Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    rodvanmechelen

    + friends - friends
    9,682 link karma
    1,449 comment karma
    send message redditor for

    [–] Male students called on last in some classrooms. 'Progressive stacking' not new, not isolated to Penn. 'How to occupy my own classroom brought techniques from the Occupy Wall St. movement.' 'Women get to go to the front of the line.' rodvanmechelen 1 points ago in MensRights

    They do this because they can get away with it, and they can get away with it because of Student Loans, which are guaranteed by the federal government. End the federal guarantees, and universities will have to become sensitive to their (paying) customers. That would, of course, also starve useless programs, like women's studies.

    [–] White, male students called on last in some classrooms rodvanmechelen 1 points ago in highereducation

    They do this because they can get away with it, and they can get away with it because of Student Loans, which are guaranteed by the federal government. End the federal guarantees, and universities will have to become sensitive to their (paying) customers. That would, of course, also starve useless programs, like women's studies.

    [–] #MeToo Movement Is Out of Control rodvanmechelen 1 points ago in MensRights

    The landmark case of Ellison v. Brady established that women and men experience different things as conduct of a sexual nature that creates a hostile environment, and therefore a different standard must apply depending on the gender of the victim. In what kind of conduct do women commonly engage that they do not consider sexual, but men do? How could that conduct create a hostile environment for men, even though women would not see it that way?

    [–] So apparently to the people in r/internetparents, men should not be allowed to approach women in public for any reason? And if you do so you're a creep?... Was I actually the wrong one here? rodvanmechelen 3 points ago in MensRights

    The laws are skewed against men. This is intentional. Second Wave Feminists made it very clear that their goal was to destroy western civilization by destroying marriage, and to destroy marriage they had to destroy men. It's in their books, if you can hold your bile long enough to read them. In the sixties and seventies, we didn't believe they could do it, but by the eighties they were succeeding. Now the laws are on the cusp of making masculinity illegal, because it's "toxic." This will not change until women rebel, or our current civilization collapses to the point where feminism can no longer be sustained. To promote the first, as a general rule men have to ignore women. To survive the second, begin learning about the next mini ice age, which has already started.

    [–] Civilization Declared “A White Male Construct” - PaulCraigRoberts.org rodvanmechelen 4 points ago in MensRights

    Feminists have been making an issue of this for more than 20 years, and you can find early rumblings about this in Shulamith Firestone's first book, The Dialectic of Sex. From the beginning, the goal of Second Wave Feminism (which has carried over to the 3rd and 4th "wave" ripples0, has been to destroy civilization. They think that a matriarchal utopia will magically appear out of the rubble of the destruction of patriarchal civilization. But feminists just don't get it, patriarchy is built upon a foundation of gynocentrism. The primary purpose of patriarchy is to protect women. The west did it best, and if the west (by which I mean, western civilization) is destroyed, it will be replaced with something more akin to the patriarchy of the middle east.

    [–] Hey, I typed "misandry" in reddit, outlook and other sites... it shows as mis-spelled... rodvanmechelen 4 points ago in MensRights

    It's been that way at least since 1994, when Microsoft Word showed misandry as a misspelled word. ... and it still does.

    [–] FEMINISM DEBATE: Naomi Wolf vs. Crowder | Louder With Crowder rodvanmechelen 9 points ago in MensRights

    Good video, although I had to swallow my bile to listen to that vile, disgusting person. In the 90s I attended 2 of her lectures at the University of Washington and she plays a good game but in my observations and opinion she is one of the most dishonest people. Christina Hoff Sommers exposed multiple lies in Wolf's first book, The Beauty Myth, Wolf responded that she was very angry, and the book continues to sell. In this conversation, she plays fast and loose regarding the wage gap to dodge the fact that in most cases it is not a wage gap, but an earnings gap. She claims to have a "Libertarian instinct," but when it comes to increasing the gender tax gap, she's all for it, because she's really a statist thug masquerading as a Libertarian.

    [–] Sex with Robots? 49% of Men say they would Give it a Try – Women 9% | Armstrong Economics rodvanmechelen 1 points ago in MensRights

    Marty isn't a journalist, he's an economist and an old time programmer (and the guy who, back in the 80s, tried to privatize social security), the creator of the Socrates machine learning forecasting application, and the subject of the Forecaster documentary that is currently banned in the United States.

    [–] Sex with Robots? 49% of Men say they would Give it a Try – Women 9% | Armstrong Economics rodvanmechelen 3 points ago in MensRights

    For blue pill egalitarians who are still clinging to the delusion that real social, political and legal gender equality for men can be attained through political and legal action, nothing. For red pill men, it's obvious: the only way to end pervasive misandry and legal discrimination against men, is for men to become scarce. This can happen in different ways, and one of them is for men to stop giving women attention, including sexual attention, and sex robots will contribute to that.

    [–] Sex with Robots? 49% of Men say they would Give it a Try – Women 9% | Armstrong Economics rodvanmechelen 2 points ago in MensRights

    TFM has a video I haven't gotten to yet with a thumb showing what looks like two women. The caption reads, "One is an expensive sex object that will never love you...the other is a sex robot."

    [–] Sex with Robots? 49% of Men say they would Give it a Try – Women 9% | Armstrong Economics rodvanmechelen 3 points ago in MensRights

    Everybody here is, of course, aware of this. Armstrong puts an economic spin on it, but while he has profound insights into many things, I think he's either ignoring or missing the analytical views of others like Catherine Austin Fitts, who sees an decline in population coming soon to an apocalypse near you.

    [–] 12 Years A Hottie – Return Of Kings - read the article, then check out Gilder's Men and Marriage rodvanmechelen 2 points ago in MensRights

    This article could serve as an introduction to an Amazon link for George Gilder's 1986 book, Men and Marriage. His chapter on the topic of this article is only one of many, and yes, it's still available after 31 years. Even though Gilder is a tradcon, he wrote 3 red pill books: Sexual Suicide, Naked Nomad, and Men and Marriage (which was actually an update of Sexual Suicide). For a blue pill man, Gilder's book truly provides a red pill experience. Or at least it did for me back when it was new.

    [–] News: MGTOW Attacked From All Sides (TFM 42O) rodvanmechelen 2 points ago in MensRights

    Having been very active in the MRM during the 90s and then MGTOW in all but name going on 20 years, I appreciate the difference between MGTOW and MRAs, but while an attack on the MRM is not necessarily an attack on MGTOW, an attack on MGTOW, unless it comes from the MRM, is an attack on the MRM.

    [–] Man sues restaurant for charging "man tax". rodvanmechelen 2 points ago in MensRights

    MGTOW, it seems to me, should count as "non-binary."

    [–] Entire article implies women are normally the victims in sexual harassment. Put in "Men can also be victims of workplace sexual harassment." as an afterthought... what a joke rodvanmechelen 5 points ago in MensRights

    In the US, under the precedent set by Ellison v. Brady, a female coworker wearing a short skirt or tight top or showing cleavage can be guilty of hostile environment sexual harassment. This is something that feminists--and employers--are desperate to keep men from knowing. There are 3 criteria for determining hostile environment sexual harassment: was the conduct of a sexual nature is number one. And in the view of most men, a woman wearing a short skirt or a tight top of showing cleavage is engaging in conduct of a sexual nature. And since Ellison established a uniquely female reasonable woman standard and a separate uniquely male reasonable man standard in these cases, feminists and women have nothing to say about it. So why haven't any men litigated this? Because most men are too decent to stoop to that level, and the men who would are the kind of dangerous men who don't get in trouble for treating women like sex objects.