TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

yeshras Archive

View 0 posts and 197 comments by yeshras on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Any evidence for that last claim? I get the feeling that's just another commonsensical neoliberal justification for not investigating discrimination.
/r/TheRedPill29/01/18 07:37 PM
1

Interesting. What about the 5% that isn't explained by those choices? Even Christina Hoff Sommers, the noted feminist critic, admits this in both her video for the AEI and her video for Prager U. What do you think causes this? Is it possible that it might be direct discrimination, something everyone who studies this and isn't bought and paid for as right-wing shills tend to admit? This unexplained idsparity ranges from 5 to 12 depending on which study you consult.
/r/TheRedPill08/10/17 04:17 PM
1

Interviews aren't necessarily indicative of technical skill. There's plenty of socially stunted STEM practicioners that are absolutely brilliant. Moreover, this study doesn't take into account all factors that might have skewed the study.
/r/TheRedPill08/10/17 03:09 PM
1

Another swing and a miss. You live in a fantasy world 5th Law. It's very clear that wanting to expand feminism is evidence of being feminist. Also you didn't answer my question: you bragged about this program working while simultaneously claiming it never happened. I never said that. We've been over this: men at the bottom end up dead or on the streets or in jail and thus aren't counted. Neither do the women who wind up dead. Ever heard of the missing and murdered indigenous women?
/r/MensRights21/09/17 10:36 PM
1

Children believe that wanting something really hard makes it come true. Oh look! Feminists want to help build the same department I just described! It's almost as if you're so full of shit it's coming out your ears. So which is it, this never happens or it's working? Women are discriminated against. Get over it. Which happens to have forced equality at the top and leaving men to dominate at the bottom. Oh wait that's not true.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 09:54 PM
1

Not feminists. Yes feminists. You've never heard of Europe? That's fucking fantastic that they're working. Finally some equality! Then again, you consider any discrimination against women to be non-existent, so you don't agree with me likely. Why no quotas there? Politics determines the policies that affect all of us, including teachers. But you're an idiot if you pretend feminists are actually interested in getting men in to women dominated fields. Citaiton needed.
/r/MensRights21/09/17 07:42 PM
1

They weren't feminist and they weren't fighting for quotas or anything. ... who the fuck do you think lobbied to have the Status of Women agency created moron? Interesting. You have quotas for CEOs. Does that mean women were never excluded from that? I don't know any country that has quotas for CEO's. I think you mean directors? Many places also have quotas for politics. These two locales affect policy decisions and should have a diversity of perspectives, racial, gender or otherwise. Except the…
/r/MensRights20/09/17 08:48 PM
1

Why don't we see women in dangerous? Why aren't feminists fighting for equal representation in dangerous jobs like they do for board rooms and tech? Currently the workplace death rate is over 90% male. Don't you think that should be 50%? I've already explained that there are large amounts of feminist organizations fighting for female representation in it. However, given the history of women being excluded from said professions because of doubts about their competence, said quota is impossible be…
/r/MensRights19/09/17 12:10 PM
0

Why not 50% since you're just making it up. Nope. Look at those studies on the blogpost. Any paper that claimed this would be dismissed in any legitimate field of study. And this is on the word of world class philosopher of science u/5th_Law_of_Robotics It wasn't counting those who pressed charges only. Not pressing charges =/= Lying You don't know what you're talking about. Neither do you. Except that study was only looking at women. The fact remains that the DOE is chalk full of homophobes and…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 01:33 PM
0

Er no. There's a margin of error of around 2%. More like 5 to 12 percent. No reputable researcher has claimed this is most likely due to discrimination. Not entirely, but quite substantially. Except for all the researchers in those studies that were posted in the Jenna Christian blgopost I sent you didn't read. And even if it were that would still mean your "70 cents on the dollar for the same work" mantra is a lie. Nobody claims "for the same work". It's a lie. The "researchers" went back and c…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 01:21 PM
0

No sorry that's projection. You guys spread the myths. We debunk. Hahaha. No. Even you people admit there's an unexplained part of the gap that's likely explained through discrimination. It's the 5% that "doesn't disappear" once accounted for choices. Here's a response to the "arguments" you suggest. That the 1/5 claim is a lie? That in fact women can lie about being raped? That male victims are generally treated worse? That we don't live in a culture that celebrates when men rape women? 1 in 5 …
/r/MensRights18/09/17 01:01 PM
1

MRAs support equal rights for all, including men. In practice, you spreading myths about the gender pay gap (which even Hoff Sommers admits is nto all caused by choices) as well as you spreading myths about rape (that hurt gay men) means this is not the case. And yet another example of claiming whoever the fuck you want as a feminist when convenient. Except it's true. http://www.dsausa.org/feminism You don't seem to understand that a group doesn't become feminist by virtue of you saying they are…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:46 PM
0

But if she does something you like you'll claim it's in the name of feminism. Her support of LGBT rights is due to her cultural libertarianism. More like a proven liar is untrustworthy. Even liars can be correct. Christina Hoff Sommers defended Michelle Fields after she was groped. She's the biggest liar I can think of. No it doesn't. CHS advances women's rights and is explicitly not a feminist. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. OMG. Holy shit that just made my day. You think a woman that spreads myths about wa…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:34 PM
0

You want the right to deny the existence of any feminist and adopt any random person as feminist at will. Except she is. Dolores Huerta, one of the three founders of UFW, actively promoted women's rights. Look at her entry here. She's claimed to have advanced women's rights, which implies a belief in feminism. Essentially your rosy view of this cult is based on confirmation bias: all good people are feminists, all bad people aren't. June Nicole of ShoeOnHead fame is an MRA of sorts and is a good…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:24 PM
-1

And these are low skilled? DSL repairpeople are low-skilled. We have female CEOs. Obviously your notion is wrong. I suggest you look up the proportion of female CEO's. You should you should also consult those academic papers I linked you abotu workplace discrimination. So show me the quotas to get women in to the most dangerous male dominated jobs the way feminists have quotas for the best male dominated jobs. Look up "classism" and then come back. This is a legitimate problem with feminism (whe…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:11 PM
-1

So you lied and now you expect us to believe that these organizations exist because you feel they should? I fucking linked you to one, you moron. You know it's funny, when we cite groups that are explicitly feminists to point out shitty stuff feminists have done you'll screech "no true feminist!" I know many feminists who work with them. In fact, it was a self-proclaimed Chicana feminist who started it. Something does not have to explicitly feminist to further feminist goals or to have significa…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 12:01 PM
1

Men were not all given the right to vote in America until 1865 (for British men it wasn't until 1918). Starting in 1869, women in certain territories and states in America began voting. So that's about a difference of 4 years. The vast majority of people were disenfranchised for all of history. Yeah, except women got it a lot later. The idea at the time was that there could not be such a thing as marital rape because as a married person you are owed sex from your spouse, i.e. conjugal rights. Th…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:50 AM
0

Good point, conceded, but it stands to reason that there are plenty of organizations devoted to getting women into this. I know United Farm Workers, the union protecting farm workers, has an outreach program for women.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:38 AM
1

IT is a low skilled manual labor job now? That's the only trade you saw listed. IT can also include electricians It really is gender based though. All the most dangerous jobs are dominated by men. Because women are deemed inept at them. Feminists are fine with that. As I showed, that;s not the case. They only demand quotas in male dominated high profile low risk jobs. Perhaps because feminists operating in the trades have less resources than those working in sexy jobs.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 09:21 PM
1

Those aren't quotas and they're just trying to assist women to get in to IT and certain trades, not the same as what I asked at all. You asked whether feminists are trying to get women involved in low skilled labor jobs. I just gave you an example of an entire government agency devoted to it. Ah so now it's classism. You always have an excuse for why men suffering isn't really men suffering. This isn't related to men only. Support for female farm workers, a highly menial job that's dominated by …
/r/MensRights17/09/17 07:00 PM
1

Because it disenfranchised them for six milennia. Tell me, do women get together and say "Hmmm, I want to be treated like a commodity, married off to a man by father chooses, have no protections against DV and marital rape, and have to stay home and raise the kids for absolute naught"?
/r/MensRights17/09/17 06:40 PM
3

Yes absolutely for a lack of trying. Let me know when feminists march demanding quotas to get women down in the mines. So an entire government agency trying to get women into hard labor is lack of trying. Maybe our classist societies deems certain jobs more sexy, but I have absolutely seen feminists try to do something. But it is a conspiracy by men. It's a system. You did. You claimed it wasn't really a thing. You never proved it's still used. And I've shown you multiple instances of feminists …
/r/MensRights17/09/17 02:40 PM
2

1) Feminism is like that, except it asks you to stop being horrific rape apologists and stop pushing gender essentialism. It's like you, on this very subreddit, you whine about male disposability, yet believe women are inept at combat. 2) That's contradictory. Saying the status quo is biological and then saying feminists enforce the status quo and are misandrists is contradictory. 3)... 4) That's because, under patriarchy, women are denied access, legally or through unconscious discrimination, t…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 02:18 PM
3

Yet the shitty male dominated jobs haven't changed hardly at all. Not for lack of trying... Which is a euphemism for men. Nope. Patriarchy affects everyone, not just men. Like when you defended VAWA and Duluth and college rape tribunals and other terrible things feminists have done to harm men. You do realize VAWA has a gender-neutral stance on DV right? I never defended Duluth. College "rape tribunals" affect female rapists as well, and is not a gendered issue.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 01:46 PM
3

If the amount of women in leadership roles is trending upwards, then that really makes discrimination a diminishing issue. At least, this is how any rational person would see things. Although, I understand wanting to see the job done. All of that is due to feminism waving the proverbial pom poms of anti discrimination and challenging gender roles. Gender roles are not something that men nor the patriarchy created initially nor have enforced going forward. This is biological and evolutionary. Aga…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 01:24 PM
0

I personally don't. Most feminists would call that virgin shaming.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 01:14 PM
2

Discrimination and gender roles play as much a role in the oppression of women as the problems men face. I think we've had enough.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 12:04 AM
-1

Trying to psychoanalyze one's opponents to discredit them? Sounds very Stalinist.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 10:44 PM
-4

How are women forced into a gender roles? I think you could make that case decades ago, but definitely not in this present time. If anything, traditional gender roles for women are widely shamed in our society. Motherhood is almost looked down on by feminists and society in general. You can't really make the argument against it when the current birth rates are plummetting in the Western world. Right now, women can do whatever they like, and society will tell them it is ok because they are strong…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 09:42 PM
2

Yes, yes and yes. Feminism has addressed my issues and done so well. Moreover, the fact women are under-represented in spheres of power mean their issues are much more economic in nature.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 09:04 PM
1

Feminists do indeed oppose the draft. Look at Finland, where most of the left-wing parties, who embrace feminism, oppose it.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 09:02 PM
1

To be quite honest, the fact people believe women are less criminal makes them more likely to trust them.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 08:53 PM
1

The women are wonderful effect is due to the belief that, because of their ineptitude at committing crime, they're more moral. It's like a backhanded compliment to women that hurts men. It is impossible to determine how many rape allegations are true and how many are false. A small percentage are demonstrably true and demonstrably false. The rest are in the category of 'we don't know'. The solution to this is not #believeallwomen. It's also rather impossible to determine how many people were rap…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 07:56 PM
-4

Own it. Toxic masculinity is related to misogyny, namely the system that forces women and men into stereotypical gender roles. I could link you something about it, but you won't listen.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 07:55 PM
1

But not the draft in WWII or WWI (you know, the one that Scotus declared was an automatic expectation of being a citizen, yet feminists didn't complain when they got to be full citizens a few years after that but didn't have to take part in a draft). Feminists before 1945 =/= Feminists today
/r/MensRights16/09/17 07:55 PM
-1

I said many of them were caused by toxic masculinity. The belief that men can't be raped feeds into that.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 06:25 PM
-2

That's because feminists are desperate to help rape victims like me and will only accept FRA if it's absolutely clear. I was accused of falsely accusing someone. It wasn't until much later that they realized I was telling the truth.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 05:33 PM
1

I have never said any of that. Leave me alone.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 05:32 PM
5

Besides men can't be raped because they have power under the patriarchy. So what you experienced was actually discrimination against women. I never came remotely close to saying that. Having power under patriarchy has nothing to do with who can or cannot be raped.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 02:45 PM
-9

You made a false accusation? I was accused of making one, even though evidence later showed I was telling the truth. Good bye 5th Law. Don't bother commenting again.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 02:37 PM
-15

Sigh It shouldn't be punished because it would've prevented me from coming forward after my rape. I've just about had enough of you 5th Law. Good bye.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 02:30 PM
-16

... you do realize feminists do not deny false rape accusations can be a thing, right?
/r/MensRights16/09/17 01:48 PM
1

It doesn't, you're just making to definitions again. And if it did that would mean women aren't oppressed. Remember those glass ceiling studies I showed you you didn't read? No I'm right. So tell me, if something mostly harms women will you interject and explain how it mostly harms women the way you've done with suicide? Because it's true. I showed you a study, which you didn't read again.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 05:15 PM
1

A patriarchy would imply men do better in things like health, justice, education, work life balance, rights, etc. So no. I'm right here. Not it wouldn't actually. It would imply that women dominate positions of power. I've shown you many times how the education "bias" is not a gendered problem, how men do indeed get access to health, how "work life balance" is caused by women being expected to give up career to be nurturers (which prevents them for achieving high positions of power) and how thos…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 05:15 PM
0

So then men use methods that work and succeed while women fret about their looks and survive. And somehow this proves more women kill themselves? It proves more women are depressed and attempt suicide, which means they're just as mentally tortured if not more than men. Men objectively have fewer resources. Prove it. Yep. All homeless men are lazy millionaires. That's not what she said. And she's on your side, by the way. No it doesn't. Invariably you argue society and social roles are controlled…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:56 PM
0

And yet here you are, reinforcing those roles. You claim women are more oppressed because they're more likely to be alive and free to be counted. Oppression doesn't mean ability to live a happy life. It means exclusion, partial or total, from political power. Just not as much as a woman in the same situation. Right? ... no.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:51 PM
0

A matriarchy would imply most positions of power and influence are held by women. So no. I'm right here.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:50 PM
0

Additionally many men in poverty end up in jail and aren't counted, or kill themselves. While women are rarely jailed and are given assistance. You're going to have to provide evidence for that second claim. As for your first claim, I said it was because of gender roles that harm men and I've told you a million times. You say that but then dismiss all male victims by saying women have it worse and really that's just male privilege. ... that doesn't mean men don't deserve compassion.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:37 PM
1

Not really. Your definition of "patriarchy" is in reality the ways in which matriarchal gender roles harm women. ... no. The gender roles that prohibit women from gaining influence also harm men. This means we live in a patriarchy.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:36 PM
1

You said they were too emotional to do something men can readily do. I'm simply saying that men use more violent means. It's widely debated why women don't do that, but it's theorized that it's bcause they don't want people cleaning up after them. I linked you to a study epxlaining why, Wait but in your last comment you said men had plenty of resources. They do have plenty of resources. They just use them less because... wait for it... toxic masculinity! Oh yes, the Cadillac driving beggars you …
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:36 PM
0

Women are indeed more likely to live in poverty. ... I just said men deserve compassion. Are you a moron?
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:16 PM
0

Not really. Your definition of "matriarchy" is in reality the ways in which patriarchal gender roles harm men.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:14 PM
0

Wow so you double down on the "hysterical irrational incompetent woman" trope. That's not what I said. No mostly just women. It's pretty well established within rational circles that women get more assistance, especially emotional, than men. Because men are expected to be stoic. This is called... wait for it... toxic masculinity. Here's a feminist source that even acknowledges it: That's simply evidence that more men are homeless. The homeless are not necessarily poor. Some can be between jobs o…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:11 PM
0

Also your un article doesn't say more women live in poverty. It just claims it's worse for women to live in poverty than for men. Nope. It does claim women live more in poverty. And if it's worse for them, that means women are worse off. This is actually toxic feminity: the notion that only women's suffering matters and men don't deserve compassion because they aren't women. Women's suffering being greater than that of men =/= Men don't deserve compassion. That doesn't follow.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:06 PM
0

You're going to have to back that up.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:00 PM
0

Oh so women are too emotional to do the job right? That study I linked you? It supports it. The matriarchy provides help for women. And men. I've had incredibly good state mental health services provided to me that prevented me from killing myself. And for the last time, privilege means the ability to acquire economic power and political influence. The extreme poor, homeless, are mostly men. No one denies this. You're going to have to provide evidence of both your claim and the fact no one denie…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:59 PM
1

It's also the reason why so many arseholes post aggressive comments on the Internet.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:41 PM
1

Which given that men and women are of equal intelligence and have equal access to materials mean that men's attempts are more likely serious than women's. This ignores emotional factors surrounding suicide. And that was unbelievably offensive to the female depressed. So fact: men kill themselves at a rate about 5x women. Yeah, but that doesn't mean depression is gendered. The extreme poor, the homeless, are mostly men. No one denies this. More women live in poverty. The UN denies this So then in…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:40 PM
0

I want you to see how others view your lazy reasoning. You might learn something.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:32 PM
1

I'm doing quite well. Your statement that the under-representation of women in politics and business is due to sexism against men was just so not even wrong I almost felt like smashing my head against a piece of sheet metal.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:31 PM
1

You know I could say all of your arguments stem from a misunderstanding of patriarchy right? And given I have the facts on my side it's likely the case.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:31 PM
0

I actually wanted to show them how much of distorted thought process you have.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:02 PM
0

Watch that video by Marinashutup. You'll understand.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:02 PM
0

Except I've given conclusive evidence. You've just given stereotypes.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:01 PM
1

Women are more likely to attempt to suicide, but men succeed more often. I sent you a link to a study. That's because women are deemed to be weak and ineffectual at manual job. I'd like to see a statistic on that. Women are more likely to be poor. As for reproductive rights, until we find a way to make male birth control and find a way to provide for all children through the state, we need to wait. This might interest you. It shows how men can be oppressed because of other things. Feminist YouTu…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:01 PM
0

This is with regard to gender roles.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:22 AM
0

Yep. It's called gender roles. And patriarchy.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:21 AM
1

Then women don't face discrimination in politics. The women who act like men do just fine. It's just that they are penalized when they act feminine. Women who act like men are called bitches.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:50 PM
0

And the handful of areas where men are ahead are really proof of benevolent sexism. Women live longer, safer, more fulfilled lives. They have more opportunities in career and family and a superior balance between the two. And all remaining legal biases are in their favor. Except this same thing prevents women from achieving high positions in government. The stereotype of woman as nurturer is what makes people discriminate against them. What hurts men hurts women. That's what gender roles do acco…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:48 PM
2

Discrimination. Lack of flexible labor markets related to childcare. Gender roles (which is one of the main things that hurts men and is the source of all of your causes)
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:47 PM
1

You're absolutely great on free speech 5th Law, I'll give you that. That's something we can learn from you.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:45 PM
0

No you've claimed it by saying it's really misogyny because everything is. Nope. I said it was because of behavior. No actually it's due to toxic feminity. Nope. No it doesn't. Stop inventing definitions. Yes it does.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:34 PM
1

Classes can apply to racial or gendered hierarchies. Black people, as a class, experience racism.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:33 PM
0

Like men in education and child care and a great many fields. I've shown you multiple times that this is not something that men as a class experience. Once again, bias against men in child care is due to toxic masculine norms. (Sexism implies ability to gain political power. It has no reference here).
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:23 PM
1

Oh yes - women have the inability to gain economic or political power. I'll just go tell wealthy women and women politicians that they don't actually exist. As a class, they have a lesser ability to do so.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:07 PM
0

Partially being excluded means that women are put upon, especially if its due to social norms. The difference is quantitative, not qualitative.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:13 PM
1

It actually did.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:10 PM
1

Men don't suffer in terms of power because they're under-represented in one area of employment. If you actually read the study, they give comprehensive evidence of it being due to discrimination and this prevents them from reaching positions of prominence politically.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:10 PM
0

Anyway there's no proof that women are prevented from "systematically prevented from achieving high levels of prominence within institutions of power." Except for the papers I sent you. Give them a read.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:04 PM
0

1) No he wasn't. The fact it came out of Elam's mouth is evidence enough.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:04 PM
0

https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=16905 Men not being over-represented in a sector of employment is not evidence of being held down economically.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:03 PM
1

1) Nope he doesn't. Most of his arguments are generally face value. 2) ... which cite evidence.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:57 PM
0

The fact men are systematically prevented from achieving high levels of prominence within institutions of power. That video by Kristi Winters is a good place to start for evidence of patriarchy. Your turn. /u/berserkerrage This might interest you.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:57 PM
1

I think I do. https://www.ipag.fr/wp-content/uploads/recherche/WP/IPAG_WP_2014_239.pdf
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:55 PM
1

Yeah, except you can also criticize the sources and reasoning she uses.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:53 PM
1

Also tell me, what evidence could ever disprove Patriarchy theory in your mind? What will ever prove patriarchy theory in your mind? Answer me and I'll answer you.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:49 PM
1

Cites YouTube. ... a video full of supported assertions.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:48 PM
1

1) Futrelle doesn't quote mine. He actually does a pretty good job taking you lot at face value. 2) And I respond with empirical evidence. 3) Except that's not the case.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:48 PM
1

So they can't do it even though they've literally done it many times? They're prevented from it on a level not comparable to men.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:47 PM
0

So you'd put them on par? No. Patriarchy is empirically provable. Gynocentrism is merely the proof that patriarchy also harms men. Replying a lot isn't the same as forming a good argument. Which I did. All you've got is "literally everything is misogyny and all men's problems are really female oppression". Which is true. You never responded to me otherwise.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:09 PM
0

And of course there are plenty of women who have achieved power. Even leading powerful nations. Except there are systemic biases preventing them from doing so. Look up the glass ceiling.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:07 PM
0

You were asked for evidence. If I linked you to A Voice For Men as evidence, would you find it credible? I'd wager you wouldn't even read it. The point being the sources you provide are clearly biased and presenting feminism in a way that isn't how it works from a practical life perspective. I would actually. Never did I specify I would never take it seirously. They didn't as you've been shown and provided with several sources that show this isn't true. You have shouted down and dismissed all of…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:07 PM
1

It is a theory. A bad one that is deliberately non-falsifiable. You mean like gynocentrism? I literally quoted a feminist source that disagrees with you. Advantages are usually economic and political in nature. They specify that. Maybe stick to your circle jerk anti male subs. You aren't doing so well in the open. I'm doing extremely well actually. I've managed to withstand an onslaught of up to five of you at once.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:57 PM
0

Fun fact; all this is nonsense. Prove it.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:56 PM
0

Except given you got so worked up over /u/BooBailey08 explaining to you how all of your issues are the result of the patriarchal system we live in, the term "male tears" is adequate.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:56 PM
1

men get longer sentences Because women are considered weak. face overt discrimination in education Nope. If they're well-behaved, they don't receive that. Moreover, women are discriminated against on math and science tests. Your research thinks this is the natural order however. We've gone over this. I posted entire links you forgot to look at. are more likely to kill themselves Nope. Women are more likely to attempt suicide, but fail more often. face non-consenual genital mutilation As do women…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:53 PM
0

What? No. Patriarch was invented by feminists. Adding "theory" after the term was something CHS did. No it doesn't. You aren't even sticking to your own made up definitions. Except that's what privilege is. Economic and political advantages. Something women don't have.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:49 PM
0

Lol male tears! That's more about you lot crying that women say mean things.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:45 PM
0

So the powerful and important use the disposable and unimportant to benefit themselves? You're slowly moving towards the answer. If they consider them useful enough. Something they don't consider women, ironically, largely because they think they're unable to fight. (I know you're going to say it's an example of the "apex fallacy", or how elite men don't benefit all men, yet this ignores that privilege means the ability to gain that power. Something women are excluded from)
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:45 PM
1

Remember that distinction made by /u/BooBailey808 between sexism and toxic masculinity? This is it. Sexism implies the fact women are prevented from achieving political power. This has nothing to do with it. Are feminists saying that he needs to man up? Because I've never once heard a feminist say that, even in my time advocating for male victims of rape.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:00 PM
1

1) BECAUSE YOU ASKED ME TOO. 2) ... then why is it that I've shown that a major feminist organization changed the definition of rape to include men are In summary, you keep demanding that your statement is true and overrides the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You've been dismissive of that evidence. I've read your evidence and showed the holes in your story. You basically say I'm wrong and refuse any real discourse. Debate isn't about change if you're really debating. Obviously, your obj…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:54 PM
0

And you didn't answer the question: why do we consider wealth to be an excuse for not being drafted? You really are one of the biggest morons I've ever met on my entire time here on Reddit. We consider wealth to be an excuse because war is the method by which the upper class gains power. Poor men go to war to make rich men richer. Women are excluded from this because they're deemed too weak to make rich men richer. Quick, name something that is discrimination against men that feminists can't spi…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:51 PM
3

Patriarchy theory isn't even an academic term. It's nonsense invented by Christina Hoff Sommers. Privilege refers to the ability to gain power, economic or otherwise. Women do not have that privilege.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:46 PM
3

This is because of patriarchal expectations and toxic masculinity, by the way :)
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:31 PM
1

To a biased feminist (e.g. you), yes. To an objective observer, no. "I'm objective because I say so!" You asserted that feminism is helping male victims of rape. Many here continually link you to content that shows that the majority of feminists do not giving you examples of organizations within the feminist movement that represent hundreds of thousands of feminists. If you look through the threads of this post, you'll see I link to the opposite. I've literally commented on one showing four exam…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:25 PM
1

I'll let you guess that by yourself. I've just about had enough. Buh bye.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:00 PM
1

Changing one's opinion is possible :)
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:53 PM
6

Because most people interested in men's issues congregate on the Internet. The MRM is not particularly well known outside of the Internet.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:44 PM
1

Feminists generally don't push for male DV shelters that much because claims of symmetry in DV cases by you lot are generally completely false. In fact, when feminists discuss this, they almost always express sympathy for male victims. http://www.xojane.com/issues/domestic-violence-shelters-for-men http://www.feministcurrent.com/2013/05/10/this-thing-about-male-victims/ Read them through. Both express deep sympathy for male victims but raise skepticism on your DV research.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:40 PM
1

You've drunk the feminist koolaid and believe men have it great always. ... the fact I spent several comments on TrollXChromosomes defending sexism against men disproves this. Gosh you're an idiot. So this is caused by male privilege and is really oppression of women? Nope. It's oppression against men caused by negative stereotypes against women. I've told you this five times already. Are you unable to understand words? Answer the question please. One last time: women were deemed too weak to fig…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:37 PM
10

No they aren't. Politics is seen as shady business for corrupt people. Women are seen as too good for it while men aren't. So really what you're seeing is sexism against men backfiring and hurting women. This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin. Women being seen as too weak to enter politics is the reason they're discriminated against. Wowzers you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:34 PM
1

Except I showed you that, just because something isn't stated literally, doesn't mean it isn't used for that purpose. I linked you to a sub that gave many examples of male rape victims being vindicated and supported by feminists. Domestic abuse shelters for men are under used. That's because claims of symmetry in DV cases from your lot are generally untrue. http://www.xojane.com/issues/domestic-violence-shelters-for-men
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:33 PM
1

Most female DV shelters are run by the government without mention of feminism. Even if you're right, it's no indication that society discriminates against men in areas of power.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:29 PM
1

Because it's very clear to many that Futrelle is not quote-mining. Him showing Janet Bloomfield harassing a rape victim or Paul Elam equating women to dogs or referring to them as bitches is not a quote mine.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:26 PM
1

You really seem to hate David Futrelle. Maybe because he proves how much of a sexist piece of shit your movement is. Women are a "protected class" because they're viewed as weak and unable to fight or do hard labor. Benevolent sexism is what this is called.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:25 PM
1

You gave me less examples. Your point is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:24 PM
3

I'm beginning to agree with you...
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:23 PM
2

It doesn't exclude envelopment. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/3k8at9/why_do_feminists_claim_that_they_care_for_male/cuvhv32/
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:46 AM
1

You think we care about feminist's opinions of us? Those insults are like ambient noise to those identifying as MRAs. You should care, because most average people think you're toxic rape apologists and woman haters, This is ruining your chances of getting real change. Now you can read my mind it seems. Also don't link to articles by that cunt. David Futrelle has done more to document how evil you lot are than any other person. It documents very well that you people don't care about men at all. I…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:44 AM
1

I recently joined a feminist group devoted to helping male victims of rape. I also have contact with dozens of others. Have you perhaps considered that feminism might not be a monolith?
/r/MensRights14/09/17 11:32 AM
2

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2017/05/30/killed-by-chivalry-everything-wrong-with-the-mens-rights-movement-in-one-tweet/ The men's rights movement is about as relevant to men's issues as Ben Shapiro is to transgender acceptance.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:05 AM
-1

The men's rights movement is more misogynistic than anything I've ever seen. Whether it's referring to women as bitches, aggressively denying sexism against women, viciously bullying rape victims (like AVFM PR guru Janet Bloomfield did) or just dismissing any oppresison against women as bilogical difference, you lot have to do a lot more to salvage your reputation. You also actively dislike men and do nothing to benefit men. http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2017/05/30/killed-by-chivalry-everyth…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:01 AM
2

Here's one example of a transgender feminist who oppose it. I've met Swedish feminists who support financial abortion but want to make sure children are given state-sponsored help. Most of the second-wave feminists opposed the war in Vietnam and the draft. Most left-wing parties in Finland are feminists and oppose the draft.So there's that. That "lack of due process" applied to women rapists too. Moreover, I feel like this is a smokescreen for you lot to bully rape victims and dismiss valid conc…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:55 PM
2

Except I've shown you that men are advantages in STEM subjects but held back in reading and writing. And said bias disappears entirely if they're well-behaved.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:51 PM
2

Yeah, except making jokes about men being assraped and wishing rape on men who you dislike is evil.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:51 PM
0

Both are related. The fact people who claim to care about male victims make disgusting jokes about them speaks volumes to the actual goals of the movement.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:43 PM
1

Irrelevant. Toxic masculinity is a concept and a set of behaviors that leads to certain outcomes that are harmful for both men and women. How it arises is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:42 PM
0

I very much am. I've been a victim of rape. I've worked with feminists who want to help people like me. Even some of the most radical feminists will gladly admit men can be raped.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:40 PM
1

Sigh Therefore I shouldn't give credence to your misogynistic and androcentric nonsense?
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:39 PM
0

When my state moved to amend statutes to enable women to be charged and convicted it was opposed by feminist and womens' groups. Doesn't change the fact feminists change it. You fucking liar. Feminists did everything they could for decades to ensure male victims remained swept under the rug. Ditto.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 10:22 PM
2

Wait, you're suggesting boys and girls have the same physiology? ROFL. I didn't come remotely close to saying that. I'm just suggesting girls aren't necessarily calm and collected and that assuming that is wrong. I just linked you to an article explaining what the experts have to say. Don't link to me feminist twaddle if you want to be taken seriously on this sub. ... except there were links to studies contradicting you. Give them a read maybe?
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:38 PM
3

Drug-related treatments for ADHD are highly effective. And no, I don't support "drugging up boys" unless they have those conditions. As for "acting more like girls", the inherent assumption is that girls are biologically made to act this way. This is of course nonsense. This is only one study. There's an entire AskFeminists thread devoted to debating your arguments. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/6zfc42/can_men_by_systematically_discriminated_against/ Women score lower on math te…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:24 PM
1

And the award for best ad hominem goes to...
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:17 PM
1

Yeah. Except their definition of masculinity is way different than ours.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:16 PM
1

And the assumption these teachers were feminist comes from where?
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:16 PM
3

I'm not talking about the ability of women to serve in the military, I'm talking about sentencing discrepencies, biased family court systems, and the approach towards false rape accusations which is infested with this narrative. The family court system is biased because of beliefs that women are better caretakers. It's also this belief that gets women discriminated against in professional settings, by the way. False rape accusations are not a feminist issue given you lot blow this out of proport…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:46 PM
0

Feminism is not a monolith. Also, why was it that the FEMINIST MAJORITY FOUNDATION was the organization that recognized men's ability to be raped? Right. You know I can find plenty of examples of MRA`s mocking male rape victims right? http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/02/16/how-to-get-upvotes-on-the-spearhead-violent-rape-fantasy-edition/ http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2012/02/09/on-a-voice-for-men-rape-jokes-about-men-are-hilarious-so-long-as-theyre-about-some-dude-you-dont-like/ Do you…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:38 PM
5

Yet, can you rattle off a list of prominent, powerful feminists (no, Christina Hoff Sommers and others like her don't count according to the movement) who have done, and are still doing, everything to fight against this toxic narrative. Christina Hoff Sommers is doing nothing to combat this narrative. In fact, she's one of many to toe the conservative line and say women are unable to fight. In fact, in her interview with Bill Kristol, it seemed very clear she believed this. Feminists frequently …
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:34 PM
1

There you go mystery solved. You were tolerated because you will made women the real victims. Saying men are victimized implies men are also victims, you idiot. And I believe they disagreed with you on the men being victims part. Not really. There was lively debate about that. Many agreed, some disagreed. Is that all they did for women in STEM or rape or DV (against women) or women in college or....? It's a large part of it yes. Except sexual attitudes towards virgins don't require DV/rape shelt…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:21 PM
10

Because you can't stand the notion that society could be prejudiced against men. Because it isn't. You seem unable to accept the fact that men are not the victimized group in society. Tell me, is the notion that male child care workers are likely pedophiles also sexism against women? Remember how I spent several comments on r/TrollXChromosomes arguing sexism against men is a thing? Drop it already. Why should money matter unless we valued people with money more? Sigh Ability to fight and ability…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:16 PM
0

Tell me, did you cite misogyny as a reason in one fashion or another? Men are victimized BECAUSE of misogyny. Misogyny is the cause, men are the victims. Talking isn't doing anything. I made a clear distinction. Talking about it is what is required to change attitudes. That's doing something :) Let me guess: toxic masculine and benevolent sexism are the real problems? Toxic masculinity, yes. Men don't behave because it`s seen as culturally good for them to be aggressive. Benevolent sexism, no.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:09 PM
4

Lower grading is due to gendered differences in behavior. It's not discrimination, as well-behaved boys are given the same grades as well-behaved girls.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:07 PM
1

You didn't really though because you tied it back to women really being the victims. Uh no. I tied it back to men being victimized. One they aren't doing anything about it. Then why is it that feminist websites write about it constantly? https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/problem-male-virginity/ They've done nothing on this front and attempt to dismiss any attempts to correct it (more male teachers, boys only classes, more physical activity, redesign of the curriculum). You seem to assume that…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:03 PM
1

Men are privileged to be viewed as disposable. I never said they were privileged. I said it was an issue that affects men caused by prejudices against women And the poor and minorities.... ... who didn't have the money to dodge it. You can't accept any explanation that isn't "misogyny, Patriarchy, toxic masculinity" etc. And you can't accept any explanation that isn't ''men are the disadvantaged group''é
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:01 PM
2

Yes, for a feminist feminist safe spaces are open. Yeah, except I expressed a dissenting opinion and it was discussed. Go and ask them why for issues that harm women they have concrete solutions while for issues that harm men they have meaningless platitudes like "well actually that's misogyny, once we fix patriarchy it'll go away". Except they admit virgin-shaming is an issue and are doing something about that. They're also doing more about fixing the education gap (they started a book drive) w…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:55 PM
0

That's not my logic. Women were forbidden from fighting because they were deemed weak. Rich people weren't forbidden, they just used they political clout to dodge it. Apples to oranges fifth. Apples to oranges.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:51 PM
2

Yeah, except I frequently post in a feminist safe space and they're probably more supportive of men's issues than all of you combined.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:49 PM
2

Rich people get off for different reasons. Draft deferments cost money. :)
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:47 PM
1

They can be. That's why change is possible.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:46 PM
4

Then why is it that I wasn't banned for discussing it? You're talking out your ass.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:45 PM
4

Privilege, in feminist discourse, refers the unimpeded ability to gain economic and political power. But then again you believe that to be caused by choices.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:45 PM
3

How can I be derailing men's issues if I accurately point out that they are side-effects of misogyny and want to do something about it? Male disposability is derived from the belief women cannot do dangerous jobs or fight in wars. If you don't admit that's the case, you can't fight the issue at the root cause.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:47 PM
1

And feminist have also fought against recognizing male rape as 'rape' and have succeeded in turning gender-neutral laws into male-on-female crimes (in countries like India, Spain, some states of US etc). Feminism is not a monolith. You seem hell-bent on only seeing the worst cases and not the best. The only people who protest the opening of men's shelters are self-identified feminists. Others (traditionalists, etc) might mock and question the men's shelters. But only feminists go and protest at …
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:44 PM
4

I'm a dude. How can I femsplain?
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:33 PM
2

The members of whichever parliamentary committee assigned to the issue will likely either ask you questions or require you provide some form of speech. Given this is the Scottish Parliament, you'll likely have access to past consultations on YouTube. They should provide you with an example. Prepare a speech and, if asked, read it before the committee. If they ask you questions, answer them to the best of your ability.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:08 PM
3

Given /u/5th_Law_of_Robotics constantly referencing this incident even though I didn't bring it up, I'm sure he'll oblige.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:04 PM
3

I'm sorry, but saying this doesn't stop or negate the fact that those feminists who are in power demonstratively use their power to exacerbate systematic discrimination against men. Hence why those feminists passed laws that recognize male rape and abuse. Hence why more and more male DV centers are opening on the public dollar. And no, affirmative action is not discrimination against men.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:02 PM
0

You're changing your tune then. Yesterday it was definitely oppression of women. Nope. I never said it was oppression of women. I said it was because of stereotypes about women. So it's agreed, men face systemic sexism and oppression that women do not and feminists seek to reinforce this with things like VAWA and Duluth and saying we should end women's prisons entirely. Feminism is not a monolith. Have you maybe considered informing feminism of your perspectives without constantly denying the se…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:12 PM
5

It's oppression because it's treating women as being weak. You seem to be aggressively missing the point. It's because of a stereotype about women (i.e women are weak) that MEN are institutionally discriminated against. Women aren'T being discriminated against. Are you functionally illiterate? Let me give you a functional example. Women are considered weak flowers that can't commit crime (hence the WAW effect). This is basically a backhanded compliment to women. Men are therefore biased against …
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:18 PM
8

That's odd. If you actually look at the responses to my post many of them admitted sexism against men was possible. It's almost as if you're a quote-mining piece of shit.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:06 PM
6

Seriously I had a long argument yesterday with that /u/yeshras guy who insists women getting lighter sentences is proof they're oppressed. ... i didn't say that. You're really getting on my nerves by putting words in my mouth. The exact opposite of when it happens for white or rich people. I said the reason rich people get lighter sentences is because they can afford better lawyers. White people are given lighter sentences because of racism. Men are given less sentences because of benevolent sex…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:05 PM
1

The posts in my link seem to counter yours.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:41 AM
1

Gender neutral means men are included. I'd expect you to know that. Have you considered reaching out to feminists for help? I've done the same, speaking about my own experiences as a male victim of rape. Many were very supportive.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:40 AM
1

Just because women receive a lot of help does not mean men don't.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:39 AM
1

... are arguments from assertion the norm here?
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:56 PM
1

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/15/537381161/more-domestic-violence-shelters-for-men-opening
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:53 PM
1

The issue I saw when I worked in the field was a complete lack of acceptance of male victims. Our local DV organization (the only one in our area) had one service available for men: a "men as batterers" counseling program. There were no services for male victims. In my time as a caseworker, of the cases where DV was an issue (most of them, unfortunately), the guy was the victim in about 2/3rds of the nonrecprocal cases. It was just baffling to me when I called the DV people about getting this on…
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:37 PM
1

I assume I won't be getting a response to my arguments. Good day to you.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:15 PM
1

If that's the case then that makes it a problem. Ever considered getting feminists to change their views on the issue? I've known men who are victims of female DV who've found a very supportive audience in feminist organizations.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:14 PM
1

Good christ, you're a delusional, irrational, histrionic circus clown. Ad hominems are great. Provide the legitimate, empirical data why Devos is wrong to REQUIRE due process in these matters and insure the PROPER legal authorities (police departments and DA's) investigate, determine the legitimacy of any claims of criminality and, if it meets that litmus test, prosecute under the appropriate statutes in any cases of alleged rape! These trials relate to violations of the school's code of conduct…
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:10 PM
1

But they like to pretend they are. Nope. So they deliberately set it to such that they will get a conviction. Nope, so they can protect the rape victim, largely because cases fall through the cracks because of the high standard. They'd rather protect a victim than let a rapist go. TIL the federal government targeting men for unfair treatment in public institutions isn't oppressive, but manspreading is. Women rapists have been prosecuted under these guidelines. This makes your framing it as a men…
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:05 PM
1

You might be right with regards to rape prosecutions, but why are you responding to a comment about women's competence with a comment about rape? You're going to have to give me some time to respond to all of that. Keep your insults to yourself please.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 03:03 PM
1

Right but they are. They claimed men are never judged for dominating a conversation. Not as much. See the study linked. But that isn't real either. Wrong. http://www.sheknows.com/living/articles/1046051/study-says-women-are-seen-as-less-competent-lied-to-when-negotiating
/r/MensRights12/09/17 02:29 PM
1

College tribunals are not courts of law. They exist because the rate of conviction is so low and because the trauma caused to victims by seeing their rapists wants to be minimized. This was done in the worst way possible but this isn't oippression. Moreover this doesn't only affect men as women are also rapists. Only NOW opposes shared custody. Every feminist I've ever met supports it. Sweden, the feminist country, actively enforces it. As for VAWA, that men's shelter thing funded by public mone…
/r/MensRights12/09/17 02:28 PM
1

I did. It's a feminist blog spouting lies. Arguments from assertion are the best arguments. You know that saying 'someone is lying' doesn't mean a person is lying right? Mansplaining and manspreading and manexisting aren't real oppression. Except the women who're held back professionally by beliefs about their intelligence that lead to mansplaining don't agree. And why shouldn't men have those? They already do. http://www.npr.org/2017/07/15/537381161/more-domestic-violence-shelters-for-men-openi…
/r/MensRights12/09/17 02:09 PM
1

Also there are reviews of it cited until 2011. In what universe is 2011 2017? Yeah no. That's a feminist blog just spouting nonsense. The first one claims men can dominate conversations and never be judged for it. Which is a blatant lie. You could address the source. But I wouldn't expect you to do it. Women aren't oppressed unless we accept your "privilege is actually oppression because patriarchy" logic. There's about 100+ examples in there. You're going to have to do more than that. Notice I …
/r/MensRights12/09/17 01:17 PM
1

Educate yourself. So given that feminism is passing legislature that hurts men and treats women as perpetual victims, which you call benevolent sexism, why should anyone support them? In what world is 2006 the same as 2017? Women are in no way oppressed in the modern world. That's where you're wrong kiddo, But it reinforces the notion that women are weak. I used to help run a safe space for male victims of rape and abuse. Does that reinforce the notion that men are weak?
/r/MensRights12/09/17 12:50 PM
1

Despite the fact it is and feminists STILL push the basic ideals of it despite saying men can be abused (not that they are abused as well, cause we all know so few men are ever abused let alone by women) That's odd. The DV charity I volunteer at doesn't It is and its never going to change as feminists are never going to give up their government money for women. They might want money for men though.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 11:33 AM
1

... in the link you're responding too.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 11:32 AM
1

It absolutely is. Nope. Feminists passed it. How does this help men? It doesn't. Feminism has its blind spots. Women as a group are neither. IIIN wrong. They're the second. So you oppose safe spaces for women? People can congregate wherever they like if they own the property.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 11:05 PM
1

Duluth isn't used anymore, given that feminists actively admit men can be abused. VAWA is crap though. Safe spaces are useful for the legitimately mentally ill and legitimately oppressed groups (like transgender people).
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:39 PM
1

Because of societal expectations. Male disposability exists because people believe it. If we stop treating women like innocent flowers, as feminism encourages, this will stop.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:27 PM
1

Or they're just good people. You're basically saying men are assholes.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:18 PM
1

This research found that while both women and men have more favorable views of women, women's in-group biases were 4.5 times stronger. Women like women a lot more than men like women. This doesn't give the underlying reason why women are believed to be wonderful.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:17 PM
1

No. They're seen as less criminally inclined. They're good people who made a mistake rather than evil. They're seen as good people because they're seen as weak and less apt to crime. Ding ding ding! I fail to see the point...
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:06 PM
1

Women are given more lenient sentences because they're seen as more innocent, largely because they're seen as weaker. That's like a backhanded compliment of sorts. "Here! Less sentence. By the way, you suck at crime". Once again, apples and oranges. Whites are given more lenient sentences because they're seen as less criminal, but not because of weakness.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:01 PM
1

Whereas being assumed non violent and not a criminal is some horrible insult? SEe below. Interesting. So you don't see the sentencing disparity as negative? I see being promoted as a positive, and being given harsher sentences as a negative.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 09:47 PM
1

Not really. I know plenty of executives who are good family men. The problem is that this doesn't result in something negative. Being promoted and being put in jail aren't the same thing.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 09:45 PM
1

Men being given a promotion over women is benevolent misandry because it assumes men put career first. Except that's not a prejudiced assumption equivalent to "women are more weak".
/r/MensRights11/09/17 09:43 PM
1

Er, what? You're stupid if you think the richer you are, the more virtuous you are. But you blame the men and call women oppressed while you do the opposite for blacks and whites. That's not what benevolent sexism is. It's sexism that may seem beneficial (i.e not being imprisoned) but relies on prejudiced assumptions (women have less agency and are less strong). Probably just assume men and women are really represented in the upper and lower classes. Men are both over represented in the top and …
/r/MensRights11/09/17 09:29 PM
3

Isn't it funny how in literally every other case lighter sentences for a demographic are proof of their privilege except for women, where it proves the exact opposite. Except wealth doesn't correlate to innocence. Beliefs about masculinity do. Almost like you start with the conclusion and invent evidence to support that. Except I could whip out studies about black men being seen as more aggressive. Unless large amounts of money lead to being seen as more innocent, that conclusion seems reasonabl…
/r/MensRights11/09/17 06:48 PM
2

Not really. They can afford better lawyers. You're comparing apples to oranges and you know it.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 06:40 PM
5

Or ''women are less strong and more stupid therefore they need lesser sentences'' Or what you said.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 06:38 PM
7

Benevolent sexism in this case means 'women make horrible soldiers, let's send all the dudes off the war''. So no.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 05:08 PM
4

Society might be the cause of that. Your concept of male disposability is the equivalent of our concept of benevolent sexism (namely the societal belief that women aren't capable of doing those dirty, dangerous jobs and therefore men have to do them, making them live harsher lives).
/r/MensRights11/09/17 03:12 PM
1

It's less what skill sets as what people find enjoyable. Women are overwhelmingly more interested in the lifeworld, while a huge number of men enjoy the deadworld. Even a woman physicist will often choose to be an applied physicist as she derives satisfaction from working with others on a project. Why is that? I refuse to believe this is biological unless you cough up some evidence.
/r/MensRights24/08/17 09:42 PM
5

I have a problem with that. In my culture (I'm half-Mexican), wealthier girls oftentimes choose engineering, yet have the choice. Wealthy Chinese girls also choose comp-sci almost at a more equal rate than men. Couldn't there be other factors at work? Also, her argumentation that STEM "uses logic more and less empathy" ignores the fact that law uses formal philosophy and logic just as much as most STEM professions. Same with medicine. Women dominate biology and other life sciences, and they use …
/r/MensRights16/08/17 08:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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