Daniel

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-0...

I understand on a certain level that in a relationship, something like this should be discussed, but why is this woman trying to get a law requiring someone else's consent to do something with your own body? I thought if it was your body, it was your choice. She claims that his sperm is a "marital asset", and should require the wife's consent. Could this law actually make it?

BQ: Would this mean women would have to get consent from their husbands to have an abortion, since that would be considered a "marital asset"?

In general, men are stronger than women, so if this is widely known, why would a woman hit a man?

I currently witnessed this incident where a friend of mine found a woman's wallet in the dirt. We sat down and he opened it to see if there was any ID in it, which may have been the mistake. The owner saw him and started slapping him, accusing him of stealing her wallet. He got up and started to fight back, but some of the other males around us restrained him, and the woman was pulled over by the rest of them. After wasting half an hour sorting the entire scenario out, one of them said to my friend he should have tried to restrain her, because he was stronger. I asked them why would someone weaker attack someone stronger if they know what the danger of being hurt, and they gave me the answer that it was a woman, so it was a different case.

I'm not promoting violence on either side, but why would being a woman exclude one from getting what may or may not be coming to them? If you know somebody is stronger than you, why would you attack them in the first place?

Or ever heard of one? I'm collecting this information for a small study, and I would like to know of any REAL misogynists, you know, men who deeply hate women, like how feminists hate men. The reason I uppercase the real, is because the word has been thrown around so much it basically means a man who speaks of an inequality, or says an overused joke. If possible, what these men have done to be called misogynist. I only ask for misogynists, since I know and have seen plenty of misandrists.

I don't mean to be sexist, but it seems the majority of women who claim they want equality rarely, or never act on it. For instance, in the dating situation, some women still expect men to pay for their meals b/c they're the "man" and she's the woman. Another thing is that he is supposed to "prove" himself to her, while she may or may not do sh!t for him.

In other areas there are astounding levels of hypocrisy from women. In abuse, women will make excuses to try and justify abuse against men, one used constantly here is men are stronger than women, and women cannot hurt men, yet say men and women are equal when things like the Army and the police force are involved.

Overall, to be gender equal would mean to lose all privileges as a gender, but I see women, feminists in particular, far from leaving their traditional privileges as women. If women want equality, why do they want traditional privileges and equality? It won't be equality if it is both ways.

I have seen quite a few questions here about hitting men, and there is always one or two females who claim he must have "deserved it". When does anybody "deserve" to be assaulted by their peers? Unless they attack you, you cannot determine when someone "deserves" to be hit, unless your that person's parent. So why do women have the tendency to victim blame when men are victims of assault? I think women who hit men are the worst type of bullies there is, since they know their actions will receive no consequence. Only when he is inches from death or severe surgery will a woman assaulting a man be taken seriously on a legal level, and he would still be ridiculed and told "he deserved it." How is that different from men telling women who were raped they deserved it for dressing proactively?

BQ: Why don't they tell women who are slapped and attacked they "deserved it"?

I already know that the US is anti-male, but I don't see why we have NO type of legal protection.

Women have more protection than us (somewhat understandable to a degree)

Domestic animals have more protection than us

WILDLIFE has more protection than us

even property has more protection than us!

So why is that? If we are attacked and abused the abuser gets a slap on the wrist (especially female), yet we do any abusing we're in the big house for months possibly years?

I already know that the US is anti-male, but I don't see why we have NO type of legal protection.

Women have more protection than us (somewhat understandable to a degree)

Domestic animals have more protection than us

WILDLIFE has more protection than us

even property has more protection than us!

So why is that?

I already know there will be people trying to get my question deleted, so I'll be quick. Most feminists hate ALL men for what a few or even ONE did. There were women and men who were truly concerned about the rights of women. Thus feminism comes into play. Women get all the "good" equality rights and the responsibilities (by nature.) That was 30-50 years ago. Today's feminism includes:

The destruction of the family

The view men are "disposable" and women's lives are more valuable

All the world's problem's are ALL men's fault

Most men who made discoveries stole them from women when they clearly didn't

The emasculation of our young boys and toddlers in schools

The way men are portrayed in the media

Supports double standards that favor women (women are weaker than men), that's how they play victim for so long)

Finds humor in male mutilation

Does nothing to fix problems against men

Against everything that would benefit men (male DV shelters, male birth control)

Men who stand up for their rights are sexist misogynistic sexually frustrated men, which is not true

All men are bad by nature and all women are good by nature

There's plenty more, but I guess this sums it up. What do you all think?

I've seen quite a few feminists here and on other blogs saying how the MRA is a hate movement against women, yet they have done nothing against women or cheered violence against women, like feminism has done to men several times. I also noticed how everything the MRA try to do to help men who are victims of things like domestic abuse (physically and mentally) by setting up homes for them, since feminists won't do it, Feminists go AGAINST the homes for men for no particular reason, even though they weren't attacking women or threatening women in any way. Feminists have proven themselves anti-male, and everyone who can actually use the brain in their skull can see that. They have made everything they do and enforce for women ONLY, when they claim equality. The MRA have never done anything against women, unless you can call trying to equalize things like child support, alimony, divorce laws, custody, Domestic abuse laws, and warning young boys about the corruption feminism has caused "attacking." I know plenty of women and men here who know this, yet still pretend the MRA are here to attack women.

To sum it up for the ones here with attention spans the size of their pinkies, Why do feminists pretend we want to hurt women, and why are they against everything we do to help men? Their claim on equality is clearly false, for reasons just look online.

I've seen quite a few stories of how men have been locked up for several years for something they never did, only to be let go one day with their reputation, family life, financial security, and any other thing that kept him afloat in society destroyed. What about the evil women who do this? Should women who commit false allegations such as false rape and sexual assault be executed? Most of these women go dirt free from their crime, and they should receive the ultimate punishment for destroying a man and his family's lives. If that happened, then women would stop doing it, and women who are truly raped and sexually assaulted can be helped and believed more. What do some of you think?

Most women here, especially feminists, see a problem with men pointing out inequalities dealt to them. They call the ones who do "whiners", and bring up the old "they can't get laid" shame tactic. They are somehow wrong for pointing out things like a man has no way to opt out of an unwanted child other than to "keep it in his pants", and women have several options. I personally do not see a problem if either gender does this, as long as it doesn't harm the opposite in return, which is what feminists are doing. These women seem to ignore the fact women and men are equally bad and do wrong, and women can do bad things to men. Others things would be false rape accusations, paternity fraud, unfair divorce laws, child custody, and other things that are actually unequal.

Blind to their own hypocrisy and sexism? Some of these women are flat out sexist and misandrists that make questions just because of their unnatural hate, yet find it perfectly ok. However should a guy make a rant about women here, he has the old "Don't generalize because you had a bad relationship" BS or the "I'm not like that". While some of those men are ignorant, they know and may admit their sexism. Yet some of these women turn around and ask questions like "Why do we need men?", or "Should men be allowed to vote?". I've also noticed that when a guy points out an inequality to him for being male, he is a "whiner", but it's not true for a female to point out an inequality towards her. Is that not sexist when your considered something due to your sex? Then there are some who say that men need to "keep it in their pants" to a question, implying a man is wrong for wanting sex. Yet when the Ultimate Man posted a question, some of those women said that it was NOT wrong to love sex. Is that not hypocrisy? My personal favorite is when some women categorize ALL men into one generalization because ONE hurt her, and it's ok in other women's eyes. A guy does that, the women are all over his question saying "don't generalize", or other lines that don't relate to his question. The funniest one is when women say men are not needed. I find that HILARIOUS because without a man, they wouldn't exist, just like without women men would't exist. I don't see where that gap goes into their brains on that subject, and the reason is because "women are better than men at everything", as if men competed with women for things like who is better at feeling empathy or pain for bragging rights, or that has ANYTHING to do with showing hatred to another human being because of their genetic makeup.

So women and men, enlighten me. I would love to know why some women here point others out for their hatred and sexism, yet are completely blind to their own. I've even seen some questions and answers where a woman would laugh and not help a man getting attacked by a woman, yet call the police if he hit back.

Since today's women can do as much as a man, should we destroy all the things we built that they use, buildings, phones, computers, cars, airplanes, etc. and let them rebuild it themselves, while we separate into another region and bring our technology with us? As strong, independent women, they would surely be able to build their own country with their own technology. Including to that we should no longer donate semen to sperm banks, or distribute any technology made by men if any stay in the region. Women are strong and are taking over this world, so it's only fair they start from dirt, like men did. Don't some of you other men out there agree?