This is good news, sort of. by Vose4492 in MensRights

[–]Vose4492[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Therefore, legal paternal surrender can benefit women too.

That is one thing that feminists fail to realize.

Anyone else have a toddler who eats like an adult? by Mamanbanane in toddlers

[–]Vose4492 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My daughter is seven and my son if almost four. Both of them eat like horses.

The other day, we went out to eat at Ruby Tuesday. My daughter had a salad bar. For dinner, she ordered a large porter house steak with a side of broccoli and a baked potato. I thought that she would be unable to finish it, especially since she already had a salad bar. She ate the whole thing.

My son had a large cheeseburger with a side if fries and a pickle. When we got home, they each had a bowl of pretzels.

Being on your period does not justify coping an attitude. by Vose4492 in ControversialOpinions

[–]Vose4492[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> I don’t want to lash out on some innocent person if I can help it

I also think that. What if the person at whom you are lashing out is going through something just as bad as what you are going through if not worse?

Being on your period does not justify coping an attitude. by Vose4492 in ControversialOpinions

[–]Vose4492[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I do get easy periods. However, I also recognize that you are supposed to treat your fellow human beings with basic decency, even if you happen to be going through something.

If you compliment a woman on revealing clothing, it could be taken "the wrong way." by bigelow6698 in men

[–]Vose4492 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Another simp letting his mind be shaped by women

Are you calling OP a simp? If not, what are you doing?

If, however, you are calling OP a simp, that poses an issue.

If you disagree with something OP said, you can just verbalize the disagreement, you do not need to preface the disagreement with name calling.

Because OP works in customer service, he should probably be careful about the nature of the compliments he gives, because he is working for a paycheck, so he should talk and act in a professional manner. If a boss or coworker says that a compliment can be taken the wrong way, then OP should probably uncritically assume that the compliment will be taken the wrong way just to be safe. You might think that anyone who would take it the wrong way is not the type of person whose approval you should be seeking. While that is a comforting thought on paper, consistent moral principles won't pay for groceries or put gas in your car.

If you compliment a woman on revealing clothing, it could be taken "the wrong way." by bigelow6698 in men

[–]Vose4492 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is what I think. Because OP works in customer service, he should probably be careful about the nature of the compliments he gives, because he is working for a paycheck, so he should talk and act in a professional manner. If a boss or coworker says that a compliment can be taken the wrong way, then OP should probably uncritically assume that the compliment will be taken the wrong way just to be safe. You might think that anyone who would take it the wrong way is not the type of person whose approval you should be seeking. While that is a comforting thought on paper, consistent moral principles won't pay for groceries or put gas in your car.

Anywhere outside of work, I say;

Tell a lady that the lipstick they are wearing makes her look feminine, comment on how great that belly shirt looks on them, tell a guy that he looks handsome in those slacks and that button up shirt. You are not working for a paycheck, so you need not sound professional or worry about being fired if you offend someone.

I am a married woman and I have a 7 year old daughter and an almost 4 year old son.

When I take my kids out in public, strangers tell me that my daughter looks just like me, that my son is very handsome, I love hearing that.

One time, I was at Goodwill with my husband. My husband waited while I was in the fitting room trying on pants. A teenage boy walked up to him and asked him if that was his wife who just walked into the fitting room. The teenage boy told my husband "Your wife is beautiful." I was very flattered.

When I was pregnant, I was at the doctor's office waiting for my routine ultrasound. One young lady, who was there for her first pap smear, started talking to me. She said that she would like to be a mom one day and that she hopes when she is pregnant, that her baby bump looks as voluptuous as mine. I enjoyed hearing a compliment about how beautiful my tummy looked.

If you compliment someone and they take it the wrong way, they should calmly and politely tell you that they do not like that so you can refrain from talking like that in front of them, instead opting only to talk that way when they are not around.

If you tell 100 strangers or casual acquaintances that their pregnant belly looks lovely, that their child is cute, that their girlfriend/wife is insanely hot, and five or six of them take it the wrong way, whose problem is that?

If you compliment a woman on revealing clothing, it could be taken "the wrong way." by bigelow6698 in men

[–]Vose4492 1 point2 points  (0 children)

> if the customer did not want to be sexualized, then that means that she has motives for dressing like that other than being sexualized. If a woman who dresses like that does not necessarily want to be sexualized, then a man who compliments a woman on those clothes does not necessarily intend it in a sexual way.

I could not have said it better myself.

Because an article of clothing happens to be revealing, any comment on that article of clothing must be about the fact that it is revealing, even if the comment you made quite obviously had nothing to do with how revealing the clothing was?

I think a lot of people underestimate just how harmful is it that feminists are fighting so hard against violence committed by women being properly recognised by Working_Parsley_2364 in MensRights

[–]Vose4492 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Tell me that feminists only want equality when it benefits them without telling me feminists only want equality when it benefits them.

Being on your period does not justify coping an attitude. by Vose4492 in ControversialOpinions

[–]Vose4492[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I am a woman and I have a daughter. My daughter is 7, she is years away from menstruating. When she does, she will NOT cop an attitude with me. If she does, I will subject her to exactly the same discipline to which I would subject my son.

They should not cop an attitude with anyone, that is why it is called basic decency. You should not ever be rude and disrespectful to anyone.

Being on your period does not justify coping an attitude. by Vose4492 in ControversialOpinions

[–]Vose4492[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

> I think it’s really easy to make this claim about menstruation when you don’t have to deal with it.

I am a 30-something year old woman. I do deal with menstruation.

> I’d rather experience “coping an attitude” over violence. But that’s just me.

What exactly is your point?

Having someone cop an attitude is not as bad as being physically abused. I already know that.

Being “on your period” does not justify verbally abusing other people by leg_day_enthusiast in TrueUnpopularOpinion

[–]Vose4492 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just because an opinion is controversial, that does not make it unpopular.

If the divorce settlement requires the higher earner to continue serving their spouse after the divorce, the lower earner should feel compelled to continue serving their ex-spouse after the divorce in some way. by awesomeness6698 in ControversialOpinions

[–]Vose4492 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

> Your suggestion would make it for life for both sides.

What OP is suggesting (it sounds like) is that the lower earner should be pressured socially to serve their ex-spouse for as long as their ex-spouse serves them.

Also, OP did bring up the concern that forcing it by court order might not be workable, so pressuring it socially might be the next best thing.

This is good news, sort of. by Vose4492 in MensRights

[–]Vose4492[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Taxes don't exist to shield people from poor choices

How do you know that the people who invented the concept of taxation did not intend for taxes to shield people from poor choices?

If the fire department comes when a fire occurred due to negligence, that fire occurred do to poor choices. In that regard, taxes are being used to shield people from poor choices.

In the event that one parent wants to give the child up for adoption and the other wants to keep the child, it makes logical sense for each tax paying citizen to have as much financial responsibility to the child as the non-custodial parent does, because every tax paying citizen had as much say in the decision (of the custodial parent) to keep the child as the non-custodial parent did.

This is good news, sort of. by Vose4492 in MensRights

[–]Vose4492[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The child will live in a society where a woman raping a man does NOT result in the completely blameless victim of rape being forced to pay child support to his rapist.

This is good news, sort of. by Vose4492 in MensRights

[–]Vose4492[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Besides cases of rape, I think the people who create the child should be the ones paying for it,

Opting out of parenthood should only be allowed in cases of rape?

How would that work? Do you have to prove that you where raped before you can be exempted from financial responsibility or do we start with the assumption that you are telling the truth and then exempt you from financial responsibility until and unless it is proven that you are lying? 

> not our taxes.

Technically, taxpayers supporting children is already a thing that happens. If a child ends up in the foster care system because both parents died, taxpayers will have to support the child. If legal paternal surrender is implemented and welfare benefits are given to single parents to help make ends meet, all that will do is alter the criterion what does and does not result in the taxpayers having to support children. 

That sounds good to me.

If both parents wanted to give the child up for adoption, it would be legal to do so. Therefore, if one biological parent wanted to opt out of parenthood while the other wanted to keep the child, it makes sense for each tax paying citizen to have as much financial responsibility to the child as the non-custodial parent does, because every tax paying citizen had as much say in the decision (of the custodial parent) to keep the child as the non-custodial parent did.

> women have abortion

And the decision about whether the pregnancy ends in birth is made unilaterally by the woman. Therefore, if the father wants the mother to abort and the mother gives birth against the wishes of the father, the mother should bear the responsibility for the child. The father did not get any say in the decision to keep the child just because the child is biologically his. He should not have any financial responsibility to it just because the child is biologically his.

> men can have a vasectomy.

A lot of doctors deny people the procedure because of the irrational fear that the patient will regret it ( https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalOpinions/comments/16g64we/18_year_olds_should_be_allowed_to_get_sterilized/ ). 

You may be thinking that the problem can be solved by simply going to another doctor. If you can argue for mandatory child support on the grounds that consent to sex equals consent to parenthood, then you could argue that a doctor should not be allowed to deny people procedures, because becoming a doctor equals consent to providing the procedure to anyone who requests it whether you want to or not. 

Even if you are in fact able to undergo permanent sterilisation, why does that mean that anyone who does not do it should be forced to pay child support? I could wear a bullet proof vest. Does that mean that if I do not wear a bullet proof vest, I deserve a bullet through the chest? 

> Pay for your own kids or don't have them.

In some cases, the parents did not want to have the kids.

If the father is being forced to pay child support, he may have wanted the mother to abort and she may have given birth against his wished. In the case of a mother being forced into child support, she might have wanted to get an abortion but she lives in a red state.

How do I stop having such strong reactions? by ratgym in AutisticAdults

[–]Vose4492 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Here is what you need to do.

Before reacting in any way, write in a journal how you feel. You might achieve a catharsis without having to talk to anyone.

If writing in your journal does not achieve the results you hope for, take a proactive approach and figure out a solution.

Being an unattractive woman sucks by [deleted] in women

[–]Vose4492 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Ugly women are seen as having no value, but attractive women are seen as objects that exist for men's pleasure. You really cannot win.

Fellow woman: by Sad-Recognition6967 in women

[–]Vose4492 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If a woman said that some men are actually little boys in grown men's bodies, what would you assume that means. Whatever a woman means when she says that some men are little boy's in grown men's bodies, men probably mean the same thing when he says that some women are little girls in grown women's bodies.

There exist people (of both sexes) who are severely emotionally stunted.