Oh, ladies, you poor, deluded ladies, so unaware of the basic facts about yourselves. If only you had an objective source for information on the mystery that is you! Happily, a Men’s Rights Redditor by the name of nigglereddit has decided to throw a giant clue your way:
You may want to step back and take a look at the entire thread here, especially nigglereddit’s original post about the different ways he and his wife have responded to being new parents, in which he mocks his wife for what sounds very much like undiagnosed postpartum depression, blaming her misery not on brain chemistry or sleep deprivation or any of a zillion other things that tend to stress out new mothers but on all those terrible women’s magazines and books and TV shows she reads and/or watches.
Also, he pats himself on the back for being a totally cool and awesome dude who handles both his job and his duties as a father in a super awesome way — way better than his wife handles her new motherhood — because he’s a man, damnit, and totally able to see the world in an objective way.
Needless to day, this meaty slab of misogynist shitthatneverthappened got dozens up upvotes from the r/mensrights regulars.
Thanks to r/againstmensrights for pointing me to this terrible post.
EDITED TO ADD:
Speaking of which, the good folks at r/againstmensrights have assembled these handy guides to the shittiest comments in the shitty r/mensrights thread. A-one and a-two.
I continue to be impressed at the incredible number of d00dz all claiming to have the cold hard facts about women and how they should behave toward the members of the abuser lobby.
“Sharon Seemins” did seem to be about r/mr’s level of what passes for humor…
Huh, how did I bork that up? Let’s try it like this:
http://bunnyfood.tumblr.com/post/31814560375/baby-hedgehog-yawning
Duke Lacrosse illustrated how many rape trials are carried out – the burden of proof was on the defendants, rather than the accuser.
As others have said, there was no trial in the Duke Lacrosse case. Nor, for that matter, was there a trial in the DSK case, or the Assange case.
However, at least in the American legal system, a defendant who asserts an affirmative defense — such as, in a rape case, that there was no rape because the sex was consensual, or in a murder case, that there was self-defense — has the burden of proof on that defense.
Defendants in the American criminal justice system don’t have to testify, and they don’t have to put on a case because the prosecutor has the burden of proving each element. But when they do decide to raise an affirmative defense, they have to prove it.
Perhaps you’re tweaked that rape defendants aren’t allowed to use the accuser’s sexual history to show that there was consent this time because the accuser had consented to sex at other times. But that’s pretty bog-standard, too — it’s called “propensity” evidence, and it’s pretty much verboten for everything except prior evidence of lying.
Sorry to burst your bubble, pumpkin, but rape defendants are in the same boat as any other defendant. Even if Amanda Marcotte says mean things about them.
Rats. Formatting fail.
Did anyone think “Sharon” was an actual woman? Ever?
Sharing semen…hahaha-hoho.
Dipshit.
Yeah, there are a few of us in here. How shocking. You write about people enough and eventually they might have something to say about it.
Anyway, just be aware that there are those of us keeping an eye on you and /amr. And we have proof of the shit you say. So I hope your post about the “reddit thing” tomorrow doesn’t make you look butthurt in addition to dishonest.
Hell, there’s another surprise, I guess. Someone turned your tactics on you. Since it seems to work so well, I guess it might happen more often.
– Lucaribro
Oooooooh, Sharon’s keeping an eye on us. I am so scared.
We’re keeping an eye on you too, dudebro. And we have proof of the shit you say, “Sharon.”
Wait!??!!??!! There are trolls here? WHY DIDN’T ANYONE TELL ME???
The logic of the abuser lobby is wondrous to behold.
I was scared but that was because I was worried my new cat would beat up my dog and hurt her.
I thought “there were a few of us in here” meant he was a sociology class.
…The trouble with this blog is getting to be that you have to have been here for ages to understand half the stuff we say.
@Sharon
What tactics are those exactly? When exactly did David try to get someone banned from Reddit?
Or obsessively read back through the older posts.
…Or so I’ve heard.
“Sharon,” you thought you were like Ben Linus and were fooling everyone all along? Awww, *laughter* Come on, you were more obvious than some of the regular trolls, with your stupid fake-ass name. Posting about artifical wombs? Seriously? Like that was a covert move? *Snicker*
Like any other liar if no one calls them on it they think they got one over.
What asshats never seem to grasp is that most people do not care enough about them to go to the trouble of pointing out the obvious deceit. You see that a lot among office workers. Everybody knows and nobody says.
“Did anyone think “Sharon” was an actual woman? Ever?
Sharing semen…hahaha-hoho.”
You know, I got my ass chewed last night by Gametime for speculating on someone’s gender. Just sayin’
It is fucking embarrassing watching MRAs aping high-handed moral superiority. Like they’re clomping around in daddy’s shoes, a necktie square-knotted around their necks.
Your sneering politeness is not respect. Do not serve me a shit sandwich and tell me how good it tastes.
@Fembot, In all fairness, I did say that trolls/sock puppets were excused from that rule. Or at least I meant to say that! 🙂
And it wasn’t a regular. It was an obnoxious troll by the name of Sunshine Mary. And now people here are discussing how Sharon Seemins turned out to be a man like it’s some big thing. I don’t appreciate being singled out for something others do as well.
Fembot, I got called out for saying sunshine mary’s a dude too. No worries. You’re good. Trust your instincts.
Thank you Shiraz.
No problem. Cheers.