TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CampfireMemorial Archive

View 1 post and 197 comments by CampfireMemorial on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
9

Reddit answer, the little llm they have. Rounded triangle at the top.
/r/MensRights31/12/25 12:10 AM
1

How much? A lot: https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-lost-generation/
/r/MensRights17/12/25 01:11 AM
1

I’ll agree and disagree. I’m being used but I’m happy to have the argument. I care about women like everyone should. Women are people that deserve our respect; no different from men.
/r/MensRights29/11/25 03:14 AM
2

It wasn’t an article, it was the CDCs release for domestic violence stats. The reason I asked you to confirm what your read is because I don’t believe you read it.
/r/MensRights29/11/25 03:11 AM
1

Thank you for sharing your feelings.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 06:39 PM
1

There isn’t a patriarchy, there is a plutocracy. My life is incredibly full and happy. My wife and daughter’s are too. That doesn’t mean that discriminatory laws don’t exist. Right now, the only purely sexist laws are anti-man. We should be aiming for equality but that doesn’t come from one side being centered.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 06:31 PM
3

Everything I’m saying is backed by research. I provided clear evidence from the CDC on DV rates for men and women (around 45% lifetime victimization rate for both sexes) but as soon as I did that we moved onto a different topic. That’s why I’m not taking the time to find sources; it’s clear the goal isn’t for you to learn new things but for me to waste my time. I’d ask you to source anything you claim here, so we can get back to a point where we’ve both shown equal investment in the facts.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 06:14 PM
3

Societial misogyny is evil too. We see that in many ways, just not within the legal system. For example, women are paid 1-2% lesser than men when behavioral differences are taken into account. This needs to be addressed. I’m not in education by my theory is that making it a point to teach young people the necessity and value of aggressive negotiation would help this, since men are more likely to negotiate than women are, naturally. If you’re interested a lot of this makes sense when we put it in…
/r/MensRights28/11/25 05:42 PM
5

And I regard the legal ways in which men are discriminated against. Fixing systemic misandry and misogyny is the goal of all non-bigots.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 05:33 PM
5

If you regard factual interactions as belittling because a man knows more than you, and then avoid that situation, the end result is almost certainly going to be bigotry. That’s why it’s important to care about truth, not what makes us feel good.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 05:26 PM
8

That’s the thing. You perceive someone explaining anti-men things as though it’s anti-woman. Equality doesn’t require women we harmed, it just requires we stop doing it to men. Do you believe your life will be worse if men are allowed to sue when they’re discriminated against? When they aren’t the default arrested partner?
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:59 PM
5

Here is a good starting point: https://www.cdc.gov/nisvs/documentation/index.html I’d love to see your sources; because I suspect they’ll use this same data but with different groupings used to skew the results. This is why the Duluth Model was put into effect: if you make it impossible for one group to be the perpetrator of a crime, they will be underrepresented as perpetrators of the crime. Same for UK rape laws that make it legally impossible for a woman to rape a man; something we all recogn…
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:51 PM
7

I’m sorry the two-part logic was overwhelming for you. You’ve admitted to being a misandrist therefore you’re a bigot. I can’t make that any easier; so if you don’t get that, I’m afraid you’ll be stuck where you are.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:48 PM
7

The CDC disagrees. Your limited knowledge isn’t evidence of anything except your limited knowledge.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:36 PM
7

Nope, reproductive laws(anti-abortion) limits everyone from having an abortion, including couples that make the choice together. It does primarily affect women though. Now compare your passion for arguing against something that mostly effects women to your support of the laws that effect all men, that you argue for. Bigotry is an ugly trait.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:34 PM
5

Which?
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:27 PM
22

You being a misandrists is a you problem; I don’t particularly care if you admit to it. The fact that you feel facts are misogynistic shows the limits on how open you are to men being treated equally.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:27 PM
10

Yep, I’m glad you highlighted the effect of sexist laws. Men make up half of DV victims but 95% of DV arrests because of the Duluth Model. That’s why it’s so important to talk about these discriminatory laws; so we can fix them.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:26 PM
7

Your feelings don’t matter; the law does. There are no laws that limit women for being women; there are still many laws that limit men for being men.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:18 PM
28

Your infantilization of women here is sexist and misogynistic and your application of it is misandry. Do you feel your life is improved through your bigotry?
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:17 PM
9

Women and men are equal except for the ways in which men are legally discriminated against. The example I gave was ended in 2025, thankfully. The Duluth Model’s influence continues to revictimize abused men through its sexist “wheel of power and control” that requires a man be arrested with the only evidence required being that he’s larger. I get that bigots can only see people as their demographics but that’s not reality and we aren’t going to pretend it is.
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:15 PM
16

There is no patriarchy, in the US at least. The “lacks institutional backing” part of this takes only a few moments to disprove to anyone that isn’t allergic to reading. For instance, is it insitutional for men to not be allowed to sue for workplace discrimination for generations?
/r/MensRights28/11/25 04:01 PM
2

Kind of but women didn’t make the laws, they contributed along with men. Any law that has gender, sex, or any other demographic build into it will of course lead to skewed stats. It’s usually the whole point of adding the language.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/25 07:57 PM
-4

Ok, adjectivenoun####. We’ll take this deeply into account. Good bot.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/25 10:34 PM
3

When that somehow makes my life, or the lives of the average man, any better I’ll agree with you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/25 10:42 PM
2

I got the notification that you’d replied but it doesn’t show up for me, so it may have been removed. I didn’t see anything in it from the notification that would have gotten it taken down, so would you mind replying with it again so we can continue?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/25 03:59 PM
3

We face lesser likelihood of sexual assault but greater risk for all other types of violent crime. If risk of crime victimization is an aspect, it seems it required discounting the vast majority of it to regard it as a system of oppression. It seems we’re in agreement about abortion, which is a good thing. It’s also telling that the vast majority of both men and women in the US want abortion to be legal and accessible. The rich people in power have decided we don’t get to have that. Another sign…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/25 01:48 PM
8

Men don’t hold the majority of power though, that’s why we don’t live in a patriarchy. Women and men hold equal power.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/25 01:43 PM
7

There is no patriarchy in the US. There is a plutocracy. Power isn’t given because of genitals. It’s taken by those with wealth, through political spending and controlling capital.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/25 12:47 PM
5

I’ve asked a few people what an example of the “power” is, since as a man I’ve never been given authority over women, because I’m a man. I don’t believe that happens, but I’m very open to your examples.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/25 12:38 PM
1

It’s always so telling when people use new phrases to distort an everyday activity. Suddenly taking a ride share is “forcing your way into a small metal box”. This type of manipulation is a form of gaslighting. If you have to manipulate in order to make your point valid, your point isn’t valid.
/r/MensRights16/10/25 04:35 PM
16

Ah, I can’t get into too many specifics on everything but one aspect you’ll notice soon is that power mods will go away, or at least that’s the goal. Mods will be limited to 5 subs they mod. This will lead to a lot of trading mod roles between people within the same echo chambers so there is another aspect that will mitigate that; I can’t talk about that part. There will also be admins looking at what accounts employ VPNs and bots, though that’s already somewhat in place. Other major changes too…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/25 10:10 PM
2

Which part?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/25 10:06 PM
15

There is no patriarchy, there is plutocracy. Happy cake day.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/25 10:01 PM
55

People love to attack men’s height/wealth/manliness because they see those things as threats, instead of just aspects that are part of a man. Don’t give in the the feeling that you need to work for their approval; the people that say those things are anti-man and will hate you/us no matter what we do. Thankfully the majority of people aren’t misandristic. Keep an eye out for a general shift. Reddit is being forced to make some major sub/mod overhauls over the next few weeks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/25 09:23 PM
3

Men don’t get cat called, men don’t have to “dress appropriately” out of fear of sexual aggression from the opposite sex That is what you said. All of these things do happen to men, as they happen to nearly all people that are victims of sexual assault. To deny men's reality because you don't see it, or simply don't want to admit that they do, is where my issue is. Men aren't granted some special protection by being men. In reality we are denied protection because we are, by people saying the th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/25 08:25 PM
2

When multiple men tell you they've experienced the same type of sexual over-stepping as women do, it's best to not then generalize men as not having experienced them. There are no valid reasons to separate men and women that are victims of violence or abuse. All reasons for doing that are bigoted and wrong.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/25 03:37 PM
3

People like EternalGreen have internalized misandry and it effects their ability to view men as people. Because they hate all men misandrists will deny any support of men, including even acknowledging obvious things, like male victims of sexual abuse, harassment, or even the very existence of misandry. That's why people that use phrases like "misandry doesn't exist", "misandry only hurts feelings", or "men cannot be raped" tend to also be very unsuccessful and uneducated people; they are uninfor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/25 03:23 PM
3

I have been sexually assaulted by multiple women in my life. Touched inappropriately by female customers, and raped by women in authority over me. You not caring when these things happen to men is why you don't see them happening. Your lack of concern for men means you don't have a valid view on this topic. This is exactly why we are forcing bigots with these type of vies into smaller and smaller communities.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/25 03:07 PM
3

Yeah. I was listening to a podcast from Australia; similar situation there. Two police were on, speaking about how they disagree with the way they’re required to treat every man as the perpetrator by default and how they know they’re arresting the victim, but have to do it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/10/25 08:34 PM
39

Try to not let it affect your relationship with your nephew. He will need someone that's willing to stand up to his mom.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/10/25 02:07 PM
2

Exactly! If someone came here to try to convince people to discriminate against women, we would all generally shut it down. Why feminist subs don't do the same is something I don't understand. that would go a long way towards cleansing the movement of misandry, and allow both sides to come together. Until that happens though, don't expect that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 04:18 PM
2

That's very noble and fair of you. Unfortunately the policies like those found in the Duluth Model are put in place by feminist orgs that use the patriarchy as a reason.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 04:12 PM
1

There is no patriarchy in the US. The claim of one is used to minimize discrimination of men as something necessary, just like those advocating for the Duluth Model. If we want equality, we need to build equality into our systems.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 04:01 PM
1

I think we've landed on the key problem: anyone can call themself a feminist, even if their goal isn't equality. Because so few feminists argue against hatred of men, people associate feminism with hatred of men. I agree feminism is a necessary movement but if most of it's members are going to try to keep discriminatory laws in place, I have to argue against them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:52 PM
3

If Feminists are arguing for the Duluth Model, feminism is due infinite criticism. Anyone arguing for discrimination to be built into laws is wrong, in all cases.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:45 PM
2

Hopefully this post has been helpful.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:35 PM
2

This is one example; https://www.cdc.gov/intimate-partner-violence/about/index.html Another important aspect you should look into is non-reciprocal violence. I don't appreciate being asked to counter theories with hard data, so I hope you understand that anything else you ask of me is going to require you to do some research on first.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:29 PM
2

How could that be if half of abused people are men but 90+% of people arrested for domestic violence are men, under the Duluth Model?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:18 PM
2

As you've shown though, they don't have answers, they have theories. this isn't a difficult topic: Men and women are abused in relationships at roughly the same rates. The Duluth Model demands men be arrested at greater rates, which we see happening in reality. Since the model's goal is for women to be protected, rather than for victims to be protected, the model itself has the potential for abuses written into it. This means that abused men are being arrested at vastly greater rates than abused…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:08 PM
3

Maybe, but this theory doesn't fit reality, so it should only be discussed and disproven at that layer. If we try to act like every wrong theory needs to be brought into public dialog, I'd ask you; why?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 03:01 PM
5

This seems like a lot of conjecture and theory, which is fine for academics to ponder, but not for us to regard as something to build laws around. Gay men have the lowest DV rate, so I think the arguments you've seem are aimed to center men as the perpetrator, when they are statistically not. I can't really say more unless I know why the people making the claim did it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 02:56 PM
4

Yeah, Duluth was there it was first put into law, that's actually where it was designed. Then it was pushed federally and put into law all over. Montana has a law, for example. that I have been discussing in a another sub: https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0460/chapter_0060/part_0030/section_0110/0460-0060-0030-0110.html
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 02:44 PM
6

It is a framework that was put into law throughout the US. Men and women can both be victims so any model built around any beginning point other than that will have been implemented for discriminatory reasons.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 02:32 PM
30

The longer I go on living the more I realize the elites on the global stage play dog and pony shows with the rest of our lives.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/09/25 06:40 PM
1

Yes; awesome point!
/r/EverydayMisandry24/09/25 10:14 PM
42

Maybe Spez can explain why men are specifically not protected by the Reddit rules, unlike every other group. If he won’t explain it, maybe someone can aggressively convince him to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/25 09:14 PM
2

Yep
/r/MensRights24/09/25 04:20 PM
4

I appreciate seeing someone with a similar history on here. Thanks for sharing!
/r/MensRights24/09/25 04:18 PM
1

I'm sorry I was so aggressive. Misandry causes so much harm it's a sensitive subject and I may have read your post with an unfair filter.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/25 03:29 PM
2

You're right and I appreciate you calling out that they could have done it innocently. Calling out misandry softly doesn't do much, so I've chosen a more aggressive approach, which may not always be best.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/25 03:07 PM
3

"Misandry Just Hurts Feelings But" is a ridiculous way to begin the conversation. It is the refrain we all see day in and out from anyone that wants to minimize the hate we receive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/25 02:03 PM
4

Wow, another weeks-old account coming here saying anti-men things. It's almost like there are people that want to demoralize us. Misandry is systemic and causes immense harm to both men and women. Anyone that tries to minimize it's effect is wrong on so many levels.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/25 01:50 PM
6

Thank you! I’m going to add this to my list of evidence.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/25 11:56 AM
23

I really appreciate to see so many people here educated on this topic. I think a little more public awareness on how the model actually affects people, would do a lot of good to raise asap for men’s issues in general.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/25 02:53 AM
29

Thank you! This is wonderful context and more info. A personal accomplishment: I saw “UN Women” and it only infuriated me a little. That group is one of the most harmful entities that exists, for men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 08:57 PM
2

I do appreciate how they argue their points fairly but I agree. It seems like they’re very politely receiving new info without taking it into account. I think the core difference of belief is that they believe there is a patriarchy in the US, which colors the rest of the conversation. I, and I think you, believe there is no patriarchy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 08:57 PM
1

I’ve celebrated you and your great discussion style in this post many times but I have to call you out on this one. You and I had exactly this conversation yesterday, so I think you may be playing coy here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 08:31 PM
3

Systemic equality is a pretty big positive that you’ve ignored here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 07:58 PM
123

The model is important because many US domestic violence policies are based upon it. The model is multifaceted; the part most germane to this sub is the presumption of guilt of men. What this means is that during domestic violence/abuse calls police are required to arrest the man, if there is no definitive evidence proving he is the victim. This skews violent arrest and crime stats, inflating male-perpetration rates, which is then used to excuse disproportionatly-high sentencings for men. TLDR: …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 07:23 PM
1

Most of the comments I see here are speaking what I consider to be good solid feminist answers, with no misandry. I appreciate you pointing out there positive posts in what many of us consider fairly anti-men spaces.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 09:23 PM
4

I don't want to interject too much since you and I have already had a nice chat. I want to give a definition though so you two may be able to continue. It could lead to something good. Let's go with a systemic definition to keep things fairly pointed: Misandry is the application of policies, laws, or systems which either by design or lack of built-in-protections, lead to negative effects which primarily harm men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 09:06 PM
2

I really appreciate where this went. Maybe we’ll get really lucky and AI will allow the best and brightest of us to self-educate and create, preventing any need for negative or benevolent discrimination. 🤞
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 06:31 PM
6

I hope you never need to answer that call. I’d just ask you to think of all the men that will be called up that aren’t as willing or capable. They need support.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 06:03 PM
8

The lever exists that can be pulled at the whims of whoever is in power. That’s a heavy burden to allow to hang over the heads of some of the population and not others based solely on protected class. I don’t think dismissing the harmful reality of just the system existing is the right answer.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 05:47 PM
7

Another good point, thank you. I can understand the argument for artificially controlling the sex/race makeup of zero-sum opportunities. I think though that is the wrong tactic. It seems it would be better to allow natural interest and blind-merit to guide enrollment and anyone that is accepted is then rated for scholarship/subsidization based solely on need. The scholarships I’ve seen are for general studies, which doesn’t land well with me when something like 62% of enrollees are women. What d…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 05:45 PM
8

Based on their answer I'd say abortion access is what they were implying. A very legitimate point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 05:02 PM
6

That's a great point and I'll soften my statement, because your misogyny example is exactly correct. To me the systemic misandry is more exemplified by policies like female-only scholarships or admission slots. The stated purpose may be to uplift or support women but with women making up the majority of college enrollees, the behavior doesn't align with reality. Basically, we can't accept that something done that harms a group is necessarily being done under innocent motivations, just because th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 04:54 PM
5

Some do and some don't so I upvoted you but I think this deserves some specificity.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 04:47 PM
14

Right, because many feminists believe in the concept of a patriarchy in the US. That's where the issue breaks down. If we predicate whether or not something is harmful, on whether or not something exists, we have to prove r disprove the thing exists. Since we won't be able to settle that argument here we need to think to the victims, in this case men that are illegally discriminated against. Since the only reason these men are discriminated against is that they're men, the cause of the discrimin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 04:46 PM
7

Wonderful argument! I think the incorrect belief that "patriarchy" exists in the US is a huge part of people's unwillingness to recognize the systemic nature of misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 03:51 PM
12

The problem is that the argument that misandry isn't systemic required a willful misunderstanding of reality. The fact that laws exist which harm men for being men, is all the evidence required to see that the issue is systemic. Most people have never seen or heard of those laws because the journalists that inform them don't report on misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 03:50 PM
4

Yeah, but they get to be that. It's not on them to do what we want them to. It's on us to motivate them towards action.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 01:49 PM
3

They weren’t talking to you.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 11:44 AM
1

This is hyperbolic. I’m all for arguing for fairness and equality but this is extremist language.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 04:51 AM
7

At that point of analysis, what’s the point of the analysis? Let’s just fix all gendered laws the way we have racial laws. Then it doesn’t matter because the actual issue is solved. Then we can argue social issues or whatever else anyone wants. At least we’ll have removed the systemic misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 01:16 AM
12

Thank you for pointing out the reality of their argument.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/09/25 08:25 PM
2

If the promiscuity were the cause of the lack of attraction, I would agree. Instead we see that it’s not the number of sexual partners but the number of recent sexual partners. This shows it’s not about a general “purity” and there is no loss of value due to men. The loss of value seems to be because of a desire for external attention(possibly reads as validation). Edit: link to the recent vs past promiscuity study: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12313963/
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/25 04:32 PM
8

I think it's great how you called it our for being misandry while also noting the extra hate that could be tacked on due to transphobia. It's both.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/09/25 08:41 PM
–

They’re just people. I don’t get to demand they fight every battle just like I wouldn’t allow them to demand that of me.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:43 PM
–

I mean yeah, it’s not “forced” but it’s coerced. I think most women have experienced being in the position of someone saying something clearly misandristic but not feeling comfortable to argue with it, just based on what my wife and women-friends tell me.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:32 PM
–

I think many women are in a tough spot; if they don’t repeat the things the extremists demand they do, they’re called a “pick me” and told they’re not supporting women. It’s a horrible position for a woman to be in because women are told to be pro-social and to support others. I don’t envy either side but I feel ok with knowing it’s the bigots that are the enemy, not the good men and women just trying to do their best. I totally understand why you feel the way you do though.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:07 PM
–

I get why you have this worry because so many accounts on here, Insta, etc are so openly hateful. I don’t think it’s good to internalize that as a “woman” problem though, because that will push away the massive majority of women that aren’t extremists. Try to keep in mind that extremists are loud but fairly rare, and generally, their broken minds tend to keep them out of positions of power. Some slip through but especially lately, they’re being called out and fired for their bigotry.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 07:24 PM
1

That’s fair, thanks for the call out.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 01:52 AM
1

NOW is a bigoted group that is thankfully being defunded. We don’t need to discuss this dying hate group anymore. Have a great day!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 02:15 PM
1

Which specific words?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 01:36 PM
2

I did in every NOW post. You post where they say men and women should be given equal opportunity for custody.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 01:03 PM
1

Well, we weren’t arguing is men feel discriminated against, they should because they are. I think what you may be overlooking or discounting is that the unemployment rate, for example, doesn’t SEEM like it’s drastically worse for men, it actually is. That’s why I always ask for specifics when people claim systemic misogyny or “the patriarchy” because they don’t exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 01:02 PM
1

Does this apply to what we were talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 03:05 AM
1

The discrimination you claimed wasn’t done in 1997, that’s when men were asked how they felt about the discrimination being done against them. What point are you trying to make? We know discrimination exists, I brought it up. What there isn’t is any discrimination against women in law, but there sure is for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 11:00 PM
1

1997 is when you want us to use the studies from? Nah.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:54 PM
1

Which policies do you believe HBR was asking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:43 PM
1

Nope, NOW has argued against shared support. Feel free to share otherwise, rather than continuing to “think” and claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:39 PM
1

I’m VERY glad you brought up Title IX because it’s another way in which a law was well designed and then used to cause harm. Biden’s enhancements to Title IX led to hundreds of men being illegally removed from courses and denied legal recourse or equal representation under the law. Universities are today paying the price for the discrimination they allowed to fester. Since you proposed this: what other discrimination do you see that affects people today?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:17 PM
1

This is a weird interpretation of decades of trended data that the article supports. Since the “centuries of discrimination“, never limited any living person today, and limited the same number of a man’s ancestors as any woman’s, there is no reason for discrimination in laws. These policies and laws exist not because of some injustice generations ago, they’re in policy because people are comfortable harming men at the expense of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:07 PM
1

It's all right there in the article.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 09:18 PM
6

NOW in Ney York: Opposed a bill (A.10565) that would presume joint custody unless rebutted, arguing it favored a "primary caregiver (usually the mother) presumption" for stability. They highlighted that joint custody enhances "family chaos" in embittered cases and that mediation often leads to shared parenting without considering child welfare. This stance was reiterated in a 2006 editorial criticizing NOW's 40-year history of blocking shared parenting to maintain gender-based primary caregiver …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 09:13 PM
8

I wish NOW would have argued for that then, rather than for female-custody being the default.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 08:12 PM
8

I appreciate you bringing actual facts into this. It's so easy for some to make claims they know to be untrue to stop the conversation. You make it much harder for them to try it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:54 PM
9

NOW has advocated against that, why are you claiming they aim for it? EDIT, so we don't just back and forth: For example, in Michigan NOW opposed House Bill 4691, which would require joint legal custody and equal parenting time in disputes. Thankfully NOW failed to put more misandry into law here but they sure tried.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:49 PM
33

Why are you bringing up women? The systemic misandry that is in-law today is purely about preventing men from having equal access to opportunities and protection under the law.
/r/MensRights08/09/25 07:49 PM
1

1980s; see how accurate people that try to spread hate are?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:37 PM
6

Fortunately I fact check all misandrists. This one failed the test: NOW has argued against equal custody multiple times over it's history. We'll get into the specifics if you don't retract your lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:35 PM
1

Society hasn't added scholarships for men due to the systemic misandry of bigots. Bigots deserve nothing but bad in their life.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:25 PM
36

Did you spin up a new account just to come spread hate?
/r/MensRights08/09/25 06:06 PM
2

This is why misandrists loved Adolescence so much: it gave them a fictional boogieman they could use to justify all their hate. “Women get to speak their non violent frustrations with men who have harmed them” is used to justify misandry anytime it’s about “men” rather than the individual(s) that caused harm.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 05:44 PM
1

This is already explained in my post.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 04:30 PM
1

I replied to you about your DARVO. The audience is all the people you attempt to employee DARVO against.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 04:12 PM
2

Can you clarify what you mean by “recently” in context of when women’s access to education was limited?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 03:43 PM
1

What we see here is classic DARVO. The user Denied a claim but was disproven. They now move on to Attack the person making the claim(and me). They’ve moved on to Reversal of the Victim and Offender (it’s men’s fault society prevents them from equal access to opportunities). Please be aware DARVO is a tactic that is employed to avoid accountability and continue the status quo. Never trust anyone that employs DARVO.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 03:42 PM
1

With Gen Z women out-earning men and the female-only scholarships the person proved, this is a ridiculous argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 03:27 PM
2

I know it’s probably more comfortable for you to be told exactly how to behave. Times will come along when you need to be able to control your own behavior. Don’t be a burden to those around you by being unable to handle yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 01:47 PM
2

Your bigotry is why you’re assuming the things you do. It will be better for you to educate yourself on this subject before you speak on it again publicly. You don’t have even the definition of terms and it shows.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 01:25 PM
3

Don’t be a bigot. Even someone so stupid that they think you can judge people they’ve never met based on what genitals they have, should be able to follow that. I’m always blown away at just how limited the mental capabilities of hateful people are, you’ve set a new low!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 01:19 PM
2

See how I’m pointing my criticism at your bad behavior rather than your demographics? It’s so easy to not be an evil bigot.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 01:04 PM
1

Do what you’re doing but don’t be a bigot while doing it. That’s the better way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:45 PM
2

Do exactly that but without the bigotry.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:36 PM
7

I assumed they were obtuse but sharing that link and misrepresenting what the article says shows that they’re not obtuse, they’re just lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:35 PM
8

That’s not what the story says. Do you think you can lie your way into “winning” this discussion?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:33 PM
5

“I’m comfortable letting my prejudice guide my interactions with people and it’s their fault if my incorrect assumptions offend them” This is a bad way to treat people.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:18 PM
–

Good reply. This person is a “red pill female”; they’ll reject anything you say like it’s her job.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:10 PM
11

Yeah, they wanted proof, you gave it, and they rejected the proof. The enrollment and graduation rates themselves tell the story, this person just doesn’t want to admit that men are actually discriminated against.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:09 PM
2

There is no patriarchy in the US. I’m very happy to have my mind changed though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/25 08:04 PM
2

Sure, statistically 0% of men and 0% of women have wealth and power enough to control others. If we zoom in a few more men that women but I don’t see that mattering to the 100% of women and men with no power.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/25 08:02 PM
2

I agree about wealth and power but those don’t equate to sex like you note in your first sentence. Unless I misunderstand what you mea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/25 07:56 PM
2

I’m sorry, I don’t have quite enough time to get into your full reply. I agree with you in concept; feminism is about helping everyone. That’s why once only hold true when the majority of people using the label have that goal in mind, and right now I don’t believe that to be the case. As soon as anti-man rhetoric becomes less popular within the movement I’ll be proud to again call myself a feminist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/25 07:51 PM
6

I agree with much of what you say here. I identified as a feminist for most of my life, until the last year. Seeing how anything anti-male is cheered I’m every feminist sub highlighted how fully misandrists have taken over the movement. I know much of it is rad fem brigading but we just don’t see any pushback against it. I worry the damage is done and there’ll be no way to get the majority of people to call themselves feminists again, until we’re able to purge the hate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/25 06:31 PM
9

Maybe, but I know I won't vote blue again unless I see it purged of all anti-man rhetoric. I'm not alone in that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 06:14 PM
6

This is always the refrain but I know in my lifetime girls and women have consistently and appropriately been told they’re strong and capable. The fact the laws haven’t been updated is a sign that some group doesn’t want them to be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/25 07:56 PM
19

There is no patriarchy in the US.
/r/MensRights26/08/25 09:18 PM
6

Exactly. The abusers that use this type of rhetoric are the same ones to abuse their friends and partners. These same people will shame and bully women when they don’t speak negatively about men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 03:29 PM
3

There is literally zero us non-rapist men can do to decrease rape any more than we have. I won’t take on responsibility for something I can’t have an effect on.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 09:01 PM
4

It’s so taxing needing to find actual text to combat these baseless posts. Thanks for pointing out the manipulation and misinformation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 12:55 PM
1

Why did you leave off agreeableness, which I partnered with contentiousness? It was to allow you to lie about what was said. You cannot have a conversation without false allegations. Your misogyny and misandry has ended this conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 05:17 PM
1

They score higher in agreeableness and contentiousness, which is submissiveness. That doesn’t mean women must or should behave submissively. Please stop trying to control women’s behavior or judge where they sent to call on these traitors scales, is it misogynistic and harmful.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 05:14 PM
1

Only you have said submissiveness is a negative trait, which is misogynistic. Women can be however they are naturally, they don’t need you demanding they behave more dominantly because it makes you mad when they don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 05:07 PM
5

When you see a 4 year old account with no karma gender-war, assume they’re a bot. So many on here will argue the way these few have. It’s gross and reductive. Thanks for keeping sane while dealing with their behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 05:05 PM
1

Not talking points, I’m fully ready to get into the specifics. I did tell you though that if you continues to try to misconstrue the things other commenters say on here as a way to make false accusations, I would give up on you. Would you like to apologize so we can move forward? I’ll also need you to affirm that you will not lie anymore, it’s a very harmful thing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 05:02 PM
1

Do you have as big an issue with women also scoring higher in the agreeableness and contentiousness scales? Please understand that men and women generally falling on different areas of these scales doesn’t mean you can’t be as aggressive and abrasive as you’d like.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:54 PM
1

I agree. Has any policy been proposed? I haven’t seen one. I have seen though how the Duluth Model has harmed men that are victims. I’m also glad to see that Ames v Ohio has opened the door to men pursuing discrimination claims. The more we fight back against these misandristic laws the better off we all are.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:52 PM
2

Submissiveness is higher in women. I’m sorry you don’t like that but only you’re implying that it’s a negative thing. Sociology as a science may use some words you don’t like. I’d avoid it as a field.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:50 PM
1

Oh, ok. So, can we focus on actual issues now?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:49 PM
1

Ok, Vance and Trump said incorrect and mean things. I’m sorry. Should we focus on the systemic misandry and misogyny next?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:48 PM
1

Someone being submissive doesn’t give anyone else the right to do anything. What makes you think submissiveness is a negative trait?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:44 PM
1

Misogyny does exist. You haven’t spoken about it yet, which is what I’m trying to help you do. Do you always need so much mental handholding or is this just a topic you aren’t very educated in? Would it help if we went about this differently?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:43 PM
1

Sure, did you come up with any examples of systemic misogyny in the US?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:41 PM
1

Women are more submissive as a whole than men are. Men are more aggressive as a whole than women are. See how both of those are true and neither is misogynistic nor misandristic? That’s because they’re not value judgements. Submission isn’t a negative trait, you just don’t like it for some reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:39 PM
2

They’ve done this consistently in multiple comment chains in this post. They keep trying to manipulate and misconstrue other people’s words. Be ready for them to try to make you seem like you’re a misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:37 PM
2

You and the individual men that do the thing you’re doing, are wrong. You aren’t representative of all women nor are they of all men. Knowing how to keep myself from hating all of a group based on the actions of the few is very helpful. If you work on that trait you may have a happier life.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:35 PM
1

That’s not what this person said. They said women lean more submissive on the dominance/submissive spectrum, which is true. You’ve again tried to misconstrue someone’s statement as an ad hominem attack. If this is how you hope to convince people of things it’s not going to work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:33 PM
1

Just name a way women are limited. If it’s so systemic it should be incredibly easy. I shared just 2 of the ways men are. You could talk about how women are kept from becoming leaders in most religions, religions that influence policy-makers. The small but real hassle of women being expected to change their names after marriage, and all the legal hurdles that creates for them. I’m informed on the actual issues so I don’t need to make things up or manipulate conversations. I’m trying to help you …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:27 PM
1

Check your comment history. Every time you makes claims like “men can’t love” or “men think their opinions are objective fact” You are making are false statements designed to denigrate men. If you ever have a second relationship you may gain experience the rest of us gained as children and young adults. Until then you can at least try to not be a troll.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:22 PM
1

Check it out!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:19 PM
1

I can point to actual laws that limit men. You can point to the reversal of Roe as one too. Other than that there aren’t limits on women, and there shouldn’t be. There also shouldn’t be limits placed on men.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:16 PM
1

I don’t understand your first point. You believe your anti-man hate makes it easier for women to leave harmful relationships? Who? This may be another of your logical leaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:09 PM
1

I’ve asked you to show systemic misogyny even if it’s not the same level as the misandristic laws and policies that I shared. You haven’t thought of any yet, take as much time as you need. I agree about abortion, it shouldn’t have been overturned. I wish Dems would have prevented the misandry of the extremists within the party from making everyone hate us and pushing so many moderates to the right.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:04 PM
1

You have a habit of pretending, or convincing yourself, that you know why people believe things. That makes you very hard to have a conversation with. If you do it again I am giving up on you. Those are hate subs because they are populated with mostly anti-man rhetoric, which helps nobody. If you’d like to prove me wrong, explain one way you talking about how men being unable to love has served you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 04:01 PM
1

“Several” doesn’t make it the dominant narrative, which you claimed. Can you point to any media from any major publications? Can you show us any articles that try to persuade people to treat women this way? I know some people can say mean things but that doesn’t mean society is doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:53 PM
1

Yep, and what did I say in the comment immediately before, you know, the one you cut off?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:51 PM
1

You’ve again cut out context to try to make your point. If you have to manipulate to be correct, you’re not correct. My “each of these” comment was about the subs I named in the comment you replied to here. You left that out of the screenshot for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:31 PM
1

More logical leaps. No one has said any of that. Misandry causes harm through implementation of the Duluth model in domestic violence policing, inflating men’s arrests. We also see it in Biden’s enhanced AAP and in the circuit courts “background circumstances” requirements for discrimination suits. Feel free to speak to these harmful and misandristic policies that harm millions of men in the US. Would you like to kick off the misogyny part of the conversation with some policies or laws that limi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:27 PM
1

No, you implied that Vance’s quote about childless cat ladies is the narrative spread through society. It’s not. You’ve done this in a few other comments too, when you take one example of something and try to apply it to groups as a whole. Your bigotry is very bad. Back to the conversation that you keep hoping to avoid: Misandry exists and causes harm, do you agree? Misogyny exists and causes harm, do you agree?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:18 PM
1

See how you have to go back to logical leaps to try to paint me as the bad guy, rather than discussing the point of the conversation? You don’t win by making false accusations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:12 PM
2

Who taught it to you? Talk about where it’s observed. I suggest we also focus up on the core argument. Misandry exists and has real world harm, do you agree? Misogyny exists and has real world harm, do you agree?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:07 PM
1

You’re a member of hate subs, I don’t care if you like how I worded it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 03:05 PM
2

Nope, I named twice for you the hate subs that you follow. You know what they are because you left them out of your screenshots as a way to manipulate the conversation, which is an abusive tactic. Let’s get back on topic. You hate all men, let’s discuss.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:59 PM
3

Who taught you it? It’s not the dominant narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:56 PM
1

See how quickly people like you lie? You’re a member of multiple hate subs, which I specifically called out. We’ll talk about specifics once you agree to stop making false accusations. Please don’t give people any more reason to doubt your honesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:55 PM
7

Who taught you?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:47 PM
1

Subs that are about hating a group of people are hate subs. Deny all you want but if you’d were to share the titles of the top 3 posts from 4b, radfem, or fem separatists, you’d out yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:46 PM
1

Women in my country are not taught this.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:38 PM
1

Each of those are hate subs. That’s why 90% of the posts on there are hate against men. Your logical leaps are when you generalize all men for behaviors of the tiny minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:32 PM
0

Why didn’t you display your 4b, radfem, fem separatist and other hate subs? People like you will manipulate and lie to convince people. All I have to do is share facts and let you whine.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:20 PM
0

Your misandry is showing in every comment. You base all your beliefs on what your hate subs feed you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 02:11 PM
0

You make a lot of big logical leaps without supporting them with anything other than your passion for hating guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 01:58 PM
2

Exactly, we see it in the data: college-educated women are marrying at the same rate they always have. Poor/uneducated women are marrying at lower rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 01:56 PM
7

Learning about the way Biden changed the AAP was a game changer for me. As soon as I saw that all business that contracted or subcontracted were required to demographically discriminate, I knew I wouldn’t ever vote for another Dem until there was a huge shift back to the center. I still couldn’t vote for Trump but I’m very glad we don’t have a Democratic in the White House.
/r/EverydayMisandry20/08/25 11:59 PM
3

It’s important to stick with policies and laws we can point to that limit men. Misandrists will claim they don’t exist, which we all know isn’t true, and is easily disproven. Lately I’ve been focusing on the “background circumstances” requirement being argued against in the Ames v Ohio case. The enhancements to the AAP that Biden put in place, and the policies the OCCFP were under, prevented proven discrimination against men from being pursued by the government. At the same time the OCCFP pursue…
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/25 02:43 PM
7

This is a great point! I think it’ll benefit us to remember that many women are bullied into repeating misandrist things by other women. Any women that doesn’t “support other women” becomes a pariah.
/r/MensRights19/08/25 12:55 PM
8

I agree. It's victim-blamey but I fully believe a lot of the hateful rhetoric happens because we don't speak up loudly or aggressively enough to shut it down. There aren't men writing articles about misandry, so it only comes up online. Men don't loudly reject politicians that propose or support laws that keep the legal systems the way they are. We can change things but change isn't handed to us. We have to demand people hear and believe us.
/r/MensRights29/07/25 08:12 PM
1

I would really like a problem and solution pair because otherwise it’s just words. I believe there are some issues women still face but If no problems come to mind for you as worth discussing, then we can move on to the issues I could clearly state for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 11:10 AM
1

I would like to discuss any real world problems women are facing and any solutions you have for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 12:31 AM
1

What statistics do you feel show women receive more harm from greater society? I'm very happy to read and learn from them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 07:24 PM
1

These are good points but there isn’t any connection made between them and the men that are being discriminated against by the laws that you’ve decided to not learn about. My solution is simple: anyone that is discriminated against had legal recourse to pursue damages from the person or org that did the discrimination. No demographics are excluded (this is the one change that’s needed).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 06:19 PM
1

I've had this discussion recently so I'm happy to join in on this. You believe there is no systemic penalty men pay due to the rise in misandry discussed here; if that's right, that's where I'd like to begin. If I were to show clear examples of men being limited or harmed by society (laws, policies, systems), would you change your opinion?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 03:17 PM
6

I agree, it's a very clear example of a two-tier system. I think it's important to talk about these things because of how easy it is for people to claim misandry isn't systemic. It's time to start pushing that in people's faces so anyone claiming otherwise has no leg to stand on. I don't think this means women are bad or society hates men but I do think this type of policy is a direct reflection of a significant different in the level of concern of harm we have for men vs women. "Unconscious bia…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/07/25 08:40 PM
7

I'm not a legal expert but I know a policy that is designed to skew data. Check out how Australian judges are instructed to view and question men that claim to be victims of domestic violence: https://judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/FVBBWeb/index.htm#34578.htm
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/07/25 04:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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