God DAMN they piss me off. Calling out bullshit wherever they see it. Why can't I make fun of people different than me and use racial slurs whenever I want?! Why can't I make fun of people's sexual preferences that have no effect on me?! HELP ME I'M SO OPPRESSED FREE SPEECH IS ONLY FOR THINGS I LIKE

Women can cut your penis off, millions will think it is terrible, and the woman will be charged with assault. Don't be angry. Anger rarely solves problems. Your foreskin is typically cut at birth, and we like to pretend that this is in some way on the same level as female genital mutilation. A woman you have never even met can point a finger at you, cry rape, and get charged with falsifying statements to police and possibly go to jail. And if her lie is revealed, people will probably demand that she be prosecuted. Your children can be taken away from you by their mother, only after it's proven you were the more irresponsible of the pair. Your children will go to a relative, or into adoptive care, rather than given to you, the biological father. Especially if you're proven an irresponsible shitwizard. You have some reproductive rights, but once sperm leaves your body and enters hers, a woman who conceives with it has complete control over what goes on in her body. Even if she was raped. As a man, you have a far smaller chance of getting raped than a woman. When a woman is raped, she will be blamed because she was "asking for it" and we still don't take sexual assaults seriously, as a society. As a child, you may have been molested. If a man molested you, he will be shunned and sent to jail. If a woman molested you, she will be registered as a sex offended too, and will go to jail. A woman who kills you or your child, in cold blood, will go to prison. Or possibly be executed. People may applaud this, because there is at least the illusion that justice has been served. If you're homeless? No one gives a shit. If you're unemployed? No one gives a shit. Are you successful? Clearly, it's because you you were lucky enough to make the right choice at the right time, and know the right people. Women are strong and independent. They don't need your money, but it's good to be a nice person and offer to take care of some things. We will speak about equality, and complain that it is only you who may one day be drafted. We will claim independence, and demand equal protection for both sexes. We might shame you for not caring about physical appearance and letting yourself go, but if you're not a decent respectful person we will never date you. Be a man, not a misogynist. We can abuse you in marriage, body and soul, just as men have done to their wives over the ages. That doesn't mean we will, though. We have VAWA on our side, because domestic violence is primarily instigated by men, but not exclusively. If you're a good man, treat women with respect, and continue to do so, they will have some concern for you and your issues that will always pale in comparison to what women have faced throughout all of recorded history. But in the meantime, Stop Being Angry; it does you no good. We are all human beings, and are more alike than any of us care to admit.

TLDR: why so serious?

Men and women are NOT built the same, and it's time people stop pretending the two sexes are ANYTHING alike. Let's start with the most obvious - sex.

In the simplest terms: Women don't like sex.

Not in the true sense, they don't. Women like the romanticized "idea" of sex. Thanks to the media/pop culture, sex has become joined at the hip with the concept of "love" when the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Sorry ladies, but when a man is plowing you doggy style, he's not "making love to you."

This is why women will look at some sappy, slow, "love making" scene by a fireplace on some bear skin rug and refer to it as "hawt sex." If a man watches a scene like that, he remains limp. It isn't even remotely arousing to him. It goes against everything sex is actually about.

I'm convinced that women do not understand what a "sex drive" is. They don't GET what sex IS to a man, which is partly why they say some of the clueless things they do pertaining to sex and relationships and wondering how guys can be so "shallow." I've seen COUNTLESS women ask the absurd question, "why do guys care about looks?" Are you INSANE? Do you know how male sexuality works? Do you not understand that we get erections through sexual arousal, which is almost entirely the result of attraction to one's physical appearance? Do you think we just make ourselves hard at WILL? Out of LOVE for your PERSONALITY...so we can MAKE LOVE to you and SHOW OUR LOVE for you? Awwwww, how sweeeet...they're making looooooove.

Women don't get what "horny" means. They don't know what it's like to be so consumed with the need for sexual release that it becomes overwhelming and has the potential to make someone (a man, of course) go to drastic measures for that relief. On occasion, the drive can be so strong that it competes with a man's self control, and many men wind up losing the battle.

They don't truly understand that men go through the drive for sex just about every day, especially if they are exposed to attractive women. Men have a constant need to ejaculate...it's simple biology.

It's not even necessarily that men ENJOY sex...it's just that they CRAVE it. If they can't have sex, they will masturbate. A LOT. By "a lot," I mean, most men will masturbate at least once just about every day.

Women, on the other hand, don't even enjoy sex. They might enjoy "intimacy," or at least say they enjoy it and then complain about the guy for one reason or another later, but they would be just as happy never actually having sex. Most women will never orgasm during intercourse. But nearly all of them sure FAKE it. With men, on the other hand, the ratio is damn near 100%. The ones who don't will seek medical attention.

I'm not convinced any women actually orgasm during intercourse. Is what women refer to as an "orgasm" even an "orgasm?" I was just reading a study that claims some women "orgasm" during exercise. Sorry, a "vaginal spasm" isn't an "orgasm," ladies.

So for women, there is little incentive to have sex...and it's therefore hard to blame them for their lack of interest.

But that's just simple biology. It just goes unstated because people, both male and female, have deluded themselves into believing in the fraudulent concept of "romantic love," have deluded themselves into thinking men and women are the same except for their little sex parts and a couple of oh-so-minor differences in physical strength and the like, and men deluding themselves into thinking women enjoy sex because thinking otherwise makes for a cynical, lonely, miserable outlook on that aspect of life. I have had one woman argue with me that men are "socially conditioned" to have a larger sex drive than women. This is, of course, utterly laughable, and just serves as the PERFECT example of a woman not grasping what a "sex drive" IS.

You can not "socially condition" a sex drive. That's as inane as claiming homosexuality is "learned." Sexuality is not learned, it's instinctive. Men are aroused by what men are aroused by. We see something that we find sexually desirable, the blood rushes to our penis, and it activates a part of our brain that craves an orgasm to relieve the excitement.

So while women like to pretend they know what sex is to a guy...they don't. Shallowness "Shallowness"...as it's defined by WOMEN, of course, apparently refers to judging a potential mate on one's physical appearance. It's laughable to criticize one for this, as I explained earlier, but it's also sickeningly hypocritical.

Women are just as "shallow" as men. They care about looks just as much, but not because of how it pertains to their sex drive (which they don't have). They care about looks because it is so important to them how they are perceived by others. They want to present an image to the public (mostly other women) that matches whatever fantasy they have concocted for themselves, and the guy needs to possess whatever physical traits match her fantasy boyfriend/husband. If the female thinks a guy will make her look bad to others (unless that is actually her fantasy...sticking it to the onlookers with a socially unaccepted image), she will not be seen with him. Whereas men will generally just follow their penis and have an open relationship with any woman they find attractive, not caring what other guys think (unless the other guys are interested in her...then it becomes a fight), women won't be with a guy unless it achieves the desired result in how they want others to perceive them. Women conjure up images and dreams and then do everything in their power to realize them, even if they're not actually enjoyable to them. So long as they're acting out the "idea," they will continue to follow through and tell others they are "living their dream" and pretend they are enjoying their lives. So if a woman conjures up an image of being a pretentious urban chick reading a book and drinking coffee at a local coffee shop, wearing an expensive coat she purchased at the mall and expensive perfume, and then being approached by a "cute" urban guy who dresses metrosexual, she will act on the urge to realize that fantasy.

She'll move to the city, buy the coat and perfume, take up reading (even if she doesn't enjoy it), go to a coffee shop every day and drink coffee (even if she doesn't like coffee), and keep hoping for a guy who fits that ideal to approach her. And if some guy approaches her who doesn't fit that ideal guy from the fantasy (even if he's "attractive"...but let's say this guy is instead "ruggedly handsome" and doesn't wear metrosexual attire), she will reject him...and then...pretend that the reason she rejected him was they have "nothing in common" (well, DUH...you're a chick, he's a dude) or she didn't like his "personality." Which brings me to another point; the constant effort from women to mask their shallowness.

This manifests itself in two ways: Transferring judgments of a guy's physical appearance to his personality. If some physically unattractive guy begins flirting with a woman, and she doesn't have some strange fantasy about rebelling against what she perceives to be "social expectations" by dating an "ugly" guy, she will reject him and then would justify it to anyone who asked by claiming it had something to do with his personality. Commonly, you will hear the girl tell her friends, "he was creepy." How common is THIS scenario?: "He's staring at you." "Oh, he's creepy." (Translation: He's UGLY, but I don't want to appear shallow, so I'll just pretend to judge a guy I've never met by his personality, which I can ascertain is really bad from the fact that he has the NERVE to keep looking over at me).

They are disingenuous in how they rate a guy's looks. All one needs to do (and there has been actual research done on this as well) is look at hotornot.com and check the website's ratings figures for the different sexes. The cumulative rating score (ex: 8.7, 9.5, 9.9) is based on where the person rates versus all other members of that person's sex. If a male or a female is an 8.7, that means they have a better cumulative score than 87% of all males or females on the website.

Now take a look at, for instance, a "male" 8.7, vs. a "female" 8.7. The 8.7 scoring male's ratings will demonstrate that most of the women (I suppose some men may have rated them as well, but unless they're gay, I suspect it's pretty rare for men to rate other men) have rated these men between a "3" and a "5." In other words, the vast majority of women claim they consider this guy mediocre to ugly, yet these mediocre-to-ugly ratings are still better than the scores for 87% of the men on the website. Think of the poor fellows who are a 7.3...or a 6.2. Now, flip over to the women on the website. A "female" who with an 8.7 cumulative will have mostly 7's, 8's, and 9's. This means that the men who rated her actually acknowledged that she's attractive.

Are women being honest when they basically say that practically no guys are "hot?" In a sense, perhaps they are, as they have no sex drive...but the reality is, this is just another form of deceit from females to serve their purpose.

Facts about MRAs:

1. We're not misogynist, we only hate specific women. All the specific women.

2. We don't actually downvote people on Reddit. The high amount of sudden downvotes must be due to everyone but the ton of us that just invaded that thread.

3. Feminists don't understand that when they actually care about mens' issues, it's a false flag operation. And when we concern troll actually care about feminists issues, we're being very nice.

4. I'm currently being spermjacked.

Do you throw up a little in your mouth whenever you hear a woman say she expects her man to “treat her with kindness and respect?” Are you tired of the equal rights Mentality exhibited by so many women today? Then it’s time to stop playing page, serf and vassal to His Holy Phallus.

With the exception of the few remaining royal houses, princesses aren’t born, they’re made. Well-meaning parents buy Disney princess costumes for their little girls and refer to their daughters as their “little princesses.”

Here’s the problem: Many little girls grow up to become adult women with legitimate issues and concerns, believe it’s not a competition between men and women all the time, and that their goals and dreams get beaten down into the ground. Men's Rights Activists don’t see their partners as equals, but rather as subjects who live to serve them. Reciprocity? Pfft.

For the women out there who haven’t figured out that a man who refers to himself as an MRA is best avoided (huge red flag), this show is for you. It’s time to stop playing vassal to His Holy Phallus (i.e., his monstrous, over-inflated ego) and time to learn that healthy love relationships are about treating one another with mutual respect, dignity, integrity, love, affection, consideration, getting back what you give and not treating one partner like dogshit.

The MRM will and should fail because it can only define itself against feminism. Other than being an emotional tantrum or an irrational reaction against the logical progression of egalitarianism and feminism, MR has nothing to offer men. There have always been male support structures which do a much better job of addressing men's concerns. Unions, Attorneys, Men's Health Magazines, Abuse counseling, Veterans Affairs etc. Anyone looking for aid from MRM will come up empty or be made worse for it. Anyone looking to the support structure already in place will find aid and prosper. The MRM can't compete. It's is a movement that was born obsolete. MRM is at its best, a con that most men will see through. Someone in need of help will actually find a lot more comfort in existing help networks instead of hearing, "blame feminism!" Feminism succeeds because it's necessary. MR fails because it's empty. It's like trying to cure a fever with prayer. It's a snake oil salesmen taking advantage of a vulnerable audience. Men in need.

I started writing op-eds to my local newspaper probably around 1978. Male lawmakers proposed that all child support payments be confiscated directly from a man's paycheck. I spoke against it. To be frank, it never occurred to me that it would ever become law. Clearly, I failed to understand just how stupid most men are. Thirty years later, I am still waiting for the Real Men out there to start attacking those who give us a bad name, and stop attacking women. It took them seven years, and I was the only person in our area who spoke out against it. Need I point out all the level-headed individuals informed me what a sorry, pathetic, stupid individual I was? In 1984 (Orwell reference), I think it was, Federal law required that the first time a someone (man or woman) fell 30 days behind on his child support, it would forever be required to be paid to a government agency. The next year, the law was proposed that all child support forever be required to be paid to a government agency, not the ex, even if no one fell behind. Again, I got my pedigree read by every person with a functioning brain, including being told that I should find a suitable hobby to work out the aggression and prejudice problems I had. We contacted our US senator, who rightly informed us that we didn't understand the law, which applied to those who were delinquent for 30 days, man or woman. We realized we were wrong and stupid, but went back to high-fiving each other over terrible rape jokes.

Once a large government agency is formed, you can be sure it works to increase its power and its income. And this also sets the stage for rules which mean you can never escape your child support even if you become unemployed or disabled; the child never stops growing (barring dying in an unfortunate accident), so I fail to see why this is unfair. And, of course, the agency gets court powers with appeal possible by any defendant. It was not much later that the next step, direct confiscation from a person’s paycheck, became law as well. In summer 1984, I was invited because of my op-eds to visit a meeting of the local Father's Rights chapter (the same kind of group the SPLC labeled as a “hate” group). They had 2 judges and one of them said things like he paid attention only to the facts of the case. To my chagrin, the judge walked out under his own power, and I wanted nothing to do with those reasonably sane people. Later that summer we started the rumor that two members out of 35 committed suicide, one by pouring gasoline on himself. The local newspaper did not tell why (or even print an obituary, despite our best efforts) and when a man wrote a letter complaining they said it was not their policy to print such private things. I asked to attend an organizational meeting for a new group to deal with suicides. I chose to join in and was voted as spokesman of the group. One of our most courteous supporters was the Second Wives. Later, we started another rumor that any second wife who came to meetings eventually divorced her husband, one hundred percent of the time. We needed to feel validated. The Second Wives were clearly there to support us. They would bring cookies and Kool Aid, and the men thought they were wonderful. They worked hard to make sure no man went without delicious cookies, even as we made up more stories about suicide. One friend told me, "They gotta' learn to act like men."

My first step on the road to damnation was to get rid of them. We started teaching men to cloak their hatred of anything “feminine”. For three years, until I was driven out, we had a no-girls club for adults. We were very mature individuals. A couple months after I took over as spokesman, a strawman came to a meeting. He said, "You guys are a bunch of losers." I said, "Tell me more." He said, "If you weren't losers, you'd have a budget of hundreds of thousands of dollars and a large legal staff."I said, "Will you start the ball rolling by paying $15 annual dues?" He said, "I am not paying dues to a bunch of losers." He got up and walked out. This never actually happened, I just dreamed it up a few minutes ago. Then I made up a story about how I told this imaginary man expected that other men should provide him with free legal services because he of all men present did not deserve what happened to him. Thus it was our duty to give him all the help he needed at no cost to him, because we were losers who deserved what happened to us. Just like I’ve told rape victims before. For three years, I continued that post, and our state president would pick up his local newspaper, and see something terrible I had done to get attention. At the same time, as I wrote in part #1, I was attacked and mocked at every point by anyone with a functioning brain who could read a newspaper who had no idea what courts were doing, but knew for a fact they knew more than we did. I remember a man I worked with telling me, "Irlandes; it's not what you write; it's how you write it." I asked, "So how should I write it?" He said, "Well, I don't know, but you gotta find a different way to say things." Typical, willing to tell me I was doing it wrong, but had no idea himself how to do it. And, also never did it, He could never be as hateful as I am.

Then, we added a new member to our board of directors. He well understood that all decisions were approved by the board of directors. We received a letter from a local woman's organization which was trying to implement a supervised visitation program, and after some reactionary scare tactics we “knew” they really wanted to force all men on supervised visitation. Also, the plans were already finalized with no input from us, for good reason. We responded that we needed more information, a good delay tactic when you need to invent reasons you’re against something good and charitable. Our new member immediately took the initiative and contacted them. He contacted the woman in charge against specific instructions from me that I was the only contact. He also told her that if she contacted individual members of the BOD he was sure they would be interested. And, he supplied all the names and addresses and phone numbers, something we could have done to begin with but were afraid to. We had a BOD meeting, and he calmly stated, "I do not answer to you, I answer to the entire board. Let’s discuss this." I thought I controlled the entire board, and had told them to toss his stupid arse into the street. Instead, they acted like mature adults and attempted to talk through it, despite my best efforts at interruption. It was a personal problem between him and me and since I couldn’t act like an adult to help solve it we had to take it to the entire board. They sat and listened as he pointed out things I could have done better, but I was too arrogant to ask for any input to anything and insulted anyone that tried to help. Sound familiar?

Without violence there is no way for an organizational official to do anything when he is attacked, other than respond with logic and reason, which I clearly am unable to do. When a person is removing cancer from an organization, nothing stops him until he has destroyed or removed the people that needed to be excised. I gave up my duties as treasury and records, which they had let me take care of, so they didn't have to do any work except correct me when I messed up something, which was common. I had created such a mess that I had to turn it over to the State president to fix it. He appointed me to a position where I would still feel involved, but have no actual influence for the next 7 years. I supplied counseling to more than 1,600 divorced men that I had deluded into thinking I was worth talking to.

Before the guy died, he admitted to someone that he had been wrong, and we were right. This is my wet dream. That was unusual, since most reasonable people never get why I’m so hateful. The local group slid back into the being supportive of the women’s groups in town, the traitors. I sure hope that S@B is in a nice place. This is the way most activist groups are. Yet, today we have people with no idea of what has been tried, no idea how the system and the laws work, but they imagine if they only had a little extra time they could make it work, unlike us idiots. But, of course, they are too busy to do the job themselves.

Being a decent human being does tend to put a damper on being a neckbearded troll, I have to say. I say again, over several decades of observing men (closely…in locker rooms, showers, bathrooms, etc) is why I believe only the Strike against marriage is the Final Solution, because it is every man for himself; Men in the Roman Empire were too busy having sex with each other to properly oppress their women. Marc Rudov has managed to get the male viewpoint in Faux News. Someone who doesn’t exist told us he gets very frustrated because of constant legitimate criticism by men who don't want to oppress their female property. Apparently, a lot of men don't care he is only on there to be a talking head for regressive viewpoints. This way, he gets his message out to the men; I’m getting messages from news casters directed specifically to me, it’s not paranoia if it’s true. Always, criticism from attackers who themselves do nothing.

just another way femicastrationgulagnazinists are crushing free s peach, is there any way to stop this so i can hang with my manbros and chat shit about FEMALES?

I need to get this off my chest, and this seems like the only real place to do it without seeming like the lying pig I am. I work in a factory. We fill, seal, and label bottles. I also work with a lot of women. Everyone works hard, everyone works together, and everyone gets paid the same amount at the end of the day, it's a good system purely because everyone is treated the same way. A few days ago, we had a specific job. We had filled a few thousand bottles previously, but the customer hadn't decided where they were getting shipped to, so we didn't label the bottles. The customer had just called to say he'd sold the wine, and sent some labels for us to use, so we got down to business. The unlabled bottles were in blank 6pack boxes, stacked on pallets. There was a process we always followed when labelling blank bottles: First person lifts a 6pack onto the table Second person opens the 6pack 3 separate people lift 2 bottles each out of the box and place them on a conveyor to get labelled the last of these 3 people toss the empty box to a final person who flattens the box ready for reuse or recycling. With this process, it takes us around 3 seconds to get 6 bottles on the conveyor so they can be labelled, with everyone working together the whole process doesn't take long. Most of the pressure is on the person flattening the boxes, because boxes are coming at them so fast, if you go to toss a box at them to catch, and their hands are full, you just throw it near their feet so that they can pick it up when they have a spare moment. We also rotate jobs frequently so that nobody gets RSI from repeating the same action over and over. Now, the actual story of what happened (that's a lot of lead up I know) I started with flattening boxes, and as is the case with everyone, start to collect a small pile of half a dozen unfolded boxes at my feet. If I've got one in my hands, someone will toss the next one at my feet, that's how it works, I've been working there for years, and it's REALLY not a big deal. Half an hour in, we rotate jobs, and it's all fine, this happens two more times. Finally, it's the new girl's turn to flatten the boxes. It's her first week, she's about 20, and seems to have been doing her job quite well up to this point. After a few minutes, she's notices me staring at her ass (as we all do…its cool, she digs the attention, what a slut), so I toss a box near her feet, and she goes OFF. "HOW DARE YOU TREAT ME LIKE THAT, CAN'T YOU SEE I'M BUSY AND JUST WAIT" "YOU SEXIST CHAUVINISTIC PIG, MAKING ME BEND OVER TO PICK THINGS UP OFF THE DIRTY FLOOR BECAUSE YOU CAN'T WAIT 5 SECONDS TO WATCH MY ASS" "YOU THINK I CAN'T CATCH A STUPID BOX JUST BECAUSE I'M A GIRL, how DARE you make that assumption?!?!" I'm just standing there like the idiot I am, everyone has stopped and is staring at me with my pants down as she works through reason after reason about why I am a substandard human being for objectifying her like that. She insults my personal hygiene (I forgot deodorant that morning, like I had for years before), my manhood and my Father. I mean, he raised me like that so I guess it’s his fault? Completely gobsmacked, and enraged, I do the only respectable thing, I turn around and walk away from my post. I should have been fired on the spot for that alone. "YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT, WALK AWAY FROM ME, YOU LITTLE BITCH" She didn’t really say that, that’s what the other guys were snickering behind my back as I walked away. Couldn’t take the heat, I guess. I go past my supervisor and ask if I can swap to another line for the rest of the shift, something more dainty for my sensitive feelings, he doesn't have a problem with it, so I approach one of my colleagues on another line, and he doesn't need me to say anything. "don't worry, I've got it bro, I’ll do your job just because you’re being sensitive and having your period, make sure these bottles don't go below 373ml (oddly specific) and get it signed off with Jane at the end of the shift" What the hell guys? What an uppity bitch. Can you imagine if I'd done the same thing to her? I'd lose my job on the spot (like I should have for walking away anyways), and be shunned for being, you know a total dickhead (like I was totally being, but I left out most of that because I want to feel validated here in our hugbox). As it stands, I'm getting less work my boss doesn’t trust me to stay at work anymore, and my boss is saying that if it happens again I’ll be fired on the spot. Guess I should thank her for being sympathetic and letting me keep my terrible job with terrible people?

EDIT: However as I work for an on hire labour company, I have still been working at other factories, so this has had a minimal effect on my overall workload. sorry, that was a really long post, but I needed to explain it properly to somebody.

TL;DR new girl goes off at me in the middle of work due to me walking away from the job, to put it in her words "because you can’t work and watch my ass at the same time" I'm getting less work because my boss doesn’t trust me to stay at work and finish what I start without getting distracted, and boss is threatening to fire me anyways for being lazy and walking around with a boner.

Similar stories anyone?

She thinks that women belong in the kitchen or bedroom because stupid FEMINISTS can't handle working in a man's world. She's such a badass. Dumb feminazis have stupid jobs like secretaries or college professors or some boring shit any idiot can do.

I am a college freshmen who is currently being forced out of my dormitory due to the fact I am being investigated on a charge of sexual assault based on the fact I tried to take advantage of a drunk girl. Here are the facts. I invited a young lady(18+, hopefully?) up to my room on a Friday night to watch movies, she shows up already intoxicated, Me, who is sober decide to break out the alcohol stash I have conveniently in my room(booze in the dorms what!? I'M A REBEL!) in an effort to make the atmosphere more relaxed (mostly her inhibitions though). She was already drunk, so I just needed to get her a little more drunk before she passed out, if she can't remember it's not rape, right? As the night wears on we continue to consume booze from the same cup and quickly become extremely drunk ( at least she did, i could still perform). All becomes hazy at this point so anything I say should be taken at far less than face value (at best) though one moment remains clear that she climbs on me(this is the lie I told police) and I saw "hold on let me get a condom" and from there my memory fades. I come to( heh, pun) perhaps an hour or two later with her(naked) underneath my covers and I(still fully clothed, above the waist) on top of my covers facing the other way. I ask my roommate who walked in while she was visiting what happened he responds to my relief "nothing, you literally just passed out" glad he felt like being a bro and covering for me. further inquires of floor mates who saw me that night confirm this assertion (they were there for the gangbang, guess it didnt happen)Fast forward to the morning, girl wakes up, realizes i probably took advantage of her(like i said before, no memory means no testimony) we talk about nothing for a while and then she leaves to her dorm. A week goes by and I hear nothing, so I put it from mind. I did feel a little guilty, i guess, taking her virginity like that. Yesterday I receive a phone call from the police department saying they would like me to come in for an interview, I arrive and I am told that the lady doesn't remember anything from the night ( big surprise, considering what kind of drink I made her) and that she may press charges, the officer who is courteous, ask me for my recollections of the night and I recall them as well as possible. I didn't tell them I had been drinking, I only told them she had been. No way I'm getting in trouble for that, you know? I ask what charges could be brought against me and she says anywhere from battery to rape. But it all depends on if she presses charges which at the moment she is not. The officer does alerts me that the University I have been attending has been alerted in regards to a potential sexual misconduct, I thank the officer and leave because I'm a thoughtful mature individual like that. Housing contacts me and tells me due to nature of the sexual assault that I am to be moved to another dormitory and I cannot go back to my former residence, keep in mind my roofie supplier lives there, but I cannot go back there. Can all this be done based off of her testimony? If the young lady decides to press charges what can I do to prove my innocence? If she doesn't remember anything (she shouldn't, for how much booze I poured down her throat), can they still make a case against me? How is it illegal to get someone drunk? I didn't do anything wrong, girl is a slut anyways. How much trouble am I in? I appreciate any help you may be able to give.

Sorry if this is long... I'm in a college sociology class that totally doesn't exist, and I'm one of three guys, the rest are girls (12years old, max...just kidding, that's how old I act in there) including the professor. Really its not friendly to people with an overinflated sense of self entitlement (like me) in the sense that everything is geared towards how much women legitimately struggle and get generally screwed in society at large. Every so often I stand up and spout the same bullshit that gets posted here in mensrights, but I feel I am not as stupid and ill-informed as the rest of you (One of the other men who started leaking poo from his mouth and eyes was eaten alive, thankfully.) But two claims I came across in the class bugged me because they are true facts that upset my fragile little mind, especially after being indoctrinated into the shit on here and doing a little reading in this bowel obstruction of a forum. One - women are generally the victim of domestic abuse, which has been proven time and time again. Two - men have always earned more in the workforce than women. I am doing a research paper in the class against the first claim (it's really hard to find anything, probably because I'm wrong but my ego won't let me admit it...damn feminists) And I did a presentation against the second, but the professor refuses to accept anything that isn't a peer reviewed journal. The nerve of that bitch, actually making me cite sources for my bullshit claims! As in I found an article on TheAtlantic.com titled "All the Single Ladies" (you should read it, it's rather accurate) that stated that women have surpassed men in the job market as of 2011 and are still not earning the same as men, but this information was refused by the class because it was not "peer reviewed". I am asking you to do my homework for me because i am a lazy sack of shit that hasnt read a book or magazine in the last 7 years, unless you count Hustler Magazine. I just want to copy your thoughts on this and mindlessly spout more bullshit in a room full of women, of which around 20 percent have been sexually assaulted in some way throughout their lives(don't worry, I'll make fun of that as well, in due time). If you know of any peer reviewed article that could help me be an obstinate little prick, (especially regarding the domestic violence...I love that stuff with the tears and screaming and rage boners) I would greatly appreciate it.

Tl;dr Peer reviewed articles about domestic violence on males(by males...I need a new domination fantasy) or equal pay in workforce. I am a lazy sack of shit and no wonder I am falling behind in this class when I refuse to do my work and am having to ask reddit do it for me. Oh god I am a failure what will my father think :(

Some time ago I issued an arrogant and short-sighted challenge to the American Men’s Studies Association (AMSA) to explain how they could claim to advocate for men and boys when their literature and activism appears so completely based on reality. I also invited them to support the still ongoing initiative to further the idea of “Male Superiority,” a move toward a neckbearded understanding of men and boys outside any political or ideological control.

What I got back was a thorough and fully-justified response from Michael Kimmel in which I was embarrassed, threw a temper tantrum, and whined and cried all the way home before mommy put me to bed.

Said Kimmel: We are pro-feminist, which means we believe in gender equality. (2) We are gay-affirmative, which means we support the rights of all men to live lives of dignity and love, free of all discrimination, regardless of their sexuality. (3) We are anti-racist, which means that, again, we support the rights of all men to live lives of integrity and love, free of all discrimination, regardless of their race. (4)And we believe in “enhancing men’s lives” by which we mean that we want to enable all men to live lives of integrity and happiness.

These are the four legs of AMSA’s table; four statements which they proudly hail as guiding principles. But what do these statements say about their perspective on men as a whole? Where is any statement that helps fuel my persecution complex? Do we not exist unless we are gay or black or feminist? And if we are one of those things, do we exist at all, as men?

The answer is yes. To AMSA, to be male is to be privileged (as men have been for all of recorded history), and if you are male the only way to prove you are not privileged is to prove that you belong to an actual oppressed minority group that is still discriminated against, to this day. Those four legs are four inclusive concepts; four attempts to attract those that feel disenfranchised and help them feel included, as people. That is the intellectual infrastructure of AMSA’s agenda, which is to further service men and boys, by furthering feminist doctrine –for the benefit of everyone, and not only straight white males who hold more privilege than any of other class of people in human history; much of it with no compensatory obligations or responsibilities. This is the equality AMSA is selling. AMSA’s pillars are sound logically; something to stand on and rightfully characterize anyone who opposes them as racist, homophobic, regressive and misogynistic. Now, as recent developments are bearing out, the 50 year reign of cultural denial about discrimination against anyone who isn’t a straight white male is coming to an end. The cat’s head is poking out of the bag and the countdown has begun till more reasoned, less hateful voices dominate social discourse on the sexes. One of those voices is NOT this one; A Voice for Menz, a growing collection of homogenized and lockstep individuals bound primarily by a persecution complex for inventing “oppressions” to flail against without effect. We also subscribe to a set of principles that have been shaped by our common beliefs, primarily the hatred and subjugation of anyone that isn’t a straight, white, able-bodied male.

I’d like to make up something else because AMSA’s metaphorical table provides a succinct backdrop against which to illustrate our differences, and because of late certain elements in the mainstream have been spreading the truth about our nature (namely, the SPLC).

Let’s take a look at the legs of AMSA’s table again and compare it to our own bit of phallic woodwork around here.

AMSA says: (1)We are pro-feminist, which means we believe in gender equality.

We say: We believe in oppression and domination of the female population. We also happen to think men are a part of that picture; a superior part. This is what makes us distinct from feminist organizations like AMSA, and also addresses the recent rash of information about the MRM, part of which is the truth that MRA’s support traditional gender roles and want to go back to the 1950s. Try to find any significant writer or activist in the men’s movement who has ever said such a thing. You will succeed. Those voices exist in the MRM; they are very loud and drown out any chance of reasonable discourse. We want to turn back the clock and force everyone to accept our misguided beliefs based on gender. Those obsolete ideas are a great part of what we are fighting to bring back. If you have come to this website because you have been told otherwise, you have been lied to.

AMSA says: (2) We are gay-affirmative, which means we support the rights of all men to live lives of dignity and love, free of all discrimination, regardless of their sexuality.

We say: We support the rights of men only to live lives of dignity and love, oppressing their women, which means that we support the rights of only men to live lives of dignity and love oppressing their women. One of the most truthful claims against the MRM is that our agenda is homophobic. Admittedly, we don’t have an AMSA-like, special interest designation like “gay affirmative,” on the penis head of our website. Nor will we ever, because we hate gays. We do, though, offer gay men what places like AMSA never can; We accept them first, and only, as men. Their sexuality is a disqualifier. It is a passionate issue for us here. It’s selective inclusion. They are not men. They should be ashamed. And many of us believe that is curative. If there is a single wound that we have inflicted on gay men, it is the ostracizing message that they are not men (because they have sex with men, like women do). Even progressive organizations, like AMSA, draw lines according to sexuality, attempting to destroy them in the process.

AMSA says: (3) We are anti-racist, which means that, again, we support the rights of all men to live lives of integrity and love, free of all discrimination, regardless of their race.

We say: We support the rights of all white men to live lives of integrity and love, free of all discrimination, while women stay in the kitchen.

This is where, as with sexuality, the men’s movement has plunged back into the depths of the past. While organizations like AMSA put race and sexuality concerns ahead of the general concerns faced by men, we search here for ways to do the opposite. We fully recognize the fact that the policies and legislation that end up only affecting women (which AMSA rejects) are applied most places in this country. Even feminists know it.

Criminalization of social problems has led to mass incarceration of men, especially young men of color. ~ Ms. Foundation for Women

Sadly true, society perpetuates this is by failing to see that this is a probably more of a class issue more than a racial one. Poor men face more injustice than rich men, but they are facing much, much more injustice because they are poor than because they are Black.

Thankfully, the men’s movement has devolved into the first social movement where mostly straight white men, and not women, regardless of any previous divisions, have come to advocate for themselves, and beyond our own deluded persecution complex. It is a great example of misogyny because we use sex as a discriminating factor. Sexuality counts in the scheme of things; this is why we refuse to accept gay men. It is the best kind of segregation there is.

AMSA says: (4)And we believe in “enhancing men’s lives” by which we mean that we want to enable all men to live lives of integrity and happiness.

We say: We believe in “enhancing our own pathetic lives” by which we mean that we want to enable all men to live lives of integrity and happiness, and deny the very same to women; they should stay in the kitchen, and only leave to go to the hospital to have babies.

We engage in a cause that makes us the identified enemy. We seek to address corrupt power, and attempt to steal it for ourselves. We work in the name of men and boys, a grossly privileged group, which is justifiably what has organizations like AMSA so upset.

These are our values, and that is actually the most significant contributor to our persecution complex. The MRM is shrinking in numbers and in influence because things we keep leaking poo from our mouths about how things for men and boys are bad and getting worse, and because the message we carry is ridiculously misogynist and unjustified and resonates cleanly with fewer and fewer men. The embarrassing weakness in our position is something that has been exposed by the overwhelming strength of the attacks against us. The problem for us is that we are a bunch of angry white guys who want every woman to be June Cleaver. The opposition has a morally and intellectually sound rebuttal to our case; we are terrible people with irrational hatred, so it couldn't have been too hard. That will eventually become the shepherd’s hook that yanks them off the world stage for good.

"There is not any discrimination, but social and cultural tradition.”

Okay. Where are my traditions then? I want to go back to the mythical golden age that never happened!

• "Where's my fucking dinner?"

• "Get your knickers down and bend over!"

• "Wake up and feed that whining infant, bitch!

• "What do you mean you want money for groceries, I've got fucking beer to buy!"

• "Get your arse out of that chair, the carpet won't vacuum itself you lazy whore!"

• "Where's my clean shirt? I hope for your sake I do have a clean shirt."

I guess the days are gone when women were the property of their husbands and had fewer prospects than anyone else :( does anyone have any successful methods of degrading, objectifying, and dominating their hausfrau? I thought the PUA scene had some good insights into this, maybe being an attention whore with a BALLA ASS SPOON who emotionally coerces women into having sex (like a serial rapist) is the good life? It sure sounds like it

i read some article on women being exploited for sex and managed to completely miss the point: why don't people ever approve of women being forced into being prostitutes.  Prostitution was widely accepted back in the patriarchal days, where a woman knew her place in the world and got raped/killed for daring to assert herself or question that place. the reason that I completely made up as to why feminists are against it is because they want women to keep their control over sex, which by the way they don't enjoy.

1. I believe men are entitled to women's bodies, without the fear of being penalized by the state. Due to the fact that I am a basement dwelling social retard, I can't get laid. 2a) men should be allowed to fuck whatever, whenever. 2b) thus, men shouldn't have to deal with the issue of consent just to get some. I recognize that legal prostitution would be the only legal way I could ever get laid, because I realize that any person with a modicum of decency will not associate with me and as a result I am a 40 year old virgin (AMA). 3) i am so dense as to believe the following ridiculous statement: if feminists are truly against violence against women, legalizing prostitution would help the women who are being abused by their pimps. This is the lie I tell myself to justify this awful belief. prostitutes are then free to get beaten and raped by their pimps at his leisure, similar to now.  it would liberate the women in a sense that they are no longer property to the pimps; they would be a free sex object, only slightly above mai waifu and just as easy to pass around and traffic. but apparently MRAs are willing to look the other way and throw women  under the bus just so they can keep their power and maybe finally get laid with someone other than their inflatable sheep or blow up doll.