TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

lasertits69 Archive

View 3 posts and 326 comments by lasertits69 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

The children go to mandatory Chinese boarding schools where they get abused and “re-educated”. They come home traumatized and not knowing their mother tongues. But they come home. It is absolutely terrible. But it isn’t “designated baby smashing tree” terrible or naked crucifixion terrible.
/r/MensRights12/03/22 05:34 PM
2

What’s going on with the Uyghurs is possibly just as bad, possibly even worse No it’s absolutely incomparable. The Turks crucified naked Armenian teens and brought scores of them on death marches through the desert. The nazis would tie two people together and shoot one of them then push them both in a river because it saved bullets. Pol Pot had innocent people brutally tortured until they “snitched” on their innocent family members and then killed the snitch and nabbed the family to repeat the c…
/r/MensRights12/03/22 02:11 PM
9

Iirc we did not even know about the horrors of concentration camps until we liberated one. We got involved with that war because hitler was basically trying to conquer all of Europe and was on track to succeed. In other words, if Hitler had not tried to invade everyone he probably could have exterminated all the undesirables in Germany without anybody saying anything. That time period is pretty notorious for horrific genocides being carried out while the rest of the world shrugs.
/r/MensRights12/03/22 12:01 AM
4

There’s really no such thing as shooting to injure when it comes to self defense. Legally speaking shooting someone is deadly force and there’s no such thing as shooting someone just a little bit.
/r/MensRights27/11/21 04:59 PM
9

She later confessed to the cops that she sexually abused many kids. One of the kids she abused was the son of a politician, he made sure she left the state and revoked her teaching license. That’s fucking crazy, she got so lucky. A powerful politician in India could probably disappear people like that.
/r/MensRights03/09/21 07:01 AM
3

Probably a mix of both tbh. The stats are out there on cops and abuse and it sounds like OP was in a closely adjacent profession. It sounds like the bureaucrat came in when they decided to selectively judge individuals from some groups but not others.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 05:23 AM
9

Yeah going down the path of judging an individual for group statistics is not good and I honestly thought we were beyond that as a society.
/r/MensRights25/08/20 04:57 PM
15

Feminists: when we say we are abused we are not believed! Lorena: no no I didn’t sexually mutilate my husband, I was being abused! Police: OK. Free to go. Feminists: nobody believes us when we are abused!
/r/MensRights16/02/19 03:57 PM
19

And I’m pretty sure that’s what you’re supposed to do as a professional licensee. You have to know your scope and your limits and not wing it if you don’t know what you’re doing.
/r/MensRights09/04/18 02:33 PM
1

Definitely misinterpreting my point here. The point is that the woman IS used as a major propaganda piece even decades later to represent women in the workplace and, broader, women in any traditionally male arena. However the fact of the matter is that this symbolic person's story runs counter to the narrative. The woman on the "we can do it" poster COULDNT do it. I do not fault her as an individual nor do I think she was a baby. As I said above, I would have noped right out of any position with…
/r/MensRights13/02/16 02:36 AM
4

Definitely misinterpreting my point here. The point is that the woman IS used as a major propaganda piece even decades later to represent women in the workplace and, broader, women in any traditionally male arena. However the fact of the matter is that this symbolic person's story runs counter to the narrative. The woman on the "we can do it" poster COULDNT do it. I do not fault her as an individual nor do I think she was a baby. As I said above, I would have noped right out of any position with…
/r/MensRights13/02/16 02:36 AM
27

I'll take that risk over laying in a foxhole wondering if I'll die by trenchrot, mortar, or starvation inside a concentration camp. I mean, men were shipped off to go live in hell for months at a time. At least working in a metal shop you're only risking your hands and you get to go home every day. But she couldn't even do that because she liked to play the cello... And she is the poster girl for grrrl power. I'm not saying I'm any braver or that I would stay in the shop. But I am saying you'll …
/r/MensRights12/02/16 09:48 PM
41

She probably wouldn't. The woman who inspired Rosie quit her job at a metal press after only a couple weeks because she was worried about hand injury. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Doyle "We can do it!"
/r/MensRights12/02/16 07:40 PM
0

You're addressing the wrong thing here. That graph is an established thing in TRP. If that graph is new to you, you need to do more reading and less posting. Besides that, the scale of the graph is not the core of my argument.
/r/TheRedPill17/11/15 08:25 PM
1

I don't often post here but it seems like nobody else is hitting the nail on the head on this. Let's start with this graph. You are correct in saying that this will not always describe an individual's life. Think of it more as a graph of peak SMVs that are possible throughout the years. The female SMV curve relies on them being 1) attractive and 2) able to leverage that attractiveness. Attractiveness diminishes for them since it is based in youthfulness, so over time they have less to leverage. …
/r/TheRedPill16/11/15 07:38 PM
0

If you live right and you have abundance mentality the dread is passive. All you need for dread is for her to know you can get it elsewhere. If she doesn't have a monopoly she can't restrain supply to create artificially high prices. Stay smart, keep up with skills, have some "you" activities, and hit the gym. All stuff you should be doing anyway.
/r/TheRedPill10/10/15 04:18 PM
1

Yeah you got away very lucky. Good to see the world works properly at least sometimes. And yes if you are one of those who says "men should never ever hit women. Even if they are hitting you, you must take it since your strikes are much more dangerous than hers," then you are still plugged in hard.
/r/TheRedPill29/05/15 06:17 PM
2

Nobody here believes they have the god given right; but they certainly have that as a state-protected right. If you defend yourself against a woman, she will call the cops. She will tell them a story that differs greatly from reality, with you instigating, escalating, and striking without reason. She will ham up the crocodile tears. Any marks left on you from her initial assault will be chalked up to self defense. No marks left on you? She was too scared to even try fighting back. Good luck conv…
/r/TheRedPill29/05/15 05:53 PM
1

I've been going to a kava bar myself called root of happiness. I know there's the two Roots and then one in Texas and another one somewhere so I figured there was a good chance you were in my bar! I agree about the strange place that is a kava bar. Mine has a unrelenting chill vibe but some of the other customers can be a bit...different.
/r/TheRedPill06/04/15 07:23 AM
3

Another poster said this already but it bears repeating: LEARN TO WORK HARD. My dad would always try to instill this in me but being a little shit, I decided "nah I'm smart enough to get Bs and some As without working hard and when that stops then I'll work hard". I relied on my natural gifts but I did not add to them. Natural gifts are your baseline and hard work is your multiplier. Anything times zero equals zero. I'll take a 5'8" guy with a 100iq who works his nuts off 16 hours a day to get s…
/r/TheRedPill03/04/15 07:57 PM
1

Was the kava bar called Root of Happiness?
/r/TheRedPill03/04/15 05:58 AM
1

There is a difference between mcdonalds and circumcision in that the child can later decide to not eat mcdonalds but you can't stop being circumcised. As for not telling people how to raise their kids, I agree to an extent. But we force parents to enroll their kids in school. We forbid beatings and molestation. Society does have a duty to look out for the children, which is why FGM in any form is banned. Even the ceremonial pinprick is banned. Should we allow female circumcision under "what you …
/r/MensRights28/03/15 11:06 PM
17

Why are you ok with circumcision? As for FGM, there are many different types varying from infibulation to a ceremonial pinprick. So it depends on the procedure used.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:56 PM
1

'I have a very simple solution which I hope you will agree is fair. If the complainant (I do not refer to her as the victim) was under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both, when she was ‘raped’, this provides the accused with a complete defence' See that? If the complainant was under the influence - that is enough for it not to be rape?! (it's a complete defense against rape accusations). Defense against legal accusations is not the same as "not rape". For something to be rape, it merely r…
/r/MensRights07/02/15 08:33 PM
2

The contract for sale, if it were a commitment to future behavior, may be void. What if they paid cash on the spot? Could they get their money back or press any sort of charges?
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:51 PM
4

australian tax rates: $100000-(0.35*$100000)-($17547+0.37*($100,000-$80,000))=$40,053
/r/TheRedPill24/01/15 10:06 AM
1

Wow. Everyone thinks if the children, nobody thinks of the men.
/r/TheRedPill24/12/14 07:44 PM
1

Since tax takes about a third of your gross, wouldn't 68% of your gross be your whole take-home pay? What state is this??
/r/TheRedPill24/12/14 08:24 AM
1

She should not gym 5hrs a day. Overworking steals your gains.
/r/TheRedPill29/11/14 07:24 AM
1

Right. If the rates of DV are similar between the genders but DV represents a smaller portion of overall violence for men than women, it means that women are experiencing less overall violence than men are.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 05:09 PM
1

What are the U and I?
/r/MensRights25/11/14 08:04 PM
0

Friendly grammar reminder here. Eg is for examples (EGgsamples). Ie is for a brief summary (in essence). 1) Often women get unnecessarily large alimony payouts, eg Robin William's wife. 2) Sometimes women receive far too much court mandated money from their ex husbands, ie excessive alimony.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 07:53 AM
1

K You jumped to sinister intent based off of a video that was cropped to prove a point. I'm just pointing out that maybe it wasn't that. There's a lot of perfectly civil reasons to share a sidewalk with someone in NYC. Your claim has about as much evidence as any of my hypotheticals do. Arghh I'm just so angry!
/r/TheRedPill29/10/14 07:00 PM
1

Or he could have been going to the bakery. Or she could have modified her pace to keep him next to her for a few minutes for the sake of the video. Or New York could be a crowded place where it isn't all that rare to walk next to someone for 5 minutes without saying anything or trying to rape them. Nah, he was probably just waiting for some alleyway to shove her into so he could street rape her in broad daylight in NYC. Yep it was that.
/r/TheRedPill29/10/14 04:51 PM
1

No no no that isn't what she wants at all! Don't treat them like criminals! Just send her some money so she can use it to end street harassment somehow. You've seen how real it is, now open your wallets and give her money. /s
/r/TheRedPill29/10/14 04:40 PM
1

The whole fat acceptance movement is pretty simple, though many find it confusing. First all women want to feel beautiful but some women are not, others could be with a little bit of penance at the church of iron. Next, most women don't want to do the work. So they say, "fuck it I'm beautiful" and they really convince themselves of it. Important to remember here that they don't actually care about being beautiful, they just want to FEEL that they are beautiful. Now you, the asshole, comes along.…
/r/TheRedPill28/10/14 04:23 PM
1

I read that and all I could think was "so if all 20 year olds were jumping off bridges..." Treat the children like children.
/r/TheRedPill28/10/14 03:52 PM
1

for the better Remember that RP doesn't deal with better or worse or good or bad. RP is amoral (not moral or immoral), it assigns no moral values and does not claim to exist in a moral system. What RP deals with is accuracy and results. Not good or bad; rather accurate or inaccurate. Not better or worse; effective or ineffective.
/r/TheRedPill08/10/14 06:26 PM
7

Its amazing they could make such a leap from such terrible footing. They try to deconstruct causality using an ambiguous situation about pens. Except their hypothetical is not at all ambiguous: they keep the kitchen junk drawer stocked with pens. They also have the following arrangement: The husband is allowed to swipe these pens for work [at home], but the wife is absolutely not [allowed to swipe pens for work at office, where she can get pens]. Nonetheless, they are both chronic swipers — in f…
/r/TheRedPill26/08/14 10:18 AM
8

This article is a testament to the power of FRAME The authors frame the concept very pro-woman. This frame is wrong. Here's the kind of bullshit you can make yourself believe by not maintaining your frame: The indents quote Nature's four ways to report epigenetic findings more "responsibly".... . (1) by presenting extrapolations to humans from other animals with appropriate qualifications, Translation: We will find data that will either support us or will be wrapped up in "qualifications". Ultim…
/r/TheRedPill26/08/14 09:55 AM
1

I'm not gonna lie man, you seem full of feel good bullshit. Could be boundless optimism but it seems more self fooling to me. Right down to the idea that coming to this sub to "seek" advice is not actually just waiting for a stranger on the internet to happen to tell you what you need to hear without ever having met you. Stop deluding yourself. No don't "have fun failing". Failing sucks. Have fun getting out there and trying and doing and bettering yourself. Don't fail every day and say "well yo…
/r/TheRedPill29/07/14 04:46 PM
1

I never experienced any smell first hand. I've heard about "fruity aromas" so its not like you smell like shit. I've had some metallic taste in the mouth/back of tongue. Everyone is different. Check out /r/keto for tons of useful beginner info and FAQ.
/r/TheRedPill11/06/14 05:08 PM
7

If I have a car with a turbocharger but no engine it won't go anywhere (turbo charger is not sufficient). If I have the engine but not the turbo charger, it goes places (turbo charger is not necessary). If I have the engine and the turbo charger, it will go a lot faster (turbo charger helps when added to sufficient and necessary conditions). Keto is like the turbo: Part of keto is that it makes it easy to run a caloric deficit. For perspective, 5000 calories is >64 eggs. Nobody can eat that much…
/r/TheRedPill11/06/14 02:42 AM
2

That the motivation to keep the laws in place is due to wanting to drive the economy. It's about not wanting to give away the female vote to your opponent who will undoubtedly smear you during campaign.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/14 12:47 PM
15

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.
/r/TheRedPill23/04/14 11:39 AM
7

Vidi. Vici. Veni. FTFY
/r/TheRedPill23/04/14 11:33 AM
3

Hey OP, something to keep in mind is that a lot of people, myself included, tend to romanticize the past and subconsciously choose to avoid remembering the bad things about a former partner. We do this because remembering shitty things makes us feel shitty and we try to avoid feeling shitty when we can. Another reason this happens is because people don't like to accept they decided to spend several years of their life with the wrong person. For many of us, "she was pretty good and I let her get …
/r/TheRedPill30/03/14 12:11 AM
1

Well hello. I am interested in procuring an intercoursal relationship. Are you so inclined as to accept? ... Fantastic then, the engagement shall commence at my abode this evening at 9pm; protection will be provided. I swear it totally works
/r/TheRedPill12/03/14 10:49 AM
1

What is the easier way to change someone's mood to "nah no free meals today, I'm not about that"?
/r/TheRedPill12/03/14 10:36 AM
1

There is a better argument against "whoever asks pays" than "but the man always asks". TMAA assumes that WAP. TMAA takes WAP and says "yes that is true but now I'm going to whine about an ages old social more." Now that is also true, and you validate their model. And what they say to that is generally some variation of yeah that's all true now suck it up or jerk off, it is the way it is buddy. The better argument is that WAP is not true at all. When she asks her friends to the club, does she pay…
/r/TheRedPill12/03/14 10:32 AM
1

they think it should Huge conjecture on your part
/r/MensRights09/03/14 06:54 AM
1

All he's really trying to point out is that they are forming a separate, concurring opinion based on factors relevant to them. Obviously most people aren't going to care about some harm that is being done to someone they can't identify with. That's why you buy a phone made overseas in factories that have to take anti-suicide measures. You can't identify with those people. Intellectually you know it is wrong, but there is no real connection. Those women are seeing the problems/irrelevancies/lies …
/r/MensRights09/03/14 03:15 AM
123

Junkies never break frame and always have something more important going on. They pursue their goals with steadfast dedication that would put Gandhi to shame. It's just that their frame is drugs are awesome, the better thing is drugs, and their goals are getting more drugs. If you could be as dedicated to anything as junkies are to drugs, you'd be a wild success story. Just don't get pissed man. Remember to not get mad at people for doing what they will do. You can only control yourself and ange…
/r/TheRedPill28/02/14 10:40 PM
6

Becoming a porn addict is like becoming any other kind of addict. It fucks with your focus, memory, and emotions. It conditions your sexuality to a screen. You'd be better off learning to harness that masculine sexual energy and DO something with it rather than blowing it out over some pixels. Really, it goes like this: non-LTR fuck>abstinence>healthy masturbation>porn Plus, there's the well known side effect of being able to get it up/get off for porn but not for women. Its hard to deny the urg…
/r/TheRedPill10/02/14 11:12 PM
6

It is pretty much just Briffault's law verbatim.
/r/TheRedPill03/02/14 01:14 PM
1

I really do think it is very good and would help alot of newer guys. Please make it into a full post. Done!
/r/TheRedPill26/01/14 04:13 PM
1

I've always wondered why women feel the urge to invade male spaces, rather than make they're own. I have a theory: As a general rule, as we all know, feminists are hideous, they seek to invade male spaces in hopes that the ratio would mean they have increased chances of acquiring a mate. That could be true for some women, but I think that feminists invade for two main reasons. One, they resent exclusion based on gender. Two, male only spaces are a serious source of male empowerment. They invade …
/r/TheRedPill25/01/14 04:45 PM
2

Victim blaming is only blaming the victim if there is a victim. He is telling you that before you become a victim, you should do these things to prevent becoming a victim or becoming a victim again. The misunderstanding of victim blaming comes when people dispensing the advice are doing it proactively to prevent re victimization; while the people shrieking against it hear it as telling a victim what they did to deserve what they got. Its the difference between a cop saying: "Dude you didn't clos…
/r/TheRedPill25/01/14 04:17 PM
2

I see you're getting downvoted a lot in this comment subthread. But as someone who had studied martial arts for almost half my life, I've gotta say that I agree with you. We would be taught techniques that seem fucking brutal and downright deadly. Some of them were overkill. But you know what sensei would always say? "I know this seems brutal and deadly. Because it is. You don't use this stuff in horseplay with your friends. You use it when your well being is in danger and not a second before. Y…
/r/TheRedPill25/01/14 04:01 PM
3

Holy shit, I just googled infibulation and read the wiki about female infibulation. That is fucking disgusting. According to wiki, they take pre-pubescent girls, remove all labia and possibly the clitoris. (Also I doubt they have scalpels over there so it is probably broken glass/sharpened rocks/dull knives.) Then they but a stick in the wound and bind her legs together for weeks so that the wound heals over the vagina and the stick creates a small hole for urine and menses. Then, once married, …
/r/MensRights24/01/14 11:27 PM
1

Imagine a guy and he loves his car... Now take that and crank it to 11 and throw in the feels That sounds really fucking annoying from some girl I'm fucking and really fucking expensive for the guy footing her bills.
/r/TheRedPill24/01/14 11:48 AM
1

horse girl I've seen the horse girl play out with guys twice my age (23). I've seen horse girls in relationships, out of relationships, and I've known a few since we were both children. I've always thought something was off about them and one of the older guys actually told me verbatim "do NOT marry a horse girl. He explained it to me but I was too young at the time to really get it. So, what exactly is it about horse girls?
/r/TheRedPill24/01/14 05:46 AM
1

Ambitious smart muscular etc are indicators of beta/alpha. If you are taking your life by the balls and take no excuses or bullshit, you will be fit, ambitious, and well read if not naturally intelligent. That's why the remedy prescribed on this sub is to lift, read, and live your life.
/r/TheRedPill14/01/14 10:00 PM
7

You guys, like the wacko feminists, turn human relationships into some kind of competition. Everything is some kind of battle for power and influence. You're right to recognize that a lot of men are in shitty relationships. A lot of men are led around by their dicks. A lot of men are in sad, sexless marriages. I just don't agree with your approach. This was a GREAT comment. Well thought out, you have a good grip on the world. I'm choosing to zero in on this part because my reply kind of applies …
/r/TheRedPill08/12/13 03:01 PM
1

Good luck fighting "rape culture" by urging rapists to oppose it! But seriously, no sarcasm, I hope that works. It would be like "Oh wow! it really was that simple," and then there'd be no more rape. How awesome would that be? I mean, I'm not holding my breath. But it is still nice to dream.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 12:52 AM
2

Interesting. Like I've said elsewhere, IANAL, so this is all armchair law 101 on my end. Just trying to use my noodle.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 01:29 AM
0

We do this because if we don't the effects of the disorder do more damage to the child's life than the side effects and changes in brain chemistry. Now if you're a naturalist who thinks we shouldn't fuck with nature, you can stop reading here and go flush your aspirin down the toilet. We fuck with our bodies all. the. time. when not fucking with them leads to worse outcomes. For instance: a person with untreated ADHD is 5x more likely to abuse substances as someone with treated ADHD. So imagine …
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:40 AM
0

During the ADHD interviews, the trained neurologist asks you a series of questions; has you perform several tasks; has you try to memorize words; has you prattle off lists. This gives an idea into your thought processes and limitations. They observe you the whole time, looking for physical signs of neurological disorder. On top of all this, they delve deep into your life experiences. For ADHD, they rule out all other mental disorders since things like depression and anxiety can make memory/atten…
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:38 AM
1

How exactly does the drug work? I'd really like to hear your explanation.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:19 AM
0

Yes, psychotropic drugs create an imbalance. The idea is to create an imbalance that cancels out the pathologic imbalance, restoring balance. If as you say: Psychotripic [sic] drugs dont treat any form of chemical imbalance they CREATE the chemical imbalance. Then how did they get crazy before they were put on drugs? And why would the FDA approve drugs which were neither safe or effective? Which takeout menu is your PhD in armchair neurology printed on?
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:18 AM
0

So you're not qualified at all...got it.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:13 AM
1

still a bullshit disorder in an entire book of bullshit disorders So depression isn't real? How about PTSD? The brain is an organ and has a function. Your thought process has a neurological mechanism of action behind it. Just like your other organs, the brain can have a disfunction. If the memory and attention parts are dysfunctional, you have ADHD. If the part that filters the real from the unreal goes out, you have a psychotic disorder. Just like if the mucus in your stomach thins, you get an …
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:12 AM
0

For example sadness is a certain brain state, and so you could say that everyone who is sad ever has a disorder, when in reality sadness is totally normal. What you describe is healthy sadness, the corresponding unhealthy disorder is depression...the neurological inability to be happy. Sometimes normal people have a hard time paying attention because of life reasons (maybe their dog died). People who have the neurological inability to pay attention to basic life tasks have ADHD. Disorders like A…
/r/MensRights27/11/13 02:57 AM
0

You are right. What I was getting at is that our theories regarding ADHD have successfully predicted reality. The proposed pathophys of ADHD involves a deficit of NE and DA. We found adderall works and hypothesized that it has to do with the increase of NE and DA. Normal people getting hyperactive is due to the increase of NE and DA. If you have ADHD you have less NE/DA than normal folks and a small dose of amphetamine brings you up to normal. If you are normal that same small dose will bring yo…
/r/MensRights27/11/13 02:53 AM
9

Dude...Just because there isn't a definite test for it doesn't mean it is fake. Do you understand the current knowledge of normal physiology in a non-ADHD brain? Basically, when the brain decides something is worth paying attention to it uses a combination of norepinephrine and dopamine to upregulate that neural circuit. In a normal brain, the neurons involved fire and if sustained attention is needed, they form a positive feedback loop AKA "getting in the zone," made possible by NE and DA. In a…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:52 PM
1

Still explains why the dentist's salary is so low, which was the topic of the comment I was replying to.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 04:58 PM
1

Still outside of the scope of practice, but I suppose you are right. They should have "outlawed" the procedure and OBGYN treating men. OBGYN is the specialty of female reproductive tract. By definition, practicing on men is outside of the scope of practice.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 04:56 PM
1

Right, which means that the direct cause of this 200$ pay gap is negotiation, not "Because she doesn't pay for date meals"
/r/MensRights26/11/13 04:53 PM
1

Yep and that is one of the reasons I loved Al as a kid: he was a good freaking guy who was respectful. I think this blox case is interesting because it seems like what is at stake is not whether the parody is legal, but who gets to say what can be done with that parody? In this case they are using the parody to associate their gender-role-breaking product with a gender-role-breaking parody. The issue is deeper than the mere use of another person's song. I think they have a stronger case than mos…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 04:28 PM
1

I looked on google and I could not find one doctor or education program for dual certifications in gynecology and proctology. If you can find one, it is an issue but not as big of an issue as MDs practicing outside of their scope and using unapproved surgical procedures. It just isn't how medicine is done. You shouldn't be using a cervical procedure on an asshole because "hey it works!"
/r/MensRights26/11/13 03:10 PM
1

I agree!
/r/MensRights26/11/13 03:00 PM
1

heir specialty is the prostate. Just because that's the entrance to their workspace doesn't make them anal experts any more that the guy that removes tonsils is a dentist. I'd say it falls to the gastro-enterologist. Really though?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:58 PM
1

The rationale is that these OBGYNs are performing an unapproved surgical procedure that is also outside of their scope of practice. OBGYN is a specialist in the female reproductive tract, according to the executive director of the board that certifies OBGYNs. You can't just go around doing unapproved surgeries on body parts outside of your expertise. That's not how medicine is done.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:51 PM
3

According to wikipedia: The commercial nature of a parody does not render it a presumptively unfair use of copyrighted material. Rather, a parody's commercial character is only one element that should be weighed in a fair use inquiry. Im not sure which court was specific on that point but wiki says the supreme court overturned the lesser courts decision and that afterwards, the parties settled on their own.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:45 PM
0

They need to wait for consenting artists, instead of using a court to enforce their wrongdoing. I'm not sure they do, since parodies are covered under fair use. They aren't using "Girls"; they are using a parody which flips the misogynistic paradigm promoted in the song to further their product which also flips a misogynistic paradigm. It's still pretty scummy Its business baby! Don't hate the player hate the game. If it is significantly scummy the rules should change to forbid that, which is wh…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:38 PM
4

See tables 1 and 2 on page 4 Women commute less often, less far, and spend less time doing it: Female and male means for both miles and minutes are significantly different by sex in each year shown with 99% confidence. EDIT: So it isn't the vagina that reduces your commute, that would be as ridiculous as saying that its the penis that makes the extra money. Which is part of what we're getting at here: Genitals<Choices
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:44 PM
2

While in and of itself not enough to completely refute either assertion by deductive logic, it does serve as a useful premise in the argument and represents something that feminists who claim voicelessness will have to reconcile with their claims. The most you could argue against this post is that it is useless since it only presents an incomplete argument and then draws a conclusion. And I will reiterate once more that its strawmanness is irrelevant if the voicelessness argument was actually ma…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:39 PM
5

However, Wierd Al is very likely to win those lawsuits. Parodies are usually covered under fair use doctrine and IIRC, he asks permission so as to not be disrespectful but also to have that much more ammo should the lawsuit come up when the artist changes their mind. Right now, GoldieBlox is not suing for money or damages. They are asking the court for permission under fair use doctrine. If they lose at this and appellate courts, then continue to use the song, we have a problem. Right now we hav…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:25 PM
0

Interesting article about Wierd Al's legal issues. It seems to be a grey area but that most parodies are classified under fair use doctrine and therefore legally defensible. Goldieblox's lawsuit is suing to get their use of the parody classified under fair use as well. In other words, they are going through proper legal channels and not being at all underhanded. If we're talking IP law here (IANAL) and we look at the law, it seems like GoldieBlox is actually in the right. If you can use someone …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:21 PM
1

I honestly don't know! If the technique has been proven safe and effective and is within the proctologist's scope of practice, then they really should be performing the procedure. IF it hasn't been proven safe and effective then nobody should be performing the procedure. Especially not an OBGYN.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:03 PM
3

I would agree with you but where is men's awareness google's? (not rhetorical, they may exist without me seeing them) Unless men's issues are getting more Google homepage dedications, then women's issues are given at least an equal voice and this screenshot still refutes the actual feminist statement. While your two hypothetical feminist arguments are significantly different, they don't lack parity in such a manner that the screenshot does not refute them both at the same time. If the tool used …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:56 PM
6

"Women get no attention or representation anywhere and women's issues are never highlighted" If this is true, we sure would have a strawman. But from my gender studies course I can assure you that many feminists DO believe that women don't have an adequate voice in society for their issues. "Women's issues are stifled and invalidated" is a core belief in most feminist's version of feminism. You seem to remove these feminists from the group of true feminists and wind up committing a no true scots…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 12:06 PM
7

You are yet to show that the "real" feminist argument is significantly different from "Women get no attention or representation anywhere and women's issues are never highlighted" in a manner that invalidates this picture as counterevidence. A straw man has a significant difference that makes the two statements lack parity in a way that the tool used to destroy the straw man does not also destroy the original argument. If the realistic feminist position is at all similar to "Women get no attentio…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:58 AM
3

Are women really objectively worse off, or are we as a species simply incapable of empathising with men? Well seeing as men don't get raped, don't suffer genital mutilation, aren't reduced to objects, and generally have no problems which I consider to be significant, I'd have to say women are worse off. /s
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:39 AM
3

I've always felt that this crusade against objectification is really just feminists trying to invalidate the male perspective of male sexual attraction and replace it with a female one. It shows that they don't understand men at all and have no business telling us how to think. For better or for worse, our psychology finds certain physical traits attractive and pleasing to look at. The male sexuality is often very physical and feminists want us to just shut that part off?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:36 AM
3

Yeah, if it were just an objectification thing wouldn't men find dead women attractive just the same as live ones? I mean, an attractive dead woman still has the same body and face objects without all that pesky personhood. But we don't. Because the male gaze does not reduce to a mere object; it admires as a spectacle of human beauty.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:29 AM
3

Feminists: When we tell you what to do it is for the betterment of humanity. When you tell us to do that same thing, you can can it shitlord, get the fuck out of my head. But yeah, I never really thought of that: by telling me to mute or amplify my natural responses to female attractiveness, feminists are treating me like some sort of object that they can change as they see fit.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:24 AM
4

This is not a "sue you for money" lawsuit. It is a "let's see if the law permits me to use this version of your art for profit" lawsuit. Honestly, I think it does. Weird Al made a career of selling parody versions of songs and has basically said that parodies do not require the consent of the original artist but that he gets the OK anyway to not be a dick. Goldieblox is acting like a dick, but it may be totally legal.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:21 AM
18

Sort of. If you put out a new Star Wars, Lucas Arts (or whoever owns the rights now) would contact you and tell you to stop. Then you could stop OR you could try to make it legal by "a preemptive lawsuit seeking to get the song classified under fair use," which is what Goldieblox did here. This isn't so much of a "sue-you-for-money" lawsuit as it is: Mike D: "Hey Goldieblox, we see you're a great company and like you guys but we made a decision based on principle to not let our music by used to …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:15 AM
2

I fail to see how this is bad. Gynecologists are doctors of ladyparts. Want to to treat your anal cancer? Proctologist. Want to get benefits of techniques used to screen for cervical cancer? Find a proctologist or ID doc who utilizes them or maybe even bring it up to your own proctologist. This seems like the equivalent of "Board of pediatricians insists that registered members do not treat adults except for in rare circumstances" Gynecologists are doctors of the female reproductive tract, accor…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:03 AM
8

The problem I have with this logic is that these are not the reasons women get paid less. There is not some board of old white sitting there like "She doesn't pay for her meals?! Take it out of her salary!" When a woman looks at her pay stub there is not a "women and children first" deduction right after social security and taxes. When a woman goes to negotiate salary her boss isn't like "Well we could give you more...but you might just get divorced and get a whole bunch of money from him and th…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:43 AM
2

IDK where you live but for USA to Australian comparison: USA pharmacists make 40-70$/hr, while AUS RPh starts at 15-25 and maybe make it up to 35-40. Source: was considering moving to AUS to be an RPh and talked with an AUSian RPh only to find that I wouldn't be able to pay my student loans and keep the lights on if I moved there.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:38 AM
22

The problem is that this poster makes the claim that men are systematically favored due to patriarchal privilege and "boy's club" mentalities. As /u/Zeddikus points out, these stats lump all lawyers together, all dentists together, all arcitechts together, etc... even though there are many subfields to each profession and they all pay differently. Then they take these manipulated stats and try to say the only real difference is a penis and a penis is all it takes to get a 10-25% pay raise. The r…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:34 AM
13

We should make a counter poster with a "add a vagina" thing. Prison sentences, job satisfaction, commute times, overtime hours worked, value-added to company.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:12 AM
10

A strawman is where you construct an argument your opponent didn't make and then tear it down and say "I won! I'm right!". What is the false argument OP makes/tears down and what is feminism's actual corresponding argument? How are they significantly different?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:05 AM
13

According to feminists, Mansplaining is the male tendency to explain away or attempt to invalidate women's issues/perceptions by using logic and reason. It comes from a privileged position and so it is laughable that men could even pretend to know anything about the issues. Extreme analogy: slave owner explaining why slaves don't have any real problems because of [rationalization] could be considered "whitesplaining". In it's proper use: "You see, rape isn't even that big of a deal. It's just a …
/r/MensRights24/11/13 05:13 PM
3

Yeah I guess in reality a lot of RPers flock to TRP because it tries to go no bullshit at human nature while everyone else feeds them feel good crap. Basically "call em like you see em." Problem is when the betas of RP get screwed over they DON'T call em like they see em; they call em how they want to see em. Rather than saying I should have done something different, they say she's a bitch. In other words, you came in to TRP preaching redpill to a bunch of betas, who are here to learn what you a…
/r/TheRedPill18/11/13 11:15 PM
8

You people are ridiculous. Ted didn't have the balls to make a move, so he got friend zoned. It's his own goddamn fault. You literally just described the core philosophy of TRP: If I don't have the balls to make a move, I lose. The whole point of this sub is to help people be more alpha everywhere in their life. It empowers you by reminding that if you get friend zoned, it is your fault, not hers. Now it is YOUR decision. You guys are the guys who call girls who don't want to dance with you at t…
/r/TheRedPill18/11/13 04:23 PM
1

So if you leave your front door open and come back from the store to find a baby sitting on your couch can you remove it from your home or do you now have to live with the consequences of leaving your door open until the baby is good to leave on its own? If you go to Mexico on vacation despite human trafficking and wake up hooked up to another person who needs to use your blood supply or they will die, do your rules allow the option to take the IV out and let the guy die or do you have to waste …
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:39 PM
1

Once personhood is determined you can't cause harm to it. OK I guess you don't want the answer to your question then. EDIT: I'll add a little thought experiment of my own to hopefully broaden your mind. Imagine you go on vacation to Mexico. You want to see the real Mexico so you hop into a cab and head off the resort. Next thing you know, you wake up attached to an unconscious man via IV line. There is a note that reads "This man requires your blood supply to stay alive until we can find a marro…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:25 PM
8

They lack object permanence, self awareness, metacognition, and the ability to act with intent. But aside from that, you can show the moral permissiveness of abortion even granting the personhood of the unborn baby. Check out Thomson's paper on it in which she uses some thought experiments to show that even if you admit personhood, the baby does not have a right to life that overrides the mother's right to her body.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 06:48 PM
1

A bit of false equivalence there. In the dating social archetype, men used to pay for dates because women didn't have paying jobs. If a date was to occur it had to be funded by the man. In the housewife social archetype, the woman should do those things because everyone has to earn their keep. If she is getting the material goods of life, she's gotta do something for it. If you accept the social archetype of women not working, you must accept that men should pay for dates. If you accept the soci…
/r/MensRights29/10/13 06:12 PM
12

I just spent a half hour over there to check it out and think TRP is good and I'll tell you why. 1) They are trying their best to put words around their experiences in relationships, with the goal of improving other men's experiences in relationships. 2) They function as a space for men to discuss their relationships and what may have caused failure/success 3) They are popular to some degree This tells me that when men utilize TRP advice, they have better experiences; When they utilize TRP discu…
/r/MensRights29/10/13 05:54 PM
9

To be clear I'm talking alimony in a (true) no-fault divorce. Not a "husband pulls the rug out and shacks up with younger secretary" nor the "Wife decides she wants to lay pipe and took me for all I'm worth" memes. I'm talking about the "Honey, I just don't think this is working any more....Yes dear I agree" situation. The first two are useless to discuss: of course he should subsidize her, and of course she doesn't deserve a cent of his future pay for deciding she wants something else more. Thi…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 04:18 PM
11

I've always said that this argument doesn't hold weight for me. Regardless of why she came out of the work force, it was her choice. Maybe not back in the 40s it wasn't really a choice, but now with 60% of college students being female they clearly have a choice. If you chose to do that without working any compensation into the agreement, then you chose of your own free will to give up decades of working experience in return for an easier life and a "traditional" family unit. You valued that mor…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 01:31 PM
2

consensual sex is an oxymoronic term; without consent, the act of sex isn’t really sex at all. It is assault. Not oxymoronic. That means contradictory terms together. She means redundant. Consensual rape is oxymoronic, consensual sex is redundant.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 11:30 AM
5

Then there's no way that he could be the father and shouldn't have to pay any child support?
/r/MensRights27/12/12 03:12 AM
0

The essence of being a man Shit you did it again! There's no such thing as the essence of being a man. Only men and what they do as a collective of individuals. The problem is that you are saying that there is something which motivates all men or all women and, somehow, as if by magic, the male one is positive and the female one is negative. Which makes you and by extension all MRAs look like people who are biased against women and make sweeping generalizations about men and women. Thumbs up for…
/r/MensRights24/12/12 09:58 PM
8

The essence of being a women Six words and two kinds of wrong. Why you make us look bad? That last bigoted part totally overrides the first part that actually contributed to the OP.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 04:04 PM
6

Observed: sluts bad; studs good. Question: Why? Theory: Stud=skill/manliness Slut=no standards/bad gatekeeper Support: Society casts men as sexual aggressors initiating and competing. It casts women as gatekeepers responsible to choose wisely her suitor. We know society loves using shame to keep us dancing so it makes sense that we should praise the ones achieving their role and shame those abandoning it. Not circular, just intertwined
/r/MensRights20/12/12 03:49 AM
5

QFT? Edit: QFT=Quoted for truth. (Thanks, firelord1973)
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:47 PM
1

It makes me feel better in that you are proof that exceptions to the general rule DO exist. It makes me feel worse that you are an exception rather than the rule. Bear with me because this may get a bit confusing: Most women expect to be payed for at least on the first date. I expect that they will expect it. If I were on a date with you, I'd have no idea how you felt about the topic. The only safe bet is to follow the rule rather than the exception. If I offer to pay and you are a +ive exceptio…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:38 PM
2

See, I never got that. If a friend asked me to go to dinner with him [hetero man here], I would assume I am paying. There is no reason for him to buy my meal. Im enjoying it, he's enjoying it; and if I didn't think I'd enjoy it enough to warrant spending my money, then it is insensitive to spend someone else's. But, you add a vagina to the mix and call it a date...all of a sudden that goes out the window. The man has to pony up for the first date and if it goes well, it is just a drop in the buc…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 12:41 PM
3

If you define rape by the old-school, held down in a back alley rape, then yeah it doesn't happen often [to either gender]. But there are many other forms of coercion than physical. I've read stories of guys being THREATENED with rape charges if they wouldn't have sex. Feminists often shout about if she says no once, you stop everything and apply no more pressure. Even if she says yes later on, that first no matters more because the yes was under pressure Yet, in my last relationship my GF would…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 12:24 PM
9

The Men's Health article references two peer reviewed scholarly journals to support the 450% increase in ED figure and the theory behind why that may be the case. And it doesn't take much critical thinking to realize that the choice to cut a part of a person's body off should be left up to that person [esp off their genitals]. Hell, it is illegal as shit to cut the female genitalia. But it would seem that men are disposable and our genitals should be cut because they are wrong by their natural d…
/r/MensRights09/12/12 06:41 PM
5

It's a legitimate medical procedure when people are in my situation. Your situation is different because: Consent Medical need
/r/MensRights09/12/12 06:10 PM
120

You mean cutting the most sensitive part off of a penis makes it dysfunction? Huh! Who knew? /s
/r/MensRights09/12/12 02:11 AM
0

You know I was going to say this in an effort to be fair to all genders. But, in our society most real male rapes don't get taken seriously. Filing a false report like this has never to my knowledge been done by a man and with the way we treat real male victims, I don't see it as a thing both genders could do. Can anyone link to a case where a male files a false rape charge (preferably against a female)?
/r/MensRights04/12/12 02:05 PM
1

ahh I understand.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 04:02 PM
2

Honestly, that sounds worse than rape. It probably caused feelings of violation and broken trust beyond that of what most rape victims feel. It even sounds to me like borderline torture. It was DEFINITELY malpractice and you and your mother should be compensated for damages. In this case, you were born preme and she was forcibly cut open and had her baby taken literally from her womb. Not to mention the physical pain because the asshole MD didn't wait for the anesthesia to kick in. Seriously, ta…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:33 PM
1

Actually it sounds crazy and made up because it is a claim of extraordinary abuse in a setting with dozens of witnesses, at the hands of people who's licenses and livelihoods are on the line. Oh, and almost no evidence was presented aside from the initial allegation. Also, I never heard of this from my women's history course or my frequent 1-on-1s with my professor which makes this either a new development or so rare that nobody knows about it...or it is crazy and made up. Individual women have …
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:26 PM
4

Good point, I see where you're coming from now.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:00 PM
2

Yep. They say it isn't zero-sum, but on many levels it is.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 01:02 AM
3

Right. But it doesn't have to be explicitly sexual. Say, you were molested as a child and anal penetration of any sort brings you back to that first violation. The MD might think "Geez, I just have to check on this guy's prostate its not sexual or anything". But it is. And if the MD forces it on you, you have been raped. Now, I have no idea how we would prosecute this doctor rape since part of being a doctor is penetrating other people who would prefer that you didn't. If they weren't MDs, then …
/r/MensRights25/11/12 12:57 AM
2

It would have been incomplete without that characterization. At first read, it DOES sound crazy and made up. But sometimes real life is stranger than fiction and it is fully POSSIBLE that this happened. The possibility combined with the serious claims should prompt society to at least look into these claims. TLDR: "It sounds crazy and made up"=/="It is crazy and made up"
/r/MensRights25/11/12 12:48 AM
4

In most cases you are right. It is people who are unhappy with their MD or have maybe experienced some form of malpractice which was tangentially related to their vagina. But what I'm saying is that if they explicitly deny a penetrative procedure and the MD forces it on them, it is rape. It sucks to be that MD but all you can do is give them the info and abide by their wishes. [assuming they are in a sound state of mind] I mean, if your MD suspected you had colon cancer but you deny a colonoscop…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 12:41 AM
3

It should be called rape if it is sexually penetrative. If I told my Dr. I don't wan't a prostate exam and he forces one on me, Id call that rape.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 12:37 AM
83

So, I know this all sounds crazy and made up, but if women really are being victimized like this in a medical setting where they should be safe and cared for, then we do have a big problem. "Oh shut up, that never happens" is exactly what people say to male rape victims. Nobody believed elderly people who say the orderlies rape them until scandals broke. As a pharm student, I hear lots of stories from medical settings and the amount of people who receive negligent care would make your heart drop…
/r/MensRights24/11/12 02:41 PM
1

IANAL but I think that sexual assault is an entirely appropriate charge that they did not bring. If it was a man who pulled a knife on two girls in one of their homes in an attempt to get his foul smelling dick sucked he would at least get sexual assault on top of the other charges.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 02:02 PM
2

It does pertain to what you said: If the costumes didn't sell, they'd be off the shelves. So, the absence of non-slutty costumes which you note tell us that they don't sell when on shelves next to slutty ones. And who buys these costumes? Women do [mostly]. They choose what they want and it is overwhelmingly slutty. The woman in the picture says that feminism is the solution to slutty costumes but feminism is what empowered women to actually buy the clothes/costumes they want in the first place.…
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:51 AM
1

Why would you be shit testing him right now?
/r/seduction27/09/12 03:09 AM
2

For me, if she seems like she's doing that "see if you're a beta pussy" shit, I'll talk over her and give her a stern-ass look. But if she's just not too good at waiting her turn, I just let her go on and pick up convo threads from there.
/r/seduction27/09/12 02:54 AM
1

Exploiting is legal. Even if it is morally dubious to sex a drunk person, if they want it at the time and you want it at the time, who's to say it's wrong? If you think of drunk sex as a crime, you are effectively banning people from indulging in the pleasures of life as they see fit. Part of life is responsibility and if you can't keep your fun bits in your pants when you're drunk [and this upsets you], maybe you shouldn't get so drunk. The other night I got so drunk that I couldn't speak words…
/r/MensRights23/09/12 02:12 PM
2

Since such a small percentage of people identify as transsexual/gender, why are the vast majority of people given a word to differentiate them from the minority? Personally, I don't care what people choose to call themselves, but it seems odd that, like Demonspawn said, the >95% are defined by the <5%. Truth. I think that by saying cisgender they are pointing out that Transgender is just a different prefix. Linguistically I think it makes sense because gender is a concept and one person's gender…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:05 AM
1

It feels like its used as a pejorative because its a way of saying that because you're Cis white man you can't discuss certain things. It doesnt have to mean that, but its the way it is often used.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 04:55 AM
1

Actually, "Cis-" as a prefix of Latin origin, meaning "on the same side [as]" or "on this side [of]", with several derived usages: *In chemistry, cis- refers to cis-trans isomerism *In molecular biology, cis- refers to cis-acting *In gender studies, cis- refers to cisgender" sauce And, "Trans is a Latin noun or prefix, meaning "across", "beyond" or "on the opposite side""
/r/MensRights15/08/12 04:51 AM
1

Wait...Fallacious or could've been worded better? If I'm being fallacious Id like to know lol
/r/MensRights13/08/12 06:55 AM
4

Care to expand?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 06:15 AM
1

You're just a little bit wrong. Cis is a prefix which means 'on the same side of'; as in your psychology is 'on the same side of' your body. Ex.: Your body has a penis and your personality is a man...Your mind is 'on the same side' of your body in that both are male/man...You are Cisgender.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:37 AM
37

It means normal. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Cis means 'On the same side of'. In gender studies, it refers to one's gender identity being 'on the same side of' their physical parts. ex a cis male is a person with a penis who identifies as a man. Of course, being cis is the 'normal' state in that it is more common than being trans. But, normal and abnormal have broader implications than just siding with the majority and siding against it. So, we replace normal/abnormal with more specific terms that bett…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:27 AM
1

but you are directly attributing a portion of the blame, however little, to the victim. No I am not. I am attributing a portion of rape prevention to people who are not yet victims. This helps people who would be victims if they hadn't tried to think like the enemy to defeat the enemy.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 07:01 PM
1

All blacking out starts with drinking. If you don't want to black out and aren't responsible enough to drink without blacking out, then you shouldn't drink. Oh you drank? Well you chose to risk blacking out. Doesn't matter, there are probably close to a million alcoholics in this town and no rape epidemic. I still have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:59 PM
1

Its not about what you tell rape victims. Its about what you tell people BEFORE they are rape victims. there is a 0% chance a, b, or c will help a rape victim because they have already been raped. a, b, or c might help someone else though.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:58 PM
1

Thank you rightsbot. I love you.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:33 PM
3

This guy gets it!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:33 PM
3

HEY GUYS! THIS WILL ONLY HELP LIKE LESS THAN 1/3 OF POTENTIAL RAPE VICTIMS SO IT IS STUPID.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:32 PM
1

Firstly, people don't decide to get into that state in the first place, it just happens as part of learning to drink and drinking. They decide to get in that state when they decide to drink. Just like nobody decides to OD on heroin. Yes they do, who else put the needle in their arm? Secondly the chances of it leading to rape, must be very remote, thins is a town full of alcoholics, there is no rape epidemic. This is not english syntax. Please try again.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:30 PM
2

No. When you said The energy spent in victim-blaming could and should be spent on calling the perpetrators of crimes scumbags. I read it as Instead of giving people information they can use, we should call rapists scumbags even though it is a waste of time since they are rapists and probably don't care what we think. So I said: Rapists are in fact scum bags so we should not give them opportunities to do scummy things. If they do scummy things, it is still their fault. Which you read as: Oh boy d…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:27 PM
1

Few people intend to do that, people just party and think OH FUCK, the next day if they black out. Right, that is very irresponsible. That is actually the opposite of responsible. I'm saying that you shouldn't do that. This is the reason you must be an adult to consume alcohol. If you don't know your limits, you should learn them before you risk putting yourself in harm's way. Here is the logic, de-fuzzed: 1) criminals wait only for the opportunity to do their crime 2) we want to reduce crimes T…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:22 PM
1

No they are not responsible for someone else's actions. They are responsible for giving that person the opportunity to take those actions. The rapist is still scum and the victim is still a victim. But, the victim should know that rapists look only for the opportunity to rape. that's it. That's how criminals work. It is what makes them criminals.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:13 PM
1

Wow are you trying to miss the point? You forgot about this part of the sentence you quoted: there are also some situations where simply knowing your surroundings can help avoid any crime being committed against you. Hes not just saying you should physically know where you are. Hes saying you should be aware of your surroundings. Awareness is like the number one crime preventer. Alcohol is like the number one awareness preventer. Surely the correlation between getting black out drunk, and rape, …
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:08 PM
2

possibly racist. Three white dudes in the hood draw attention. They don't look like they belong there. They are different from most people that are there. Upon further inspection, they are driving a 2005 toyota and do not look like they know what they are doing here. Who the fuck do you think the criminals will target? Downvoted for logic fail.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:59 PM
2

It is simple: rapists are rapists because for them an opportunity to rape is just as good as the victim consenting to rape [as if that is possible]. So the idea is to do your best to not give a rapist an opportunity. Its not about giving consent, its about giving opportunity. The easiest way to avoid giving the opportunity is to know your limits while drinking. It isn't so simple as 'don't get drunk around men' as it is 'don't get so drunk that you can't control yourself or think critically unle…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:56 PM
1

What's the Qtip bit about?
/r/MensRights10/04/12 02:17 PM
1

Great post except for one thing: there are biased infrastructures across the world that result in unjust and often abominable treatment of men. Some of these infrastructures include: ... circumcision (debated)... Just take the "(debated)" out. Almost every biased infrastructure you listed is debated by somebody but pointing out circumcision makes it seem like we KNOW all of these other things are bad but just maybe circumcision isn't so hot either but we aren't sure. Plus you are posting in r/MR…
/r/MensRights10/04/12 02:09 PM
11

This all the way. My roommate is a chick magnet. His game isn't great but its definitely there. I just see girl after girl turn their heads when he walks by. Literally all he has to do is walk up to a girl, say ANYTHING for like 5 minutes and walk away with her number. I never thought he was THAT attractive but I guess he is irresistible to women. And from the flip side, I'm friends with some really hot girls who just don't even realize how many of the things that happen to them happen because o…
/r/MensRights10/04/12 01:58 PM
9

Dude you're completely missing the point. If the kid costs 1000$/month, it should be 500$ from dad and 500$ from mom. If dad is a deadbeat and mom is not, then mom is paying her 500$ AND fronting the money for dad's 500$ so her kid won't suffer. The money was spent on the kid before she even had it and now she needs to be reimbursed if in fact the father is a deadbeat.
/r/MensRights10/04/12 01:45 PM
1

Of course not! just don't expect any special treatment [if you do, then you don't really belong here]
/r/MensRights09/04/12 02:18 PM
5

Its not about who is a blame. It is about the injustices that exist for men and the anger stems from the fact that these injustices are mocked or at best ignored. Its not about 'hating women' its about hating that men's issues get no attention besides mockery while women's issues [and non-issues] are treated as top priorities. We hate that male politicians sell men up the river and pander to women's rights. We hate when female politicians do that too. Its not about the genitals its about the act…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 05:53 PM
7

Feminism makes women seem like children in certain situations, such as by not making a woman responsible for consent given when drunk. Absolving women of this responsibility seems to be implying that women are weak and not capable of handling themselves and making responsible choices, and forces men to take a paternalistic attitude towards them. This. A lot of times my girlfriend will be drunk or baked and want to have sex. I have to judge if she is fit for sex and if she isn't...I have to say n…
/r/MensRights28/02/12 02:34 PM
1

defend shit nope not yet. try specific
/r/MensRights05/02/12 06:21 AM
1

You're not making a point, at all, and that's the real problem...
/r/MensRights04/02/12 03:27 PM
2

You're not reading me in context, at all, and that's the real problem... "I think" implies that I don't know. It is a qualifier for the statement following it. Besides that, I said earlier I took the course a few years ago and that it was the first thing we did. I never really claimed to be an authority on the trials.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 07:39 PM
16

Third
/r/MensRights02/02/12 07:19 PM
2

my professor tended to insinuate that men today are part of history's problem with women. Like she was resentful of men because of oppression women before her endured; and that somehow we were implicated. So kind of a four-dimensional collective.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 01:32 PM
2

I think they killed one or two guys but it wasn't for witchery. I think it was for defending justice by saying "hey maybe we shouldn't be putting these women to death based on the say so of some crazy 14 year old girls." Then everyone else was all like "You're probably with satan as well! You wish forgiveness for his associates" Edit: John proctor was put to death for witchery. Giles Cory was pressed to death in an attempt to force a plea from him. Also no men were put to death for directly defe…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 01:28 PM
2

Hah. I took women's history a few years ago. They started with discussing the Salem witch trials as the first N. American demonization of women without any evidence besides bad woman=witch. The irony was completely lost on my professor that the nearest modern analogue for the witch hunts' hearsay-based trials is rape trial and that she was lecturing for an ideology of justice that was in direct conflict with her favoring a low evidentiary standard in rape cases because: "There's no evidence but …
/r/MensRights02/02/12 12:39 AM
1

You really think a man that did exactly these things to a female stewardess would not be treated entirely different, or even allowed to STILL work with children? No I don't. But I don't think that imposing stupidly strict consequences on everyone is the solution either. The solution is to treat men and women with equal, reasonable leniency.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 06:00 PM
1

exactly.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 05:28 PM
70

First off: Being drunk is not an excuse to sexually assault someone. Second off: She should not be getting off easy because of any of the bullshit the article says. she should be getting off easy because the man was not phased by the incident. She did no harm other than to her image. She is only a 'sexual assailant' in legal definition but not in effect. If she had done harm, I would hope she would be treated strictly. But she did not. So why do more harm to her when she did no harm to society o…
/r/MensRights28/11/11 04:45 PM
11

Right. The onus for support is on the guy. Lets review: Man uses contraception successfully Woman undermines contraception and steals part of man's body fluid Woman makes unilateral decision to impregnate herself Clearly the man is responsible for the creation and thus the support of this child. /s
/r/MensRights27/11/11 06:26 PM
0

sorry about your poop bro but you shouldn't have eaten all that wood
/r/MensRights26/11/11 12:22 PM
5

I get it, it is a joke. But it is based on discrimination that men can't pick colors and that women are all anal about what color their paint is. Sexist on both sides.
/r/MensRights19/11/11 05:22 PM
5

Hes pointing out the ridiculous hypocrisy of White American "A" telling American "B" that B doesn't get the way the world works because B has too many privileges. Bitch, you are privileged too, WTFs your point?
/r/MensRights19/11/11 05:19 PM
2

Yes! Idk why you get downvote. I give you upvote :)
/r/MensRights09/11/11 12:16 PM
4

Would a transgendered female have to register with selective service? Would a transgendered male also have to? That is quite the question
/r/MensRights08/11/11 02:37 PM
0

Someone link this kid the antifeminist derailing guide. The one with all the code colors and explanations. I dont have it :/
/r/MensRights08/11/11 02:22 PM
2

If I were you, I would keep a running tape recorder in my pocket every time you pick your kid up. If she lets you in the house and you can see anything that's fucked up, and you get the chance, snap a photo on your cell phone. Came here to say this. Actually everything this perosn writes is great advice I think (but, IANAL). Talk to a psych, get stamped "normal" and spend the next few months gathering audio and photo evidence of the shit your son goes through and then maybe a lawyer will care. T…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 02:20 PM
19

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't male/female biologic sex terms while woman/man are the social gender terms? So technically OP is a female man or a transman? Since OP has a vagina (female) but presents socially as a man? Not really trying to nitpick...I just like to work on my transterms because they can be confusing.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 01:58 PM
2

Its not exactly about equality since we don't have a viable comparator case with reversed genders. Its more about general men's rights. The woman (alleged assailant) is not said to have been charged and that is unacceptable. I'd put my bank account on the line to wager that if a man sewed up his cheating wife's vagina "because she deserved it", prison guards would be watching him get ass-raped by evening and people would be joking about his sore, bleeding butthole by morning. Male genital mutila…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 07:39 PM
2

But dude...all men deserve everything bad for the next 10,000 years because all men for the past 10,000 had exclusive rights to all things good! I hope this clears things up for you. /s
/r/MensRights07/11/11 07:16 PM
1

HA!
/r/MensRights07/11/11 07:14 PM
16

1) This is benevolent sexism against females. 2) This is propagated by some feminists Therefore, some feminists propagate sexism against females ...Orwell would be proud.
/r/MensRights06/11/11 11:11 PM
2

I like how all the toxic people are men.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:03 AM
11

Might as well just say that the man is always at fault, and the woman always the victim. FTFY
/r/MensRights02/11/11 11:53 PM
5

So.... feminists blaming the victim? The shocks just don't stop with these people.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 02:09 PM
49

From the comments as to why this is insulting to transwomen: the ad reinforces the idea that a woman with a scrotum is shocking. Quick poll: when seeing a woman's private parts for the first time, who would not be shocked if there was a scrotum?
/r/MensRights16/10/11 04:25 PM
4

I dont see how they fail to grasp that. They think we all think its rape if (trans)she doesnt disclose the Trans part. I am yet to see that to be a large facet of r/MR. Most of what I saw yesterday was guys saying that sexual consent is personal and irrational. White cis men are entitled to their own sexual quirks as much as anyone else. You can't relate ABCphobia with not wanting to have sex with ABC or reacting negatively when you found out you had sex with ABC. Its sexual preference it makes …
/r/MensRights13/10/11 04:34 PM
3

Generally, Id say you are correct but this is sexuality that we are talking about. Theres not much in it that makes sense or is rational. Women like smart, nice, funny, caring guys. But they are attracted to men with big muscles and chins and an asshole demeanor. Guys like girls that are laid back and sweet. But they are attracted to skinny, large breasted women who are too young to know their ass from their elbow and start more drama than Bravo!. I personally don't like to have sex with people …
/r/MensRights13/10/11 01:43 AM
7

It is dangerous given the current social climate to reveal yourself as trans to a one night stand or even an ongoing hookup. It would be wrong to require transpeople to tell every potential sexual partner about being trans, since it would result in more targeting. The way I see it, when you just hook up, you are putting yourself at risk for a number of things. One of them is having sex with someone who has a hideable, deal breaker quality. Being trans is a deal breaker for many but is easily hid…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 08:42 PM
6

Ok I can kind of see that. But in both cases, neither person really chose to feel trans or chose to feel attracted to animals. They didn't choose their taboo you know? Im the kind of person who says: "Oh thats what you prefer sexually? Cool. Just don't hurt anyone." So I'm not trying to say that trans people are a bunch of pig fuckers, I'm trying to say that pig fuckers are people too [just like trans people and cis people] and as long as they don't actually hurt anyone, they should be able to d…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 08:23 PM
3

TLDR: a bunch of counterarguments assuming the form of your argument that are preposterous to anyone with half a brain. They are intended to show that your argument and conclusion are misleading technicalities. Or alternatively: TLDR: the intellectually laziness that requires a TLDR is the kind of intellectual laziness that gives rise to flawed arguments that make everyone in their group look bad.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 08:15 PM
1

I definitely get that. I am not trying to defend pedophiles. Kids cannot legally consent because they aren't responsible enough to make any sort of binding agreements. Animals, on the other hand, are animals and cannot make any binding agreements by the nature of their comprehension. but they can hump. We tell them "no" because we don't like being humped by animals, no matter how much the animal wants to hump our legs. But what of people who like that? Im sorry but letting a dog hump you doesn't…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 08:10 PM
2

ahh i see. What if the dog is already humping your leg and you just move it up a few feet. You just let the dog do its thing and don't force anything onto it and this gets you off. It is still bestiality but I wouldn;t call it rape.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:17 PM
0

Did you know that an estimated 8% of all hammers and screwdrivers bought at Home Depot are used for assault? Home depot is a provocateur of assault! I mean without the tools they provide, many hammer-assaults would not have happened. We should hold them responsible. Without HD providing tools to contractors and repairmen, assailants would have nowhere to buy their tools from. Glock's guns are used for murder. MURDER! They provoke more murder than any other company in the world. Without their too…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:16 PM
13

He's comparing one social taboo to another. I think it's fucked up that you think it is hateful. Its like straight, cispeople are saying "[transphobia]" and the trans people react by saying "Hey, we may be trans but we're just like you! Everyone deserves respect for their sexual decisions. Except those sicko dogfucking bestialists!" Everyone has a whipping boy that they'll step on to get into the circle of acceptance and it seems a bit hypocritical to me. Everyone has their own sexual preference…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 06:34 PM
23

Honestly, I support trans-people in their quest to be whatever they want. But to say that men who don't want to have sex with them are transphobic is a little much. Way I see it, everyone has the right to discriminate on whatever basis [or no basis at all] as to who they have sex with. For some people, having a penis a couple of years ago is a deal-breaker. No matter what, you can't tell people [including men] who they should be willing to have sex with. Its your own sexual consent and you do no…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 06:22 PM
1

Right. That's dumb women who don't understand how roles and responsibilities work. The intent of feminism was to liberate women from their roles as wives and open them up to the other possibilities of the world. This is a good intention. Some women choose to shed "Femininity" and just be themselves regardless of vagina/penis. Others are crazy bitches who are crazy. Seems like the blame rests far more with crazy bitches who are crazy and not with feminism. If your friends don't understand that th…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 06:00 PM
3

No but if you ask me their work at trying to reduce DV against women by and far outweighs this minor contribution to DV. If you really want to link feminism with DV, link it to DV against men. That is fairly easy. What Im saying is that statements like this are far reaching accusations that do far more harm for the movement than good.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:54 PM
2

So work that reading comprehension and deduce that there are not codified special rules for girls on the field because they can not set foot on the field or even into practices. The special rule for girls on the field is that they have to GTFO the field. Instead of modifying gameplay for girls, they banned them which supports offensivebrute's theorizing that the issue wasn't with the girl playing, but with the rules made specifically for women who seek to enter men's football games in this leagu…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:49 PM
1

IDK. The team she was on clearly didn't care. None of the teams they played up to that point in the season cared. This most recent team wants to stick to league rules I guess.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:35 PM
0

Damn bro, you need to learn some reading comprehension. Bobsutan: What special rules? Lasertits69: These rules right here [insert rules and source] Seriously, it was like <4 sentences.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:33 PM
3

It is a lot easier to blame feminists for DV than this very far reaching "logic". They promote domestic MURDER of men when that man is alleged to be abusive, post mortem, by their murderer. Even when the murderer had other means to adress the problem, like simply walking away. Woman starts acting like a man. When she crosses the line, man treats woman as he would another man. Man is punished. Man learns to hate women. This part is not so bad. It happens a lot. Girls insist they can hang with the…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:28 PM
7

The insanity is that feminism does a lot of things they should be blamed for. Promoting domestic violence against women is not one. DV has been around far longer than women encroaching on men's roles. DV is about power and control. If feminism promotes DV by promoting women to step out of that control and anger their oppressors well then that would be one thing that I would support from feminists.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:23 PM
3

This is something I fully agree with. I wrestled in middle school and one match I figured out quickly during weigh ins that my opponent was the only girl on their team. I too came to the no win conclusion but accepted the match anyway to not appear as either sexist or afraid. I won via pin in under 1:00 in every other match before this one. Every move I did, I was worried about touching a breast or vagina or hurting her in some way. I won by the second round, but I would've rather not had a matc…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:16 PM
0

Here's your citation: http://www.tidewaternews.com/2011/10/07/sa-girl-football-player-sits-out/ Both teams belong to the North Carolina Independent Schools Athletic Association. According to the league website, participation by boys in girls’ sports and vice-versa is prohibited.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:12 PM
0

http://www.tidewaternews.com/2011/10/07/sa-girl-football-player-sits-out/ Both teams belong to the North Carolina Independent Schools Athletic Association. According to the league website, participation by boys in girls’ sports and vice-versa is prohibited.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:11 PM
2

Im pretty sure its part of a novelty account where he is an offensive brute.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 04:56 PM
3

Not to mention cinnamongreen's reward is a wonderful son for the rest of her life. Reward from tarring roofs is a paycheck thats gone by next month. Which job makes you want to put your feet on the floor in the morning? Tarring roofs for $4k/mo with some days off or helping to create a good human being without pay while someone supports you?
/r/MensRights12/10/11 04:53 PM
2

Encourage women to apply themselves, and support the industry, in the same way men have for the past thirty or so years rather then seeking free incentives for being female or diminishing the work of others for being male. This.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 04:38 PM
5

"Charlie Foxtrot" = CF = Cluster Fuck?
/r/MensRights10/10/11 06:31 PM
10

Dude, you can't just drop a bombshell like that with abslutely no facts or citations at all to back it up. Even if your logic is valid, faulty premises will make you false. If you want to draw a connection between feminist activism's role in breaking up the nuclear family causing social crisis you have got to do a better job. Here is the issue with what you say: well run families with a father at the head of the household are unlikely to produce children who will grow up to be rapists. Define "w…
/r/MensRights10/10/11 03:41 PM
6

THANK YOU (no sarcasm. Seriously, thank you. This shit is counter productive.)
/r/MensRights10/10/11 03:32 PM
8

the man who got kicked in the balls is the only person offering an alternative story Except the one sober person who reported seeing the girl run at him as though punting a football.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:38 PM
3

Well...its a true statement which is kinda different from a valid one. It implies that women's suffrage was to blame for world wars and nuclear attacks. It also implies that if they didn't have that right then we would have seen fewer wardeaths and fewer nuclear incidents. While it is true that since they have been voting these things have happened, it is misleading to put it together that way just like it is misleading to say that most wars have been under male leadership. It is a valid counter…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 05:07 PM
5

Bring up the fact that since women got the right to vote in this country, we have dropped more nuclear bombs and killed more humans in wars than in all pre-suffrage years combined. Her point is just as valid as this one. (which is not at all)
/r/MensRights27/09/11 01:29 PM
10

I definitely agree with you but the thinking behind his beliefs can be put into a mens rights frame. He lays out that women in part define masculinity with their choices in sexual partners. He sees himself as a man of value yet sees men of little functional value to society being chosen by many many women. In this way women as a class are pressuring men as a class to behave in ways that would be detrimental to humanity by witholding sex from all but the most useless. In this way they help to cre…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 11:21 PM
0

My philosophy is not that free market will solve everything. It is that free market will prevail and come to the surface in any way possible. As long as it is profitable to do something, people will try to do it, whether its with 'whites only' signs or opportunist policy that secretly discriminates. If you try to pursue it, they will try to hide it. It happens with alcohol prohibition, prostitution, drug prohibition, underage drinking, firearms, fireworks, drag races, vandalism, illegal car modi…
/r/MensRights15/09/11 04:04 PM
0

I do agree with the fact it is discriminatory but sexism/racism requires another level of malice in my opinion. I don't think we should lose the scope of what racism or sexism can be by labeling this incident racist or sexist. Then the word loses meaning. But as long as it is profitable to discriminate, people will try to profit from it. If it is illegal to try to profit from bias and gender roles then businesses will try to keep it on the down low with policies like these. As long as there are …
/r/MensRights15/09/11 03:49 PM
-5

Seems that the policy itself is not sexist. Seat women at bar-->easier for men to buy them drinks-->Profit. It reflects entrenched gender issues in our culture but does not cause them. But you can't get mad at a business for taking money from people who want to give it to them. Blame the men who do not buck off the roles they were saddled with and the women who talk out of both sides of their mouths about equality; both of whom continue to make policies like these profitable.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 06:01 PM
1

Along with discrimination based on sex or race, this legal framework also prevents companies from: polluting the environment, using child labour, stealing intellectual property, using pyramid schemes, and so on. These are erroneous comparisons. Let us measure the policy by the direct results of the practices it intends to implement. Safety and biohazard violations have direct, measurable harm on the employees and the inhabitants of the area. Dumping toxic waste into public water? someone is gonn…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:57 PM
1

I want to start by thanking you for your cool, even tone in the face of a polarizing topic. You, sir are a gentleman. I will do my best to reply in kind so please do not read this as hostile or what could be referred to as "reddit standard" argument. And in the same vein, a business can't refuse to serve customers because of their race or sex, even if it's a "good business plan" to draw in other customers who don't want to associate with the race or gender that is being excluded from that busine…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:47 PM
1

If this were 50 years ago then it was likely that the bar owner was racist and wanted to create a hostile environment for "niggers" so that he wouldn't have to welcome any of "their kind". Now it is because women at a bar get more drinks bought for them, make more money for the bar than do two black men. They didn't say: "hey, we dont like you dark skins, you ain't welcome here"; they said "Hey listen, its getting crowded in here and we try to keep women close to the bar. So we're asking you to …
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:47 PM
-19

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the way the bar acted. It is a business. Businesses like money. Women at a bar are easier to buy drinks for compared to those away from the bar. Men will buy more drinks for women if it is easier to do so. The more drinks men buy for women, the more money the bar makes. So if there's two non-women sitting at the bar, the manager may want to "invest" some drinks and food to the non-women to get them to move and make way for women. They never 'told the niggers t…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 03:14 PM
6

100% troll
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:19 PM
1

This is because we live in a largely male dominated society and I want to struggle within it to achieve egalitarianism Well yeah, but we also live in a society that steps on more males than it lifts up. If you look at the top of society it is sure male dominated. But if you look at the bottom of it (prisoners, drug addicts, homeless, blue collar workers, people injured at work, people killed in the military, etc...) you'll see a hell of a lot of males. Really it comes down to confirmation bias. …
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:26 PM
4

Hey man they say that every problem has a positive side and its just a matter of how you look at it. Obviously this comment isn't going to change your life or whatever but think about it like this: you don't know what you're supposed to be. That is the curse and the blessing. The angst and lostness you are feeling now will force you to try the harder path which is consciously deciding your identity. Most people have it pushed onto them and it is very easy to just become whatever you are told to.…
/r/MensRights25/08/11 12:54 PM
3

i always thought feminism was about being able to choose what i wanted Well feminism has so far come in three waves. The first wave was primarily based on suffrage. The next two were about the legal/social equality and winning the hearts and minds of the population. More recently though, institutional feminism (that is, the people who are professional feminists) has been pushing for measures that seem more compensatory than equal. That is part of the problem we have with it: In one breath women …
/r/MensRights25/08/11 12:45 AM
2

At first glance...yes. But it was posted here to point to the ways in which institutions will help women unnecessarily. Establishing favoritism. Obviously this issue as a whole is a women's issue.
/r/MensRights25/08/11 12:30 AM
11

Sorry man but thats not what the article says. To date, explanations for the underprediction of girls' GPAs by standardized tests have focused on gender differences favoring boys on such tests ie boys are better equipped to take that test. Not the people who made the test made it so boys would do best Mediation analyses suggested girls earned higher GPAs at least in part because they were more self-disciplined. This makes sense and from what I saw was true. The girls mostly did more work than th…
/r/MensRights23/08/11 09:04 PM
1

Except that's the outcome of a woman using her right of bodily autonomy, not an opportunity. No, It is the definition of a woman using her bodily autonomy, not the outcome of it. If bodily autonomy-->no men abortions. No exceptions ever will be possible. In this way it is not comprable to equal working rights. That is all I am trying to say. Everything else we agree upon it seems. I am not defending people flipflopping from pro EOutcomes to pro EOpportunity. All I am saying is that your analogy …
/r/MensRights09/08/11 11:46 PM
1

You want to distinguish between de facto discrimination and de jure discrimination, but that's a distinction without a difference From a utilitarian standpoint I suppose there is no difference however, De facto vs de jure makes a difference if you talk about/against patriarchy theory. If disparity comes de facto from free choice then its an acceptable divergence, if it comes de jure from the definition of a right then it is generally unjust. one of the major reasons for the gap is (ironically) t…
/r/MensRights09/08/11 04:09 PM
1

In abortion rights, you see equality of simple right (bodily autonomy) which leads to divergent results (women can abort, men cannot) as being unequal Bodily autonomy doesn't result in women being able to abort and men not; it necessitates it. If you have autonomy of your body and everyone else does as well then no man would be able to "order" an abortion since he can rightfully control no uterus. Women and men have different bodies to be autonomous over. Men can have procedures that women canno…
/r/MensRights09/08/11 02:03 AM
-1

invalid comparison within your reversed question and that is why it doesn't seem like it makes any sense. gender-wage gap is an issue of equality of opportunity resulting in a divergent outcome. The current abortion/paper abortion situation does not give equality of opportunity (in that a soon to be mother has the opportunity to opt out while a soon to be father does not). If there were a paper abortion and less men were opting out than women and MRA were all about promoting men to "paper abort"…
/r/MensRights08/08/11 09:41 PM
5

Take that somewhere else that isn't here because we do not need that kinda sentiment on this sub (or in our minds for that matter).
/r/MensRights07/08/11 04:43 PM
5

What the hell are you talking about? The only part that made even a little sense was about the fact that knowing what a BF is capable of you should get out if he beats you. That makes sense. But how the hell is beating women and promoting domestic violence in general supposed to "improve this place" ...As I type this I sense a troll /communication
/r/MensRights07/08/11 04:27 PM
1

Sexual oppression in America stems largely from the Puritans.
/r/MensRights07/08/11 03:03 PM
1

Why am I getting downvoted? The letter of the law justifies what happened legally. The moral implications are horrible. The fact that our laws are so out of sync with pretty basic morals is sick. ....Kinda thought that was the whole point to the MR movement's legal facet.
/r/MensRights30/07/11 09:32 PM
11

it leaves her a disabled, semi-invalid who cannot even provide for her children herself; instead, her former husband must continue to stand over her, giving her hand-outs and coddling her. Because even a man without full use of his body is still more able to provide than a fully-functional woman. Nobody here gets this! Im glad you see that she clearly needs it more than he does. Like why does he even need his house? /s
/r/MensRights29/07/11 07:18 PM
-4

Legally, the judgment was justified. Morally, it is disgusting. That huge disconnect is what is so sick.
/r/MensRights29/07/11 07:13 PM
2

Well I don't ever think its ok to tell someone what kind of language to use. Words are just words. It is futile to try to control someone else's lips and tongue. You can only control how you react to their words. Plus, bad language is a usually symptom, not a disease. The disease is the underlying hate. Making Klansmen stop saying "nigger" will not make them stop hate. In the case of the LAN parties, I find that most online gamers' racism, misogyny, homophobia is only in their words. They aren't…
/r/MensRights29/07/11 05:36 PM
3

I cant tell exactly what you mean here but you seem to be missing the point.
/r/MensRights28/07/11 09:04 PM
4

Wasn't about the lan parties. It was about the first two sentences. That is why I quoted that part and not the LAN party part.
/r/MensRights28/07/11 07:41 PM
8

the men are expected to not express themselves as they otherwise might. If they do not, they are said to be creating a hostile environment for the women. Sounds like the presence of women creates a hostile environment for the men!
/r/MensRights28/07/11 03:37 PM
1

whichever one also has the woman from king of queens I think. My knowledge of current pop culture is very poor so even that could be wrong. A coworker put it on at work and i didnt pay attention but for the shitty excuse of an apology.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 08:42 PM
2

It was just on the TV at work earlier today. She did it on the view before they started their "show". Saw it live.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 06:46 PM
9

Right, thats what I was getting at. We choose to view (and thus give good ratings) idiots. Instead of wise elders we have...the view
/r/MensRights19/07/11 06:28 PM
2

I see what you're saying here but one main reason I'm pissed off is that this standard would be applied to men but if some man brutalized a woman like that-- taking away her ability to have intercourse and children--and daytime talk show hosts made light of her ordeal and insisted that she had to have done something to deserve it, then those hosts would be fired very quickly. It is only different because it was a male victim and that is a pretty toxic attitude for our society to adopt.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 05:48 PM
3

So, I apologize for any undue irritation I caused. You caused no irritation, he caused irritation. You caused words to appear on his monitor, he took over from there and got himself in a tizzy. Your comments were benevolent and even though he kinda freaked, it was still a productive conversation [at least it was for me to read]. The gender warriors on both sides can be a bit touchy and forceful. You seem like a smart respectful person and that is what we need more of in r/MR. You have moderate s…
/r/MensRights17/07/11 02:27 PM
1

I don't really have a central definition I am using for coerce, so let me just explain the occurrence that I meant to describe in the contract scenario. Basically the person is told they have the job but they NEED to sign the contract for the job. No contract and the job is gone. The person clearly needs a job and if all the defense contractors were to include mandatory arbitration, then the person would have no choice of work. idk if they all do have that in their contracts but if they were to …
/r/MensRights15/07/11 07:01 PM
9

the very evidence that it believed made it 'more likely than not' that Warner had committed sexual assault was seen by the police and courts as reason to charge his accuser with lying to them wow. college courts ftw. /s
/r/MensRights15/07/11 06:26 PM
4

I generally oppose anything that restricts any freedom but this I find to be an exception. There is as far as I can tell, no good, genuine reason to put a 'mandatory arbitration' clause in a contract. It is one of those 'fuck you in the ass' clauses that comes back to bite you but never does any good. More important than the freedom to enroll in any retarded contract you want is freedom from getting coerced into signing a contract which deprives you of due process as a prerequisite for employmen…
/r/MensRights15/07/11 06:15 PM
5

But surely we can agree the amendment is a good one which could help potential victims of sexual assault see justice. It was possible that she was drugged and gang raped for days and then had to fight four years just to get anything more than a "neutral arbiter" Too bad false rape accusation may take the wind out of its sails
/r/MensRights15/07/11 03:59 PM
1

If you can say "you cannot/have to XYZ because you possess/lack a vagina/penis," then you could say that XYZ is a gendered privilege. A privilege is granted to one class and not the other. So, in the UK where there is a proposal to close down all female prisons, you could say that being a criminal who never worries about jail may become UK female privilege. In the US where Title IX has passed and been put into effect, you could say that being kicked out of school during the last semester of your…
/r/MensRights12/07/11 07:54 PM
2

It is great that you did persist in the devils advocate game. If you had stopped then slapthesassybitch may have only left one comment and others like myself would not have been floored by the amount of data pointing away from feminism.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 07:14 PM
27

one girl fell asleep, and two white knights sat on the couch the whole time with her. HAHA "We respect you so much as a person and an equal that we're going to treat you like a child who cannot manage to sleep unsupervised. God, you're so equal!" Some white nights are really something else.
/r/MensRights03/07/11 02:57 PM
2

When the facts aren't on your side, make sure that volume is
/r/MensRights09/06/11 08:12 PM
1

our courts MUST operate on evidence in order to be fair. THIS is the the MRA view on alleged rape victims. The problem with rape as a crime is that consent is usually verbal or simply "felt" and its absence or presence can almost never be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Legally, the burden of proof is not on the accused for crimes in the US, rather on the prosecution. This is so because a crime usually has evidence while absence of a crime usually has no evidence attached. Each alleged rape can …
/r/MensRights06/06/11 09:01 PM
2

This reminds me of a book called "Way of the Superior Man" which talks about the roles of masculine and feminine in relationships for a few chapters. It is an excellent read and I recommend it highly.
/r/MensRights28/05/11 06:37 PM
3

Sorry but i disagree. She later says that her choices may not be right for all people and that it is up to the couple and the couple alone to decide the roles in the relationship. The only generalization she makes for all couples is that they should sit down and decide who will do what. And if the genders were reversed I think that the sentiment here would be along the lines of "Not for me but whatever makes you happy man. Just make sure that you really are happy and you dont just think you are.…
/r/MensRights28/05/11 06:36 PM
-1

Oh by no means am I saying that patriarchy is actually ruining our country and needs to be stopped as the feminists are. I was just pointing out that by saying that there are underprivileged men and that not all positions of power are held by men does not even begin to disprove patriarchy by even the simplest definition. Its like seeing a green car and saying "see, cars aren't red!" And politicians pander to teachers because they are a huge union and they kill two birds in one toss since panderi…
/r/MensRights25/05/11 04:17 PM
-3

But it logically follows that you cannot, in turn, prove the concept of patriarchy based on a small subset of men who are grossly privileged, does it not? Not all men are CEOs of fortune 500 companies, senators, media moguls and heads of state. I agree with most of the article except this little bit up at the top. Patriarchy theory doesn't claim that all men control all of everything. It claims that men control more than their fair share (50%?). So its not a "small subset of men" to believers of…
/r/MensRights24/05/11 08:47 PM
5

Here you go: Circumcision is generally performed either for religious reasons or for some somewhat minor health benefits, mostly risk reduction for STDs. Circumcision is generally opposed because it is the mutilation of a person without that person's consent. If the person would deem those health benefits worthy of going under the knife later on in life when they have some cognitive ability, then they can always go to the doc and have it done [they shouldn't need the risk reduction benefits unti…
/r/MensRights13/05/11 01:34 PM
1

/s ...?
/r/MensRights19/04/11 07:47 PM
3

While there are many misogynists who take advantage of this movement to woman bash and give it a bad name, there is also a growing body of evidence for an unequal cultural and legal environment slanted in favor of women. You making blanket statements that all of us are douchebags who should go shoot themselves in the head is in the same vein as an intolerant MRA who says that all women should die in childbirth or something like that. Organize, discuss, live. Yeah that's fine. But its unreasonabl…
/r/MensRights19/04/11 05:34 PM
1

I honestly dont see why Fems arent more upset about the misuse of this kind of stuff. It was put in place because there actually are real victims who need protection. When people abuse these protective measures for selfish gain it hurts innocent men [MRA territory] and it hurts every real victim who has to wait in line behind some money/kid grabber [feminist territory]. If the original feminist thinkers heard of this kind of abuse I think that they would be as appalled as we are.
/r/MensRights17/04/11 05:32 PM
3

http://www.businessinsider.com/actually-the-gender-pay-gap-is-just-a-myth-2011-3?op=1#ixzz1GSepTxxq So women do make less than men if you were to average every female and every male worker but those differences have been shown to be due to choices and career habits that occur more predominantly in one gender. Now that that has been settled though, many feminists still insist that there is disparity of choice because women are not encouraged enough to go into high paying fields in science/math [v…
/r/MensRights17/04/11 04:20 PM
7

If women are so paranoid about geting raped and not seeing their attacker punished, then why do they not take responsibility for gathering the evidence themselves? If before they went out at night they left with a GPS tracker, a small voice recorder and maybe even some sort of mini cam that they could disguise in their jewelry, then they could have incontrovertible evidence if it were to ever happen. 99% of rapists would be imprisoned and no innocent people would be sentenced to years of very re…
/r/MensRights12/04/11 09:26 PM
1

BAM! Diction FTW
/r/MensRights29/03/11 06:17 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights28/03/11 10:17 PM
1

I dont know, man. Ive heard cases on here where men who refuse to fight back are physically demolished by women half their weight and then are arrested when the cops arrive because they have the most potential to do harm. What if one person has a weapon but is far smaller? who is responsible for restraint? What about two people of equal strength and size?
/r/MensRights28/03/11 10:17 PM
1

PEW! PEW! PEW!
/r/MensRights24/03/11 03:25 PM
1

Well, technically, its just some upvotes; but you can wear them as hats if youd like that better! Theyre your upvotes now so you can do whatever you like with em. Flip it upside down for a cereal bowl that you always have to hold! EDIT: Here! Have another!
/r/MensRights24/03/11 03:20 PM
2

Someone forced the child into the decision and hes the one getting his dicktip cut off. No parents died from their decision or grew up with part of their dick cut off. If a kid wakes up one day and says 'i wanna have the tip of my penis cut off' He can always do that. but the opposite isnt true. and, if the kid doesnt care either way, then im sure hed prefer to not have to have undergone that procedure in the past (even if its out of conscious memory). There is no need for the parents to decide …
/r/MensRights24/03/11 03:14 PM
2

Here buddy, I got you a couple of these: ^
/r/MensRights24/03/11 05:59 AM
2

I dont really think what he is doing was talking statistics. He is pointing out that there were 117 boys in the US that would be alive if it were not for some "medical" procedure. The benefits of this procedure certainly do not outweigh the 117 families that got shattered before they even got home. His comment is a number; not a statistic (like yours was). 117/4200000 is a pretty small incidence rate (statistics; what youre talking about) 117 dead babies from genital mutilation is pretty fucked …
/r/MensRights24/03/11 05:53 AM
5

At the age of 21, I still am unreasonable afraid of needles and of being physically restrained and tortured and ive always wondered why. This video and your comment kinda clears things up for me. I watched that video and felt violated. No way that shit gets completely forgotten. "welcome to earth, let me put your legs in these restraints so that i can mutilate your penis!"
/r/MensRights24/03/11 05:33 AM
1

understand thought process =/= know his exact thoughts. And yes about the laws and such but that is ideal. in reality, by disobeying child porn laws, we would be portrayed very poorly and the entire movement would lose momentum. we would get smeared for looking at kiddie porn and defending it (not what happened, but its how they would talk about it)
/r/MensRights24/03/11 01:27 AM
2

What you just described is very similar to what the original feminist thinkers were trying to liberate women from.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 07:51 PM
1

Figured that this could be used to encourage educated discussion that seems to already be beginning.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 02:55 PM
1

I dont really agree with everything i said here i was just trying to understand kloo's thought process and it does have some merit. in the end though, if we follow the laws that we are fighting against...well then, what the fuck are we doing? You dont fight a brutal dictator by following all his orders, you dont beat a school bully by giving him your toys and lunch every day and you dont beat child-porn-witch-hunt feminists by pretending that an image that non-pornographic did in fact do any kin…
/r/MensRights23/03/11 02:52 PM
5

Not too sure but i think that the pic was the one of a young girl pulling her underwear away form her body (exposing no genitals whatsoever to the viewer of the photo) so that a male child can look down at her parts as children who explore the difference between the sexes often do. It was captioned with something along the lines of "look! I will use this to control you for the rest of your life!" Now this was far from fap material and certainly not porn, but as we know kiddie porn can basically …
/r/MensRights22/03/11 11:31 PM
5

Mayor Nutter
/r/MensRights22/03/11 06:27 PM
1

...but this pun thread was giving me wood
/r/MensRights22/03/11 06:26 PM
2

All of those things are reasonable things to do and consider in order to prevent yourself from being raped. You cant expect to not have to worry at all about being raped or mugged ever. Ideally those things wouldnt happen. When you find a zip code in Idealica where there's nothing that you need to protect yourself from, then send me a PM cause i havent seen anything in this world where you dont have to take any precautionary measures to protect yourself from harm and expect everyone to not take …
/r/MensRights22/03/11 02:39 AM
1

Yeah. Its one of the best responses to the feminist argument for lower thresholds of evidence of in that it is short and really summarizes the core of Blackstone Ratio. It says that when you get imprisoned--both legally and falsely--society has basically said that it is ok for people like you to be hurt and have years taken from you because we as society value the relatively small amount of comfort victims get from justice over the collateral damage that is your shattered life. So we legislated …
/r/MensRights16/03/11 07:00 PM
2

I saw this person on a few of yesterday's threads and it looked like they were not really down with the MR cause and were just here to start trouble/provoke. So, when I saw this comment which really adds nothing of material to the discussion, I called them out on what appeared to be trolling.
/r/MensRights16/03/11 06:55 PM
1

From AVM comments: A rape is at least a lone psychopath – false imprisonment is a betrayal by all society. this
/r/MensRights16/03/11 04:40 PM
-1

silly, silly troll. If you dont like MR then just don't come here
/r/MensRights15/03/11 09:55 PM
3

‘If the defendant genuinely believed she consented, even though that belief may have been mistaken, he is not guilty of rape' BAM!
/r/MensRights15/03/11 09:51 PM
1

When men say things like the house could be cleaner or the plates could be fuller...they mean it. They are voicing their desires so that they are that much closer to being met. Do you as a woman WANT to clean or cook more? if yes, then do it and everyone wins. if no then say so and dont do it. Ultimately it is up to you whether you cater to these desires. Some opposers of early feminism stood on the grounds that women were not mentally fit or strong willed enough to be successful in the world ou…
/r/MensRights10/03/11 09:21 PM
1

exactly
/r/MensRights05/03/11 09:59 PM
1

:)
/r/MensRights05/03/11 03:37 AM
2

its an issue of kids and parents. the common perception [in family courts] is that the mother is a better parent for the child to be with. this is because men are seen as somewhat incompetent or immoral or irresponsable as parents. this article is about showing that women are capable of seeking the very things that they condemn men for seeking.
/r/MensRights05/03/11 03:34 AM
4

No. We're single-parent-slut shaming. being a slut at the expense of the relationship between you and your child is shameful. You have a fucking kid; you created a life, so [hu]man up and do what is best for them. One point of a society is to assign shame onto actions that are unjust and harmful. The parent-child relationship is psychologically a prettyfuckin big deal. Your priority as a single mother or father is to care for the life that YOU made. the child never consented to coming into your …
/r/MensRights04/03/11 10:00 PM
3

why wasn't the match.com article about "Sex and the Single Parent", instead of single mom? HA! I didn't even think of that. I think the difference is that when men have sex with women they are just seeking power and are probably raping about 3+ times per day. Men just want to see women hurt and submissive. He cant just kick her out though, because she needs a place to stay and that would be very insensitive and not at all what men have a duty to do for women. When women do it, its empowering (di…
/r/MensRights04/03/11 07:15 PM
2

Deadbeat parents. And 'deadbeat dads' aren't always deadbeats, they are often just poor and saddled with debt that they can never possibly pay due to an unjust court system. Oh for sure. I agree with you on all that. I just said that because I was kinda ragging on deadbeat single moms and I just wanted to be fair by pointing out that men can suck as parents too. [also before a femi-troll comes in and goes all "you know, dads aren't perfect either, so youre completely wrong, even though what i sa…
/r/MensRights04/03/11 07:00 PM
10

Still, despite all of the right things my mother did, growing up in a single mother home fucked with me. "single mother." Why is 'single' first? When you have a child, you are a parent first. Your actions created a life and it is your responsibility to care for it and nurture it. Single parent homes can really fuck with a child in ways that may not even show up until years later when they cannot form healthy relationships because they did not grow up observing one. There's a reason married coupl…
/r/MensRights04/03/11 05:15 PM
1

thanks. I would like to read that, but goddamn ive got a pharmacoepidimiology exam today and if I have to read that much study-talk i think i will shoot my face off lol
/r/MensRights03/03/11 06:13 PM
1

hmm interesting. Ive taken a few stats courses but weve never gotten into the analysis of component groups; when i looked (glanced?) at neofools post i just thought it was a confidence interval assessment for the whole population and honestly thought that if you wanted to do like a strong study of women, then you couldn't have any men since that would be like bringing a sandwich to a buffet--you just dont need it lol. I originally commented because I saw that the median was [misrepresented as] 2…
/r/MensRights03/03/11 03:48 PM
-2

Ahhh, I had not read the primary document and was going off of previous comment which got that info right except interchanging median for mean (which is a problem for non-normal distributions like this one). But still, 20+% of the participants are almost a decade, or more, out of college? doesn't sound like it represents "college aged men" to me. Its entirely possible that the 6% rapists of the study was disproportionately contained in the 20+% who were not college aged. strangely, that would ac…
/r/MensRights03/03/11 04:21 AM
1

...and knowledge is power! :)
/r/MensRights03/03/11 02:39 AM
-2

Plus, if the median was 26.5, then that means that half of the participants were over that age and half were under. So, assuming you get out of college at 22, that still puts you 4.5 years away from the median (enough time to spend 6 months travelling the world AND THEN go to college again!). On the other side, half of the participants were 4+ years out of college! There is no was this study is statistically relevant to "college aged men." She could say this: "A study that included men from coll…
/r/MensRights03/03/11 02:21 AM
0

The study is decent. The interpretation is horrendous. She says that college age men are 6%....blah blah. Just because a measure of center (like mean or median) is about "college aged," does not mean that the study is representative of "college aged." For example, I could take an extremely well designed study of 10000 male newborns and 10000 forty year old men and survey their physical coordination, finding that the 50% of them are unable to even hold a pencil. Just because the mean of age in th…
/r/MensRights03/03/11 02:14 AM
1

I stand by childish. It's childish in the sense that a little kid might angry when his siblings starts opening their Christmas presents because wanted them all for himself. Well if that is how you meant childish....you're still wrong. Its not an issue of who gets their problems solved first, it is an issue of how those problems get solved. By the way, your analogy here implies greed because "he wanted them all for himself." Sure, its childish greed, but it seems to be more greedy than childish t…
/r/MensRights01/03/11 02:52 AM
1

ahhh. I went back and re-read the second case. I misread and thought there was a recording but it was just a speakerphoned conversation that the friend was on the other end of, making her a witness. Well with the facts the article presents it is possible that he is guilty or innocent and we can only speculate. Ideally this would be sorted out through objective police interviews where detectives would use trained skill to prod and poke at the accusation to make sure it is sound. But in rape case …
/r/MensRights01/03/11 01:05 AM
1

It could have been a set up. But I can't really think of how she could get him to have sex with her while crying rape and assault at the same time and creating all of the ancillary crashes and scuttles typical of angry assault/rape. Did I just not think about this hard enough?
/r/MensRights28/02/11 08:05 PM
1

Lol yes! This is spot on. When men and women become politicians I think they trade in their genitals and gender identity for 100$ bills and a corporate logo on their crotch haha.
/r/MensRights28/02/11 03:34 AM
0

Hey, nobody make any jokes near Oglethorpe; jokes offend him! There you go bro, now you'll never have to worry about taking shit too seriously ever again. Children don't know what the UN is, so how is it childish to make a joke about the UN. The more appropriate insult to use against me here would be "petty." Not knowing vocabulary is childish. By the way, don't tell me what I said. What I said is what I wrote just above your comment and our comments do not match. If you meant to say "what you m…
/r/MensRights28/02/11 03:31 AM
0

Lol, exactly. IDK why MRAs are fretting; the Woman UN will probably get just as much done as the real one does.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 08:35 PM
3

There is a U.N. Men, its just called "U.N." But they don't really seem to give two shits about violence against men. Hell, they don't even give one shit.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 07:46 PM
5

"never married, never had children" accounts for a vast majority for young, single people. OP says "single women...young single men" right on the hyperlink that you clicked on. TLDR If you got misled, it was your fault
/r/MensRights08/02/11 10:21 PM
3

This actually sickens me. I've read many many many stories like this one, but ...wow. Good luck man. She stated then that she would simply erase me out of the picture so her, the children, and her boyfriend can go on with their lives as a family. And she did just that with the full support of the courts all the way. Absolutely fucking disgusting
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:56 PM
2

http://www.reddit.com/r/Dogfort/comments/fb160/limited_edition_shirt_sales_will_be_shortened/c1ep4c8?context=3
/r/MensRights29/01/11 09:36 PM
0

The majority of feminists do not agree with radical feminist groups, but then again, at least there are groups. The majority of feminists who don't agree with radicals aren't speaking up about it. Person 1: "I am a Globrog and I think Z, X, and A." Person 2: "I too am a Globrog." Although Person 2 never said anything about Z, X, or A; the fact that they use the same identifier (Globrog) to describe themselves as someone who IS known to think Z, X, and A often leads to the conclusion that Person …
/r/MensRights29/01/11 06:44 PM
1

this
/r/MensRights29/01/11 06:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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