xcbrent Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
45	Unattainable Women's Beauty "Standards"	Social Issues	xcbrent	/r/MensRights	08/10/19 10:27 PM

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
1	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. 1.) Yes, you tried to strawman. You said "Yea, i have read these 'arguments' and they're banana's" after I sent you a very in depth paper on the topic we're discussing. That's not engaging with the science and data at all and intentionally just being like "nah you're dumb." If you want to have an opinion on something like this, you need to know the science, which you clearly do not. 2.) The word 'feminist' isn't used in the article whatsoever. Open that article, press "CTRL+ F" and search it, yo…	/r/MensRights	06/11/24 10:37 PM
1	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. Holy lord what a terrible strawman attempt. And lets be clear, I've never once said the word cancer isn't scary. But here are the facts about the type of cancer OP's article references based on the paper I cited to you. 1.) The type of cancer we're discussing has a negligible rate of metastases. 2.) It's rate of progression to more dangerous stages is negligible. Those are just straight up facts about the cancer type we're discussing. If it can't spread or progress (except in negligible cases), …	/r/MensRights	05/11/24 06:15 PM
1	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. I actually lol'd. I cannot imagine being so confident and so clearly uninformed on a topic. This is what we'd call a "literature review" paper. At the bottom are over 60 references to scientific papers, reviewing everything discussed in the paper. Nearly all of those papers are nothing but facts and data. What I sent you is not even an opinion. It's a summary of factual data. Please Google the Dunning Kruger effect, cuz you're a shining example of it.	/r/MensRights	05/11/24 03:18 AM
1	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. If you think those scientifically based facts presented in that paper are "bananas" then we're just wasting our time here. You clearly lack the ability to understand nuances in oncologic treatment paradigms, risk benefit analyses, treatment plan evolutions, etc. You are only interested in narrative humping and that's okay. But just don't go posting garbage like this when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about because you're entirely unable to even consider the fact that some cancer, …	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 07:32 PM
-5	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. "The very fact that so many men suffer from this should be an indicator that there needs to be much more research into this and more action that needs to be done into the subject. More checkups for men so that this can be caught in time, better information." - Oh we have. PSA blood tests have been used for 20+ years to detect prostate cancer and within the past 2-3 years insurance companies are paying for prostate MRI's to better tell if PSA's elevated due to cancer or benign growth. Our treatme…	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 03:47 PM
-7	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. I'm calling you a baby because instead of realizing that this is a complex topic that has true nuance and depth to it you resort to "wahhhh women infantasizing men wahhh." It's name calling sure, but appropriate. You sure do have a lot of copy and pasting there with no citation. I've never once suggested the "therapeutic landscape" is clear. It's immensely complex and not as clear as "wahhh women hurting men wahhh" like you're claiming. You read this article, which is a nuanced, complex topic wi…	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 03:31 PM
-45	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. I presume you're referring to my comment about "a small area of 1?" If so I'm referring to the fact that prostate cancer is diagnosed by taking a prostate biopsy, the standard of care is 12 cores. When I say "a small area" I men something like 3 or less of those 12 cores are positive for cancer. If all 12/12 are grade group 1, that's a different story and definitely definitely move the needle more towards treatment, cuz that's higher volume. but 3/12 grade group 1? Man that's not something many …	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 04:58 AM
-80	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. Ho boy I got a truth bomb for you and all the incoming downvotes. For all of you that are about to downvote me, just understand this debate that this article is discussing has been talked about for years by both male and female urologists. World leading experts of both genders. This is NOT some feminist agenda to fuck over men like all you babies are crying about. I'm a man and have worked in urology for years and I've seen more prostate cancer patients than probably anyone in this comment secti…	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 04:47 AM
-106	Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope. So I'll say you're technically correct, cancer is cancer as in it's "uncontrolled cellular growth." BUT not all cancer is created equal. 5 year survival rate for pancreatic cancer is currently 13%, for prostate cancer it's 97%. Those are IMMENSELY different prognoses and thus should be treated IMMENSELY differently. We often say "you'll usually die WITH prostate cancer, not FROM prostate cancer." Most dudes are gonna die of a heart attack or other cancer. Furthermore this article is ONLY referri…	/r/MensRights	04/11/24 04:41 AM
3	Trumps appeal to men that the media just doesn't get Yes, is there something you'd like to discuss?	/r/MensRights	03/11/24 10:10 PM
26	Trumps appeal to men that the media just doesn't get "fact that he's not interested in supporting the military industrial complex" - Bullshit. He said during his 2016 campaign that he would pull the US out of Iraq. He literally said it was a "big fat mistake" and that we should have "never been there in the first place" to Jeb Bush during a debate. Guess what? He didn't pull us out during his 4 YEARS as president. Then when Biden finally did it, he tore him apart for it. Also, his pentagon budget has only ever gone up during his presidency. So don…	/r/MensRights	03/11/24 08:18 PM
-9	Trumps appeal to men that the media just doesn't get Harris is not shaming all men. She's shaming men such as @Leather_Tax1095 who perfectly exemplifies the typical uneducated republican male voter mindset that can be best demonstrated with comments such as "I don't want no woman in charge of me." "A woman's place is in the kitchen." "No woman should be a leader they have periods and thus are emotionally unstable." And if someone agrees with any of those stupid arguments, they should be shamed. As a male who also wants Kamala to win, I did not ONC…	/r/MensRights	03/11/24 07:58 PM
2	ask your counsellor if she is a feminist? "I suggested feminists have a very one sided view on the world and I'm seeking someone who is more open minded." That's an incredibly bad opener. Way to paint an entire group of people with a broad brush, even if they aren't a feminist they won't like that.	/r/MensRights	19/10/22 03:54 AM
21	Double Standards No, this comic is simply about “girls always go for Chad’s. I’m such a nice guy. why do they never like me?” It’s stupid. Also she didn’t abuse her power, she called HR. An abuse of power would be if HR did something about it, which nobody knows if they did.	/r/MensRights	16/02/20 09:15 PM
82	Double Standards What is this r/niceguys ? Get this crap off of here.	/r/MensRights	16/02/20 08:36 PM
39	What bs is this That's not BS lol. That's very true.	/r/MensRights	17/09/19 04:17 AM
11	Nice one Apple. People post to this sub about ISSUES men are having. Problems like societal stereotypes, double standards, etc. Stuff that bothers them. Either that, or it's progress in society made towards giving men more "rights".	/r/MensRights	07/09/19 03:24 AM
-8	Nice one Apple. By posting it on MensRights	/r/MensRights	07/09/19 03:16 AM
10	Nice one Apple. Holy shit this is the actual dumbest thing I've ever seen on this sub. Getting butthurt over Siri's response, good God do you have nothing better to do? Literally nobody cares.	/r/MensRights	07/09/19 03:10 AM
0	Convincing my wife that circumcision is wrong... That's a fucking stupid argument. That's like saying men can't have opinions on abortions because they can't get pregnant and thus can't have abortions. I agree that children shouldn't be circumsized anymore for sure. But good God that's a bad argument. It's a philosophical question on abortion and it's a philosophical question on circumcision. Therefore, females and males should be allowed to argue both sides without strawman arguments like this.	/r/MensRights	04/09/19 04:12 AM
6	Wait for it This is funny and clearly a joke. Good God this sub has some stupid shit sometimes	/r/MensRights	04/08/19 05:35 PM
6	Marketing experts labeled Gillette's sexist against men ad as the worst marketing move of the year, and they predict it will trash Gillette's sales Why the hell is this downvoted? Jesus Christ guys the dude just wanted a source for the information.	/r/MensRights	25/04/19 03:41 AM
2	A look at the photoshopping of male models and the unrealistic standards men have Unrealistic standards? On what planet is this an unrealistic standard? This is absolute garbage content.	/r/MensRights	20/04/19 04:10 AM
-3	This is more fitting than the meme I have seen floating around about one person “singlehandedly” completing the task. She gave the Ted Talk, like it or not that's just kind of how it goes. It's not some societal thing about "erasing men from science" or some bullshit like this sub seems to think. It's just that people frankly don't have the shits to give about the many people that worked on this. They really only want to focus on one person. She gave the talk and did have a large part in the project, so people will focus on her. Get over it you SJW's. This sub is so stupid sometimes. You guys have A LOT of good…	/r/MensRights	11/04/19 06:51 PM