~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Rural_Dictionary939
[–]Tiny_Professional358 65 points66 points67 points 2 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It’s funny because Men’s rights *do* change.
Different child support laws for men.
Different DV laws for men.
Different divorce laws for men.
Feminist propaganda really loves to spout nonsense.
[–]AfghanistanIsTaliban 15 points16 points17 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_State_Penitentiary
https://www.vera.org/news/reopening-the-plantation-immigration-detention-in-angola-prison
The largest maximum-security prison in the USA was built on a former slave plantation. Nearly all inmates are black men and they are still picking crops in the fields. The governor recently made an agreement with Trump to also use the facility as an immigration detention center
[–]Atreigas 1 point2 points3 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But I think we can agree with them that thats an issue.
[–]ConcentrateNo2949 0 points1 point2 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is this not about bodily autonomy? What one can and cannot choose to do with one's body?
[+]Dry_Fact_4584 -17 points-16 points-15 points 2 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link
This pic is referring to abortion rights tho. What right of men changes in state to state? I don’t know about this is why asking…
[–]One-Impress9145[🍰] 32 points33 points34 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Men's legal rights change substantially by state: paternity rights (putative father registry deadlines can permanently terminate a father's parental rights and vary by state), child support calculation formulas, custody presumptions, the ability to challenge paternity fraud, and alimony eligibility all differ state to state — and disproportionately affect men. Selective Service registration is also tied to state-level benefits like financial aid and government employment in some states. The premise that men's rights are uniform across state lines is flatly incorrect and unsourced.
[–]couldntyoujust1 33 points34 points35 points 2 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Abortion is not a right, and in that sense, it's being portrayed backwards as a right denied rather than an unequal privilege granted. Men have zero reproductive rights regardless of state. Women have at least one in some states. The reality is that there is no such thing as reproductive rights. Reproduction is a consequence of sex regardless if it's perceived as a reinforcing or punishing consequence, it is still a mere consequence. And just like I consent to falling to my death when I climb a cliffside without safety equipment, a woman consents to pregnancy when she consents to have vaginal sex with a man. That's all there is to it.
[–]Nicherix 8 points9 points10 points 2 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I think it's not good to force a baby to be born in an unloving family just because his\her parents had had fun.
Also, a woman can seduce a random guy on a party if she's single but yet wants a baby. A single man who wants a baby have to hire a surrogacy which is very expensive and in some places illegal, and he'd still be considered as a potential molester by child observation service even if he's the most loveful and responsible parent ever. This is what reproductive rights are about.
[–]DeliciousSTD 7 points8 points9 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
abortion is only a hot topic because of WHO the baby daddy is
have them get pregnant by like lebron james, bill gates , zuckerberg , drake , see how fast they gone keep the baby
ooooooooooooooooo lebron james is a pinnicile of man a literal championship , billionaire , gold olympian
not some low life who smokes weed everyday
i gurantee they will keep that baby, thats monnnneyyyyy right there ez 20k month minimum
hence why that person brought up consequence, its just another form of 100000 women vs accountability
[–]couldntyoujust1 1 point2 points3 points 2 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Be born to? No. Not being born at all because you were killed in tbe womb will always be worse than being "born in an unloving family." Nobody is forcing the child to do that either. Birth is a function of their mother's body, not a behavior on the part of the unborn child.
And statistically, the idea that unwanted children fare worse is not what the data shows. The child most likely to experience abuse by their parents are actually the children most wanted by their parents: adopted children. Meanwhile accidentally conceived or not, unwanted pregnancy or not, children parented by their biological parents fare the best.
If a woman wants a child and opts to seduce a random guy at a party to conceive one, then I think that's awful and should be roundly socially condemned and the guy shouldn't have to pay child support. I might even be convinced that such should be illegal since single mothers tend to be the parents who produce the worst outcomes.
In the meantime, abortion represents a feminine super-privilege she holds over men and children as a class and equality would demand that women not be given that privilege over all others.
[–]Nicherix 1 point2 points3 points 2 months ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Not being born at all because you were killed in tbe womb will always be worse than being "born in an unloving family."
Worse in what terms? On what mesure? Bringing an unwanted child to life benefits nobody. The Erth is critically overpopulated already, we don't need more peaple. If the parents aren't ready to take accountability to provide the child into life, it's morally right to kill it before it becomes a person.
The child most likely to experience abuse by their parents are actually the children most wanted by their parents: adopted children.
According to how hard it is to make child observation service let you adopt a child, your statement is just nonsense. Only the most reliable parents can adopt a child, while every drunkard bastard and coke addicted whore can just make a baby naturally and it'd be a lot of job to take the baby away from them.
No, the true equality demands that men have this privilege too, at least in form of paper abortions. I think it's fair enough, in case if surrogacy is legalized and included to medical enshurance.
[–]couldntyoujust1 -1 points0 points1 point 2 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Worse morally. The data simply does not bear out that being born of an unwanted pregnancy results in a bad life by any objective measure. Meanwhile, being adopted or fostered actually does increase the likelihood that the child will be abused because proportionally more abused children are abused by adoptive or foster parents - ostensibly parents who wanted them.
Secondly, the earth is nowhere near close to "overpopulated". This is a myth in virtually every sense of the word. We overproduce food in proportion to population, all of humanity could leave the rest of the planet empty living with a 5 square mile parcel each per family in a land-mass the size of texas. We've been told over and over that energy will run out and yet we keep finding more and more energy resources in the ground. Fracking and horizontal drilling is why gas prices dropped at the end of Obama's second term despite his policies causing them to increase by more than a dollar per gallon in the US. Potable water is a rapidly renewable resource. There's just no evidence for this supposed overpopulation. The problem moreso is ineffective distribution. People congregate in cities, local areas and political boundaries force people into crowded spaces despite the availability of more land, food distribution is often hindered by everything from geography to terrorism.
Thirdly, any abortion is not killing anyone before they become a person. That would require the destruction of sperm or egg. What is destroyed in an abortion is a person - a genetically and physiologically individual, living, human being. It is a fundamental moral atrocity to kill an unborn child.
You can call my observation of the abuse data "nonsense" but in fact it is not. The data is the data. A proportional majority of child abuse victims are abused by adoptive or foster parents. All it takes to remove a child from biological parents into the foster care system is a CPS worker who opines that such is the best course of action. The system actually incentivizes removals in a lot of cases.
Finally, as for paper abortions, it simply meets one atrocity with another and doesn't solve the problem. See, if a dad wants to step up and care for the child, the woman can deny the man that right to his child by having an abortion. Actually, she can even deny him that if she fails to get an abortion before time runs out. She can give birth to the child, and then drop that child off at any "safe harbor" for a closed adoption and the father does not have any right to stop her. Worse, he has no right and nobody has a duty to even notify him that she has become pregnant with his child, nor that she has given birth to the child. Paper abortions do not balance the scale.
[–]Nicherix 0 points1 point2 points 2 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Secondly, the earth is nowhere near close to "overpopulated". all of humanity could leave the rest of the planet empty living with a 5 square mile parcel each per family in a land-mass the size of texas.
You say like humans are the only species that needs area. Humans have already destroyed too much nature just for surviving, and the more population density the worse destructions.
What is destroyed in an abortion is a person
No, it's not. Foetus has no personality, no memory, no speaking, no thinking and no feelings. It's just a clod of flesh. There's nothing morally wrong in preventing it from turning into a human.
You can call my observation of the abuse data "nonsense" but in fact it is not. The data is the data.
So where's the data? You link to some data for severalth time but yet haven't shown those data. Seemingly you just made up your data.
if a dad wants to step up and care for the child, the woman can deny the man that right to his child by having an abortion
A dad cannot have rights for the child before the child exists. And no, it doesn't happen at the moment of conception.
She can give birth to the child, and then drop that child off at any "safe harbor" for a closed adoption and the father does not have any right to stop her.
That's gruesome of course but not related to the abortion issue.
Worse, he has no right and nobody has a duty to even notify him that she has become pregnant with his child, nor that she has given birth to the child.
Actually paper abortion is supposed to solve this problem too as every dad will get to know he's about to become a dad within first three months of pregnancy.
[–]enemy_of_misandry 24 points25 points26 points 2 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link
0 and 0 are the same number.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Tiny_Professional358 65 points66 points67 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]AfghanistanIsTaliban 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Atreigas 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ConcentrateNo2949 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Dry_Fact_4584 -17 points-16 points-15 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]One-Impress9145[🍰] 32 points33 points34 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]couldntyoujust1 33 points34 points35 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Nicherix 8 points9 points10 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]DeliciousSTD 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]couldntyoujust1 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Nicherix 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]couldntyoujust1 -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Nicherix 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]enemy_of_misandry 24 points25 points26 points (0 children) | Copy Link