So an Argo fan who also happens to be a fearless champion of men’s rights ( a white knight, perchance?) seems to think that because his team is speaking out against violence on women… oh to hell with it, let the guy’s own words do the talking.
The applicant seems to allege that WRC engages in discrimination against men because the WRC does not advocate for male victims of domestic violence and because the WRC portrays men as villains. The applicant maintains that the Argonauts, in expressing support for this cause, has similarly discriminated against men and is perpetuating the message that men are villains. He asserts that as a male this constitutes discrimination against him.”
Without going into stats etc, I’m just going to address the simple version of his case. The Argos just chose to support one particular charity rather than another. The applicant seems to be arguing that you can’t support a charity unless you support all charities, because that means you are discriminating. I guess on a fundamental level he is right. When I choose to have tea in the morning, I’m discriminating against all the other options available to me. But I doubt that any reasonable person would think of starting a Human Rights complaint on behalf of the coffee farmers over my decision. But I guess that is the crux of the matter – MRAs are not reasonable people.
This case is a classic case of dogmatic myopia and stupid reasoning and as such this clown should be laughed at whenever one comes across him.