TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

white_cloud Archive

View 9 posts and 375 comments by white_cloud on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
687

white_cloud/r/MensRights16/11/11 04:42 PM
105

white_cloud/r/MensRights28/01/12 11:35 PM
86

white_cloud/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:12 AM
83

white_cloud/r/MensRights04/01/12 06:28 AM
59

white_cloud/r/MensRights18/11/11 02:31 PM
29

white_cloud/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:07 AM
13

white_cloud/r/MensRights20/12/11 04:39 AM
4

white_cloud/r/MensRights05/11/11 01:48 AM
3

white_cloud/r/MensRights10/01/12 05:05 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

You addressed this pretty well in one of your videos. Men are seen as legitimate targets for aggression and violence, whereas women are not. Men's actions are seen as active, women's actions are seen as reactive. These two reasons explain why misandry from feminists was and is tolerated, but misogyny from MRAs will never be tolerated. I think it's highly probable that there are just as many women who become feminists because of personal anger that they have towards men as there are men who becom…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 04:26 PM
11

Text version of the video: http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2012/03/okay-getting-my-shit-together.html
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:54 AM
–

This is really just an indication of the extreme gynocentrism of today's college campuses. It's an environment that caters to the female. They want to talk about walking a mile in her shoes, but no one cares about walking a mile in his shoes. Definitely not the women on campus. What would walking a mile in his shoes look like? How about a day where every woman on campus has to wear a shirt that says "I'm a rapist", because the kangaroo campus court decided that his story about being raped was 50…
/r/MensRights23/03/12 07:03 PM
4

The fact is that you're just woefully uninformed. It positively oozes out of your comments. You would have to spend a few months just educating yourself on the issues, reading a few books, watching a few videos, poring over a few blogs, to get a grasp of what this is all about. Honestly, trying to educate you in the comments of this self-post would be like teaching calculus to someone who doesn't know basic arithmetic. You just have to educate yourself. I can give you some resources to start, bu…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:57 PM
–

Not really. You're really not being civil here. You're coming here with a very confrontational tone, saying that you don't care about our issues, that "all the issues on the side bar are bitching", that men who have these problems just did it to themselves because they didn't protect themselves enough, and then asking us to educate you. You may be legitimately seeking information, but you are not being civil or respectful about it.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:22 PM
6

When has there been instances of visitation rights denied by a wife where the husband has done nothing wrong and deserves the right to see his children? Uh, this goes on all the time. It's called visitation interference. 40% of custodial mothers have admitted to denying their ex-husbands visitation time with his kids in order to punish him. http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/pas/turkat94.htm
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:17 PM
–

I will admit I'm terribly ill informed And there's your answer as to "why you don't care".
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:10 PM
1

This may be the day that this subreddit jumped the shark. I'm serious. This is fucking ridiculous. The post is OBVIOUSLY being upvoted from somewhere else. The one yesterday about changing the title was the same way. Someone is gaming the shit out of this subreddit. Top-voted post about how this subreddit needs to stop being anti-women. FUCK ME. Three months ago, this shit would have been utterly wiped off the front page in 10 minutes from downvotes. Now it's the top-voted post.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 10:46 PM
1

I don't know of any crossposts.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 07:09 AM
9

Does anyone actually know this ZorbaTHut guy? Or any of the other people supporting him? Has anyone seen him here before? How many submissions has he made? What has he done for men, besides tell us to be less offensive to women? I pointed out in the other thread that he has never made a single submission to r/mensrights in four years as a redditor, except his self-post today saying to change the title. Hamakua pretty much nailed it about that entire thread: The people "in the recent conversation…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:36 AM
6

Let the man speak. His post is at the top of r/mensrights with 363 upvotes (as of right now). He is speaking. Loudly. I'm not stopping him and neither is anyone else.
/r/MensRights03/03/12 10:54 PM
–

Coming out of my self-imposed exile for a minute here to say this. I've been a member of this community for about 9 months. The author of this submission has been a redditor for 4 years and this is the first submission that he has ever made to r/mensrights. I have made probably 20 submissions in 9 months, all of which were in r/mensrights, some of which I deleted, so my submission page only shows 8. What I'm saying with this is, when you say "can we change the title", who is "we"? You've been he…
/r/MensRights03/03/12 05:38 PM
3

This video should be subtitled "how giving women everything they want is destroying society and marginalizing men", because that's what it seems to come down to. In order to incentivize men to get married and have a family, the divorce laws have to be reformed so that those men know that it won't all be taken away from them if their wife decides to unilaterally divorce them. Those laws won't be reformed unless women give up some of their power and control with regard to marriage, divorce, and ch…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 05:19 AM
15

I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't read the book Taken Into Custody by Stephen Baskerville. #5 is true. Family court judges routinely pass orders prohibiting divorced fathers from speaking about or writing about family court issues. Not just their own specific case, but any family court issues at all. It's a violation of the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of free speech, but no one seems to care, because it's just divorced fathers amirite. That's one of the reasons why there is so little pub…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 04:27 AM
–

That's a good idea. Two ways to get the word out: video and written form. If you're going to post them as articles, I would recommend modifying the text to make it read more like an article as opposed to a direct transcript of the video. I would also recommend that you start working your best material into a book. This is good stuff. Like whoa and like damn. I would love to see what you could come up with if you really sat down and put all of your ideas into a single coherent theory. I would lov…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 01:14 AM
4

Excellent video. Damn, she is so smart. This really should be part of a book or an article.
/r/MensRights25/02/12 05:50 PM
13

The scariest thing that I ever read from Erin Pizzey was this article. Here she writes a first-hand account of how radical, man-hating women took over the domestic violence industry that she herself started because it gave those women a "legitimate reason to hate and blame all men". These women hated men first, and got involved in domestic violence advocacy because it gave them a socially-acceptable outlet for their hatred of men. Our grant was given to them and they had a legitimate reason to h…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 04:59 PM
–

It's more like, "Wow, this got 6 upvotes in an hour in a mostly dead thread. I wonder where...wait, checks user page, see's a page full of submissions to SRS, remembers how SRS users troll the shit out of r/mensrights, mocking friends of mine and calling people names...yeah, it's not worth it. I'll just tell him/her that his/her decision to participate in SRS means that I'm not going to engage him/her in a serious discussion". It's not my fault that people choose to marginalize themselves by par…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 05:43 AM
–

::checks user page:: Oh, an SRS poster. I wondered where the upvotes were coming from. I don't give serious replies to SRS posters.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 05:25 AM
–

But wouldn't that suggest that he is acting like less of a man, and therefore acting like a woman, which is a bad thing? I don't think so. Saying that a man is "not a real man" or is less of a man (which is really what calling a man a "wimp" or "bitch" is really about) is not the same as calling him a woman. It's actually saying that he's neither a man nor a woman. He's less than both. He's less than a man, but he's not a woman either. He's just a nothing. A loser. A nobody.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 02:54 AM
1

I'm glad to hear that you agree with my point. I wasn't sure if this was an aspect that you thought fit in with your own theory, but I'm glad to hear that it does. I don't know why, but I get kind of sidetracked by the empathy argument. To me, empathy is a conscious thing. Empathy means that you try to understand how another person feels, to "put yourself in their shoes". When I do this, I think of it as a conscious attempt to see where someone else is coming from, not as a subconscious orientat…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 02:39 AM
1

Sort of on-topic, but you finally got me to agree somewhat with your biological basis of the empathy gap argument. I was resistant to it until I re-framed it in a way that made more sense to me. You were saying, if I am correct, that human beings are biologically programmed to not empathize with males because human beings throughout history have needed men to be strong and to bear society's burdens (and therefore it was a liability to empathize with men who were suffering). I didn't agree with t…
/r/MensRights23/02/12 08:38 PM
–

I'll quote it again: The language of prison rape reflects rape-related misogyny, from jokes about the rapist making the less powerful prisoner his "bitch" to our limited understanding of prison sexual assault as necessarily entailing penetration with a penis. Rape-related misogyny. There's no reason to invoke this except to make rape of males in prison somehow also about the victimization of women. 90% of prison rapes occur to men. Misogyny means hatred of women. She's saying that we lack a comp…
/r/MensRights23/02/12 08:02 PM
–

I disagree with that and I'll tell you why. Because it re-frames male victimization through the lens of women's victimization, without empathizing with the male's experience of what he actually feels about his own victimization. When a man is raped by another man, he doesn't feel violated because he feels like a woman, he feels violated because he was raped. To say that because women are penetrated during sex, that a man being penetrated feels violated because it makes him feel like a woman is t…
/r/MensRights23/02/12 07:19 PM
–

Quote from the article: But sexual assault is also used to put "undesireables" in their place. Misogyny plays into that, too. The language of prison rape reflects rape-related misogyny, from jokes about the rapist making the less powerful prisoner his "bitch" to our limited understanding of prison sexual assault as necessarily entailing penetration with a penis. No. Here they go again trying to make something that happens to men into something that is about women being the victim. 90% of prison …
/r/MensRights23/02/12 05:12 PM
2

No, you just think you're right. I don't say what I say to be popular either. I say what I believe is right. I believe that it is wrong to deny women the right to vote. It's not going to make you "successful" advocating taking away women's right to vote, it's going to make you a fringe nut that no one takes seriously.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 09:11 PM
2

I don't mean to insult you, but you should have flair that says "women should not be allowed to vote" so that everyone knows what you believe. You would be considered little more than a troll. Don't you realize how much of a fringe nut it makes you sound like by advocating taking away women's right to vote? It's in the same category with people who advocate sending black people back to Africa. It's not a serious thing. It makes you sound like a nut. And I guarantee you that if you ever achieved …
/r/MensRights22/02/12 08:43 PM
2

I said taxes as a share of GDP, not spending as a share of GDP. Taxes as a share of GDP went down dramatically after the Bush tax cuts in 2001. Source
/r/MensRights22/02/12 08:34 PM
3

When you figure that out, you understand why I say there are only three solutions to feminism: Revolt, Expat, Turtle. Only you've constructed "revolt" to mean taking away women's right to vote. How many people realize that when you say revolt, that this is what you mean? Most rational people probably assume that revolt means educating people about the issues and doing activism to help alleviate the problems that men face in their lives. Don't tell me that there are only three solutions, then mak…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:59 PM
2

As such, a progressive tax system is... yet again... another fucking moral hazard that is destroying us. People will continue to be frivolous with other people's money. Until they have skin in the game, this problem cannot be solved. Bullshit. A progressive tax system means that everyone pays the same rate on the same income. Marginal tax rates. A billionaire pays the same rate on his first $20,000 as someone who only makes $20,000 in a year. Everyone does have skin in the game. Everyone pays th…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:44 PM
2

Suffrage might come with problems, but it's not something that I would take away. The right to vote is a fundamental right of a citizen. I don't see how it's productive to have a discussion about taking away suffrage rights. As it pertains to the fledgling men's rights movement, if taking away women's right to vote became a central tenet of the movement, it would marginalize us even more than we already are. I personally would stop associating with the MRM if this became a central tenet. I can't…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:16 PM
5

How do you imagine that we change it such that men care more about men than they care about women? I wouldn't want that. I would want men to care about men as much as they care about women. And vice versa. How I would do it is through socialization. Teaching people that both men and women have problems that need to be addressed, that men are not all powerful and that women are not all vulnerable, that men can feel pain, that men are not the oppressors of all women, that men haven't been privileg…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:34 PM
7

Banning FGM didn't require a male protective instinct - it's objectively horrible, and nobody risked re-election by banning it, since it's not the type of genital mutilation favored by most Americans. It required an instinct that says protect women more than men. MGM is still legal.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:14 PM
3

It's not a problem. It's just an "Is". Wouldn't be too far fetched to imagine that cultures which protected their women tended to outbreed and conquer societies which didn't. What I mean by that is if you can't resolve the issue, it can't be a "problem" to be corrected, and instead must be a base condition of humanity which a successful society must be based upon. That's just a complete deflection of the issue. And it's probably because you're uncomfortable with the topic. It IS a problem that m…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 04:55 PM
–

That's not relevant to this point though. The point is that men don't have an in-group bias toward helping other men, but have a bias toward helping women. It seems to be independent of what percentage of voters are women. It appears to be a problem with men themselves, that they would rather help women than men.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:16 AM
4

I was thinking that men's rights needs to figure out how to exploit these same human instincts that feminism has piggybacked on for the last 50 years. What are the natural human instincts that favor men that men's rights issues could piggyback on to garner support among the populace for men's issues?
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:10 AM
3

If the research is correct, women in power would still have in-group bias toward other women. So it wouldn't be chivalry, but it would still be bias toward women. It would be more transparent though.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:46 AM
1

Feel free to read my two prior comments in this comment thread to see where I am coming from. If you read my comments, you'd see that I'm probably a lot closer to your way of thinking than you think. I poured out my heart in those comments and posted a lot of personal details about my life and my experiences. It wasn't intended for you, but if you want to read it and see where I am coming from, go ahead.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:13 AM
–

I would say, and it looks like GWW is coming around to this view, that feminism didn't really challenge any gender roles but rather built on existing gender roles and reinforced them. I wouldn't say that she's coming around to this view. She's written about this before, as have I and others. But I agree with you that this is the problem. But it's not a new theory, and this video is not the first time that she has said this. I could pull my past comments, but I've said the same thing. As have you…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:51 AM
–

Thanks for the reply. You and I seem to be largely in agreement. I'm not interested in putting women back in the home, either. However, just because your parents made it work for 50 years despite your adoptive mom earning more than your dad does not mean that that will ever be the norm--especially when divorce is so easy for women. Even asking feminists in a women's studies class what they want, and they'll usually tell you it's a husband who is as successful as, or more successful than, they ar…
/r/MensRights21/02/12 08:11 PM
–

I wanted to give you a longer response to this. I know that this is a 3-day-old thread, but I hope that you see this as a reply in your inbox. Maybe you can reply. If not, I hope this gives you something to think about and helps you see where I am coming from. Part of the problem I think is what people mean by traditionalism. I have gathered so far from talking to various people about this that a big element of "traditionalism" entails having sexual restraint and encouraging intact two-parent fa…
/r/MensRights21/02/12 02:45 AM
1

When I hear people talk about traditionalism as it relates to the gender debate, I'm hearing things like women shouldn't be allowed to vote or women shouldn't be in the labor force. As it pertains to those things, I don't think that we can put the genie back in the bottle, so I don't see the point in advocating for it. All it does is make the person advocating for it come across as some kind of neanderthal. Personal responsibility is a different thing. Women shouldn't get special treatment becau…
/r/MensRights19/02/12 05:52 AM
–

Exactly, this is what I came here to say. It's not slut shaming that is a problem for men, it's virgin shaming. And it's not primarily feminists who do it, it's a society-wide phenomenon. Men who are virgins are shamed every bit as ruthlessly as promiscuous women. Maybe even more.
/r/MensRights18/02/12 11:23 PM
–

I think Demonspawn is a brilliant [...] man No. "Make things back the way they was a hundred years ago" is not brilliance. Sorry. I could easily advocate the same things he does, because his view is based in what comes natural to human beings. What stops me is not lack of "brilliance", it's a desire to rise above that. It's not enlightened to advocate for something that is rooted in base human urges and instincts. What's enlightened is a desire to transcend those base urges and instincts, and cr…
/r/MensRights18/02/12 09:16 PM
–

Not right now. I'm collaborating with someone on an article about this. I need time to gather the data.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 08:01 PM
–

I read her original article and this newer one and I cannot even begin to explain to you how misleading her "analysis" is. First of all, if you notice she does not include ANY of her calculations. She vomits a bunch of words and then HERE YOU GO lays out a bar graph for which she has not provided a single calculation in terms of how she derived those numbers. Her chart has almost 4 million women being raped every year. The National Crime Victimization Survey has less than 200,000 women being rap…
/r/MensRights17/02/12 07:03 PM
–

Good job, ignatius. I agree with this choice. For anyone who doesn't know, Qanan also writes under the name Kyle Lovett. You can read his work at The Reformed Buddhist, Of Fathers, Men, and Boys, and A Voice for Men. I've communicated with him by PM. He's a good man.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:25 PM
1

Actually, I take back what I said in my other reply to you about being a "damaged person who is on the edge of most the time". That's a little dramatic. I do struggle with depression and suicidal thoughts, which I inherited from my biological father who committed suicide when I was 8. I am also just in a stagnant period in my life, and am trying to move forward but it is difficult. My main problem with the trolls and disruption here is that I come here for community and I get triggered pretty qu…
/r/MensRights15/02/12 06:38 PM
2

The community aspect of this site takes place in the comments. Trolling posts are actually fairly easy to downvote and push off the front page. It's the cesspool in the comments that is the problem. Unless you want to hover in r/mensrights at 10,000 feet and only click the links, never participating in discussions or caring what goes on in discussions, then not addressing trolling comments will not solve the problem. I don't think I would be here if it was not for the community aspect of it. I d…
/r/MensRights15/02/12 05:09 AM
–

I think mods should delete blatantly trolling posts That's what I said. You just said you disagree with me, but agreed with the main point that I made: that blatantly trolling posts should be deleted and those users banned. That's what I said, dude. That's what I am asking for. The moderators do not do that. They don't enforce that policy currently.
/r/MensRights15/02/12 04:50 AM
–

This: The whole idea that we should allow the most vile, hateful, anti-men's rights attitudes here under the guise of free speech has become nothing more than a facile slogan that allows the destruction of any true sense of community or productive discussion to take place here. Imagine what this subreddit could be like if it was dedicated to men's rights more than facile notions of "free speech", as if free speech in a specific niche subforum was more important than the topic of the subforum its…
/r/MensRights15/02/12 12:31 AM
3

I saw that too. "Fathers, you have failed your daughters." 5,000 upvotes. To see how little this makes sense, imagine a common thing that I see online all the time: men saying that they wouldn't mind being raped by a woman, usually as a response to an article about a woman raping a man. Would the reply "Mothers, you have failed your sons" make any sense at all as a reply to this? Would anyone even think to say this? Why would someone's mind automatically go to blaming a father for a daughter's d…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 08:59 PM
–

Great comment. Can you elaborate on your experiences with this: I look at my work console and see nothing but countless economic and social programs to help girls and women and see nothing that helps boys and men. And when these boys and men look to me to provide them the help they need to make their lives better, I can only shake my head and sigh, because there is nothing there for them.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 08:29 PM
1

I'm just a more sensitive person than you are. I hide it well, but I'm a damaged person who is on the edge most of the time. PM me if you want to talk about it, because I'm not going into personal stories in public. Thanks for the hugs.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 07:50 PM
–

Thanks for saying that. If you really don't want me to stop coming here, then help me do something to change the culture in this subreddit. If it stays the same, I will leave. I'm not the only one who realizes that something is wrong.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 07:46 PM
–

All of that might be true if this was a general forum and not a specific subforum dedicated to the advancement of men's rights and a place for men who have been harmed to gather and have camaraderie with other people who feel the same way about things. The whole idea that we should allow the most vile, hateful, anti-men's rights attitudes here under the guise of free speech has become nothing more than a facile slogan that allows the destruction of any true sense of community or productive discu…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 07:37 PM
–

Who said I was giving up? I'm already a member of forums that don't allow trolls. I'm talking about what goes on here, in r/mensrights. I'm trying to get people to realize that this is becoming an unproductive and hostile place for the advancement of men's rights issues, so that we can do something about it.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 07:27 PM
5

That's the tragic thing man: we're here to discuss and support each other with regards to men's rights issues. We don't even campaign or fight, we just come for mutual reassurance that we are not alone in facing discrimination as men and try to give constructive advice to those that need it. Exactly like the male equivalent of a female-oriented forum. But it's only us that have to deal with numerous groups being created both inside Reddit and elsewhere with the explicit intention of harassing, c…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:55 PM
–

I should not have called you an asshole. I apologize for that. I don't think that I should have to grow a thicker skin so that I can tolerate abusive, hateful people in a place where I go to discuss issues. GWW said it herself: she gets more hate here from SRS than she ever has in real life. That's probably true for a lot of people. It's not worth it. There are other ways to be active and promote men's rights. I'm not saying I will stop caring about men's rights. I'm saying if the hate and ridic…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:50 PM
–

All I had to do is click your username and see within the first page you are in SRS circlejerking along with the rest of them. That was just page one. I don't even want to know what else you've said. You are part of the problem. You are what I was talking about. You engage in these hateful discussions, consorting with people like the ones featured in those screengrabs, then come here and act like your hands are clean. They are not. You are part of the problem. There is nothing you can say. I alr…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:48 AM
–

Dude, I want to say this in the most encouraging, non-offensive way possible, but don't be a wimp. Anti-male shaming language. Nice. Never heard that one before. Oh wait, yes I have. Pretty much everywhere. It's amazing how you get this "don't be a wimp" shit from other men when you show any kind of weakness. This shit is actually just as harmful as feminism. I can't show any kind of weakness, any kind of emotional vulnerability, without having some asshole tell me "don't be a wimp". Does it mak…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:34 AM
–

Because SRS main point is to make you mad, make you feel marginalized, and make you know what it's like to be objectified like women. This is absolute fucking bullshit. Make me know what it's like to be objectified like women, by joking about a systemic, institutionalized culture of sexual assault against males of which I was a victim and which is itself an example of how males are not only objectified, but sexually victimized because they are male. You are so full of bullshit, it is coming out …
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:19 AM
–

Fuck you. You are an SRS poster. You are precisely what I am talking about. You are the problem. This is a screenshot of SRS posters joking about rubbing on face cream made from foreskins: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9K7NhHeeXfE/Tzh8X5Fs1SI/AAAAAAAAEV4/TOUKR6zbBmI/s1600/Picture+18.png This actually happens. Male infants have their genitals permanently mutilated against their will, and the foreskins are used to make cosmetics for women. This is not something that anyone with any sense of common dec…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:01 AM
–

All of those screencaps are revolting. The only reason why I even know about SRS is because they troll here in r/mensrights. I came to reddit for this subreddit. That's why I'm here, to talk about men's rights issues. But they invade this space and derail anything that might make this a meaningful or productive place. And they harass and ridicule friends of mine here. It pisses me off so much. At some point, I'm just going to stop coming here because I can't deal with it. Enough is enough. I alr…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 04:37 AM
–

Thanks for writing this. Now, there are a lot of guys that come to the Men's Rights subreddit because something very painful has happened to them in their life. A lot of guys who are on MR have been the victim of paternity fraud, domestic violence or even rape. Some have attempted suicide or are war vets going through a lot of shit; many have been rung through the family court system so often that they have lost almost everything. Several have been falsely accused of DV or rape. I know a few who…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 02:46 AM
1

"SRS is not a downvote brigade". -8 points
/r/MensRights14/02/12 02:14 AM
8

over 50 pro woman blogs now have the link to it Good. I hope they fucking read it and learn something.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 10:50 PM
6

If women want equality, they should have to make the ultimate sacrifice just like men have been for thousands of years. None of this bullshit where women claim equality, but only when they want it and where they want it. FUCK. THAT. It's either women on the front lines or shut the fuck up about how women are as capable as men. I'm calling their bluff. Get your ass on the front lines and show me.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 09:31 PM
–

Because when "feminists point out the existence of rape culture", they are talking about a culture that legitimizes RAPE OF WOMEN BY MEN. My comment was about RAPE OF MEN BY WOMEN.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 07:42 PM
4

But thanks for being patronising. It's not being patronizing toward women. I'm talking about how MEN feel when they read comments from OTHER MEN legitimizing rape of men by women.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 07:40 PM
–

15,000 women brought closer to front lines Good. It's about fucking time.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:39 PM
–

Any woman reading this can now know what it feels like to be a man reading an article about a woman who raped a man, and have dozens of men in the comments say "she can rape me!" and "I wish she raped me!". Feels disgusting, doesn't it?
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:33 AM
1

The MRM is not an ideological movement, we don't have any unifying ideology and theories If the MRM ever grew into the size that feminism has grown into, it would have unifying theories. The bigger it gets, the more likely it will develop unifying theories. The only reason why there is no unifying ideology in the MRM right now is because it's too small.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:02 AM
1

This is why you're depressed, because you analyze this too much! You're making me depressed (and I'm already depressed, so that can't be good). There are a lot of individual men's rights issues that I care about. I care about male genital mutilation, men's reproductive rights, false rape accusations, male rape in prison, the undercounting of rape of males by envelopment and forcing to penetrate, bias against men in criminal sentencing, support for male domestic violence victims, bias against men…
/r/MensRights13/02/12 05:53 AM
2

Sorry to hear about the poor turnout. You did a good thing by going there and speaking.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 04:11 AM
–

I think the underlying ideology of feminism is the main problem. It's that ideology that leads to the harmful actions of feminism. Unfortunately, a great many moderate feminists buy into that ideology--male privilege, Patriarchy Theory, the feminist dogma around rape and domestic violence, feminist BS wrt the pay gap, the socialized nature of gender, etc. That may be true. I utterly despise many feminist theories like the idea that male privilege is a thing, but female privilege is benevolent se…
/r/MensRights13/02/12 03:50 AM
2

Honestly, Whitney Houston was a very good singer in her early years and it's sad that she died. I think it's ridiculous that you would post this. Check his post history, too. He posted an offensive imgur about Whitney Houston and crack. It's shit like this, r/mensrights.
/r/MensRights12/02/12 05:59 AM
–

I'm against specific actions that feminists take when they work against men's rights. I'm not against specific actions that feminists take when they work for women's rights without harming men's rights.
/r/MensRights12/02/12 05:49 AM
–

I've always been more pro-men's rights than anti-feminist. I frankly get tired of anti-feminist rhetoric. I'm pro-men's rights.
/r/MensRights12/02/12 05:41 AM
–

Well, at the risk of being downvoted due to expressing an unpopular opinion in r/mensrights, at some point you have to look at the way that men interact with other men, rather than blaming everything on feminism. This group specifically geared their event toward fraternities. A fraternity is not isolated men. It's a men's group. The only thing stopping fraternity members from supporting men's rights is themselves.
/r/MensRights12/02/12 05:31 AM
–

What's telling is that that is a fraternity guy. If fraternity guys feel like they can't tell other fraternity brothers that they are interested in men's rights, then who can?
/r/MensRights12/02/12 02:11 AM
–

This is really superb writing. I like how you provided the historical background on the Lorton prison, then transitioned into a discussion of the origins of the term "rape culture" at that prison, then brought the prison rape issue into a modern-day context by citing the BJS studies. The only thing that I disagreed with was calling the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 a complete joke. I'm not totally familiar with the PREA, but it does do some good things. For one, the PREA is what led to the…
/r/MensRights12/02/12 01:30 AM
–

Reddit in general just has more users now than a year ago or two years ago. Most of the subreddits have more subscribers because there are more users on reddit. A year ago, r/politics had about 600,000 subscribers. It now has 1,100,000.
/r/MensRights11/02/12 02:16 AM
–

I run into this attitude a lot while lurking the wilds of reddit and elsewhere: "men have legitimate issues, but I hate MRA's (or I hate r/mensrights)". I think that it's dismissive and shows a lack of real concern about those issues. If you really cared about those "legitimate issues", then you wouldn't denigrate the main group of people who are raising awareness about those issues (MRA's).
/r/MensRights11/02/12 12:49 AM
–

Make the same cover, but make it a man in a suit with a pig on a leash, and the National Organization for Women would put out a press release condemning the misogyny and calling on Psychology Today to apologize to women.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 09:13 PM
2

Literally laughed out loud.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 09:07 PM
–

In before the inevitable rush of people trying to downplay this as "just a joke". What people don't realize is that it's small things like this that normalize the demonization of males.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 08:07 PM
1

I definitely got it there. I saw it install itself right as the website was loading. That isecurity.exe virus is a real pain in the ass if you don't know what it is. It installs itself in seconds, then closes your browser and locks you out of all .exe programs. So you can't open your anti-virus or anti-spyware program to delete it, and you can't go online to research how to remove it. I had to locate the program on my computer, re-boot in safe mode, then manually delete the program and all its a…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 04:43 PM
–

I clicked this link and it immediately downloaded and installed the isecurity.exe virus on my computer. No fucking joke. I just spent 2 hours getting rid of this shit. Do not click this site. Fuck everything about this.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 05:46 AM
1

I'm not trying to be critical of what you are doing. I just think that a stand-alone website looks more professional than a wiki.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 02:23 AM
–

I use Notepad or WordPad in Windows to save important comments or articles. I have probably 30-40 articles saved in WordPad. Anything that I can save as a pdf, I just download the pdf. But articles that are in html, I copy/paste them into WordPad if I think they are important enough that I might want to use them later. I only save things that are really, really important. Like a comment that strikes me as very insightful or an article that has important statistics or data. I support your efforts…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 07:06 AM
–

The empathy gap feels natural. To pretty much everyone. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to fight that culturally? You'll have to essentially brainwash the majority of the population to resist their biological programming I'm going to say something incredibly un-PC here, but homosexuality feels unnatural to pretty much everyone too. But yet you don't hear gay rights activists talking about how it's insurmountable to gain equality for gays, because the vast majority of the population is …
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:53 PM
–

I can't believe that you would say that it's insane to be a stay-at-home dad. Because you have so little understanding of human behavior that you would even suggest something like that. Suggest what? Being a stay-at-home dad? Yeah, I must be insane. I was thinking about why I hate this entire argument and I realized that it's because it's trying to psychoanalyze the behavior of entire genders. People are individuals. Individual behavior can't be ascribed to an entire gender. Whenever I hear peop…
/r/MensRights03/02/12 06:59 AM
–

Even if it is true that human beings evolved to care less about men than women and to have less empathy for men than women, that still does not mean that we, as modern people, should stop working to end male genital mutilation, or stop raising awareness about male rape victims, or stop calling out instances of misandry in the media. We've already identified the problem as a lack of empathy for males. Whether the source of that problem is biological, evolutionary, or cultural, the solution to the…
/r/MensRights03/02/12 03:48 AM
–

Because nobody in their right mind is going to assume that role when the alternative is available You just insulted every woman who is the breadwinner in her family. Like my own mother. Good job. Won't happen. Not as long as 50% of women drop out of the full-time workforce 10 years after graduation to mommy-track. Right, because it's better to have 50% of the entire population not working at all (and therefore not paying ANY taxes) than to have a portion of that 50% working full-time and a porti…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:17 PM
–

GWW, what about the rest of what he said? You quoted one sentence, but he said a lot more than that. Specifically, this: The tools to overcome the empathy gap and male disposabiltiy are in place already. Modern technology made almost all sacrifices men and women had to make in the past obsolete. The risks women had in childbirth and pregnancy are a fraction of what they used to be. Similarly the risks men had in producing and providing have largely vanished. There is also economic self interest …
/r/MensRights02/02/12 07:57 PM
–

Of course not. We can't free men from traditional roles. Think about that, the #1 male traditional role is to produce more than you consume. If nobody is held to that standard, who's going to support those that decide to be supported? Right now that's being done via government force of taxation, but pretty soon you're going to run out of other people's money. I think that this is very short-sighted thinking. Who are you to say that women in the future won't "produce more than they consume"? You …
/r/MensRights02/02/12 06:06 PM
–

I like to think that we as a society right now are in a transition period where women have been liberated from traditional gendered expectations, but men haven't. I don't think of it as a permanent state. I think that it's a transition period, and that right now we are in an uncomfortable part of that transition period. I admit to falling into apocalyptic thinking sometimes, but I never think about gender issues as part of that. In my opinion, in a collapse, gender issues will take care of thems…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 07:24 AM
2

I agree that using the impoverished nutritional condition of third-world people to get on a soapbox about female genital mutilation is pretty abhorrent. Male genital mutilation is practiced in a lot of those same cultures. So if she's going to claim that poor nutrition creates a greater risk of infection, that risk applies to both men and women in those cultures.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 05:02 AM
1

Well, first of all I have a huge problem with comparing penises to breasts. Not just in this situation, but anytime that someone does it. Men and women both have breasts. Men and women both have nipples. I think that breasts should be compared to breasts. A penis is much more of an intimate sexual organ than a breast. A penis should be compared to a vagina. Grabbing or touching a penis is not the same as grabbing or touching a breast. Grabbing or touching a penis is like grabbing or touching a w…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 04:19 AM
1

Sex without consent is rape. Oral sex is sex, that's why it's called oral sex. Vaginal sex is sex. Anal sex is sex. A handjob is... not sex. I disagree. Hand sex is sex just as much as oral is. Why would it not be? Is it not sex if a man uses a dildo on a woman's vagina? I think it is. It's a form of sex. Go back a couple of comments and you were saying that: When an object is inserted into a woman's vagina or anus it very closely emulates sex for her. Oral also applies for a penis because she's…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 03:39 AM
1

You said in another comment that envelopment with an object is not rape. Period. But then you go on here to talk about whether or not pliers, or a jacket (?!) can envelop a penis. If you don't consider envelopment with an object to be rape, then don't engage the hypotheticals. I mean, you just admitted that sticking a fleshlight on a man's penis IS envelopment. Elsewhere you have stated that envelopment with a body part is rape. But not a hand. To you, it has to be a mouth, vagina, or anus. Enve…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 02:11 AM
–

Wow, that's awesome! Sounds like a great organization.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 12:17 AM
–

Because we live in a rape culture: I would add that if we live in a rape culture, it is a culture which normalizes and condones and encourages the rape of men by women, not the other way around. rape of men by women isn't considered rape under the law a disclosure is usually followed by multiple assertions that, "Shit, wish I could get raped by some hot chick" or in more extreme cases like the salon owner in Russia, "he sure got what he had coming." rape of boys is framed routinely as a problem …
/r/MensRights01/02/12 08:52 PM
–

Interesting fact: the last three U.S. presidents combined have had a total of 5 daughters and 0 sons. Mitt Romney has 5 sons and 0 daughters. This is not an endorsement of Mitt Romney, just something that I thought was interesting.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 08:29 PM
–

The good thing is that there are already groups set up that will help you with anti-circumcision activism. Check out Intact America. Their website has informational flyers that you can download and print, and then hand out to people. I don't know if you can say that "I'm a member of Intact America" or associate your activism with them. But I think that if you could, it would be good to associate with a larger group like that. Their website is professionally done, it's a non-profit, and they have…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 08:12 PM
2

I can't help but wish there was a way for her to cash in somehow She accepts donations on her website. She's also planning to write a book on gender issues/men's rights.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 07:05 PM
1

I think that the Stanford study is this: Stanford Child Custody Study
/r/MensRights01/02/12 06:52 PM
–

They think it will benefit them Probably this. A male birth control pill would take the burden for preventing pregnancy away from the woman and place it on the man. That's what it looks like from a self-interested woman's perspective. From a man's perspective though, what it actually does is give him control over his own reproductive capacity and allows him to control who he lets reproduce with him. Most women aren't seeing that part. They aren't seeing the part where a man would be able to with…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 06:13 PM
1

Do you think that forced envelopment is rape? Shouldn't forced envelopment include objects and body parts other than the vagina, anus, or mouth? If a woman (or a man for that matter) grabs a man's penis without his consent, isn't that forced envelopment with a body part (the hand)? And shouldn't that be considered rape, if forced envelopment is rape?
/r/MensRights01/02/12 05:37 PM
1

But I don't think envelopment with an object should be rape anyway. Oh, so finally you admit it. You think that envelopment is rape only when it's a penis being enveloped with a vagina. You could have stated that at the outset, and saved me a lot of time. Read the research on how women rape. They use objects. There is such a thing as envelopment with an object. It's rape.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:25 PM
2

Also you've failed to explain why a woman that drops a jacket in my lap or prods my crotch shouldn't be a rapist. No, I pretty clearly explained that. You just ignored it. Just like you completely ignored my point about enveloping a penis with a fleshlight as being envelopment with an object. Do you believe that a woman sticking a fleshlight on a penis without a man's consent is envelopment with an object, and is therefore rape? It's a pretty simple question, yes or no. If you say yes, then why …
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:20 PM
3

You yourself acknowledged that envelopment is rape. But there is also envelopment with an object. If it's rape to insert an object into a woman's vagina, then it's rape to envelop a man's penis with an object. You're surely not going to claim that envelopment is only envelopment when it's envelopment with a vagina, are you? That would be like saying that insertion is only insertion when it's insertion with a penis. And the law is clear that insertion of an object into a vagina is rape. Envelopme…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 06:31 AM
7

I honestly don't think that touching a penis and inserting something into a vagina are the same thing. If you forcibly touch a woman's vulva, you have not raped her, you have sexually assaulted her. Penetration and envelopment are rape. Squeezing with pliers is not envelopment, just like rubbing the exterior is not penetration. You keep saying that this was "touching". This was not touching. His penis was grabbed, pulled, and twisted with pliers. That is not touching. Stop saying that it is. Sec…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 05:31 AM
8

They touched his dick Not quite. They grabbed his penis with pliers and twisted it. They also made him drink their urine. I would say that grabbing and twisting a man's penis with pliers is equivalent to inserting pliers into a woman's vagina. It's not "touching". This is a form of sexual assault. Under the new FBI definition of rape, inserting an object into a person's vagina or anus is rape. If this had been two men inserting pliers into a woman's vagina, this would indeed be a rape. I think t…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 05:03 AM
10

Rape culture: I would add that if we live in a rape culture, it is a culture which normalizes and condones and encourages the rape of men by women, not the other way around. rape of men by women isn't considered rape under the law a disclosure is usually followed by multiple assertions that, "Shit, wish I could get raped by some hot chick" or in more extreme cases like the salon owner in Russia, "he sure got what he had coming." rape of boys is framed routinely as a problem because it makes thos…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:19 AM
16

If you want to know why this happens, scroll down and read the comments. People logged in under their real names, joking about a sexual assault of a man. I'm looking at 27 comments, and I swear not one of them is displaying any kind of sympathy for the victim, or in fact even acknowledging that there was a victim. It's all jokes. Every fucking comment there is a god damn joke.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:01 AM
4

Good idea. If it was me, I would try to stretch the opening. It really does stretch into a different shape if pressure is applied for long periods of time. That's how foreskin restoration works. Surgery should be the last option. A partial circumcision would not be as bad as a full circumcision. I had a partial circumcision at birth. I still have most of my foreskin, enough to cover the entire glans. I consider myself intact. Don't get a full circumcision. It's not necessary for the condition th…
/r/MensRights31/01/12 11:04 PM
–

Actually, I don't know if I would say that it is. Systemic, legalized sexual assault on male infants is a pretty big issue. Especially when the female form of said assault has been banned by federal law for 15 years. But the main reason why I suggested it is because memymine posts a lot about circumcision. It's an issue that he cares about, why not talk about that?
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:53 AM
2

Ehh. Whatever dude. I tried.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:15 AM
–

Circumcision! That's your biggest issue, isn't it? Talk about what you know. You can educate people about this issue.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:12 AM
1

I just told you, talk about individual issues. Want me to give examples? I can give you examples of individual issues that would fall into a "leftism" category, even though those issues would help men. Tariffs and subsidies for manufacturing: Men have been losing manufacturing jobs in the U.S. since the 1970s. Western European countries often heavily subsidize their manufacturing base. Some countries also impose stiff tariffs on imports, to protect their own export-based industries. That's "left…
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:46 AM
2

This was a great comment. Thank you for taking the time to write this, Gavn.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:25 AM
–

When you talk about opposing the mentality of victim classes and privileged oppressor classes, you are being more accurate as to what is the problem. When you use terms like leftism, it's not being precise. Very few people here would agree with the victim classes and privileged oppressor classes mentality. Even so-called leftist MRA's would probably reject that. They would also probably reject the more stifling forms of political correctness. But you have to talk about individual issues, rather …
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:13 AM
–

This is the same problem I have with identifying as an MRA. The problem with not identifying as an MRA is that the change that needs to happen to solve the problems that men face has to be done as part of a movement. I think we can agree that it won't be done by feminists, or else they would have done something about it by now other than saying, "patriarchy hurts men too!". But it also won't be done by random individuals writing about it, disconnected from a broader movement for social change. W…
/r/MensRights31/01/12 03:37 AM
–

As I mentioned elsewhere, the mods can't watch r/MR every minute. Sometimes things build up and we can't get to them in time to remove them. Yeah, I know. That's the problem. Find out who are the top 10 most active posters in r/mensrights, then add 3 or 4 of them to the mod list. Give them a limited set of tasks, like monitoring for repeat troll comments. Mods should be active and engaged in the site. There are people who are that active here. Make them mods. The fact that you are busy is not an…
/r/MensRights30/01/12 11:50 PM
–

I think it's interesting how SRS trolls have pretty much trolled the crap out of a post by one of the moderators of this subreddit, and he's just taking it. They are just thumbing their nose at him, mocking how easy it is to troll this place, right in his own post. Read your moderation policy again, ignatius. It clearly says that "messages from people who (repeatedly) choose to post ridiculous and instigating messages purely for entertainment value" will be removed, and in some cases those users…
/r/MensRights30/01/12 10:17 PM
0

What they want is for the space to be open, so outsiders can come in and praise and validate them. But they don't want them to be open when it comes to outsiders can criticize them. Closing the space does not allow for recruitment. Opening it makes them vulnerable to criticism they don't want. So here they are, guilting their critics and trying to pass themselves off as hapless victims when they could easily prevent their own "victimization" by closing or more strictly moderating their forum. Th…
/r/MensRights30/01/12 08:44 PM
–

There aren't enough moderators to enforce the existing mod policy. The existing policy says that "messages from people who (repeatedly) choose to post ridiculous and instigating messages purely for entertainment value" will be removed, and in some cases those users will be banned. I spend a lot of time here, and I almost NEVER see deleted messages. You know a deleted message when you see it because it says [deleted]. I rarely see those. But there are users, many users, who fall into that repeat …
/r/MensRights30/01/12 05:48 AM
–

I don't agree with everything you say, but I want you to know how much I appreciate and respect you, white_cloud. And this needed to be said, and was put so beautifully. Well, thank you for that, GWW. I'm glad that you brought your voice into the discussion. Unfortunately, this thread got targeted by SRS trolls and someone going by the name "MensRightsWatch", who posted this thread to SubredditDrama (which has a lot of the same users as SRS). There are at least four SRS regulars who came in to t…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 02:31 AM
–

You know what? I've lurked on SRSDiscussion. I see some good discussion taking place there. I have even been tempted at times to make a comment there. But I have decided against participating there for one reason: because of what I've seen on the main SRS site. SRSDiscussion is a subsite of SRS, and some of the things that I've seen on SRS are just fucking FOUL. I mean really, really ugly stuff. There was a time when you guys had a joke about circumcising MRA's on your fucking title bar. It was …
/r/MensRights29/01/12 01:14 AM
–

StephenMurphyJr -3 points 11 minutes ago It portrays us being outnumbered by many more shouting MRAs downvoting our opinions and silencing us. There is no feminist safe space because it can't exist; the users of this subreddit would never allow it. It's about who can scream their opinions louder by bringing in the most people to downvote the opinion you don't like and upvote yours. Feminist opinions on Reddit aren't challenged; they're pulverized at the first chance. And that's exactly what you'…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 12:19 AM
–

Circumcision is absolutely required under Jewish law ... these Rabbis have decided to ignore that fact. According to the quotes in the article, circumcision is such a minor aspect of Jewish law, that intact males can participate in almost all aspects of Judaism and be considered fully Jewish: "The ritual and religious consequences of not being circumcised amount to nothing. There is absolutely nothing that an intact Jewish male today cannot do. Contrast this with -- I'm talking from the Orthodox…
/r/MensRights28/01/12 04:35 PM
11

No, over-analyzing it would be writing a 300-page book about the sexual politics of meat. I wrote four paragraphs.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 06:42 AM
–

I think that this is a really great thing. I'm glad that circumcision isn't required under Jewish law and that some Rabbis are promoting being intact.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 06:33 AM
10

You know, my initial reaction to this was one of uproarious laughter that anyone would be so deluded as to say things like "meat is a symbol of male dominance" and "meat eating is the re-inscription of male power at every meal". But then I did some research and found out that this is a real thing. The author apparently believes that meat-eating is a part of maleness and vegetarianism is a part of femaleness. But is this really true? Have women throughout history eaten less meat than men? Do wome…
/r/MensRights28/01/12 05:37 AM
–

Cutting off a baby's foreskin in utero would involve sticking cutting instruments into a woman's uterus and making a precision cut on a 1/2-inch penis without being able to see what you are doing. This is insane. Even attempting to do this could result in killing the baby. If you are talking about delivering the baby and doing a circumcision while the baby is still in the birth canal, I hope I don't have to remind you that babies come out head-first. So the baby would be 3/4ths of the way out be…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 08:28 PM
7

It's "irreverent". All the cool kids are doing it.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 08:01 PM
–

If there are any natural genetic conditions that already cause what appears to be circumcision, then it would be far easier. If not, then there is still the possibility of people resorting to in utero circumcision via cutting even if post birth circumcision was banned. The natural form of the human penis has a foreskin. Circumcision is caused by cutting. When a penis forms in utero, it comes from undifferentiated tissue that in women forms the clitoris and clitoral hood. Male hormones cause the …
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:42 PM
–

You know I had thought of this, but it only made me wonder how often it is true in the gay case, but people are just more afraid to admit it. I guess the difference is that in today's society, you would get raked over the coals for saying about a gay couple what this article said about a single dad.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:18 PM
16

Overall, 81% of all children under 5 were killed by males. No, it doesn't say that. It doesn't give an "overall" number. It says that 31% of children under 5 were killed by fathers, 23% were killed by male acquaintances, 29% were killed by mothers, and 10% were killed by other relatives or strangers. It says that, "of those children killed by someone other than their parent, 81% were killed by males". But it also shows that the vast majority of children under 5 are killed by a parent. So that 81…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:01 PM
–

What in the heck are you talking about? Doing circumcisions in utero? First of all, if scientists ever figure out a way to "cause circumcision through genetics while in utero", then that would be a different thing than circumcision through cutting. That would be a form of genetic engineering, and would probably be very difficult to do, because it would involve genetically modifying the development of the sex organs in fetuses. The same technology could probably be used to give men 12 inch cocks.…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:25 PM
–

Wow, this is pretty insulting. Notice how she says "divorced dad" rather than single dad as a way to make it sound worse. Let's do a fun experiment! Replace "dad" with gay and see how it sounds! The Sitch: You've accepted a sleepover invite for your daughter, not realizing that her pal's parents are gay. You're not OK with it. What to do? The Solution: "Call and say 'I'm sorry, and this is about me and not you, but I just don't feel comfortable with a gay couple supervising an overnighter,' " sa…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:03 PM
–

Yes. I just think that this is a really good rebuttal to people who say, "X percent of politicians are male" as a way to show how men are privileged. You can show them that women win elections just as often as men do when women actually run for office. There are more male officeholders because more men run for office. I always suspected that this was true, but now I've found a few studies to back it up and wanted to share with r/mensrights.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:52 AM
–

Yeah, I think it would be a trip to read your erotica. Not sure I would want to though, because it might affect how I see you. Sometimes I read your writing on gender issues and I'm like, "Wow, I can't believe she writes erotica". But like I said in my other comment that I just deleted because I posted before I saw you posted this, I didn't mean any offense by the erotica comment.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:32 AM
–

Oh, so that's what you meant. I misunderstood you. I think it's better to not use the word "lube" for that gliding action, because I think when people hear that word, they think something different. A lot of people who are misinformed think that foreskins collect massive amounts of smegma, and this contributes to the idea that it's hygienic to circumcise. Other people think that foreskins are wet or damp all the time, which is also not true. So when you use the word lube, I think it could give t…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 06:01 AM
6

In addition, I don't have the data right now but I suspect that a large percentage of people who end up in prison for failure to pay child support are black men. The number one reason that people don't pay child support is because they don't have a job. Black male unemployment is close to 20%, and in some cities is more like 40%. Black men are affected by the same lack of reproductive rights as all other men. And black women have less access to birth control and abortion than white women do. But…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:25 AM
3

Yeah, I'm not getting how people think this is about divorce. It could just as easily be a stay-at-home mom's car.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:43 AM
7

The problem is not that things like this get posted. It's that they make it to the top of the subreddit so fast and stay there. That's why I downvoted it. Nothing wrong with it being here, but it shouldn't be at the top.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:31 AM
4

Most of those things that you listed would be considered by the domestic violence industry to be "coercive tactics" and "emotional violence" if done by a man against a woman. I.e. "You can't go out to the bar", "If you don't do X, I'm going to withhold Y". Those are the kind of things that courts use to justify taking a man's kids away from him.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:26 AM
–

What of all the couples who live together and have no issues Who says they have no issues. Tune into those shitty "Judge Judy" shows on daytime TV and half of the cases are about someone suing because the other partner broke a lease agreement.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:15 AM
–

In the book Legalizing Misandry, authors Nathanson and Young honestly suggest that men should carry consent forms with their condoms when they do on dates. Seems like a good idea. In the he said/she said cases, courts and juries are going to be pretty suspicious of a woman saying she was raped if the guy has a signed consent form. Just getting her to sign it would be a deterrent for her filing a false rape accusation. And if you notice how feminists talk about consent, how important it is for me…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:00 AM
–

Not ribbing so much as built-in lube. This kind of makes me cringe when people say this. Honestly, unless a guy is not washing for 24 hours or more, I don't think there is a build-up of material large enough to be considered "lube". Sweat and oils collect under the foreskin just like they do on your face or behind your ears or any other part of your body. But it's easily washed away and the volume of material that's created is not that large. Twelve hours after showering, under my foreskin feels…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 02:46 AM
4

I generally don't post on feminist sites. I learned my lesson. In fact, the very reason why I found the MRM in the first place was due to the hatred and ridicule about men's issues that I encountered from feminists and their allies online. I don't consider GMP to be a feminist site. It is and always has been an attempt to co-opt the discussion of men's issues from sites like The Spearhead and A Voice for Men. That's why I hate it so much. Rather than put the focus on the real problem, which is s…
/r/MensRights27/01/12 01:21 AM
9

That's the type of article that the GMP wants to promote. That's why those who care about men's issues should not participate on that site. They want to cast such a broad net that they have content that appeals to different audiences, but what that does is diminish the meaning of anything. You see something genuinely supportive of men's rights, but right next to it is some rank bullshit like that. On a site about what it means to be a good man, let's run an article from a feminist activist in Rh…
/r/MensRights26/01/12 07:47 PM
6

How could women face systemic discrimination when women have special legal protection against violence, against genital mutilation, against pay inequity, against job discrimination, against workplace harassment, against sexual assault and rape in college. Pretty much in every aspect of society, women have actual laws that are specifically written for their protection and help. No one can deny the existence of those laws, so they can't honestly say that women face systemic discrimination. Women a…
/r/MensRights25/01/12 01:25 AM
–

You remember me? Aww... that's so sweet! Well, I have a good memory. Either that or I have no life. It's one of those two.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 12:33 AM
–

I didn't just notice and it's not a threat. I know you're Dan Moore and you write under the name Factory. I didn't just find that out. You pick these things up over time, you know. But your comment to me was way over the line in its direct personal insults (I counted four). The meanness of your comment was uncalled for, especially for a fellow men's rights supporter. No matter what problems you are going through in your life, I am not your personal punching bag.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 12:28 AM
3

I saw that, but those are lifetime perpetrators. The report, as you know, separates reports into lifetime reports and 12-month reports. The 79.2% of men reporting being made to penetrate by only female perpetrators (pg. 24) refers to the lifetime reports of men being made to penetrate, not the 12-month reports. I don't see anywhere in the report where it shows the gender of perpetrators for the 12-month reports.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 12:12 AM
2

80% of men said they were victimized by women. Where is this in the NISVS report? I'm not finding this. Where does it show gender of perpetrator for males being made to penetrate?
/r/MensRights24/01/12 11:02 PM
–

Wow, there's one person I won't be talking to ever again. Have nice life, Dan.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:31 PM
–

It's pretty sad that you believe this. Vengeance as a political philosophy. Take theirs away because you don't have yours.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:00 PM
–

You are not providing any logical grounds for the benefit to anyone other than the individuals involved for why abortion should be legal. I can talk about the benefits to society from abortion, but it makes me feel dirty inside. Most aborted babies are unwanted babies. That's why they are aborted. A lot of times the mother doesn't have the money to raise the child, or give the child a decent standard of living. Sometimes the mother is unwilling to love the child, or sees the child as a burden. I…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 09:55 PM
–

The problem is that you want what you want and damn the cost to everyone else. Don't tell me what I want. You don't know me. I was born to a 16-year-old mother who had me when she was a junior in high school. She could have aborted me. It would have been a lot more convenient for her to do that. But she didn't believe in abortion. And I'm here because of that. I don't believe in abortion either. But I'm a man, so it's not something that I will ever have to do. If I was a woman, I would not have …
/r/MensRights24/01/12 09:24 PM
–

Yes it is. Unfortunately, many people will judge a book by its cover. I had one person here fucking berate me for recommending the book. He hadn't read it and had no idea what was in it, but felt like it was appropriate to berate me for recommending the book (because he disagreed with the political persuasion of the author). I honestly believe that you could give that book to anyone who was skeptical that men face discrimination, and if they read it, if they actually read it, it would make them …
/r/MensRights24/01/12 09:01 PM
–

Abortion, in every instance other than rape and medical risk to the life of the mother, is simply an instance of escaping the result of one's actions. How can you define it as anything else? Because abortion is a medical procedure. What you're saying would be like someone jumping off a roof and breaking their leg, then you deny them medical treatment because "they should accept responsibility for their actions". Would you say that? Would you deny someone medical treatment because the way they we…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 08:42 PM
–

Make them watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gekyg7yy4Dc Make them read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Taken-Into-Custody-Against-Marriage/dp/1581825943/
/r/MensRights24/01/12 08:16 PM
–

You're advocating that abortion be made illegal in all cases, and using buzzwords like freedom, responsibility, and equality to do it. You'll get some idiots to agree with you who can't read between the lines of what you are saying, because of those buzzwords that you are using. But you are basically saying that abortion should be illegal in all cases, including for rape victims apparently.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 08:07 PM
3

That's true. Because they see it as abandoning responsibility.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 07:37 PM
–

So two wrongs make a right? Because men don't have reproductive rights, we should take away women's? By the way, you've told me that you oppose abortion. So you are biased on this subject.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 07:24 PM
1

I agree.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 07:15 PM
–

Dude, you're linking to a GMP re-post of a Seattle Weekly article that was posted here last week. If you're going to link to it, link to the original. Oh wait, you can't because the dumbass moderators on r/mensrights have Seattle Weekly on the spam list. I, and others, tried to post the original story here last week and it was blocked multiple times. Seattle Weekly ran the story, not GMP. Tom Matlack even got the name of the paper wrong. He called it the Seattle News. It's not the Seattle News, …
/r/MensRights24/01/12 07:10 PM
–

No, the OP posted here before. I recognized the name. She made an "I'm a feminist, but I support you" kind of post. She earned some points from me for being respectful and engaging in honest debate. But still, I hate these "what do you guys think about X", where X is some restriction of women's rights. As if we are responsible for it? I just wanted to point out that most men's rights supporters support abortion rights for women. To me, it's contradictory to support reproductive rights for men, b…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 07:00 PM
–

You can't post a "what do you guys think" post in r/mensrights and expect that the answers will in any way constitute the majority opinion of this subreddit or the majority opinion of men in the men's rights movement. You are going to get some troll answers, and you are going to get a small unrepresentative sample of people who are reading this subreddit on this particular day and notice your post. Most people in r/mensrights support abortion rights for women. There are a small number of traditi…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 06:48 PM
1

I'm so glad that someone is doing this. It's so important to have peer-reviewed, scholarly journals from a masculinist perspective. And the pdf is free! I'll spend some time reading this one. Looks like some interesting articles.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 12:59 AM
–

I like typhonblue, but I have to partially agree with you here, Jeremiah. I do not agree with everything in that article. Some of the things in it I find offensive and some of the things I just disagree with. But overall, it actually has some good advice for men who are looking for a wife, to minimize the possibility of divorce. Things like look for a wife who comes from an intact two-parent family, don't marry until you're at least 30, and don't marry a woman who believes in divorce. Those are …
/r/MensRights23/01/12 05:04 AM
–

Another thing is when you take men's rights issues and break them down into race, these same people who ridicule our issues would see them as legitimate civil rights violations. For example, MRA's will talk about how the family court system is biased against men, how child support guidelines are unjust, etc. Critics of the MRM will take those comments and use them to ridicule us, act like we're whining. But if you break it down into a race issue, and you show how disproportionately the child sup…
/r/MensRights23/01/12 02:07 AM
–

Did you ever get any of your bail money back? They arrested you multiple times on allegations, you paid your bail to get out of jail, shouldn't you get the bail money back? I don't know how bail works. I've never been arrested. I think it's really fucked up that someone can be arrested and spend months in jail based on someone saying "he did X to me". But if they put a bail on you and you pay the bail to get out of jail, they should not be able to keep that money. What happened to the charges? T…
/r/MensRights21/01/12 03:33 AM
–

Women are already the majority of the workforce in the U.S. This happened two years ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/economy/06women.html
/r/MensRights20/01/12 07:17 PM
–

Not posting a comment there, so I'll respond here. Feminists have not argued that no women in the history of the world has ever filed a false report of rape. The problem is that the idea that this occurs is raised to cloud those claims that are actually true but lack physical evidence No, "the idea that this occurs" is raised when a man actually has been falsely accused, so that he doesn't get railroaded into a guilty verdict. Furthermore, just how do YOU propose that "rapes that are actually tr…
/r/MensRights20/01/12 05:52 PM
–

In case anyone cares, the bill is Senate Bill 12-090. It has 15 Senate sponsors and 1 House sponsor. The bill restores male circumcision as a physician's service under Colorado's Medicaid program. As the article stated, when Colorado dropped coverage for male circumcision under Medicaid, they projected that it would save the state $186,500 a year. This bill is just going to cost the state money for an unnecessary medical procedure, in a time of budget constraints. The only logical reason that th…
/r/MensRights20/01/12 05:00 PM
–

I posted it, but mine went into the spam filter as well. Pretty ridiculous. I'm going to delete it so that you can post it later, when the problem is resolved.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 03:13 AM
2

Yeah, I just finished reading it too. Pretty much the same stuff that's in Stephen Baskerville's book Taken Into Custody. Family "court" is just insane.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 02:46 AM
–

Wow, that sucks. I will post it, but you have to delete yours first or it will tell me it's already been posted. Your post is going directly to the spam filter, and unfortunately the mods are not attentive enough to fish it out.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 02:40 AM
–

Wavevector's posts ended up in the spam filter. He should delete it and resubmit. Direct link to the main article: http://www.seattleweekly.com/2012-01-18/news/ripped-apart/
/r/MensRights20/01/12 02:22 AM
–

This is a fascinating article. But honestly, you could write the same article and replace the locale with any western country, and the same things would apply: men who defer to their wives, "a culture of men who feel useless", women who "do not trust men to look after their money so they take control of it themselves", women who society "has afforded ample opportunities to be both a mother and a successful career woman", and a "men's rights movement" that "doesn't want to bring women down, but w…
/r/MensRights19/01/12 09:32 PM
–

Well, he seems like the kind of guy who highly values what women think, so I hope that he did read your letter. And in other news, the "lifeboats" scenario that you often talk about suddenly became more real: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16576289
/r/MensRights17/01/12 03:53 AM
–

Well, UVic is over 50% female Most universities are. I attended a college that was 63% female, 37% male. And people wonder why after attending college in an environment like that, that men would start to doubt the whole "men are privileged" bullshit.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 09:46 PM
16

This is the type of "everyday misandry" that takes place, people openly saying things about men that would be seen as horrific "misogyny" if the genders were reversed. I'll just take a sample of the comments and reverse the genders to prove the point: Original comments from forum: Man training tips who has em' Should i start a clicker training program? Pet him and say good boy if he picks his socks up?? You will NEVER train a man, they either are thoughtful or they are not. Men cannot be changed…
/r/MensRights16/01/12 09:26 PM
–

Did you ever hear from Tom Matlack about your open letter to him?
/r/MensRights16/01/12 08:13 PM
5

Well, if you notice, they have a lot of "categories". They have a category called "Male Lust". They have a category called "Women's Obsession With Beauty". I just have never felt comfortable with that website. There is just something about it that doesn't feel right.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 03:47 PM
–

The men's rights section is not listed in the title bar on the home page. They have 11 categories of issues listed in the title bar. The only way one can find the men's rights category page is if there is a current article posted on the front page that has been placed in that category. There are only 9 articles total in the men's rights category, most of which were posted in March 2011 or earlier. They are clearly minimizing this section of the website. The only thing good about that website is …
/r/MensRights16/01/12 02:38 PM
–

Wow, good job putting those links together. I have started noticing your comments recently, naive1000. You seem like a decent person with a good perspective. I notice your account is only one month old. What brought you to r/mensrights?
/r/MensRights16/01/12 06:34 AM
8

In the U.S., anyone with a child support order already has their wages garnished. All new hires are checked in a national database to see if they have a child support order. If they do, the child support is taken directly out of their paycheck. If someone loses their job, and therefore no longer has a paycheck, the government will take whatever money it needs to cover the payments out of that person's bank account(s). It is only when a person no longer has a job and has no money left in their ba…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 11:25 PM
–

I see nothing wrong with the age of consent being 16 or 18, as it is in most states. I see your point about how attitudes about male predation in the 1890s and early 1900s led to a rapid increase in the age of consent. There is an interesting chart in the pdf that shows how in 1885, the age of consent in most states was 10 or 12, but by 1920, the age of consent in most states was 16 or 18. Some of the states that in 1885 had an age of consent of 10, by 1920 had an age of consent of 18, but then …
/r/MensRights15/01/12 06:50 AM
9

The article is fundamentally flawed because it doesn't recognize that for men, consenting to sex is consenting to fatherhood. Sex is NOT cheap for men.
/r/MensRights15/01/12 06:19 AM
9

I understand the main point that the author is making about how an oversupply of women in college, women's access to birth control, and a culture of permissive sexuality makes it easier for men to get casual sex from women without committing to a long-term relationship or marriage. But the way that the author frames this as "men being in charge of relationships with women" is just asinine. Men are not in charge at all, because they have no reproductive rights. Sure, more women today are willing …
/r/MensRights15/01/12 05:55 AM
–

Actually that line about porn was just a throwaway line in the article. The article isn't about men's access to porn at all. I think it's an idiotic article and I have a lot of problems with it, but the main point it's making is that an oversupply of women in college, women's access to birth control, and a culture of permissive sexuality makes it easier for men to get casual sex from women without committing to a long-term relationship or marriage.
/r/MensRights15/01/12 05:42 AM
2

Sounds kind of contradictory. Many traditionalists are opposed to female birth control, abortion, and even condoms. You aren't? Or do you only support a male birth control pill? Plus, I don't know if you realize this, but you're making this a racial thing by talking about the native culture/immigrant culture. Are you a white nationalist? It's an honest question, because that's where you are going with this.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 10:34 PM
1

Could be interesting but I suspect it's part of a plan to try to censor conservative views at r/MR. You speak from experience? ;)
/r/MensRights13/01/12 10:05 PM
1

The adjustment to what GWW and I agree would come next would take only a year or less. Well, if LPS would lead to a "population crash", then a male birth control pill would do the same thing only worse. A male birth control pill would be a more effective, preemptive form of LPS. So are you opposed to a male birth control pill?
/r/MensRights13/01/12 09:59 PM
1

Well, he said both. He said it would "cause a large influx of single motherhood", then later a "population crash". Neither of those things would necessarily happen.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 09:25 PM
3

Legal Parental Surrender for men sounds like a good idea until you start recognizing the second and third order changes from it which will, basically, hand over our country to any traditional culture which immigrates and out-populates us (because LPS will cause first a large influx of single motherhood which will drain resources and then later a population crash in the current majority culture). If you watch girlwriteswhat's videos on LPS, she pretty effectively argues against the idea that LPS …
/r/MensRights13/01/12 09:06 PM
–

Time Magazine, "When is it Rape?", Nancy Gibbs, June 24, 2001: This line of reasoning has led some women, especially radicalized victims, to justify flinging around the term rape as a political weapon, referring to everything from violent sexual assaults to inappropriate innuendos. Ginny, a college senior who was really raped when she was 16, suggests that false accusations of rape can serve a useful purpose. "Penetration is not the only form of violation," she explains. In her view, rape is a s…
/r/MensRights13/01/12 05:09 AM
2

Okay. Thanks for being respectful.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 02:26 AM
10

I don't think it's intentional. I think they see these men as collateral damage. They think it's more important that women who are raped are able to bring their rapists to justice than it is that some innocent men are going to have their lives and reputations ruined by false accusations. I agree with your point about the justification: "these men must have caused some woman to get upset at some point". That's probably at work subconsciously in the minds of a lot of people implementing these laws…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 10:07 PM
3

Not when applied in rape cases. There's seldom any proof to begin with in rape cases. That's why they lowered the burden of proof to the preponderance of the evidence standard. It removes the need for any evidence. So long as the accuser's story is believable enough ("the rape or sexual assault is more likely than not to have occurred"), and so long as the accused doesn't have evidence that disproves the accusation, the accuser's word IS literally enough proof to convict in these cases. People s…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 09:56 PM
–

LOL at "my tales". The point is that it doesn't matter whether I have had this experience or that experience. The issues are still valid. It's like another commenter said to you, you can look at the fact that men commit suicide at 4 times the rate of women and conclude that perhaps there is a reason for that (without anyone having to divulge their personal life story to you), or you can be a jerk and assume they are all making it up. It doesn't matter how many individual men choose to tell you t…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 09:33 PM
–

This was my first post on reddit. This video. I've since stupidly deleted it. But the comments are still there. I still remember this comment by someone justifying the unequal treatment of the blind man vs. the blind woman in this video. This is how this user explained it, completely oblivious to the fact that none of this has to do with "acting male", since if "acting male" (not seeking out help) was the reason for the unequal treatment, then neither the woman or the man would have been helped,…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 08:29 PM
–

If their process can find you guilty based solely upon her word, then your right to due process is nil, and the school is not treating you fairly if they don't give you due process in their grievance hearings. That's the whole point of the preponderance of evidence standard. That's what it's designed to do. They don't need evidence to prove that something occurred. An accuser's word is good enough.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 08:00 PM
–

So tell me, what have you guys experienced in your own lives? I don't want to talk about things that happen to other people; just you. Have you been unfairly treated because of being a man in any given situation? Please, do tell me. I sometimes think about telling my stories, but then I realize what a fucking sewer reddit and most of the Internet is. See, when you open yourself up, when you make yourself vulnerable by telling your stories to a bunch of anonymous people who don't know you or care…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 07:29 PM
–

2 hours later...still awaiting moderation.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 07:11 PM
16

This will probably be downvoted, but as much as I respect your blogging efforts, you often come off as a real jerk in your comments here. This guy is not "venting". He has already went through numerous legal channels and is writing here as a sort of last resort to enlist help in his case. It's almost like you feel insulted that he didn't come to YOU first.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 06:35 PM
–

I read your whole story and while this site gets trolled A LOT, I believe based on the specific details in your story that you are telling the truth. I am really sorry that this happened to you. You are not alone. This same thing has happened to other men. A man named Caleb Warner was expelled from the University of North Dakota based on an accuser's charge of sexual assault, when that accuser was being wanted by police for filing a false police report about that very same sexual assault. It too…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 05:28 PM
1

It could be 80/80 if you look at all income redistribution. It might be different in Canada too since the tax structure and spending is different in Canada than the U.S. Off topic, but have you ever seen this TED Talks video by Hanna Rosin on the "rise of women"? I just saw this tonight and it has me fucking raging. It's not so much the rise of women that has me raging, but the reveling and gloating in the ways that men are falling behind in society, which is on full display in this video. I don…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 06:57 AM
1

I doubt it's 80% and 80%. That seems kind of high. I went looking for it earlier and could not find any source to verify that high of a number. One source said that women pay 40% of Social Security payroll taxes, but get the majority of Social Security benefits. Another source said that 90% of TANF (welfare) benefits in the U.S. goes to women. I don't think that there is any doubt that the majority of taxes are paid by men and the majority of government spending goes to benefit women. It's proba…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 06:11 AM
1

I did not change the meaning of what you said. You are the one back-tracking on what YOU said. Why would you care about men being treated like crap if you don't care that the workers are treated far worse than the elites? This statement makes the issue of "men being treated like crap" into a class issue related to "workers [being] treated far worse than the elites". Whether or not workers are treated worse than the elites has nothing to do with why "men are treated like crap". Men are treated li…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 02:07 AM
1

Yes you did say that. You said: Why would you care about men being treated like crap if you don't care that the workers are treated far worse than the elites? I paraphrased you by saying that the issue is not "men being treated like crap because workers are treated worse than the elites". The issue is, as I said, men being treated like crap because they're not women. Men's rights is not a class issue, it's a gender issue. Making it about class obscures the central issue here, which is a society …
/r/MensRights12/01/12 01:07 AM
1

It's counter-productive to bring class issues into men's rights. The issue is not "men being treated like crap because workers are treated worse than the elites". The issue is men being treated like crap because they're not women.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 12:17 AM
1

Academic feminism uses Marxist theories and language. And it's well-known that feminism, along with other radical leftist movements of the 1960s onward, used Marxism as part of their movement. I'm more interested in why you are a Communist "anti-feminist". Please explain that to me.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 10:55 PM
1

Explain to me how you are a Marxist "anti-feminist", when feminism itself is a Marxist movement?
/r/MensRights11/01/12 09:50 PM
0

Your whole class warfare thing is not relevant to men's rights. You already admitted that you're not an MRA and you don't know much about the movement: Not an MRA and I don't know much about the movement But yet you're an "anti-feminist". Who knows why. All you're talking about are class issues. Men's rights is about: male genital mutilation, divorce law, false rape accusations, reproductive rights for men, misandry in the media, and other issues. This is about gender, not class.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 09:13 PM
1

LOL @ 15:35. Tell us how you really feel.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 08:34 PM
2

This is just so wrong.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 01:07 AM
3

many states in the US require the non-custodial parent to pay for half of all college expenses for their children More information about this. The states with these laws are: Alabama, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington. The level of contributions required of non-custodial parents to support college funding varies widely from st…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 12:45 AM
–

Holy shit man, they banned you? I saw your post there where you were asking them if OneY was a good place for you. I can't believe they banned you. So many men are just not aware of societal/legal discrimination against men, because they are socialized to be indifferent to men's rights and to prioritize the suffering and problems of women and other groups. OneY seems to be populated by those type of men. I have problems with TwoX as a "male focused site" though. It's not a men's site. Most of th…
/r/MensRights10/01/12 06:21 PM
–

I just don't see how you can sit there and stone-faced try to say that assuming that all women wear panties isn't relegating women to a traditional gender role. Dude, are you serious? If he said "underwear", would it not be a gender thing? Because most people wear underwear, and panties are underwear.
/r/MensRights10/01/12 06:39 AM
3

How do you guys define a successful man's life? Is it just about the family? his works? his friends? I would appreciate some discussion here before /SRS cuts loose again. I've heard about people who have near-death experiences, basically people who are physically dead for a period of time, but who come back to life and remember the experience of being dead. One of the things that they report is their life flashing before their eyes, sort of a life review that they experience very quickly. Someho…
/r/MensRights10/01/12 06:14 AM
–

If he is so MRA-friendly, why write a bill putting accountability for proving paternity anywhere other than where it naturally lies: with the woman. This bill just gives women a way to get out of accountability for their choices. It's not a burden on a woman to know how many cocks she's had in her. If a woman knows that she has had more than one cock in her, and therefore has some doubt about which cock caused her pregnancy, then it's her RESPONSIBILITY to determine the paternity of the child. A…
/r/MensRights09/01/12 09:19 PM
1

Well, you definitely make some interesting points. You have given me a lot to think about. If I may, one thing I want to point out though is that when drawing a parallel between women who opt-out of motherhood or postpone motherhood for career, and men who are going their own way, I think the motivation is different and thus the implications are different. Women have more control over motherhood if they choose motherhood than a father has control over fatherhood if he chooses fatherhood. For a w…
/r/MensRights08/01/12 05:24 AM
1

Alright, this debate is getting a little off track. Let's go back to the original question that you asked me: Okay, I asked a question on my YT channel a while ago, and no one has answered it. It was in response to a person who said the "rule of the sea" that women and children go first was there because if it wasn't, men would be able to push past smaller, weaker women and children to get to the lifeboats, and women would end up drowning. I asked: "And if men did push their way past women and c…
/r/MensRights07/01/12 01:56 AM
1

I would say that freedom from the male gender role would be the freedom to put one's own desires and wellbeing before those of women, children or society. This is a vague statement that doesn't address the question that I posed in my other comment. I asked you to help brainstorm about specific things that would be examples of men being freed from traditional gender expectations. I strongly disagree that this can be categorized in such a terse way as "the freedom to put one's own desires and well…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 10:30 PM
1

The book appears to be about how societies that limit sexual freedom flourish, while societies that encourage free sexual expression fail? Freedom for men from gender expectations is more than mere sexual freedom. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that loosening restrictions on male sexuality will lead to societal decay, because each society is different in how its males use that sexual freedom. Think about crossing modern technology with male sexual freedom.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 09:33 PM
1

If you want to have this discussion, we need to first define what freeing men from traditional gender expectations means. I'm not sure if I am even fully capable of doing that myself. I mentioned the marriage example, because that was the first one that occurred to me. It used to be that men were expected to get married very young and be breadwinners for the family. There were very strong cultural norms enforcing this, and men who didn't live up to it for whatever reason (either inability to fin…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 08:36 PM
–

The study is still a piece of shit anyways. What are you talking about? The CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey is one of the most respected and authoritative studies of sexual violence. The only thing that was "shit" about it was the way the media reported on it, never digging deeper than page one and never telling the whole story about what the study shows about male victimization rates.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 08:00 PM
0

The new definition makes no assumptions about the genders of the attacker and victim. If a woman coerces a man into penetrating her, that penetration is done without his consent, so it would be classified as rape under the new definition. You're assuming that is the case without knowing for sure. No where does it say that a man being made to penetrate a vagina or anus is considered rape. It says that penetration of a vagina, anus, or mouth is a crime unless done without the "victim's" consent. T…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 07:34 PM
1

We've attempted this in the past No, we haven't.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:36 PM
–

Full quote: "The new provision will define rape as any kind of penetration of another person, regardless of gender, without the victim's consent. It also includes a broad range of rapes involving both males and females in which attackers use objects to penetrate their victims." Women will be counted as rapists if they use an object to penetrate a man. BUT, this new definition DOES NOT count rape as when a man is made to penetrate a female or male. THAT is the more common form of rape of males, a…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:26 PM
1

I disagree with your certainty. I don't have a problem with you having this opinion, but I disagree with the certainty with which you express it. The idea that freeing men from traditional gender expectations will inevitably lead to "no civilization" is an entirely speculative claim. We haven't done this yet, so we don't know how it will actually turn out. Therefore, your certainty about it is speculative. I think that your traditionalism is almost as harmful to men as the current system. I read…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 05:45 PM
2

What do you say to people who think that your traditionalism will just keep oppressive gender expectations on men? You want to go back to a traditional society where men provide and protect, and women nurture the family? Isn't that a bad deal for men? Is there a possibility that you are wrong, and that liberating men from those expectations is a better way forward? What if the problem right now isn't that our society went off course from the traditional roles, but just that the traditional roles…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:46 AM
–

I would say that believing in equality isn't the same as taking an active role. Obviously, if a man and a woman both believe in gender equality and both support the rights of one another and see each others struggles, they will still be primarily focused on their own issues first. The reason feminists do little or nothing in terms of mens issues is because that's what mens rights activists are supposed to be doing. Remember, everywhere there is a womens rights issue, there are men doing nothing …
/r/MensRights06/01/12 05:08 AM
–

Those are serious issues. Now can you point to specific instances where feminists have done work on those issues, to create fairness for men facing those problems? Exclusion of men from female-dominated work places (especially education, healthcare and nursing, childcare, etc) What have feminists done to include men in female-dominated schools and jobs? Have feminists lobbied for scholarships for men in nursing? Have feminists stopping pushing for more women in college, even as women have become…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 04:47 AM
–

Here's a question for you. I already checked your user history enough to see if you were a troll. I don't think you're a troll. I found out you're a gay man. Fine. Just putting that out there, because it affects where you are coming from. I also noticed you have a large number of submissions to various subreddits, including LGBT ones, but have never posted in Men's Rights. In your self-post, you said that you "understand fully the notions of masculinity and 'manliness' in society, and how they a…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 04:15 AM
–

I stand corrected.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 06:43 AM
2

What is wrong with people? I'm telling you. You know, they're anarchists. They're.. they're.. they're.. huge.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 06:22 AM
–

I think that men who rape must be sociopaths, because I don't think that I could even get aroused if I was committing harm against someone or if someone was fighting against me. That's what they call people who get-off by committing harm against other people: sociopaths.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 05:57 AM
–

Women reported to have perpetrated conflict-related sexual violence in 41.1% of female cases and 10.0% of male cases Hmm. I wonder if any of these "rape awareness" programs discuss women's sexual violence against other women? 41% seems pretty high. As for the Guardian article, as bad as the men's stories were in that article, this part may have been the worst: As part of an attempt to correct this, the RLP produced a documentary in 2010 called Gender Against Men. When it was screened, Dolan says…
/r/MensRights05/01/12 04:47 AM
–

The movie is not about a radical feminist per se. It's about a woman who gets attacked by some men, then buys a gun and stalks those men and murders them vigilante style. Some reviews of the movie said that it was "empowering" for women. I have also read articles by feminists supporting gun rights. It makes sense. If you're a radical, man-hating harpy who thinks that every man is out to rape you, you need protection.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 03:22 AM
–

Some feminazi's like guns. They think it's "empowering". See Jodie Foster in The Brave One.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 02:39 AM
–

A biological man who identifies as a man is just...a man. Same for a woman. I will call "transpeople" what they want to be called, but I'm not going to call myself by a term that you invented for me. Because I don't see a need for such a term. A biological woman who identifies as a man, I guess that's a "transman"? Some of them get offended if you call them anything other than a "man". They are creating that problem themselves. It's like the article about the "pregnant man" that made the rounds …
/r/MensRights05/01/12 02:09 AM
–

What I find most irritating about this article is how they keep repeating "heterosexual" over and over again, as in: "The heterosexual Internet pornography industry" "exploited heterosexual men's loneliness" "meaningful and egalitarian heterosexual personal relationships now seem bleak" "Pornography provides a lucrative market that sells its wares to mask heterosexual men's fear of changed gender expectations" What, is it only bad when it's "heterosexual" porn? Because they clearly wanted to emp…
/r/MensRights04/01/12 10:47 PM
1

Thanks for adding the link to MRRef.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 10:01 PM
–

May I suggest that you post this research report to your subreddit MRRef: The Invisible Boy: Revisioning the Victimization of Male Children and Teens I am a subscriber to MRRef. It's a good resource. I think that it should be added to the side-bar here on r/MensRights. The Invisible Boy report is where Barbara Kay got that information about female sexual abuse of males who become rapists. The report has other information about male victimization rates, including how males are ignored when they r…
/r/MensRights04/01/12 06:46 PM
5

It actually comes from an amazing 1996 study sponsored by the Canadian government called "The Invisible Boy: Revisioning the Victimization of Male Children and Teens". If you download the pdf of the Invisible Boy report, the peer reviewed studies that show that "between 60% to 80% of rapists, sex offenders, and sexually aggressive men were sexually abused by a female" is on page 30 of the report. The report cites three studies for this claim: Finally, there is an alarmingly high rate of sexual a…
/r/MensRights04/01/12 05:25 PM
5

The responses to that comment are even more revolting. One guy stood up to her and people called him gay.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 06:10 AM
–

Relevant article and video response that challenges the notion that violence against women is more "endemic around the globe" than violence against men: Article Video Violence against women exists, but violence against men is more common and more systemic. And more ignored.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 06:39 PM
–

Well said. It's dishonest and insulting to claim that feminism is an equality movement for men and women both, when feminists do nothing to create equality for men in areas where men lag behind women. This is the central issue that they fail to address or even see.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 04:41 AM
–

Sarcasm, I hope?
/r/MensRights03/01/12 03:36 AM
–

"Women who have been raped have to deal with a [...] male-dominated and biased student body" Brown University: 53% female, 47% male
/r/MensRights03/01/12 03:10 AM
–

Well, I was totally wrong about that. It made the front page after all. You should post all of your videos there from now on.
/r/MensRights30/12/11 07:41 PM
3

I understand, similar to people avoiding the term communist when in fact they are communist, simple to avoid the associations that come along with the term. No. I don't think you understand. She doesn't call herself a feminist because she doesn't agree with feminist ideology. It's not about avoiding "associations that come along with the term", it's about the fact that what she believes is directly contradictory to what feminists believe and preach. She is saying that males are the primary victi…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 07:35 PM
–

Oh, great. Upvoted!
/r/MensRights30/12/11 07:03 AM
–

Well, considering that the topic of her video is trying to get people to see, contrary to what they have been led to believe, that men, rather than women, are the primary victims of systemic gendered violence, it doesn't surprise me that you would need more convincing. It's going against what you have been led to believe your entire life. If 280 scholarly studies that show males being as likely or more likely to be domestic violence victims doesn't convince you, I don't know what will. Your "qui…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 06:56 AM
–

She provided the links to back up her assertions. Click "show more" under the video. The first link provides evidence for domestic violence parity between genders. Here's one link: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Martin S. Fiebert Department of Psychology California State University, Long Beach SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 282 scholarly investigations: 218 empirical studies and 6…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 06:41 AM
2

It is such a bizarre response. I can't even comprehend the mentality of someone who would respond that way in that situation.
/r/MensRights30/12/11 06:25 AM
–

Oh, there's better ones than that too. There was one where they set up a woman to put a drug in a man's drink in full view of other patrons at the bar, then set up a man putting a drug in a woman's drink in the same bar. The patrons didn't even tell the man that a woman (his date) had put a drug in his drink. They let him drink it even knowing that it was drugged. But when the man drugged the woman's drink, they all told the woman that it was drugged before she drank it. Another episode had a bl…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 06:14 AM
–

Most of the videos posted to r/videos don't make it to the front page, and therefore don't get seen by hardly anyone. If a video makes it to the front page, it will get tons of attention. But if it doesn't, it will scroll off with no one seeing it. It's just random. All kinds of random things are posted there, and there's no telling what will become popular. I think her video yesterday was popular there because of just pure randomness and the novelty factor of it. I don't know how you get huge s…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 05:52 AM
3

This is a very good video. Would be voted to the top if it had a better title and/or if more people had seen it (and/or if SRS trolls weren't downvoting it because they hate GWW).
/r/MensRights30/12/11 05:34 AM
1

It's an entirely accurate statement, I've seen it. Granted, anecdotally. I wasn't able to find statistics It's not an accurate statement to say that men are just deserting their wives, leaving the women the only ones to "file the divorce paperwork", unless you can provide evidence that this is actually occurring in large numbers. If you can't find that evidence, then it's a baseless claim that I personally find offensive. Ok, the Brinig and Allen article. I've tried to find the actual text of th…
/r/MensRights29/12/11 04:11 AM
–

To address your point though, that's true. However, many men who leave, just leave. They don't file the paperwork because the system is stacked against them. That doesn't mean that men aren't responsible for broken marriages, it just means women are more likely to file the paperwork with the court. You're going to have to cite a study which shows this, otherwise I do not believe that this is an accurate statement. There are a couple of studies that have been done on why women divorce, Brinig and…
/r/MensRights29/12/11 02:36 AM
–

I think you're disregarding his argument too easily. Women do initiate 70% of divorces. That's been proven by many scholarly research studies. The way that the current system is set up, it does encourage women to divorce men. Because they know they will likely get primary custody of the kids (80% of the time), and with that primary custody will come a steady stream of guaranteed income from the non-custodial father, income which will be taken directly out of his paycheck and transferred to her b…
/r/MensRights29/12/11 01:53 AM
–

I noticed that you quoted me here, but responded to Sigi1. I assume your comment was intended for me. I've read your comments and you seem very fair in what you have said and what you claim to have done with regard to: not circumcising your sons, not seeking automatic child support from the father of your children, trying to work out a fair custody arrangement with your former partner/spouse. I'm not sure what your problem is with men's rights, because you seem to agree with our issues more than…
/r/MensRights29/12/11 12:55 AM
7

To me, you sound like an intelligent and honest broker. This subreddit does get the "I'm a woman and I have questions about men's rights" people pretty frequently.
/r/MensRights28/12/11 08:29 PM
–

Think about it this way. Right now women get primary custody of children 80% of the time. Men have to fight really hard in "family court" and spend literally thousands of dollars in court costs just to attempt to get a fair split of custody time, which many times they are not able to do even after contesting it. Suppose a woman, after getting primary custody, moves three states away. The man has a court-ordered child support order that he MUST pay or he will be imprisoned. He can't quit his job …
/r/MensRights28/12/11 06:58 PM
–

I don't believe that you have read the book. I believe you are lying about that. Because if you had actually read the book, you would not be trying so hard to tell people not to read it. I specifically mentioned that book BECAUSE it is one of the best, unbiased resources to give to someone who doesn't understand men's rights issues to get them to understand that our issues are legitimate. Because it is extremely well-written, well-researched, and contrary to your ridiculous over-the-top rants, i…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 01:56 AM
–

The fact that an attack is ad hominem does not make it worthless. Imagine you read a plausible theory and then discover that the writer also believes that the World Trade Centre was bombed by the US government. There is a difference between theories and fact. Like I told the other guy who responded to me, there is a reason why research articles are submitted to scholars for peer-review without a name on them. Because it doesn't matter who the author is, it only matters what is written in the pie…
/r/MensRights22/12/11 05:42 PM
–

Uh, no. I am issuing a challenge to you to actually READ THE FUCKING BOOK. We can do this by PM. You get the book, either buy it or get it at your library, you read it, and then you come back to me and tell me just what about it was "right-wing" or "not moderate". It is just amazing to me how much energy you expend in guilt-by-association tactics, when you don't even know what is in the book that you are criticizing. Let me say it to you again very slowly so that you understand: The book Taken I…
/r/MensRights22/12/11 05:32 PM
–

That's called an ad hominem attack, to attack the writer because of his beliefs rather than look at his argument. I am not a tea partier. I don't care what his ideology is. I bought the book and read it with an open mind. The facts in his book are documented with 1,000 footnotes. The facts are not right or left. It is not a right or left book. It is a scholarly, well-researched book, not a "tea party" polemic. He doesn't advocate a right-wing position in the book. I know because I actually read …
/r/MensRights22/12/11 06:32 AM
–

I think the best way to reach people is if you can get them to read books. You can't give books to everyone, but you can afford to buy them for your closest family and friends. Taken Into Custody by Stephen Baskerville is the best book to give to someone to show them how men face discrimination in divorce and family law cases.
/r/MensRights22/12/11 03:17 AM
–

This is honestly one of the most poorly-researched screeds that I've ever read on here. I can't even begin to explain to you how wrong you are. Not sure you're even worth it either. The fact that you would even believe that groups like Promise Keepers and Focus on the Family are part of the men's rights movement just shows how ignorant you are. I think that trying to explain to you why you are wrong would be like trying to explain calculus to someone who doesn't know basic arithmetic. You're not…
/r/MensRights22/12/11 02:57 AM
3

And who are all these jerkoffs giving him crap and supporting the concept of child support? People who think they are smart and tolerant, but who exhibit the worst kinds of ignorance and bigotry that they claim to decry. The guy is describing a situation that millions of men face where he is trying to deal with the reality of living a regular day-to-day life in a tough economy while constantly being aware of the fact that if for some reason he gets fired, loses his job, or in some other way beco…
/r/MensRights20/12/11 06:48 PM
–

This is why alimony should not exist AT ALL. You will notice in the story that the reason the woman was ordered to pay alimony to him was because SHE EARNED MORE MONEY than he does. Women are now earning as much or almost as much as men, therefore since alimony has always been paid by the higher-earning spouse, it makes sense that women would now start getting caught up in this. Alimony should simply be abolished. It is an out-dated Victorian-era concept. By the way, 97% of all alimony payers ar…
/r/MensRights20/12/11 06:16 PM
–

This is really disgusting. You can see when she tries to pull off his underwear that he grabs them and looks at her like "NO! WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO DO!?" as he's trying to keep her from pulling his underwear completely off. Right at the end before the video stops, the kid looks slouched in his chair like he just endured some kind of major traumatic life event. Seriously, look at him. He looks like someone just stole his soul. This is illegal and that woman should be in jail for a minimum five y…
/r/MensRights20/12/11 05:08 AM
–

Here's a link to a page where you can download the 32-page document: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/19/united-states-national-action-plan-women-peace-and-security Here is the Executive Order: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/19/executive-order-instituting-national-action-plan-women-peace-and-securit Make up your own mind what you think this means. I don't think we would be seeing national action plans to help men and boys.
/r/MensRights20/12/11 04:50 AM
2

You've been sexually harassed MULTIPLE TIMES by this person who has authority over you. I don't know what the laws are where you live, but if this happened in the U.S., I would tell you to file a sexual harassment lawsuit.
/r/MensRights20/12/11 03:02 AM
–

The cover depicts a woman as person of the year. There were only four runners-up: three were male and one was female. One of the males was Asian. So we have five people here: two females, three males, and one of the males is Asian. Five is an odd number, so if we replace one of the males with a female, that makes it three females and two males being recognized. Do we then say that is slighting males since there are more females than males being recognized, or do we act like adults and realize th…
/r/MensRights18/12/11 05:54 AM
12

You already admitted that you've "never heard of deaths" from "proper" male circumcision. That right there shows that your opinion is uninformed. I've never heard of deaths from proper male circumcision. Here is a scholarly, peer-reviewed research article that shows that approximately 117 male infants die every year from circumcision: http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/ That's one out of every 77 male neonatal deaths caused by circumcision. More neo…
/r/MensRights18/12/11 05:06 AM
6

Good post. There was a wire article about this study that ran in hundreds of newspapers and it was all focused on the 1 in 4 women being victims of intimate partner violence stat. It didn't say anything about male victimization rates or indicate that in some categories, males actually are reporting higher victimization rates than females. For example, in this study more men than women reported psychological aggression by an intimate partner (48.8% vs. 48.4%). Also, the rape rates for non-white m…
/r/MensRights17/12/11 02:10 AM
–

In addition to that, radical MRA's are not as radical and hateful as the radical feminists. I used to read the site mgtowforums, which is probably the most radical MRA site on the Internet. I mostly stopped reading it because there was, in my opinion, too much misogyny. However, I can honestly say that I NEVER, EVER saw any MRA ever talk about murdering female children just because they are females, or genetic engineering the female gender to eradicate them from the planet. Feminist radicals are…
/r/MensRights17/12/11 01:38 AM
–

Feel unsafe, simply because you are male. Males are more likely than women to be victims of every single violent crime except rape. Look it up. And the only reason that rape is lower for men is because until recently, the FBI categorically denied that males could even be classified as rape victims. Statistically, men should feel more unsafe than women. Men are more likely to be victimized. The fact that you think that it's a female thing to feel unsafe because of your gender just shows your narc…
/r/MensRights16/12/11 09:11 PM
–

You missed the part where the article showed that these bigots are in real life child care workers, arts council members, community development coordinators, professors, writers, web developers, communications assistants, special education teachers, lawyers, and activists who have succeeded in getting feminist legislation passed. You can't write this one off as being the rantings of radicals. These are real people with real power who hate men and boys.
/r/MensRights16/12/11 01:24 AM
–

Good catch. Disgusting. Keep that link so that when you are debating the next person who claims that feminism helps men, that feminists are supportive of men's causes, you can give them that and see how they rationalize it. Feminism totally helps men, now excuse me I must go speak at the annual SCUM Conference (Society for Cutting Up Men). And this one presenter's bio is rich: Dr. Betty McLellan "A psychotherapist with over 20 years experience, Betty McLellan is the author of HELP! I'm Living wi…
/r/MensRights15/12/11 09:44 PM
–

You should read this book, it details all of what you describe and why it is happening: http://www.amazon.com/Taken-into-Custody-Fatherhood-Marriage/dp/1581825943/
/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:56 AM
3

"In spite of numerous studies of program outcomes finding little or no positive effect on violent behavior, the Duluth model remains the most common program type of interventions with perpetrators of domestic violence." Kenneth Corvo, Donald Dutton & Wan-Yi Chen (2009). Do Duluth Model Interventions with Perpetrators of Domestic Violence Violate Mental Health Professional Ethics? Ethics and Behavior, 19 (4): 323–340. http://philpapers.org/rec/CORDDM
/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:46 AM
–

The Duluth Model is based on ideology, not science. It was created by radical feminist activists to shift the focus of domestic violence entirely on men's use of violence against women. Remember that phrase: men's use of violence against women. http://www.batteredmen.com/batdulut.htm
/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:33 AM
–

It's probably phrased like that because the author took the stat straight out of his/her backside. In other words, there is/was no source for it except anecdotal bullshit that the author heard somewhere. Baskerville in Taken Into Custody cites research that shows that in 80%-90% of divorce cases, the mother gets primary custody. Fathers almost never get "sole custody".
/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:16 AM
–

It's called Legalizing Misandry, and I posted that to him two hours ago. Taken Into Custody is a more hard-hitting book for an American reader anyway. Taken Into Custody will blow your mind away. It is the most important book ever written on father's and men's rights. Legalizing Misandry is quite boring and scholastic, but if you dig into the chapters and footnotes, it has good information.
/r/MensRights13/12/11 10:42 PM
1

I don't think it matters, so long as your facts are correct. If people are honest, they will side with whoever makes the best argument. If they aren't honest, then they aren't going to listen to us or really care about our issues no matter how it is phrased to them. Even if you tell them something, but don't put it as men's rights, and they buy that argument because it isn't tainted with men's rights, they still won't do jack shit about it, because if they are the type to discount something beca…
/r/MensRights13/12/11 10:33 PM
2

Taken Into Custody by Stephen Baskerville Legalizing Misandry by Katherine Young and Paul Nathanson If you only read one, read Taken Into Custody. Buy it. Now. It will change your life.
/r/MensRights13/12/11 07:12 PM
–

The question though, is will just making "reasonable points" in discussion actually move our issues forward, without identifying it with any group or movement? People will accept someone making "reasonable points", even if those points are about how men face disadvantages, because they feel like it's just one random person saying random things that has no possibility of translating into any real action on those issues. But the same "reasonable points", connected with a political movement (like m…
/r/MensRights13/12/11 06:09 PM
–

Who's being divisive and damaging the movement? The guy spawning rational discussion on how we solve men's problems or the guy who contributes nothing but offal to the discussion and demands that the first guy be banned? I personally find both Sigi1 and Demonspawn to be worth reading. Both of them are smart and are interesting contributors. I agree and disagree with different things said by both of them.
/r/MensRights11/12/11 05:11 AM
–

Demonspawn, thanks for reading my comments from a week ago, even though I know you probably found it through girlwriteswhat's user page. You post some interesting comments occasionally, although it seems like many others here don't like you (be careful that they don't ban you like they banned those others!). I would suggest looking at your premise. You're talking about how society views women as a group, but views men as individuals. This hampers men's rights activism, because we can't get socie…
/r/MensRights11/12/11 04:51 AM
9

This is a pretty important story for the MRM. All the pieces are here to construct a damning indictment of the family court/divorce industry/female entitlement industry complex. This is actually a really common story, with the one exception being that most times it doesn't end with the woman killing herself and her children. The common part is a woman divorcing her husband (50%+ marriages ending in divorce, 66%-75% of divorces initiated by the wife), getting custody even though she is obviously …
/r/MensRights09/12/11 05:24 PM
–

I said it should be illegal to judge based on gender. Really doesn't matter to me what rationale they use for claiming that based on my gender alone, I will cost them more. I might drive much less than the average male. If you want to insure me based on how much I drive, insure me based on how much I drive. Don't insure me based on how much other males drive.
/r/MensRights05/12/11 04:25 AM
2

Also I cannot read this subreddit because the majority of the front page is really debasing to women, that is why I asked the question I did. I don't think this is the majority view of MR's but it is there, and perhaps the loudest on other subreddits, which is maybe a reason why you guys are painted as misogynists. For example on the front page" Ukranian police crush semi-naked feminists demonstrating against prostitution" and "factcheckme's "nigel" has 99 problems and a bitch is all 99 of them!…
/r/MensRights05/12/11 04:07 AM
10

The real problem from my point of view is that whilst it might be the case in the upper echelons of society that men have a better deal, for the rest of us we're generally screwed over time and time again. It's called the Apex Fallacy. The fallacy to conclude that since the majority of politicians or CEOs are men, that it somehow benefits men as a gender. A small portion of men are at the top, but the vast majority of men are at the middle and bottom. And since women are the majority of voters a…
/r/MensRights05/12/11 03:40 AM
–

It should be illegal. Basing my insurance cost on how certain other members of my gender drive should not be allowed. I am a very conscientious driver. The first thing I do when I get in my car is put on my seat belt. I've never been in an accident. I have NEVER talked on a cell phone or texted while driving. And yet, I'm going to be charged more for insurance because of some other people who are not as conscientious as me and who have nothing in common with me except my gender? It's fucking stu…
/r/MensRights05/12/11 03:28 AM
–

Even your comments that behaving in vulnerable ways gets you nowhere as a man. Men must perform masculinity to have any individual value. Masculinity is based on men doing things that would be too onerous, dangerous or difficult for women--men in the support role. Or let me put it this way: as a masculine woman, I don't face any discrimination or difficulties because I'm tough, committed, don't put up with bullshit, work, do heavy lifting, and behave (and even look a bit) masculine. This is beca…
/r/MensRights05/12/11 02:49 AM
–

Well said. My basic point was that in modern society, it seems to me like the advantages that women have, the privileges that women have, the special treatment that women get, is based a lot more on society's perception of women as being vulnerable rather than women's value as baby-makers. Women get benefits because society wants to protect them. I don't disagree that at one point in the past, women's value was strongly tied to having children, and perpetuating families and societies through tho…
/r/MensRights04/12/11 02:42 AM
–

I really respect your opinions. I learn a lot by reading you. You've said a lot that is true even in this comment. But I wonder about the biological argument for women being more valuable to society. I wonder how this applies in today's culture. Because what I see is a society filled with a bunch of Lady Gaga clones, women who are fucking and sucking through their 20s and 30s with no care whatsoever for having babies. They use every means available to avoid having a baby, even going so far as to…
/r/MensRights03/12/11 05:58 PM
–

What are these organizations actually doing to improve the situation for males, that's my question. Fine organizations you have posted there, National Fatherhood Initiative, National Center for Men, etc. But what have these organizations actually done? I started being interested in men's issues a few years ago when I found out how damaging our family law situation is for men. The majority of marriages ending in divorce, 66%-75% of divorces initiated by the wife, wife gets child custody majority …
/r/MensRights03/12/11 03:29 AM
–

There is no way to convince society to see men as having the same inherent individual value as it does women, and even if we could, no society could afford to care as much about men's wellbeing, health and protection as it does women's. What do you mean by this? Male disposability and the indifference to male suffering is a cultural issue. It can be changed by educating people. This is one of the main goals of the MRM.
/r/MensRights03/12/11 02:50 AM
0

Blame the people who up-vote it. There's nothing wrong with AnnArchist posting this submission. It's not his fault that people up-voted it to the top. Blame the people who up-voted it. I saw this submission today, clicked it and read it to see what it was about, then just moved on. I didn't up-vote or down-vote. That's how I approach about 90% of what I see on this subreddit. If you have a problem with this post being at the top, blame the people who up-voted it.
/r/MensRights02/12/11 09:09 PM
-1

I think of this person: http://www.avoiceformen.com/portal/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/eradicate-males-300x354.jpg
/r/MensRights02/12/11 06:41 PM
6

Another quote from his NY Times article: Yet today, here we are, talking seriously about the "end" of this global epidemic. There are now 6.6 million people on life-saving AIDS medicine. But still too many are being infected. New research proves that early antiretroviral treatment, especially for pregnant women, in combination with male circumcision, will slash the rate of new H.I.V. cases by up to 60 percent. This is the tipping point we have been campaigning for. We’re nearly there. http://www…
/r/MensRights02/12/11 04:53 AM
–

Why the fuck should I read this cunt's article when the prologue starts out like this: Recent years have seen an explosion of male joblessness and a steep decline in men’s life prospects that have disrupted the "romantic market" in ways that narrow a marriage-minded woman’s options This is the first fucking sentence. An explosion of male joblessness and steep decline in male life prospects, but the real question is how this affects women's options. It's all about women. You can't even get mainst…
/r/MensRights02/12/11 04:14 AM
–

"I hate uteruses" campaign. Male actor: "Unfortunately, I can't cut the uteruses out of female humans - yet. So I dedicate my time to cutting out dog uteruses, because that's legal." Ha Ha fucking HILARIOUS. Cutting out uteruses is FUCKING HILARIOUS. FUCK YOU if you think this is "just a joke".
/r/MensRights01/12/11 03:18 AM
–

Because it's not about OWS. People were distracted by that, so I had to go out of my way to remove that from the title. The only way reddit allows one to edit a title is to delete the submission and do it again. It's the exact same submission. I think it's telling though, that all I did was change the title from: Occupy Wall Street protester says her goal is to "Eradicate Males", ABC News video (fast forward to 2:08) to: New York protester says her goal is to "ERADICATE MALES", ABC News video (f…
/r/MensRights18/11/11 08:54 PM
19

Conscious misandry doesn't require one to be "crazy". Just hateful.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 05:17 PM
–

This is her sign, which says "ERADICATE MALES": http://abcnews.go.com/images/Business/abc_occupy_signs_05_nt_111117signs7.jpg Taken from this site at ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/11/occupy-wall-streets-day-of-disruption-wn-live-updates/ Eradicate e·rad·i·cate verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing. to remove or destroy utterly; extirpate: to eradicate smallpox throughout the world. to erase by rubbing or by means of a chemical solvent: to eradicate a spot. to pull up …
/r/MensRights18/11/11 02:33 PM
–

This is bullshit. I am disappointed that so many people are more concerned with how someone advocating hatred against males makes their pet political movement look, than about the fact that someone is advocating hatred and ERADICATION of males. This is r/mensrights. It is completely irrelevant whether ABC put her on camera to make your movement look bad. This is not about your movement. The only thing that is relevant is that this person exists and espouses these views. And yes, I do believe tha…
/r/MensRights18/11/11 02:26 PM
0

I didn't ask about people who advocate "similar practices against other groups". I asked specifically when you have ever, EVER seen a man standing at a political rally with a sign saying "ERADICATE FEMALES".
/r/MensRights18/11/11 02:18 PM
–

I care more about the fact that someone is publicly advocating eradicating males, than I do about whether a person publicly advocating eradicating males makes OWS look bad. But that's just me. :|
/r/MensRights18/11/11 04:46 AM
–

Damn it, this is NOT about OWS. This is about a woman publicly advocating eradicating males. I should have just wrote the title as: "Protester says her goal is to "eradicate males", ABC News video (fast forward to 2:08)", because now I have people downvoting and getting pissed because they think I'm insulting Occupy Wall Street. I only put that in the title because that's where the person was.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 04:23 AM
–

When was the last time you saw a man at any rally with a sign saying "Eradicate Females"? Think about it. This doesn't happen. If you can find an example, any example of this ever happening at a political rally in the United States, show me. This was a woman today in a major rally in New York with a sign advocating eradicating males. Today. November 17, 2011. Show me where men are holding signs in public saying eradicate females.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 04:14 AM
–

This is her sign, which says "Eradicate Males": http://abcnews.go.com/images/Business/abc_occupy_signs_05_nt_111117signs7.jpg Taken from this site at ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/11/occupy-wall-streets-day-of-disruption-wn-live-updates/ Eradicate e·rad·i·cate verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing. to remove or destroy utterly; extirpate: to eradicate smallpox throughout the world. to erase by rubbing or by means of a chemical solvent: to eradicate a spot. to pull up …
/r/MensRights18/11/11 03:58 AM
5

This is such bullshit. You keep saying "the father can reclaim the baby" as if this is an easy thing to do. Yep, just walk in and take the baby. Then get that bitch for child support. Read the link. Only 5 of the 49 states that have safe haven laws even allow a nonrelinquishing father to petition for custody of the child that was abandoned by the mother. If you can't get custody, you can't get child support.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 07:42 PM
–

Well, according to the link, only 5 of the 49 states that have safe haven laws even allow a father to take custody of the child after the mother abandons the child.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 07:30 PM
–

So mom is going to raise her child as a single parent. OK. She'll probably need some help. Food assistance, Head Start, etc. Woah, this stuff costs money. You think we the taxpayers are going to let some sperm donor get away with impregnating women and wandering around the country while we pay for his kids? No way. Dad has to pay. When a woman abandons her baby at a safe haven, the taxpayers pick up the costs of raising that child until an adoptive family can be found (could be years or never). …
/r/MensRights17/11/11 03:15 PM
–

That's exactly what I'm getting at, but many people seem to deliberately avoid the issue. If a woman uses the safe haven laws to abandon a baby that she has, she is off the hook for any financial responsibility for that child. The costs will either be shifted to the state or another family if she abandons the baby, or the father will pay 100% to raise the baby if he takes custody from the mother after she abandons it. Either way, she's off the hook for any financial responsibility if she opts ou…
/r/MensRights17/11/11 03:06 PM
–

If a man opts out of any financial burden for a child, the mother either has to abandon a wanted child or pay 100% of its upbringing. If the woman opts out and abandons the child, the father does not have to pay for the childs upbringing. Who pays when a mother opts-out? The child goes to the magic fairyland of rainbows and lollipops where it costs nothing to raise a child? Let's make it fair. Whoever pays when a woman opts-out, that's who should pay when a man opts-out.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 03:51 AM
–

No. You're like the third person who has said that, thinking that it makes you sound smart. I will explain this yet again, as I already have numerous times today. In order for a man to avail himself of the safe haven laws and legally abandon a baby, that man would have to have sole custody of that newborn infant. Men are not granted sole custody of newborn infants, except in exceptionally unusual circumstances, because it obviously would involve taking custody away from the woman who just gave b…
/r/MensRights17/11/11 03:31 AM
–

This was already addressed here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/meiwb/number_of_states_that_allow_a_woman_to_abandon/c309udk Follow the responses (including mine) to that comment. I'm not going to repeat myself and neither should the other people who posted comments have to repeat themselves.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 09:40 PM
17

Termination of parental rights does not end child support obligations.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 08:29 PM
6

Citation yourself. Specifically, this: The mother cannot give up the child without the consent of the father if he wants to raise the child.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 08:02 PM
–

The poster to whom I responded made it sound like a father could abandon his baby unilaterally, as if this is a choice that a father makes. This is not correct. The decision is made by the mother, so long as the mother is alive and conscious. Your wife's baby might be your baby, but you cannot abandon "your" baby unilaterally without agreement from the mother. In which case, it is not YOU abandoning the baby at all, it is the mother making the decision.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 07:55 PM
–

Under what situation would a father be able to surrender his baby to a safe haven? Explain this to me. You do understand that fathers can't give birth, right? What happened to the mother? The only scenario under which this makes sense is if the mother died.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 06:03 PM
–

Well, for one thing, your line of reasoning would lead more to a situation where women are held financially responsible for babies that they abandon under safe haven laws, in addition to keeping the current onerous laws on men's obligations. I am looking at this more as a way to show why men should have an opt-out clause like women do, not as a way to show why we should put more responsibilities on women.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 05:56 PM
–

I could agree with your first two paragraphs. But the third paragraph is unnecessary, and is exactly the kind of comment that certain subreddits take and highlight, to smear both you and the rest of us. They like those one-off lines like "Western society does it by preventing women from having to take responsibility for their fuckups", because it looks like a bigoted statement when they link to it, and therefore allows them to disregard your entire theory. In their minds, it goes something like …
/r/MensRights16/11/11 05:44 PM
–

You seem to be taking this argument in a different direction, by veering the discussion back to abortion. This is about post-birth options. Keeping the discussion about post-birth options for men and women makes it more clear that this is discriminatory towards men. It demolishes the argument that men are forced to pay "because a child now exists in the world that needs to be financially supported". If that argument was applied equally to men and women, then women who abandon their babies at saf…
/r/MensRights16/11/11 05:02 PM
–

Submission inspired by comments in this thread. Particularly, this comment. "Why should women have a post-birth option to opt out that men do not?" Really begs the question. Women are given the legal right to opt-out of financial responsibility for a child post-birth if they do not want the child. Men are forced by law to pay for the costs of raising a child, and have no legal right to opt-out. Does the cost of raising that child disappear when a woman abandons her responsibility, rather than wh…
/r/MensRights16/11/11 04:47 PM
10

As for the after responsibilities, you do realize you can give up the rights to your child right? My step father did for his son and was not obligated to pay anything. Oops, logic. Sorry guys. A man cannot unilaterally end his obligation to pay child support for a child that he fathers. Not legally allowed. Period. A mother can decide that she doesn't want to seek child support from the child's father, but that is her decision, not his.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 04:11 PM
–

No, see. What you don't understand is that it is in the best interests of the child that a woman has the legal right to abandon her baby at a fire station, and thereby absolve herself of all financial responsibility for raising that child. /s
/r/MensRights16/11/11 03:34 PM
2

I don't give a shit if you want to "hang out with white people to discuss white people things". But that is not what I stated. I stated that this is the equivalent of sending a message to your co-workers stating that you are having a WHITES ONLY NIGHT and that non-whites shouldn't be offended that they aren't invited. Typical reddit that you would turn it into "if I want to hang out with white people, that's my right". You're right, it's your right to hang out with who ever the fuck you want to …
/r/MensRights11/11/11 02:27 AM
9

whites only night "Please know, that we love you all, but we will be making this a whites only night." Yeah, nothing discriminatory there. ::rolls eyes::
/r/MensRights10/11/11 06:24 PM
–

I am aware of that. The problem is that you don't just "find" an adult woman who is a virgin in this culture. If you just try to date women who come into your social circle spontaneously, which is how most people traditionally found a marriage partner, in today's culture you are not likely to be meeting very many adult women who are virgins. Fifty years ago, it was common for unmarried young women to be virgins well into their 20s. That is not the case today. I'm also old enough that any woman t…
/r/MensRights09/11/11 06:55 PM
–

What I don't see Conversations and debates about masculinity, society and what it means to be a man. Discussions about real problems men face and the pressures our culture puts on them. Questions about how we can improve these problems Am I way off base here I honestly want to know. Yes, you are off-base. Discussions about real problems men face are probably the majority of what this subreddit discusses. A few days ago the main submissions were self-posts by men who are going through paternity i…
/r/MensRights09/11/11 05:52 PM
–

Modern women's attitudes toward divorce and the laws that encourage unilateral divorce by the wife are the main reasons why I largely stopped thinking about marriage as a goal for myself in life. I just can't put myself in a position where over 50% of all marriages end in divorce, where 66%-75% of those divorces are initiated by the wife, and where no fault divorce laws give the wife the ability to unilaterally terminate the marriage all by herself, regardless of what the husband wants. I actual…
/r/MensRights09/11/11 05:26 PM
–

This is honestly one of the most bigoted articles that I've ever read in a mainstream newspaper. It's sickening that Concordia University lets trash like this be printed. And in case anyone wonders, the author is a self-described "avowed feminist". NAFALT? Keep saying that while I archive another bigoted feminist anti-male rant.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 01:33 AM
2

I really am sorry to hear about your troubles. I hate the kind of drama that you are describing. Insulting you and breaking things in your house? I am glad that I don't have anyone that toxic in my life. I have my own struggles with my own issues, but I don't have anyone taking out their crap on me. I don't think I would tolerate that very well.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 05:48 AM
7

It's unfair and unjust. She took a relationship from you, she took your child, and instead of your income being used to support a family and household together, you now have to send your income TO her. In the process of making those payments, you will become impoverished in your own living conditions. And if you somehow can't make your payments, you will be called a deadbeat. Even though she left you, not the other way around. You wanted to make the marriage work. You wanted to have a family. Th…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 05:22 AM
5

You know, I read your story and then I went back to the top and read that line again: "I met the woman I wanted to marry at age 34". This is seriously fucked up. A lot of men are cautious, responsible, and wait to father a child until they are old enough to do it maturely and responsibly. If you waited until 34, that sounds like you. But you got burned anyway because you picked the wrong woman. Let me ask you a question, how old is she? She sounds immature. If I waited until 34 to marry, I would…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 05:06 AM
–

That's a pretty sad story. I can't give much advice because there are too many things that I don't know about your situation. You've only said certain things, leaving other things to guess about. I assume you are required to pay court-ordered child support to her. I assume based on what you wrote, that you do not have any court-ordered visitation rights, but she chooses to grant you visitation rights on the weekends. I assume that you and your son's mother broke up and there are bad feelings bet…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 04:09 AM
–

Think about this; people mention the issues with colleges? Obama isn't responsible for that; most of that happened in administrations previous to his. The author of the Dear Colleague letter, Russlynn Ali, was appointed by Barack Obama: Russlynn Ali was appointed assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education by President Barack Obama on March 18, 2009 The Dear Colleague letter is what people are referring to when they mention the issues with the colleges. It removes du…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 01:46 AM
–

Two explanations: A. It's a male employer who likes having women around to gawk at/flirt with/get with. (Or a male boss who is threatened by other male employees.) B. It's a female employer who likes having women around because girl power. (Or a female boss who is threatened by male employees.)
/r/MensRights03/11/11 09:00 PM
–

It is hard to know what to make of these sexual harassment allegations, because it is not clear what exactly happened and we don't have any secondary corroboration from eyewitnesses to prove what happened. What we have are quotes suggesting that he may have "invited a woman up to his suite" at a conference or used "sexual innuendo" in conversations. This sounds pretty minor to me. Sexual innuendo could be saying that someone has "big balls" (a euphemism for saying that someone has a lot of coura…
/r/MensRights31/10/11 04:29 AM
–

Documenting the hate: "Men need to be stripped of their social, economic and political power." cherryblossomlife October 5, 2011 at 10:01 pm http://radicalhub.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/radical-feminism-in-the-21st-century/#comment-3514 -- "Women need to stop raising male children." Mary Sunshine October 5, 2011 at 7:20 pm http://radicalhub.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/radical-feminism-in-the-21st-century/#comment-3503 -- "Females don’t have to kill baby boys. Just not nurture them. Females are forced…
/r/MensRights31/10/11 12:30 AM
6

I was surprised by how many comments there are. Over 200 of these nutjobs! Please do save this and show it every time that someone says "feminism helps men too!".
/r/MensRights31/10/11 12:03 AM
9

I like this comment, taken from the site: This article hints at the fundamenta­l divide between men and women on the subject of marriage: most men enter marriage with an expectatio­n of a lifetime commitment­; most women don't. Why? Because, for most women, "getting" married is an end in itself. It marks a benchmark in their lives that, once achieved, allows them to move on, in whatever direction they choose. Most women fear permanent singlehood much more than divorce. Ironically­, for many wome…
/r/MensRights30/10/11 11:40 PM
2

I'm trying to be respectful here. I just responded to you with six paragraphs trying to explain to you after you insulted me by calling my original comment gibberish. With all due respect, I do not think that I "need to do more work here" to explain myself. I posted a six paragraph response to you and you quoted one sentence of that to respond to me. I am comfortable with what I am saying. These are my beliefs on this issue. It is a gender issue because it involves males inflicting harm on other…
/r/MensRights29/10/11 06:07 PM
–

I don't know how I could be more clear than what I already said. The only way that I could "re-state" it would be essentially to say the same exact thing that I already said only in more words. These young men subjecting other males to treatment that could permanently harm his reproductive capacity, inflicting physical trauma on his scrotum, is males harming males in a specifically gendered way. That they would do that shows that they don't care about the welfare of other males as males. They ha…
/r/MensRights29/10/11 05:41 PM
–

I just wanted to point out that the top comment in this thread was posted at r/shitredditsays about an hour ago. The way this works is that readers of that subreddit click through to that parent comment and downvote all the comments beneath that parent comment that they disagree with. Unless they open up the larger comment thread that shows all comments in that submission, they don't see the rest of the comments. That is why I am posting this comment as an individual comment, not as a response t…
/r/MensRights29/10/11 04:42 AM
–

The thing that bothers me the most about this is that as males, these other hockey players on the team should know how damaging it can be to a male's reproductive ability to inflict that kind of trauma on his scrotum. A man could conceivably become infertile due to something like this. And yet they inflict this on one of their fellow teammates. I just don't understand it. We will NEVER be able to fight misandry and societal bias against males if males treat each other like this. Everything that …
/r/MensRights29/10/11 12:57 AM
–

She goes to the head of our dept, tries to say I raped her. Unbelievable. This makes me fucking SICK. Was reading your story and got to that line and just about exploded. It's a sick fucking culture we live in where so many "normal" women have zero qualms about going to HR and saying "he raped me" just to get back at a man who scorned her. I just hate this shit so much.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 05:15 PM
2

This is the article that this letter is about, in case anyone missed it: Wife Cuts Off Husband's Penis & Chucks It in the River She says she admires women who cut off men's penises.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 04:41 AM
–

As someone who was told recently by other users on this subreddit that "this is not a safe place for you as a male, this is a place for activism", let me extend to you the courtesy and humanity that those people didn't extend to me. I read your story and also read one of your other posts from when you were seeking relationship advice before you broke up (had to check to see if you were legitimate and not playing with us). If you are telling the complete truth about this situation, it sounds like…
/r/MensRights28/10/11 04:22 AM
–

The responses to his original comment were not hateful. At this point, I am showing four responses to his original comment. None of them contain insults directed at him. None of them are hateful in nature. phlake's response simply calls out his sexism (he was being sexist) and informs him that mothers are more likely than fathers to abuse their children. The user's responses when informed that he was incorrect about fathers being abusers is more telling. Follow phlake's comment thread with him a…
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:42 PM
–

Pocketbook Power: How to Reach the Hearts and Minds of Today's Most Coveted Consumer - Women by Bernice Kanner McGraw-Hill; 1 edition (April 9, 2004) From the back cover: Women control 88 percent of all purchases. Women handle 75 percent of family finances. 43 percent of those with assets over $500,000 are women. One out of every 11 women in America owns a business. Women influence two out of every three of the 3 trillion dollars spent in the U.S. each year! TIL that author Bernice Kanner is a "…
/r/MensRights27/10/11 05:23 AM
2

Interesting statements. I can't say whether I agree or disagree with you. I bookmarked the link and am going to read it later. I have heard about this lecture, but I need to read the whole thing.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 05:08 AM
–

I like the implication that men invented these things because they're inherently more intelligent than women Actually, there was no such implication in my comment. I didn't imply in any way that men were smarter than women. I simply made the statement that it could be demonstrably proven that a large percentage of the things that we use in our daily lives were invented or created by males. This is a fact. Computers, appliances, machinery, plumbing, electricity, automobiles, building materials, m…
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:47 AM
–

The problem that I have with the way that the word patriarchy is used by feminists and assorted ideologues, is that when they use that word, they are ascribing to me as a male some kind of privilege that they assume goes along with it, and I disagree that any such privilege exists in this day and age. They take that assumption, that this patriarchy which they believe exists gives me some kind of privilege, and use that to almost deny my humanity as an individual person. I'm just a "straight whit…
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:34 AM
–

I know you're either trolling or are just a bigot, but your statement, in case you actually believe it, is demonstrably false. Probably 90% of the things that you use in your daily life could be demonstrably proven to have been invented by a male.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 04:02 AM
-1

I wondered how my simple quoting of a newspaper article got massive downvotes. Checked "ShitRedditSays" subreddit. Sure enough, the parent comment to this thread is at the top of their subreddit, encouraging them to click through and downvote everything that they disagree with. Clue to SRS birdbrains: if you think you're anything but a downvote brigade, think again. You're violating redditiquette by downvoting me. All I did was quote an article.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 03:39 AM
–

I'll tell you my first thought when I read that statement was that it reminded me of how serial killers like to keep mementos of the people that they kill.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 06:52 PM
–

Not only did she not leave, she actually visited him in jail and hoped to marry him after he had been arrested for assaulting her: Mr. Gillespie had previously been charged with assaulting Ms. Lewis, but afterwards, she continued their relationship, visiting him in jail and hoping to marry him.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 06:50 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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