOT to fuck someone who says they don't want to be fucked? WOW! That's really oppressive to men. I object that you think that men are incapable of making informed adult decisions concerning their sexuality!
/r/MensRights13/01/11 05:10 AM
3

So she sucked his dick, willingly, but then after they had sex she called it rape No, she sucked Satterfield's dick in the hopes that he would be satisfied. She didn't even remember that Everson was there. Furthermore, there are any number of reasons for a woman to prefer to perform oral sex than to be fucked (pregnancy, STDs, plain old hygiene, not wanting to be penetrated). But this case isn't about whether Satterfield raped her or not (sounds like he did). This case is about someone who wasn'…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 04:57 AM
1

The other part is that it was in the men's restroom and none of the men objected Yeah, none of the men in this thread complained when kn33ch41_ talked about how funny it is to piss in a woman's mouth when you get a blowjob, either. How odd that only a woman would find that offensive! I contend that if men here chanced upon a thread that talked about pissing on men for amusement without prior consent, you would all be horrified and offended. So, how far is this going to go in this regard? Are we …
/r/MensRights13/01/11 02:24 AM
0

Like when a extremist muslim says that they don't want to see any picture of mohammed being pissed on. FTFY. If you're going to go for an analogy, try to actually capture the essence of what someone is trying to say. Otherwise, you're either being stupid or belligerent. (And I really don't think you're stupid.)
/r/MensRights13/01/11 02:14 AM
2

Do they? I honestly don't have evidence from experience that this is the case. I'm sure there are "bad girls" out there who reward boorish behavior, but I don't take it as any kind of rule. I also have the opposite image (probably from fiction, so I also don't take it to be "truth") of a girl going up and slugging the bully for being so mean (much to the dismay of the bullied boy who doesn't want a girl to stick up for him)!
/r/MensRights13/01/11 02:11 AM
1

You wrote: I'll paraphrase this quotation by Edmund Burke again: "All that is required for misandry to prevail is for good feminists to say nothing...." Men are oppressed widely by society, not narrowly by feminists (most people, feminist or not, are complicit in the oppression of men). Society in general still assumes that men should suffer nobly in silence, society in general still thinks that the most dangerous job in the world (combat) is a man's role. dressing male hate in gender-equitable …
/r/MensRights13/01/11 02:05 AM
2

Not wounded, not emotional, not whiny, etc etc yadda yadda. I'm here because I'm interested in men's rights, and I've been an ally for years. I happen to disagree with the right-wing anti-feminist (sometimes anti-woman) stance that a number of MRAs take, yourself included. To some degree, I do hear the criticism and agree with some of the details of the critique of feminism's excesses and blindnesses. Most feminists, like most people in society, don't see men's oppression. I find that feminists …
/r/MensRights13/01/11 12:07 AM
5

I'm trying to show that there are reasons to reject as a generalization that "boys bully because girls reward them".
/r/MensRights12/01/11 06:02 AM
2

I'm not trolling. I don't know why you continue this line of discussion. You don't know me at all. You're just fighting for no reason I can tell except that I'm the closest available female.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 05:59 AM
4

Did that encourage you to be a bully though?
/r/MensRights12/01/11 05:57 AM
1

because this fits in with accepted reddiquette. No, wait....
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:51 AM
1

Fair enough. Upvoted.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:46 AM
3

instaed of just using feminism to leverage female privilege? Ok, case in point, since you need me to "prove" that I'm on your side before you stop treating me wish disrespect: In order to prove to you that I'm not interested in female privilege, but in gender equality: In our last pay negotiations between my company and my union, I brought a petition to the union that we incorporate the same language and change the rules so that men could get the same benefits as women, with regards to parental …
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:45 AM
2

Where are the organizations providing funding to end violence against men? On the one hand, it would be great having Men's Right's activists working towards this (and I'm sure somewhere there are). On the other hand, if one's activism mere extends to informing people that DV against men is a serious issue, I commend them! Speaking more generally about violence against men, however, I thought most violence against men was random and performed by (usually male) strangers. Billions of dollars is ea…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:37 AM
-1

I don't know why I was downvoted (yeah, I do ;-) but I still contend that the person didn't view the article. /Shrug Yeah, I don't want to be pissed on, symbolically or otherwise.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:32 AM
1

Yeah, I'm sure you're right. I think that many women (feminists and otherwise) are afraid of men's sexuality (because men's strength is frightening to them). AND let me state, before I am misinterpreted, that I recognize a couple of pieces of men's oppression in this: the unfounded assumptions that a men are dangerous and men cannot control their sexuality (i.e., "men want it all the time", "men are animal"s, etc). I don't want to buy into that, and I will point out that this is where it gets me…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:30 AM
1

Ok, you make good points. I guess the measure of whether they are misogynist is whether if they'd been angry at men, would they be calling to "assault" them. It's an open question. I'm not sure though that the desire to assault women with whom you're angry isn't a definitely of misogyny. I need to give it more thought. I'm pissed off at those three, but I don't want to assault them, and I presume it's because I actually like and respect men as a group. I'd prefer to debate and come to some commo…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:11 AM
-1

Yes. There exist some people who are "fucking retards". How is this misandrist?
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:05 AM
3

As I wrote in my first response: I agree with your ideas about consciousness raising and men's rights. But do you mind not calling women "bitches"? MUST you insult us? You write: inbuilt consciousness raising for male rights Which right are you calling for in our back and forth? The right to insult people without regard? Sure, go for it.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 03:02 AM
2

However, there are also studies that show that the violence is asymmetrical: women are more likely to use objects in their violence, probably due to being weaker than men. Men kill their female intimate partners at about four times the rate that women kill their male intimate partners. This is NOT to say that DV against men isn't of utmost importance, especially given its disproportunately underfunded status. By the way, this is a very interesting read; Fiebert is the 2nd of 3 authors. Less of a…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 02:53 AM
3

The point is that violence against women is overblown hysteria Or perhaps violence against women is getting the funding it needs (I doubt it, actually), but violence against men is extremely underfunded. This certainly needs to be addressed. According to this website about 'Domestic Violence Against Men' , 40-50% of DV is against men. However, when DV against men and woman is compared, women take more damage and women have more trouble extricating themselves socially and financially. I'm only po…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 02:43 AM
8

pretending that men are encouraging boys to be bullies Boys are often taught, largely by other males, from the very youngest ages to not cry, not express pain, not express emotion. (This is very much at the root of men's oppression, in which men don't speak up against ill- treatement, and this is why Men's liberation is so important.) However, acting out in an aggressive manner is one avenue open to such young children. I'm not sure how you can say this isn't "encouragement".
/r/MensRights12/01/11 02:27 AM
3

Boys see that girls reward aggressive bullying behavior, and guess what boys start to do? Aggressive bullying behavior has its own rewards (such as not being the target of bullying, or expressing one's own frustration at having been bullied) far earlier than boys start desiring approval from girls.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 02:22 AM
1

That is between two consenting adults in the privacy of their home.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:53 AM
2

A large part of men's oppression is due to men being trained to put up with shit and not complain. The opposite side is that women have stopped putting up with shit and are vocal about perceived bad treatment. The debate here is whether the urinal is "bad treatment" or not (and shouldn't be about women silencing themselves).
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:52 AM
0

Come on, we women/feminists know not all men are women haters. True, I've flagged some above who I consider misogynist, but two of them said that they want to assault women and the third said he finds it immeasurably funny when he pisses in a women's mouth during a BJ. I certainly wouldn't paint everyone with that label.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:43 AM
2

Really... If you heard there was a women's only group that practiced beating up male dolls, the men here would be up in arms, even if they weren't there, even if they'd never be invited, etc.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:39 AM
3

The anti-porn movement is largely NON-feminist. It's generally a hardcore Christian Conservative movement and always has been. Only a small percentage of (2nd wave) feminists were anti-sex and were as often countered by other pro-sex feminists. The radical feminist journal "Off Our Backs" was answered by a radical feminist journal called "On Our Backs". I assure you, we don't want to stop men's sexuality (we just want to stop assaults and rapes, etc. Which you do as well.)
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:37 AM
0

You didn't bother loading the article, I take it.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:32 AM
3

Perhaps the suggestion that it is desireable to piss on women/in women's mouths is akin to hate speech. Consider an equivalent to be shaping/coloring the urinal to resemble a cartoonish version of a member of an ethnicity so that you were peeing on a certain ethnic group. (I'm sure you can see why this is offensive).
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:29 AM
-9

Wow. Misogyny #3. Man, you guys are fucking retards. For you three, this has NOTHING to do with ending oppression of men- it's all about displaying your hatred towards women.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:24 AM
-3

Wow. Misogyny #2.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:23 AM
-5

Wow. Misogyny #1.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:23 AM
3

females failing to display empathy, Calling me bitch was the cause of my lack of empathy with you. How can I empathize with someone who's made it clear before we even start that you will disrespect me simply because of my gender? i am a male rights activist. this is a crucial distinction. ... all males deserve rights. I agree with the latter, but I thought "males rights" was the new dogwhistle to signal that you're a right-winger. (Fuck the right wing. Corporate shills all. Pretending that it's …
/r/MensRights12/01/11 01:20 AM
5

I agree with your ideas about consciousness raising and men's rights. But do you mind not calling women "bitches"? MUST you insult us? FFS, some of us want to be allies, and then you go and be a complete fucking misogynist. FUCK your phony "equality", you're clearly all about ruling over us. I don't like and I don't trust you. Give me men's rights activists who don't hate women, please!
/r/MensRights11/01/11 12:46 PM
4

the impact a DNA paternity test can have: ‘The result can be shattering, leading to divorce, marital violence, mental health difficulties for all parties including the children.’ Hopefully only for the current generation who didn't have the benefit of DNA testing that we do now. Kinda sucks for them, sure, but isn't the point that testing would save future generations of this kind of bullshit? At a stroke, the one thing that women had going for them has been taken away, the one respect in which …
/r/MensRights09/11/10 05:58 AM
1

. The man is certainly responsible for her decision No. The man is certainly (50%) responsible for her pregnancy. I agree with you that in a perfect world, they should talk and come up with a solution that both agree with. I agree with wolfsktaag that this may not happen, and ultimately she is/was/may be the final arbiter. Personally, I like the idea of men being able to choose to raise the child should he choose, or disavow the child completely, if that's what he wants instead. Women currently …
/r/MensRights05/11/10 04:29 AM
1

Men ARE working on mens issues. Yes, I know. I consider myself an ally. I was more commenting on the original unnecessary slam of feminists for no reason I could perceive. Feminist policies and social memes are the CAUSE of most of these issues. Social memes, yes. But you list feminist policies first and I call 'bullshit'. It would be great if feminism had evolved to perceive men's oppression, but it didn't (in the same way that feminism had it's racist aspects - the followers are part of the so…
/r/MensRights04/11/10 03:37 AM
1

it's obvious as all get-out that Feminists ain't gonna do it Sounds like you're just grabbing at any opportunity to criticize feminism. Let women work on women's issues and let men work on men's issues. (It is oppression of women to always have to take care of everyone all the time. Another oppression of women is that we then get blamed for everyone's ills.)
/r/MensRights04/11/10 03:02 AM
1

Kanin's research remains the biggest, most rigorous study of this subject ever conducted Which is an extremely sad state of affairs, since it's neither larger nor rigorous. (By the way, your statement isn't true. There are other studies, some of which call Kanin's work into question.) Clearly, false rape is an issue that should be looked at, because the stigma associated with sexual abuse charges, true or false, is so life-altering (life threatening, even, since people lose their families and li…
/r/MensRights03/11/10 02:53 AM
4

Please stop using this faulty number. This number was from a badly written piece by Eugene Kanin that's endlessly repeated, but it doesn't make it true. Kanin himself warned against extrapolating from his number. The report made the following mistakes: The 41% is based only on the closed cases, rather than on the total number of cases. (Note that research shows that less than 40% of rapes are reported and of those reported, less than 30% are "solved"). The cases were from a small city (about 75,…
/r/MensRights02/11/10 03:04 AM
-1

On the contrary, from what I've seen "here", the high level of misogyny in this group guarantees that a large number of subscribers cheers the idea of rape when applies as a punishment to women (while denying rape happens to women), and abhorring the idea of prison rape (as it is currently incorrectly envisioned only to happen by men to men). However, I personally applaud your stance: rape isn't a fitting punishment for humankind.
/r/MensRights02/11/10 02:40 AM
1

Rape isn't a life sentence in the UK or the US. In the UK, the sentencing council recommends a 5 year sentence if the victim is over 18 and there are no aggravating issues. The average time served in the USA is 5.4 years. Note that this includes both longer sentences reduced by parole and repeat offenders.
/r/MensRights02/11/10 02:28 AM
1

Ah, thank you... I read the poster above, and then pulled the sentence I quoted and completely missed the one below it. I withdraw my point.
/r/MensRights02/11/10 02:24 AM
1

the problem is men are oppressed by other men more often than by women. and it's partly because, yes, you are ontop of the hierarchy. Possibly. I think it's useful to distinguish between oppressions by one group upon another, and societal oppressions (the oppression is generically performed by everyone). Otherwise we get into a blame game. A lot of rightwing men's "rights" groups are misogynist, but there's a more liberal branch that's pro-feminist, recognizing that both groups are benefited by …
/r/MensRights02/11/10 01:01 AM
1

Well, congratulations on your very own misogynist subreddit. just wondering: why did you need one? The question to ask men who think 'women have it all, women are privileged, women have too much power' is this: " Really? You would trade?"
/r/MensRights29/10/10 03:09 AM
3

"I'm sorry, but I think politics are more complex than your Neanderthal approach to my gender, Sharron."
/r/MensRights29/10/10 02:59 AM
4

That's politics It's actually a perfect example of men's oppression, and it points out that people still are fairly unaware that men's oppression exists. Useful to point out anytime a sexist comment is made towards men, however, be aware of the catch-22 nature of men's oppression: (Since "men aren't oppressed", men can't complain.) If you complain, you "aren't a real man". This runs extremely deep. Boys are taught to suppress their pain and their feelings from the start. If you do express hurt, …
/r/MensRights29/10/10 02:42 AM
4

I really liked your analysis above. The other thing is that telling men to 'man up', in the 'grow up' sense, often means to 'get a job to support other people' or to somehow be more serious rather than playful. (I've even heard men's child-rearing techniques come into criticism since dads are more likely to play - which turns out to be great for the kids. (Moms do need to sometimes loosen up.)) I think it's important to challenge both uses of the term "man up". I think it's important to retain o…
/r/MensRights29/10/10 02:23 AM
1

Yes, but have you studied it? (Sorry to be glib. I come from a scientific field and so I assume the article is saying that given the dearth in recorded data, research has been needed to come up with the best estimates possible. Researchers try not to pull the answers from our asses, to the best of our abilities. We also try to publish in scientific journals where our peers can view our methodologies and question them if we make mistakes.) Caveat: I haven't read the research and it may be faulty.…
/r/MensRights28/10/10 04:17 AM
2

Perhaps you can speak to me like an adult, Endo. Sorry I didn't step into your argument like you wanted. /shrug (because we're not actually in disagreement.)
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:46 AM
1

Nah, I don't agree. The real way to gain strength against oppression is to be aware of what and why and how it all works.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:43 AM
1

Sounds like she was smart enough to ask for what she needed. Kinda sad she needed to drug, however. But several years of counseling unfortunately takes a long time.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:41 AM
1

Err... excuse me? My awareness of the standards doesn't mean I uphold them OR approve of them. In fact, if you read what I wrote, you would notice me denouncing the standard. So, you are blaming the false rape accusations of idiotic girls who regret having sex later and throwing guys in jail for LIFE or twenty years...on guys and their freedom to desire. I am saying that women who wake up the next day regretting sex she had should grow up and reject their internalized standard that "women who li…
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:39 AM
2

Actually, everyone holds the view that you can't rape the willing. Rape, as you know, is when you are forced to have sex when you're NOT willing. Translation: Not all gay men are insatiable sex machines who want it all the time. That's precisely akin to the men's oppression that denies that men can be victims of rape.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:24 AM
2

The media had me so fucked in the head with your misandrist messages Because the media is feminist? I doubt it. Oppression against men happens regardless of whether women are powerless or powerful. Men were oppressed before feminism and continue to be after feminism. Ending men's oppression is important in its own right. And there are a number of ways oppression of men and women are tied together and both need to be ended. I would posit that the anti-male messages that had you stay in an untenab…
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:08 AM
1

Why do you think only 1 in 10,000 men commit rape? Somewhere around 1 in 8 men are sexually assaulted in their lifetimes. That isn't all that different numerically from the 1 in 4 women who are. That's saying that 18.6% of people are assaulted by 0.02% of people... that's 931 attacks per assaulter. Isn't it more likely that the a larger number of people commit very few assaults? I think the numbers are getting at "don't be one of the few that makes the mistake and goes over the line. ANYONE can …
/r/MensRights14/10/10 05:03 AM
5

Yeah, but women can/do commit forcible sex. And just because a man isn't willing doesn't mean he won't get aroused. (Arousal and even orgasm doesn't imply willingness or consent.)
/r/MensRights14/10/10 03:45 AM
2

Have you considered that the offer of a drink is an invitation to get to know someone? (And I don't mean intimately. It should be no more than an invitation to chat.) If you accept a drink, but make no attempt at further communication, you're simply taking advantage of people. If you are completely uninterested, don't take the drink, as a matter of principal.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 03:37 AM
3

I expect you pay a a gesture of courtship. If she's not boorish, and she doesn't end up liking you, or at least considering you as a courting partner, she should split the bill. THAT would be classy. On the other hand, if she offered to pay, it would be a show of generosity and signaling that she doesn't wish to take advantage of you, and you could expect that if you kept dating her, she would reciprocate in kind, occasionally paying or cooking for you. If she insisted on paying for the first da…
/r/MensRights14/10/10 03:33 AM
1

Paying for one or two dates isn't comparable to what women expect and put men through. Not all of us. I'm always had more money than my husband and have always paid proportionately more (or treated him, when he was broke). But I am under the impression that culturally, even though it's 2010, men still expect to pay for dates (the first few anyhow) and expect women to want them to and/or to let them. I agree that it's a strange setup.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 03:26 AM
4

As a woman, I hate the stupid standards that are taught to us that (we need to pretend that) we don't want sex, so that we aren't thought of as sluts and whores etc etc... I think women drink sometimes in order to lose that inhibition. Unfortunately, the next day when that inhibition is back in full force, women can get confused about desire and regret. If only we had the same freedom to desire that men are allowed. I'm certain there would be a lot more fucking and a lot less "date rape" (as opp…
/r/MensRights14/10/10 03:18 AM
0

Speeding does not endanger lives. I took a driving course as a way to reduce a speeding ticket to (effectively) a parking ticket. The one thing I learned is that most traffic accidents are a result of mechanical failure. If you get a blowout at 98 mph, you will have less likelihood of controlling your car than if you get a blowout at 70 mph. I also learned that we are fragile creatures and the additional damage of an impact rises exponentially as the speed rises linearly. So, mechanical failure …
/r/MensRights12/10/10 04:41 AM
3

the vast majority of procedures are relatively cheap. If you are a wealthy American who can fly there: yes. If you are a member of the middle class within those societies, perhaps. A poor worker? nope. patients [in Canada and England] often have to wait months (or even years) before they can see a doctor. For free non-standard, non-life threatening elective procedures - which are 100% outside the availability for Americans who don't have the money!! Show me where either is an argument in favour …
/r/MensRights12/10/10 04:16 AM
1

If I have no incentive (monetary or otherwise) to innovate, I won't innovate. All incentives flow from market mechanisms (price signals). From Paul Krugman: [E]conomists have known for 45 years — ever since Kenneth Arrow’s seminal paper — that the standard competitive market model just doesn’t work for health care: adverse selection and moral hazard are so central to the enterprise that nobody, nobody expects free-market principles to be enough. To act all wide-eyed and innocent about these prob…
/r/MensRights12/10/10 04:12 AM
2

The average time served in the USA for rape is 5.4 years. First degree murder penalties are state by state, and often have a 25 year to life sentence. Of course, you might be up for parole in half that time. Besides, why don't you think you would regret taking someone's life? It might be a life sentence inside your head.
/r/MensRights07/10/10 03:44 AM
1

Failure to consent due to being inebriated is not consent. Big difference. (However, it isn't certain from the tale whether he consented at the time or simply didn't speak up.) If you're too drunk to protest me taking your wallet or your car keys, it might still theft if you didn't give me your money or car. (It may be hard to press a criminal case, I may even be able to persuade a jury that I was doing it for your own good.) But the inability to press charges doesn't make an act what it isn't.
/r/MensRights07/10/10 03:38 AM
3

Not all women use the term 'rape' or even 'date rape' for 'regret' (although sometimes this forum would have you believe otherwise). The strength of publicizing 'date rape' in the 80s was to let women know that they could say 'no' if they chose to - they weren't obliged to have sex with a man. And 'no' means 'no'. I agree completely with AnnArchist: Regret isn't rape. However, it may be that you didn't consent. And I think consent should be absolutely mandatory before shagging. If you didn't con…
/r/MensRights07/10/10 03:28 AM
-1

any man from some slight during her youth. This woman is clearly damaged. People don't really get all that damaged by "some slight". For some reason that I can't fathom, you appear to think it's in the interest of men to paint women as completely irrational, but for the most part, people who act out this level of violence are irrational for reasons we can usually understand. Note that understanding why someone turns out to be criminal, pathological, insane, whatever word one chooses to use, does…
/r/MensRights05/03/10 08:40 AM
1

I really did think you were purposefully annoying me Nah, not purposely ;-) So I apologize as well. Thank you. Apology more than accepted. :-) So in this case I really do believe that thinking "it was not just a hug" is intimately connected with the mindset that branded this kid a sexual offender.... (Because even if something a child does is indeed "inappropriate" (as this certainly was), does not mean in the least that there was some kind of inappropriate intent behind that.) Kids do stuff tha…
/r/MensRights07/01/10 12:21 AM
1

Oh, so no evidence, except "the world according to AnnArchist". Please provide links to reliable research supporting your claim that 90% of sexual harassment suits are frivolous.
/r/MensRights06/01/10 11:51 PM
1

I linked to a site a week or two ago here that gave this new definition of rape Ah ok, I missed that one. That's rape now according to the extremists I'll have to check out feminist sites and see if anyone's buying it. Sounds a bit like Dworkin in the 80's, who considered all penetration to be oppression. A fair number of (just as extreme) women opposed her, and even started a journal dedicated to celebrating sex, including penetrative sex (including teaching lesbian feminists to love their dild…
/r/MensRights06/01/10 11:41 PM
1

Quick to pull the gender card, eh? You've been implying that I'm somehow part and parcel of the sexual double standards and implying that I support them. I took this, perhaps I was too hasty, to mean you were calling me an oppressor of men. That opened the door (i.e., that was your gender card). Again, perhaps I was too hasty, and I apologize if I read too much into it. You called me stupid, because you didn't see the point I was making, and all I could think of was "fuck you and the horse you r…
/r/MensRights06/01/10 03:31 AM
0

what the adults did with it, as that is the real problem Yes, it is. However, what I was responding to was the claim in WaPo that "hugs are not allowed, onoes!" . You saying that "it was not just a hug" is precisely the rationale that led to people crucifying that kid's actions. No, my pointing out that "it was not just a hug" is precisely why WaPo was wrong in their claim. fini. That's all. Nothing more. None. That's just you being thick. No, that's you adding complex layers to something as sim…
/r/MensRights06/01/10 02:16 AM
1

It's the logical implication of what you said. No. It really is not. Not unless your interpretation is "children are perfect angels and never do inappropriate actions". I simply pointed out that the "hug" wasn't a simply hug, from what I'd heard, but may have been an action that the boy needs to learn is "inappropriate". Kids can be inappropriate. I know I was. What part of "I don't agree that a child should be labeled 'sex offender'" means I think he should be labeled "sex offender"?
/r/MensRights06/01/10 12:46 AM
1

Very uncomfortable but we both got though it We've all been on both sides of that equation. Today, this is included in the radical feminists definition of rape. I don't think it is. According to whom? I'm talking about consensual sex. Ah, yes, you were. Sorry, that was me being unclear. I wasn't distinguishing between unwanted and non-consensual (in my defense, I did distinguish between criminal and (non-criminal*). By my main point is still this: great, you (sorry, not you, carchamp1, but the g…
/r/MensRights06/01/10 12:10 AM
1

Thats what she said because she wanted to sue the school and quit working. I hadn't heard this. Do you have any evidence for this?
/r/MensRights06/01/10 12:02 AM
1

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Wait, no I didn't. but since you want to put words in my mouth and paint me like an idiot, then go ahead and lie. I was pointing out that the hug was a bit more than a "hug" and required some type of intervention. I also said that children should not be labeled "sex offenders". I'm certain if a little girl buried her head in a male teacher's crotch, and rubbed forcefully, the teacher would be quite disturbed and would act very quickly to protect himself. Kids do …
/r/MensRights05/01/10 11:55 PM
1

Hugging bans are being enacted all over the country right now. Yeah, I actually know you weren't kidding. I'm pretty sure that this ban is for older kids, though. I don't think they've gone quite this far in pre-school. The new radical feminist definition of rape includes things like unwanted hugs and kisses, and "sweet-talking" your girlfriend into giving you a blow-job (yes, I wrote that correctly - you can now be considered a rapist by getting a blow-job) Well, it isn't new. And unwanted hugs…
/r/MensRights05/01/10 05:21 AM
0

This bill is CERTAINLY an effort to oppress men. I don't deny that a law can be used to oppress men, but I'm not certain that's its design. Besides, it's also a tool for men to use. I'm certain that psychological violence goes both ways.
/r/MensRights05/01/10 05:05 AM
4

I couldn't figure out the quotes. In the sentence, "This is what makes Levant’s criticism of the same selfish, excessive, and anti-social behaviors so refreshing", it would appear that the quotation that follows would be Levant's words, but they're clearly some copy-editing, possibly sent out by the book's publishers: “The Cultural Devastation of American Women is a factual investigation into American women’s misunderstanding and abuse of liberation. Levant burrows into the psyches and habits of…
/r/MensRights05/01/10 04:57 AM
2

Yes, I saw that as well, that the complete first page "above the fold" only used gender neutral terminology (5 times in the first 5 paragraphs, in fact). Interestingly, though, the rest of the article dealt with a denigrated woman, and the associated TV campaign uses the same tool (a controlled woman). I'm thinking that the article is kind of a two-pronged fit to men's oppression. First, I assume they chose the women's stories because the (Western) audience pays more attention to women's pain. T…
/r/MensRights05/01/10 04:28 AM
3

The Washington Post over-simplifies things. If I recall the story about the 4-year old boy in Texas, the boy didn't simply hug the teacher's aide, he planted his face and rubbed her breasts with his face fairly vigorously. I don't agree that a child should be labeled "sex offender", especially young children. However, I think it's appropriate to (carefully) teach a child what's acceptable and what isn't. Hugs are actually still allowed. And we have no idea if that boy will grow up to be a "sex o…
/r/MensRights05/01/10 04:04 AM
4

I actually liked the phrasing: “The study emphasizes the importance of couples’ figuring parenting out together and accepting the different ways of parenting,” Dr. Kline Pruett said. Fathers tend to do things differently, Dr. Kyle Pruett said, but not in ways that are worse for the children. Fathers do not mother, they father. I read it to mean that men and women have different parenting styles, but neither is "better". I think it allowed for a(n undefined) gender difference. The concept can pro…
/r/MensRights05/01/10 03:45 AM
1

Women want equality, but you can't be equal if you're babied all the time True. I don't want to be on a pedestal. I just want respect I've earned for my abilities. and can't be struck like a man would for talking shit I would prefer that men don't get hit rather than women also get hit. The reality is that men get hurt by random violence in fairly obscene numbers. and striking first. Violence should be resisted conscientiously - with a phone call to the police. (Sentencing should be equal for bo…
/r/MensRights30/12/09 03:50 AM
1

but if it became common-place it would inevitably lead to some children being psychologically abused. Absolutely! And adults should always be in positions of care, not harm. In giving the woman an 8 month sentence, the judge is saying some combination of "this woman is not a responsible adult" and "boys want sex with older women (thus the boy was not harmed)". Both are offensive. I'd be interested in reading his notes, and figuring out what he was thinking..... kinda like gawping at an accident,…
/r/MensRights29/12/09 05:20 AM
3

no, your 2 cents are appreciated as long as you are cordial. Thank you. I also appreciate the discussion/debate. I actually see us as having more in common than it would seem from what appears to be (on one level) completely opposing POVs. I see us as both wanting to end oppressions of men and women. And I would agree that many many feminists haven't looked at men's oppression well, or at all.
/r/MensRights29/12/09 04:51 AM
3

the fact that feminists have such ridiculous double standards You're using a (ridiculously) broad brush. Certainly some people have double standards. Certainly the movement contains millions and millions of people who contradict one another. whilst attempting to claim moral high ground. I don't see such claims. (Interestingly, it fits in with men's oppression though - the notion of women on a pedestal, men as villains.) It's possible that you get this from reading anti-feminist writings, that cu…
/r/MensRights29/12/09 04:43 AM
0

and yet its proponents regularly do and advocate things that directly contradict that claim. If you could keep the blog to point, and document these things, rather than bashing feminism (i.e., the movement towards the equality of women), I would support your endeavor. Will you also document where non-feminists don't support men's rights? Will you document where men don't support men's rights? There is an issue I have with the goal of "bashing feminism" rather than finding common ground. If your …
/r/MensRights29/12/09 04:29 AM
2

claimed moral superiority as crusaders of gender equality I haven't seen any such claims. If you want another forum to bash feminism, I'm going to point out that we're not the enemy. Most men's oppression is due to the traditional attitudes of men as savior, men as being tough, men as being cannon fodder, etc. These attitudes interfere with permission for men to be in touch with themselves, or to ask for help. It means men have a shorter lifespan, due to stress, mental illness, increased alcohol…
/r/MensRights29/12/09 03:54 AM
4

It's part of the men want sex/women don't want sex, men pursue sex/women guard the gates of their virtue (whatever the hell that means) dichotomy, which is oppressive to both men and women. As soon as we stop valuing virginity, and stop assuming men are virile race horses, we'll be more sane. The fact that 2 of the 3 commenters asked, "where were the women like that when I was 14?" points out that people don't take this seriously. And I'm sure that many, many 14 year old boys and girls can have …
/r/MensRights29/12/09 03:52 AM
0

Thank you. The examples actually have a lot of explanatory power :-) The first one is better, I thought, because it more points to an actuality that we see occur (and that can be organized against). The second one speaks of a perception about feminism that I don't agree with. I'm a feminist and I actually quite like men and support men's rights. I've also found it useful to speak to leftist feminists about how men get the shaft. Most feminists rather like men and support them.
/r/MensRights22/12/09 03:28 AM
0

There's a difference between being treated as people with basic human rights and being popular, desirable, and attractive. Err, yes, of course. And what does this have to do with the implication that women become feminists when they aren't beautiful?
/r/MensRights22/12/09 01:41 AM
0

I knew you weren't the originator. I thought you were picking out statements that you found to be misandrist. I was wondering what you were reading into it, because I didn't necessarily find it misandrist (but, as I said, I did see a couple possible meanings that could be questionable). As an aside, any time I post to mensreddit, I get treated to the downvote brigade. I'm not sure what in my original question could be deemed objectionable enough to be downvoted. Me and kloo2yoo, who I like talki…
/r/MensRights21/12/09 03:49 AM
1

Yes. Sometimes beautiful women also want to be treated as people.
/r/MensRights21/12/09 02:43 AM
3

Feminism isn't about the hatred of men. Please don't confuse the two.
/r/MensRights21/12/09 02:39 AM
3

Thank you for the summaries. I haven't seen the documentary yet. One question, however, why did you choose the statement "It's not required for all men to be rapists for all women to be afraid of rape" ? Maybe I'm reading it differently than you, but it more just points out the way a fear is used to control us, than its saying anything about men. (Although I suppose there is a feminist reading which assumes rape is used politically, as a means of control. There is also a reading I can see in whi…
/r/MensRights21/12/09 02:36 AM
2

"The difference between subjective and objective sleep quality arise not because women are more likely to be complainers, but because men strongly overestimate their sleep duration," and According to the authors, the sex differences in both self-reported and objective sleep measures may be explained by the fact that women may require more sleep than men, meaning the same amount of sleep may be satisfactory for men but not for women. So, despite evidence that men might actually be more satisfied,…
/r/MensRights09/12/09 09:02 AM
3

"Seem" is the operative word. I, for one, have never made a false accusation, and yet I've been both assaulted and raped. About 1 in 4 women are sexually assaulted and/or raped in their lives and it's impossible to say how many men (1 in 1,000? 1 in 5,000?) are falsely accused. I've never seen any statistics, only the occasional anecdote. But from the prevalence of such articles (and the news doesn't bother reporting rapes, unless they're splashy), you'd think that false accusations were the onl…
/r/MensRights09/12/09 08:49 AM
1

well that's not really true, womens reproductive rights do current;y come at men's expense, it's thieir choice but for that to be possible it's our responsibility. In theory, it's the child the benefits, at least that's what the law claims. I"m personally in favor of (and outspoken about) the right of any adult to "opt out". Why should my desire for offspring trump your desire to not? But that's an entire other conversation and one that's been had fairly recently on Equality, so I'd prefer not t…
/r/MensRights28/10/09 11:30 PM
1

Furthermore you can talk about caring when men get fucked over, ultimately though like other feminists you only take interest in issues that mesh with your pro women agenda. Well, I actually take interest in issues that also a neutral with respect to a pro-woman agenda. I have men in my life who I love very much, and their issues affect me as well as my own. I don't, however, take interest in issues that are anti- woman, but I also don't believe that either group benefits from the misfortune of …
/r/MensRights28/10/09 04:30 AM
3

Yes, but the way boys and girls are treated is reflective of real gender differences. Across entirely separated cultures, throughout history and even across species males and females tend to do things very differently. Not always. Some gender differences are imposed upon us by an oppressive culture. Some of those messages about "how to be a man" are taught, otherwise they'd go without saying. The ones that are inherent don't need to be taught. "How to be a man" includes "don't cry", "don't emote…
/r/MensRights27/10/09 01:14 AM
3

During this whole conversation, I have been respectfully disagreeing with you and not taking your bait. By calling this behavior "abuse", I submit that you are insulting people who are actually abused emotionally by their partners. If you reread the original article, it states: ... she’ll flip out on you for minor transgressions or simply because she’s in a bad mood, you’re experiencing emotional abuse. If nothing you do, no matter how hard you try pleases her, you’re experiencing emotional abus…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 09:07 AM
2

Actually, if he had said all women were princesses, I would have downmodded him for telling falsehoods. Generalizations suck.
/r/MensRights26/10/09 06:00 AM
5

Men rock. You guys have great qualities. Thinking of the men I love, I love their fierce love and loyalty of their families, I love how they'll take time to encourage each other and encourage children to grow. I think men are smart, I think they're (often) wise. I like men's strength and I like when men use their strength protectively (although this can feed into how men are oppressed too. We need to assume that men can also go first in the lifeboats with the children and that women should occas…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 05:56 AM
2

to me, I felt my trust was utterly betrayed, since I had clearly stated that personal commuication must stay personal. Speaking as a woman, I think you're completely in the right, and she was a complete shit to have betrayed you like that. What part of "confidential" did she fail to understand? I don't think we're "designed" to gossip, but I think we do gossip (i.e., it's a way we learn to manipulate the world). I think we need to learn better communication skills, including not gossiping. There…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 05:47 AM
4

You're telling me I'm wrong JUST BECAUSE I'M A MAN. No, I'm not. I was saying: you and I are not in disagreement about the basic concepts, and you should reread what I've written. I agree that emotional abuse and physical abuse are bad things. I read the article about the way women can be abusive to men that are often overlooked. I agree that women shouldn't emotionally abuse men and that more attention needs to be paid to this. I simply questioned some of the adjectives the author used in one o…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 04:33 AM
1

So, you two are saying that we need male violence back in order to remind women of their place. Um, that's just old-fashioned sexism. Why can't both genders be free from oppression? Why do you need to oppress women in order to feel like men?
/r/MensRights26/10/09 02:37 AM
2

Male conversation is not a poor alternative to female conversation. Conversational skills are developed and don't always come easily. There are a million examples of our communication being shut down when we're children, and it happens to girls as well as boys. The inability to express emotions may be a result of the very special brutalization done to boys when they do emote. Just because girls aren't brutalized in the same way and thus we can often find it easier to emote, doesn't mean that emo…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 02:32 AM
3

Wow. Just wow. You couldn't be more wrong. Re-read everything I've written in this thread (or any others) and I dare you to find one example of misandry or lack of complete support for men. All I've done in this thread is to clarify where the author could have been clearer (to which she agreed). I pointed out that women are sometimes called "bossy" when we speak up for ourselves (and there are a lot of non-abusive ways in which to stand up for oneself). Again, I contend, you're just looking for …
/r/MensRights26/10/09 01:28 AM
2

By your own definition, you're abusing me. Stop creating a conflict where there is none. We're not on opposite sides. We're not even in disagreement. I'm not suggesting artificially creating a conflict. I'm just pointing out that conflict occurs quite naturally in relationships. He wants chicken tonight and I wanted beef? It's a "conflict". It's how we resolve the conflict that speaks to our strengths and weaknesses. I don't fight with my sweetie. We'll hit a restaurant and order chicken (him) a…
/r/MensRights26/10/09 12:33 AM
3

Just to be clear: I'm not recommending conflict although conflict happens and is not necessarily negative. I do recommend that women be adults: i.e., strong, speak honestly, speak their requirements. Women are put down when we do so, and neither 'firm' nor 'assertive' are negative, in their own right. However, sometimes when a woman is firm or assertive, she's called 'bossy', 'tough', 'aggressive'. I just want to be clear that there's a difference between being firm and assertive and being rude,…
/r/MensRights22/10/09 03:52 AM
1

Instead, these other words are used. Ah, that makes sense. I'm just sensitive to some of them because some of them are used to devalue women who speak up and assert themselves. I had a partner who called me 'bossy' because I'd state my preferences. It took him a bit of time to realize that stating my preferences was simply one step in our communication. It didn't mean I was insisting that my preferences came first, or, in fact, were even done. Likewise, I wanted to know his preferences as well. …
/r/MensRights22/10/09 03:46 AM
4

It's becasue we have a grown up attitude. A lot of men's oppression boils down to "men get hurt, and this hurt is ignored". It's behind a lot of the "chin up, don't cry, don't express your feelings, don't be a 'sissy', don't ask for help, work too hard, have dangerous jobs" set of oppressive attitudes. To that end, it's great to hear this being talked about, and I'd encourage men who are abused to speak out (which doesn't equate to "playing the victim"). Or maybe it's time for men to actually sh…
/r/MensRights21/10/09 05:23 AM
2

Thank you. I was thinking that the article was conflating a few too many things. I did like this paragraph: If you walk on eggshells around your partner because you’re afraid she’ll flip out on you for minor transgressions or simply because she’s in a bad mood, you’re experiencing emotional abuse. If nothing you do, no matter how hard you try pleases her, you’re experiencing emotional abuse. If she regularly puts you down, criticizes or demeans you through name-calling and humiliation, you’re ex…
/r/MensRights21/10/09 05:16 AM
1

Shit. That's low. Sigh.
/r/MensRights09/10/09 08:09 AM
1

Sure, I was explaining where the 1 in 4 number may have came from, and why it's misleading even if technically accurate (that is, even if the "1 in 4 over a lifetime" is accurate). Clearly "1 in 4 right now!" isn't accurate at all.
/r/MensRights09/10/09 08:09 AM
1

Well said. Ironically (in the humor sense, not in the "this is untrue" sense), as a woman, large men seem very, very safe to me. Cuddly. Bear-like. Warm. Safe. My dad never, ever raised his hand in anger. My mom, in contrast, was a bit of a rage-aholic. I assume my interpretation of men = safety set in when I was very little (and adults were very big).
/r/MensRights09/10/09 03:30 AM
3

It's possible that they've taken a more acceptable number such as "1 in 4 women will be the victim of domestic violence in her lifetime" and rephrased it to make it completely and utterly unacceptable. Mind you, even the "1 in 4 women will be the victim of domestic violence in her lifetime" number hardly makes sense. It's overly dramatic. For instance, I've been the victim of domestic violence in my life. Once upon a time, my boyfriend of 3 months slapped me. My (growing? potential?) love for hi…
/r/MensRights09/10/09 03:18 AM
17

"Misandry" is the word that you're looking for. (And it's in the title)
/r/MensRights04/10/09 09:34 AM
1

That's a good point, but it may have to do the following: If the majority of rapes (73%) are by acquaintances, but only 30 - 37% of rapes are reported, then, if the majority is unsolved, it could be because people are more likely to report stranger rapes than acquaintance rapes. It's easier to solve acquaintance rape, but there would be a lot less reason to report someone you know (including dragging friends and family into it, the difficulty facing your assailant in the future, etc.) (I do know…
/r/MensRights26/09/09 02:51 PM
1

Can't be most rapes are by familiars and most are unsolved. Why not? I'd imagine most rapes are of the he-she variety and there's just not enough evidence to prove one way or the other. I was recently in a car accident where both of us claimed the right of way. No witnesses stepped up. There was juat not enough evidence for the police to make a determination. How is that different? to make it easy for complainant to get a restraining order for an alleged sexual assault without filing charges Not…
/r/MensRights26/09/09 01:42 PM
1

is that women had no way to drop the charges without "recanting". I need a source, as I don't believe it. I was going to point out that it was in Kanin's study itself, but I just reread a synopsis of the study and I concur. I think I mis-remembered this (or perhaps the synopsis leaves things out), and so I'm happy to withdraw my original statement. sorry for not realizing that most unsolved rapes would be complaints where some unidentified stranger attacked them and fled. For your 10%-30% figure…
/r/MensRights25/09/09 03:11 AM
1

Most rapes are not solved. the 10-30% isn't per year, it's for all time. Stop making shit up please. Most rapes are not reported and most that are reported are not solved. This happens to both men and women, and both are perpetrators. One of the largest criticisms of Kanin's study, additionally, is that women had no way to drop the charges without "recanting". So recantations don't actually mean the rape must have been false, simply that the women were no longer interested in pursuing them for a…
/r/MensRights23/09/09 08:12 AM
1

Kanin's test city size was around population 70,000, if I recall. if 41% of rape cases are recanted at the investigation stage, and you accept that recantation means its false, then at least that number are false, as the remaining ones didn't all lead to a conviction. It wasn't '41% of rape cases are recanted'. It was 41% of solved cases recanted. I looked into this at more depth some time ago and I recall that solved cases is a fairly moderate number, somewhere between 10 and 30%... So we're ta…
/r/MensRights22/09/09 10:54 AM
2

I've most recently seen studies showing that boys are still lagging behind girls in school test scores and all. This article reflects that the pendulum swung too far in one direction by the year 2000. The numbers of college attendees by gender were nearly the reverse in 2000 of what it was in the 1960s. But I think the pendulum's swing back a little. While this article states: In 1997 college full-time enrollments were 45 percent male and 55 percent female (and this seemed to peak in 2003 with 4…
/r/MensRights21/09/09 02:26 AM
1

But he has deniability. Absolutely. I wouldn't have pressed charges anyhow. At this time, as well as back then, I considered it merely abhorrant rather than criminal. And I still actually recall that I was dead certain he would have harmed me. He bore me animosity that I wouldn't go home with him on prior occasions. And he neither liked nor respected me. He hunted me that night. I was certain his presence there was because he'd stalked me homeward to purposely take me. Strange as this is going t…
/r/MensRights13/09/09 01:07 AM
1

Ahhh... this would have been '86 or '87.... so she probably was 24 at the time (not 28)... I've been out of touch with her for decades. I think Blue Velvet was more S&M and Secretary was more B&D (or even D&S - dominance and submission), isn't that the case? I don't recall actual pain being dealt in Secretary....
/r/MensRights12/09/09 11:11 PM
2

just this week discovered something new about my sexuality, something that absolutely shocked me. Yeah? I remember watching the movie Blue Velvet with a friend who got awfully quiet during the middle, and later admitted that the S&M scenes had had quite an unexpected effect on her. The surprise for her was that she was 28+ and never had a clue what turned her on.
/r/MensRights12/09/09 02:45 PM
1

Wow. This is an excellent post. I've read it and there are points I'd like to answer, but I don't have the time at the moment. I just wanted to say thank you for putting the thought into it. You've made some great points and a few responses spring to mind. I didn't want to leave you with the impression that you've been ignored or your contribution wasn't fully appreciated. Cheers.
/r/MensRights12/09/09 06:45 AM
0

Riiiight. Well, if your assumption is that women are plain impossible to reason with then (1) there is no discussion about how we rationally might act/reason/etc; and (2) you've just proven why I need to continue to be a feminist and promote women. Clearly 50 years of educating men that we're people, same as you, hasn't been enough. By the way, I gave you one example from personal experience and you've completely disregarded my whole argument. But sure, there are crazy individuals out there, and…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 10:50 PM
3

Not on reddit! That would be wrong!
/r/MensRights11/09/09 10:47 PM
2

Namely, that the women's movement has about fifty years head start on the men's movement, and has been effective Yes, at this point, I agree that much of the work has beed done raising awareness that (1) women are people with the same (2) wants, hopes, desires, basic rights, etc, as men. while the men's movement is in its infancy and has yet to be taken seriously by society at large or even academia. Absolutely. And I"m 100% ready to be there as your ally. I've not yet shut up about men's oppres…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 10:46 PM
4

It's simply not logically consistent to claim that "feminism" is gender-neutral but "chairman" isn't. Feminism isn't gender neutral. It's a women's liberation movement, not a men's liberation movement. There is a separate men's liberation movement (probably several, actually), to address the numerous ways in which men are oppressed. At a certain point, we will have to focus our attention on winning the peace Sure, let's. I think the two liberation movements have everything to gain from working t…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:40 PM
1

One reason I've liked for continuing to be a feminist (I also support men's liberation and ending men's oppression, I really don't see any inherent conflict), is that all liberation movements thus far have raised some consciousness about that group and have improved their lives. But in each one, the gender disparity has always remained, and the relations of the men and women with respect to one another remained static. It wasn't until the women's liberation movement (whether you believe it's gon…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:29 PM
2

Why would you assume that? A woman who's mature enough to enjoy sex enough to take men home without being all tied in knots about some retarded religious morality shit is going to be a woman who'll let a bad decision occasionally slide. That woman isn't likely to suddenly decide that the strange man in her bed is an enemy. It's the prissy misses who believe in some quaint old-fashioned morality about women being sluts who will call rape upon regretting one night's bad fuck.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:18 PM
1

The problem is, when innocent people go to jail, there is no liberty Okay. I'll buy that. In my fantasy scenario above, the innocent always prove their innocence and the guilty are always caught. I do understand that it's fairytale. In RL, the innocent too often languish in jail. /sigh
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:14 PM
3

Actually, I think "Off Our Backs" (which used to be a magazine, pre-internet) was always very extreme. Reaction to its anti-sex stance even spawned a lesbian feminist pro-sex spin-off called "On Our Backs" (great name, huh? ;-), which completely rejected the Dworkin anti-penetration attitude. (After all, the thinking goes, if lesbian feminists want each other to penetrate them with toys, how can you argue that penetration is oppressive?) One of my favorite sexpert's, Susie Bright, got her start …
/r/MensRights11/09/09 11:00 AM
3

Enough lesbians have anger issues with men that I think it is a justly deserved prejudice. Women don't turn gay because of anger issues, but I guess a bisexual woman might choose to be women-focused, so I guess I see your point. There are a lot of assholes out there (and from some of the anger I've seen here, I guess there are a lot of bitches out there too). I'm extremely lucky, I think, to have had some of the men in my life that are/were awesome and amazing fellas.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 10:52 AM
2

I have to strongly disagree with that being called a rape. Well, as I said, I didn't consider it a crime and I didn't press charges, but I consider it a "date rape" (acquaintance rape). Sometimes women give in out of fear. I would not have consented except I thought he would hurt me. How is this all that different than the fellow with the gun? Quite possibly he wouldn't have shot me. Quite possibly this other fellow wouldn't have grabbed me and forced me. It was some 20-odd years ago, I really d…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 10:11 AM
2

it can establish a pattern of behavior once they get home from the bar. Absolutely. So, if she sleeps with many men and never claimed rape ever before, you'd then assume that this time is unique and different and something must have happened?
/r/MensRights11/09/09 04:40 AM
1

I am far more concerned with the innocent than the guilty because I would prefer a guilty man or woman go free any day of the week over an innocent man or woman going to prison. That is the far greater tragedy. That's a very cool answer. I'm definitely in support of that, to a very large extent. The tragedy, of course, is when a guilty party commits another crime. I suppose that for me there must be a balance between the cost of liberty and the tragedy, and without a magic scrying glass, it's go…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 04:29 AM
4

I don't like the word "gash". It's not a wound. It's a healthy, living, lively, essential part of my anatomy.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:26 AM
1

Interestingly, "flup" has only even been used to refer specifically to the group that takes offense. The non-offended group has never been called "flup", nor would they ever be.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:24 AM
1

the vulva or vagina (dunno which one actually it names). Cunt is the whole genitalia, so a combination of the vulva (external bits) and vagina (internal bit).
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:22 AM
0

Some women get so offended by the word pussy, but they themselves use the word cock. I think you miss the point. To some people, "pussy" is an offensive word while "cock" isn't. Saying "cock" isn't disrespectful if it's inoffensive. Myself? I don't find either offensive at this point in my life, but at certain points, "pussy" has been a difficult word. "Cunt" still is a bit difficult. "Cock" isn't a difficult word, and doesn't have a negative connotation for me, while "dick" does.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:19 AM
0

Men were assigned terrible, gargantuan responsibilities and, yes, relatively meager "rights" as the price of being born male. Including the "right" to rape their wives. Women have been subservient to men throughout all of history. When men starved, their wives starved first. The "lion's share" went to the lion, not the lioness. I'm not saying men haven't suffered throughout history. They did. Mainly because of the way wealth worked in a class society. But women suffered from poverty and factory …
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:09 AM
0

And the hallmark of MRA is to blame feminism for everything, no matter how unrelated.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:06 AM
1

misguided feminist propaganda may well have something to do with that . You'd really have to research whether "cunt" is more offensive now than it was pre-Feminism. I doubt it's gotten more offensive. There are branches in Feminism trying to reclaim it for years.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:05 AM
3

Oh and tell me why several feminists I've known, including my late grandmother, have said the word "fuck" is derogatory to women. No idea at all. I don't hear it as derogatory. By the way, as a USer, I perceive "cunt" as a "dirtier" word than either "prick" or "dick". But, cart-horse. Is it more offensive because it's used less and therefore not become jaded? Or is it used less because it's more offensive? And in saying that, I recall now that I used to find the word "fuck" scarier than I do now…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 03:03 AM
1

Yes. "Cunt" is more acceptable in the UK than in the US, and used more regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 02:54 AM
12

Are we supposed to feel sorry for her? I kinda feel sorry for her because of the way her life's turned out. But I agree with the Judge - I don't feel sorry for her at the expense of her ex. He had very little to do with it, and it's possible that the seeds of her future mental illness and incapacity were evident and helped cause the breakdown of their marriage.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 02:50 AM
1

(Caveat: I can't read the original posting. Only this thread. So I admit I might be missing something key.) But from what I read in this thread, it appears that your main goal to make the woman out to be a liar. I don't get that reading from anyone else. Is she lying? or do you simply want to create doubt? Wouldn't the main goal be stopping rapes?
/r/MensRights11/09/09 02:45 AM
1

I do think the evidence is MORE valid in a he-said she-said rape where he contends it was consensual. Why is the number of partners valid at all? Sorry, I'm completely missing your point. By the way, I've had a "colorful" past. I'm the girl with 100 ex-lovers. That one of them date-raped me (which I didn't think was worth pursuing, by the way. I agreed at the time only because I was afraid he'd get ugly) had nothing to do with the other 99. In fact, because I'd had many kind considerate lovers, …
/r/MensRights11/09/09 02:41 AM
2

I agree with your conclusions. If a woman's slept with 100 men and each one was an overall welcomed, positive, enjoyed experience, and no ill-will was ever expressed, no violent or negative episodes, etc etc, there's no reason to think the 101th, which ended in a rape claim, had anything to do with the effects of the first 100. I'd assume it was a valid rape claim. That said, all that matters was the subsequent history.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 02:33 AM
16

I am a woman and a feminist, Ah, that would be two of us.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 01:46 AM
17

Unfortunately, she isn't. Her next article writes about her being attracted to and occasionally shagging guys. Also, you shouldn't insult lesbians. Not all lesbians would be anti-male.
/r/MensRights11/09/09 01:40 AM
32

This woman is working me into a frothing rage. If it's any consolation, I'm in completely agreement with you and I'm a woman. While I understand why one individual can be misogynist or misandrist, based on incidents that may have traumatized them in their youth, celebrating misogyny/misandriy and encouraging it in others really pisses me off. In contrast to what the author may be saying about how we women feel, I love men. My dad was an awesome human being that caused me no pain and was possibly…
/r/MensRights11/09/09 01:38 AM
1

What reasons would make it not a crime? I actually wrote, 'all rape is a crime'. But I said not all people who commit rape should be classed as criminals. I would paraphrase what I'd written as: some perpetrators are not unrepentant criminals, some perpetrators shouldn't be jailed. I don't like our current penal system and I think some perpetrators would be better served by counseling, by classes, stuff like that. You have a range of rape crimes ranging from someone grabbing a stranger at gunpoi…
/r/MensRights09/09/09 11:53 PM
1

Hmm... I hadn't thought of that. I was thinking of the numerous Innocence Projects I've read about where the DNA evidence pointed to a different perpetrator altogether. I think if a claim of rape is made, though, a rape kit/exam should be done for other evidence, such as force. However, even evidence of force (vaginal tearing, for instance) isn't necessarily evidence of rape, just as lack thereof doesn't mean rape hasn't occurred. It's a difficult problem.
/r/MensRights09/09/09 11:20 PM
8

I think a rape claim shouldn't ruin someone's life. I think the police need to investigate, at least get a rape kit and some evidence before anyone can be charged. Charges should be quietly done, and if there's no more reason to believe the accuser over the accused, the bail should be manageable, no work should be skipped, etc etc. A false charge of anything can be traumatic enough, without losing a job, a family, a home, etc. There are some horrific tales of people whose lives have been complet…
/r/MensRights09/09/09 05:11 AM
4

does the recantation stand alone as evidence it was false? This is a huge problem with Kanin's study - the assumption that a recanted claim meant the claim was false (even though when recanting it, the women needed to state it was false, because legally, dropping charges in a criminal case was not enough to drop the case). In a small city, claims might be recanted because rape, while a crime, is difficult to prove, and court cases can be stressful. This might get me in trouble here, but I don't …
/r/MensRights09/09/09 05:04 AM
5

And confessing a rape, as The Innocence Project has proven time and time again, does not necessarily mean that the man is guilty. I love the work the Innocence Project has done. And in this day and sage, no one should ever be accused of a crime without DNA evidence. Of course, DNA doesn't prove a crime's been committed, but at least it will result in less innocent people being charged for something they couldn't have committed. (A number of people that the Innocence Project worked with were fina…
/r/MensRights09/09/09 04:52 AM
5

I find it very annoying what's left out of newspaper reports. I would love to read the court records/transcripts. Some of the comments seem to imply that the children were endangered and/or the protective orders went in both directions and/or the father kidnapped them in the first place.... And there is no way to confirm or verify what basically might be true or what might be anonymous slander. If newspapers provided the court transcripts, we would be better armed against injustices.
/r/MensRights27/08/09 06:07 AM
0

Begone, Screechy thing. I bear no threat to you or your offspring. Lol. Ok, THANK YOU for doing it with humor. You're right, the legal system is biased and it's unlikely these women will get the maximum sentence, but I just wish it wasn't always hyperbole. Also, some women behave badly, but sometimes this subreddit acts as if there's nothing but women behaving badly. Again, hyperbole. We're really not the enemy. Some of us are good and decent people who treat men and women well.
/r/MensRights04/08/09 09:00 AM
-1

Impunity? The women are each charged with being party to false imprisonment, a felony with a maximum prison term of six years. One is charged with fourth-degree sexual assault. All four are charged. But it's ok, since that would ruin your story about how horrible women are. After all, men have never ever hurt anyone, not even other men. Oh wait. The largest percentage of murders are committed against men by male strangers. Better hang out with no one anywhere!
/r/MensRights04/08/09 05:47 AM
1

Bail is not a punishment. It's a mechanism to stop the accused from running. We don't know a lot about the four women, but obviously the judge felt they weren't flight risks.
/r/MensRights04/08/09 05:46 AM
1

Damn. I always feed them. My apologies.
/r/MensRights20/07/09 04:55 AM
1

The article includes too many falsehoods. This one jumped out at me: First, false claims of rape are at least as common as the real thing. The Home Office in England investigated rape claims in 1999 and found that 45% were false charges; the woman retracted completely. Actually, according to an evaluation of the actual study, T h e re were 216 cases classified as false allegations: as a pro p o rtion of all 2,643 cases re p o rt e d to the police this amounts to 8 per cent; as a pro p o rtion of…
/r/MensRights20/07/09 04:04 AM
9

One of the most insidious aspects of men's oppression, is that (in Western cultures at least) men's masculinity is always up for questioning. I would hate to think that you were contributing to the oppression that people in Men's Rights are fighting against.
/r/MensRights20/07/09 03:49 AM
6

One of the most insidious aspects of men's oppression, is that (in Western cultures at least) men's masculinity is always up for questioning. I would hate to think that you were contributing to the oppression that people in Men's Rights are fighting against.
/r/MensRights20/07/09 03:49 AM
8

I'm sorry for your situation. Rather than explaining, which sounds like it upset her, simply stay with something simple like, "I'm your daddy and I love you more than I love anything else in the world" *cuddle*. She'll respond to your love more than anything else.
/r/MensRights20/07/09 03:45 AM
7

Fair enough. Thanks for your response.
/r/MensRights15/07/09 06:10 AM
8

I actually agree with a different article in this subreddit: if_a_chick_hits_you_call_the_fucking_cops_on_her. Throwing a drink is simple battery, a misdemeanor charge. The hassle of having to go to court, hire a lawyer, pay expenses, etc, is fair punishment, even if she's found not guilty. The response, to kick someone's legs out from under them, is fairly drastic. I understand the reason for the response: you want to be as drastic as possible, in order to finish the fight immediately. However,…
/r/MensRights15/07/09 03:36 AM
6

She also said she is opposed to a standing army. This is clearly an idealist and a misandrist. Explain? Let me admit that I haven't read the page, I found it boring, so you might be referring to some context I'm missing. Is she misandrist by being opposed to a standing army? I take the military as it currently exists as an example of men's oppression: unable to find fulfilling work, young men (to a vastly greater extent than young women) are used as cannon fodder.
/r/MensRights15/07/09 02:04 AM
2

Eh, you're just saying that cos you probably like blow jobs ;-) Thank you, by the way.
/r/MensRights15/07/09 01:50 AM
2

Me. My husband's never bought me a piece of jewelry. In addition to not wanting jewels, in particular, I don't want a diamond. Have you ever looked into the politics behind diamond mining? I earn more than him. We split all finances 50-50 (added: by which I mean, everything goes into joint accounts. I didn't mean that I make him pay 1/2 everything on a lower salary. That would be unfair). What more would you like to know? Oh, and it's not simply that we play outside the typical gender roles. We …
/r/MensRights15/07/09 12:05 AM
2

You do know that knew more unfair laws could be written as well right? That is a point, but I don't agree that it's more likely. I have seen an upward trend towards more personal freedoms in my lifetime. We've virtually lost all sodomy laws; we've lost laws prohibiting marriage between races; slowly, we're losing restrictions on same-sex partnerships and marriages. I don't doubt that the men's movement is successfully erasing unfair alimony statutes in several states. I know that there is some s…
/r/MensRights14/07/09 11:51 PM
3

I am an equalist. I like the word. Is it in common usage?
/r/MensRights14/07/09 10:37 AM
2

Unless you draw up your own contract. You can specify all of those things. Pre-nups are powerful. Each state provides a default contract, as most people don't bother. Furthermore, a states change the rules over time, so the contract that you may have had in 1970 will not be the same in 2000. And this is a good thing. This actually allows unfair laws to be rewritten, although it may take a long time.
/r/MensRights14/07/09 06:51 AM
7

Ok. Some of the assumptions are incorrect and/or based on a stereotypical couple, and no one here is stereotypical ;-). Here are a couple assumptions that I would question: a diamond ring - not every woman would want a diamond ring. Find a non-gold digger who isn't interested in expensive jewelry. that men pay for the wedding - traditionally the bride's family paid, actually. When you marry older, however, things change. I know couples that saw the costs, and decided to buy a house instead. I kn…
/r/MensRights14/07/09 06:45 AM
4

because the marriage contract entitles her to half your stuff There is no one "the" marriage contract. Draw your own up.
/r/MensRights14/07/09 06:31 AM
2

The parent post was kloo2yoo's statement, "after a couple of kids, it looks like shit down there anyway." I have no issue with rmosler's statement.
/r/MensRights12/07/09 03:24 AM
2

As an aside, to everyone out there, the pill is only 98.6% effective or so, even when doctor administered (saying that last bit in case you think the ineffectiveness is due to the user). Of course, sometimes the problem is with the user (the term "pebkac" was coined as part of computer helpdesk jargon for "problem exists between keyboard and chair"), in which case the pill's even less effective. I'm glad you had the foresight to protect yourself against the ex. One of my closest friends (aside f…
/r/MensRights10/07/09 04:31 AM
1

I'm not denying that the article sucks. I'm just stating that referring to female genitals as fecal matter can be construed as misogynist.
/r/MensRights10/07/09 12:16 AM
2

I think you and I are very alike. And I also don't see where "feminism" means not cooking and cleaning. That's just lazy. They need to grow up a bit. My husband and I both work, but both like the house a bit clean (not fastidious) and we do that together. I certainly do a bit more of the little nit-picking stuff - he'll never notice the sauce that dripped down the front of the cupboard, while I was trained by a fastidious mother. He won't notice the inside of the microwave. On the other hand, he…
/r/MensRights09/07/09 01:38 AM
2

I'm not saying it was easy, but it wasn't all that hard doing it all myself. I had to keep structure in our daily schedule and was lucky to position myself to get a job that had flex hours and let me work at home. On top of that my daughter is a great kid and never gave me any drama. Sounds like you're a great dad :-) However, I would also contend that you got lucky. (Sorry, "luck" is a funny word, since I actually attribute your fortune to skill, talent, and perseverance on your part). But not …
/r/MensRights09/07/09 01:24 AM
2

It's like you just glaze over it. How did I "glaze over anything"? Wow! I'm not up in arms and offering to hunt the bitch down? I don't think it would be effective. I hope for his sake that when she gets caught, she gets thrown in jail, just like everyone else, but that goes without saying. Wait... I get it. I have XX chromosomes so therefore I need to prove to you that I am not the enemy. Clearly, because I haven't put down a woman strongly enough, I don't yet past the muster. OK. how's this: O…
/r/MensRights09/07/09 12:10 AM
1

"Deformed" is objective. "Unattractive" is subjective. "Shit" is subjective (and insulting). Just use the fucking language clearly and think logically. That's all I'm requesting.
/r/MensRights09/07/09 12:04 AM
3

I have, I was a single Dad for almost 5 years Then why would you say "without lifting a finger"? You know it's shitloads of work raising kids. I'm glad that the judge ruled in your favor. I hope for your sake, and your daughter's, that she gets caught and coughs it up.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 09:57 AM
4

Really. Because I would have taken a statement such as, "after a couple of kids, it looks like shit down there anyway" as a subjective opinion, rather than any objective scientific reality. For starters, "shit" is a dramatically biased word. Calling a woman's genitals "shit" is pretty much the definition of misogyny. And someone who takes it fact is, by definition, a misogynist. Hey, I'd think that as someone who clearly hates normal biological female parts, you would wear that label proudly.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 06:15 AM
1

Ah, I missed the nanny part.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 03:44 AM
5

The author claims to have been influenced by feminism, but admits that her ideals (that she doesn't care about money) and her actions (that she's pursuing a guy with money) don't match, and that her actions are decidedly anti-feminism. pro-female I'd say pro-author. I'd pretty much all it raw individualism, to the point of greed and selfishness.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 02:04 AM
8

She sounds nice. :-) My sweetheart was on the dole when we married ;-) Even now I earn more than he does, but he works as many hours as I do (so neither of us resents the other. We just resent our bosses). As far as the expensive life that my parents were able to give me? That was back when the mortgage was 1/6th of my dad's income rather than 1/4 of our combined earnings. Travel expenses were a percent of the weekly paycheck, rather than 10%. I blame it on post-war prosperity and cheap energy. …
/r/MensRights08/07/09 02:01 AM
4

If I recall, you've spoken in the past about a long-term relationship, right? So you're not opposed to relationships, just codifying it under restrictive legal structures, correct?
/r/MensRights08/07/09 01:55 AM
7

doublethink so bad, it hurts my brain to try to conceive the idea. I know... it's like the whole "I'm not racist, but..." thing. As long as I can persuade you I'm not giving up my ideals, I'm going to give up my ideals. Why are men even trying to marry women anyways? Lets just get whores and be done with it, much cheaper and easier. Because sex with intimacy is much much more attractive on some level? Unfortunately, intimacy is rare when people think of you as a wallet rather than a human being.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 01:51 AM
2

Step right up, folks. Here's where the misogyny comes in to the MRA subreddit.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 01:47 AM
1

Well, it's probably just that in our post-modern world, she simply doesn't have the earning power that her parents did 25 years ago. However, she doesn't actually question any of that or adjust her sights accordingly. %50+ of his earnings Ummm... err... "child support" is in theory for the children. And all without lifting a finger. Ummm... err.... tell you what, feel free to raise the kids since it's clearly free from lifting fingers. However, I agree with you in theory.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 01:45 AM
1

Well, I've noticed the position of being the bread winner touted as "easy" compared to being a stay at home parent which is considered a "sacrifice". I am at a loss to hit you with an example. Have you not noticed this meme used often in feminist discourse? Ooh, I haven't really seen it stated as such, not as a general principle, but if you've heard it, I believe you. I'm sure that some people would find staying home with children an imposition and a sacrifice, but I think with women in the work…
/r/MensRights08/07/09 12:46 AM
1

Ah, yes, you're mostly correct. Perjury is actually a bit broader than "court". and includes making a sworn statement to an official (including police). But it didn't occur to me that a legal police report wouldn't constitute a sworn statement (it isn't made "under oath"). Perhaps it should. Perhaps police reports ought to be where perjury begins.
/r/MensRights07/07/09 11:01 PM
1

According to wikipedia, In the United States, the general perjury statute under Federal law defines perjury as a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to five years. If a perjury results in injury (loss of family, income, etc), a civil suit ought to be available as well as the criminal charges.
/r/MensRights07/07/09 06:19 AM
1

Not if they're educated in research methodologies, it isn't. That said, I wish him well. I just think his findings are shite.
/r/MensRights07/07/09 04:44 AM
1

Kanin's study is rife with errors. Foremost, in this study, 41% of "solved" rapes were deemed "false", because they were recanted, which was legally required in order to drop the charges. Kanin did his research on a very small set of cases: 109 solved cases in a small mid-Western city, where it's quite possible that women dropped their charges in order to avoid sending someone they knew to jail. (This is in line with the idea that rapes tend to be committed within peer groups, between people who…
/r/MensRights07/07/09 04:42 AM
1

I don't know... I am aware that I did a quick scan and picked up a couple random sentences, and probably, on closer reading, should give him more credit than I originally did. He wrote: [women] were used to complaining when they weren’t happy about their situation. And to start a movement that protests against a perceived injustice, you need to be ready to complain. On a quick glance, this seems suss. Why "perceived" injustice rather than actual injustice? And is he calling women whiners? Giving…
/r/MensRights07/07/09 03:27 AM
2

Please explain to me WHY women should get attention. Because everyone's oppression ought to get attention and be ended. Men should get attention for the same exact reason.
/r/MensRights06/07/09 06:37 AM
4

Hi, H_C, To some extent, I think you're completely right. Men are taught not to complain, not to request help, to chin up and "take it like a man". Questioning men's oppression, then, took forms for a long time such as questioning class or questioning working conditions (which affected working class and poor men to a large extent). It's only now, as one of the more recent focuses of who various groups are oppressed, that men's liberation is getting the focus it deserves. One problem with Pelle B…
/r/MensRights06/07/09 06:35 AM
6

Look, I don't disagree that the woman was completely in the wrong and that something drastic was needed. I'm glad the cops were finally brought it. I'm just also glad that he didn't "perform justice" on his own. The article points out, when the cops almost arrest him, that men are perceived as the danger. More reason for him to have remained innocent of the charges. By the way, I didn't intend to be flippant before. It did read like a "what is a man", rather than "what is right to do". Thank you…
/r/MensRights17/06/09 06:12 AM
2

Really. You suggest that the "right thing" for a "good man" to do is to hit someone? "Why, I oughta....." (said in a Ralph Cramden voice) jk
/r/MensRights17/06/09 06:03 AM
0

My husband and I noticed that starting a decade back. Somehow, people creating the movies started every new love with, effectively, adultery. We couldn't figure out whether it just meant that adultery was now normalized.... Or whether they were trying to avoid the notion that a single man or woman is dysfunctional and thus you'd need a lot of backstory to explain why they were single....
/r/MensRights17/06/09 05:58 AM
4

It's interesting to watch you go back and forth in your definition of 'what makes a real (tm) man'. I would define a 'real man' as any adult human being with an XY chromosome (XYY in some rare cases). (There is no reason why any man out there shouldn't get credit.) (ADDED: By the way, I realize I left out the subset of men who are transgender and don't have XY chromosomes. I apologize.)
/r/MensRights17/06/09 05:40 AM
1

Nah, they're right. I've been a bit of a bitch. I used to want to treat this reddit as a support place, but now I think it's too conservative and my presence just gives them a target to bash. I respond in kind. Keep on keeping on, H_C. See you on other reddits.
/r/MensRights23/05/09 09:43 AM
0

In the review, he states "a nostalgia for the time when fathers weren't objects of ridicule." And what's ridiculous? That "the poor sucker agreed to take on responsibility for all sorts of menial tasks -- tasks that his own father was barely aware of -- and received nothing in return. If he was hoping for some gratitude, he was mistaken." So, the modern father does the same chores the modern mother does, somehow it demeans him (but not her, clearly) and because of this, he expects her undying gr…
/r/MensRights21/05/09 09:28 AM
2

The article makes good points. In terms of liberation though, wouldn't it also be useful to lift the educational opportunities and the economic advantages for the underclass so that less men and women (and it's primarily men who rob, and primarily men who end up in the penal system, so this is a men's liberation issue) fall into that pit? You can stop crime by making this a fortress state, or you can lower crime by treating crime as a social problem as well as a criminal one. The same goes for r…
/r/MensRights21/05/09 06:27 AM
2

Oddly, I'm in complete agreement with you. Although teaching young men and women to speak with one another honestly, and getting rid of the double standard so that women who desire a man who desires her back can more easily say "yes" rather instead of "no" plus mixed signals, would be good too.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 06:19 AM
2

Har har har.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 06:09 AM
0

I did bring something meaningful: that a number of men and women have decent respectful marriages in which someone isn't taking advantage of the other. I believe I got downmodded 8 points. I also discussed how the review was crap and pointed out that men don't get liberated by oppressing another group. That got 10 downmods. You call me a troll? The rest of you have absolutely no interest in reading a point of view that differs from "women are cunts, women should be in the kitchen (baking cakes),…
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:57 AM
2

Yes. 100 points for pretty much nailing 80% of sexism in one smooth sentence. You forgot "fat" or "ugly" or you would have completely nailed how women are oppressed by you.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:52 AM
-3

Traditional conservative bullshit that feminism has been rejecting for 70 years: women being the only one raising kids. We're not on opposite sides; you just hate women.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:47 AM
-1

Did you even read the book review I was referring to?!? The author was yearning nostolgic for the bygone day when men "enjoyed absolute authority within the household." What else would you call that aside from "privilege"?
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:45 AM
0

You want to suggest a middle ground? What would that look like in the current context? NOT driving your kids to lessons? WOW, such liberation.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:43 AM
0

Not hard for you anti-women misogynist MRAs to pissoff anyone who has a brain. What you don't know about me is that I'm also involved in men's liberation, but you conservative fucktards aren't actually for men's liberation. Clearly, the conservative fucktard branch of MRA has finally completely taken over this subreddit, spouting nothing of any use, just conservative claptrap. Being anti-women's rights and pro-men's privilege isn't liberating to men. There is no liberation by oppressing another …
/r/MensRights21/05/09 05:42 AM
0

Well, you can stop being such a brainwashed misogynist prick, for starters. "Feminist", my ass. List five things that are feminist about your country. I bet you can't, because they don't exist.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 01:20 AM
0

Nope. Because it's not true. Many many courts these days assume joint custody unless there are overwhelming reasons (such as neither party requests it). Not every man wants 50% of the responsibility of child-raising after a divorce. Those who do, don't have as many hoops to jump through these days. Look, I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's in no way "absolute power", as you state it. Most couple are still traditionalists and have the mother provide the majority of child care and the father pro…
/r/MensRights21/05/09 01:14 AM
0

Way to be completely black and white about how women are the enemy, misogynist pig.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 01:11 AM
-5

You do know that that is the word the book and its review used? Wow. a lot of downvotes by the pro-men's privilege, put women back in their place as sex objects and house cleaners, the traditionalist, misogynist MRAs. You all suck. You have no clue about ending men's oppression. You STILL think it's all about beating up little boys when they cry, and being "real men" (tm), don't you. Go back to your neanderthal holes in the ground.
/r/MensRights21/05/09 01:09 AM
-10

This book review is complete crap, pap, conservative pro-patriarchal bullshit. The author yearns with "a nostalgia for the time when fathers weren't objects of ridicule", but he never points out any instances of ridicule, merely instances when the father is actually doing some work helping raise the bubs instead of "enjoy[ing] absolute authority within the household." Damn! You've lost the privilege to be the iron fist, the grand controller, but fuck you, that's not "men's rights". You don't end…
/r/MensRights20/05/09 12:52 PM
0

Thank you. As a married woman, I can say that I completely respect my husband. We avoid every doing anything belittling to one another. We both work and earn an income. We both support each other's goals. Perhaps if folks aren't treated well by their spouses, there's a mutual misunderstanding that you're only seeing half of.
/r/MensRights20/05/09 12:48 PM
1

Sooner or later he's going to experience teasing, and see other kids being teased, and I will encourage him to speak up and not internalize the taunts. That's really important. Raising children with enough sense of self-worth to overcome the type of crap they catch out in the world.
/r/MensRights19/04/09 11:50 PM
3

My husband's a RPer, and so we're in the RP gaming community. All of the men who are gamers tend to be smart and witty and creative. Quite a number have girlfriends who are smart and witty and creative (and who like dressing up in corsets and showing boobage at parties). This certainly raises the question about why people think that you need to comply with a very narrow definition of masculinity to be "successful" at attractive mates.
/r/MensRights18/04/09 02:45 AM
3

I think her point (and the point of author Naomi Wolf in the book, "The Beauty Myth") is not that the choices they are making are invalid, but that it's less "choice" than all that. The pressure pre-teens feel to fit into very narrow gender definitions are pretty devastating even if "... they appear to be complicit in maintaining it". women generally are still keeping men in their constricting little gender box No, the whole of society does this. In fact, she's just pointed out and example of ho…
/r/MensRights18/04/09 02:34 AM
5

I love it when men reject women as allies on some basis that we couldn't possibly understand or even care about our sons, our brothers, our fathers, our husbands, our lovers. When we don't understand, we certainly hear about it. Clearly, when we try to understand, we're somehow oppressing you too, Unless, of course, you're just looking for any fight at the expense of a woman.
/r/MensRights18/04/09 02:17 AM
1

I think only the "successful" ones are. I suspect that most boys, even the ones successful at navigating this, have some doubts from time to time. What do they revel in? I might have this wrong, but isn't "revelling" in gender identity closely tied to a misogynistic notion that "boys are better than girls" and "be glad you're a boy"?
/r/MensRights18/04/09 02:13 AM
2

Season 2 is started thanks for the heads up! lol
/r/MensRights18/04/09 02:09 AM
2

Sad, actually: It’s weird, isn’t it, that in an age in which the definition of acceptable girlhood has expanded, so that desirable femininity now encompasses school success and athleticism, the bounds of boyhood have remained so tightly constrained? And so staunchly defended: Boys avail themselves most frequently of epithets like “fag” to “police” one another’s behavior and bring it back to being sufficiently masculine when someone steps out of line.... How do we enable and encourage boys to be …
/r/MensRights17/04/09 06:24 AM
3

I also do not believe this couldn't have happened as a humanist movement with an interest in supporting people of both genders as equals Yes, perhaps, but this latter movement did not spring up in time, whereas second wave feminism did, and 15 years before any humanist movement. Furthermore, all the various liberation movements of the 70s and 80s were informed by the lessons learned in early feminism, due to practices such as consciousness-raising and support groups. I wouldn't have wanted the g…
/r/MensRights15/04/09 05:20 AM
6

Feminism has more to do with superiority then equality; I don't even know where this meme comes from, but it's a popular one in MRA. But it isn't true. Feminism is not about female superiority, anymore than men's liberation movements are inherently about male superiority (and sure, there might be a branch of conservative MRA out there who is all about getting male "privilege" back). Most people involved in men's liberation know that most men actually didn't benefit from those "privileges" anyhow…
/r/MensRights15/04/09 04:00 AM
3

You sound like a wonderful and reasonable person. Well, I'm not always wonderful nor reasonable, as some here can attest, but thank you. There are feminists who hold that view, certainly, but it isn't a feminist view (or even a view embraced by a "wing" of feminism, from what I can tell. It always seems to just be various individuals. And maybe a movement is made up of individuals, sure, but I don't think its a widely held belief.) By the way, I did google "Are men necessary", rather than simply…
/r/MensRights15/04/09 01:59 AM
5

It is because extreme feminists aren't happy with merely equal rights, they want to do away with men altogether. Look, sorry if my ilk has given you the wrong impression. But it's a strawman. Don't believe it. Sure, there are some women who don't want or need a man in their lives. Just like some men don't want or need women in theirs. Personal choice. But to think that it's an honest and embraced movement within feminism is, frankly, wrong. Speak to actual feminists. Most women I know are femini…
/r/MensRights15/04/09 01:45 AM
1

I was actually recommending it. I wouldn't put up with such nonsense if I were you.
/r/MensRights13/04/09 10:11 AM
1

I'd report the lecturer to the school board.
/r/MensRights13/04/09 01:44 AM
2

Hey, read anything else I wrote in this thread I completely agree with you that men being put in danger is one of the way men's oppression works, and I've written as much, a number of times. I'm just pointing out in this particular case, the men were in their booths, they correctly signalled for the police, the judge completely exonerated them, and about 98% of the posters agreed that they did the right thing. I'm just pointing out that a couple of posters with shit for brains holding on to an o…
/r/MensRights13/04/09 01:29 AM
1

Yeah yeah. Joking about misogyny might be a good source of humor to some. Also, it was the sex that was empty, not the human being. But you're working hard to avoid that concept ;-)
/r/MensRights10/04/09 02:41 AM
1

it's immoral and unproductive to call out men who do not do violence against women. Yes, fair enough. And that's the major point against the article I have as well: she's breeding cross-gender discord by "hating" men who don't act to get "men's violence" handled (assuming this exists in a vaccuum, and we've already discussed that). It is not usually difficult to spot unhealthy people. And true... ish. It's hard to say what level of unhealthy poses a threat. I've heard some people say some pretty…
/r/MensRights10/04/09 02:34 AM
0

Amazingly, when people here are confronted with the occasional misogyny, they get all bent out of shape and upset about how terrible feminism is and how "you women need to clean up feminism". But confronted with someone like you who states right out that he hates women, no one here from the male side is saying "WoW, MRA as a movement really is fairly misogynist" and no one says "we guys should clean up this shit." If you're in that much psychic pain, perhaps you can get some counselling, clean u…
/r/MensRights09/04/09 11:54 AM
1

Not sure I understand the connection. However, it was an interesting read. Ta.
/r/MensRights09/04/09 06:06 AM
1

Well, if empty sex with "vessels" is what you define as "completely human", you may as well be goat. Or fuck goat. Enjoy.
/r/MensRights09/04/09 06:01 AM
1

And you're upset with us that we no long do? Is that why you "hate" up or was that just an off-the-cuff comment? I didn't notice right away that it was a month old. I apologize for dredging back the traumatic memories ;-).
/r/MensRights09/04/09 05:57 AM
1

re: being completely human You'd be surprised how much better love-making can be when she wants you rather than when she's compelled by servitude or money ;-)
/r/MensRights09/04/09 04:21 AM
1

Yes, you make a number of good points, but again, you're all pissy at her because her (brief) article wasn't everything to everybody and didn't include the million caveats that everyone needs in order to be PC. Yes, violence is done by women against men and against children and against other women. Yes, women can prevent a lot of violence as well. One of the examples she used, however, the guy who killed his 5 kids and himself? Their mother, his wife, left him. That's why he was pissed off. Not …
/r/MensRights09/04/09 04:12 AM
1

cute. But I didn't read the ones that said "boys hate girls", "girls hate boys back".
/r/MensRights09/04/09 03:21 AM
1

it is every woman's responsibility, just like it's every man's responsibility, to care for her own self. Come on. You know that everyone knows this. This goes without saying. She also didn't have to say "the ground is below us and the sky is above us". We all know: don't wear revealing clothing. Don't go out along at night. Don't talk to strangers. Don't be in dark places. Bring mace. Have a cell phone, etc etc etc ad nauseum. Her article wasn't about "hey ladies, here's some tips on how to avoi…
/r/MensRights09/04/09 03:10 AM
1

I'm sure you do. To which I say, "you sir, go fuck yourself."
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:32 AM
1

Women have acquired a childlike status with modern feminists. Sorry, that's the pre-feminist, tradition attitude, and you, sir, have just created a strawman.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:31 AM
1

ah c'mon. That's not what she's saying and you know it. She is pointing out that men can and should take responsibility for men's violence. Who else should? Is it a woman's job to always clean up after men? ;-P Actually, we, the community of adults in the world, should start handling shit like violence, war, child abuse, etc. Pity we just continue it.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:29 AM
1

She states: Every piece of credible research produced in every country in the world where this work has been done shows that sexual and domestic violence is committed overwhelmingly by men against females. Presumably if a woman commits violence against a woman it's not misogyny.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:26 AM
1

You wouldn't recognise the end goal of radical feminism if it bit you on the ass. The end goal is the same as radical (not conservative) men's liberation. That we all be free to be completely human.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:24 AM
1

I don't agree with you that he message is "men are evil". I think her message is: "violence against women is a men's issue. We wish you would clean it up." (Aside from the obvious that violence is also a woman's issue, although women often tend to express themselves in ways other than anger and violence, while men don't always have that extra avenue.) As a feminist I agree, and as a masculist as well, I'll even go a step further: it would improve men's (and women's) lives to explore alternatives…
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:19 AM
1

Fuck you. I'm not responsible for your well-being. Nor for anyone's. Sit at home, enjoy your nightly TV. You'r not obliged to stop the war, you're not obliged to feed the hungry, you're not obliged to make anyone's lives better, not yours, not your family, not your children. However, if you should so choose, then great. There's a lot of work to be done. She's just pointing out one of the many issues that are in need of attention. But why does this make you pissed off? Hey, you have a great life.…
/r/MensRights08/04/09 09:10 AM
0

LOL!! Damn, you're a good troll. I almost fell for it. And yes. I'd like to talk about hate. I'd like to talk about how much I hate people who troll: for how disgusted I am that you can repeatedly post here and that nothing you write moves men forward. Instead, you're too busy creating lies and strawmen arguments. Sad really.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 08:56 AM
1

Sure. You're about the stupidest thing I've ever seen.
/r/MensRights08/04/09 08:52 AM
0

... don't feed the trolls.... don't feed the trolls..... *walks away muttering*....
/r/MensRights08/04/09 08:51 AM
1

Fair enough - I understand what you're saying, but I also think you're reading way too much into some of the original post's comments. I just have a problem with this bullshit, tawdry and sensationalist headline. In the first few dozen posts, quite a few people say "Human beings are supposed to help other people", only one jerk says that the problem with the world today is the lack of "real men" (tm) since MEN (himself included) are supposed to be protectors. For the most part people agree that …
/r/MensRights08/04/09 08:41 AM
1

I may have reconsidered... It occurs to me that rape also seems to "[rob] a person of full sexual experience ... possibly leaving indelible psychic damage".
/r/MensRights08/04/09 06:33 AM
1

I'm not trolling. Why did you say, "Calling someone a coward ... is attempting to absolve yourself(and the privileged few in your group, in this case, "women") of responsibility for your own well-being". Just wondering how women became "the privileged few". In this certain MRA forum, it's fairly common to bash women, and I read that sentence as containing a slight little dig at women. I'm just pointing out the absurdity in this case, because being able to be dragged by one's hair and raped seems…
/r/MensRights08/04/09 06:32 AM
2

Quite possibly. As a feminist who actually believes in basic equality, I can't for the life of me figure out (1) why she can't live within more humble means like the other 99.9997% of humanity, and (2) why she can't find a job/get her old job back... it sounded like she was accomplished within her career in her own right. Did she give away her brain when she married?
/r/MensRights08/04/09 06:27 AM
1

Nah, I think he did pretty well. I really loved the part where you pointed out - in a rape case yet!! - how women are privileged! Way to go! Misogynist prick.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 11:29 PM
2

I'm with you. I stopped one guy kicking the shit out of someone else. The guy on the ground was in rough shape. I swear, one of his eyes was dangling from his socket... I grabbed the assaulter and said, "hey buddy, you'll get in trouble if you keep doing that, you don't want to be in trouble". He actually stopped long enough that a few other people took the opportunity to get in and start helping the guy on the ground. When the assaulter saw that, however, the mad fucker started clawing at my fa…
/r/MensRights07/04/09 11:26 PM
-2

Maybe you ought to respond to the writer who said that, and not to me. I wrote none of the crap you attributed to me. This is what I was pointing out: The whole premise of the title is to make people knee-jerk about how badly you're being oppressed (!!) while the reality on the ground is: All people who posted who had thought it through and realized that the men would have been in danger, supported the men. And the judicial system supported the men. Where is the oppression again? Oh - a few assh…
/r/MensRights07/04/09 11:20 PM
2

Maybe boys and girls should get martial arts training.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 06:25 AM
7

There weren't two of them in the same place at the same time. it might have only taken yelling and running And it might have resulted in a gun being pointed at them. I'm not a man, but I probably would have charged in and tried to stop it. But that's because I'm fairly stupid in those situations. I'm clear, however, that it's not bravery. And someone's failure to physically step in isn't cowardice. I think they did exactly what was needed, and my only feeling of dissatisfaction comes from there …
/r/MensRights07/04/09 06:24 AM
-4

And no one is claiming that they are. So, please: stop making a strawman and using it as proof of your oppression.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 06:17 AM
13

If the transit workers were two women, can anyone here with a straight face say that there would be nearly the same amount of comments calling them cowards and hoping they get raped? Only because of the underlying assumption on the parts of some people (without any evidence) that the men were somehow capable of stopping the assault without putting themselves in harm's way. Everyone who noted the possibility of harm to the workers supported their actions. The basic sexist assumptions here include…
/r/MensRights07/04/09 06:13 AM
0

The title is really reaching.... The respondents aren't coming from a point of view of oppressing men, and here's the only reason I say that: Every one of the respondents who expressed the awareness that intervening would possibly be dangerous agreed that the employees did the right thing. Furthermore, the two were ruled in the right, by the legal system, so there's no systemic men's oppression here either. Just pointing out, because there's a lot of men's oppression out there without calling a …
/r/MensRights07/04/09 06:01 AM
2

In terms of circumcision as a single painful event of which I would probably have no memory, I'd prefer circumcision. However, as a life-long result of that one act, robbing a person of full sexual experience and possibly leaving indelible psychic damage, yeah. You win.
/r/MensRights07/04/09 05:58 AM
1

Thank you daddy. And here's where you resort to being "the big controller", another one of the aspects of masculine chauvinism you so readily embrace. Keep showing your psyche, Appanouki. We're all so charmed by you.
/r/MensRights04/04/09 06:34 AM
1

Like most human beings, I get frustrated when someone isn't debating in good faith. Once again, you do the cutesy little thing of scoring points, this time about my frustration. You see, since I'm a "feminist" and so you hate me on spec (and don't even think of me as a human being first. I'm a *gasp* evil feminist to you), and so you don't choose to communicate. It's all about scoring points.. But isn't that at the root of how men are oppressed? Men don't get to be themselves, they simply are al…
/r/MensRights04/04/09 01:08 AM
1

Wow. Learn to read please. It would be so much easier discussing shit with you if you'd just answer in good faith instead of trying (and failing miserably, may I add?) to score cheap points. MY issue is that you keep rabbiting on about "gender equality" as if this had anything to do with feminism. I've pointed out that it has NOTHING to do with feminism, that it's nothing but your classic traditionalist gender roles. The woman is a typical a gold-digger, and her "john", err husband, is a fucking…
/r/MensRights03/04/09 08:16 AM
-2

You see, you take a couple of owning class people, who by definition are probably conservatives, and you can tell right off that they've done the completely traditional sexist role thing: get married, she leaves her job to be a (classy) housewife. For the length of their marriage, she gets luxury, he gets a beautiful prop upon his arm.... And yet you somehow make up this ridiculous story that this has anything to do with women's liberation (!?!?!). Once again, Appanouki, you're wearing your miso…
/r/MensRights02/04/09 12:40 AM
2

Postnup potentially signed under duress, and that's what the case is hinged upon. Personally, I don't understand why, if she's an heiress and former investment analyst, she doesn't have her own money. And why would she leave a cushy career to be a housewife? (They don't have kids, I can understand why people leave jobs to raise the children.) I wish to hell the 20th century would happen for some of these people. I'm nearly in the second decade of the 21st.
/r/MensRights02/04/09 12:34 AM
-1

Wow. How like a conservative to completely think life ended with your god Reagan. How about including the Bush I and Bush II wars in Iraq (and Afghanistan)? Please add 10 years of Republican war to your counting, in the last 2 decades alone.
/r/MensRights19/03/09 03:47 AM
-1

Fuck yourself, Noah. Been through this before. I'm here because I support men's rights. Men's rights != conservative dickheads' rights. For YOU and your misogynist ilk, feminism is a bad word because you conservatives wish to hark back to the sad day where women didn't have any rights. I'm for equality, you're for some conservative culture where men ruled the roost. Sorry, neanderthal, not going back. Grow the fuck up and accept modernity. By the way, your conservative leaders put us trillions i…
/r/MensRights19/03/09 03:44 AM
0

With bold strides into the nation's boardrooms, bedrooms and every other room in the house, the overweening president wants to make clear that "issues like equal pay, family leave, child care and others are not just women's issues, they are family issues and economic issues." I should think that MRAs were as interested in issues such as these, since they affect working fathers and fathers with families. MRA does NOT equal "rabit conservative batshit." Some issues are actually shared between all …
/r/MensRights19/03/09 01:07 AM
1

<paraphrase>women not held accountable, men held accountable</paraphrase> I don't know how true that is. In this case, women are held quite accountable - they end up having kids to raise. Quite a lot of men have women they're barely involved with raising their babies. This phenomenon even comes with the terms "baby momma" and "baby daddy".
/r/MensRights18/03/09 11:54 PM
1

Rape is sex against her will, not pregnancy against her will. if a guy wanted to impregnate a woman but she refused and he did it anyway. He's be better off sticking holes in a condom or in her diaphragm. Or changing the order of her pills, or replacing some with others. There are no laws against those acts. Furthermore, people know that no method of birth control is 100% effective, so, short of having bits chopped, there's always a risk of pregnancy.
/r/MensRights17/03/09 12:25 AM
1

Yeah, definitely a "Psychology Today" article. They have their point of view about evolutionary biology that isn't necessary rooted in scientific fact any more than Rudyard Kipling's "Just so" stories. Aside from couples who've already talked about birth control (some of which can't simply be stopped for one session, such as the pill or IUD), sex in which the woman didn't discuss pregnancy with the man is also sex in which the man didn't discuss pregnancy with the woman. I think most people are …
/r/MensRights17/03/09 12:19 AM
1

You don't think there are equally men who don't manage their birth control, because they don't like condoms, and they don't care if they father children? I'm sure there are some.
/r/MensRights17/03/09 12:19 AM
0

I don't think that trying to gay bait someone in a subreddit whose aim is the liberation of men is a fantastic thing to do. For starters, one of the oppressions that face men is that of always being scrutinized to see if one is "masculine" enough, given a very narrow definition of masculinity. The cessation of that oppression would be for men to be able to be themselves without ever having to prove again that they are ok, they are acceptable, they are masculine enough. By the very definition tha…
/r/MensRights17/03/09 12:18 AM
1

It's an emotional, hormonal urge in all fertile women which is not governed by common sense. Yeah, bullshit. The sex might be "an emotional, hormonal urge", as it is for men as well as well as women, but don't start with the crap about instinctive urges towards pregnancy.
/r/MensRights16/03/09 11:53 PM
1

There's an opposite sex, not an opposite gender. From wikipedia: Although gender is popularly used interchangeably with sex (male or female biology), or more recently with "sexual orientation" and "identity" (including LGBT), historically, within the social sciences, including political economy, it refers to specifically social differences Since gender refers to the social and cultural differences, I'm suggesting drop those things associated with "masculine" from the social construct that we rej…
/r/MensRights05/03/09 01:14 AM
1

Personally? I'm simply using the terms language as they're currently used. You're calling for a change in language. I would actually consider using different terminology, but there are so many anti feminists these days, that I want to hold on to the term. I don't want the misogynists to win.
/r/MensRights05/03/09 01:09 AM
1

Let's get rid of some of those old crap stereotypes anyhow. Most of them reflect some old tired oppressive stuff anyhow, and aren't really who men anyways. I think it makes sense to have a definition of men that embraces and encourages the best of man: strong, warm, loving, comforting, smart, creative, sexy, sensual. What have I missed? Look, there's sure to be problems with that anyhow, because "masuline" should be defined as "anything a man is, is by definition 'masculine'". Sometimes men are …
/r/MensRights03/03/09 01:13 AM
1

I think the terms Feminism and Masculism are used by people who want to stress that the work they do (or an egalitarian / equality-seeking nature) tends to focus on the one gender over the other. But that's not all. I know men who call themselves "feminists" to stress that they are anti-sexists. Maybe the terms will change, they're already changing. Just the fact we're having a conversation like this. I might start calling myself a masculist as well as a feminist. Right now I call myself a femin…
/r/MensRights03/03/09 01:01 AM
1

Or you could stop being so arrogant. I cut my teeth on Farrell. Stop making me "prove myself", kanuk. I'm not ignoring your point. I actually do know the ways men are oppressed and I don't support the oppressions. These oppressions go back into antiquity (and are done by men and women). Men as cannon fodder? Way back into antiquity (and done by men and women). Men probably died more on hunts than women did gathering nuts and berries. Boys are mistreated on the sports field, told to ignore their …
/r/MensRights03/03/09 12:36 AM
1

allegations about male privilege retracted.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 05:25 AM
1

editted: rewrote after goggyras clarifications. It is hypocritical to want more women in upper management in the name of "equality" and then turn around and say that it's fine for men to be overrepresented in other jobs. It would be hypocritical to be all about "women should only work the good paying jobs". I don't think this is ever a feminist position. Feminism is about giving opportunities to everyone regardless of gender. Period. Women work all sorts of other undesirable, low-paying, and yes…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 05:09 AM
2

Similar to men, women want "highly coveted positions" and don't want "less desirable jobs". I'm sorry, explain to me again how this is a failure of feminism? That can only make any sense if you think that your gender somehow "wins" the highly coveted jobs as a prize for working the crap jobs. (We have some pretty crap jobs too, by the way.) By the way, the oppression isn't that "men work the crap jobs". The oppression is that men's safety appears to be less respected than women' safety, in a sle…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 04:51 AM
3

I've finally figured out why the main assumption here is "fucked". Men are historically oppressed in that they've done the heavy dangerous work and because their injuries are ignored and their complaints stifled. It's another way they're devalued. The assumption here, and why this headline is just wrong, is because someone is trying to imply that somehow, "now it is feminism's fault". Nu-uh. This example of men's oppression is traditional. As an aside, blaming women is sexism. Furthermore, and m…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 12:22 AM
2

Feminists want to be men, but without stopping to be women. What can you possibly mean by this?
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:59 PM
2

Just as an aside, if, as a man, I went around calling myself a 'masculinist,' I would sound like a bit of an asshole, wouldn't I? Not necessarily. The term ("masculism" is a shortening) is becoming more used. I think originally there may have been an interpretation that it was about male supremacy, or recapturing the "privileges" that some conservative men felt they'd lost because of feminism. But there's also a progressive branch of Masculism that sees that traditional gender roles oppress both…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:49 PM
-1

Feminists want to stay inside, safe and warm, pushing their carts around a hotel, yet be paid the same as guys risking their life outside building some skyscraper. Yes, because all construction workers are all dangling 100 feet above the ground at all times, and hotel workers never face threats like finding glass and needles in trash and sticking themselves, or being exposed to chemical cleansers all day long without masks. However, maybe they're warm in that one industry of low paying jobs held…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:26 PM
1

New: Women can do that if they want, or they can have a career in whatever they want. It's their choice. Not true. Poorer women have always worked and they continue to work today. Think of black women in the south during civil rights. You think they chose to be domestics for someone else's family because they wanted to express themselves? And nowadays, it's rare for a couple to be able to live on one salary, so that everyone is more "poor", in terms of buying a house, for instance. I'm in the lo…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:14 PM
2

the "wage gap" can be nearly completely accounted for by women's choices Actually, this is a myth spread by anti-feminist conservative media. Women's "choices" are still pretty much informed by the sexism of the culture. Let's have men stay home with the babies for a few years rather than women; let men do an equal share of the the childcare and the running home to get kids from schools, bring them to doctors, etc, and then we'll start talking about wages and "choices". Let's start opening all j…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 10:58 PM
2

I was just adding data. Not every reddit response has to be a "you're wrong, I'm right". I was more interested in adding to a conversation than attempting to disprove anything. I was, however, giving additional info by pointing out that there are plenty of dangerous jobs that women do do, such as factory work, that aren't in the original list (logging, mining, etc).
/r/MensRights01/03/09 02:55 PM
3

thanks for the head's up. I'll go check that out over there too.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 02:39 PM
-3

I'm not living in a fairy tale world. I'm just not agreeing with the earlier poster that "most women are inherently privileged over a large section of the male population". Are you claiming that because you might end up in jail and be raped that you personally are more oppressed than I am? I don't think you are. I'm saying that comparisons don't make sense either. Who are we to say that our psychic pain is greater than the other's? Better that we be allies and stop all oppressions.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 02:33 PM
1

yes, but one of the arguments used by MRAs about why women don't get paid equally is that "men do the hard. dangerous work". So, if men are chosing those jobs and being paid extra, where is the inherent oppression?
/r/MensRights01/03/09 02:06 PM
-1

Or, she could be leaving it for you because she spent 25 minutes cooking dinner and 15 minutes cleaning after. Well, that's why I didn't stop my husband from taking out the trash. Your mileage may vary.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 02:02 PM
-5

Yeah, we're fucking privileged all right. We're raped in far higher numbers, we're murdered by intimates in far higher numbers. Let's start seeing some reality around here. By the way, I'm not saying all men are rapists, I'm not saying men aren't hurt by violence or rape at the hands of men or women. (I'm also not saying that some women don't lie about rape, and I'm not saying that some fights aren't started by women.) I'm just saying: don't live in a fairy-tale dream world and start with vaccuo…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:59 PM
7

Because, as a feminist, I'm pretty much anti-war and I have instead lobbied against selective service requirements for men. I'm from the US, so I'm pretty much only going to make demands in my own country.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:51 PM
4

I thought it was funny. Upmodded.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:47 PM
-3

No we're not. We're talking about it all. Feminists talk about women having the right to go for manual labor hard jobs is they wish and for men to go for childcare, staying at home and being carers, nursing, (i.e., jobs held traditionally by women) etc. Feminists support women in the military, in combat positions... in dangerous and hard tasks anywhere that women wish to go. You're just making this up off the top of your head because you have some bone to pick. Why don't you actually sort it out…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:42 PM
4

Oops. I replied with the "I know women..." Personally, I don't tend to encourage anyone to take manual labor jobs because I was raised middle class. I encourage everyone, men and women alike, to do the jobs that they would love. It's actually a very stupid question, and it's being used here to try to imply that feminists aren't REALLY for equality. But it's a stupid logical fallacy strawman argument. I really don't think that your (not you, lampochka. the whole thread) version of "feminists" is …
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:41 PM
3

Women of the same socio-economic class "fall into" food service, retail, or clerical work, which while not glamorous, is also far less dangerous. Not always. I know a woman who lost her hand in a canning factory accident. It's might not be the heavy lifting of mining or logging, but factory work is dangerous for anyone. (And hot, and dirty, and fast, and stressful.) Also, I know a number of women in construction, and even worked a stint myself, in my 20s.
/r/MensRights01/03/09 01:34 PM
6

I think this is very well-put: Patriarchy, as lived, doesn’t feel like privilege. It feels mostly like getting beat up, and always fighting for status—always trying to live up to some insane, ever-shifting masculine ideal. Men don’t feel like they are in a better position than women. In truth, no one in a hierarchical society, not even at the top, feels like they’ve "won," or like they’re the in-crowd. Pretty much everyone feels like they’re struggling. And, as this study shows, everyone in a cu…
/r/MensRights22/02/09 03:54 AM
1

That's crazy. I've never heard of "blood feuds" in that way before. I'm currently reading a book written by one of Sudan's "Lost Boys", one of the tens of thousands of displaced boys from southern Sudan . Wikipedia states that they "were fleeing persecution by Arabs", but the book reports that the long term unease between the Arabs and the Dinka (African tribes) was just part and parcel of a long long emnity between the groups, later kicked off by political parties who could gain advantage throu…
/r/MensRights17/02/09 05:27 AM
1

But the real reason dad should be there is the same reason that doctors want dad out. He's there to kick the ass of anybody who messes with his woman. Lol. Sounds like you have some experience with this. taking pitussin and climbing aboard the cesarian surgery cash cow, Yeah! Nice to hear someone else say that. Way to cause fetal distress and force a c-section. (For those who haven't read about it, hospitals like women to deliver ASAP after the water breaks, trying to avoid "infection". My under…
/r/MensRights17/02/09 05:13 AM
1

Well put.
/r/MensRights17/02/09 04:45 AM
1

An interesting read. It is 10 years ago, so I don't know how applicable my comments still are. Anyhow, the judgment in this case is insane. To wit: At bar, the defendant assumed the status of father to this child when he: l) allowed his name to be placed on the birth certificate, 2) failed to contest the Findings of Fact and conclusions of Law supporting the Judgment of Divorce, 3) failed to inform the Family Court hearing examiner on two occasions of his denial of paternity, 4) made child suppo…
/r/MensRights17/02/09 04:14 AM
1

That's actually a great idea. I'm betting there's a statute of limitations on individual cases, but what if it was done as a series of class action suits against hospitals? I think Class action suits have different rules due to the longevity of some of the effects that are sued over.
/r/MensRights17/02/09 03:52 AM
2

To sum up: husbands at the birth might be stressed and some of that stress might be transmitted to the mom, making labor longer/harder. Solution: rethink the current assumption that men should take part of the birth experience. I'm always a supporter of the idea that every couple should decide for themselves what makes sense. But how about having support for the dad as well as the mom? If the dad's gone off into his head and is starting to worry about the bills, (as per one of the examples in th…
/r/MensRights17/02/09 03:25 AM
0

By the way, I missed saying so earlier, but I actually think that the preponderance of "women did bad" articles might stifle the liberation of men: It turns off potential allies (granted, you may not care). It feeds into various people's psychological hurts and makes them feel angry and justified. These feelings might keep people from seeking help with their own unresolved issues from childhood. It creates a perception of the world that might not be that reflective of reality. We perceive the ha…
/r/MensRights16/02/09 06:06 AM
0

feminism continues to feed rape and pedophile hysteria as part of their anti-male propaganda program. It's so amazing to me that I read feminist articles, I read feminist blogs, and I really haven't found evidence of an "anti-male propaganda program". How exactly do you expect to get men into those roles? Now, that is a question and a half. I think men love kids and would welcome the opportunity to be move involved if they can. How would I personally do it? Well, I recently got involved with my …
/r/MensRights16/02/09 05:55 AM
1

Mind you, I'm not arguing that men aren't oppressed. (Reread what I've written.) I was arguing that on this list, we don't need to be convinced that men have great capacity for good and that women have great capacity for evil. I'd claim that we're all here on this forum, wanting to advance men's liberation, because we either are, or we know, men that have been kind, loving, creative, intelligent, fantastic. If we didn't love men, we wouldn't be concerned with men's well-being. I'm merely making …
/r/MensRights16/02/09 05:36 AM
1

... so says the right-wing pundit who's called President Obama as a "revolutionary Marxist", who's supported Geert Wilders, a Dutch politician who wants to ban the Koran and deport Muslims, who argues the Palestinians can be collectively punished for acts of terrorism by Islamist terrorists because they are "a terrorist population". (Not necessarily ad hominem, I just don't care about her "opinion". Everyone's got an opinion. I don't have the time or inclination to read someone with whom I alrea…
/r/MensRights16/02/09 02:52 AM
0

Cheap shots, definitely. Joking aside, I don't think we actually need to be convinced that men have great capacity for good and that women have great capacity for evil. After all, we're all human beings, and as such, we're complex creatures with a capacity for both. I think we have a preponderance of the "look! a woman did evil" posts here simply because certain people here just get off on dissing women. Part of their unfortunate psychological makeup. They justify it by saying that it forwards m…
/r/MensRights16/02/09 02:31 AM
0

Part of that is showing that men can do good and men are able to be the equal of women. Yeah, but I notice that you guys never quite get around to that part of it. You all might want to consider that.
/r/MensRights16/02/09 02:19 AM
0

female-idealization Bullshit. The reason this case happened is precisely because "women's work" (childcare, in this case) continues to be extremely under-funded. This is more impetus for men to become more associated with child-raising, because it will be better funded once that happens.
/r/MensRights16/02/09 01:57 AM
5

I like the line: In fact, studies have shown that men maintain larger social networks with other males compared to women and tend to have longer lasting friendships with members of the same-sex than do women. I'm not at all surprised by this. My mother dropped people like hot potatos when she got mad at them. I completely learned how to not trust people's continuity from her (even thought she was the one who broke their friendships' continuity). What a shitty lesson.
/r/MensRights13/02/09 10:50 AM
1

All human emotions experienced by boys and men are masculine, and they experience almost the entire gamut, and all human emotions experienced by girls and women are feminine, and they experience almost the entire gamut. Yeah, it sounds like we're on the same page and just using different words. I'd completely agree with what you wrote there. Part of what I meant was that men aren't girly when they enjoy cooking for example, and women aren't manly when they're beating their best time to run a mil…
/r/MensRights11/02/09 05:27 AM
1

I had to fight a holy war against my wife and mother-in-law to stop my son from being circumcised. OMG. I'm so glad you won. I recently read another apologist tract about "the myths" of anti-circumcision. They're so clever to try to make it seem like opinion rather than abuse.... as if the baby boy even gets an opinion on the matter. It made me sick. By the way, recent research shows that female partners of uncircumsized men experience more sexual pleasure. A good argument for women, although I …
/r/MensRights11/02/09 02:30 AM
1

Lol, that's funny. Because the way I see it, humans evolved with only 1 pair of hands and 1 pair of feet. That means that three pairs of shoes is the "natural" maximum for any woman, unless she's carrying babies, in which case, she only gets the pair on her feet. Now, I won't deny that so-called civilization might have corrupted the natural order of things. Furthermore, agriculture allowed the proliferation of those small rodenty critters that you believe to have died in your wife's closet.
/r/MensRights11/02/09 01:01 AM
1

Hi Hextor, I don't think I agree. There are no "feminine" feelings or "masculine" feelings. There are just human emotions. And your boys, being human, will experience the full range of human emotions, unless someone teaches them that some are forbidden. One of men's oppressions is not being able (permitted?, allowed?, safe?) to express themselves fully, because they've always been told that some of their human emotions are "not masculine" enough. being told "Cry? I'll give you something to cry a…
/r/MensRights11/02/09 12:50 AM
1

Sorry I'm weighing in on this so late (5 days). I didn't see it earlier. I agree with much of what you wrote, but I think you're misinterpreting something there and it's bugging me. I agree that the boys should be allowed to shine when they shine. Breaking someone's will to succeed in order to boost someone else's low self-esteem is pure crap. We tend to underfund things in our society and so classes for advanced kids, separate teams, all that sort of stuff that would help the talented kids, get…
/r/MensRights11/02/09 12:34 AM
1

Yeah, yeah, always blaming it on the woman.... ;-) YOUR problem is that you married a gal with normal sized feet. You should have married a monkey, like me, with feet just a little long. Shoes are hard to find. I own one pair of work shoes, and one pair of runners. (By the way, all the women in my family wear size 10 shoes. All the men are in size 13. They don't have it any easier.) On the other hand, as a member of a diaspora, it probably helped with all that hiking away oh so many generations …
/r/MensRights11/02/09 12:15 AM
1

Interesting points. The denial of the oppression is a hard one to break through. I'd love to start an ad campaign that speaks to as many people as possible in ways that everyone can get. I've seen a few lately but there was always something in them that I recognise would lose the audience. One of them I (mostly) liked recently started with some of the dire statistics about men's work tends to be more dangerous, and how men are treated as more "disposable"... I wonder... if you could sum up men's…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 02:52 PM
1

Hi pn6, I actual wrote: (In this current case, the boy is too young to have consented to the contract, even though he may have consented to the sex itself.) I wasn't really referring to the current case. I was talking about child payment in general, and was rejecting the whole assumption that both parents have to pay regardless of whether they chose to have the child. In the current case, the boy's too young and couldn't have consented to any legal contracts. In this event, he shouldn't be held …
/r/MensRights10/02/09 04:20 AM
1

The term "profit" is kinda throwing me for a loop, but only because $50 per month is quite a small amount when paying for a baby's needs. Me, I think I'm back to thinking that this proposed system might be better: if she chooses it and he doesn't, she pays (he doesn't), but he gives up rights to the child. if he chooses it and she doesn't, he has the right to sue her for the baby, in which case he pays medical costs and compensation and raises the baby. She gives up rights to the child. if they …
/r/MensRights10/02/09 03:09 AM
1

I agree. (But it hasn't been clear to us that the sex act itself distressed the boy. It's the subsequent occurrences that would have been the distressing part.) Also, I'd really really like to hear from the boy himself. The article says that he's suffering nightmares, but honestly, it sounds like the whole thing's been just awful, period. Very antagonistic. His own parents sound like nightmares. Any connection he might have had with the girl is buried in the distant past, so he doesn't even have…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 02:58 AM
1

Hi junkeee999, I'm a woman from America who's been raped (at gunpoint) and assaulted (at age 11 by two 13 year olds) and date-raped (I thought he'd turn nasty and wanted to avoid that, so I just "gave in") I'm a woman who's overweight and hence doesn't fit into the conventional definition of beauty - as a result I've received jeers, and been silenced and ignored, and didn't get the boys I liked to like me back, even though I was merely a little chubby back then). (By the way, "barking" at a woma…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 02:31 AM
2

Thank you for that response. There's a lot in there to think about. The problem is that while women benefited from the strident "consciousness-raising" of the 60's, which highlighted the many subtle ways in which society (men and women) oppressed women, the ways in which they were taken for granted, there has been so similar movement for men. Sexism against men is something that is denied every goddamn day, and yet remains very real. Yes, and a very strong key men's oppression is the lack of saf…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 02:19 AM
1

At least in that sense, everyone is welcome to post and argue here. Thank you. declare that mens' rights should be a subset (read:accept a subordinate position to) feminism. I agree with you completely. It's an untenable and unfounded position. Who am I to tell you that my healing is more important than yours (or even make a claim that my pain is "somehow" worse)? Particularly in your living room ?
/r/MensRights10/02/09 01:52 AM
2

I heard that Jackins knew Hubbard, that together they designed some similar forebear to both therapies together, but that they split up quite early when Jackins wasn't interested in it as a money-making enterprise. The other story about its beginning was that Jackins and friends took care of a very distressed suicidal friend of theirs. He was terrified at his breakdown and begged them not to put him in a loony bin. Over the weekend, they slowly watched him recover as they all took turns and simp…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 01:21 AM
1

HextorFreebish pretty much covered it, but I'll add just a little: The "re-evaluation" part: the basic premise of RC is that experiences of hurt are generally tied in with not having permission to fully "discharge" the hurt (i.e., crying, feeling fear, anger). So rather than being finished with a hurt, we don't fully recover from the experience, and the memory of the experience is left behind with the unresolved emotional content which blocks our thinking whenever a similar situation comes up. B…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 01:11 AM
1

I have just as little tolerance for woman-hating "men's rights" advocates as for the man-hating "women's rights" advocates. Yeah, fair enough. There have perhaps always been haters on both sides and they tend to glom on to the extremes of any point of view, perhaps. eah, there are shrill "women are evil!" folks here, but they don't speak for all men. Of course, their ilk problem considers me a traitor for thinking that women aren't all bad. You can't win with them, so why try? Oddly, I don't thi…
/r/MensRights10/02/09 12:30 AM
1

I do wish it were easier. I see so many of our struggles have so many commonalities (love and concern for the well-being of ourselves, our partners, our children). Yet I know a lot of women who, even as we're starting to have the whole world open to us, still feeling embattled and embittered, and thus in denial about men's pain. I think it's important for women to be part of the solution because ... well, for one, we're so influential in raising kids, that if we don't clean up our part of the sh…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 12:38 PM
2

Hi tomek77, I actually reprinted some of this as a self reddit, to get feedback about whether this was a men's only space, whether allies were welcome too, etc. (Actually, it's part of the subreddit description that we are, but I do take your request to "go away" with a degree of seriousness.) One thing is, I wanted to apologize to you because there's a way my post sounded a bit snide. (Or perhaps whiney.) I'm sorry about that. My desire isn't to mock or thwart you. I do get what your saying, in…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 10:55 AM
1

Thank you for answering. The first time I came across the topic, I think I had the same reaction - "but men are the privileged class, etc etc". I was answered with a few key examples and it blew apart all I thought I'd "understood". (That was a long time ago by the way.) It's clear from my current vantage point that that's just part of the oppression too (and yields to education). One of the most basic and undeniable oppression of men that I find almost everyone can relate to right away is one y…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 10:40 AM
1

Can I ask you some questions: is it your personal experience as a man that overwhelmingly women have been telling you that you are scum? I have a lot of male close friends as well as considering my husband my best friend. Most of them are self-described feminists and they don't express that that as their experience (or I don't think they'd use the word "feminist"). By the way, my friendship group is mainly in our mid-30s to late 40s, and even a few friends in their 50s. Do you think this might b…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 04:46 AM
6

I thought some of you might want to weigh in. Are women welcome as allies? Or is this a men's only club? Do women have to agree with you politically in order to be allies? Maybe forcing one to questioning one's assumptions is hard, but perhaps it can be a liberating experience. What do you think? Clearly I've pushed this one guy's buttons too far (by standing up against him when he finally admits is not hard facts when he claims that that it's all a feminist conspiracy, but his opinion). Anyhow,…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 04:21 AM
3

Look, I appreciate your concern for men's rights, but this is not your fight Bullshit, it isn't. People need allies in liberation struggles. I have men in my life I support and I fight for. I don't trust you That's fine. But.... Men's groups are for men. You don't belong here, and nobody owes you an explanation, or a discussion. You're right, you don't "owe me" anything, but the thing about allies is that they get to see things about the broader picture that people might not see in the narrow fr…
/r/MensRights09/02/09 02:05 AM
3

Let's cut the bullshit and have an adult conversation here. Your stats on single mothers are clearly from the Ann Coulters of the world (yeah, I did a search). If you have some actual data, not by rightwing conservative traditionalist front groups, please supply it. In the meantime, thank you for admitting that your claims about how feminists are conspiring to kill fatherwhood and ruin the world are mere "opinion". I would also question all of your above claims. I don't think they're tenable. Th…
/r/MensRights08/02/09 11:59 PM
1

It's not a fine. It actually pays towards child support, even thought you seem to have conveniently forgotten the child. Actually, since the grandparents are so keen on keeping the child, perhaps they should be helping their son out.
/r/MensRights08/02/09 12:51 PM
1

In other words, richer, older single-moms are just as bad as their ghetto sisters. That's interesting, if it's true. I hadn't heard that. Can you supply some links? (P.S. I don't necessarily believe you, I'll be honest about that up front. If they're from some conservative rag, you've lost all credibility.) Time and nurturing with the parents is more important than piano lessons, after all. That I'm not surprised about. On the other hand, people who've picked up a lot of additional skills at lea…
/r/MensRights08/02/09 12:16 PM
2

I agree that it wasn't rape. I think that 15 year old boys know enough to know whether they want to have sex or not, and it sounds like he agreed to the sex. The courts also didn't consider it "rape" and charged the girl with "unlawful sexual conduct". That said, I disagree that he should have to pay child support.
/r/MensRights08/02/09 08:48 AM
1

There is a mountain of evidence regarding the disastrous effects of single motherhood on children. That may be, but as in any population statistics, you need to be cautious of what's a correlation and what's a causation. Single women tend to be poorer. Single women tend to be over-worked. If you break down percentages by class and race, single women tend to be from groups that are already disadvantaged. Some single mothers chose to be single moms, and others didn't. Some women try to involve the…
/r/MensRights08/02/09 01:49 AM
1

He's the one making a claim. Standard logic would require him to provide supporting evidence.
/r/MensRights07/02/09 12:27 PM
1

IMO: It doesn't. The clear response to the oppressive fallacy that "men are (always) perpetrators" are a slew of counter-examples in which men are shown to be kind, loving, caring, creative, fully human. The tact that certain (misogynist? You decide) men's rights activists have taken is "Yeah? You guys suck just as badly!" I'm over-simplifying, however. pn6 has a number of good points he makes in his FAQ. It is important that we stop putting half the human race up on a pedestal. From the FAQ: Do…
/r/MensRights06/02/09 07:24 AM
-2

I never said women are the whole of our problems, you said that. You wrote earlier: But in the case of divorce, family court, and child support, the woman has the unique power to call down fire and brimstone onto the man. and you wrote: Part of our challenge today is some problems are created by women. And the only solution, if there is to be one, must come from women In the context of the current thread, that's virtually saying that it's all women's fault. Perhaps that is how you subconsciously…
/r/MensRights06/02/09 06:15 AM
1

ADDED: Oops, I probably didn't answer this, I may have been answering your earlier post again, because you've conceded a couple of things that I didn't realize, and that I claim (below) you haven't. I apologise for that. It's late and I'm tired, and I just kinda accidentally cherry-picked a line or two.) I'm gonna delete the whole thing and start over....
/r/MensRights06/02/09 05:22 AM
-1

There's no information in your link about how connected any of the children are with their dads. For all we know, except for the abusive one, the writer might be close to all the fathers, the fathers might be in all the kids' lives, and the kids might not be the ones committing crimes and causing "societal mayhem". On the other hand, for all we know, each of the men involved may have chosen not to be responsible for their offspring. The link simply doesn't supply enough evidence to support your …
/r/MensRights06/02/09 01:02 AM
-1

Why did you call him an asshole? I lost my temper. This is not helping your argument. Yeah, I'm sure you're right. But after three days, I don't expect to have an impact anyhow :-( Women are the problem and only women can possibly hold the solution, in kanuk's argument. I think this gives us impossibly too much power, and I also think it demeans men by claiming that they are utterly without power. I reject this. Wrt the current argument (i.e., not being treated fairly in courts as potential equa…
/r/MensRights06/02/09 12:41 AM
-3

But did it occur to you that John wouldn't have needed your help, he wouldn't have needed to fight so hard, if the courts held a presumption of joint custody? ZOMG! I never realized men were oppressed!!! Look, let's start over. You somehow keep making the assumption that I'm the enemy. (Over and over and over .........*puke*) And why is that? Because I called myself a "feminist"? Get over it. Feminists can be allies (by the way, I've been involved in the men's movement for 12 years, asshole). In…
/r/MensRights05/02/09 11:10 PM
-2

It's a reasonable thing for me to state, as a supporter of men and someone who's quite interested in ending men's oppression, that SOMETIMES MEN HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR CHOICES AND FOR MAKING THINGS WORK OUT FOR THEM I helped my friend John get joint custody. I counselled him, supported him emotionally, was always there when he had difficulties with his ex who wanted sole custody. John didn't give up, he held out time and time again, to the ex, to the kids, to the courts, that he w…
/r/MensRights05/02/09 01:08 PM
1

Wow. You're claiming that one man's sad tale (agreed, he was treated badly at the hands of the courts. Agreed, men and women in our current system can feel totally helpless) proves that all married men in western cultures are as badly treated as trafficked slaves? Black and white and no in-between much?
/r/MensRights04/02/09 11:06 PM
1

Yadda yadda yadda. Just keep acting out your personal psycho-sexual dramas here. Someday someone will pay attention.
/r/MensRights04/02/09 10:53 PM
1

You just saw it! You just misread it! Not every female slave is a sex slave. Most are not, as stated in the Ms article. The best estimates that we have are that 15 out of 16 slaves today are not enslaved in commercial sex. The typical slave is a woman between the ages of 12 and 40, South Asian, and in some form of debt bondage, typically generational. Beyond that, the slave would likely be on a farm or in some low-level industry—brick making, fishing, that kind of thing. And yes, Ms Magazine has…
/r/MensRights04/02/09 10:40 PM
1

Yes, you're right. The numbers seem to be different 2 years ago from what we know now. Since they presumably used the resources of all the links they supply, they're either crap researchers or the known numbers were different a couple years ago(?) Anyhow, I think the basic point stands (mistakes aside): it's untrue to claim that feminists exclusively ignore anything other than sex slavery.
/r/MensRights04/02/09 10:07 PM
-2

You pretend women have no power. No, I don't. Never said anything of the sort. Ain't going to work here. Women have enormous power -- including the power to include or exclude the father Men have a lot more choice than what you are crediting them with about whether they are involved in their children's lives. You claim that because every man doesn't have 100% power all the time that they have zip, zilch, zero, nada. Man, you must think we're the fucking enemy all the fucking time. Occasionally, …
/r/MensRights04/02/09 09:54 PM
-3

Given those "disincentives," imagine what fathers could do with even a little encouragement. Imagine what would happen if the media had frequent news items, articles, television and radio programs showing competent, loving fathers, men fulfilled by fatherhood. Imagine if boys weren't born to single mothers. Imagine if, in two-parent families, the mother didn't shoulder the dad aside and demean his efforts at childcare. Obama's encouraging men to make those decisions and get involved. Why is this…
/r/MensRights04/02/09 06:11 AM
2

The author of the Foreign Policy piece you linked, E. Benjamin Skinner, was interviewed by Mother Jones here. This isn't about downplaying the horrors of human trafficking. It's just that one of the commenters pointed out that it's untrue to claim that feminists exclusively ignore anything other than sex slavery. Skinner seems to state that in everything he writes (I googled him to see where he gets that claim from. He never specifies.) The following shows it's simply not true. The commenter lin…
/r/MensRights04/02/09 05:52 AM
1

Ok, that comparison is a bit more justified. However, I'd still say that there's an enormous difference (at least in the US and Australia, which is where I have life experience) between victims of domestic violence, who often have family, a support network, and ways out of a dangerous marriage. Human trafficking can put its victims in a state of complete helplessness. Often, the slave doesn't dare seek help out of fear that they would be jailed or punished, or out of complete lack of resources s…
/r/MensRights04/02/09 05:39 AM
0

it's pretty damn disrespectful toward the men and women who ARE enslaved throughout the world today. To compare the experiences of an unhappily married person to the experiences of victims of human trafficking is deplorable. Well said.
/r/MensRights04/02/09 05:08 AM
-1

Hi, the countless times a feminist has made hay out of women not having the right to vote in the early 1900's. Yeah, fair enough. That would be annoying. But since I don't know the context in which women are using that as an argument, not sure what to think about it. It kind of reminds me that people just hold on to past injustices a long time. I guess I can see why these quotes keep getting dredged up. However, I personally wish they wouldn't, only because I so disagree with them, and starting …
/r/MensRights04/02/09 12:39 AM
1

Being the party in control of raising the kids is NOT an issue that feminists ever pushed for. It was the status quo. Having the ability to not have to be doing the sole child was an issue that feminism took on. I for one am extremely happy that a number of men are very involved with child raising, that it's no longer considered out of the purview of men. As I wrote, women have traditionally been treated as the child-carer and that rigidity of mens' and womens' roles have largely remained despit…
/r/MensRights04/02/09 12:24 AM
1

They are the ultimate feminists. Sure, feel free to redefine the word any way you see fit, in order to jibe with your limited conception that feminism is the enemy. However, when you do that, we simply lose all ability to communicate.
/r/MensRights03/02/09 11:35 PM
2

feminists actually gained more power than is strictly equal. That may be, and often the men's movement does put things in those terms (and continues the fore-mentioned "battle"). However, it's useful to point out that women have traditionally been treated as the child-carer and men have traditionally been the sole supporter of families. Feminism actually opened up a world in which women often have careers and gender roles can be questioned. As a result, nowadays some women are the ones paying al…
/r/MensRights03/02/09 08:47 AM
1

Case in point. These women are not feminists. They are tribal women some of whom are living in stone age cultures. I think it points to "the battle between the sexes" pretty much being an endemic part of human nature. I'm trying to appeal to our better natures, which we're able to do because we have the resources to sit and discuss and debate. We have the benefit of modern anti-oppression movements (I think feminism was the first example), from which the men's movement sprung up. By the way, in …
/r/MensRights03/02/09 08:15 AM
-1

So barbarism has an expiration date, fair enough. How recent must an outrageous comment be for it to be relevant to you? If you actually read what I've written here and in a connected post in this thread, no, I don't support the comment. I think it's an unfortunate effect of a backlash against the oppression. Yeah, there was real anger there. There was real hatred. I reject it but understand it in a historical context. I'm asking you to do the same. You can call feminists on their bullshit. But …
/r/MensRights03/02/09 08:05 AM
0

99% of women in history had no complaint with men and supported their families in happiness. Citation needed Geez, talk about making up bullshit to support your pet theories. I'm sure women in history just loved being chattel, having no property rights, being "owned" by men. Or is this "propaganda"? That I only think these things caused unhappiness because a group of women in the early '70s said so? What you fail to even comprehend was that women's liberation / feminism didn't spring up from a v…
/r/MensRights03/02/09 07:50 AM
1

I don't consider this subreddit to be only about examples of "systemic" men's oppression. Well, it isn't. But men's oppression isn't about that one kid who's being hit by his dad. It's got to be an extension of one piece of anecdotal evidence. We need to to look at the evidence and think about and talk about how dads lash out because they're not given the support they need, it's about how boys aren't respected in their bodies, about how they're expected to take pain without crying out. I think t…
/r/MensRights03/02/09 02:38 AM
3

I wanted to add something to this conversation. As a feminist, it breaks my heart that these early feminist leaders had so much bile and hatred. It breaks my heart that none of them saw men as allies, as friends, as lovers, and as also people who are oppressed by gender stereotypes. Was the world so different back then? (In some ways it was. In my 5th grade, when Feminism was becoming well-known, we had a debate on "whether girls were as good as boys". Not as good in maths, or school or sports, …
/r/MensRights03/02/09 02:34 AM
-3

The "battle of the sexes" predates feminism by millenium. Early second-wave feminism wasn't wise. It wasn't smart. It hadn't learned its lessons yet. It was simply the first moves of a group of oppressed people who then lashed out and made mistakes. However, with more clarity about men's oppression, all sorts of people, feminists included, reassess their thinking. After all, Robin Morgan wrote her quote, what, 35 years ago? (I don't know where she stands, but I do know where I stand. I'm not apo…
/r/MensRights03/02/09 02:10 AM
1

David was and is by all accounts a caring and loving father; he does not deserve this treatment. I venture to say that no one, regardless of whether they're a great parent or a fairly poor one, deserve this treatment. That said, since the abduction was illegal, and the kidnapping was (simply) an act of crime, this doesn't constitute (systemic) men's oppression. It's nice to bring it to our attention though, to keep it in the public eye. But shouldn't it be posted on the main reddit for that?
/r/MensRights03/02/09 02:03 AM
1

Collectively our evasions have brought our relationship growth to a stale mate. Yeah, that's a shame that happens. I think most people are pretty unwilling to go to those difficult spots, because they're pretty much where we've been hurt or rejected before. And yet, only through sharing them do people grow (individually and as a couple). By the way, I'm not implying any fault to you for this. It sounds like there's an unspoken mutual agreement between you two not to go deeper. (If you wanted, yo…
/r/MensRights02/02/09 05:56 AM
1

Wait... Are you saying that these women shouldn't be deterred because of your unrealized teenage fantasies?
/r/MensRights30/01/09 05:05 AM
1

Interestingly, all of them are anti-feminists, too (their blog bills itself as "free from the scrutiny of feminists"). Ironically, your criticism of them and mine (as a feminist) would probably be somewhat similar. As an aside, I completely appreciate their technique of meeting in a support group to help them with their goal of how to emotionally support their men through difficult times.
/r/MensRights29/01/09 05:44 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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