Women didn't had any such conditions for being allowed the vote

I used voting as an example

My dude oppression is not limited to women

Back then too.. There had been no molopoly of oppression by women

No, but it was very close to it

women were to oppression as google is to search engines

Not even close

Egad

You're essentially female exceptionalism @PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS

If you say so

@PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS it is much more accurate to say that men and women had different sets of obligations and dangers than that either were specifically oppressed over the other. Were women oppressed when their husbands were arrested for debts they incurred themselves?

Regarding birth rate, our current social course is already doing that.

I think we really should be pro family as a movement. But also pro equally in the family.

Why is being in MRA make you an automatic republican to people on reddit?

@lazzzycarrot(30) / senpai(40) socety is being manipulated into a binary view of "left vs right" where everyone is lumped into two sides. we are seen as part of the "alt right", even though we are not. i see the MRM as independent and very balanced. we're consistent and fair in our beliefs and we dont crossover into other political realms

There is no need nor benefit to.

What is a republican?

Lol

i'm an independent XD

Same.

I’d assume many in the MRA are.

I was a Liberal.... but I have been really disappointed in the party lately and don't really want to support them anymore, but I am sure as hell never going to support labor.... so now I am on board with the Australian Hemp party 😄

Grrr...https://youtu.be/WxqHfHGFEvM?t=943

He might not be right about criminal "hindering of prosecution"

How so? Does he define what that means incorrectly?

No, it is simply a stretch. Hindering a prosecution likely would be interpreted as hindering a particular prosecution, whereas this is hindering prosecutions generally. If that interpretation of hindering would be taken as he suggests, you'd be able to tack that onto a ton of politicans for instance

I'm pretty sure that isn't one of the normal add-on crimes

However, what he is saying about that woman either promoting lying in court or negligence in prosecution is a correct one

But she's specifically arguing that cases that she *has* been sent in the past shouldn't be dealt with via criminal proceedings. If they are genuine crimes, shouldn't they be dealt with like that?

She's absolutely crap justice-wise. Almost all cases where her suggestion is taken is either going to be doing injustice to the DV victim, or to the falsely accused person

but being negligent in prosecution isn't a crime IIRC

it certainly doesn't fall under the hindering provision

Even if the negligence is willful?

If the negligence is willful it might be another thing, but the lawyers are all going to be "I was vigourously arguing for my client", and she's going to be "I was training lawyers to..."

But even if the negligence is willful it wouldn't fall under that particular provision

Maybe. I'm not going to pretend that I understand all the complexities of what misconduct falls where. It's a great video though, I'm glad it exists to educate people on the horrendous way the system is being used, even with that exaggeration

indeed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFXtmED9DUI

Man Down put up a new clip

Karen explains how she became an antifeminist

A women's studies professor got me arrested because of my "offensive comments" - https://redd.it/acrj0s