TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

91

The whole stud vs slut debate. If you argue that men and women are different and that men have to put a lot more effort into getting pussy than a girl does to be a slut you are labeled a misogynist right away. Yet those same people will argue that domestic violence is a women's rights issue and that hitting a woman is worse than hitting a man because "men are stronger". Those same feminists either don't care or will excuse the fact that there are homeless shelters specifically for women, domestic violence shelters where men aren't allowed, duluth model, the fact that men die in the workforce at a much higher rate, suicide rates. The wage gap is often brought up, yet if you look at young women they are outearning men and graduating college at a higher rate. Is this not a clear example of a "gap"?

It seems as though modern day feminism is more about special treatment for women and breaking down double standards that negatively affect women than about actual equality. Feminists claim women should not be judged for promiscuity because men aren't, yet will argue that men shouldn't hit women in self defense because men are stronger and can easily "restrain" women.

You can look at the Ray Rice and Joe Mixon situations. Both men defended themselves against assault and were demonized by mainstream media. One lost his livelihood simply for defending himself against domestic violence.

The tables are turning heavily in favor of women. If feminists don't adress these double standards and focus on actual eqauality I fear that the next generation of young men will harbor resentment towards women and our interactions will be fucked. This in part led to the Trump victory, who knows what will happen next?


[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (97 children) | Copy Link

What do you think the fem part of feminism is for?

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✑️🐈✑️ the purring jew42 points43 points  (55 children) | Copy Link

yeh well, i got banned from ask feminists for saying that feminism was about women. theres soem confusing rhetoric going on , at least in reddit feminist circles

[–]tiger1296A little bit of both40 points41 points  (42 children) | Copy Link

There is no confusion, everyone knows exactly what's going on but they just can't blatantly admit it

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✑️🐈✑️ the purring jew30 points31 points  (41 children) | Copy Link

There's obvious confusion, men keeping thinking feminism is somehow about advocating for them

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM31 points32 points  (27 children) | Copy Link

thats because feminists insist feminism benefits both men and women by smashing the patriarchy

[–]mgtownigga18 points19 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

it's funny how they'll trot that out when a man questions the usefulness of feminism in addressing male issues, yet when a guy wants to raise concerns around a particular male issue, feminists will often respond that it's not the job of feminism to fix male issues. It's the most self-serving, convenient ideology-ie utter fucking bullshit

[–]OfSpock7 points8 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

What feminism does has a side effect of benefitting men, it's not their main focus. How is that hard to understand?

[–]mgtownigga7 points8 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I keep hearing this but I have yet to see the side effects being anything but negative. Name one thing that has benefited men due to feminism? All I see is a bunch of women breaking free of gender roles while men are still beholden to theirs. It's an issue of wanting your cake and eating it too. The contradictions are endless

[–]OfSpock10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Feminism petitioned for parental leave. That helped men who wanted to spend more time with their new babies and bond with them. A two income household has a backup earner if one earner loses their job or is injured, is this not better for men who now have less stress about money?

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Feminism petitioned for parental leave.

Despite they really don't.

[–]------__------------1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I think if feminism ever does help men it's more an unwanted byproduct than a side effect

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why would it be unwanted? Side effect, byproduct are the same thing.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

lol. Trickle down equality doesn't work.

[–]OfSpock3 points4 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Did I use that term? Feminism is about helping women to be what they want. Men benefit from that to, or at least women thought they should. There are apparently a lot more men who are happy with forced, begrudged or bought sex than they thought.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

Did I use that term?

By saying what feminism does has a side effect that benefits men, you are promoting trickle down equality.

Men benefit from that to, or at least women thought they should.

I've never seen feminists overall think men should benefit from feminism. All I seen like you have said is what feminism does for women benefits men. Reality and such the facts clearly shows otherwise.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✑️🐈✑️ the purring jew13 points14 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Which isnt saying "feminism benefits men in ways men claim they wish to be benefitted", is it

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes but it's so pervasive and they've done very well to label all criticism of feminism and women as sexist, so even if it's obvious they're about women first, pointing it out gets you nowhere. That and male feminists have put pussy on the pedestal so they are willingly blind to the problems.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Has it occurred to you that maybe just maybe women and feminism are sexist? I know its a radical thought but its not like they aren't as they very much are. I mean feminists did after all create the saying men are trash, and took over Game of Thrones hash tag of killallmen to well promote killallmen. There's other examples like Duluth Model, and feminists throwing a fit over the change in how colleges are to handle rape allegations.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Preaching to the choir

[–]HossMcDankEdgy Centrist4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

We don't think that, we just call out the fact that they are lying when they claim to be anything but a man-hating cult, at least in the western world.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

You'd think these internet geniuses would realize this at some point and start advocating themeselves.

But nah. Losers always going to lose, but their bitching will intensify, as they continue to lose. And keep begging women to advocate for them. While creating bizarre narratives inside narratives, where some girl will advocate for them.

While also claiming that woman need men to advocate for her. "if men didn't care, blah blah blah"

God damn this place makes me embarrased for my gender

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Because that worked so well for the MRM. I mean, after Cassie Jaye made her Red Pill-movie, you had a feminist sincerely arguing on national television (I think it was Australia) that the movie should be banned. No, the cunt didn't see it, she just assumed that a flick that doesn't vilify the MRM can't be anything than highly dangerous.

That's the hatred the MRM is going against - hatred from an ideology-driven movement that's pampered by 90% of the media.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Who cares? I mean that movie was advocating for what? Women to not be repulsed by weak fat men crying? The shared parenting initiative has had great success. In the past our ancestors fought battles to create labor unions and collective bargaining, and that allowed young men to start careers and make enough money to have families. Now we have billionaires who have utterly destroyed most unions and you modern terp fags cheer it on.

What change would you like to see in the world? Do tell me, and show me some group that is advocating for it.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin-1 points0 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

You had one mean woman unsuccessfully try to ban a movie? Ouuuhh, the hatred! Almost as bad as the fire hoses opened up on peaceful protesters by the government in Birmingham or the hundreds of people spitting on little kids who tried to go to the school a block away in New Orleans.

So hard to get the word out when everyone is so against you! It’s worse than the women’s suffrage movement, when women were not even allowed to speak in public. If only you had male lawmakers and male representation in politics. 😒

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Fortunately for women, they had the Rockefellers bank rolling their movement so they could overcome the issues.

This was so capitalists had a greater supply of slaves workers and could keep wages more competitive. Those billionaires are pretty scarce now, so while women enjoy being smug about how they got their demands met, they were backed by serious money. Money MRMs don't have.

If only you had male lawmakers and male representation in politics.

People who believe in identity politics make seriously sexist and racist assumptions like you're doing now. Just because they're a man or a woman, black or white doesn't mean they advocate on behalf of their race or gender. What you're seeing is the benefit of having the female vote because campaigning for women's rights and convincing people that women need more benefits gets them male and female votes.

Why?

Because men are the evil assholes who are out to victimise women, they say. Men are the devil and women are going to stop their evil ways. So if you want equal pay, despite already having it, and don't want to be a one-in-four statistic, despite it being near impossible, then support this liberal over here. Campaigning for men's rights is political suicide. If it garnered more money, votes and support, they'd send women back to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.

Y'all are deluded if you think politicians and lawmakers give a damn about anyone else but themselves.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

πŸ™„. No hyperbole in any of that. The mrm/sjw oppression Olympics. How do you poor oppressed people make it through each day? It must be awful.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

How do you poor oppressed people make it through each day?

Yes, it's about as tough as you coming up with an actual argument that isn't laden with sarcastic eye rolling so you can revel in self righteous smugness.

It must be awful.

Only when non-arguments like yours come along. Otherwise it's very average.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You had one mean woman unsuccessfully try to ban a movie? Ouuuhh, the hatred!

Hey, I have an idea. Why don't you just - in the spirit of an experiment - vocally and publicy advocate for the ban of some seminary feminist work on the basis of that being hatespeech. Assuming you get a platform in the first place and aren't just sent away as some fringe weirdo nutjob, can you guess what a reaction you get?

(hint: you'll probably be vilified as some sort of Nazi)

The thing is: it isn't just the fact that some neurotic feminist idiot thinks that anything that doesn't paint the men's right movement as worse than Hitler should be banned outright (and, if she could have her way, would probably have every MRA convicted to serve 25 years of forced labor), it's that she can broadcast these opinions and nobody bats an eye. And bluepillers are actually a part of that problem.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

No one bats an eyelash...and noone banned the movie. Again, your greatest fear , someone will say bad things about you. Talk to John Lewis about being beaten and jailed, then get back to me about how hard it is to stand up for your rights.

The media loves outrage porn no matter what the topic, it’s good for ratings

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you not think their bitching isn't advocating for themselves? As if it wasn't for MRA's whining online like they have feminism wouldn't be talking about men's issues let alone acknowledge them to any real degree. And you do realize its feminists who define feminism as being about gender equality, so maybe feminists should stop defining feminism that way. Also men do advocate for themselves but feminists don't like it when they do. For example feminists have attacked Movember for being sexist and not well about women.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I saw this argument repeatedly in Gillette commercial threads

[–]mgtownigga6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

yeah, they have massive cognitive dissonance. In one breath they'll exclaim it's not the job of feminism to fix or alleviate men's problems, but in the next they'll say it's for everyone and benefits everyone, regardless of gender. It's the most ridiculous bullshit rhetoric and they redefine when it's convenient to do so

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't forget about how feminism is about gender equality. I really love that one.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

yeh well, i got banned from ask feminists for saying that feminism was about women.

If I am giving them the benefit of the doubt, I think they assumed that you were arguing in bad faith.

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

feminists are like the average woman: they don't know what the fuck they want

[–]Regal_NewtBlue Pill Woman0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

What else did you say? Ask feminists bans people easy but not for that.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✑️🐈✑️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

i think it had to do with my posting history, as i am not a feminist. all of my comment son askfeminist were advocatign for a fairly radfem definition of feminism

its possible demmian thought i deliberately posted a top level comment as a nonfeminist after being warned not to, bu tthat was a timing issue on my part

[–]Regal_NewtBlue Pill Woman0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Interesting. I got banned more or less for being a liberal feminist and not advocating for radical Feminism. They're an inconsistent bunch other there.

[–]Texastentialismshe's got a tattoo and two pet snakes0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I got banned on an old account for no discernible reason months after I had last posted there.

[–]RelevantInstance1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I also got banned from there for no reason. I even wrote a super polite message and kindly asked for explanation. But I was given a really vague answer that I could not understand.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✑️🐈✑️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

really? i thought they despised radfem there

[–]Regal_NewtBlue Pill Woman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

From what I've seen the mods are rad fem and they tend to off people who aren't. And by rad fem I mean wanting to deconstruct the concept of gender as a whole due to how it may influence women.

[–]CamoWoobie105 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

But I though feminism was just a synonym for equality and that's why the term egalitarian isnt needed.

[–]mgtownigga6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah, that's another stupid explanation they give when confronted with reality. Usually its because women are oppressed so they need a little extra umph, which completely negates the idea of a purely egalitarian philosophy. It's all utter nonsense

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Public appearance vs. actual goals.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

Do you not think women have been subservient to men for centuries?! The expression 'rule of thumb' apparently meant that a man could not beat his wife with a stick thicker than his thumb.

I agree that feminists have now achieved their objectives, but it has become an industry of sorts. I'd say we have equality of the sexes nowadays.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac14 points15 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The expression 'rule of thumb' apparently meant that a man could not beat his wife with a stick thicker than his thumb

And then there are some in the Age of Information who are still being long-distance trolled all the way from the 18th century.

"A modern folk etymology holds that the phrase derives from the maximum width of a stick allowed for wife-beating under English law; this belief may have originated in a rumored statement by the eighteenth-century judge Sir Francis Buller that a man may beat his wife with a stick no wider than his thumb. The rumor produced numerous jokes and satirical cartoons at Buller's expense; however, there is no record that he made such a statement."

[–]qwertyuiop111222Purple Pill Masticator4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

in the Age of Information ...still being long-distance trolled all the way from the 18th century

Good stuff!

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've heard that it may come from a naval practice: when plotting your boat's trajectory on a map to avoid reefs, always add your thumb to allow some extra space, because maps have errors. No matter the map scale, the rule is just "add a thumb".

[–]korkyshadow19 points20 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

Nope absolutely not. If they were subservient to men they would do the worst manual labor and have been sent to war. Just because they had to do house work (because it had to be done and men were busy breaking their backs) doesn't mean they were subservient. It used to be a trade off, you got the benefits of staying at home/being defended/having the guys resources and in turn you support him. There is a reason most guys will tell you they 100% would be a house wife (and yes they are picturing the 1950s house wife not the 2000 watch netflixs all day one).

[–]mgtownigga10 points11 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

furthermore, women toiled in the fields as much as men. The average peasant was toiling in the fields, sex be damned. The idea that women werent engaging in farm work or hunter-gatherer type roles is completely off the mark. Women even fucking hunted. you can argue that women tended to get the shaft at the upper echelons of society throughout time, but so few were a part of those classes that it really is a silly point to bring up. As soon as we started to modernize, women slowly but surely gained access to a lot of occupatoinal roles, some new, some old. They fucking worked in factories for god's sake

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Especially when men had to fight in wars guess who did the farm work? The women and children of course.

[–]mgtownigga6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

even when they didnt fight in the gruesome and terrible wars, they still engaged in the farmwork. The idea that women werent workign alongside men is false

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's why I said "especially".

[–]redpillschoolRed Pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women even fucking hunted.

How many women do you think it took to bring a dead buck back to camp?

How long before that community decided it made more sense to send fewer men to do the same job?

[–]insultin_crayon15 points16 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Do you really not think that low class, poor women did back-breaking manual labor since the dawn of agriculture?

[–]korkyshadow-2 points-1 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Compared to their husbands? Nope.

[–]insultin_crayon14 points15 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Pick up a book then. Women worked fields, textiles, did farm work. You’re downplaying their labor for your own agenda, which is weird because it’s so easily provable. Women of color did all the same work as males, but would you ever admit that?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Women of color did all the same work as males

Women worked but it was limited work compared to men. They weren't doing the kind of heavy lifting men were doing and they weren't being sent off to war. Men were also expected to sacrifice themselves for the continued survival of women and children (the Titanic, for example).

Yes, women worked. But this belief that women were slaves while men were slacking off all day has to die. It has never been that way. Men were not having parties at the office. They were not enjoying lung disease in the coal mines. They were not looking forward to waking up at 4am to go fishing in cold weather. They were not messing around on construction sites.

Working on a farm? Sure, both men and women did that. But can we please get away from this narrative that any domestic duties women had was oppressive or women working in general was a sign that men were oppressing them.

[–]toasterchild2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Its not the duties themselves that were oppressive, it was the lack of choice available.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Women worked but it was limited work compared to men.

No more limited than it was for men. Modeling, medical field, daycare, etc are all women dominated fields of work.

Men were not having parties at the office.

They where and are if they are white collar.

[–]redpillschoolRed Pill1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They where and are if they are white collar.

Source: The historical documentary Mad Men.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"worked"? They still do in poor countries.

[–]korkyshadow-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nope they generally worked the house. They did pick fruit/cotton but they did not work the fields. Just like they didn't build the railroads. I'm not saying the did literally zero field work ever, i'm saying that did 1-5% compared to mens 95-99%. Hell i'm not even saying it doesn't make sense (men are larger) but you are trying to rewrite history for your agenda.

[–]insultin_crayon8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope, you’re wrong as can be. A quick google search would help you.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I literally can't express how wrong this is.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Women have the choice of being a housewife today...how many actually are, though?! They prefer their independence. That's fair. However if there's a draft, I would expect women to be conscripted too.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.12 points13 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Aside from Abrams' excellent post, let me chime in as a (female) Army Reservist and say firstly that the draft is becoming more and more obsolete with technical advancement as well as impractical for the catalogue of reasons in her post, and reinforce that even at the lower levels, no soldier in their right mind wants to serve with people who don't want to be there or are otherwise deemed unfit. Go hang out on /r/army and see what they have to say about it, if you need more info.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fair enough. I'm not saying there should be a daft, but if there was it should not be discriminatory.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The draft may becoming more obsolete, but that don't void the problem/point with it though.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The reason you'd usually not want to send women to war has nothing to do with them not being physically or mentally fit for war but because they are the factories of new humans. If you're going to war you'll need a steady stream of new humans if you intend for your civilization to survive this war especially when the war is long and you don't expect peace even after one war has ended and there might be yet another war. You wouldn't send the factories to war. Yes, this sounds dystopian but a woman can roughly produce a new human reasonably well every two years. That's wasn't even uncommon a few years ago regardless of war. Often you'd have 2-3 kids all separated by two years and then you'd stop. If you lose a woman you're not just losing one person, your losing one person now and 3 future humans so your actual loss is 4 humans, not one human. That's a bad move. And yes, men do have that protective instinct and we're also concerned about the survival of the species that's why we usually inevitably value women's survival over our own survival in some contexts.

[–]mgtownigga2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

the reason that many women opt out of housewife life is because it's not economically viable. If you look at wealthy households, where the man makes a significant amount of income (think top ten percent and upwards), you actaully see a lot of women content with being homemakers. There was an article in the ny times that snidely criticized such women, even though they said they were content when interviewed.

[–]mgtownigga1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I think men and women have largely been subserviant to the wealthy and elite for centuries. Upward mobility was not a thing for the vast majority of people, men and women, throughout time. Male and female peasants worked all day, on the farm or otherwise. I guess you could make the case that specialized classes like Merchants were primarily male based, but so few were a part of that class that it's almost a moot point. It's also worth noting that women could wield considerable power in the courts, and sometimes directly rule depending on the civilization and era. Furthermore, religious positions like being a nun often resulted in immense privileges when compared to the average peasant.

Feminists have this weird view of history, it's as if they think that there was a vast amount of administrative, office, and other modern roles throughout time, when this coudlnt' be farther from the truth. Very small subset of society until the last few centuries

[–]OfSpock4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Property went to the eldest son. Not all sons, but only sons, so if anyone were to climb out of poverty, it's going to be a man.

[–]mgtownigga2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

yet you still saw ginormous dowries gifted to a woman, even in ancient times, and she had more power with that than your modern sensibilities probably have lead you to believe. Look, im not saying that women didn't face hurdles throughout time, but the vast majority of the populace in any nation pre-industrial era was fucked. Sex didnt matter.

Most of the conversations we have about workplace fairness and equal employment weren't even possible until we modernized, and lo and behold, things changed VERY rapidly. Within a few hundred years, we now have legislation in place and women are even out earning/ out learning men at a rapid rate.

[–]OfSpock5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Dowries weren't gifted to women, they went from the father to the husband.

[–]mgtownigga1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

in ancient rome, women had a decent amount of control over the dowry though. they also could divorce

[–]OfSpock6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Arab women technically have the ability to divorce their husband and go home with their dowry too. It's social suicide and your family may try to kill you, but technically the right exists.

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The expression 'rule of thumb' apparently meant that a man could not beat his wife with a stick thicker than his thumb.

Can't do much damage with that now, can we? Sure it wasn't "rule of wrist"?

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac54 points55 points  (30 children) | Copy Link

How could anyone expect feminism, an ideology that's biased in favor of women to not have biases in favor of women?

[–]worldnewsie50 points51 points  (29 children) | Copy Link

Feminists lie about it and claim it is really egalitarianism. Some people believe it, due to the women are wonderful effect.

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (10 children) | Copy Link

If someone tells you that pile of shit looking thing on the plate is a cake would you actually eat it??

[–]worldnewsie10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

It's not readily apparent as shit though, they do try to dress it up and hide it. The more proper analogy would be a sandwich that fell on the floor but the dirt hidden by the other slice of bread.

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

I think it is... its in the name.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Gaslighting is one hell of a drug, especially if it's done by an entire media landscape safe a few rightwing outlets.

[–]mgtownigga4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it seems obvious to us but you have to understand that people are literally being indoctrinated from childhood onwards. It's also verboten to criticize feminism publicly in fear of backlash, which can result in a loss of friends, reputation, and even tank careers.

SO yeah, in that kind of climate, it's not hard to believe that the obfuscation and rhetoric is working

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I have a friend who made a near perfect poop emoji cake. Shit was good too.

[–]NohoTwoPointOh1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You can tell a man that there are a zillion stars in the sky and he will believe you.

Tell the same man that there is wet paint on the bench over there and he will touch it just to be sure.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm 14 and this is deep

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably because you can see a zillion stars but not wet paint.

[–]AllahHatesFagsBLACK PILL MOTHERFUCKER!-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not shit, it's beautifully brown and delicious. If you don't like it, you are a shallow, toxic misogynist. STOP SHIT SHAMING ME!

/s

[–]FalseBuddhaSomething borrowed, something Blue-1 points0 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

It is egalitarianism, just from the perspective that women aren't equal. Just like the Civil Rights movement was for equality despite having nothing to do with white rights.

[–]dawnpriestess4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

This is a terrible analogy, btw.

[–]FalseBuddhaSomething borrowed, something Blue0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

And some very constructive criticism in response.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It is terrible as women were not slaves shipped over from another continent. It's also starting with a flawed premise that women are not equals, which would mean the end of feminism the second women had equal rights. They now have more rights than men. Job's done but apparently there's "still a long way to go" because the money and benefits need to keep coming for a long time.

[–]dawnpriestess0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly this, thanks.

[–]worldnewsie1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Comparing race to gender is asinine. Any differences in race are due to environmental factors, however far back you need to go. Sex differences are intrinsic to the human species. Men and women have been different since the birth of humans at the very least. All the different races didn't even exist at the birth of the human species.

The Civil Rights movement included whites, at best men can be feminist allies who try to help women, not themselves.

Different races are not at odds with each other in a zero sum situation, men and women are. Men have to give things up so women can feel equal.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Any differences in race are due to environmental factors

Lol

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

You know how different human races evolved, yes?

Another difference I forgot was that races can easily mix, a half man half woman like a Klinefelter's or XXY is a genetic abnormality and usually sterile.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Another difference I forgot was that races can easily mix

yes, creating a person carrying the different genetic traits of each race

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Genetic factors influenced by what? Oh right, the environment, however many generations ago. Men and women were genetically different from the birth of the human species, not true for the different races.

You take a white kid to Africa and his descendants will eventually be dark skinned. There is no environment you can take a female so her female descendants eventually grow a dick.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

we actually dont know what will happen, there is scientific consensus that the Y chormosome will become obsolete in the future.

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Now you're just being obtuse. Ok, let's say that has never happened in history in any noticable form while the change in races has. At the very least my point about the difference in sex being there from the birth of humanity is true.

Source for the scientific consensus?

[–]redpillschoolRed Pill1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Any differences in race are due to environmental factors, however far back you need to go.

Why do you think humans evolved different traits if they have no bearing on survival and sexual success?

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Where did I say they had no bearing or survival or sexual success? But they played a role in those particular environments, such as light skin in Europe due to the low light levels. Again, due to dispute that environmental factors created the different races? Do you not see how that is different than sex which was there from the creation of humanity?

[–]mgtownigga0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

at this point in time, where are women 'not equal' in society? At least in the US and Europe? I definitely understand some of the past iterations of feminism, but i'm at a loss when it comes to third wave

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminists lie about it and claim it is really egalitarianism

I don't think even male feminists would be dumb enough to actually believe that.

[–]bonusfruit18 points19 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Short answer is historic power and privilege. It's a catch all solution to having to think about sex issues with any complexity. It goes like this. Men used to have the power, men used to oppress women. Therefore, [literally anything I want]. It sanctions all double standards , all female hypocrisy, any advantages women enjoy, any mistreatment of men by women, the complete dismissal and amusment of male problems and suffering, etc. Its all covered under historical power and privilege

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. I always ask people to think: 100 years from now, if you get everything you want, what would you get? you'd get a society where women have the position men used to have. If the movement you're pushing for is successful and it ends in just a flipped script, then it's implied that your goals are not conducive to equality, they're a power grab.

[–]goldmedalflower0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

/ thread

[–]solorathain6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

In feminist ideology, women are seen as oppressed and incapable. Anything that benefits them is seen as a net positive, even if it's at the detriment of men.

[–]Iceklimber13 points14 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Imagine you have two ancient tribes. One sends males to war, the other females. The second tribe loses 80% of females and its reproductive capacity is down to 20%. The first tribe loses 80% of males and its reproductive capacity remains at 100%.

From the evolutionary perspective, only the tribes which protected their women had offspring. Males are biologically disposable.


[–]Ashen_Light6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The tribe that lost 80% of its males is getting wrecked though in the next war

[–]hugeostrichegg6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Defends on how soon the next one is. If it's next week, sure. If it's in 16-20 years, then they'll be ight.

[–]lbspredh7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The tribe who lost 80% of it's men is getting the other 20% of them killed in short order and then 100% of their women taken into the other tribe, meaning they have 120% reproductive capacity.

it's a terrible hypothetical anyway though.

[–]BoiledCentipedes4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

People are misunderstanding (either willfully or otherwise) the gist of your post. It is an absolute truism that women are more crucial than men (on a one-to-one basis) when it comes to the maintenance and proliferation of a population.

Tribe A has 20 women and 100 men.

Tribe B has 100 women and 20 men.

After a week of sex, Tribe A has 20 pregnant women. Tribe B has 100 pregnant women. After 9 months (assuming no deaths in either Tribe), Tribe A's population has grown by 20, and Tribe B's by 100. Rinse and repeat. Tribe B flourishes relative to Tribe A.

The only advantage Tribe A has is in manpower. But only until Tribe B's absolute advantage in population size translates to a larger number of men as well.

[–]Iceklimber-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The only advantage Tribe A has is in manpower.

I wrote an even amount of losses for the sake of simplicity. However a real battle between female combatants of one tribe and male combatants of another tribe would not have an even distribution of deaths.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You do realize women can have more than one kid right?

[–]Iceklimber2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Neanderthals were perpetually pregnant.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men can have kids with multiple women faster than one woman can have multiple kids.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure27 points28 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

The short answer:

Because women are advocating for double standards and men are supporting those women so long as they can still have sex with them.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

lol those men aren't getting laid. They'll probably realize that sooner or later that acting like a woman won't get you women.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure9 points10 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

The men who very likely support feminism and double standards for women are the men who are in relationships with women who are pro-feminism, so it would be in those men’s interests to support their Significant Other in that instance.

There are also men who very likely sympathize/empathize with women because they see where and how their feelings toward β€œThe PatriarchyTM” could arise.

[–]Ladyofblades2 points3 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

In all honesty, I've hardly ever encountered men who were successful AND have had successful relationships with women from the beginning /were "naturals" who didn't support feminism or at least didn't really care enough to speak against it.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You don’t have to be an activist to support your SO.

[–]Ladyofblades5 points6 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, but my observation was that men who have had relatively few issues in attracting and having good relationships with women (family as well as romantic)seem to not mind feminism at all. My impression is that these men have never felt threatened by it, hence the lack of negative perception of it.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right. What I was saying is that, until feminism causes enough radicalization to affect those guys’ relationships, they’re going to support (or ignore) it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Nah, we laugh at it along with our high SMV women

[–]Ladyofblades2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This sounds like you actually care about it more than the men in question

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's fun to laugh at idiots what can I say

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

In all honesty, I've hardly ever encountered a thin women who supported feminism

[–]Ladyofblades5 points6 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

There are plenty on the coasts. Fit, attractive, successful and in relationships and marriages with high value men, feminine too. The image of the radical feminist on the internet is largely of a certain segment that doesn’t have much overlap with them. In my professional circles most women are feminist and many are involved with women’s career initiatives in a male dominated industry. A large number of men are too (and many of them are highly successful)

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

There are plenty on the coasts. Fit, attractive, successful and in relationships and marriages with high value men, feminine too.

Ah, the coffee shop feminist. Able to extract the benefits of a traditional relationship without it's responsibilities and still claim she's supporting a worthy cause because she believes in freedom.

If only they knew what the movement really was about...

[–]Ladyofblades0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Look up Adriana Gascoigne. Hardly a coffee shop feminist. She’s probably the epitome of the type I mean, and I’m quite fortunate to know many women of her kind of conviction. The women I am friends with are mostly in STEM and participate actively in or lead initiatives for girls and women in tech and education. I’m a former activist in the third world (repro rights).

I feel you’re really not acquainted with the type I mean or the kind of culture I’m familiar with. Our experiences seem worlds apart in this.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Those men usually are just to save face or for appearances. Especially in those coastal bubbles

[–]Ladyofblades1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Only some of the men I know are actually holding dialogue with other men about it and honestly believe in improving masculinity. It’s very easy to speak as an outsider on something external to your experience, but people from differing locations, cultures, political bent and upbringing will adhere to those social structures first before those of gender. There’s a reason it’s called tribalism and not genderism.

[–]mgtownigga1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

or if they do, it's in passing or for social media likes.

[–]mgtownigga-1 points0 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Eh, I rarely see a correlation between a guy's feminist stance and success with women. Maybe there is a small subset of extremist ideologues that cannot be dated unless the guy is completely emasculated and on board, but I rarely find those types to be pleasant and/or that attractive.

I've personally fucked a lot of girls that claim to be feminists, one even had a fucking radio show, and i'm hardly a feminist supporter and i'm pretty open about it. I'm not a misogynist, but i'm wholly against feminism

[–]Ladyofblades2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Success with women (eg. A lot of sex) doesn’t really mean successful and non toxic relationships with women. The latter is more what I mean.

[–]mgtownigga1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

honestly, i've seen kind of the opposite in that regard. I've seen a lot of beta like dudes take in toxic women and overlook their faults and past n count out of virtue and being 'a feminist', and they often have a hell of a time. They also lack the options to clearly filter out the bad.

Meanwhile, guys that are more masculine and less feminist in nature tend to have an abundance of options and end up being able to properly separate the wheat from the chaff later in life.

That's what ive seen anyways

[–]Ladyofblades2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Probably very different where you live. More masculine doesn’t mean less feminist either though, there are firemen, trainers and athletes who are feminist. In reality I think one’s options are influenced by the politics and economics of where you live way more than whether you advocate for a gender movement or not. I’ve sometimes brought up the feminism issue with some men here (especially younger men) and they often are surprised I ask there’s even a problem with being feminist (response goes like β€œI thought feminism meant equality for women?” And the conversation just goes elsewhere because they have zero issue with it). I actually think less people in the real world have the time to care or just don’t.

[–]mgtownigga0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

yeah, I mean I don't have a problem with equality for women or even the past iterations of feminsim, but i'm definitely against the bullshit we see today. I take issue with the third wave bollocks, and I also take issue with the idea that we can't have an egalitarian philosophy over a feminist one. Were well past the point that it needs to be labelled 'feminism', and the feminism that is being trotted out is often at ends with men, regardless of what its proponents say to the contrary

[–]Ladyofblades0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

What bothers me is that few Americans are looking critically at polarizing issues on social media and not realizing a lot of it is intended to destabilize national and cultural unity. Before the investigation on Russian operatives I would’ve thought it was a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, but it’s more and more abundantly clear foreign interests are behind the broadening gap between supporters of different narratives. There’s documented proof that Russians have had a hand in everything from white nationalist propaganda, Antifa sites, the manspreading video/antifems and Star Wars issue. How much of this is real? My experiences in the real world don’t really match what I’m seeing online.

Unfortunately I think the damage is done.

[–]BoiledCentipedes-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I rarely see a correlation between a guy's feminist stance and success with women.

In my experience, the correlation is a negative one. The most ardent male feminists I know personally are the least successful in the dating world (and as an aside, happen to be absolutely sexist and toxic behind closed doors).

[–]-Mavs3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's the possibility that keeps them around.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep, they're beta orbiters hoping their agreeableness will lead to sex and relationships.

The politicians are only on women's side because they bolster your voting numbers from women and men.

[–]Maybelowsmvman-repellant16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"The whole stud vs slut debate. If you argue that men and women are different and that men have to put a lot more effort into getting pussy than a girl does to be a slut you are labeled a misogynist right away."

How is this a double standard? A double standard would be if men were shamed for having casual sex, whilst women are praised for it. The case you mentioned is just an opinion made that men have it harder than women. It doesn't show any type of double standard

[–]KaraokeKween5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You really can't see the issue with allowing men into a domestic violence shelter? Also why do you expect women to create homeless shelters for men? Why aren't men doing that for themselves?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

This is essentially one of my main critique on some groups of feminism. If you start sending the wrong message towards men you'll gradually lose that support or worse. In my opinion it'd be better off to include men in this rather than exclude them or "pissing on them". I think it's just so much better long-term if one actually focuses on equality.

The problem with the wage gap and statistics about wage gap and related topics is that your average person doesn't have tertiary education to know how to actually read a statistic.

I for example when I still worked at the university liked to ask students these questions:

In a country C the poverty line is defined to be at 1200. The average income is 1750? Which of the following statements is thus true:

  1. Most people are above the poverty line.
  2. Most people are below the poverty line.
  3. 50% of people are below the poverty line and 50% of people are above the poverty line.
  4. Most people have an income of around 1750.

There are many zoos. There are two animal species A and B. Both A and B like peanuts. On average A receives 3130 peanuts per year and B receives on average 2460 peanuts per year. Which of the following statements is thus true:

  1. Individual zoos discriminate against B giving them less peanuts than A.
  2. Individual zoos discriminate against A giving them less peanuts than B.

In our country (CH) there are 400 reported rape cases where the victim was female yet 0 reported rape cases where the victim was male. Which of the following statements is thus true:

  1. Women are raped more often than men.
  2. Men are raped more often than women.

Don't feel bad if you get it wrong. Even tertiary students who had a semester of statistics will get this wrong most of the time.

[–]vileoatRussian mafia0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

On this questions answer is "none of the statements are true"? I mean it's seems like there is not enough data.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

For the first two questions this is of course correct. The data doesn't support the claims. But what about the last question? Oh BTW you're allowed to make the assumption that the data is itself correct because otherwise nothing can be concluded from anything obviously. But to be fair the last question kinda requires you to have some knowledge about my country's laws.

[–]vileoatRussian mafia0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

The last one just shows that women report for assault and men don't at all. Thus we can make an assumption that we can't know rate of assaulted men and therefore can't know who got raped more.

BTW, in my country, legally speaking, you can't rape someone if you don't have a penis. though if nobody reports rape it just shows the trend that even if rape occurs it won't be reported. Therefore the data can't tell me who GOT raped more, only who REPORTED more that they were raped.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

No. The reason is that rape requires a female victim in my country. So answer #1 is technically correct.

[–]vileoatRussian mafia0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

That's harsh. What if man rapes man? It does not count?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's still a crime but it's not legally rape. It's sexual assault.

[–]statusincorporated2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If you argue that men and women are different and that men have to put a lot more effort into getting pussy than a girl does to be a slut you are labeled a misogynist right away.

I mean, here's the problem chief...

most guys with high N-counts aren't super swarthy studs.

they're guys who have the ability to lower their standards.

and when a guy lowers his standards, he can get pussy as easy as a woman can get dick.

So what's the difference?

Both are indiscriminate in their own way and both don't have to put in much effort.

[–]fuckyousquirtle1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You really think that there’s a 1:1 ratio between the number of women having casual sex and the number of men having casual sex?

The bottom 80% of men don’t get casual sex (without paying for it) even if they have no standards.

[–]VojvodaSrpskiRed Pill Man4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because Western society is sexist towards men.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Easy" women are only easy for Chad.

Many women don't want to be judged for getting their fill of Chad in their youth and then settling with Melvin in their 30s & 40s.

This seems to be the trend. Where as men used to be seen as more sexually experienced, it's now men who have to get with women that have far more experience.

And, unfortunately for women, they also tend to not really like guys less experienced than they are.

[–]neualgae 1 points [recovered]  (61 children) | Copy Link

domestic violence is a women's rights issue and that hitting a woman is worse than hitting a man because "men are stronger"

70% of female victims in one of their studies were "very frightened" in response to intimate partner violence from their partners, but 85% of male victims cited "no fear"

the fact that there are homeless shelters specifically for women

To prevent sexual assault.

domestic violence shelters where men aren't allowed

Because men try to track down the women who are escaping them.

Why do men expect that feminism is for fixing men's issues? Like honestly, I have never gotten a good answer to this - why do you specifically look to FEMinists to fix issues that specifically affect men? Why do you take the fact that they're not working on issues that do not pertain to women as a sign that women are intentionally trying to hold men back? It's like flipping out at a cancer charity because they're not trying to cure HIV.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (27 children) | Copy Link

Why do men expect that feminism is for fixing men's issues?

Why do feminists expect men to help women fix their issues?

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Why do feminists expect men to help women fix their issues?

Because women can only control some men through other men.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's almost like those patriarchy folks were onto something

[–]neualgae 1 points [recovered]  (12 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is a social/political movement that's focuses on problems that affect women. I never see MRAs asking "why don't women work on these issues?", it's always "why don't feminists work on these issues?". Why is it always "feminists" in particular?

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Why is it always "feminists" in particular?

Because it purports to be about equality of the sexes. If they didn't hide behind that false veneer of nobility, it would be far more digestible.

For example, 2 out of every 3 college degrees are awarded to women, but they still keep fighting for woman-specific collegiate assistance. What disparity will be adequate? 3/4? 4/5?

That's not fighting for equality, and calling it so is disgusting, toxic hypocrisy, and it's also cowardice, almost as though they know they'd lose traction if they truthfully stated their MO

[–]Eartherry6 points7 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Feminists expect men to be doing the same thing for themselves and other men the same way they are for women. Why don't those same men that are complaining learn from feminists example?

[–]rubrix11 points12 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Many feminists attack men who try to make spaces or groups for men.

[–]Eartherry3 points4 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

The way feminists do? By people like yourself? That doesn't stop them.

[–]rubrix5 points6 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure what "people like yourself" is supposed to mean. I'm not aware of it being common for men to protest and try to dismantle women spaces and I welcome evidence to the contrary.

In contrast, there are many examples of women protesting spaces or events for men. Just look at how Jordan Peterson is routinely protested.

[–]Eartherry0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

None of these are adequate excuses for men to pull their own weight.

[–]rubrix4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Your lack of empathy for struggling men is disappointing but not surprising

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

becuz theyve been better at actually convincing men to, historically

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

historically

I think they've reached the end of the line now.

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/576382/

Men are increasingly taking the tack of asking themselves how they stand to benefit from all this.

[–]qwertyuiop111222 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Could you edit your link to this instead? https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/576382/

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Done. Thanks!

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

those men have always existed. we don't need every man, just the ones in power. the bitter dude brigade can just be mad about it.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

just the ones in power.

The ones in power are put there by the ballot box.

the bitter dude brigade

is changing who is in power by virtue of their vote.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What exactly would you vote to change?

[–]GoldPilot(βŒβ– _β– )0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Because they have moms and sisters and female friends, or they're just generally sympathetic to problems that don't affect them directly.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Women have fathers and brothers and male friends, and yet they're not sympathetic to problems that don't affect them directly, as pointed out by the initial comment I was responding to.

Men are increasingly waking up to the fact that perhaps their mothers and sisters and female friends have been helped enough

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/authoritarian-sexism-trump-duterte/576382/

[–]GoldPilot(βŒβ– _β– )1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Women have fathers and brothers and male friends, and yet they're not sympathetic to problems that don't affect them directly, as pointed out by the initial comment I was responding to.

Which women? Just all of 'em? And what problems?

Is it possible that these women who "don't care" simply aren't aware of or exposed to said problems, or don't realize that they're gendered issues to begin with?

Men are increasingly waking up to the fact that perhaps their mothers and sisters and female friends have been helped enough

I'm not calling you out specifically, but any man who decides that they've helped their mom enough based on the sociopolitical climate is a fuckin' loser.

This all sounds like jealous, bitter, loser talk to me.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not calling you out specifically, but any man who decides that they've helped their mom enough based on the sociopolitical climate is a fuckin' loser.

Helping out your own loved ones is different from the political feminist movement. False equivalence.

Which women? Just all of 'em?

I mean specifically the political actions and positions of the feminist movement, which is the comment I was responding to, which is what we are ostensibly discussing.

And what problems?

For example, it is widely known that women are awarded 2 out of every 3 college degrees. You know, that basic prerequisite for even a modestly decent life. And yet, continuing to hide behind the fake veneer of nobility that feminism is about equality, they continue to fight for special treatment and programs for women to access college, without so much as lifting a finger for men.

Despite having fathers and brothers and sons.

No, they're far more.concernd with correcting a 3% wage gap for upper middle class white women, with continuing to expand the discrepancy while quibbling over how the prizes are awarded. They don't care that half as many men even get to play the game.

[–]GoldPilot(βŒβ– _β– )1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

For example, it is widely known that women are awarded 2 out of every 3 college degrees.

I didn't even know that.

Don't you think that speaks to the fact that it isn't the feminist movement that's failing men? Maybe it's the fact that men's issues need to be televised better.

What the Men's Rights movement needs isn't to be babysat by the Feminist Movement; it needs to get its shit together. I'd totally be onboard with a Men's Rights movement if it wasn't run by bitter, racist, sexist, keyboard-warrior megalomaniacs and actually cared about the issues men faced.

[–]worldnewsie9 points10 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

Feminists literally say men being their allies will fix their issues too. Obviously it is a lie, but they still do try to fool men.

[–]ChewedandDigested5 points6 points  (23 children) | Copy Link

It’s not a lie when you consider that the root causes for the differences in the way we treat women and men are the same. The society that says women have no control over their emotions is the same one that says that men shouldn’t cry. If you look at it the way many feminists do, dismantling gender roles, then of course the end result should benefit men as well.

But as with anything, proponents tend to be more focused on their cause and their own group than that of others. And rightly so. You burn yourself out if you try to fight for everything. Sometimes it reminds me of my grandpa asking me why I’m even bothering to be vegetarian if I’m still going use plastic or not cut out cheese.

Men have a lot of really tough, really valid issues that need their own focused attention, even though ostensibly feminism could also help those things. So my response is that men should band together and create their own movements to inspire and help eachother and lift each other up. Movements to reduce male suicide or work place injuries. Movements to raise awareness for testicular cancer. Maybe it’s not true, but it often appears that current iterations of men’s rights are more focused on fighting feminism and hating women than on helping their brethren.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man5 points6 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

Men's rights focuses on feminism because a lot of the aims of feminism are detrimental to men. Feminism is also newer so rolling back mistakes first makes sense. If your house floods, you get the water out first then fix the house. You don't fix the house first and then get the water out.

[–]OfSpock3 points4 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

How will rolling back feminism help men's suicide rates?

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man-2 points-1 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

I didn't make the claim that feminism is linked to male suicide rates though... But assuming you aren't just being flippant, probably increased happiness, less hopelessness or shame/guilt.

[–]OfSpock1 point2 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

It's often cited as a major cause of the manosphere. Why would pressuring a woman into a marriage she doesn't want make men happy? Do we want that sort of man made happy?

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man0 points1 point  (18 children) | Copy Link

Why would pressuring a woman into a marriage she doesn't want make men happy? Do we want that sort of man made happy?

You're all over the place. How did you make that connection? Less feminism = less demonization of men = increased happiness.

[–]OfSpock2 points3 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Less feminism means women can't work and are pressured to get married and have kids, even the ones who don't want to. Women who want to get married, do under feminism.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man-2 points-1 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

People get pressured to get married and have kids whether they work or not. Spinsters existed before feminism, and with all the services governments provide these days it should be even easier.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have never gotten a good answer to this

It's just a semantic issue. If you're a cancer charity claiming that you trying to cure illnesses then people would start asking about "yeah... but what about HIV?". If you make it clear that you're only concerned with cancer then you don't run into this issue.

The problem is feminism has started to push this "equality" stuff as an attempt to include more men in it but as a downside this caused people to expect that feminism addresses all genders issues which since they often don't leads to this sort of critique and loss of support from men.

Is that a good answer?

[–]solorathain4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Why do men expect that feminism is for fixing men's issues?

Because feminists are constantly saying how "feminism is for men too". Feminists are trying to position themself as the umbrella social justice movement that includes every social issue (sex/gender/racism/sexual-orientation/etc). If you say "feminism helps men", then a natural response is "how so?".

[–]toasterchild2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminism could be for men to and yet at the same time not tackle all issues that men may want looked at. You could have 2 movements going on at once or even 6 different ones, they don't cancel each other out.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The reason people look to feminism to solve these issues is because men's spaces are systematically attacked and dismantled to keep men from actually mobilizing to tackle them. MRA clubs on college campuses get shut down left and right if you haven't noticed. As does any male-only space / male-centered space, because any male-only space is seen as being inherently "anti-female" Take it from me, I tried to start a men's club at my high school and had my application denied and just got relentlessly shamed. Onto college, and they wouldn't give us the same funding status or reservation rights as women's groups that met on campus. Nobody even bothers to look into what you're talking about or would be talking about in these groups, they only see "men's group? Can't have that."

It's like telling someone "just get medication" while you're bulldozing urgent care.

[–]the_calibre_cat8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why do men expect that feminism is for fixing men's issues?

I didn't come up with the phrase, "feminism is for men, too!" It's not and we know it's not, and it's fun watching feminists squirm in that hole. If you don't want me to hold you to account for not fixing men's issues... don't fucking tell me that you're also trying to help with men's issues.

[–]JustAnotherNorwegian1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It has to do with a lot of feminists insisting it's about gender equality.

[–]mgtownigga-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

ive met some scary stalker women in my time

[–]GradualDecomp8 points9 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

That's how double standards work. It's the same reason men walk out on their families and start new ones with almost zero repercussions, and when a woman does it she ends up on Oprah being labeled the worst mother alive.

We have different expectations for different types of people. Sometimes fair, sometimes unfair. Best to just do what you think is best and not worry too much about other people's opinions

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It's the same reason men walk out on their families and start new ones with almost zero repercussions

Alimony and child support aren't things? News to me...

[–]GradualDecomp6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Most absent fathers don't pay even the court ordered amount of child support, and if course a vast majority don't pay alimony.

But we're talking more about the court of public opinion. Fathers walking away is considered totally normal and ok. Mothers walking out are monsters.

It's my personal opinion that anyone who abandons their children is a piece of shit loser who deserves to be publicly shamed on Oprah, but for now that's only for bad moms.

[–]couldbemage6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Except that's not true at all. Do I really need to find you a bunch of talk shows where they shame dad's for abandoning their kids? Because I can. I've never even seen the opposite.

[–]GradualDecomp0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You know just as well as I do that fathers walking out is accepted as an unpleasant, but totally normal fact of life

We have extremely low expectations for men's parental performance. Men get a round of applause for changing a diaper.

[–]whatyoucallaflip 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

If feminists don't adress these double standards and focus on actual eqauality I fear that the next generation of young men will harbor resentment towards women and our interactions will be fucked. This in part led to the Trump victory, who knows what will happen next?

It's already happening, not just here but around the world.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/576382/&ved=2ahUKEwjrg7zO7v_fAhUaITQIHVmdDiEQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3pBxmE-84tMBxtf-FVQc2b&ampcf=1

Men are increasingly realizing that it's worth asking themselves how they stand to benefit from the new order, and many are finding that they are not

Shaming men with rhetoric

"You just want to control women's bodies" "Real men stop other men from drunkenly trying to sleep with drunk women at frat parties"

was only going to work for so long. I believe we've reached the end of that period.

[–]the_calibre_cat5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Gynocracy's a bitch

[–]MGTOWtoday3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do a wiki search of the β€œwomen are wonderful” effect.

[–]sandal_on1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Society is controlled by an tiny elite. The elite wants power and money. To do so, giving women rights as men will benefit them as women consume more than men does and are more easily controlled by media.

To stop injustice from happening, some things need to happen. One is that women's rights are changed to almost identical of a child so they will either be under the responsibility of their father or husband.

This way the society won't be in favour of women and giving them privilegium.

[–]BajaBlast90 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

Is this satire or a mentally deranged individual? I can't tell with Reddit sometimes....

[–]sandal_on 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Anything constructive to add other than insults?

[–]BajaBlast90 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

It was a legitimate question. Most users on reddit (including PPD) Are either trolling or bad shit crazy.

Anything constructive to add other than insults?

Kind of hard to add something constructive when your statement was never comstructive in the first place.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Hitting a woman is generally worse than hitting a man because I am a far stronger and bigger than just about any woman. My wife literally can barely hurt me, and if she did she knows what my adrenaline could do to her. One of things I taught my wife early in our relationship when she said something about how she would fight an attacker is that shes not nearly as strong compared to a man as she thinks she is and did so by pinning her with just about no effort with one hand.

On the other hand I could literally kill my wife with a good punch, and at the very least send her to the hospital.

Its a double standard yea but with good reason.

[–]dawnpriestess5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Spoken like a real white knight. Tell women to keep their hands to themselves then.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol guess I'll start pimp slapping the wife.

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Hitting a woman is generally worse than hitting a man because I am a far stronger and bigger than just about any woman

Would you ever hit your child? Hitting a child is far worse yet no shortage of people will brag about how they hit their kids.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

yet no shortage of people will brag about how they hit their kids.

Get out of the ghetto then. No one brags about that anywhere near me. I view this as a strawman.

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Get out of the ghetto then. No one brags about that anywhere near me.

I did not say where I lived or that such bragging is done in my social circle. Not everything has to be about me to know about it, you see.

I view this as a strawman.

Who cares what you view it as?

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

You made a straw man argument, who are these people bragging about hitting their kids?

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You made a straw man argument

What do you think a straw man argument is? This is not a rhetorical question, by the way.

who are these people bragging about hitting their kids?

I installed Google on my computer so I could find these for you:

Fully seven in 10 U.S. adults agree a β€œgood, hard spanking is sometimes necessary to discipline a child,” while less than half as many disagree (29 percent) according to the 2014 wave of the General Social Survey released Tuesday by NORC at the University of Chicago. After a modest drop in popularity in the late-1980s and 90s, support has stabilized, fluctuating between 68 and 72 percent in the past decade.

See also, every asshole who says, "my parents hit me and I turned out fine!" Fuck.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Ah so spanking, and who brags about that?

Do you feel the need to teach your woman a lesson to be a better person by hitting her?

Does anything implied in the thread imply spanking btw?

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah so spanking, and who brags about that?

Spanking is hitting, and a shit ton of people.

Do you feel the need to teach your woman a lesson to be a better person by hitting her?

No, I don't feel the need to hit anyone in my household.

Does anything implied in the thread imply spanking btw

Spanking is a form of domestic violence. Thus, when one form is discussed, other forms are on-topic. Hope this helps!

[–]gmanex1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because "women are magical"

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing10 points11 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

PPD: sluts, pussy, bitches n shit, marriage NONONONONONO, feminists BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH. Fat chicks BOOOOOOOOOHISS. Muh dick blatherblatherblather.

[–]worldnewsie4 points5 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, you're too good for this place. Maybe you should see yourself out.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing3 points4 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Who are you?

[–]worldnewsie3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Someone who hasn't been here for years even though they complain about this sub endlessly

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Okay?

[–]worldnewsie2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Hope you are

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Your response did not mean anything to me.

[–]worldnewsie4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh no!

[–]Salty-Bastard1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Dick Blather

Found my new alias...

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Glad I was able to assist you.

[–]Salty-Bastard0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know if I could keep a straight face introducing myself though Goat. "Hi my name's Dick, Dick Blather, but most of my friends call me Richard- that's long for Dick..."

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Heh. You are a sales type I think you could pull it off very well.

[–]JustAnotherNorwegian0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Modern feminism is just populism. It's for the dumb and emotional.

[–]Shazoa0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you're arguing against some very specific people here. Yes, you will find people with those views, but I don't know how prevalent they are.

Physical violence, for one, is only part of domestic abuse. Men and women are both equally capable of emotional abuse in a relationship, and both are just as bad. Physical violence can be very different - men are much less likely to be afraid of their partners or feel threatened by them - but it's not a given. The presence of shelters for female abuse victims is at least partly due to the fact that they help keep these women safe from their partners. It's not perfect because it generalises people and will leave some left behind. It's a nuanced issue.

It seems as though modern day feminism is more about special treatment for women and breaking down double standards that negatively affect women than about actual equality. Feminists claim women should not be judged for promiscuity because men aren't, yet will argue that men shouldn't hit women in self defense because men are stronger and can easily "restrain" women.

I don't think this is all that common a belief, but even then it doesn't represent a double standard.

At the end of the day most people will accept this sort of nuance and understand, in my experience, feminist or not when you talk about it calmly. I'm afraid that you're likely just railing against some extremist cartoon feminazi strawmen, to be honest. This is common in a lot of political discourse today where we rage against a stereotypical 'other'. This can be 'librals' or 'brexiteers', 'incels', or even just political parties, but it's a worrying thing at any rate.

[–]Regal_NewtBlue Pill Woman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Most of these aren't connected and you're doing some real mental gymnastics to make them about the same thing, let alone about a double standard.

[–]Fabianstrategy1Asshole with asshole opinions0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If feminists don't adress these double standards and focus on actual eqauality I fear that the next generation of young men will harbor resentment towards women and our interactions will be fucked. This in part led to the Trump victory, who knows what will happen next?

Too late. The next generation of men may be the most toxic and misogynistic lot I have ever seen. I listen to my son talk to his friends on Xbox and the phone, My buddies and I never talked about women the way they do.

[–]GoldPilot(βŒβ– _β– )0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

For the same reason chefs aren't particularly harried about farming, or a fan of Fist of the North Star may not know anything about Pokemon. A feminist is most likely concerned with subsets of problems that affect women.

Instead of focusing on an activist being unconcerned about issues outside their sphere of awareness, just start, join, or question a movement that actually cares about and has time for Men's Rights issues.

Activism is a passion project for many people. Derailing your agenda for every single social issue that might relate is a way to get absolutely nothing done and render your movement impotent, unless you have legions of resources and a council of top minds to delegate.

Effecting social change is a lengthy process, and I don't think there's a council of Feminist Overlords to handle everything, so if you actually care about and want to help Joe and Ray, do it yourself.

[–]Xemnas810 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Our species requires default gynosympathy as a class to function, rationalise male disposability (which is required for capitalism to function, ie.. statism including Feminism/the welfare state to function and everything which keeps modern women and children from rebbellion.

In absence of a religion which restricts their agency we need one which pedestalises female virtue=Feminism.

[–]Ultramegasaurus0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Gynocentrism, male hyperagency, male disposability, Women are Wonderful effect

[–]shonenhikada0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because women are more valuable biology wise and so society will cater for them while encouraging men to be work horses/slave to facilitate women.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (48 children) | Copy Link

you guys care so much about what feminists think. why do you look up to them so much? is there some part of you that genuinely sees them as better and more noble that causes you to seek them out for guidance on these matters

[–]worldnewsie7 points8 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

It is foolish to say not to worry about what they do/think. Letting the guard down is what got us into this mess in the first place. It isn't like things can't get worse in the future for guys, and if the feminists have their way - they will.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (17 children) | Copy Link

were not in any mess, life is better than it has ever been at any time in recorded human history

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy Link

For western women, but men are getting screwed over.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot6 points7 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

no they're not lmao

[–]worldnewsie5 points6 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

Says a woman

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot6 points7 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

if you're a white western male who feels "screwed over" thats a failing of you as an individual, not a failing of your demo.

[–]worldnewsie1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Well I'm not white. Are you?

Individuals make up a demographic, and the percentage of guys getting screwed over is increasing rapidly. It hasn't happened to my family yet, but I see the writing on the wall and see it affecting my male descendants/relatives in the near future if things continue as they are. I can see it happening to tons of other guys in real life all the time. It is gonna affect almost all males eventually.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

well what are you then? and lets define "screwed over", its a meaningless term

[–]worldnewsie3 points4 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours.

Decreasing relative quality of life, achievement, and happiness.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Is it? I agree that MRA and trumpists exaggerate the problems white men face just like feminists greatly exaggerate the problems women face. Would you agree with this statement?

"If you are a western woman who feels screwed over that's a failing of you as an individual"

But if you are a white, or non white male you can do everything right and still get passed over in favor of women and minorities because "we are commited to diversity".

And if you are a man and get accused of sexual harassment or rape then good luck i tell you. You are automatically guility. Even if you are found not guility it still hangs over your head. See kobe bryant. Once that allegation is out there it never goes away.

I hope eventually we can reach a middle ground where we deal with things like sexual harassment and rape accordingly instead of the whole "guilty on accusation" bullshit that's going on now. If it doesn't then you can expect more pushback from bitter young men who feel expendable because they don't have vaginas. Trump is only the beginning.

Do you think being a woman is actually harder than being a man? What about being a black man vs a white woman?

[–]wtffellification0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

were not in any mess, life is better than it has ever been at any time in recorded human history

This still doesn't mean it's not a mess though

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

you guys care so much about what feminists think. why do you look up to them so much?

I care because they hold legitimate political and social power. They claim to be for equality when they simply are not. And if I disagree then I am a misogynist.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot3 points4 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

maybe stop expecting feminists to care about things that are blatantly not apart of their agenda. instead of asking why group A won't champion causes for group B, ask why Group B won't champion causes for group B. where are the men in power advocating for men's domestic violence issues

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Exactly my point. Feminism is about female supremacy, not equality.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

yes. now what are you going to do about it?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Norhing. Continue living my life as a "misogynist". Doesn't really affect me in any meaningful way, yet. I might get accused of rape by a bitter fling who's mad I won't commit to her or one who is mad that she slept with someone as lame as me lol. I might get passed over in my workplace in favor of a woman simply because of her gender.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I might get accused of rape by a bitter fling who's mad I won't commit to her or one who is mad that she slept with someone as lame as me lol.

things that have nothing to do with feminism. vindictive bitches and lame guys have existed before the first woman ever casted a vote. youre much better off getting your shit together with your personal life than trying to call out feminists

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

things that have nothing to do with feminism

"Listen and believe" has nothing to do with feminism? I'm not actually worried about a false accusation. I understand that's not something that is common, most girls won't do that. Just like most guys don't rape girls. Yet if it DOES somehow happen, that would be a stain on my character forever regardless of the facts and that sometimes fills me with anxiety.

youre much better off getting your shit together with your personal life than trying to call out feminists

Believe me, I am. Started working out regularly, am dead set focused on my classes/career, and my job. I don't care too much about feminists anymore and just try to do my own thing because worrying about that shit gets you nowhere in life.

I have no power to change societal standards and accept that, I'm a very emotional and sensitive guy, most girls see that and get turned off from me sexually yet at the same time those qualities make me attractive as a boyfriend. Girls have their fun with the "bad" boys, then once they realize he isn't going to commit to them they are drawn to beta guys like me. I learned this lesson with my ex, never open up to a woman if you want her to still be attracted to you. I had to drastically change my personality and demeanor in order to get laid regularly, at the end of the day it works, can't argue with results. It's fun fucking the brains out a feminist chick, they claim to be against "toxic masculinity" yet women are attracted to guys that exhibit those personality traits. Feminist hypocrisy is astounding, they don't address the fact that women are just as complicit in reinforcing these gender roles as men are.

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

where are the men in power advocating for men's domestic violence issues

They were removed from power. For advocating for men's domestic violence issues.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

like who

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know, they never had time to become famous.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol so no one

[–]daveofmarsFor Martian Independence2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

That's a very strange viewpoint that I haven't seen before.

We're all going to come across ideologies and philosophies that we don't agree with, and many specific ideologies are in direct opposition to our own. That's just a matter of living life on this planet.

Where does it follow that encountering an opposing ideology means that one cares what the other side thinks, or even further that you look up to them?

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot5 points6 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

its the deep fascination with having feminism empathize and even fight for things that don't concern them. these men clearly want feminists on their side even when feminists have given them every indication that it isn't going to happen. feminism has become a substitute for mommy in the minds of these men. they want mommy's approval and getting feminists to agree that sluts suck and that men hitting women is ok is the way to do it. deep inside they feel they are on the wrong side of history until mommy tells them their beliefs are ok

[–]daveofmarsFor Martian Independence1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

IMO, that's an odd interpretation. From my time in the manosphere, these men characterize feminism as this monolithic antagonist that they must defeat, not something that they are subservient to.

When they say feminism doesn't address women's bad behavior, they're not looking for approval from feminism to admit to the bad behavior; they're using it as a bludgeon against feminism itself, framing the ideology as hypocritical, or something like it.

I think you're getting the intent wrong here.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot2 points3 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

From my time in the manosphere, these men characterize feminism as this monolithic antagonist that they must defeat, not something that they are subservient to.

those things aren't mutually exclusive and ive noticed both present at the same time. they may have this stewing hatred around feminism when talking amongst themselves, but when they actually encounter these feminists they resort to a very childish, subservient mindset. the word "care" is brought up a lot wrt to feminists, in a way i don't see used in debates centered around other idealogies. "you don't care about what's happening to men" is a central part of these discussions and its very "mommy doesn't love me"

you can't bludgeon feminism with any of this because the only ppl invollved in these discussions are feminists and antifeminists online, meanwhile actual political action is happening in the form of real world policymaking and activism while antifeminists remain secluded to corners of the internet.

a real, actual takedown of feminism would require real world action which just a few days ago most men here said they simply aren't interested in doing

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Isn't the election of Donald Trump or Republicans in general real world action against feminism? Sure, it may be small but I think the hope is that it snowballs. At the very least more conservative Supreme Court justices will help against feminism.

I'm a liberal who has given up on the Democrats for being hijacked by feminists. They should have booted them to the nutters at the Green party when they had the chance.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot-1 points0 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

feminism?? no, economics and xenophobia were much bigger issues the last election cycle than feminism

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm not saying pushback against feminism was the reason, but it was certainly one of the reasons - definitely one of the bigger reasons. Especially considering his opponent would have been the first ever woman president.

But that still doesn't change the fact that having Trump/Republicans in charge is a real world action against feminism, even if you consider it a byproduct. Feminists are pissed they are in charge, which is one of the reasons I can even stomach this administration. It almost makes it all worth it.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

feminists were pissed when Bush was in charge too over 10 years ago. the culture ebbs and flows, there isn't some linear political rebellion against feminism

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Feminists are always pissed, it is their way. But they hardly acted the way with Bush the way they did with Trump. Every vote for a Republican is a political rebellion against feminism. Every win for a Republican is a win against feminism. The manosphere wasn't even this big during Bush. Bush had very little to say regarding women's rights when it came to his campaign. Trump actively had bad things to say about women.

[–]wtffellification1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

"you don't care about what's happening to men" is a central part of these discussions and its very "mommy doesn't love me"

So when someone commits suicide, we can boil it down to "they had a victim mentality"?

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

i can, yes

[–]the_calibre_cat1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No it's mostly that I live in society, and feminist messaging is ingrained into... everything.

[–]NoSophie-10 points-9 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Haha! Yep, I earn more than my boyfriend and I'm about to sell my house for a decent profit and yet he pretty much pays for everything. Why wouldn't I accept that? He knows if he messes up I have loads of guys in my social circle who'd bite their hands off to be in his shoes.

Guys are slaves to their libidos...that's not the fault of women. As for the education/pay gap, that's down to women being more studious and diligent. Guys at my uni were always partying and missing lectures, I went out one night a week and focused on my studies, as did most of my female friends. It's wrong to hit anybody, but if a guy wants to come at me, I hold a third dan in karate and have done Thai boxing for five years.

As for sex, if I want it I have it. But usually I will let guys work their asses off for it first. Supply and demand, and all the guys I have ever been with want it waaay more than me.

I believe in equality of opportunity, self-restraint and a work ethic. Nothing stopping guys from being successful if they adhere to those principles.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No problem with what you do. If men are stupid enough to get played by girls like you then keep playing them. At the same time I play girls with low self esteem constantly, if they're dumb enough to fall for my shit and keep fucking me then that's on them. The difference is that I am a "misogynist" while you are considered normal.

[–]worldnewsie4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Poor bastard...

[–]NoSophie1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

His choice. He has this macho idea that a guy should pay, but he also knows that I have loads more options than him and he wants to demonstrate his appreciation.

[–]worldnewsie5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I mean, cuckold's are cucks by choice too...

[–]wtffellification0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel sorry for the guy even more than I'm cynical of this lady.. does this mean I'm a mysoginist?

[–]Freethetreees1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Truth! Keep living your best life

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is true to a large extent. Men desire women more than the other way round, and women exploit that. It's harsh, but cannot be legislated for.

[–]boomcheese442 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I dont see anything wrong with this. Men usually dont mind paying for everything if the woman is worth it to them. :shrug: Men and women arnt equal. More women should require investment before sleeping with any guy. Its called "buying the cow".

[–]dawnpriestess0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

More women should require investment before sleeping with any guy. Its called "buying the cow".

No, it's called "prostitution"

[–]boomcheese440 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Keep telling yourself that.

[–]RedditsRealist 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

You're a shitty girlfriend.

The exact type of girl I try to get everyone to avoid

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband[M] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Be civil.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Copy that!

[–]dawnpriestess-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Congratulations on having a beta for a boyfriend. But it sounds like you are in the process of creating yet another MGTOW.

[–]NrthnMonkey-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree with everything ou are saying except the 'why can't men hit women' part. Obviously no-one should hit another person...but there is an argument that if you have an extreme physical advantage over another man/woman/child it does make you even more of a prick if you do hit them.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Do you really want to know what's happening or are you just ranting

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

What's happening? I'm ranting because I'm worried. I feel like feminists are creating these bitter young guys that hate women, I would know, I was like that. I'm smart enough now to realize that every individual is different but it's hard to get over this stuff when society is constantly putting you down.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

the government pushes minorities, favoring minorities is the best way to increase world productivity right now, it doesnt really matter if the girl is wrong or not, when a girl is wrong (or many times even if she's not) they are opressed and it decreases production, when guys goes wrong (like cheating) they normally dont lose anything so it's better to throw them guilties in other areas since guys are already too privileged, that's why many times it doesnt really make sense, because it's not about "who's right" but "balance privilege".

to your question, yes guys have harder way to get sex, but that doesnt mean girls are sluts if they do it, girls can have how much sex they want to and not be shamed about it, doesnt matter if it's easy. noone should hit anyone, but if they do it's worse if it's a guy, it's not really hard to understand that. in case of wage gap its a bit tricky, i believe it will never be achieved since i believe men are biologically superior in brain (i'm not sure though) but EVEN if what i said is right, women can still increase their average wage and make it closer to men's, and the best way to increase it is by encouragement, women are usually demotivated on their jobs and all these "wage gaps should be the same" is a way to encourage women to work for their wages and promotions, this logic is also applied to the black community. i believe people should leak this stuff more often to open their mind, the gorvernment probabily thinks the population is stupid and they wouldn't understand because people normally dont have an open mind.

it's also true that some men are stupid and have stupid ideologies, like slut shaming girls who have sex and claiming they should be raped if they have few clothes, almost every man dont care if they hurt women's encoragement

the new gillette ad was supposed to open the minds of some guys and start a trend, but it made a backlash, i wish it worked though

maybe in the future when people have better open minds and fight together for encouragement the government will stop prioritizing in "privilege balance" but for "what's right"

[–]allweknowisD-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel like feminists are creating these bitter young guys that hate women

Honestly, what an eye roll.

How do you suppose this is corrected? Women being given off to men again by their fathers? Because let’s be honest, this all comes down to β€œall these bitter guys aren’t getting sex”

[–]DXBrigade-2 points-1 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Most feminist are against domestic violence whether it's against men or women.

[–]Plopolok6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Most feminists will tell you that domestic violence against men is negligible, something no one should worry about.

[–]DXBrigade0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

They think that it's rare, but they don't think that domestic violence against men is okay.

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

"Something no one should worry about" isn't very different from something okay. Don't forget that the "should" isn't just a theoretical advice. It is heavily enforced, if you try to worry about it you're immediately shut down.

[–]DXBrigade0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You are extrapolating. They didn't say that violence against men is okay but as feminists they focus on violence against women.

[–]Plopolok1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They shutdown people who try to act or speak against violence against men. That's not extrapolation, that's what's happening.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

Β© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter