TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Any_Fox5126 Archive

View 0 posts and 185 comments by Any_Fox5126 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Yep. The term was originally coined by and for MRAs a little over a decade ago, but feminists took it and distorted it. Their version is now overwhelmingly dominant. Being in the same sphere as PUAs or Tate will always be a problem, I think it’s better to deny that we’re part of it. Positioning ourselves as "defenders of men’s human rights" works pretty well.
/r/MensRights27/07/26 08:29 PM
2

It basically amounts to turning a fallacy of hasty generalization into an academic term. The term isn't technically incorrect (it's not "pro-men", but rather "men's issues"), but its use is misleading and tarnishes the reputation of legitimate movements by lumping them in with illegitimate ones.
/r/MensRights27/07/26 03:06 PM
3

I've been looking into it and I'm still not sure, but it seems they don't have their own model and use various models under the hood. DuckDuckGo makes it easier in this regard.
/r/MensRights27/07/26 02:16 PM
21

These minor points make it clear that the authors disregard women’s capacity for agency and consent if they do not do what the authors want.
/r/MensRights26/07/26 02:36 PM
9

Totally agree. If you broadly deny that women were oppressed, they’ll claim you’re denying forms of discrimination that objectively did happen, or the discussion will end up turning into whataboutism. It’s much easier to discuss the present, where the scales are so clearly tipped in virtually every respect.
/r/MensRights26/07/26 03:32 AM
3

The post doesn't really match the title, if you haven't tried it yet and you actually have your supervisor's support. I hope you report it, because even if nothing happens to her, it will be taken into account in future conflicts.
/r/MensRights25/07/26 12:52 AM
-1

That's why I said "in the historical sense" and clarified it several times. You're using a different definition to answer a different question.
/r/MensRights23/07/26 02:35 AM
-1

4 replies in and you still haven't defended your claim. Explain, logically, clearly, and objectively, why patriarchy never existed (in the historical sense, systems where men held legal authority over women). If your response keeps boiling down to "men have it worse", then you're not refuting anything, you're just changing the subject and repeating empty rhetoric that falls apart outside this echo chamber.
/r/MensRights23/07/26 02:08 AM
-9

Yes, gender roles had two sides. But patriarchy (in the historical sense) describes a type of social organization and distribution of authority, not a competition over who suffered more.
/r/MensRights23/07/26 12:09 AM
-8

For much of history, there were societies where women were legally subordinated to their fathers, husbands, or other male relatives. If your argument relies on pretending those systems never existed, the issue isn’t the concept of patriarchy or whatever new definition you want to give it, the issue is that you seem to have skipped the history books you were supposed to read in primary school.
/r/MensRights22/07/26 11:45 PM
-10

Feminists use ahistorical falsehoods like this to attack MRAs. Don't pass off ignorance as fact.
/r/MensRights22/07/26 10:53 PM
1

You could at least put enough effort into the bait to make it mildly entertaining.
/r/MensRights15/07/26 04:11 PM
59

It's almost funny how many feminists (among other sexists) indirectly equate women as disabled. This reminds me of a case in spain where being a woman was given the same weighting in public hiring benefits as having a severe disability, and twice the weighting of having a mild disability.
/r/MensRights12/07/26 06:15 PM
9

First, feminism is a movement claims to represent gender equality itself, to the point of dismissing any other movement that also seeks equality. Then yes, the very least it should do is speak out. Second, blaming all men for military conscription simply because it's a historical institution is completely misleading and amounts to an apex fallacy. And it's not even as if we're dealing with laws from centuries or millennia ago, many of them are only a few years or decades old. More importantly, f…
/r/MensRights11/07/26 03:20 PM
5

Yours would have sounded like a condescending explanation 😅 That still wouldn't be mansplaining, because that implies assuming a woman is ignorant simply because she's a woman, but feminists don't usually make that distinction.
/r/MensRights08/07/26 02:53 PM
1

Even the earliest and cheapest version of claude would have made a better argument.
/r/MensRights07/07/26 08:03 PM
-1

Clinical diagnoses and the way most people understand narcissism or use the term casually are two very different things, and you’re conflating them. Also, you can’t make generalizations about half the population based on what you see on tiktok.
/r/MensRights07/07/26 05:58 PM
2

Honestly, but it's a bit funny to do an AMA about being a feminist, when on reddit lift a rock and five feminists pop out from underneath it. If you want a constructive debate, it would be better to open a specific topic or just reply to any post.
/r/MensRights04/07/26 07:32 PM
9

Argentina is just as bad as spain (echa un ojo al canal de la entropía de valen). I've also heard bad things about mexico.
/r/MensRights03/07/26 02:34 PM
8

Or change their gender. In spain it's a simple administrative procedure.
/r/MensRights03/07/26 02:31 PM
9

Empower means to receive power, in this case, the power supposedly held by men. A powerful woman doesn’t need a feminist coach to tell her that other people have to give her that power.
/r/MensRights02/07/26 01:57 PM
7

Helena simply filters it to just men. Do you think that if she filtered it to kill only black people, it wouldn’t be perceived as promoting racism?
/r/MensRights01/07/26 04:47 AM
2

video game about exclusively murdering men is set to launch. Well, that's certainly not a strong starting argument, since that's VERY common in videogames. And in other media like films as well. It would be better to wait for the demo to come out, collect clear instances of blatant hate speech, and then present them.
/r/MensRights01/07/26 04:43 AM
2

This sub was never particularly progressive, but a long time ago it used to be fairly neutral, focused on legality and rights. As reddit started banning trash subs, this one got infested with repillers, full of prejudice and who only know how to whine about their dating problems. Even though they're smaller, you'll probably want to check these out: r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates, r/Egalitarianism, r/Intactivism, r/SystemicSexism
/r/MensRights30/06/26 01:46 PM
-1

Nonsense. It's equivalent to saying that having a term for "right-handed" is "marginalising normality". We’re talking about basic descriptive taxonomy, to avoid doing stupid things like referring to "people who are not left-handed". It remains a useful descriptive term even when someone uses it incorrectly or in bad faith. We could do the same with gays and many other groups. A lot of people here like to do this exercise to point out feminist biases, but they conveniently forget to apply it to t…
/r/MensRights30/06/26 04:43 AM
9

It amuses me that they do this with their old accounts. Then they'll get shadowbanned from feminist subreddits, and they'll complain about it.
/r/MensRights29/06/26 10:26 PM
1

I don't really agree with the order of the labels. Specifically, number 5 should be second, otherwise the ones in the middle don't make much sense.
/r/MensRights29/06/26 10:24 PM
3

The worst part is that, even if the OP thought both troops were the same, it’s already clear before and after the story about the three nurses that they were rescuing civilians in general.
/r/MensRights28/06/26 10:07 PM
17

Imagine how it would sound "people of all races, except blacks". Disclaimer for useless bots: I am criticizing hate speech
/r/MensRights22/06/26 09:14 PM
10

I think it's linked to gender and maybe to a gender role, not to doing half the parenting.
/r/MensRights21/06/26 03:53 PM
6

Also 6 and 10. Although for the latter, the mods are very, very lenient...
/r/MensRights20/06/26 02:03 PM
-7

Your wife likely has a side piece. Her panicked messages are probably because the side piece bailed when she told him you were arrested Wow, this is on a whole other level of speculation.
/r/MensRights19/06/26 01:35 PM
10

You start with a straw man, and everything that follows is basically a reverse gish gallop that practically demands a dissertation. You're also trying to dump the entire burden of proof on me, even though you've written several walls of text packed with unsupported historical and sociological claims. How about you start by looking up your own sources? Unbiased ones, of course... good luck with that in the social sciences 😂
/r/MensRights14/06/26 01:44 PM
59

Wow, the amount of fallacious reasoning and made-up achievements here is actually pretty amusing. Feminists didn't give you any of that, but even if they had, it wouldn't really matter. "If feminism gave you a voice but doesn't allow you dissent, then it didn't free you from anything, you just changed owners".
/r/MensRights14/06/26 03:34 AM
1

There are more than 500 laws in spain that discriminate on the basis of gender and deprive men of their human rights. Yes, driven by the feminist premise of "equality".
/r/MensRights13/06/26 08:30 PM
37

Looking at the list of mods, I see huge red flags. The two oldest and the newest were mods at FragileMaleRedditor (interestingly, none of them are anymore).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/06/26 02:20 PM
28

Call the cops yourself and be adamant that you want them prosecuted for harassment. If you don't have any evidence, that's extremely dangerous. You'll always be presumed guilty. I value privacy a lot, but sometimes it feels like it’s worth recording every second.
/r/MensRights09/06/26 03:05 AM
0

Gossip about public figures of both genders is common. Just because some people try to delegitimize it when it’s about women doesn’t mean it should be applied to men. As usual, the best approach isn’t to mimic feminism. And hell no! He’s aged really badly and really fast. There’s something for everyone, but pretending that it looks good by conventional beauty standards is absurd.
/r/MensRights08/06/26 02:04 AM
78

"Incel" is an slur aimed at men's masculinity, since it's considered degrading for men not to have sex. The opposite is true for women, so a more direct gender-swapped equivalent would be "slut", which would't be socially tolerated. Some try to dodge this by claiming it really means misogynist, but slut also has other connotations and doesn't make it any more socially acceptable. Besides, if you genuinely just want to call someone misogynist, there's already a word for that: misogynist.
/r/MensRights05/06/26 08:43 PM
3

A patriarchy is a system in which power is structurally (legally, politically, etc) vested in men. If the meaning shifts to "suffering discrimination to some extent", the term ceases to be useful for describing the patriarchies that have been widespread throughout history, and the few that still exist. If you also acknowledge that both genders face genuine discrimination, and this isn't a competition over who is more victimized, we would be living under both a patriarchy and a matriarchy at the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 03:51 PM
15

It's important to a lot of women, so it will likely be a turn-off. On the other hand, maybe you should be the one who doesn't want to date someone whose identity is built around a hate group.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 07:44 AM
1

Bullshit. Obviously, a false positive could lead to bad biopsies that might cause harm, but claiming that PSA tests (just a simple blood test) are the cause of that is completely misleading. You pretend that your claim is based on science, but your link is an opinion piece, poorly written and full of contradictions.
/r/MensRights29/05/26 02:39 PM
18

So, your basis for denying that normalization exists is that someone was critical in a reddit comment? Pfft...
/r/MensRights21/05/26 12:13 AM
3

The worst thing I usually see here is using "women" and "feminists" interchangeably. That shouldn’t be tolerated, but at least you can almost always address it successfully. Try criticizing any generalization in a feminist sub. Not only will you face simple social rejection, you’ll probably get banned quickly.
/r/MensRights20/05/26 09:00 PM
20

Thanks for the links! So they relied on participants' strategies in a simple game (the ultimatum game). Claims about becoming more fair are interpretations without a solid basis. The effects of taking it shifted the score to +0,5 out of 10, while incorrectly believing it had been taken to -0,92.
/r/MensRights18/05/26 03:33 PM
29

To be clear, the article is absolute garbage. One could compile a scathing list of just how terrible the methodology is. I don't have a strong opinion on the topic, and I don't really care which of the two is more prevalent. I find it more relevant that society and the media are appropriately critical of cases of misogyny, while cases of misandry are seen as justified.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/26 10:21 PM
18

Going after clients is effectively the same as taking away their source of income and pushing them into precarity and underground conditions. They also target anyone who might benefit indirectly, such as landlords or even family members. Yes, family members. In the very first country on your list (sweden) they arrested a prostitute's husband even though he was just staying home taking care of their child. Feminism and the nordic inequality model are a cancer for sex workers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/26 02:25 PM
13

Maybe this one: https://www.apa.org/monitor/dec04/women
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/26 10:57 AM
13

It's ironic, because chances are, like most feminists, they hate and denigrate prostitution and prostitutes. However, what they do is basically work as event escorts, but with added malice, deception, and harm to innocent people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/26 10:56 AM
2

Absolutely! I saw an article about this case a while back: https://web.archive.org/web/20230925034412/https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ (Note that the cowardly media outlet took it down)
/r/MensRights15/05/26 08:36 PM
8

They internalize dogmas, such as the idea that women are always victims and men are always aggressors, as part of their identity, so they feel personally attacked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/26 11:02 AM
1

Gender segregation is always regrettable, single-gender segregation is always condemnable.
/r/MensRights14/05/26 01:03 PM
1

First of all, what are you actually hoping to achieve? Convincing someone so hateful and radical requires a lot of care and patience, there isn't a single argument, no matter how perfect, that will suddenly convince them. It's more likely you'll just burn yourself out mentally, you'll lose just by trying. If you're trying to persuade the public, that gets more interesting, but it varies a lot. A common problem is misinformation, so accurate data can introduce doubt, as long as you avoid triggeri…
/r/MensRights13/05/26 05:32 PM
5

I'm surprised you even included homophobia and transphobia. Is that something you noticed among english-speaking influencers? Could you have confused them with redpillers? Among the most prominent spanish-speaking influencers, I'd say they all show complete respect toward the LGBT people; not so much the Q, depending on how much you want to extend it.
/r/MensRights13/05/26 12:40 AM
11

Gender studies are to science what chiropractic is to medicine.
/r/MensRights07/05/26 09:50 AM
1

Be a serious human being for once in your life. That's hilarious, especially coming from someone who has packed a whole collection of fallacies into so few words.
/r/MensRights01/05/26 12:58 AM
4

Mods used to delete unquestionably bigoted content like this, but this sub has become more redpiller over time...
/r/MensRights01/05/26 12:53 AM
7

Not a bit. Whether the genders were swapped.
/r/MensRights29/04/26 09:46 AM
8

Even when they see us as friends, if they're also misandrists, they don't hate us because their homophobia prevents them from seeing us as real men.
/r/MensRights28/04/26 07:16 PM
0

Once again, you're going to need a dictionary, because even if your delusions about me were true, there still wouldn't be any hypocrisy; and in any case, what would still be missing is the only thing that actually matters: an argument. You're not worth the trouble.
/r/MensRights27/04/26 07:13 PM
-1

regardless of gender. Quoting myself, for those with poor reading comprehension. It's not not nitpicking semantics, it's about not stripping words of their meaning or trivializing rapes. Orgies of drama only undermine the cause.
/r/MensRights27/04/26 06:26 PM
-14

inserting them between his butt cheeks while he was asleep. There was no suggestion of penetration. This is the closest thing to it, and I wouldn't call this a rape, regardless of gender. Edit: I was actually too diplomatic. This isn't rape, period. Stop making up things to get upset about, the actual facts are more than enough for that.
/r/MensRights26/04/26 11:43 AM
11

With the mandatory smiley face too. That looks like a red flag of trolling to me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/04/26 07:03 PM
4

Hypothetical headline if the study were reversed: Women turn to AI as a refuge from abuse and toxic masculinity
/r/MensRights24/04/26 02:42 PM
24

There are several issues here. Supporting the rights of a group doesn't mean you have to subscribe to a specific ideological movement. Hegemonic feminism actively demonizes and criminalizes men, in addition to enacting discriminatory laws; in my country, there are already more than 500 such laws that even strip me of my human rights. This also causes harm and death, not only through social factors like misogyny, but also through institutional ones. And regarding the so-called epidemic, you shoul…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/04/26 07:12 PM
2

Even if you were referring to the majority, that's still a huge leap from your experiences at the supermarket.
/r/MensRights22/04/26 05:11 PM
1

That's very naive.
/r/MensRights21/04/26 07:40 PM
28

Here we see intersectionality in action: an indigenous woman has more victim points than a wealthy white woman, which lets her wish the white woman be beaten and raped without being condemned, but merely "not condone".
/r/MensRights19/04/26 08:32 AM
3

Do you seriously expect context too? Lol no, obviously I'm not going to bother just to please some feminist troll. Make do with this article, which includes plenty of quotes and links. If you genuinely want to dig deeper, there are anti-feminist influencers all over the world who compile and document cases in considerable detail and with a fair amount of rigor; feel free to ask for relevant sources in your country. To mention one from spain, the author of the article above also has this channel.
/r/MensRights17/04/26 07:36 AM
7

That would be annoying, but certainly not difficult. In spain, almost all prominent feminist influencers with a presence in major media regularly defend women abusers; the media itself, feminist organizations, and most political parties do as well. Even the government grants a large share of its pardons to female perpetrators. Most people you'll find on the street who identify as feminists are typically quite ignorant on the subject, with low levels of misandry and often with good intentions; fa…
/r/MensRights16/04/26 08:43 PM
47

Or fighting against laws that recognize women as capable of committing rape.
/r/MensRights16/04/26 08:27 PM
8

The ability to choose matters, even if you have to suffer the unfair consequences of picking one thing over another.
/r/MensRights09/04/26 01:52 PM
5

This kind of news has been on the rise for months, but it seems to be picking up speed...
/r/MensRights09/04/26 01:50 PM
20

The title makes it clear that this is about registration, and ending up in vietnam is what might happen next as a result of being registered; all beyond your will.
/r/MensRights09/04/26 01:50 PM
1

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/MensRights03/04/26 12:58 PM
63

My country has over 500 laws that discriminate based on gender, and some even strip men of basic human rights. Social perspectives may vary, but the law is explicit and clear.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/26 09:03 PM
12

Women's issues are often explicitly recognized and addressed. Men's issues are more likely to be dismissed or left unexamined, without considering whether the person is actually able to deal with them. Phrases like "take it like a man" aren’t about personal growth, they essentially mean "tough luck, it's your problem, don't bother me".
/r/MensRights29/03/26 12:00 PM
0

The headline isn't even clickbait, it's just a malicious lie.
/r/MensRights28/03/26 11:15 AM
7

That's a false equivalence: one issue is about how society and the "justice" system are biased and discriminatory, the other is about the mere existence of criminals. It's also a useless whataboutism.
/r/MensRights28/03/26 07:53 AM
5

Among MRA influencers, there are quite a few women with noteworthy contributions and visibility.
/r/MensRights27/03/26 11:33 PM
20

However, the court concluded it could not rule out the possibility that Kosuke had ingested the drug himself by mistake. It's the dumbest excuse they could have come up with.
/r/MensRights27/03/26 10:18 PM
-1

There's no proof that women are doing unpaid labor simply because they're That's correct, but there's a key misunderstanding here. You define wage discrimination and then attack the myth that it's systemic, yet what you actually name and point out is wage discrimination. Wage discrimination is real and demonstrable according to its real definition, yet feminists conflate the two. If you do the same, you're falling into their trap (see Motte-and-bailey fallacy).
/r/MensRights25/03/26 06:54 PM
3

Once again, you deny objective facts and choose to ignore what suits you, completely overlooking the central point and the full context. Your comparison fails and is a perfect example of moving the goalposts and building straw men. Your incendiary closing line just reveals what was already obvious, you're a pathetic troll.
/r/MensRights21/03/26 06:41 PM
2

No. Tax-wise and in general terms, men contribute more and receive less; both of them. Besides, they just clearly told you that there are programs exclusively for women... The fact that men don’t take full advantage of what is available to them doesn’t change that.
/r/MensRights21/03/26 04:03 PM
35

"Incel" is almost always just a very crude ad hominem attack. They aren't worth your time.
/r/MensRights20/03/26 09:23 PM
1

Do men have to earn your respect?
/r/MensRights20/03/26 07:31 PM
0

If you can't even tell the difference between women who treat you badly and women in general, then you're the one who's being overly entitled and toxic here.
/r/MensRights20/03/26 07:30 PM
46

You're the one attacking people and groups without any basis. Take a look in the mirror, troll.
/r/MensRights20/03/26 02:30 PM
60

First of all, yes, she did do something wrong, don't trivialize the assaults. No one is attacking the girl, and certainly not random women. If you hadn't completely ignored the title and the post, you'd be perfectly clear that this is only calling out society's double standards and bias.
/r/MensRights20/03/26 02:01 PM
4

Oh, I guess ublock is unblocking it for me. Here's one from the wayback machine.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/26 08:58 PM
15

Abuse is part of the punishment society imposes on bad men. That is why atrocities like this can happen.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/26 08:35 PM
25

manosphere is a loose term for any space that does not cater to non-male voices. I never understood it that way, just as a grouping of all men's issues movements, including anyone who wanted to take part. I don't even remember ever hearing the term used in a non-malicious or non-misleading way. Always, as you say, to lump legitimate movements (like MRAs and intactivists) together with others that are condemnable (like PUAs).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/26 11:32 AM
5

😂 I'm glad it's not just my imagination.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/26 01:33 PM
5

The irony is that, if anything, the opposite would make sense, since the lack of privacy in urinals is indeed a coherent argument for segregation; prejudice is not.
/r/MensRights10/03/26 10:37 PM
2

I don't really care about corporate posturing, I'm used to it, but promoting inequality is unacceptable. They could have supported a cause that is exclusively (or almost exclusively) for women, but they chose to back sexist organizations that do completely generic work, yet only for women.
/r/MensRights10/03/26 11:50 AM
1

Sure, that's usually one of its effects 😂
/r/MensRights09/03/26 05:53 PM
3

even lonelier than men I highly doubt it, but it doesn't make sense to compete over who is more unfortunate at the bottom of the ladder, both will be miserable anyway.
/r/MensRights09/03/26 04:47 PM
1

I think you took too much of christ's blood in the eucharist.
/r/MensRights09/03/26 04:43 PM
25

Not only ukraine (and russia) should be singled out, but several allied countries are returning male refugees or have stated their intention to do so.
/r/MensRights08/03/26 10:24 PM
6

We can, and we do. In spain, there are more than 500 laws that discriminate against men, even taking away human rights. Without a real transition, social discrimination won't change, but eliminating legal discrimination with the stroke of a pen is a great idea in such a misandrist world.
/r/MensRights04/03/26 06:54 PM
1

If you argue that adult women are unable to make free decisions because of social influence, you are denying their autonomy and capacity for agency. You think someone else should decide for them... maybe you? You can assess risks and give your informed consent, a child cannot. As for blaming men, pfft, it could go both ways, and in both cases it would be an overly fallacy.
/r/MensRights27/02/26 04:30 PM
11

If you don't want downvotes, don't say malicious bullshit.
/r/MensRights22/02/26 08:05 AM
29

Only if earning involves money or services. It's fine if it's part of an erotic game, as is customary.
/r/MensRights20/02/26 08:01 AM
3

? LeftWingMaleAdvocates is not feminist at all, you can very bluntly declare that feminism is a hate movement and only receive upvotes.
/r/MensRights18/02/26 11:59 AM
13

I'd link a video but the sub doesn't allow it Please share the link as text, those who are documenting these outrages will appreciate it.
/r/MensRights17/02/26 03:04 PM
4

Does your wife realize it? If you're living with your meddling mother-in-law, you’d better make sure you and your wife are on the same team, especially in case things escalate.
/r/MensRights16/02/26 09:43 PM
0

That's the background, I don't think the perpetrator has any erotic motivation, humiliation, domination, or intent to harm sexuality, etc. It's probably just some nonsense like "it's harmless, just hygiene and tradition".
/r/MensRights15/02/26 10:47 AM
1

Your definition is simplistic, not all contact without consent is automatically sexual assault.
/r/MensRights15/02/26 10:44 AM
11

How about we make an anti-neoluddite instead? This is about men's rights, your biases about AI is just noise and distracts from the issue.
/r/MensRights15/02/26 10:00 AM
1

When they check my profile just to throw a vulgar ad hominem for participating here, all I read is: "I don't know how to refute it and I have more free time than brain cells, so I'm just going to screech"
/r/MensRights13/02/26 08:29 PM
15

It is highly inappropriate to compare adult decisions about their own bodies with child genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights13/02/26 08:56 AM
5

It depends too much on the context, but in general I prefer very brief comments that stick strictly to the facts. The less you say, the less they can twist your words, and the less it will cost you in terms of your mental health.
/r/MensRights12/02/26 11:30 AM
5

Saying it will be made mandatory for people over 60 is speculation, but everything else is well-established fact. If you want to refute something, you should be more specific.
/r/MensRights11/02/26 03:02 PM
4

First you went for an ad hominem, and now a straw man. Either bring a real argument, or do us all the favor of shutting the fuck up.
/r/MensRights11/02/26 02:57 PM
9

Men are repeatedly told from childhood that they are privileged, and that equality only needs to be promoted among others. I don't think they have even stopped to think about it.
/r/MensRights11/02/26 11:37 AM
1

I actually like it. Talking specifically about rights, something so tangible and concrete, is very convenient for tying it to human rights and shutting down straw-man arguments. Terms like masculinism invite a more general, fuzzier narrative. It's true that it's stigmatized, but even if we rebrand, feminists will keep stigmatizing us with whatever vile labels are fashionable at the time anyway, so whatever.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/26 08:09 PM
1

In spain, the data on false reports of "gender violence" are even lower, with some years recording none at all. For a false report to be officially counted, it must be the public prosecutor’s office that initiates proceedings against the complainant, and this must occur specifically during the pre-trial investigation phase. It rarely even gets to this stage, since the prosecutor’s office, which is government-dependent, has instructions not to pursue false reports in order to "avoid revictimizing…
/r/MensRights10/02/26 11:17 AM
3

Hey, hi! I didn't expect a reply since you blocked me right away. So you came back, just for that? Huh…
/r/MensRights09/02/26 11:03 PM
5

You get downvoted because you were pedantic, unhelpful, and condescending. You claim others can't use their brains, but this was entirely predictable. The edit and this second comment only show that you turn lack of validation into persecution fantasy. Go console that ego, lest you actually develop critical thinking skills.
/r/MensRights09/02/26 10:12 PM
4

I guess you’re focusing on the murica context, but over there they have a brutal culture war where integrity and reason are completely absent. So, I don’t expect this to bring anything other than a partisan use of victims and possible perpetrators, without making any coherent or useful progress for anyone.
/r/MensRights08/02/26 02:50 PM
24

The position of hegemonic feminism towards lgtb people has always been a bad joke. Gay men are not recognized as full men, yet we are considered man enough to be demonized and discriminated against. We are treated as if we were domesticated beasts, tolerated conditionally as long as we support their creed, always subordinate. If you take a stand against their hatred, you will be worse than a straight man, a traitor, and the focus of overwhelming homophobia and misandry. Btw, something similar ha…
/r/MensRights08/02/26 12:47 PM
7

Yes, that's how claims work. Linking a whole sub is not a source, it's just "Google it" with extra steps. Feel free to come back with something more substantial than "You’re a big boy".
/r/MensRights05/02/26 07:13 PM
9

So, they censored the names of women suspected of being rapists (just because they were women), but they exposed the names of women and girls who are proven victims?! Sexism aside, I can think of many ways to interpret this, and all of them deserve more expletives than any automod can tolerate.
/r/MensRights03/02/26 03:54 PM
-2

You wouldn't need to make flawed disclaimers if you refrained from talking about "the good old days before the invasion of women and blacks". Furthermore, the feelings you specified that you miss are not male things, but cultural ones; if anything you are talking about the nerd era.
/r/MensRights02/02/26 10:49 PM
5

Female != Feminist
/r/MensRights31/01/26 10:48 PM
3

Not with that attitude.
/r/MensRights28/01/26 09:46 PM
3

The context makes it worse, that's unprofessional.
/r/MensRights28/01/26 09:45 PM
4

I took a look and was surprised to find this: Is Anyone Else Seeing an Uptick between Teens and False Allegations?
/r/MensRights28/01/26 09:42 PM
1

Gender segregation may be a good stopgap measure, but it is always something to be regretted. It is unfortunate how this sub constantly strays from egalitarianism, and increasingly seems to be the reverse of feminism.
/r/MensRights28/01/26 11:33 AM
2

In spain, it would be sexual assault if a woman did it to a man, and rape if a man did it to a woman. Previously, the line for rape was drawn at the use of violence or intimidation, but recently it was expanded to include any penetration (only by men in practice) without the victim's free and affirmative consent; which obviously includes cases where the victim lacks that capacity.
/r/MensRights26/01/26 02:17 AM
3

Of course, I don't think I phrased it well. I'm including height one more characteristic of overall beauty/attractiveness. You can have a gorgeous face, but being short will affect the average/result. That doesn't sit well with the media, which is obsessed with superficiality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/26 06:32 PM
2

Although it is nothing new or unique to the genre, discrimination based on beauty has always existed. You will probably see even fewer ugly* men, at least without being looked down upon.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/26 05:47 PM
5

Even crazy people usually tone it down in the real world. Social media is never a good reflection of reality.
/r/MensRights18/01/26 11:37 AM
8

I don't support segregation, but I think it's reasonable when it's limited and utilitarian; however, in these cases, I think it needs a better name. Feminists and wokes have normalized "safe spaces" as a synonym for "places where we exclude the identity group we don't like", it is a term that is too hate-filled.
/r/MensRights12/01/26 01:26 PM
11

That comment is not only the ultimate expression of misandry, it is also a crime.
/r/MensRights08/01/26 02:59 AM
22

At this point, I can only conclude that you are either deliberately being obtuse or trolling, or at least I hope so for your sake.
/r/MensRights07/01/26 08:46 PM
22

Rather, losing friends, jobs, ostracism, etc. It doesn't matter what you have done objectively, but how it has been perceived and disseminated; this is where men, just for being men, play at a huge disadvantage.
/r/MensRights07/01/26 08:41 PM
27

The question is loaded, as it assumes that only legal issues matter, when social ones can be just as harmful.
/r/MensRights07/01/26 02:59 PM
9

Nah, the context is different. It's not the same to do it instrumentally in a fight (just physical aggression) as it is to do it out of desire, humiliation, to assert power, etc (sexual assault). If you want to claim that 90% are committed by men, and they are not “just” physical aggression, you're going to have to back that up. But in any case, it's very relevant to condemn how society trivializes it.
/r/MensRights06/01/26 01:18 AM
2

Empty statements and phrases like "come to the real world" are not arguments, they just dismiss others while relying on a non-existent consensus. This rhetoric is an excellent way to prevent debate and have your position rejected before it's even considered.
/r/MensRights04/01/26 12:14 AM
2

Systematically women are subjected to sexism in real world prevalently compared to men. If anything, the sexism suffered by men is institutionalized, and not only tolerated but also viewed favorably by the media and society, which is why it is much more widespread and normalized. But anyway, this is a pointless discussion. Thus it's reverse sexism. This is a non sequitur. The basis is, sexism = discrimination based on sex. Patriarchy Sir/madam, you are on r/MensRights, using the myth of patriarc…
/r/MensRights03/01/26 10:59 PM
6

Don't be silly, gender self-determination is precisely notable for having no requirements other than self-determination itself. I am in spain and I legally changed to female, submitted an application and changed a letter on a document, that's all. Absolutely nothing in my life has changed, except for the small detail that I am no longer legally discriminated against.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/01/26 03:53 AM
12

So, according to your logic, we must assume that all women are potential infanticides and treat them all as a threat to children, right?
/r/MensRights30/12/25 01:22 AM
2

At this rate, they will last you around 55-60 years 🙃
/r/MensRights30/12/25 12:46 AM
11

Edit: If you downvote me, you’re stupid. No matter the context or what precedes it, saying this is a statement of utter idiocy.
/r/MensRights30/12/25 12:36 AM
2

If it's not available in epub, it doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights28/12/25 01:41 AM
6

That's how it usually is these day, men are either stupid or evil. If you see an intelligent man among the good guys in a recent movie, especially a disney one, spoiler alert! He's not good.
/r/MensRights27/12/25 01:57 PM
23

Practically from the very beginning, it became a movement of "believe women simply because they are women", extending even to anonymous accusations. It is a sexist movement, even if it had an initially legitimate starting point, it is ultimately deeply toxic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/25 04:23 PM
0

As you rightly say, perceived insecurity bears no relation to objective data, but it undoubtedly exists. The problem that needs to be addressed is perception, not supposed insecurity. To help them and help ourselves, the solution is not to feed their neurosis, but to combat the cause: feminism.
/r/MensRights23/12/25 02:04 PM
7

I agree that it's pointless, but that's because feminism is a movement rooted in hatred and there's no point trying to reform it. On the other hand, exposing its double standards is quite useful for us. They usually claim that feminism is THE movement for gender equality, pretending that masculism is unnecessary or harmful, so if you force them to reject men you put them in a contradiction.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/25 04:13 PM
41

I hate it when they call it "reverse", as if sexism only affected women and there was an inferior category for men.
/r/MensRights21/12/25 02:12 PM
1

I've never had this problem, but I assume this must be mainly, or maybe even exclusively, a problem with the official smartphone app? With previous accounts, I've been banned from subs and received user blocks, which I probably accidentally evaded many times, but reddit didn't seem to notice. Although that's much less serious than a reddit suspension/ban, and I also use a hardened web browser with a vpn.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/25 03:42 PM
3

It's worth mentioning that it still requires penetration. In other words, they chose not to recognize men as possible victims of rape by women in practical terms. This is progress, but it's not "gender-neutral" as its proponents claim.
/r/MensRights15/12/25 02:02 PM
4

Maybe, but anyway the point of the OP is people's reaction, thousands of people humiliating or even dehumanizing a man for not sacrificing himself for a woman/"being a man".
/r/MensRights15/12/25 01:37 PM
0

This only shows a proportion of references when using the search tool, which is irrelevant. Even if it mattered, benchmarks like the ones in that post are conducted offline. Let me say it again, since you seem determined to ignore the point: gpt does not copy answers from reddit. Even if it reads comments via web tools, and it happens that they come from reddit, that doesn't mean they are even relevant to the response, much less that it copies them.
/r/MensRights15/12/25 01:05 AM
0

Being part of the training data != trained mostly with reddit Having access to internet search tools, which includes reddit != gpt copies its replies from reddit/the internet
/r/MensRights15/12/25 12:34 AM
0

GPT/LLMs don't copy, and that they mostly do so from reddit is just your invention.
/r/MensRights14/12/25 11:41 PM
1

For that, you would need the training data to be completely gender-neutral, and you will never find enough. You can try to instruct or overcompensate to make it more neutral, but there is no realistic way for it to work perfectly in all circumstances, especially for one of the most deeply rooted biases in training data.
/r/MensRights14/12/25 11:38 PM
9

That's a very reasonable point, but it bothers me that it isn't usually accepted in the opposite direction. Complaints among women about the lack of pockets in clothing and similar issues are common, yet the blame is never placed on the collective of female shoppers but on some patriarchal fashion magnate.
/r/MensRights14/12/25 01:07 PM
10

Rather than some kind of malicious sexist idea, I can imagine several narrow-minded feminists saying that mansplaining should be banned, and drafting it in the most stupid way possible.
/r/MensRights14/12/25 01:27 AM
1

Girl scouts are a problem because they segregate by gender, the solution is not more gender segregation. If it is considered appropriate to have more than one model of scouts, each more oriented towards the tendencies of one gender or another criterion, that is fine, but it can be done without discriminating against those who don't fit the expected mold or simply want to participate in a different one. Edit: I guess the OP doesn't like non-discrimination, because he blocked me.
/r/MensRights11/12/25 01:56 AM
37

Reddit mods (not the volunteers, although they also stir up plenty of drama) do a low-skilled, underpaid job where they're rushed to judge a comment without context, and usually they don't even judge it themselves but a bot does. I don't expect a well-done or even coherent job from them, and I just try to assume there's an absolute biased moron with a finger on the ban button, which often seems to be accurate. Anyway, I don’t care about my account, I'll keep labeling feminism appropriately as a …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/25 10:51 PM
2

People can adopt ideologies that clearly harm them, and in fact they do so all the time. Don't ascribe to malice what can be easily explained by stupidity.
/r/MensRights10/12/25 01:45 PM
7

It's funny how they treat their biased surveys as unquestionable facts, then use them to wildly extrapolate and deliver us the Truth™. But when you, carefully and using official data, point out that the recorded number of false reports is blatantly below reality, you're instantly labelled a denier or whatever label is fashionable that day.
/r/MensRights08/12/25 10:04 AM
1

It probably wouldn't happen, but the point is that it should happen, and therefore it must also happen when a man does it.
/r/MensRights06/12/25 07:57 PM
1

When a more experienced person invites, guides, and makes decisions for someone clearly less prepared, they automatically assume a duty of care, it doesn't have to be professional. But according to your logic of blaming the victim, if your girlfriend, an expert diver, urges you to join her with faulty equipment and instructions, it's your fault. I hope you enjoy being fed to the fishes or getting scammed by nigerian princes.
/r/MensRights06/12/25 07:53 PM
16

plenty sensitive In other words, you were mutilated as a child and you don't know what that really means.
/r/MensRights05/12/25 01:56 PM
16

First, bodily integrity and autonomy are human rights, they are a matter of men's rights, and they cause real problems that can become extremely serious, period. Pretending otherwise is delusional and utterly ignorant, and by doing so the only one spreading misinformation is you; it is also particularly stupid to do so in a post dedicated to bad experiences caused by being mutilated. Second, women with mutilated genitals often have no complaints and say they are fine because they do not understa…
/r/MensRights05/12/25 01:50 PM
34

"I don't understand why you don't kill yourself", said casually by a friend who knew I was depressed at the time. She had been a good friend before, I think things changed when one day she said she had fallen for me, but I gently turned her down (I hadn't come out yet back then) trying to keep the friendship. She pressed a little, but when she finally gave up, her toxicity and malice escalated quickly. This didn't make me resentful or biased against women, but it did worsen my state and harmed m…
/r/MensRights04/12/25 07:37 PM
14

You are not responsible for what other individuals do who share your identity traits. But anyway, let's try to apply your logic to other areas: shouldn't men's taxes benefit women?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/25 02:08 PM
7

If the goal is to end forced recruitment (the only thing consistent with human rights), great. But it should be noted that switzerland also voted against ending forced recruitment for men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/25 02:04 PM
1

So, should we be at least as bad as them? We are supposed to be better because we have human rights, but do these disappear when they are not convenient? Furthermore, if no one is willing to fight for their country, then it is not worth sacrificing any innocent people for it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/25 02:04 PM
0

You have a double standard. If you applied your own criteria in a gender-neutral way, in Srebrenica you would say that they weren't killed for being men in the abstract, but rather that the motivation was instrumental, to neutralize potential "military assets" during ethnic cleansing. But the underlying problem remains that you are trying to redefine terms that are already socially and academically established. Criticizing how they are applied legally or politically is entirely legitimate (and I…
/r/MensRights01/12/25 12:38 PM
0

But that's exactly what I was saying, that more context doesn't eliminate sexist motivation. You're asking for a “pure” motivation that doesn't exist in any crime; people never act based on isolated variables. The point of femicide is not that the murderer hates women in the abstract, but that the cause of the conflict can only make sense because she is a woman: gender roles, control of behavior or sexuality, honor linked to female behavior, etc. Like it or not, it's basically murder + gender-de…
/r/MensRights30/11/25 10:30 PM
1

At that extreme it's much more restricted, and I don’t dare make any statements. I think there are still some murican states that allow abortion with almost no restrictions, although finding a doctor or clinic willing to perform it is another matter. Anyway, the purpose of the extreme scenario was to highlight the contradiction of granting full rights to a premature newborn of 22-41 weeks, while at the same time dehumanizing a 42-week fetus, as if being attached to its umbilical cord changed its…
/r/MensRights30/11/25 07:55 PM
1

It should be, but it isn't. To prevent unwanted births, drugs are given in advance to ensure fetal death.
/r/MensRights30/11/25 06:03 PM
1

at any time in the pregnancy So, does that include a 42-week one?
/r/MensRights30/11/25 03:09 PM
0

If a woman does not wish to continue with a pregnancy, whether for personal choice, rape, or any other reason that does not put her life at risk, it depends on the stage of fetal development. I don’t see any non-spiritual or non-metaphysical reason to recognize a very early-stage fetus as a person or grant it human rights, and therefore to prioritize its rights over those of the mother; the opposite is true for a fetus that is close to being born. Determining the exact cutoff point is not easy. …
/r/MensRights30/11/25 02:54 PM
-1

Many women (and many men), and it gets a lot of media attention, so it should be fairly obvious to anyone not living under a rock. But okay, let's do a search: Elliot Rodger, Christopher Harper-Mercer, Alek Minassian, Scott Paul Beierle, Qandeel Baloch, Farzana Parveen, Banaz Mahmod. They're easy to find, but don't search for "femicide" or you'll get murders driven by any motivation, better to use "incel killings" in western contexts and "honor killings" elsewhere. It's important to emphasize th…
/r/MensRights30/11/25 12:20 PM
1

Let's not fall into the trap of denying the obvious, or we'll just lose credibility. It is a fact that femicides exist, even if they are extremely rare. The key point in this type of law is that the motivation is based solely (or mainly) on the gender or relationship of those involved. This is objective discrimination, and pointing it out makes it much harder to dismiss.
/r/MensRights30/11/25 02:05 AM
3

Even with your cherry-picking, the problem is exactly the same: not convicting for rape but for a lesser offense. You're not partially correct, you're outright false. I'd be curious to hear how pointing out gender-based legal discrimination is supposedly "damaging". Really, I’m all ears.
/r/MensRights29/11/25 02:34 PM
1

Just use an adblocker, or a mirror service such as archive.org
/r/MensRights29/11/25 02:08 PM
1

Of course, they don't literally say that all of them are a myth, but it's an implicit premise for interpreting the interviews; you choose the worst possible interpretation while using it to criticize reading comprehension, which is ironic. The second part fails as a counterargument, as it doesn't actually refute the criticism and, in fact, confirms that it's based on subjective interpretation. Most sociological studies, especially on highly politicized topics, rely more on narrative than analyti…
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:26 PM
1

The abstract clearly shows that those responsible for the study are extremely biased, so I don't trust anything that doesn't come from explicit data. I mean, literally the first sentence says that false accusations are a myth, and then it assumes that cops think accusations are false because of their sexism without considering other factors, among other biases. Like most stuff that sociology spits out to the public, it's just garbage.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 11:54 AM
7

It's very easy to cherry picking, then confirmation bias does the rest.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 11:06 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter