If you ever have the desire to get yourself downvoted on the Men’s Rights subreddit, here’s one sure-fire strategy: Write a sensible comment suggesting that birth control benefits people with penises as much as people with vaginas.
Here are the two top replies to this comment:
I was going to point out some of the ironies inherent in Men’s Rightsers getting mad about women getting “free” birth control, but I suspect you can figure those out on your own.
This is why the so-called Men’s Rights movement is not so much a rights movement as a take-away-other-people’s-rights movement.
Don’t they have those in Sweden already?
Haha, I see what you did there. But it’s a great point — just install urinals and say the toilets are for sitting. I always forget urinals, heh.
Hey jiggles, if you’re driving on a highway and freak out that everyone else is going the wrong way, there may be another explanation for your predicament.
@AIT: Um, when you promote hatespeech, I don’t care how many of you are saying it. Appeal to masses doesn’t make it right. Can’t make it right.
The term “hatespeech” became irrelevant when its definition was expanded from “speech that incites violence” to “anything liberals find objectionable, including PUA blogs.”
Okay, dude, we’ll use your definition.
“Speech that incites violence.”
Yup, that’s the manosphere. As seen here many, many times.
It’s to your credit as an up-and-coming liar-of-note that you manage to ignore all that. Really. It’ll do your career good.
Rapey-Roissey claims that men should just keep sticking it in until she stops saying no. That is your PUA movement, bucko.
Men don’t have reproductive rights? Huh? Men can choose to wear a condom or get a vasectemy. Heck, some men soak their testicles in ice water to keep from impregnating a woman. So what if men don’t get to decide if the women they knock up get abortions or not? Women own their own bodies so it’s their decision.
The hormones in the Mirena are really low-dose and theoretically only have a topical effect in the uterus. This doesn’t always translate into the real world because some women are so sensitive to progestin that they’ll still get side effects even when it’s not in their bloodstream. I only had mild side effects in years of bc pill-taking (mostly decreased libido) and have none at all with the Mirena. I did have several weeks of bleeding when I first got it, but I haven’t had more than spotting in the 3 years since. Also, my gynecologist is of the opinion that monthly checking isn’t necessary because if it goes anywhere, I’ll notice.
I <3 my Mirena.
What is it with you manginas and selective reading comprehension?
Wait, I’m sorry, did you move those goalposts? Yes, yes you did! And then you complain that I didn’t agree to that? Awww, you haz a sad because of all your hate!!!!
Hey, why are women’s IQs higher than men’s? Inconvenient Truth?
To recap the convo so far:
David: “….completely misguided the folks in r/mr are.”
AIT: “Hey jiggles, if you’re driving on a highway and freak out that everyone else is going the wrong way, there may be another explanation for your predicament.”
(appeal to masses)
Me: “@AIT: Um, when you promote hatespeech, I don’t care how many of you are saying it. Appeal to masses doesn’t make it right. Can’t make it right.”
AIT: The term “hatespeech” became irrelevant when its definition was expanded from “speech that incites violence” to “anything liberals find objectionable, including PUA blogs.”
RMR incites violence. (well, Redditors do. And get healthy upvotes. See David’s previous posts on this… the ones who tell men to ‘remove judges by any means necessary,’ etc.)
But it’s still so meaningless! EVEN WHEN WE USE YOUR OWN GODDAMN DEFINITION!!!
BECAUSE TELLING FOLKS TO RAPE ISN’T INCITING VIOLENCE IN YOUR WORLD!!!!
You are a sick, sick fuck.
Dude, meds.
So, you maintain your position in the face of criticism.
How awesome that you think telling folks to rape and kill judges is super-cool awesome and you won’t be dissuaded from defending those guys!!!
youve chosen to analogize a niche internet forum guided solely by cultural practice with highways, a public thing with explicitly set rules of operation because…
you’re dumb and don’t know how analogies work? idk help me out here.
*raping women and killing judges, that is.
it’s probably more a function of your incompetent writing, hth
Yeah, howard nailed it.
I love how MRAs think they win when they get feminists angry.
Dudes. Any decent human being gets angry at rape advocacy. The fact that it doesn’t make you angry doesn’t make you the rational better man, it makes you almost pathologically self-centered.
AIT: The term “hatespeech” became irrelevant when its definition was expanded from “speech that incites violence”
Which the MRM does (some even going to jail for it), so your little attempt to dodge the issue with a head bob and a pretense that it’s all “liberals gone mad with oversensistivity” is pointless.
On your terms, it’s still hate speech.
🙂
I mean, his argument boils down to this:
BECAUSE you call incitement to rape incitement to violence–
THEREFORE when the RMR crowd incites other kinds of violence, it’s meaningless.
Bam. Boom. That’s his whole argument.
It starts from hating women enough to call inciting rape ‘non-violent’, and proceeds to protecting those who incite violence against, y’know, men of the wrong thinking persuasion.
Oh so eloquent and well reasoned.
To quote a certain summer movie, “I’m always angry.”
It’s kind of my default setting. So it’s not a particular victory to get me angry. Because, to employ another cliche, “if you ain’t angry, you ain’t payin attention”
But then condoms are also preventative care (both preventing pregnancy and STD with only minor annoyances). So why should they not be covered?
It would be good if they were covered by insurance, because they are so cheap and prevent both STI’s and pregnancy. In some states, Medicaid pays for condoms, but not all. Planned Parenthood offices offer free condoms and so do some other organizations.
The trick is convincing more people to use them, but that’s hard with sex education teachers lying and saying they have giant holes in them. That’s what they taught in my sex ed, that condoms are useless in preventing STI transmission and pregnancy because they have huge holes. So if students believe they’re ineffective, why would they want to use them? So not only are schools lying to students, they are discouraging them from using condoms when they do decide to have sex.