TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

danpilon Archive

View 0 posts and 483 comments by danpilon 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)
19

Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist
/r/MensRights20/03/25 01:53 PM
14

pickup artist
/r/MensRights30/05/23 08:16 PM
19

I was actually pleasantly surprised that their sentences were so similar. Of course I think hers should be longer than his, but the difference between 11 and 13 years isn't huge. I was expecting a sentence double that of hers.
/r/MensRights08/12/22 01:30 AM
1

I always wonder what these types of people are actually thinking about when they say these kinds of things. I honestly can't think of a single thing where men unambiguously have it easy. Like sure there are things like dating where certain aspects of dating are harder for women and vice versa, but it's pretty laughable to say men have it easy there. Am a being too generous in assuming they have any kind of rational thought process?
/r/MensRights14/10/22 02:00 PM
129

Do you really think that HR departments are entirely men? This bias is not entirely (or even mostly) a bias by men. Women also need to stop their bias against men and for women.
/r/MensRights12/07/22 04:53 AM
-5

I agree 100%. Also let me say you definitely belong here, for what it's worth. OPs post has a number of red flags in it that stand out, and make it definitely seem anti-trans. Like the whole bathroom thing. As you said, you accidentally walked into a women's room and practically caused a panic. What room are you supposed to use then? Like using the mens room is some kind of massive benefit or something... OP sounds like the male version of a TERF, which I think the majority of us here should be …
/r/MensRights20/06/22 01:02 AM
2

This reminds me of the whole, if you had a bowl of m&ms and one was poison you'd treat them all like poison, argument that some feminists use to justify treating all men as potential rapists. So we can already see what would happen if the roles were reversed.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 07:21 PM
5

This is wrong. Only the 5 million got reduced based on a cap the law enforces. He still won the 10 million and she won the 2 million.
/r/MensRights02/06/22 02:06 AM
1

Yes this is true. The 10 million still stands though.
/r/MensRights02/06/22 02:03 AM
2

This doesn't make sense. Is this the same vaccine as J&J in the US? The recent data released by the CDC showed the J&J was almost as effective as pfizer during the delta wave, and significantly more effective than 13% (looks more like 80% based on the peak in the delta wave). Most people who got J&J got it more than 6 months ago as well. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status
/r/MensRights06/11/21 03:02 AM
1

Every person ever with a job is objectified by that job. They are there to provide a utility, whether it be from their body, or mind, or whatever. While they should be treated humanely at their job, their humanity is somewhat irrelevant. This is fine. People being objectified in various situations doesn't mean their identity as a person is reduced to that object. If someone treats someone else entirely as an object then they are an asshole, and really that is what people should be against. So no…
/r/MensRights12/10/21 09:42 PM
6

If they want to "silence" me by doing things that move towards actual equality I'm fine with it. That's like saying in the future if we solve all the problems of men's rights then we are being silenced, which is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights03/09/21 01:09 PM
12

They can keep their traditionalism just as much as liberals can keep their feminism in my mind. Neither is good for men, they are just differently bad. You might prefer one over the other, but that doesn't mean they are the only 2 options or that either is the best option.
/r/MensRights06/07/21 10:01 PM
6

Why would the school care if you pay back your loans? The school already got their money. Sounds like a cop out answer.
/r/MensRights16/06/21 09:12 PM
1

It's probably because they assume that the same lack of required proof to put a man in jail currently will be applied to them if allowed. When due process is undermined nobody is safe.
/r/MensRights15/06/21 07:11 PM
7

Both female and male come off like this if used as nouns. They are perfectly fine as adjectives. In any case it is still kind of dumb to assume some kind of ill intent just because the phrasing sounds a bit off.
/r/MensRights26/05/21 07:55 PM
6

Breaking down women's gender roles and only women's gender roles is not equality. Men have gender roles too and many of them are not very nice. Pointing out that Feminism was never for equality, in the sense that it only cared about women's gender roles and portrayed men and only men as the perpetrators behind those gender roles, is not the same as supporting gender roles. So yes you can believe that Feminism was never about equality without thinking that women belong in the kitchen.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 06:24 PM
10

It’s sad that a lot of feminism nowadays is just reverse hate speech FTFY
/r/MensRights18/02/21 12:04 AM
3

I'm going to go with all of them.
/r/MensRights15/12/20 04:18 AM
1

Just chiming in to let you know I can see your comment.
/r/MensRights17/11/20 07:45 PM
1

In my experience individual agency comes up here a lot to combat identity politics, where the actions of an individual are attributed to a group, and where the perceived characteristics of the group are attributed to individuals within the group. Many people here reject identity politics because it is akin to racism/sexism. It is wrong to assume things about a person because of their race or sex, and it is equally wrong to assume the actions of an individual are a result of their race or sex. Th…
/r/MensRights02/11/20 09:11 PM
7

I also never said people can't enjoy female sports. Many currently do enjoy them, but there are a lot more people who prefer male sports simply because it is a higher level of play. Your original comment also seemed to be claiming that the female athletes that are as good as male athletes exist, but we just haven't discovered them. While it is possible we missed some prodigies due to the general lack of interest in female sports, do you really think we've missed basically all of them? Just look …
/r/MensRights21/10/20 02:42 PM
10

What you said might be true if you're talking about just average people playing sports for fun. But we're talking about the best athletes in the world at a given sport. The best men in a sport will almost always be better than the best women, because the peak of male strength/agility/endurance is simply higher than the peak for women. This is a demonstrated fact and it is pointless ignoring/denying it.
/r/MensRights21/10/20 01:34 PM
9

I completely agree with this. I am very much against the concept of no fault divorce. The cause of divorce should be taken into account in family courts, and if doing that appropriately is considered treating adultery as a "punishable offense", then I can agree with that too. "Punishable offense" can easily be read as extending far beyond that, though, which is the original disagreement that I pointed out.
/r/MensRights19/10/20 06:22 PM
4

That is what lawsuits are for. The original post seemed to imply criminal punishment for adultery which is what I disagreed with. Whether someone should be able to sue a spouse for breach of their marital contract is a gray area I haven't thought through fully.
/r/MensRights19/10/20 04:53 PM
1

Strongly disagree with number 1. Adultery makes you a bad person, but we don't punish bad people for being bad. A marriage is a contract, and breaking a contract should not be a criminal act. I can get behind the rest though.
/r/MensRights19/10/20 03:54 PM
4

The definition and the use have to line up though. Sure you can define incel that way, but if you don't apply the term in a way that fits the definition, then what good is the term? I'll stop defending incels when the term incel is only used to refer to terrible people who don't deserve my support. Instead it is used as a blanket term to denigrate men, many of whom are good people.
/r/MensRights09/10/20 05:26 PM
2

Yup I don't think she's the asshole here. She even said she'd support him if he remained unemployed. He isn't an asshole for wanting his dream job, either, but he is a bit stupid if it truly is the case that they would lose their livelihood if he takes the job.
/r/MensRights28/08/20 08:53 PM
3

the term just doesn't mean what some MRAs want it to mean What do you mean by this? I have seen the "pay gap" stated literally as less pay for equal work (by feminists). Clearly that is false. The earnings gap you mentioned is how every MRA I've ever seen understands the term.
/r/MensRights16/08/20 11:29 PM
18

Yes we should really instead be addressing cases where men and boys are shamed when they do not act. This kid should be applauded, not because he should be expected to sacrifice himself for others, but because he should not be expected to but did anyway.
/r/MensRights13/08/20 07:41 PM
3

Why not both? She may be hallucinating which is concerning, but her attitude about it is definitely a problem. Even when he proved that she could not hear his music, it was still his fault. The proper response there is to be apologetic and go try to figure out what music she was supposedly hearing.
/r/MensRights13/07/20 05:25 PM
2

It also doesn't address the "for the same crime" stats. Control for the crime committed and the person's criminal history and it makes zero difference how often a certain demographic commits the crime. The individual should not be affected by the actions of their demographic.
/r/MensRights24/06/20 03:36 PM
-1

Would you say the same about a similar post about the white women killed by police? Or even the white men? How might the person who created this image feel about those similar images? Nobody is ignoring female victims. The movement is called Black Lives Matter, not Black Male Lives Matter. Those that specifically look into why police brutality overwhelmingly affects men and black men aren't ignoring or downplaying the women who were killed precisely because the words "overwhelmingly affects men …
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:54 PM
2

In my mind it is appropriate to focus on how an issue affects a demographic only under two circumstances. The first is the issue affects that demographic notably more than other demographics, and therefore the issue is linked to something about that demographic. The second is that the demographic has unique experiences related to the issue, so they should be addressed despite being the minority of those affected. This is neither of those cases. Police brutality overwhelmingly affects men over wo…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:41 PM
9

Men make more money than women on average, but women make something like 70-80% of all purchasing decisions. That means that almost half of all money spent is a woman spending money a man made. Not to mention the whole pink tax thing is ridiculous. If the cheaper male version of something is equivalent then just buy that? Also, nobody ever mentions how men are ~20% larger on average so they need more food to live, yet don't get a discount on food. Where are all of the charities that give starvin…
/r/MensRights01/06/20 09:34 PM
21

You are correct, but I would rather have a fair but unjust system (as long as unjust means overly lenient) than an unjust and unfair system.
/r/MensRights29/05/20 04:12 PM
3

Can you please explain what you mean by average here? I can't figure out what a meaningful definition of it would be in this context. If 80% of rapists come from single mother homes, does 14 times the average just mean that for any single mother home you are 14 times likely to be a rapist? If that is the case then that would imply that 5.7% of homes are single mother. However the rest of the stats work the same way, but give different results. The suicides one gives 12%, etc. Is there a differen…
/r/MensRights26/05/20 07:26 PM
5

I am 100% willing to recognize that women face issues that are specific to them, or at least affect them more than men. However, those issues must meet 2 criteria. The issue must actually affect women more than men The issue has to be something that is objectively harmful, as opposed to a single-sided view of a gray-area issue (effectively spin). None of your examples meet these criteria. As you said, 21% of men could be affected by automation, and 20% of women. How is this a women's issue when …
/r/MensRights19/05/20 04:32 PM
25

This is a fantastic response to that asinine "question". I will definitely respond with this attitude in the future.
/r/MensRights28/04/20 03:04 PM
2

Exactly. If there is a pay gap, but no quality of life gap, then all that means is women get to work less for the same quality of life. They get more choice in career because they don't have to base their decisions on pay as much as men do, and they can work fewer hours. How is this sexist against women again? Obviously the same job, same hours, same experience should pay the same.
/r/MensRights21/04/20 06:33 PM
1

The bottom shows you need 8 points or less to receive icu care with decreasing care with higher score. Did I read that wrong?
/r/MensRights19/04/20 04:20 PM
2

Exactly what kind of point is this person trying to make? At first it appears they are defending male victims from people who trivialize their abuse, but then they go on to say that certain men don't have a right to point out that male victims are ignored? Is this not simultaneously supporting and ignoring male victims? I'm just going to assume the point is to blame men for the problems men/boys have and ignore this post entirely.
/r/MensRights16/04/20 04:08 PM
29

The mother should lose custody with the option for him to take custody. Emphasis on option.
/r/MensRights01/04/20 06:42 PM
9

He is saying he is not circumcised. It is just missing a few commas.
/r/MensRights09/03/20 01:25 PM
5

Most of the people I've seen in real life negatively reference this sub have admitted to never even checking the sub out themselves. They just believe whatever crap other people have been flinging about us. When something specific and negative is directly referenced from this sub, it is either taken out of context, or the fact that it was heavily downvoted is ignored.
/r/MensRights17/01/20 03:47 PM
6

Not to mention this is a terrible response to feeling threatened. I felt threatened so I started but did not end a physical altercation... Like was he going to become violent but a slap stopped him? What a stupid excuse.
/r/MensRights23/12/19 02:06 AM
1

Define "actually wants it". He is a kid. When I was a kid I wanted to be a dinosaur, but my parents never made me undergo gene therapy. Kids should not get to make life altering choices for themselves. When it comes to bodily integrity, parents shouldn't get to choose for their kids either. If he wants to transition when he able to choose, go for it.
/r/MensRights27/10/19 08:43 PM
5

I won't comment on how realistic or unrealistic it is, but that isn't contradictory. It is entirely possible to have a strong sex drive and also believe strongly in monogamy.
/r/MensRights13/09/19 02:55 PM
29

Made by Procter and gamble which owns Gillette.
/r/MensRights24/08/19 03:00 PM
9

Then where is the toxic femininity? Where are the positive aspects of masculinity being praised? Pointing out only the negative aspects of masculinity and the positive aspects of femininity is effectively the same as saying masculinity is toxic. It's a term born out of bias so yes, people take offense to it.
/r/MensRights22/08/19 11:34 PM
13

Fair to whom? Certainly not the child. They get no say in the matter. The only fair thing to do is let people decide for themselves as adults. If it is really a thing worth doing people will still do it. If not then they won't.
/r/MensRights22/05/19 05:31 PM
3

This plus in many cases, self harm is counted as a suicide attempt, when the person never intended to die. Suicide attempts are an easily manipulated statistic. Suicide deaths not so much.
/r/MensRights13/03/19 10:41 PM
1

It's not morally right, but there is a biological reason. To maintain a population, many more women are needed than men. Men can impregnate many women in a short period, but each woman can only have 1 child ever 9 months. There is an evolutionary advantage to making men more disposable than women. Just because there was an evolutionary advantage historically, however, does not justify it in modern times.
/r/MensRights21/02/19 04:06 AM
33

Also who the hell is against the pill? If you don't like it don't use it.
/r/MensRights06/02/19 01:42 PM
17

Your son should get to make the decision when he is an adult. Your husband likely has no idea what a foreskin does since he has never had one. The issue is largely about the right to personal bodily integrity. Even a parent should not get to infringe upon that right.
/r/MensRights06/02/19 03:37 AM
21

It's always been a convenient way to say that men must always pay. How often to women really ask men out to dinner?
/r/MensRights08/01/19 04:50 AM
13

Ya but at least the amount the father pays would actually go to things the kid can benefit from.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 06:20 PM
0

I'd say Republicans have the same problem with their racist nationalists, but they don't have the institutional power that feminism does By institutional do you mean in universities? Because Republicans absolutely have a ton of institutional power in government, where it matters more anyway. I otherwise agree though.
/r/MensRights14/10/18 04:15 PM
10

I felt the same but I also felt that way about Trump, so I ended up just writing in Bernie. A wasted vote for sure, but I'm in Massachusetts so it didn't matter. Only really voted for the ballot questions.
/r/MensRights14/10/18 04:11 PM
3

Whenever this comes up people seem to blame it on homophobia, but I don't think that is the case. It is not really acceptable for a man to hold hands with his platonic female friends either, even though it wouldn't be gay. That kind of behavior is just reserved for romantic relationships in the US. The US is just generally prudish about PDAs outside of relationships.
/r/MensRights14/10/18 06:59 AM
5

Sexual harassment is legal, period. It is a workplace concept that is bad etiquette and therefore a fireable offense. It is not illegal. This is sexual assault, which of course is illegal.
/r/MensRights04/10/18 11:58 PM
13

I don't think we should be assholes to guys who are ok with their circumcision, but I still can't respect the opinion "if I'm ok with it everyone should be". Should they hate their parents for what they did to them? That is up to them. Should they understand that we shouldn't be doing this shit to babies? Yes, absolutely. All it takes is basic empathy for baby boys to see that. If a guy wants it done to himself as an adult, more power to him, so if you like your circumcision, support that instea…
/r/MensRights27/04/18 02:29 AM
3

Especially when men are actually more likely to be attacked randomly in the street. Nobody even believes me when I tell them that, even when I provide sources. There's this idea out there that men never have to fear anything and it is ridiculous. They only think that because they don't give a shit when men actually do get attacked, so they completely ignore that it happens.
/r/MensRights20/04/18 12:29 PM
3

It's a no participation link to stop brigading. You'll have to go there directly.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 12:42 AM
13

They can mean it that way all they want, but Trump was talking about the legal system, and to respond as if he was talking about mental and physical support is disingenuous at best. An accusation should never be just automatically believed in the legal system.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 05:53 PM
6

That's too hard or inconvenient for most people.
/r/MensRights29/01/18 02:52 AM
3

Seriously this is yet another example of projection. That and the fact that many women seem to have no sympathy for men, hence them thinking men are overreacting when sick.
/r/MensRights16/12/17 11:03 PM
2

That doesn't count. That's what men are supposed to do. /s
/r/MensRights06/10/17 02:29 PM
6

This whole situation has me all over the place. On one hand I agree with you that the media is placing expectations on men to sacrifice themselves. On the other hand I can't help but think extremely highly of all the men (and I'm sure some women but I haven't heard about them) who put their lives on the line to save others. Then there's the harpies who blame the shooting on masculinity while completely ignoring all the men who sacrificed themselves to save others (especially women). I guess none…
/r/MensRights04/10/17 03:07 AM
8

Nobody here wants to be right. Being right means the world is as horrible as we believe it is. Of course I think we are right about that, but it isn't something to be celebrated.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 03:13 AM
3

I am all for equal rights regardless of sexual and gender identity, but to me this seems like approaching things backwards. Opening up female only services to people who identify as female is all well and good, but it doesn't open such services up to men who identify as men. Men shouldn't have to identify as female to receive equal rights and services. Approaching this the other way, if we just give equal rights and provide services regardless of gender or sexual identity/expression, what we get…
/r/MensRights23/07/17 06:51 PM
5

You should probably stop calling people darling. You sound like an ass.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 05:15 PM
19

I don't see all these women fighting over who gets to date all the fat men out there. People find fit people attractive. Shocking!
/r/MensRights15/07/17 05:14 PM
10

Agree they don't get enough credit. Massive disagree they deserve more credit. It doesn't have to be a contest.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 02:49 AM
3

Totally agree with this. I really don't believe there is a systemic lack of safety awareness and regulation. It really just is that men agree to do dangerous jobs a lot more than women do. The reasons for this are almost always ignored when talking about the wage gap and the pressures women experience when choosing a career. Men feel extreme pressure too, to provide for their family in any way they can, including doing very dangerous jobs. You have to factor this in when considering why men and …
/r/MensRights22/05/17 04:20 AM
13

If you had your arm amputated due to a medical issue does that mean it's ok to amputate the arms of baby boys without any medical issue? This is not difficult.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 03:34 PM
13

Sarcasm aside they are working on getting rid of all women's prisons entirely...
/r/MensRights03/05/17 02:58 AM
2

The tides are turning a bit in that thread. The only really heavily downvoted people are the ones posting really ignorant crap like 'women are vastly more likely to suffer from GM' (paraphrased) etc.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 11:23 PM
1252

Especially because the only "real" argument I've heard is women go into the bathroom when it's dark and fall in because they don't look. Who does this in a public restroom? The seat could be literally covered with shit for all you know.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 11:15 PM
1

Agreed. I've actually never heard a feminist bring up this quote because it universally looks so bad.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 11:12 PM
1

You're assuming they actually want to solve problems. This will just give them yet another self-inflicted problem to blame on men.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 05:16 PM
13

The problem is that it won't occur naturally. It will happen because it "must", which results in a shoddily created show usually ripe with feminist garbage. Make a good show with a female lead and people will watch it.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 01:28 PM
18

You don't get to be 'the greatest' in tennis if you can't even beat any of the men currently competing in the sport. You can be the greatest female tennis player, or you can be a good tennis player overall, but you don't get to be the greatest.
/r/MensRights27/12/16 06:21 PM
59

Exactly. She lost despite being a woman, not because of it.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 05:30 AM
5

Yup. People always act like a fight between a man and a woman is a fair one. Sure men would win most often in a fair fight, but everyone is assuming that the man is even willing to try to defend himself, let alone do it successfully.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 10:13 PM
2

It seems like current family law in Ontario is very archaic. Women now have more opportunities than they used to (though not entirely equal yet). I'm pretty sure this is what /u/dellsharpie is referring to.
/r/MensRights19/10/16 02:13 AM
9

Just the name of the bookstore is solid gold. "Women and Women First".
/r/MensRights07/10/16 02:37 AM
3

Don't forget gynocentrism on top of it. Why should women be the only ones to enjoy non-violent behavior?
/r/MensRights24/08/16 01:37 PM
4

True, but it won't be because nobody wants them. You can't blame someone else for you having too high standards. Men as a whole have never had the requirement that their partner make at least as much as they do, but a lot of woman do have that requirement. They need to either change what they are looking for in a man, or likely be single.
/r/MensRights23/08/16 05:55 PM
9

Because if you don't spend your life serving women then you are a misogynist. /s
/r/MensRights22/08/16 06:11 PM
9

Technically yes they do. They are not punished for doing so. Rights come with responsibilities, though, and in this case, the responsibility still falls entirely on men. Two people get drunk and have sex. The woman had the right to do so. The man did not.
/r/MensRights09/08/16 05:19 PM
23

This is hilarious. Where did they find men who are willing to go to a place to protest themselves being allowed in that place? It makes so little sense that I 100% believe it.
/r/MensRights09/08/16 05:15 PM
2

Whenever this is brought up, the typical feminist response is 'Men do more harm with domestic violence', which is technically true, since more women are killed by their spouse than men, etc. However, this is moving the goal post. When male-on-female domestic violence is discussed, great bodily harm is not required for it to count. Controlling behavior is very commonly added into the mix. If you keep the definitions the same, either male-on-female domestic violence is a lot more rare, or female-o…
/r/MensRights12/07/16 08:59 PM
1

You should probably collect your facts before drawing your conclusions. That's a classic way to read meaning into data that isn't there.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 05:50 PM
7

Exactly. Did you know if we killed all men it would raise women's cancer rates relative to men by infinity %? That would be unacceptably sexist against women! /s
/r/MensRights28/06/16 05:29 PM
2

I'm ok with downvoting hate speech, as it doesn't really contribute positively to the conversation. At least here she won't get her posts deleted or be banned for expressing these views.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 06:09 PM
2

Really what more needs to be said? I can support a person who calls themselves a feminist if their positions are level-headed and reasonable, but I cannot support the movement for these reasons.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 05:54 PM
5

I know a girl who ends basically every sentence with "do you know what I mean?", and it is very frustrating. Yes I know what you mean. What you said wasn't exactly complicated.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 04:10 PM
6

Even then it is a last resort procedure. Steroid creams work most of the time and even when they don't, a partial circumcision which leaves most of the foreskin intact will work.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 12:27 AM
5

Nobody argued against their validity, just the terminology. I see this argument all the time. One person says the traditional terminology is wrong and the other disagrees. The first person then claims the second hates or doesn't care about trans people. You can use different terminology without ill intent. Nobody here said trans people shouldn't be able to live their lives as they see fit. People just don't like to be forced to change how they use words.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 05:39 PM
3

I really wish Trump wasn't such an insane asshole on other issues, because I am actually agreeing with some of the things he says lately.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 04:49 PM
18

Except it was feminists that introduced the tender years doctrine which is why, even to this day, family courts automatically give custody to the mother, except in extreme cases. Before that the custody of children was the man's responsibility, since it was his responsibility to provide for them. Don't let them blame the patriarchy for their own actions.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 04:58 PM
7

Yup I'm totally fine with it. The only thing that annoys me is the double standard of when women do it, it's because they don't need no man, but when men do it it's because they are losers who couldn't get a woman anyway.
/r/MensRights15/04/16 08:08 PM
4

She does seem fairly level headed about these issues. However, this basically all stems yet again from assuming "feminism" means "equality" and nothing else. People can choose to call themselves feminists if they want just because they believe in equality, but problems arise when they start calling out others who don't call themselves feminists, because those people very often don't use the same definition. Most antifeminists are not against the dictionary definition of feminism, they are agains…
/r/MensRights13/04/16 03:44 PM
3

Because everyone knows that the day a boy turns 13 he becomes a rapist. Coincidentally, it is also the day that his male privilege card comes in the mail. \s
/r/MensRights11/04/16 06:48 PM
1

Came here to say this. Some people here really read discrimination into anything and everything. If anything, such pens even existing should be insulting to women.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 09:50 PM
2

Women have more than two choices, and the other choices are more comparable I think. Women can choose to: -keep the child and raise it -keep the child and give it up for adoption -keep the child and drop it off at a safe haven -abort the child The 2nd and 3rd option are comparable to the proposed right for men to "financially abort" a child, because they don't directly involve the pregnancy, but result in the removal of rights and responsibilities for the mother. Sure some people will have some …
/r/MensRights07/03/16 03:52 PM
10

Pretty sure this is a joke. Nobody is actually pissed off that men get paid less, but it is a great response to a feminist who, if the genders were reversed, would be screaming sexism from the rooftops. Hell, they already do without the genders reversed.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:58 PM
1

That is correct and I am shocked they don't use this to begin with. I don't know how this works in the Virgin Islands, though.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 07:46 PM
3

Serious question: who names their twin sons Jeff and Jeffrie? That is just asking for confusion. I have no doubt this is simply a case of mistaken identity, but I know how much of a bureaucratic nightmare it can be to fix a mistake with the tax man, so I hope he is able to clear this up. There should definitely be more checks and balances before automatically taking a person's money like this.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 06:52 PM
3

Or when women enter a job there are more applicants in the valid applicant pool. Same demand more supply equals lower price.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 02:18 AM
1

I definitely agree some people here are too quick to assume an accusation is false, probably because of all the proven false accusations we've been hearing about lately that result in little to no punishment for the false accuser. However, it is important to distinguish between reactions when there is little evidence and when there is a lot. The Duke case had a lot of evidence for the accusation being false, so motive was irrelevant. It happened. When there is little to no evidence either way, a…
/r/MensRights26/02/16 07:30 PM
2

For me the distinction is the same one I make regarding "listen and believe". If a friend came to me and told me they were abused, I would not question it. If the same friend took their abuser to court, I would absolutely expect them to be questioned. It's not a matter of whether or not an alleged victim should be questioned or believed, it is a question of when where and how. Santoro made a youtube video about his abuse. Ke$ha brought a case to court. Let's say both of them are lying and we fin…
/r/MensRights26/02/16 06:03 PM
2

60% of college students are women, so just increase all the numbers by 50% and you're done. It still isn't even close.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 03:41 PM
2

Sounds like she is right. Feminism is not the dictionary definition and it is not about equality with men.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 03:58 PM
31

Oh come on. Can't we just be happy that justice was served here? This woman thought she could get away with her false accusation probably because history tells us she probably would get away with it. After all it is entirely possible for a 14 year old boy to sexually assault someone, so good on the police for actually demanding evidence (and then seeing through the lie) instead of just listening and believing. I see the fact that she did not get away with this as a sign things are moving in the …
/r/MensRights04/02/16 03:56 PM
2

You are probably right. The wording in the picture was vague but your numbers seem more reasonable.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 04:21 PM
8

It means that very few women who go to the ER are there due to violence. A high percentage of the violence women experience is due to a partner, but this is very rare (according to that stat) compared to other reasons for ER visits. The stat is saying 37% of the tiny fraction of ER visiting women who are there due to violence (0.5% of those who go to the ER for any reason) are there due to violence from their partner. That is 0.16% of all ER visits by women, not 37%.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 03:23 AM
1

Would a federal investigation not be a good thing? My only complaint about how campus sexual assault cases are handled is that the accused isn't given a fair trial that demands proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead they get a kangaroo court that only requires a preponderance of evidence, even if run fairly. I fail to see how a real investigation into an accusation of rape is a bad thing.
/r/MensRights27/01/16 08:34 PM
2

I think we generally agree then. I just don't have an opinion on which parent is better, since I think this heavily depends on the individual people involved. There is a lot of evidence that growing up without a father at all is detrimental, though, so I think a lot of changes have to be made.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 09:13 PM
5

I agree completely. The abortion issue just distracts people from the real issue. The biological danger of pregnancy is unique to women and needs to be considered, even though there is no analogy for men. Safe haven laws and adoption are rights mothers have after the birth of the child when biological issues are no longer relevant. They can also choose to exercise either of these rights without the consent of the father, so why can't the father exercise the same right without the consent of the …
/r/MensRights26/01/16 07:48 PM
2

Is there any evidence that dads are more important than moms? That seems far fetched. It is certainly clear that dads (or at least a second parent) are very important for the proper development of children, but saying they are more important without good evidence is just inflammatory. I'd rather see more shared custody than more kids going only to the dads.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 07:44 PM
3

If it's the same thing, buy the cheaper one. If it isn't, then you aren't comparing equal products. QED.
/r/MensRights19/01/16 10:48 PM
1

This is the case right now, but some people are arguing for mandatory police reporting, which is entirely different from the philosophy that the police should handle rape trials on campus. I actually agree that mandatory reporting is not a good idea, despite wanting the police to handle actual accusations. The point of reporting the rape to administration is to be able to receive counselling, though it is currently used also to punish the accused without a real trial, which is the problem. If ma…
/r/MensRights12/01/16 06:53 PM
4

In my opinion, a person should be able to report to the school that they were raped without an automatic report to the police, but this should not result in disciplinary action for the accused without a real trial. It should be used purely as a support network for people who are emotionally damaged from whatever happened to them. If you want to punish the accused, you should have to report it to the police and the accused should only be punished after they are found guilty by a court of law.
/r/MensRights12/01/16 03:42 PM
8

No it isn't. It is illegal for a landlord to discriminate based on gender, but a lot of ads on craigslist are people looking for roommates. It is explicitly legal for a person to discriminate based on gender when advertising for a roommate.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 11:07 PM
3

I see this as being one of the biggest problems. There are always people who are fine with their circumcision, which is fine, but they use that to argue that since they are fine with it then everyone should be. It isn't a question of whether or not it's better to have a circumcised penis; it's a question of obtaining consent to permanently alter a person's body for cosmetic reasons. If being circumcised is great, then people will choose to have the procedure done as adults, and that is fine. Peo…
/r/MensRights04/01/16 08:01 PM
1

Too broad. Is kissing a sexual activity? How about touching a person? Distinctions need to be made between sexual assault and rape, or else rape will carry the same weight as the least severe kind of sexual assault.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 07:48 PM
1

Honestly the first one should not be considered rape. Stuffing an inanimate object into a person's mouth might count as some form of assault, but I am totally fine with it not being rape. The second two are certainly sexual assault, and I might be ok with them considered rape as well. Sexual assault is still a thing outside of rape.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 07:45 PM
1

My guess would be that separate crimes are treated separately. In the bomb case, you know about a single bomb that will hurt/kill others. In the rape case, you know about a single rape that hurt only you. Whether or not the person then goes on to commit more rapes is an issue separate to yourself. Likewise, in the bomb case, you would only be held accountable for the bomb you know about, and not future bombs you did not know about. You cannot be held responsible for the unknown future actions of…
/r/MensRights04/01/16 07:37 PM
1

Listen and believe is fine until it doesn't end at sympathy. Someone tells you something horrible happened to them? Don't immediately say "prove it". Show sympathy if you care about that person. Someone tells the police that something horrible happened to them? They should believe it only enough to launch an investigation to prove it.
/r/MensRights22/12/15 04:47 PM
3

I'm with you on at least some of this, but do people really object to her defending a child rapist as a defense lawyer? I am 100% for the right for any accused person to have legal counsel. Just because the person is found guilty does not mean it was wrong for the defense attorney to accept the case. Admittedly, I do not know much about this specific case, so maybe there is more to object to than what I said.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 06:00 PM
7

If you do not sign up for selective service as a man in the US, you can be fined or jailed, and you will not be eligible for certain subsidized student loans. You can also lose the right to vote. You also have to sign up even if you are just a permanent resident, and if you don't you cannot get citizenship later. I'm sure this isn't an exhaustive list.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 02:35 PM
0

I disagree with you on this, unless you can show it's the exact same women who say it as those who hear it. Feminists like to point out that violence against men doesn't count because it is largely perpetrated by men. This is a bad argument, since they are blaming the victim just because they share a gender with the criminal. If, say, the victim was also participating in violent crime at the time, you would have less sympathy. I think we should remain consistent on this. If some women do somethi…
/r/MensRights09/12/15 08:21 PM
3

I frankly don't care what the gap is as long as it is a result of personal choices and not discrimination, which I believe has shown to be the case rather thoroughly. If you do care about closing the gap, regardless, one side that is almost never discussed is why men choose to work as much as they do, not just why women choose not to (or choose lower paying jobs). Men are often pressured into their career choices as much as women are. Take pressure off of men by making alimony and child support …
/r/MensRights30/11/15 07:21 PM
1

I agree, but maternity/paternity leave would also have to be mandatory, because there would still be more men who choose not to take it, making it pointless (FYI I am not necessarily for mandatory leave, I just think it is necessary if you want the gap to close). I'm also for companies providing day care, regardless of the gender of the parent.
/r/MensRights30/11/15 07:12 PM
4

If you are at the point of hearing, believing, and supporting, then every "survivor" of sexual assault is an "accuser" of sexual assault, and vice versa. That is not to say the accusation isn't valid, but rather there is no way to distinguish the two before there is evidence/a trial.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 08:07 PM
1

"Philosophy" professor uses double standard against men to show that there are not any double standards against men. I thought philosophy was supposed to be about strict logic. This is not to mention that those examples aren't even double standards, but rather catch-22s. Double standards are situations where one standard is applied to one person or group, and another standard applied to another. So here are a few. If a woman wants to be a stay-at-home mom, it is fine, but if a man wants to be a …
/r/MensRights13/11/15 06:22 PM
1

50/50 gender quotas inherently mean the people are not the best candidates for the job. I would be fine with a 100% female cabinet if they were truly the best candidates. The same is true for a 100% male cabinet. Unless you can show that a person's gender actually matters in the position, or that a roughly equal mix of genders is more beneficial than having the best people, then I am against the quota. A much better way to do it is something like 'there must be 25% or more of each gender'. That …
/r/MensRights06/11/15 05:50 PM
1

No see you're just supposed to accept whatever definition a feminist tells you while also accepting that the severity of and punishment for the crime will be as if the definition had not changed at all. /s
/r/MensRights03/11/15 07:42 PM
2

Who says this will increase diversity? It is just as likely, in my opinion, to reduce it. It can only possibly increase diversity if schools are actively rejecting minorities due to their race, but the opposite is usually true. What happens when diversity decreases? Will this new plan be scrapped as a failure? I do think this is how it should be done, with gender included. If it reduces diversity then so be it. I you want some kind of affirmative action, make it about income.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 09:56 PM
1

How is this a men's rights issue? If men's and women's hearts are in fact different, then different medical care could be necessary. Do you think this study was motivated by bias? Is it wrong to screen women for ovarian cancer and not men (obvious ridiculous example)? I am totally fine with medical care being motivated by unbiased science.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 09:38 PM
5

Can we please just finally agree on this and get past the whole liberal vs conservative fight on this sub? I swear this needs to be posted every day.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 11:39 PM
6

I am not OP, I was just pointing out the location. It is quite stupid to hold me to both statements since I did not say one of them nor did I agree with it.
/r/MensRights21/10/15 12:34 AM
2

Judging by the Clayton campus part, it is Monash University in Melbourne Australia. I don't know Australian law well, but do they not have a sex discrimination in hiring law?
/r/MensRights20/10/15 11:46 PM
11

Me too. It seems to me to be yet another attempt to make sexism against men actually just sexism against women in disguise.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 02:48 PM
12

So vigilante murder is totally ok if the person is actually guilty of a crime? Why not just make the death penalty the default sentence? You don't have to like the victim of a murder to think murder is wrong.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:16 PM
11

You should seriously be able to sue therapists like this for malpractice. They call themselves medical professionals (not sure if medical is the right term, but they deal with mental health) but just push their own ideology on the people they're supposed to be helping. It's like a medical doctor prescribing prayer instead of medical treatment when a person has a treatable disease.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 05:42 PM
1

I agree with you actually. I was just saying it is more comparable than other forms I know of. I still think removing the clitoris is worse than removing the foreskin, but you are right the foreskin has more function than the clitoral hood.
/r/MensRights27/09/15 02:38 AM
2

There are a number of practices, so there isn't one answer. The most common as far as I know is to remove the clitoral hood. This is the most equivalent form to male circumcision because the foreskin and clitoral hood start out as the exact same thing until the genitals start to differentiate in the womb. Some more extreme versions involve cutting off the clitoris. Some more minor versions involve ritual pin pricks where a single drop of blood is drawn. Just like the article says, all of these a…
/r/MensRights27/09/15 12:08 AM
1

I would agree with you about child support if there were any checks and balances on how the money is spent. Sure in extreme cases like this, no matter what the mother spends the money on, the kid will likely benefit, unless she spends it all on heroin or something, but in normal cases, where the woman has a job and can support herself, there's no guarantee that the child's quality of life is at all affected by the child support. If child support is truly about the child, and not the mother, then…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 04:10 PM
4

No-fault divorce just means the reason for the divorce is not considered when determining alimony/custody etc. Essentially a woman can cheat on you, get a divorce, and take half/all your stuff and the kids. I wouldn't be thanking anyone for that.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 03:57 AM
3

Sane alimony laws are a good thing. If a couple collectively decides that one of them will leave their career to stay home with the kids, they should be able to end the marriage without making themselves homeless. Alimony should be reasonable and temporary, and applied equally regardless of gender. It should not be there to "maintain the quality of life she has grown accustomed to", but to maintain a minimum quality of life for long enough to get back on your feet, while not bankrupting the othe…
/r/MensRights17/09/15 11:46 PM
1

Well it's their fault because the usual perpetrator is also male /s.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 02:09 AM
22

I'm pretty sure vibrators are about as close as you can realistically get to a sex robot these days (at least affordably). We should clearly ban those.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 03:18 AM
8

It is absolutely possible and an erection in no way indicates conscious consent to sex. Men do not consciously control their erections, so erections cannot equal consent.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 08:53 PM
2

It seems to me that the first is an unbiased scientific study of the issue, while the latter is a PR move. The blog post gives soundbite stats to support pretty broad claims, such as "a typical 25-year-old woman working full time would have already earned $5,000 less over the course of her working career than a typical 25-year old man". They correctly call this an earnings gap, but use it to explain away the "myth" of the wage gap being incorrect, as if an earnings gap and a wage gap are the sam…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 07:20 PM
1

There are lots of women working on curing diseases. What are you talking about? Other than that I agree.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 05:39 PM
2

I definitely like Elizabeth Warren a hell of a lot more than Hillary, but when Warren was running for Senator her campaign was almost 100% wage gap this, women that, at least from what I saw. Even if I agree with her most of the time on non-gender related issues, it still changed my view of her.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 02:32 PM
3

Great, so even if false accusations are 79% of all accusations, you can just go off the accusation alone and be 21% sure the accusation is true. Such justice...
/r/MensRights10/09/15 11:14 PM
10

I say they should accept the women as customers and give them a good ol' buzz cut. That way they are providing the same service regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights08/09/15 09:09 PM
20

I would agree with you if you ever saw anything talking about dads on mothers day. You deserve that cupcake, and so do single moms on father's day, but it still seems quite lopsided.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 07:32 PM
123

I've brought this up before, and the usual response is to shift the argument to why men are called men, then. I don't really have a good response to this, but I'm honestly fine with being called a wereman if people want.
/r/MensRights31/08/15 03:39 PM
11

No, it means women die from other causes even less than they die from murder, compared to men. Women are still vastly less likely to be murdered on the job than a man, it is just the relative percentage compared to total female deaths that is higher.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 09:59 PM
4

Why? Does the gender of the murderer somehow matter to the person being murdered? If you are not a murderer, you should probably care more about your probability of being murdered than your "probability" of murdering someone.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 09:57 PM
3

I think I've heard it before and it was a serious misuse of statistics. Women are more likely to be murdered at work compared to other causes of death at work, compared to men, but men are more likely to die from all causes than women.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 09:40 PM
2

This is already happening, and all I can do is laugh. There has been a big increase in "where have all the good men gone?" articles and the like recently. Men are abandoning the idea of marriage because it is a terrible deal for them, while women are making more and more money but still want a man who makes more than them. If successful women want a better chance at finding a good relationship, they need to abandon the idea of marrying up, which might alleviate some of the issues men have with m…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 04:50 PM
34

Lol you think you get a judge? It's just a group of barely trained administrators.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 07:04 PM
26

I always hear about how men are in control of their bodies and I've never actually heard an argument how, at least in the US. We can be drafted, women can't. Our genitals can be cut on at birth, women's can't. Basically our only birth control option is condoms, while women have tons of options including abortion. Do these people have a single brain cell or do they just spout feel-good nonsense that lets them play the victim card?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 12:35 AM
3

He should have used that line in every essay he had to write. "This is the truth, and I don't want to hear any arguments", rather than support his position.
/r/MensRights07/08/15 01:30 AM
3

Every single instance of the word cunt I can find in the comments is referring to specific people because of specific actions that are in my opinion very deserving of the word. Almost all of them are referring to the woman who chopped off her husband's penis or Sharon Osbourne for turning it into a joke. I can't watch the video right now so I can't comment on what is said in it. If you read my previous comment you would see you are proving my point. A man would rightfully be called any number of…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 07:21 PM
3

I have no problem with a woman calling a man who did something horrible a dick. I do have a problem with a woman calling all men dicks. I also have a problem with a man calling all women cunts. It is not sinking to their level to apply the same concept with genders reversed. Getting easily offended at the use of a word without any concern for the context in which it was used is sinking to their level in my opinion. Show me one example of someone here calling all women cunts that is heavily upvot…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 07:10 PM
2

And I suppose it is equally disrespectful to call a specific man a dick? The idea that this is even remotely similar to the n word is an attempt at appropriation. It is an attempt to make it seem like women have suffered as much as black people have suffered, so deserve equal consideration. Calling all women cunts is of course wrong, but calling a woman who has committed evil acts a cunt is just fine in my book. You don't see women holding back on the names they will call a man, and they usually…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 05:49 PM
15

My understanding is that when advertising shared housing, you can discriminate. Landlords cannot discriminate when looking for tenants. The reasoning is you have to live with the person so you should get a choice. I ran into this problem a while back and it is one of the reasons that brought me here. I have no problem with the rule, just the fact that I didn't see a single ad looking for men only.
/r/MensRights06/08/15 03:21 PM
3

Especially when dress codes are usually much more restrictive for men, requiring suits or usually at least dress pants and a collared shirt.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 08:49 PM
4

Who said the door could not be opened from the inside? There is zero chance that is the case, since it would certainly be against fire code. You simply can't turn the outside knob without the key code.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 09:30 PM
2

This is often used as a place to vent, since venting about such topics is not socially acceptable almost anywhere else.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 07:14 PM
2

And most people don't murder or commit other serious crimes, except of course the ones that do. Basically you can never charge anyone with anything because most people don't do that thing.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 04:31 PM
7

Sure and proof of this is how much feminists respect the right of the MRM to exist. We're just doing our job after all. No feminist would ever be against the MRM. /s
/r/MensRights21/07/15 08:30 PM
7

No it isn't, but it is a convenient boogeyman for everyone to equate us with.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 02:24 AM
1

I didn't see the "I don't know" option on my first read. I agree, that is the only logical option.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 06:15 PM
7

I think part of the problem is the wording of the questions. They are almost always absolutes. Does "insert action" mean consent? Yes or no? Well, the real answer is yes (or no), most of the time, but no (or yes), some of the time. How a person decides to approach such a question can change their answer entirely. Does a nod mean consent? Yes, most of the time. There may be some situations where the nod was meant to answer a different thing, so it doesn't mean consent. Do I answer yes, or do I pl…
/r/MensRights19/06/15 04:30 PM
1

You are right it is not a pill, but you can't compare how unpopular female surgical methods are, since women have other non-surgical alternatives. Men have no other ways to make themselves temporarily sterile. I foresee Vasalgel being much more popular than female surgical contraception.
/r/MensRights18/06/15 08:40 PM
1

This title is awful. While I agree what happened to this guy is terrible, it is not a simple case of 2 near-aged teens having sex. He is 19, she is 14. Had he had sex with her knowing this, he should rightfully face punishment. The reason I feel bad for him is she lied to him about her age, so he did not knowingly have sex with a minor. Not only that, neither family wants to press charges. It is quite disingenuous, however, to reduce this to a "two teens have sex and the male is charged" scenari…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 06:59 PM
1

Might be nice to have a quick synopsis of this before devoting an hour to listening to it.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 06:12 PM
1

Seriously, how can you think this never ever happens? It has to be a problem with how the question was asked. I bet there are some chimpanzees and species of birds that are aware of at least some of the recent high profile cases.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 04:55 PM
1

/u/chocoboat never said he didn't think the same thing about MSNBC. Just because Fox News is awful doesn't mean MSNBC isn't similarly awful or worse. You can care about journalistic integrity without taking a political side.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 04:49 PM
1

A man who supports feminism isn't automatically a white knight. The reasons he supports feminism are important. There are a bunch of definitions, but the most common I've seen is a white knight is a man who defends a woman simply because she is a woman, attempting to gain her favor. If a man supports feminism because he truly believes in patriarchy theory and rape culture, etc, then he is not a white knight. I'm not sure if there is a term for the female MRA version, but a woman who supports the…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 06:12 PM
4

I am at least glad to hear that you got a mostly positive response from the users. The mods sound awful but there must be at least a few good apples there. This gives me hope.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:01 PM
1

It depends on what kind of result you are looking for. Do you want to know how likely it is that someone will experience any violent crime? In that case, you should cap it at 1. Are you trying to gauge some kind of average victimization level? Maybe you shouldn't cap that data, but if there are large outliers the average would be quite meaningless. It all depends on what type of information you are looking for and how uniform the distribution is.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 06:02 PM
5

It may be a tool of the democratic party (not that the republican party is much better for men's rights), but it certainly isn't a tool of liberalism. The two are not the same. Liberalism as an idea is at odds with much of feminist rhetoric, so I would not equate the two. The fact that you can find tons of people who consider themselves liberals and feminists simultaneously just means cognitive dissonance is a thing.
/r/MensRights05/06/15 12:02 AM
1

This is fine. They were given an equal shot and did not pass the test. If a woman does pass, good for her.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:08 AM
0

Just because as a straight guy I don't want to get married doesn't mean I want to deny anyone the right to if they so wish. I definitely support gay marriage. In fact there are fewer potential issues with gay marriage, like child custody (except for adoption etc) and family court bias.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:07 AM
123

It does matter, just not immediately. That death grip was established when feminism had a better PR game. That is slowly changing, and the death grip will go with it, though probably with some (possibly considerable) delay.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 07:19 PM
4

I'm sure if all the guys in class were half naked, the girls would be distracted too and complain. Even if this were the reason, I see no problem with it, unless the dress code was exceedingly puritan or something.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 05:10 PM
5

There is a line, however, that sits roughly around where the person is passed out. This case seems to be in the grey area, since the guy was falling asleep during the encounter, but wasn't asleep during the beginning. I'm totally ok with holding feminists to their own standards, though.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 04:56 PM
1

I definitely agree in this case if he plays his cards right. I really hope that happens to bring awareness to the simple fact that he is the victim here.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 04:22 PM
4

It's true that such a high profile case may have different results than normal, but think about all the low profile cases, where a woman falsely accuses a man, tells everyone she knows he raped her, then the case gets thrown out. You think everyone just changes their minds in that case?
/r/MensRights20/05/15 04:03 PM
9

Seeing as she previously described her tweets as 'being passionate about race issues' (I'm paraphrasing), I highly doubt this apology. It is basically 'I'm sorry you got upset about something I still believe and won't change my mind about'.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 03:24 PM
6

Very true. I would like to see the details of both sides of the "harassment". I feel like anything posted on sites like twitter other than direct personal threats should not be cause for arrest, but I also want to see how valid the logic is that they should be arrested too. In either case, the trial needs to happen quickly. You shouldn't be able to take away a person's ability to make a living for an indefinite amount of time before a trial.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 05:19 PM
3

And the equivalent practice for girls compared to circumcision is also illegal in most of the developed world. It isn't about total equivalency, but what is right and what is wrong. If a more minor form of female circumcision is wrong, then so is male circumcision.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 06:20 PM
1

Correct. For clarification, wage typically refers to hourly wage, while earnings typically refers to amount earned over some amount of time. Depending on how you define things, these only differ by the number of hours worked in that time period, but you can also use wage to refer to hourly pay for a specific job, which is obviously more useful. If you define it that way, there is an average earnings gap, but probably no, or close to no, wage gap.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 02:38 PM
1

I completely agree with you, but FYI, most wage gap statistics only count "full time workers", who work more than 35 hours per week. I'm fairly certain this included hourly workers (as opposed to salaried) who work more than 35 hours, so hours worked per week, including overtime, is still a huge factor.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 02:35 PM
20

You don't have to be a good person to be protected from slander/libel. Unrelated wrongdoings the past have nothing to do with how much a person should be protected under the law.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 03:15 AM
3

Oh ya in that case it is definitely a double standard.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 06:18 PM
7

Or they printed the same sign for both bathrooms that covers all the known issues. I wouldn't get outraged at this unless you know first hand why the sign was put up.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 05:25 PM
19

Just because people say we are doing that doesn't mean we are. We embrace women who support the cause. In fact, many of the most prominent and popular MRAs are women, like /u/girlwriteswhat. If some MRAs are boycotting anything, it is marriage, which is not the same as boycotting women. You can still have meaningful relationships with women while remaining a bachelor. I'm not sure what youtube video you are talking about, but it sounds like it doesn't fit the common opinion here.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 05:16 PM
9

Oh I absolutely don't think we live in this world at the moment. I 100% believe there is gender discrimination in the courts. I just don't think we should be working towards 50/50, if the crime is not 50/50.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 05:14 AM
20

You are absolutely not the only one. This is my general philosophy. If more men commit crime then more men should be in prison. It should be treated on an individual basis regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 04:51 AM
2

It is an unnecessary surgery performed on infants, who cannot consent to said surgery, for purely cosmetic reasons. The US has outlawed all kinds of female circumcision, including a simple pin prick that leaves no lasting damage. This results in unequal protection under the law based on gender. Either you are ok with a similar procedure performed on girls, are against both, or are a sexist/hypocrite. On top of that, it is not "better to get it done young". The foreskin is fused to the glans unti…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 06:16 PM
2

Anyone can host a TEDx conference. They are basically completely different things.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 11:30 PM
63

The article doesn't say, but do the men have a prior record and the women don't? I want to be outraged at this, but only if it doesn't have another explanation.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 06:13 PM
2

tldr; If a problem men face is not explicitly caused by women then it is "debunked". Almost everything here can be explained away by the person's own marxist reasoning. Gender issues are not simply a class war between men and women. They are complex issues whose causes are almost never easily explained by a single phenomenon specific to a single gender. Men being murdered by men is a men's rights issue. Even if the problem can completely be explained by issues related to the male gender, it is s…
/r/MensRights10/04/15 09:05 PM
9

I'm totally fine with this. The standard is there because that is what is required for the job. If a woman can do it, good for her. She should be allowed to do the job and not be doubted for it. If the standards are lowered all women who meet the lowered standard will have their qualifications doubted, even if they could have met the previous standard.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 02:07 AM
6

It's also physically way easier to circumcise an adult (who can also give meaningful consent), since the foreskin is fused to the glans until around puberty. You have to peel it off which can cause permanent damage to the glans when done on an infant.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:14 PM
2

As someone in grad school in a STEM field, I have seems countless more things that encourage women than discourage them. In fact, I have never seen a single instance of institutional discouragement towards women. Of course there are a few people who hold outdated views, or are awkward when working with women, but that is a personal issue (that should be addressed but it is a different problem). The schools themselves all have women in (insert field) programs, with special lounges, events, awards…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 07:52 PM
2

At the very least get rid of the 10% from the verbal pressure category. The other two categories are just fine, unless the exploitation one includes just being drunk at all, rather that being passed out. It is still at least 1/5 men (can't be sure due to the note at the bottom). The 4.6% intercourse through physical force is pretty damning by itself.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 08:52 PM
4

Why not compare like with like? This is how they report it when it happens to women. I don't agree with how the analysis is done, though. It obviously should at least try to be more meaningful when it involves both men and women.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:42 AM
1

I think this is a good point and it really shows just how important it is to go to the police with honest accusations rather than going straight to popular media (or a college administration etc). Even if the accusation is true, you are doing damage by not reporting to the proper authorities.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 06:06 PM
9

Every time I've had this discussion (at least 2 times so far), all I get is "It's different", with no explanation of why or how it is different. Then I am seen as the asshole if I call out the fact that that answer is bullshit.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:24 PM
2

This seems reasonable at first, but they lump the entire men's rights movement in the misogyny side while only including their most extreme members in the misandry side (not to mention the misuse of the venn diagram). This is just a bullshit attempt at re-branding the word feminism as meaning egalitarian. It is demonstrably true that they aren't the same. Most MRAs don't hate women, and most feminists are not egalitarian.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 04:07 PM
3

I don't think she was emphasizing the "slightly more than half" part, but instead the fact that women are human, so according to her, human rights issues are women's rights issues. This is simply a logical fallacy, as women are a subset of human, but human is not a subset of women. It is fine for feminists to care about non-gendered human rights issues, but only if they keep them non-gendered. Only looking at how non-gendered issues affect women is effectively purposefully ignoring how they affe…
/r/MensRights18/03/15 02:43 PM
26

How many cops have to come forth saying that this kind of thing happens all the time before people actually realize it is true? Maybe once the cops actually do their job and go after the women who file these false police reports?
/r/MensRights17/03/15 01:58 PM
7

Can we please stop using the term "red pill". We are not TRP and are in no way associated with them except maybe a few people who are members of both. The whole red pill imagery could work in this context, if it weren't confused so readily with another community that most here do not agree with.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 11:08 PM
2

I would make the claim that they do not value the achievements of men either. They assume that those achievements were merely given to men, and because they are undeserved, women should benefit from them just as much. They live in a world of victimhood, where things just happen to you and you have no control over your own life. It follows naturally from this mentality that any good things a person receives in life just happened to them as well, rather than being earned.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 05:35 PM
2

Logically this doesn't imply that the subset of the 82% who are not feminists believe that feminism is not about equality, though. It does however imply that feminism and equality are not perceived to be identical. One can think that feminism is about equality and agree with that point, but disagree on other points.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 05:02 AM
4

If it is actually effective, surgical means are just fine, as long as they are consented to by able adults (the same adult on whom the procedure is being performed). There is zero reason to circumcise a child because of a benefit to STD transmission. Children should not be having sex. If the procedure is too horrible for an adult to willingly inflict on themselves, even for some perceived benefit, that tells you something.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 03:35 AM
5

The typical response when you show undeniable proof that men suffer from violence more is that, well, the violence is usually committed by men. Somehow, sharing the same gender as the person assaulting/murdering you means it is your fault or something.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 08:14 PM
16

Studies have shown that 90% of men will commit at least one act of rape or jaywalking in their lifetime. /s
/r/MensRights12/03/15 06:39 PM
2

So therefore whether or not you open doors is completely independent from whether or not you are sexist, so opening a door or not opening a door should never be equated with sexism. Isn't this what everyone has been saying from the start? Of course this is spun to mean that both actions are in themselves sexist, so it is impossible not to be sexist.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 05:42 PM
3

You really shouldn't give dead men a pass like that. The ultimate act of sexism is dying, because you can't make any money to support women. /s
/r/MensRights11/03/15 11:49 PM
0

Probably when my patience runs out. Certainly there have been people like this here for a while, but there is also good content that I want to see and discussions I want to take part in. Either when the crap overwhelms the good discussion, or when I find a better alternative sub, I will probably jump ship. Obviously everyone has a different threshold.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 05:15 PM
3

Just because you are being downvoted doesn't mean there is a brigade happening. Everything you have said in this post is either hateful, accusatory, or a twisting of other peoples' words to suit your own arguments. I consider myself a staunch member of this community and agree 100% with these downvotes.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 04:57 PM
1

I'm definitely seeing more and more posts like this, but it is hardly what men's rights is. I feel like there are currently a few very active people here who contribute nothing but negativity and hate, combined with baseless accusations like this one here. Anything that supports their viewpoint is fair game, no matter how vitriolic or incorrect it is. It is possible this is what this subreddit will eventually become, and if/when that happens, I will unsubscribe. I'm still holding out hope, thoug…
/r/MensRights11/03/15 04:53 PM
3

At least if you have a black/indian friend you chose them as a friend and respect them as a person. You don't choose your students as a professor. They simply join your class and there's no way she'd be able to refuse to teach them because of their race/gender.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 03:46 PM
4

A post's upvotes do not determine whether or not people agree with the view on that subreddit. If you look at the comments, you will find mostly ignorant attempts to change the view that are heavily upvoted.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 05:09 PM
9

It is not impossible, it is just not practical in the US two party system. Liberal does not equal Democrat. I suspect it is similar to being an atheist Republican. You may not agree with the other side, but your party has been co-opted by lunatics. I wish I knew a solution, but since I don't really see any politicians that are friendly to the cause, I would go with whatever you determine to be the lesser evil.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 05:51 PM
10

I think the point is you don't have to be feminist to be left-thinking, and vice versa. Too many people associate the MRM with conservatives, but it is quite the opposite for a lot of MRAs.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 05:10 AM
2

I don't think anyone really cares if circumcision as a whole is outlawed. The vast majority of circumcisions in the US are performed on children, so it is just simpler to discuss circumcision while assuming the term means on children. If you had to qualify it every time it would be annoying. Adults can do whatever the hell they want with their own bodies for all I care.
/r/MensRights26/02/15 06:04 PM
3

People who just argue FGM is worse really don't have a logical argument. Even if FGM as performed most of the time is worse, any form, no matter how minor, is still illegal. Unless you are willing to conclude that even a pinprick on a girl's clitoral hood is worse than the complete removal of a boy's foreskin (which is just silly in my opinion), then there is no argument. You have to get to the heart of what people think is wrong about it. Is it wrong to cut off parts of a baby's genitals? If so…
/r/MensRights26/02/15 05:59 PM
3

It is still a double standard. Just because more severe forms of FGM are outlawed, doesn't mean less severe forms aren't also outlawed. Define an equivalent form of FGM to MGM. The FGM one is illegal and the MGM one isn't. There is your double standard. One response I hear is that there are no forms of FGM that are not as bad as male circumcision as performed in the US, but there is a type of extremely minor FGM that involves just a ceremonial pinprick that is also outlawed. If you think this is…
/r/MensRights26/02/15 05:57 PM
1

I think I see what you mean now. I mostly agree, but I don't have a solution. Sometimes even if you use a condom and birth control, your DNA ends up inside one of her eggs. Unless we forced abortion in this case (which I have previously said I absolutely do not want), there is not much we can do. I don't really agree with negative consequences for keeping the baby in this situation, but perhaps positive incentive to abort it? How is that backwards? I thought your argument was based on financial …
/r/MensRights25/02/15 10:10 PM
1

No contraceptive is perfect, and accidents can happen even if it is used religiously and correctly. It is great that this has not happened to you, but it happens to some people and it sucks. The point is women get choices after the act of sex (they also have contraceptive they can use to prevent pregnancy as well so that argument falls flat), but men don't.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 10:05 PM
7

The natural solution to that problem is to remove the legal obligation of the father, making it voluntary, not to remove the right of the woman to give birth if she so chooses. Your argument seems to be based on harm done to the unwanting father, but I think your solution is backwards.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 06:00 PM
1

Wow that is probably the most reasonable thing I've ever seen written by a proclaimed feminist. It's almost as if an MRA wrote it. If everyone was like that I think we could all finally agree and move on.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 05:49 PM
9

I have to disagree with this. I am all for the rights of fathers, but I could never support a system that forces abortion (or gestation/birth) on women. I think our system as is would be fine if the legal rights/responsibilities of the father were also voluntary. As it stands now, women have all the choices, and the only choice men get to make is to not have sex.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 05:39 PM
7

Yes, if women have the same right. There are legal surrender locations (usually a police station or fire station) where women can legally abandon their child, giving the responsibility of the child to the government. Women can also give a child up for adoption (even without the father's consent). I think such safeguards should be available to men who cannot support or raise a child as well, especially since they didn't get a say in the birth of the child in the first place (other than the whole …
/r/MensRights25/02/15 05:36 PM
1

Just another form of "some have said" to create fake news.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 05:25 PM
4

I'm right there with you. The only complaint I had before was the worry that they would do exactly this, and lo and behold. People are just fine with female characters when they aren't 100% trope.
/r/MensRights24/02/15 05:52 PM
1

I don't like quotas when they artificially inflate numbers for women, and I don't like quotas when they artificially inflate numbers for men. In short, quotas are unfair and unnecessary. Ideally, you will be considered on your merits and not your genitalia. Why should you have a significantly easier time getting a certain job than a female candidate with the same credentials, just because there are more female applicants? The same goes for a woman applying for a job in a male dominated industry.…
/r/MensRights20/02/15 09:52 PM
3

So what exactly is the problem? If you are pro-choice, then you realize that abortion is a valid part of making sure pregnancies are actually planned, since accidents will still happen even if other precautions are taken.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 08:40 PM
11

They do a lot more than abortions. Abortions are a tiny fraction of the services they provide. I used to support them. After this I'm not so sure.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 04:57 PM
4

I believe this is simply because the MRM as a movement doesn't try to co-opt other movements. We specifically are interested in certain issues, and those typically go hand-in-hand with gay rights, but we are not specifically a gay rights group. This also means we are completely not at odds with gay rights groups, and we can function side by side. I honestly believe the only reason to co-opt other groups is to try to steal the credibility associated with those groups. For example, if you aren't a…
/r/MensRights17/02/15 02:35 AM
3

It might not be an example of victim blaming here, but it is a common tactic used to blame victims. How many times do people (usually feminists) bring up that men are the primary perpetrators when talking about male victims? The gender of the perp is irrelevant to the gender of the victim. It serves to minimize their victimhood by associating them with the perpetrator through their gender.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 08:29 PM
14

Did you know that 100% of women killed by men are women killed by men? This has to stop!
/r/MensRights08/02/15 05:04 AM
15

Just to be clear, some of us are Right-wing, just like some of us are Left-wing. In the same way, some of us are anti-abortion and others are pro-choice. The important point is the movement itself is not defined by these issues.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:05 PM
1

This is pretty spot on and reflects much of what I believe. I would really like to see a feminist honestly try to answer his rhetorical "Why?" questions. It seems to me his conclusions are the only possible reasonable explanation.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 05:14 PM
5

People here are decrying the western response to this issue, or lack thereof, rather than the sexism of the event itself. When girls get kidnapped we get the first lady campaigning to "bring back our girls", and rightly so. The problem is when boys are murdered, there is nothing but silence.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 12:04 AM
10

I agree, but I think the point is that many feminists claim this is what they are doing already. Asking where they are when issues like this appear is simply a way of calling them out.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 04:56 PM
5

No straw for me either. I always believed in equality, and assumed that feminism meant that, because I didn't know better. After seeing this wasn't the case, I stopped calling myself one.
/r/MensRights01/02/15 07:36 PM
1

I don't really get why the author is disagreeing with the viewpoint that this can largely be explained by the inability of men to open up without being seen as failures. He seems to assume that this is said out of malice (which it might be but it doesn't sound like it). It is not a defect of men any more than a defect of society not allowing men to open up. I would think that this is a common sentiment here. Just because there are men going along with their gender roles doesn't mean the gender r…
/r/MensRights30/01/15 06:34 PM
3

They are both of value but suicide attempts are hard to define. All the statistics I have seen count any kind of hospitalization for self-harm as a suicide attempt. That simply isn't true, and self-harm for it's own sake is far more common than suicide. It is itself a problem, but a different one. If an accurate suicide attempt statistic can be generated (don't ask me how), then it will be an important statistic to consider.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 03:40 PM
2

A common occurrence I have seen in male rape stories is the woman threatening to cry rape if he doesn't comply. Another is extreme intoxication, waking up to a woman riding you and being too drunk to resist.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 06:50 PM
3

I guess I am trying to distinguish having something to fear (or defend against) vs fearing it. Just people there is no fear doesn't mean there is no threat.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 07:59 PM
16

I agree, and I certainly don't mean to suggest men should cower in fear of attack. But not having to worry about your safety at all is completely different from taking a level-headed and effective approach to your safety. I see the argument all the time that if I am afraid and you aren't, then you don't have to be afraid and I do. This argument is circular and incorrect. I think everyone should take reasonable steps to ensure their safety, taking into account real danger, rather than perceived, …
/r/MensRights26/01/15 07:45 PM
10

I don't know whether I should laugh or cry. I seriously don't get how anyone can look at that graph and think women are the ones who need help the most.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 05:35 PM
310

Why is it most feminists (and probably other people as well) think that men can walk around without fear at night? Is it simply because we aren't delusional about the apparent dangers out there? Men are more likely to be mugged/beaten/murdered/harassed/you name it at night. The only thing we suffer less of is stranger rape in a dark alley, which is also not even common for women. I know men who also think they are safe at night simply because everyone tells them they are. I pointed out the stati…
/r/MensRights26/01/15 05:32 PM
8

Free speech doesn't mean speech has no consequences. It simply protects you from arrest by the government for said speech. If it comes to light that a teacher thinks its totally ok to rape underage male students, I definitely want him/her to lose their job.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 03:55 PM
1

What would be the point if neither the alleged victim or alleged rapist are named? It would just be a list of sentences saying "I was raped". That'll solve lots of problems /s. Surely the alleged rapist would be named.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:26 PM
1

Any false reports an MRA would make would be to point out how stupid such a reporting system is. You could, say, anonymously report the creator of the database, and how could they possibly disprove it? The same problems they find with the fake reports are the reasons you should totally ignore such a database in the first place.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:25 PM
2

I don't mean to dismiss it. I was just offering one mechanism for a gender divide. I would also posit that the reason more men join gangs is similar.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:20 PM
2

I would argue that it is related to the idea that men are providers. Whose responsibility is it to commit crime to get money to put food on the table, or to buy whatever else it is criminals want? That responsibility will far more often fall on the shoulders of men rather than women. I wonder how many women are married to male criminals who knowingly benefit from their husbands crimes?
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:09 PM
3

So precisely zero people with any training whatsoever in handling what should be a criminal case. Add on top of that just a straight up admitted assumption of guilt. I thought colleges only got this crazy in the past few years.
/r/MensRights08/01/15 07:51 PM
3

You are technically correct, but just because there are multiple issues with this case that affect each gender doesn't mean there isn't one in particular that is the overwhelmingly dominant issue. In this case, which is worse, being seen as weak because it is shameful for your husband to be beat up by you, or to kill yourself because not only does nobody give a shit that your wife is beating you in public, they ridicule you for it? There is more going on here than just people thinking women are …
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:44 PM
3

The fact that we have student panels that decide this shit is mind boggling.
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:27 PM
1

The courts don't prove innocence. They only try to prove guilt. If guilt is not proved, then you are declared not guilty. You are not declared innocent, since that was not proved. It is entirely consistent to question the guilt of an accused person. If their guilt is not proved, though, they should not suffer for a crime they were not proven to have committed. It is still entirely possible they did commit the crime. So yea, cases that are dropped or found not guilty are still a grey area. They a…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 08:19 PM
-3

None of that matters. Just because the abortion isn't due to the woman's life being threatened at the time doesn't mean the pregnancy doesn't carry life-threatening risks. Also, name one scenario where a vasectomy is a life-saving procedure (that doesn't involve child support leading to suicide or something). What matters is the law has deemed pregnancy to be optional, and since it involves a medical condition of only the pregnant woman, it is entirely her decision. You may disagree with this, b…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 08:01 PM
0

I said there are no direct consequences. How the man handles contraception other than the vasectomy is a different issue. Like it or not, we have deemed in the US that pregnancy is an optional medical issue. I think a man absolutely should be able to get a vasectomy if he wants, but I also think accurate comparisons are important if you actually want to convince someone of something. The abortion comparison has the added complication of involving a serious medical condition, so it only confuses …
/r/MensRights07/01/15 07:59 PM
-1

While I agree this is ridiculous, I wouldn't compare it to abortion. Pregnancy is a possibly life-threatening medical condition, so forcing it on someone is worse than forcing someone to be fertile, which by itself has no consequences. The direct comparison would be a woman getting her tubes tied. Does anyone know if there is precedent of a doctor refusing that without her husbands consent?
/r/MensRights07/01/15 05:48 PM
2

The whole point of the petition is to tell them that they are alienating some of their customers for no reason, not to make them feel obliged to change anything. If they don't want to change it, so be it, but some people might not remain customers if they don't, and Amazon should know that.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 05:50 PM
29

He paid for it probably because he loved his kid and didn't want him to suffer. He paid the child support because he was legally obligated to.
/r/MensRights03/01/15 12:29 AM
1

I didn't say they don't matter. I said statistics are pointless to determine whether or not they are suicidal, since it is already clear they are. For those individuals, helping them depends on personal details. Broad statistics don't really apply to the individual. Just because a person who kills themselves cannot be helped, doesn't mean that other people who are suffering in a similar way cannot be helped. The goal of the statistics should be to determine the ways people suffer that leads to s…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:06 PM
1

I don't agree that these statistics should be used to determine that. Say for instance that men and women as individuals are equally likely to attempt suicide (counting by person not by number of attempts), but men succeed on their first attempt 100% of the time, but women take on average 2 tries. You would see women attempting suicide twice as often and think you should focus on why women are attempting suicide. Sure if a person attempts suicide and fails they are likely to try again, so they s…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:00 PM
1

Until someone does a more difficult study and actually calculates number of people by gender who have attempted suicide at least once (completed or not completed) with an accurate definition of suicide attempt, I will go by actual death statistics, which are about as accurate as we can get right now. Defining what an "attempt" means will only add uncertainty to the statistic. Multiple failed attempts get counted, meaning 1 suicidal woman could count as 10, since men are far more likely to succee…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 08:40 PM
4

It literally doesn't matter how well you can show that the 77 cents statistic is useless. I know multiple feminists who threw that number around constantly, claiming it was for the same work, and would not even consider that they were wrong for the longest time, assuming that it was from discrimination. Now, they recognize that it is not for the same work, but do they admit they were wrong to assume the number was due to discrimination? Absolutely not. Now they say that discrimination is what fu…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 08:22 PM
1

I don't think either should be considered a gender issue, unless you can prove gender is the cause of the disparity. It is a fact that more violent crime is committed by men, which means more men are going to be killed by cops. Why that is the case is a different problem. You have to show that the disparity in justifiable killing is larger than expected by crime rate for it to be a gender issue.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 05:48 PM
3

The same goes for me. I can understand why people tend to think we are all conservative, mostly because political feminism almost entirely comes from the left, but just because some (or most) Democrats believe it, doesn't mean we all do. There aren't only 2 sides to every issue, and I am perfectly content being an MRA and a liberal simultaneously without cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:29 AM
1

One minute walking through the infinite corridor would tell you that, judging by all the posters and pamphlets etc on the walls.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 01:57 AM
5

I didn't say I agreed with it. I was just agreeing with you that it is bullshit that they say it is to protect kids.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 06:25 PM
13

While this is quite interesting, is it really relevant to men's rights? Sure it says the words "paternity fraud", and it is interesting to see that this happened back then, but that is quite unsurprising. The whole concept of marriage is essentially to combat paternity fraud, since for most of human history, paternity tests didn't exist. Since they do exist now, we can have other ways to ensure proper paternity.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 05:23 PM
18

More likely it is to protect them from liability if abuse happens in their shelter.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 04:49 PM
3

Hours worked does not completely get rid of the gap. You have to take into account what jobs you are talking about on average to make it minuscule. Only young childless women make more than men on average.
/r/MensRights13/11/14 01:40 AM
13

It may be consistent with societies expectations, but I dare say the average person does not like their job and would love to stay at home with their kids if they could. We do not shun women who want to work, as evidenced by the fact that women who work the same as men get paid the same. We do shun men who want to stay at home, calling them lazy losers. I think the wage gap shows sexism mostly towards men. If you look at quality of life statistics, women are no less happy than men, and no less p…
/r/MensRights13/11/14 01:38 AM
2

No that's bullshit, and people who come here seeing you say this will think this is what men's rights is about. Everyone should have the right to vote. We just shouldn't place requirements on that right for one gender over the other.
/r/MensRights12/11/14 04:47 PM
146

Thereby admitting that men do not in fact have the right to vote currently. We purchase that "right" with the possibility of giving up our lives.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 11:12 PM
12

Currently the only people who would be pushed into such roles are men. In your situation, at least some of them would be women. Therefore fewer men in front line roles. I fail to see how this makes things worse for men. Just because the percentage of men in the armed service in dangerous roles might go up, so might the number of conscript men decrease, simply due to an increased supply (women). Since this would only happen in cases of a emergency that require a draft, it would not affect the nor…
/r/MensRights11/11/14 11:10 PM
1

Unfortunately it is up to them to decide in the current system. While I agree with you ideologically, you are simply incorrect for now. It is precisely this that we need to change, though.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 05:47 PM
1

If you believe the world is biased against women and for men, that's misandry. Or you could just be wrong/lied to/lacking in information. If you believe this and are not open to new information to the contrary, then maybe.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:08 PM
2

"Not all _ are like that" can be used legitimately, if it can be shown the the group as a whole denounces those members of the group. For instance, people here who say extremely hateful things about women in general get downvoted to oblivion. You could point to that person being an MRA and say "see MRAs hate women", but since the group as a whole disagrees with and denounces those opinions, that statement is false. If, however, you point out a cop who uses excessive force, and people reply with …
/r/MensRights29/10/14 05:05 PM
2

Technically, yes, but not necessarily in practice. You would have to convince the court that you did not know you were doing it and that you had good reason not to know. That can be quite difficult.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 01:38 AM
0

It doesn't matter if the effect is you get convicted of rape anyway. Perhaps the wording should be "Half of MIT students think it is possible to be convicted of rape for something they did accidentally".
/r/MensRights28/10/14 10:31 PM
2

Thanks for responding. I see what you meant now. I definitely didn't mean we should ignore cases where a male feminist fits the mold. After rereading your letter, I think I mistook your use of "many male feminists" to mean more of a generalization. I think saying "some male feminists" here would be more appropriate in order to not be taken out of context.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 05:09 PM
3

I completely agree with you, and this is probably the first point where I disagree with Karen Straughan. While it may be true for some of them, I'm going to take the high road and not generalize all of them like some feminists generalize us.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 02:20 PM
9

It is an issue, though, because it is not an issue of looking professional if he is a chef in a kitchen. It is an issue of practicality. If women having long hair aren't hurting anything by having it, then he isn't. I can understand some differences in dress code for men and women, but if the reason is on purely practical grounds like this, then it should be the same for both.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 06:51 PM
2

I wasn't trying to say the survey is correct, just that the math was wrong in calculating 41%.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 03:13 AM
4

I tried to reply on mobile but it posted wrong. To get the correct number, you have to add the total number of rapes of both genders to compare the numbers for men. If there are 1/5 rapes of women and 1/12 rapes of men, then the percentage of men is (1/12)/(1/5+1/12), which is 29.4%. (To those who downvoted my other comment in the wrong place, I don't don't actually believe the number is only 1/12 due to lack of reporting).
/r/MensRights21/10/14 03:12 AM
1

I was replying to a different comment on mobile and it seems to have replied to the main thread. I was simply using someone else's numbers. I deleted my comment since it was a mistake.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 03:07 AM
2

I remember that study and I remember the forced to penetrate numbers being similar to the female rape numbers, but how does 1/5 and 1/12 make 41%? That should be about 30%, assuming equal populations of men and women. Factoring in the 1/59 only makes it 33%.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 10:54 PM
1

Definitely don't say nothing if this is in California. Basically guilt is assumed until you prove consent was given.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 10:40 PM
1

They are damned if you do, damned if you don't though. Spend less time at work to spend time with the kids and you are lazy and not providing for your family. Work your ass off to provide and you are a terrible father. What are you supposed to do?
/r/MensRights15/10/14 05:21 PM
1

I think it's his way of slipping under the radar of people who would otherwise be offended and not like him. Either that or he actually believes it, I don't know. He seems to be a smart guy who has his ear to the ground on these issues, though, I think it is the former.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 08:53 PM
10

If by forced you mean by circumstance and not someone actually forcing them through threats of violence, then yes. Would it be better if the option wasn't there? You said it yourself, it is to avoid starving. Men must be so privileged to get to starve to death with no other options.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 04:47 PM
2

Apparently blaming all men was too bad of a PR move for them, so they've moved on to a safer target, fraternities. On top of that, blatant hypocrisy as mentioned by /u/misterpocket4.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 01:37 AM
7

I agree, though even though the wage gap might work on this particular person, it is not a good example to use, because doing so acknowledges that the wage gap is actually a result of sexism, which it isn't. I'm sure there a number of other examples to use in its place.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 03:42 AM
4

It would be all well and good to be impartial if innocence was assumed before proving guilt. Instead, just the accusation causes him to get kicked out of school and his name smeared across the newspapers. That is what we should be fighting, and that requires no other evidence.
/r/MensRights18/09/14 02:47 PM
6

I always hear this argument, and usually they are claiming women attempt suicide far more than men, and I don't think it holds much weight. How do you define an attempt? How do you control for one person who fails many times counting multiple times? How do you account for "attempts" that are not serious and just cries for attention? I think the only stat that really matters in the end is who ends up dead, and that is largely men. So while we should try to help both genders in this, we need to ap…
/r/MensRights04/09/14 03:45 PM
2

Tell that to all the feminists I know who are either entirely for circumcision, or indifferent to it. One even, in all seriousness, advocated for forced circumcision to apparently reduce the rate of HPV and HIV transmission. This is in real life, not on the internet.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 03:51 PM
2

Do we really need "safe spaces"? I am all for having spaces just for men just like there are for women, but calling these place "safe spaces" is insulting in both cases. We don't need to hide from the other gender because they are dangerous. We do need spaces we can be ourselves and be comfortable without the pressures of sexual attraction etc.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 04:02 PM
40

You don't have to prove the child is the biological father. You just have to prove that he served enough as a father figure for the child. It happens quite often that a man who is not the father is stuck paying child support.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:12 PM
2

I find that NAFALT not only serves as a dismissal, but also a challenge to personally attack the person using it. Many feminists I have met have said that, and they actually are exactly like that from what I have seen them say and do, but my choices are to either agree they aren't like that, or personally attack them, which I am usually not willing to do.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 07:12 PM
1

Of course but I've never seen anyone make this claim. The only people who think anyone makes this claim are feminists when MRAs talk about prosecuting false rape accusations.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 05:31 AM
3

So she basically just straight up admitted that she only accepts arguments from authority? Are you white? If so, you probably shouldn't let her sheer hatred and disdain for your gender, race, and sexual orientation slide either.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 01:54 PM
9

Stop fighting the MRM on issues where they are not in conflict Debate honestly with the MRM on issues where they are in conflict. This includes admitting they are wrong when proven so and changing their stance from then on. I would expect us to do the same in this environment. It also includes an effort to use accurate statistics that have been analyzed correctly and without bias. Show any kind of compassion at all for men and boys. This includes not treating us like the enemy. Unfortunately, in…
/r/MensRights22/07/14 03:59 PM
10

I prefer we don't blame problems on some abstract boogeyman and instead try to figure out problems on an individual basis.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 03:25 PM
2

I don't really think this is in depth enough to mean much. What does it mean to support the "good things feminism does". I would think by definition people support things they think are good. Is it implying that everything feminism does is good as long as it doesn't treat men unfairly? I was tempted to choose that option but I wasn't sure of its meaning.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 06:10 PM
1

It is a cartoon that pits a reasonable person against a hypothetical unreasonable opponent that represents a group, ie a strawman. I realize that some feminists react at least in part like the person in the comic, but it still comes off as a fabricated conversation to prove a point. If it were an account of an actual conversation, then it would not be a strawman.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 02:37 PM
1

Despite the fact that I agree with the sentiment, unless this actually happened, it is a straw man and we should not support using straw man arguments.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:48 PM
1

I was with him until the Occidental College thing. The false submissions were done as a protest to point out how useless and harmful such a reporting system is. It was not done to gain the benefits of victim status that the Occidental system allowed for. The point, of course, is that the school couldn't figure out which reports were real or not, which should call the whole system into question for any sane individual.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 08:47 PM
6

Oh that is nice. I didn't know much about it, but by the picture of the hat it looked like there was merchandise.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 05:48 PM
19

While I am normally against these "awareness" campaigns where you buy a product and typically almost all of the proceeds go to "awareness", ie marketing, I think this is an area that actually needs an awareness campaign. It is really nice to see this.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 02:57 PM
3

I was super happy to see this on AskReddit, and despite there being some negative comments, the most upvoted ones were in support of these victims. There was overall a very positive message. Usually AskReddit tends to be, in my opinion, on the wrong side of these issues. I'm glad to see this might be changing.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 03:43 AM
1

I read John Dies at the End when it was still being released every Halloween in installments online. I loved that book. I thought I loved David Wong. Such a disappointment.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 06:27 PM
2

You can go around assuming all men are predators all you want, just don't tell all men they are responsible for the actions of the few men who actually cause problems.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 07:18 PM
2

Yes you can and should have both sides. When out in public, everyone is a potential threat. The difference here is that those potential threats are a problem that you have to deal with personally. You should take precautions for yourself. You can't just go out and tell everyone in the world to stop being a potential threat to you. That would just not work. On top of not working, it is hateful to only do this to one gender.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 04:26 PM
3

I don't think it's bullshit. You have the right to label yourself as whatever you want of course, but that label becomes misleading if the implications of the label are counter to the person's beliefs. I think people (and myself) are suggesting to ditch the label because it will make OPs life easier, not because we want to see less people out there calling themselves feminists. A label is only a good one if it accurately reflects some aspect of a person. Otherwise it just adds confusion.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 03:00 PM
3

There is nothing that feminism "is supposed to be". It was what it was, and it is what it is now. The only reason to label yourself by any label at all is to make it easier to express your beliefs and opinions on the issues. If the label "feminist" no longer reflects your beliefs, because what feminism has become is something you do not support, then just stop calling yourself one. It doesn't change any of the beliefs you have and your reasons for believing them haven't changed.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 02:55 PM
9

Women also statistically use more health insurance dollars than men, but by law, insurance companies are required to charge people equally despite gender and despite the statistics. So why does it matter what the statistics say when men are disadvantaged?
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:47 PM
8

American liberal white male here. I totally agree and people who try to pigeonhole all political debate into two categories can go fuck themselves. Just because you agree with one political ideology more than another, doesn't mean you have to agree 100% with the party that supposedly represents that ideology.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 05:45 AM
1

Left leaning does not mean you have to support everything a democrat does, or even something the entire democratic party supports.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 08:28 PM
3

I am for people doing whatever makes them happy in life, within reason. I wouldn't hold resentment for a person who decides to forgo serious dating/marriage because why the hell should they be forced into it? I don't know how others feel about it, and I wouldn't say one movement is a subset of the other, but there is definitely overlap. Some of the things MRAs fight against are also the reasons the MGTOW movement exists.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 09:15 PM
3

Show me an honest political platform for a national election and I'll eat my hat. Doesn't excuse the behavior, but it's nothing atypical.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 11:15 PM
2

I never said she was representative of all feminists, but it does prove the point that not all feminists are against circumcision. You also used your experience with feminists as anecdotal evidence for the contrary. Anecdotal evidence is sufficient to counter other anecdotal evidence.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 09:51 PM
2

The most outspoken feminist I know once argued to me that circumcision should be mandatory, much like in this article. Her argument was that it helps women because of some dubious study that suggests that circumcision reduces the transmission rate of HPV and HIV. She gave zero shits about the effect on men and boys, only that it might help women and girls.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 09:38 PM
2

That's what I thought at first but now I think he actually is saying that he already 'manned up' and supports feminist ideas.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 08:01 PM
2

Of course, and I don't argue with not considering the people who aren't reported, especially when they are calling them rapists right off the bat. I was referring to the people who went to court and didn't go to jail. There may be a few cases where they were convicted but didn't serve jail time, but I would assume most of the time they were simply found not guilty. I guess I just wanted there to be a discussion somewhere about the group found not guilty, and how they should be considered in the …
/r/MensRights19/03/14 05:52 PM
14

For the sake of this argument I guess I agree. It might have been good to mention that this is the most conservative assumption that can be made at that step, though.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 04:00 PM
22

I loved the reasoning until the point where they got rid of the faced trial section and replaced it with inconclusive. The only objective measure we can get is the result of the court case. If people face trial and are not convicted, they are not guilty. While this doesn't necessarily mean innocent, it is more than just an inconclusive result. I suppose, though, that you would need a lot more data on specific cases to be able to distinguish, since an inconclusive result in court is automatically…
/r/MensRights19/03/14 03:55 PM
85

Wow I never noticed this before and I've seen this graphic many times. Normally it would be possible that the person who made this was simply ignorant or misinformed, but this tactic implies intent to mislead. I figured it was intentionally misleading in the first place, but this is proof.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 03:43 PM
1

So the problem is that nonverbal consent is sometimes ambiguous and might lead to some rapes. Ok, in that situation, people not receiving verbal consent are sometimes rapists. The clear solution to this problem is to make everyone not receiving verbal consent a rapist. Yay we just increased the number of rapists out there by 10000%. That'll look good on our feminist handouts!
/r/MensRights10/03/14 08:53 PM
1

That is why that was my last reason I mentioned. If I had to guess, the threat of false accusation is probably the most common way.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:53 PM
10

Very often the raped man is extremely drunk and incapable of fighting back. Even if he is capable of fighting, there can also be threats of crying rape if he resists. People will always believe the woman if both parties are claiming they were raped. Even though the average man is stronger than the average woman, this is not true of all men and women. It is entirely possible for some women to overpower some men. Threat of violence with a weapon. These are all possible ways, though I am sure it is…
/r/MensRights07/03/14 04:43 PM
4

I swear I'm done being careful with my words with feminists. You can agree with 99% of what they are saying (100% of what matters), but if you disagree with even a slight detail you are suddenly a horrible monster who is ok with rape, or some other nonsense. I've tried to have discussions with my very feminist friend before, and no matter how much I extend the olive branch by trying to be completely reasonable and trying to find all the ways in which we agree, all I get in return is name-calling…
/r/MensRights03/03/14 09:01 PM
8

This might be the best logical breakdown of most feminists arguments I have ever seen. I got angry just looking at it because I have encountered it so many times. Logic courses really need to be required in public schools.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 04:50 PM
3

Oh come on I'm sure lots of stores have sales on men's clothing without an equivalent female clothing sale sometimes. This would only be a problem if they were giving discounts to female customers over male ones. As long as the sale applies when a man buys one of the sale items, who the hell cares?
/r/MensRights18/02/14 06:17 PM
13

It's an irresponsible, selfish behavior and it's one that is perpetrated by women, against women No, it is perpetrated against men. People only bring up how it affects women because the people whose minds we are trying to change only care about how things affect women. It would at least be fair to say it is perpetrated against men and affects both genders negatively.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 04:47 PM
2

It is also ridiculous because nobody here is trying to make it so all DV funding goes to men. We just want there to be a support system in place for men and for women. They, however, will happily see all DV money going to womens' shelters and the like. The whole oppression olympics is stupid because it is often used to argue that only one group should get help, even when they 'have it worse' only by a small margin.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:25 PM
5

Most of this is spot on, but I really don't like the supposedly known statistic on false rape accusation rates. They claim a 2-8% rate, but what does this mean? It really can't mean anything other than provably false accusations, but what are the odds that a false rape accusation is proven to be false? How many accusations have unknown veracity? I find this similar to when people compare rape conviction rates to accusations rates, and decry how low that percentage is. This, of course, assumes al…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:08 PM
5

You should read the article. While not perfect, it makes no such claim. OP is either making shit up to make a point, or is mistaken.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:36 PM
5

Your title is just awful and makes this sub look like a bunch of assholes who can't read. The article and chart do not say you are a misogynist if you are not a feminist. It simply, and correctly I might add, defines feminism in a way that is more consistent with reality. I do not agree fully with the conclusions in the article, which seem to suggest (though not claim) that you are a good person only if you think women are more disadvantaged, but it certainly doesn't claim that all non-feminists…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:34 PM
8

I find the whole "nice guy" stigma to be a bunch of crap. I am sure there are some people out there who legitimately think that if they are nice to a girl then they deserve sex, but that is not the majority. Instead, they are just guys who do not have good luck with women, who get frustrated when they keep getting rejected. Instead of feeling sorry for such a person, people instead demonize them, making them seem like some kind of selfish, self-centered monster who thinks they can buy sex with k…
/r/MensRights08/01/14 09:28 PM
30

It isn't. You can only discriminate based on gender when it is a roommate situation (if you are looking at craigslist this is spelled out in their discrimination policy). A landlord renting a property to a person or persons cannot discriminate based on sex by law. A person looking for a roommate is allowed to discriminate based on sex. The problem, however, is typically men are ok with living with women, but women are sometimes not ok with living with men. This is evidenced by the vast majority …
/r/MensRights08/01/14 06:05 PM
2

I was hoping this would be quotes or something, not just objects or ideas. I found none of these to be either feminist or misogynist, unless your definition of feminism is "yay women" and your definition of misogynist is "things that women don't like". Example: twerking. This is totally unrelated either concept. Unless you see men forcing poor women to twerk, it is a non issue.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 09:49 PM
1

Yet somehow whenever we talk about false rape accusations people always assume we just mean that if the person is found not guilty then the accuser should be found guilty. I'm getting sick of having to make this distinction.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 02:08 PM
1

Yes openly trans men (and women) are welcome here. That is not, however, to say to that the issues we will focus on will be trans issues. We have not really tried to co-opt other movements into the MRM like feminism has. Basically, we are not anti-trans or anything like that, so anyone is welcome if they bring an open and critical mind to the table.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 04:39 PM
2

Yea she did basically assume that since she didn't like the strip club even though she is attracted to women, then that means there is a difference between men and women. I don't go to strip clubs either and would not want to. You can't conclude that all men's sexuality is below the belt just because it might be sort of true for some men, and is not true for her (one woman).
/r/MensRights11/12/13 10:04 PM
5

I'm very torn on this. I think such an experiment is extremely valuable and some of the insights that she has developed due to the experience are spot on. However, I can't get over some of the conclusions. For instance, she reinforces the stereotype that men's sexuality is entirely below the belt. I can accept it is a bit more physical than women's sexuality, but to simplify it in such a way is kind of insulting. Also, her observation that men withhold their emotions and feelings is pretty spot …
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:43 PM
13

It is classic circular reasoning. "Patriarchy" supposedly exists because we supposedly live in a world that benefits men over women and gives men power over women. Now we see that that is not the case. Now they are using their initial conclusion from a faulty assumption to try to protect their faulty assumption. Let's not consider that the fact that "Patriarchy hurts men too" invalidates the whole concept of Patriarchy to begin with or anything.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 04:16 PM
4

No you misread. What she meant was they are only "mean and nasty". She would like them to be murderous gendercide supporters.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 04:07 PM
25

I really love their arguments on this. How can we trust men to take the pill? They're offish brutes who can't do anything right. The hilarious thing is that they have their own birth control they can still use, and men very often have less reason to trick their partner into pregnancy than women do. They just don't want their ability to trick a man into pregnancy (child support) taken away from them.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 10:53 PM
3

It enforces traditional gender roles, and for the most part, we are against that. It is basically saying 'you need to act a certain way or else you are not a man'. I find it similar to telling a woman to shut up and get back to the kitchen.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:50 PM
2

Obviously what this guy did is not ok, and he should be charged with the appropriate crimes, but yes the law seems inconsistent. Abortion is allowed before a certain point because the fetus is not seen as a person. Therefore, it should not be able to be murdered before that time. That is not to say it is ok to force an abortion upon a woman. Far from it. What he did was some form of assault, possibly sexual assault, and should pay for crime against the mother.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:58 PM
2

An adult can do whatever they want to their body for all I care. It is only when circumcision is forced on a child (or adult but this is probably rare) that it is inherently wrong.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 07:05 PM
3

This is a really well thought out comment. While I am not a red piller, I am always hesitant to completely dismiss them due to "misogyny". That is precisely what many people do to dismiss the MRM. I seems to me that there are some valid concerns that some people take to ridiculous extremes, and that puts off a lot of people. That does not mean the valid concerns are not valid.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:04 PM
10

100% of your arguments can be used to justify outlawing abortion as well. Is that your intent? If not, then you need to reevaluate your position as it is hypocritical. If it is your intent, you should state so. Also, you are assuming there is no emotional considerations for a man who is giving up his rights and responsibilities as a father. The current situation has men pay a hefty emotional price by very often losing custody of their kids, and a financial one in the form of child support.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:55 PM
21

Especially at a university that is predominately female. If anything, everywhere else is women's space.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:51 PM
2

Since when would traditionalists care about double standards? There's nothing more traditional than gender roles.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 07:36 PM
10

Nobody really doubts that there are people that hate or disrespect women as a group. That is not being argued. I believe slovenly_seconds is simply referring to the use of the word "misogyny" as it is used to slander men's rights. Yes there are crappy people here, just as in all groups, but it is usually not those people that others object to. You wouldn't believe how many times I've been called a misogynist simply for bringing up what I consider to be completely reasonable issues that men face.…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:27 PM
3

I guess I just meant that you won't find many people trying to justify feminism here. I expect the vast majority will simply agree with you for the most part. The only thing else I can add is that it is only certain parts of feminism that I would label as bigotry. Some parts of feminism have nothing to do with demonizing men.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 05:21 PM
1

Ok this is about some person's perception of men, but I fail to see how this has anything to do with men's rights. It is neither demonizing typically male hobbies nor promoting typically female hobbies as something men can do too.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 05:17 PM
2

Many of us here would agree that it is. The only question is how someone who doesn't believe this can justify that it isn't.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 05:13 PM
12

Holy bad statistics batman. All of those statistics assume that a man being forced to penetrate against his will is not rape. If you define rape so that only men can commit it, then yea all the people who commit it will be men. The 1/4 statistic has been debunked countless times (did you know that if you ever had sex while drunk and female you were raped according to this statistic?). I'm calling troll.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 04:54 PM
1

That was the point wasn't it? Celda is making the standard feminist argument, the same one used in crying discrimination when it comes to the pay gap. Many feminists have paraded the wage gap as women making less for equal work, when the gap only applies on average for all full time jobs.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:17 PM
1

Thank you. We are perfectly capable of disagreeing with aspects of both political ideologies as a movement, and do not need to align with one or the other. Trying to figure out which political ideology is least bad for men's rights is similar to the oppression olympics people very often play, which does not add anything productive.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 10:20 PM
12

The problem with the word is that everyone has a different definition, but they throw the word around like everyone knows what it means. The only consistent thing about it is the word itself, which implies somehow that men are at fault, even if that was not the intent. Use a better word, or be consistent with your definition, so that we can actually argue its validity. I am not just talking about MRAs either. I've met many many feminists who consider the patriarchy to mean that men are privilege…
/r/MensRights21/10/13 05:37 PM
1

I really liked it except one thing. She uses the word 'respect' interchangeably with chivalry, or special treatment. Just because a man might not open the car door, or put a woman on a pedestal, doesn't mean he doesn't respect her. To say that would be to say a man does not respect any other men. Having respect for people is a good thing to an extent, and the word should not be re-purposed as some kind of privilege.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:44 PM
2

Some feminists like to say rape is about power as part of their argument that only men can rape. It is the same as how women can't be sexist against men because sexism is prejudice + power (according to them). It is used to ignore victims.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 06:32 PM
1

I prefer to think of it not as a benefit for the individual, but a benefit for society. The people who cannot afford birth control are the last people who should be having lots of kids. Say what you want about their personal responsibility etc, but it's going to happen, and we're going to have to deal with the consequences. I think both genders should have basic birth control supplied to them, because it is a win for everyone involved.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:43 PM
2

It's not anecdotal evidence. It would only be so if he claimed all (or most) women who make false accusations do so for this reason. This is one reason women do it because it is a reason a woman has done it.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 03:27 PM
2

Man I've had a woman explain her laundry list of requirements for men she would date, and then in the same breath complain about a guy who didn't like her because her boobs were too small. We're talking things like height requirements, waist size, income, hair color, literally everything. To me, having reasonable standards is fine for both genders. I find it unacceptable to chastise men for their reasonable standards.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 06:01 PM
5

The only situation I can see this not being sexist as fuck is in some crappy 3rd world country where only men are educated. There, educating 1 more man doesn't do much, but starting to educate women as well would be quite important. This would absolutely not apply to any western countries, or even most 3rd world countries.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 05:54 PM
1

I'm with you on your points about feminism, but not on the politics. I agree that equal opportunity is the goal we should all work towards, but in capitalism that is just not a reality. Sure working hard can make you successful, but someone who grew up in a rich family will not have to work as hard to achieve the same success. You depend on the success of your parents so much in early life that it is their success that provides you with opportunity. Nobody chooses which family to be born into, s…
/r/MensRights25/09/13 05:50 PM
1

Google doesn't define anything. It pulls definitions it finds from the internet. Some other source defined rape that way. This source could have been from England, for example, where that definition, while morally wrong in my opinion, is technically correct.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 05:45 PM
11

Let's not go the route of the feminists, who often use not guilty verdicts as instances of rapists escaping justice. We should not assume that a not guilty verdict means the accuser was lying. Yes it happens, and far too often, but one does not imply the other.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 02:19 PM
9

Almost always no, unless it can be proven that the accuser lied about the accusation. Just because someone is innocent/not guilty does not mean the accuser is guilty of a false accusation. Even when it is shown that the accuser knowingly and purposefully lied about the accusation, it is fairly uncommon for charges to be pursued.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 02:18 PM
1

They typically work in the office at the pig shit fermenting plant, whereas the person who has to wade through it for a living is a man (typically).
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:41 PM
8

I think we tend to focus on female on male rape here because it is still very common that people don't even think it is possible. While male on male rape is often ridiculed, especially prison rape, it does not have the stigma that it does not happen. Obviously, all victims of rape should be given support, regardless of the genders involved, but that is why I think there is a prevalence of talk about female on male rape here.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 04:14 PM
6

No, this is stupid. What the guy did was wrong, it just wasn't murder as long as abortion isn't murder. In my mind, it is akin to assault, which is what he should have been charged with (or similar). Forcing someone to undergo and abortion is very different than choosing to have an abortion yourself.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 03:16 PM
0

Compare that situation to what we have here in the West where women are pulling far ahead of men in school, women hold almost all the power in terms of child custody rights, women aren't faced with genital mutilation when they're born, women have greater access to public assistance, women have little burden of proof with rape accusations, and so on. ... Women have made great progress in Western society and I think everyone can agree that it's awesome and how things should be. None of these thing…
/r/MensRights06/09/13 07:36 PM
4

I love how these numbers are clearly wrong but are still high enough to warrant concern. Like 8% being false accusations means we should assume all of them are true? Any justice system that intentionally falsely convicts 8% of people is not a just system in my mind.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 10:08 PM
6

I swear a few years ago on the same sight the comments would be the opposite. I love to see progress.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:00 PM
2

I can agree with some of your sentiment but I don't think it is a flaw in research itself, just in the imperfect way that people carry it out. Research is hard, especially studying things that cannot be completely controlled. A result being incorrect (or reversed later) is not always due to bad research or bad intent, but simply due to the result being confounded by unseen variables. It is like saying physics research is all flawed because Einstein proved Newton wrong in some limits. One study m…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 07:35 PM
28

Surely she'll never do it again. Right guys? Right?
/r/MensRights29/08/13 02:08 PM
1

Tell your wife that a stranger on the internet thinks she is an idiot. Maybe she should actually learn about how a penis works before developing opinions on things as serious as rape. It is the same kind of complete ignorance that leads to a certain republican saying that women can shut down a pregnancy in the case of legitimate rape. Use the vocabulary of feminism and call her a rape apologist and a victim blamer.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:38 PM
3

I wonder what the actually most common crime is. Jaywalking? Littering? It is apparently very important to find this out so we know what to spend 100% of our time fighting.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 03:51 PM
6

Wow that is ridiculous. So you got banned from debating because you were too good at debating? Pointing out the fallacies of your opponent is one of the main strategies in debate.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 03:42 PM
2

I wasn't really commenting specifically on this case. It is not up to me to judge that her stated actions make her an unfit parent. I simply wanted to stress that I think 50:50 custody should always be the case unless one parent is proven to be unfit. That could very well be the case here, but I do not know the context of any of her stated actions. I do agree, however, that if one parent wishes to move far away, it should cut into their custody time, so it cannot be used as a weapon against the …
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:47 PM
1

Don't get me wrong. I don't think you did anything wrong. I do not know the details of your case other than what you said, so I cannot really make any judgments. I just wanted to stress that instead of reversing the current state of the family courts, we should be working towards a more equitable solution. I only commented off of your comment because it served as a natural segue-way to my point.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:44 PM
6

I am happy for your that you got primary custody, but I'm not sure I like this either. It would be hypocritical of me to decry the current status of family courts and custody battles without also being fair to the opposite sex in the changes I want. I think the general solution is as stated by OP. 50:50 default custody unless one parent is proven to be unfit. Not just worse off, but unfit. Courts aren't invading the homes of married people and telling them how much time the kids have to spend wi…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 02:40 PM
1

I find it appalling how often I see feminists who not only do not oppose male circumcision, but actively promote it. When it is done to them, it is a monstrous barbaric act. Not so much when it is done to those other sub-humans.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 07:48 PM
2

Excuse me, but all forms of female circumcision in the United States are illegal. This includes even a ritualistic pin prick that has absolutely no lasting effects. Please explain to me how this is worse than cutting off the foreskin. Yes, cutting off the clitoris is worse, but FGM is often cutting off the clitoral hood, which is exactly analogous to the foreskin. I hear this argument all the damn time, but I have never heard a good argument for why a pin prick is worse than male circumcision, u…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 07:14 PM
1

And not a single mention of female circumcision and the cognitive dissonance required to be ok with one and not the other. It always boggles my mind how female circumcision is considered to be so barbaric (it is in my opinion), but male circumcision is a-ok.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:38 PM
18

I am liberal and I hate the generalization that caring about men's rights makes me conservative. I don't want traditional gender roles. I argue that fighting for men's rights is more progressive than any of the other gender ideologies. I do hate the strangle hold that feminism has on the democratic party, but to say that means the republican party is preferable or better for men's rights is laughable.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 05:49 PM
9

Don't forget a woman's right to intact genitals that people seem to think is not worth giving to men as well.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 04:25 PM
5

It depends on how you define rape and if you include prison rape. The CDC published a study that is referenced on this website that shows that if you include men forced to penetrate, the rape rate is equal for men and women. I do not believe this includes prison rape, which is overwhelmingly male victims, though I could be wrong. The definition of rape has long been used to ignore male victims. In some countries, it is even defined to be a man raping a woman, so good luck finding male victims of…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:15 PM
1

I never claimed that I did not believe that this problem affects men more than women, just that the article does not. While there are inherent, hidden, gender issues related to this article, the article by itself does not bring any of them up.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 08:34 PM
1

Did I miss something or did this article not mention gender at all? Sure the person they talked to is male but it doesn't say anything about the effects of unemployment on men vs women.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:34 PM
5

I love that conviction statistic because it assumes 100% of people accused of rape are guilty, but most fail to be convicted. It says absolutely nothing without somehow knowing what percentage are actually guilty without considering the criminal cases.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:20 PM
8

Everyone (not in r/mensrights) needs to read this comment and finally understand the reasonable stance on false rape reports. It seems like every time this comes up people get all up in arms about punishing victims of rape by charging them with false reports and deterring them from coming forward. My guess is it is because the standards of evidence are so bad for convicting someone of rape that they thing the same will apply for convicting someone of a false rape report.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:18 PM
16

That would probably be illegal. Somehow this isn't.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 09:48 PM
2

Nobody is saying that feminism is anti-male because it focuses on women. They are saying it is anti-male because it has been used to specifically attack the rights of men. I only object to feminism focusing on women because they claim to care about men's rights as well, but do absolutely nothing about it all the while opposing men's rights organisations.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:17 PM
3

It means about as much as "100% of murdered women were murdered". Of course some percentage of murdered people will be murdered by a certain group. And of course people are more likely to be murdered by somebody they know than somebody they don't. This is only worrying if the rate is going up, or the total number of murders is very high compared to other murder rates. This is purely a scared tactic.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:34 PM
1

Cooking is not typically associated with women, but baking seems to be. I am not sure why. It probably has something to do with cooking meat being seen as manly.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 04:08 PM
1

Even if a girl is blackout drunk it shouldn't be rape unless a guy is taking advantage of a blackout drunk girl. What if they are both blackout drunk? Blacking out doesn't mean passing out.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 04:07 PM
7

This concern always comes up and I think it is ridiculous. Women aren't charged with making a false allegation just because the person isn't convicted. Hell, even when the evidence that the accusation is false and malicious, it is still very rare they she is charged with a crime. If we actually base our justice system off of evidence, instead of a he-said-she-said situation, then women don't have to worry about people believing them, as it will be irrelevant. Even in the current system, I don't …
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:08 PM
6

It's from The Big Lebowski
/r/MensRights16/06/13 01:23 AM
2

I agree that these kinds of cases should be handle less severely, but look at when a male teacher has sex with a 15 year old student. You don't see people calling for constraint. You see people wanting to burn him at the stake for being a predatory pedophile (ephebophile). We point out cases of statutory rape where the female gets a light sentence because it is a double standard, not because we (most of us at least) want to burn her at the stake.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:08 AM
1

By self-reporting I meant they self-reported that they were raped. I guess that is not what others mean when they use the term.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 03:04 PM
5

The 1 in 4 number is not self-reported, if I remember correctly. It is from a study that asked women various questions, like has a man every persuaded them to have sex, etc. They then concluded that 1 in 4 were raped. Most of those 1 in 4 would not say they were raped. Too lazy to find a source, but someone probably has it at hand. You are correct, however, that the two numbers are not equivalent. The 1 in 4 number is an extremist exaggeration of the rape rate, while these numbers are official c…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 03:00 PM
6

I hear this argument every time and it holds no weight. Tell me then, which part of the female anatomy is it acceptable to cut off? None of it? That's what the law says, and rightfully so. I only contend that the same should hold for boys.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 05:41 PM
16

I love how it is a fact that women make up the majority of voters in the US and spend the majority of the money, yet they have "far less" political and economic power.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 05:38 PM
2

I dealt with this a few years ago trying to find a room as a college age male. 70% of the listings were for female only or for grad/professional only. Not one male only listing. I've lived with girls. They are certainly no more tidy or easy to live with than any of the guys I've lived with. Of course there is nothing that can be done, as people looking for a roommate can discriminate all they want under the law. I just wish attitudes on men would change so that this (among many other things) wou…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 07:47 PM
5

Of course we show restraint. We live our lives dealing with rejection, with nobody approaching us and telling us we are attractive and validating our sexual identity. We also live in fear of being too bold, as that can become a harassment claim very quickly. Women have their sexual identity confirmed much more often than men, and very rarely have to worry about being too bold. A lot of men often ignore sexual cues because they err on the side of doubt. It's not that we don't notice them (most of…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 03:01 PM
2

I love how some people (I assume not you) think this is a bad thing. Everyone hides things from other people, sometimes from all other people. Why should he have to be a completely open book to his ex? She doesn't have to do the same and nobody else does either.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:55 PM
18

No, that's just what some people think people mean. I've never seen anyone actually claim this should be the rule. We love innocent until proven guilty here. The same holds for accusers.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 04:28 PM
5

The false equivalency is killing me. The first one was noticed was the person saying being a feminist just means you think women should be equal to men. Ok, then I'm a feminist (assuming they mean equal rights and not outcomes), except that's not what it means in practice at all. They frame the debate such that you either agree with their batshit insanity (no matter what it is) or you think women are worth less than men. The second one I noticed was when they mention that the term feminist just …
/r/MensRights06/12/12 11:37 PM
4

How much do you want to bet that "gender neutral" standards means different standards for men and women?
/r/MensRights04/12/12 04:52 PM
16

I imagine they think that the standard is there based on the average man, but really it is there based on the needed skills to be a marine. I wonder if feminists will cry sexism when the female marine death rate per capita is higher than for men.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 04:50 PM
0

Any social movement that wants results that do not occur on their own needs some sort of controlling influence to succeed, which is usually government, or some kind of uprising (and establishment of a new government).
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:18 PM
3

This is kind of a logical fallacy. I agree that feminism essentially requires some kind of big government with social programs to function, and that means feminists are usually liberal. Let's take the extreme and say if you are a feminist, then you are a liberal. What OP is saying however, is the converse of that statement, which is not necessarily true given the original statement. That is, if you are a liberal, then you are a feminist. This then implies that if you are not a feminist, you are …
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:14 PM
23

I'm with you. I'm as liberal as they come. I fail to see how feminism==liberal. Just because many republicans make statements that are quite offensive to women, doesn't mean you are republican if you disagree with feminism. I am all for righting wrongs that women face, as long as those wrongs are real and not a result of phony/flawed statistics. I am also all for righting the wrongs that men face, with the same caveat. I just think it is wrong to solely focus on one and not the other.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 04:57 PM
1

Specific problems with executing the idea are exactly the issue though. I would be all for an egalitarianism movement, but in the current climate it would not work.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 02:45 PM
2

They also don't just magically disappear if you don't agree with them. All he said is that she fits the typical stereotype. All that means is a stereotype exists and she is it. It says nothing about women in general.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 03:31 PM
9

SFU is 58% female. Everywhere else is largely female space.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 07:27 PM
25

Is that what professors do nowadays? You could just read the powerpoint yourself.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 01:43 AM
2

Thanks for sharing your story. I also was not trying to minimize the what I can only imagine to be torture that going through that must be. I only mean to say that the world we live in is usually not hostile to rape victims like some people claim it to be. Of course the process of getting justice is a long and hard one, which could be made easier by people being more understanding, but understanding should only go as far as the courtroom, where due process should take over.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 08:39 PM
12

In order to be fair here you'd have to compare this response with responses to other reported crimes. Do you have reason to believe that this was a woman/rape specific response, or just lazy cops?
/r/MensRights02/11/12 05:56 PM
43

I really don't understand this. I've never seen anything but pure sympathy and support for women who claim they were raped except maybe from republican senators. The law supports women in this scenario so much that they trample the rights of the accused men, ruining their life even if the charges get thrown out. Show me one woman ever who was laughed out of court in a rape case.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 03:11 PM
2

Agreed up to the last point. I don't think we should hold anything hostage to get what we want. I agree that a woman should have a choice about being a mother, and I believe a man should have the same choice (about being a father in rights and responsibility). Just because the latter is not yet accepted by society doesn't mean we should retract the former.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 10:51 PM
3

This is great. I personally prefer making mistakes so I can learn from them rather than avoiding it entirely.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 10:44 PM
11

I'm sick of this whole MRM=conservative crap. I realize that the democrats like to pander to feminists more than republicans do, but it's not like republicans do anything to further men's rights. They do, however, say stupid shit like how rape babies are a gift from god and that women's bodies can shut down pregnancy from 'legitimate' rape. Who here agrees with any of that? I certainly don't.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 10:43 PM
1

Except that I haven't met a single self-proclaimed feminist that didn't laugh at even the most serious of men's rights issues, like longer prison sentences and family court issues. The claim that we all want the same thing is disingenuous at best. I am sure there are some people out there that think of themselves as feminists who want true equality, but in my admittedly anecdotal experience, they are the minority.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:36 PM
65

and get the child support amount raised...
/r/MensRights20/09/12 09:19 PM
5

And since when should things that are grounds for divorce be prohibited? Just because a person shouldn't do something, doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to. His body, his choice.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 08:51 PM
2

I believe that was sarcasm.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 08:53 PM
10

Thank you. I got so mad at that post the other day because I couldn't find a single person in the comments who understood this.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 02:46 PM
1

Argue against the ideas, not the source.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 02:44 PM
6

It's hilarious to me that even though the majority of people in college now are women, "the Men's Center exists everywhere else". I'd love to see any sort of honest justification of this kind of statement, but alas I know one doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 01:13 PM
11

You can call it "harassment", but you can't call it misogyny. Like the OP's mother mentioned, this "harassment" is applied equally to males and females. As a person, someone can take offense to that kind of workplace dynamic, but it's just wrong to call it sexism. I am of course only speaking about the kind of "harassment" the OP's mother mentioned.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 07:47 PM
5

Do these people really want to protect and serve the same kids that are going to "bang their mom because they're a fag" later on-line? I'm sure what they want is to be able to put food on the table with a job they are the most qualified for.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:09 PM
1

There's a difference between wanting the right (when both people agree) to stay at home, and wanting to force women to stay at home. I haven't seen anyone here argue for the latter.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 04:43 PM
29

This is the best response I've seen to this question. I never get the other side of this argument. I see it as an argument born of frustration rather than clear thinking. If transgendered people want the respect they deserve to live their lives as they see fit, they should give everyone else the same respect. Nobody should be forced to have sex with anyone, for any reason. Nobody should be judged for not having sex with anyone, for any reason. Period.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 06:35 PM
6

How? How could you think she is sane? I've never heard a single word she has said that wasn't completely batshit.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 05:51 PM
1

Which is why people are supposed to be assumed innocent until proven guilty. You shouldn't have to prove a claim is false. You have to prove it's true.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 08:54 PM
9

Name one tv show, serious or otherwise, where the woman is portrayed like men are in many sitcoms. The only one that comes to mind for me is family guy (Meg) but she gets balanced out by Chris. If it were merely a result of a disproportionate number of male characters, some would exist.
/r/MensRights08/10/10 11:36 PM
1

That is most certainly not what most feminists mean when they say patriarchy.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 01:49 PM
-4

I didn't say that men don't suffer, I said you can't consider the cause of the suffering to be men (patriarchy).
/r/MensRights27/08/10 01:46 PM
9

I was completely with this quote until she mentions the patriarchy. How can you say you don't hate men when you intrinsically blame them for all the problems you are fighting against? I believe that men and women are both victimized by the patriarchal culture How can it possibly be a patriarchy if men are victimized as well?
/r/MensRights27/08/10 12:35 PM
6

The difference is that justice will be served in this case in divorce court, whereas if the roles were reversed, the court ruling would most likely be the same. Nobody claims there are no bad husbands or that all divorce court rulings should favor the husband.
/r/MensRights05/08/10 06:09 PM
17

Did you want the study done last week? I fail to see how 3 years makes a difference. Maybe if it were 50 years.
/r/MensRights16/07/10 03:18 AM
2

Pop music is to popular music as emo music is to emotional music. That is all.
/r/MensRights01/06/10 02:00 PM
1

Led Zeppelin is extremely far removed from pop.
/r/MensRights01/06/10 03:23 AM
1

I only referred to her as a victim for clarity. Accuser is a better word.
/r/MensRights04/05/10 01:25 AM
7

The point is to not take the accuser's word as 100% truth. Because of the severity of the crime, some people might find it incredibly hard to believe that someone would lie about it. There is often very little other evidence in rape cases than the accuser's word. If all juries took the accuser's testimony as 100% truth, 41% of people sentenced to years in prison for rape would be innocent, assuming your number is correct. I don't, however, see how reporting on the psychological trauma is relevan…
/r/MensRights03/05/10 01:34 PM
8

Exactly, which is the same reason why he can't "man up" and hold his own against her. Sure he could win in a fight if he's willing to risk jail for it. She doesn't have that problem.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 03:15 AM
9

I don't see how this is a men's rights issue. The husband was worried that he didnt give her HPV. He was merely reassured that he might have or she might have gotten it without cheating. How is prudence supposed to know whether or not his wife is cheating on him?
/r/MensRights11/03/10 03:41 PM
20

What a sorry excuse for a judge. How is it rocking the boat to incarcerate a woman who beat and stabbed her boyfriend? Oh I see, they played the depression card, as if that is any excuse at all for any man ever.
/r/MensRights28/01/10 02:56 PM
7

But study of a single gender would be sexist!! ... wait...
/r/MensRights26/01/10 11:12 PM
2

Good luck finding a poster or anything really that has the roles reversed.
/r/MensRights21/01/10 03:01 PM
3

It doesn't if there is ANY other evidence.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 04:56 PM
5

cue feminist protests/hypocrisy
/r/MensRights11/01/10 06:42 PM
3

Although still terrible, college in canada is much much much cheaper.
/r/MensRights08/01/10 04:07 PM
7

If we ignore all the data that contradicts our hypothesis, our hypothesis is confirmed!! Eureka!
/r/MensRights20/11/09 07:32 PM
5

report: 20% of divorced parents love hating their ex more than they love their children.
/r/MensRights20/11/09 04:03 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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