TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DoctorUnderhill97 Archive

View 0 posts and 290 comments by DoctorUnderhill97 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)
1

Speak for yourself.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 06:20 PM
–

It doesn't sound like you read many books.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 06:17 PM
–

There is a difference between being desired as a person and being desired as a sex object.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 06:17 PM
1

It is funny to me that people on this sub complain about how boys are underperforming in school, and then they turn around and disparage actual academic achievement. Hilarious.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 06:14 PM
1

Very substantive. Good job.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 06:12 PM
1

Very interesting.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 01:31 PM
-4

Feminists say that men should express their emotions, but when they do, feminists are grossed out and prefer the unemotional man. No they are not.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 01:03 PM
1

You think women shouldn't be allowed to hold office?
/r/MensRights08/07/24 01:02 PM
1

People who aren't held accountable or responsible under a legal system identically as everyone else have zero right to vote or make laws. White people consistently receive lighter sentences in the US court system than black people. So, which people should have zero rights to vote or make laws?
/r/MensRights08/07/24 01:01 PM
2

Well, that's helpful. It's good to know that you have nothing thoughtful or reasonable to offer. Gee, why do people have such a negative view of MRAs? Maybe because bitter little boys on this sub gleefully talk about murdering women who are disrespectful.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 12:33 PM
1

Take your tantrum elsewhere kid.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 12:32 PM
1

Yeah, OK guy. Stick with video games.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:21 AM
1

Not that kind of doctor champ.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:18 AM
1

Oh look. You mouthing off about something you have no clue about.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:17 AM
1

Lots.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:16 AM
–

So, you'd commit murder because you grandfather did something? That's pretty unhinged.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:15 AM
–

You don't seem to understand what I am saying at all.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 10:15 AM
0

You see, the difference is that I'm not claiming that highways other people have built make me special.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 09:32 PM
1

Yes, but you are not protesting the draft. You are bitching about women. Women aren't the ones who are going to kill you. It's other men.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 05:57 PM
-2

Chances are really low that Queen Elizabeth I is going to send me to my death.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 05:54 PM
-4

Oh yeah, I bet women feel very welcome to come join you. Sure.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 05:53 PM
0

What mistake?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 05:50 PM
1

It does make a difference, champ. Men being in charge and legally restricting women from certain activities is not "gynocentric." It's pretty obvious who has the power.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 03:18 PM
-13

Why don't you go build some highways big boy, since this is something you are clearly responsible for. Or so you claim.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 03:16 PM
-4

So your whole "when men are fighting wars" thing refers to nothing you've ever done or came close to doing. So how is this a useful argument?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 03:14 PM
-11

I don't know what country you are in, but no one is sending me to die on any front lines. If they were, I can guarantee it's another man sending me, not a woman.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 02:30 PM
-1

I am not twisting anything. I am referring directly to what the poster said. How many wars have you fought?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 02:29 PM
1

Why don't you just read the post I am responding to rather than asking stupid questions?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 02:27 PM
-14

How many highways have you built?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 02:27 PM
-6

Who do you think passed the laws making these jobs illegal for women?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 01:12 PM
-15

But they are not "welcome," because the law specifically prohibits it, so I don't get your point.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 01:11 PM
1

Can men not wear nail polish and dresses? Seems like that is already a right men have.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 12:15 PM
-6

they more or less never police their own. Huh? Do you know any women in real life?
/r/MensRights07/07/24 12:12 PM
-40

I really don't get the point of posts like this. Men aren't dying in the workplace because they are men.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 12:09 PM
-12

I suspect you don't have a lot of friends.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 12:32 AM
-13

Yeah, sounds like you're a great friend. You go complain about her to a bunch of woman-hating misogynists instead of working it out with her.
/r/MensRights06/07/24 11:24 PM
-12

Anyone who uses the term "femtards" is a child not worth engaging with.
/r/MensRights29/06/24 04:28 PM
-12

And yet, the only people I have ever heard confronting ableism in society are progressives.
/r/MensRights29/06/24 02:34 PM
-17

Yeah, who is "they"? The only time I have ever been criticized for showing too much emotion is from other white men.
/r/MensRights29/06/24 02:31 PM
8

Someone can perpetuate a stereotype without meaning to.
/r/MensRights27/06/24 12:41 AM
0

Oooh. Touchy. Maybe you need a real hobby, if you're so well off already.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 09:35 PM
0

Me? I'm not stealing from anyone. I'm putting money into the system.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 08:49 PM
0

So you are saying that if even a penny goes to support someone else in your community, you totally lose your willingness to work and you flop down like a ragdoll? That seems pretty petty and pathetic if you ask me. I just wanted a sense of what you saw as the scale of the problem, and you couldn't really even give me that. It's almost like you are looking for an excuse for your own failings.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 08:45 PM
-7

I also don't want to be working hard just so I'm subsidizing groups of marginalized people who have mostly placed themselves into the situation they're in. Excatly how much of your pay do you think goes to subsidizing people who have made bad choices? Seriously, make the case that this is such a significant portion of your pay that you completely lose the incentive to work.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 07:09 PM
-14

Can you blame them? Why wouldn't they want to search for the best partner? Wouldn't you?
/r/MensRights26/06/24 06:30 PM
-16

It's so fucking weird to me that the folks on this sub think that feminists destroyed the middle class. That has to be one of the stupidest theories out there.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 05:56 PM
-23

"Elites have rigged the economy so working class jobs are no longer a stepping stone to a comfortable middle-class life. I guess I'll shit on single moms." ----This Guy
/r/MensRights26/06/24 05:54 PM
-12

Oh good. More dime store Hegel. That's what the economy needs.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 05:52 PM
2

I'm a man and I don't want a job without air conditioning. I don't blame women for that.
/r/MensRights26/06/24 05:51 PM
-8

They pick the one more fitting to their needs, discarding the others. What is the alternative exactly?
/r/MensRights26/06/24 05:47 PM
1

ps I carried out research for over three decades. Nearly fifty patents, twelve academic papers, five entries in standard textbooks. I, too, have a PhD, but I don't go on about it. That don't impress me much. You are the one who called me out as an academic friend. I was merely responding to your condescension. It also just so happens that my PhD is a whole lot more relevant to this conversation than yours. You don't seem to understand what the Dunning-Kruger effect is. We are having a conversati…
/r/MensRights25/06/24 12:06 PM
0

Why is it always that weak "you think you know everything" bullshit? I find this tends to be the default response from older people who are embarrased to be called out for their vacuous nonsense. I am not the one making sweeping and largely meaningless claims about all of culture. You are. And then you resort to calling me a pompous academic? Clearly you misunderstand what it means to be an academic. Actual smart people understand the limits of their knowledge; in fact, this is a necessary preco…
/r/MensRights25/06/24 11:30 AM
0

Yet men remain driven to take almost every element of culture and coax these to ever greater heights. You are just talking nonsense, man. None of this vague garbage means anything. And I don't think you have a strong grasp on the history of the novel form. Again, you are just spouting sillyness.
/r/MensRights24/06/24 10:14 PM
0

Participate can be inclusive of "drive," because no one gender "drives" culture. Again, you don't seem to be living in reality. Food, as an obvious example, is a major element of just about every culture that has long been shaped by women traditionally confined to domestic work. The same with fiber arts. The same, indeed, with literary forms like the novel.
/r/MensRights24/06/24 09:17 PM
-3

Yeah, maybe you should try one of my other suggestions. And look, if you think woman don't participate in creativity and art.... There is really nothing to say to you. You aren't living in reality.
/r/MensRights24/06/24 08:30 PM
-8

Haha. Fucking nonsense. This sounds like it is coming from a 12-year-old boy, but the sad part is that I know you are much older than that. But fuck man. Go for a walk; enjoy a good meal; play a game (on your own or with friends); take up a hobby; do some overtime work; improve your craft; hug your kids, or your siblings, or any family members around; make plans; ditch plans; try a new food; get a tan; read a fun book; write a poem; learn a new language; or any of a million other activities you …
/r/MensRights24/06/24 07:21 PM
0

Proof?
/r/MensRights20/06/24 12:09 PM
1

I reference outcomes as proof for a very well-documented and attested to phenomenon--misogyny in business/tech/politics--and you latch onto this unthinkingly and accuse me of citing ONLY outcomes. My point is that no one here has a better or more substantiated theory to explain these outcomes. Actually, the literature on the pay gap goes deep into all of these "factors" you claim are ignored. It's not my fault that your understanding of the issue is based on shallow tweets.
/r/MensRights20/06/24 11:28 AM
0

I"m assuming you don't mind being called an asshole, right? You're either guilty or you'll accept the charge, right? See, this is what you don't seem to understand. The "if you're not guilty you wouldn't object ot the accusation" thing doesn't apply because you personally are not being accused of something. As I said, you are taking things personally that are not. Now, that is notably very different from you directly calling me an "asshole," which is a clear personal attack. You see the differen…
/r/MensRights20/06/24 11:25 AM
0

If your "wired differently" argument were true, then we would see disparate outcomes for companies and countries with women leaders. Do you have evidence for this?
/r/MensRights20/06/24 11:16 AM
0

You are right. I am unwilling to consider an alternate reality that has little resemblance to the one we live in. I guess you got me there.
/r/MensRights20/06/24 12:35 AM
-1

My point is that people on this sub love to act like they are rational and have evidence-based beliefs, but when a question like this comes up, they flat-out ignore decades of well-docunented proof of rampant misogyny in business, tech, STEM, etc., and instead they throw up their hands and claim either that there is no clear answer or that there is some bullshit biological reason. This question is only puzzling to you if you have already decided due to your own biases that misogyny is not an iss…
/r/MensRights20/06/24 12:21 AM
-7

Men made it.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 11:56 PM
-6

System encourages and men are in general pushed for this direction. Who made the system?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 11:23 PM
-4

So it sounds like the poster can answer for himself, so what are you doing?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 11:22 PM
-2

If women are capable of being CEOs, they are also capable of creating and growing businesses. The question is, why aren’t they? You tell me.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:17 PM
1

I would say fewer women probably think they need money and power to get respect and a mate. But I'd be willing to venture that most people running for office are already married, and probably so are most CEOs.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:14 PM
-1

CEOs? Why would women suddenly need to be CEOs of companies created and built by men in the modern age? So you are saying that men should inherit what was built by previous men because they are men? That sounds an awful lot like the literal definition of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:07 PM
-2

So then why do you think fewer women run for office or become CEOs?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:06 PM
-21

I asked why he said "naturally." You are not helping.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:02 PM
-1

As am I. Somehow I don't feel shamed at all. Maybe it is because I know I'm not an asshole.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:01 PM
-7

Not the apex fallacy at all. It's not a fallacy to point at the vast majority of powerful figures in politics, the economy, etc., because that is obviously the product of a patriarchical system that has traditionally excluded women. Seriously, how can you claim that its a fallacy to point out that there has never been a woman president and a vast majority of CEOs are men? The apex fallacy is about overgeneralizing based on the those at the top and most visible, but when you are talking about pol…
/r/MensRights19/06/24 10:00 PM
-24

Why did you say "naturally"? Why would this be a natural choice for men?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:34 PM
1

They also promote "father's day gifts" around father's day and "gifts for him" all the time, so you can say that stores that cater to men also get free advertising. I just looked on the homepage, and I did not see it singling out women and black creators.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:31 PM
0

I will say though that I'm describing a "a societal system that benefits men in power". What you describe is an oligarchy, which we have now. Oligarchy and patriarchy are not mutually exclusive. You can have an oligarchy that is patriarchical, and you can have one that is not.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:26 PM
-13

painting us as the bad guys. Only if you decide you want to be a bad guy.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:24 PM
-14

That's why there are so many women presidents and CEOs, right?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:23 PM
-16

How so?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:22 PM
-26

That's not the same at all. Also, are you suggesting that all black-owned and women-owned businesses get free advertising?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:18 PM
-4

Why else would you feel shamed?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 09:15 PM
-32

I would first question if we live in a "Patriarchy" and in short I would disagree. Our system benefits the rich, and naturally men socially are encouraged to work the ladder more then women both positively and negatively. Why do you say "naturally" here?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 07:50 PM
-16

Because you need to get the male-shaming language in somewhere. Why do you feel shamed by the term patriarchy? That doesn't make sense at all. I'm a man, and I don't see any reason why I would take it personally.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 07:48 PM
0

How many times are you planning on having sex in your life? That's how many kids you need to plan on having.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 07:33 PM
-24

How is this like that?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 07:04 PM
-2

So, no one should ever have sex unless they are willing to be pregnant? A fetus doesn't have personhood or bodily autonomy. Simple as that. A woman being forced to carry a fetus and undergoing a potentially traumatic and even dangerous medical procedure is not the same thing as a man being forced to pay child support. They are just not the same fucking thing, any way you slice it.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 04:01 PM
-6

You are just talking nonsense.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 03:41 PM
0

Well, either is pretty crummy to do without discussing it with your partner, but I don't see anyone threatening to take away the legal right to a vasectomy.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 03:37 PM
-2

Can you elaborate on things that have been "proven wrong"?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 12:11 PM
-2

That's not the main argument. The main argument is basic bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights19/06/24 12:06 PM
1

What study shows that 30% of rape allegations are proven false? Where are you getting the 1-2% of rapes proven true? And comparing rape to child molestation in terms of difficulty to prove is obvious nonsense. ANY sexual activity with a child is illegal, and you only need prove that any occured. On the other hand, sex between adults is legal, and the difference is that it is very difficult to prove non-consent. This point is so fucking obvious that it proves how shitty your reasoning is in gener…
/r/MensRights19/06/24 12:05 PM
-3

Did that sound clever to you?
/r/MensRights19/06/24 12:35 AM
-22

I don't think you have any fucking idea what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 09:57 PM
-49

I'm not making any exceptions. My point is that it is absurd to take pretend you folks are taking the rational high ground. When people on this sub talk about things like women's safety, they are constantly accusing women of being irrational and overly emotional. Ironically, that criticism usually comes from a place of the poster having his feelings hurt by a women who didn't want to talk to him or wanted to stay away.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 09:56 PM
-16

You are talking about castration, which is entirely different from circumcision. If you are so concerned about castratos, why don't you go protest medieval Venice?
/r/MensRights18/06/24 09:54 PM
-28

Female circumcision and male circumcision are completely different operations.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 09:00 PM
-11

It's not whataboutism. It's blind hypocrisy. Yeah man, two wrongs don't make a right, but you are the one participating in one of those wrongs.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 08:52 PM
-78

No one lashes out this stupidly without being absolutely dominated by bitter feelings.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 08:51 PM
-128

Their entire job is to spread propaganda and man hating. And what do you think your job is? Because that seems like some bullshit propaganda and woman hating.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 07:40 PM
-42

So I was looking on the feminism subreddit, and half of the posts are just them complaining about men and spreading misinformation, but when I try to debunk it in the comment section very politely, in fact, I get downvoted and delete my comments because why do I even try anymore? It’s like some of them hate us for existing… Sounds pretty similar to what happens to anyone who violates the woman-hating groupthink on this sub. Have you noticed how many bullshit generalizations circulate on this sub…
/r/MensRights18/06/24 07:39 PM
-6

Yeah, I'm not getting your point here. If you can't go into a specific area for fear of being gang raped, that's a rape problem.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 05:56 PM
-7

Men's right to do what in this case?
/r/MensRights18/06/24 05:41 PM
-6

Where did they say that every single Indian man is a rapist? I'd say that any place where someone tells you that you can't go in a specific place because you'll be gang raped has a rape problem.
/r/MensRights18/06/24 05:40 PM
-1

Where do you have data to support this?
/r/MensRights18/06/24 11:33 AM
-8

Guy, why are you asking the goons on this sub? Go get some professional help. Some marriage counseling, or maybe a lawyer.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 09:55 PM
-3

I don't think you read my post at all.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 09:36 PM
-8

Or, you could just mind your own fucking business. If someone on the sidewalk wants to avoid me, why should I care?
/r/MensRights17/06/24 04:14 PM
-3

It's funny that you are holding up logic and reason while spouting massive overgeneralizations.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 04:11 PM
-3

But actual assault is only one thing women are worried about. They also don't want to be harrassed, followed home, etc. These are not really problems that men need to deal with.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 04:09 PM
-10

This is fucked up man. You deliberately scare women and make them uncomfortable?
/r/MensRights17/06/24 01:40 PM
-51

And yet it rings hollow.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 08:33 PM
-74

Men who call other men pussys are straight-up assholes. You can't pretend to care about men's rights and call another man that.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 06:33 PM
1

I am kiddo
/r/MensRights16/06/24 03:45 PM
-8

He put a mentally ill man in a chokehold for several minutes until he died as a response to verbal abuse. He's a fucking murderer. Kiddo, I love and work in a major city. If I murdered every mentally ill person I met on the subway who was being verbally abusive I'd have quite a body count by now.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 02:53 PM
2

Childish, as expected.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 02:46 PM
-10

He killed a guy.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 02:43 PM
-9

Are you talking about TikTok, or the dudes on this sub?
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:50 PM
0

So apparently her MeToo involvement wasn’t what was considered subversion Yes, the dictatorship told you this, so it must be true. If she weren't an evil subversive, why would an oppressive government want to throw her in jail?
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:12 PM
3

You are surprised that people still advocate for their rights in an oppressive system?
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:09 PM
2

Pathetic bootlicker.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:08 PM
-1

The admiration for oppressive autocratic governments on this sub is just fucking pathetic.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:07 PM
-1

Jesus fucking Christ...
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:06 PM
1

Clearly a trained killer. Nobody better mess with you! You tell people on the internet that you have a gun and that you're willing to kill someone! What a hero!
/r/MensRights16/06/24 01:04 PM
-10

I'm sure you're a big hero. Anyone who says on the internet that they are willing to kill someone must be a really strong and tough dude.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 12:31 PM
-13

Yes, I am certainly free to not murder anyone.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 12:21 PM
-4

You think circumcision is destroying men?
/r/MensRights16/06/24 11:15 AM
-39

Daniel Penny? The guy who murdered a homeless man? I think it's pretty easy to not reproduce that mistake. Just don't kill someone with your bare hands.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 11:11 AM
-1

1: Yeah, you don't have to explain statistics to me, because the issue is sample size and what is excluded from the study, which is not aimed at or helpful for interrogating the cultural impacts and material outcomes of patriarchy. 2: Rulers do not change entire structures of society and cultures overnight, and comparatively few have the power to autocratically bestow rights. Queen Victoria of England never actually had the power to grant women the vote. Before that, do you honestly think Queen …
/r/MensRights15/06/24 10:41 PM
1

No cherrypicking. No ignoring anything. I asked you two straightforward questions. Answer truthfully. Also, the Daily Mail never names the study or the researchers, but the quote they take form it is FROM THE SAME STUDY by Dube and Harish as all of the five other links you have provided.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 10:12 PM
1

You can't compare total number of wars by men and women as there were way more kings than queens, And why do you think that is? If women did not have rights under a female ruler then it's the fault of another women and not men. Wow. You really don't understand politics do you? I guess I couldn't hope for a more clear and direct indication that your understanding of the interaction of politics and society here is incredibly, horribly oversimplified. You are positing that every one of these rulers…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 10:11 PM
0

I asked you two straightforward questions. Answer truthfully. Also, holy shit man. Those are two more articles pointing to that same single study. They are not additional studies. Do you read any of these links?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 09:55 PM
-1

How many wars have been started by male leaders versus female leaders? I mean total. Because you can take a look at that same study you linked four times. As they say: "Our primary sample covers 193 reigns in 18 polities, with queens ruling in 18% of these reigns." The reason why they include only 18 polities is that they are only considering states that have had at least one female leader. In other words, this is entirely insufficient as a study of patriarchy because it excludes the more patria…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 09:36 PM
-4

The idea of two dozen female rulers over a 450 year period starting a few more wars than their male counterparts does not disprove the idea of patriarchy at all. I was just curious about it as a historical question. Which sex dominated the vast majority of power structures until very recently in history? Which sex afforded very specific rights to its own sex while not affording them to the other? Please, answer truthfully. World War I and World War II were the most destructive wars in history, w…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 08:56 PM
0

If it's reality, then it should be easy to prove, right?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 06:20 PM
-8

Yes, if every woman voted for the same candidate regardless of any other beliefs and policies, then that would be true, but that is a pretty impossible scenario
/r/MensRights15/06/24 06:18 PM
-2

Actually, that is factually incorrect. Women still serve in the armed forces of both countries. Nothing I said was a no true Scotsman fallacy; I wasn't saying that this or that person was 't a feminist. Please read more carefully.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 06:07 PM
-2

What you are describing is VERY different from the claim that governments take their cues from women.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 06:05 PM
-4

To be perfectly honest, I don't give a shit about Norway and Finland. I don't see how either of these involve women being militaristic.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 06:03 PM
-6

I don't know where you are getting this idea. The Republican Party in the US has for decades relied on white men as it's core voting block.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:58 PM
0

As I said, they are different kinds of things. They can coexist. You can have a government structure that is oligarchical, and a culture that is patriarchal. You can also have one without the other.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:52 PM
1

So, not proof. I should just take your word for it.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:50 PM
-1

"The Apex fallacy that many feminists including you fall for is: You look at the top 1% of society (World Leaders, CEO's Million / Billionaires etc) and see those positions "Dominated" by men and therefore assume that ALL men are at that level." Nope. That has never been my claim. Your position is fundamentally absurd, so I know it's inevitable that you create a straw man to soothe yourself. You don't understand the concepts here at all But then again, if you were well informed and had any criti…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:49 PM
-2

That is some wild bullshit
/r/MensRights15/06/24 03:47 PM
0

You understand that oligarchy and patriarchy don't describe the same things, right? A government can be both.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 03:46 PM
-2

This is certainly very interesting. Did you read the article? It points out that the reason for this is likely due to the division of labor inherent in a "dual ruler" situation, since prince consorts are traditionally given a much greater role in governance than women in the same position. Additionally, we are talking about 28 reigns over almost 450 years, which is a rather small sample. We should also note that rulers like Queen Victoria of England would likely account for a disproporionate num…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:48 PM
-17

You used Emmeline Pankhurst, a feminist activist in the UK a century ago, to typify feminism. This is obviously nonsense. Were there and are there feminists who are also militant? Sure. People can believe a wide range of things. I am asking you specifically to explain the meaning of your original example: what are you claiming is the link between militarism and feminism?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:34 PM
-1

Can you give me a source for this information?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:30 PM
-2

Yes, I know what the apex fallacy is. Whent he previous poster uses Emmeline Pankhurst to typify feminism, that's textbook apex fallacy, so maybe you should point that out to them. Pointing directly to a broad historical fact (not one person or the top of the hierarchy, but across all levels of government) taht government have been male dominated is very much not the apex fallacy. You'd expect that if a government is made up of a majority of men, then men's rights / issues should be at the foref…
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:26 PM
-21

Evade evade evade. Are you denying that militarism is a masculine/patriarchal value? Again, answer honestly without evasion. And please, be specific about this militarist feminism that you seem to think typifies modern feminism. By this, I mean prove that there are activists who see militarism as a feminist value.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:08 PM
-4

Let's see your data concerning queens being more likely to start expansionist wars. You are making a broad historical claim, so you should support it. And, to state the obvious, governments are usually made up of more than one person. Power structures have historically been dominated by men (so, patriarchy). And what the fuck do false rape accusations or paternity have to do with anything?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 01:03 PM
-5

Men run the system. You don't think that's privilege? You don't think that's patriarchy?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 12:59 PM
–

Maybe the feminists can get bears to fight their wars for them. Are feminists starting wars?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 11:44 AM
–

Wars usually don't end until it's women and children doing the dieing. Sure, but who starts the war?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 11:42 AM
-7

the government sees men as Expendables It's pretty odd that you just mention "the government," as if almost all major governments haven't been overwhelmingly packed with men for most of recorded history.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 11:42 AM
-21

Governments take all cues from women. Huh?
/r/MensRights15/06/24 11:39 AM
-26

Are you aware of the genetic fallacy? That's what you are doing here. Do you think most feminists today are militarist, or anti-war? Answer honestly.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 11:39 AM
1

Eh. Your worldview is warped, and your argument relies on false equivalencies and your "insight" into my subconscious motives. So, in short, it's bullshit. Great job Clearly you are doing important work in raising awareness of men's issues.
/r/MensRights14/06/24 08:14 PM
1

I want you to imagine something, okay? Imagine that the question posed was slightly different: "Would you rather be stuck in the woods with a bear, or a black man?" First of all, the obvious point is that the category of "men" includes black men. Singling out "black man" rather than, say, a white man or an asian man, is rightfully understood as racist, because it is suggesting that there is some fundamental difference between racial categories that makes one race more violent than another. Race,…
/r/MensRights14/06/24 03:10 PM
-1

Look, there is nothing I can do to argue against such blatant overgeneralizations. What's more, your logic is circular. Someone is identified as a feminist when they speak loudly about issues concerning women and girls. Then you use the fact that they are focusing on women and girls to claim that they don't care about men. Do you see how this is silly? As I said, every feminist I know personally is anti-war. Many of them actively demosntrate. As as you say, these conflicts kill thousands of men …
/r/MensRights14/06/24 11:50 AM
-1

I read your post. You are talking about #BringBackOurGirls? A short-lived social media thing from ten years ago? Now, I am all for arguing that the mainstream media needs to report more on ongoing brutal conflicts in the world, and I understand the critique of the shallowness of social media campaigns like this, but laying this at the feet of feminists is a huge stretch. I see your "#BringBackOurGirls" and I raise you a Trayvon Martin. Two years before the Nigeria incident, the death of a young …
/r/MensRights14/06/24 09:35 AM
-1

Woah man. Sorry, you lost me on the comparison of female and male circumcision. They are completely different operations with vastly different impacts. They are not really comparable. For everything else, how much of this happened in Reddit subs and online?
/r/MensRights14/06/24 01:07 AM
-6

The evidence for feminism's utter, pervasive, and systemic callousness to men is your behavior right here. It does not even occur to you that you might want to look at what happened to men before you declare that what happened to women was worse and was unidirectionally inflicted by men. Women engaging in gender policing also resisted having power and agency because those things came with responsibility and danger. I suppose this is what I don't get. "What happened to men"? I am a man, and I don…
/r/MensRights14/06/24 12:43 AM
2

You say this, but you just have to read the responses on this thread to see people belittling women's concerns and dismissing sexual assault.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:59 PM
1

This sounds like some nasty shit, but why do you think this is representative of feminism generally? It just sounds like people being shitty. No feminist I know would ever say anything like this.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:56 PM
-1

Instead of aborting babies, give them to their Fathers. I mean, you are missing the part where a woman needs to carry the baby for many months and then go through a potentially traumatic and even dangerous medical procedure. I sympathize with the idea that the father might want the baby, but I can't get behind the idea that the woman would be forced to give birth. My own wife almost died in childbirth, so that it not something I take lightly.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:52 PM
1

You are complaining about woke sci fi. Application for a high horse rejected.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:48 PM
-6

Well, I'd say the issue with that is that women and men can get financially trapped in unhappy and even abusive relationships because they don't have the money to support themselves. People shouldn't be forced to stay in a bad marriage, period.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:47 PM
-2

Is there a particular incident that you can recall that turned you against feminism?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:43 PM
-13

Feminism believes that sexism is a thing made by men and inflicted upon women, in order to harm and endanger women, out of hatred for women. First of all, in the statement above, leaving out the "hatred for women" thing (which is just inflammatory language on your part), the exclusion and disenfranchisement of women by men in power is just plain part of the historical record, so I don't see what you take issue with here. Second, I think we need to address the fact that a person comes in here in …
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:38 PM
-29

What the fuck are you talking about?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 07:00 PM
-2

It is if it's a fucking nonsense fake version of what "someone else" thinks. Yes, that's a strawman. See if you can keep up.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 06:59 PM
0

The purpose of getting rid of statues and philosophers is to get rid of any sense of shared culture that binds people together. Who is fucking getting rid of philosophers? For Christ's sake. You think Plato and Aristotle bound you together with others? How much Artistotle have you read lately? And your whole thing is gatekeeping sci fi? You pretend your mad about Plato, but you're really just bitter about women and black people in modern sci fi?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 06:57 PM
-1

Moves against us? Jesus Christ. Are you fucking Aristotle or Plato? Yeah man, you don't have power over the suggested readings offered by faculty of SOAS University of London. Maybe you don't get to control everything and every one.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 06:50 PM
-51

Why wouldn't it? What are you suggesting?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 05:24 PM
-30

Is men's rights just about consuming endless ragebait? Should I be enraged by a "toolkit" put together by students and academics at the "SOAS University of London, formerly the School of Oriental and African Studies"?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 05:24 PM
-17

The same women who work and go to school with dozens of men in a room Holy fucking God do you still not get the point of meeting an unknown man far from anyone else who could help you? That's not the same at all. I've encountered plenty of bears at the zoo, and none of them have ever hurt me. Does that mean bears are totally safe?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 03:32 PM
-11

Well, they were identifying something as internalized misogyny, which is something a woman can have, sure. It's not called "toxic femininity" just because it's a woman. That's not how those concepts work.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 12:26 PM
-21

You are referencing a theoretical conversation as your "proof." The obvious difference is that being a man wasn't seen as disqualifying.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 12:25 PM
-16

Anyone who has been in school, at least in the US, knows about property requirements, etc. But again, no one was excluded for being a man, which is fundamentally different from the issue of women's suffrage.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 12:22 PM
-29

I don't understand. Who is overlooking this? What is the point? Obviously, it was not their male-ness that disqualified them.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:55 AM
-17

It's not gone unnoticed that gender roles for women are labelled misogyny, not toxic femininity. Well, the idea is that men, particularly when they held just about all the power in society, defined those roles and boxed women into them. This doesn't sound inaccurate. But people do talk about "toxic femininity," as well as toxicity in a number of women-centered subgroups (toxic mommy culture, for example). I really don't think that this is so imbalanced as you suggest.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:51 AM
-8

the braindead position that men are subhuman Nice strawman kid
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:21 AM
-35

The man vs bear nonsense demonstrates that many women are irrational, illogical and make decisions based on emotions rather than facts. And yet, it's partly the fact that they are not taken seriously when talking about their safety that contributes to them not feeling safe with men, so you are jsut proving their point. You have to at least have the intelligence to see this, right?
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:19 AM
0

I mean you should understand that they use this slang to trigger men and if you explain to them this is wrong you are just giving them attention . And this is how women are winning. Fuck dude. Is it possible that maybe women are just talking about how they feel unsafe, and it's not about "winning" or "triggering" men? Not everything is a zero-sum contest.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:16 AM
-9

I guarantee I will get the police called. Look, there will always be some fringe incident, but honestly, if someone is calling the cops on you for talking to them, you are probably doing something wrong or weird. You may feel like this is a big risk, but in reality it is not. This sounds like acute social anxiety rather than a commentary on "society."
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:08 AM
-15

Yet what is society’s reaction? To indulge themeselves in an outcry of course and bitch and moan about how men today aren’t “MasCuLinE” enough or how men today aren’t “SaCrifiCing” or “proViDing” to their families enough or how most men are supposedly entitled and lazy ... You’re constantly stripping them out of their quotas, you’re constantly telling them masculinity is toxic, You complain about toxic masculinity, and then complain that people say masculinity is toxic....
/r/MensRights13/06/24 11:03 AM
0

It's an extreme example that is not comparable to this situation
/r/MensRights12/06/24 09:32 PM
1

sub about men's rights? I'm saying that there is almost no discussion of actual men's rights here, and a awful lot of rampant misogyny.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 09:19 PM
1

What others as myself would suggest for these women is therapy or someone to discuss this with. I would say the same about the men who unironically post on this sub.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 09:10 PM
-1

And yet women across social media are doing just that. Sure, there are people on social media doing all kinds of things. Why don't you go argue with those specific people? What I was saying was pretty clear.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 07:43 PM
1

No. If you had actually followed the conversation, you could see my point was that saying "avoid strangers" is not the same thing as saying "all people are bad," no more than "avoid unknown men in the wilderness" is the same as saying "all men are bad." It's a straightforward and clear point. Sorry it escaped you. Maybe you should actually try to catch up instead of just attacking.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 07:33 PM
1

More unsafe how, genius? Your arrogance here is kind of funny, because you don't seem to know what this conversation is about at all. I am not making a factual or statistical claim about one being safer than another. I never claimed to be doing that. The point is listening to people who say they are unsafe. Call me names all you want. The simple fact is that one of the things that make women feel unsafe is that men don't actually listen and try to understand when women talk about their safety, p…
/r/MensRights12/06/24 07:31 PM
-2

You can't "disprove" someone's feelings. You can call it irrational if you like, or unsupported by statistics, but that isn't "disproving" it. The scenario isn't about making a factual claim.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 07:24 PM
-2

You don't seem to know what lying is.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 07:21 PM
1

I'm a little confused about who a "random man I know" refers to. Just anyone from the pool of people I have met before? Well, I suppose I would choose that category, if these were the only three choices.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 06:39 PM
1

Do you think I am? You are making quite a leap there.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 06:38 PM
0

I think you are confused. The scenario is about encountering an unknown man. That's what it is. It has nothing to do with trusting the people that you know.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 05:03 PM
-2

No one here is saying "kill all men."
/r/MensRights12/06/24 05:01 PM
-3

You think the choice is to either coddle women or call them stupid? That's a doozy of a false dichotomy there.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 04:59 PM
-2

I asked you to clarify. It's not my fault that your position is inherently weak.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 03:06 PM
-1

Notice how you have to mistake the situation in order to make your comparison work? It’s not whether a woman “feels” unsafe around strangers men, but whether she is more unsafe around strangers men than a bear. These are not fundamentally different things champ. She feels more unsafe encountering an unknown man than a bear. That's what the scenario is. Statistically, women interact with hundreds of men daily, safely, their homes, cars, the streets and buildings and machines they use, the police …
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:57 PM
1

Disingenuous; people are a threat, and always have and will. So you are saying that all people are bad then? And further, you are arguing that, for a woman, a lone, unknown woman is an equal threat when compared to a lone, unknown man? This is your argument?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:53 PM
1

Do you think the average man can physically overpower a bullet? We live in an era where sheer physical force does not decide conflicts the way you imagine. Honestly, what the fuck do bullets have to do with anything? And really, you are just proving my point, because if you are suggesting that women carry guns to feel safer around men, you are conceding that men are a threat. But for Christ's sake, it has nothing to do with fucking guns.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:41 PM
-1

I tell my kids to avoid strangers. Is that saying that "all people" are dangerous? Obviously not. So, a woman feels unsafe around unknown men and your response is to tell them they are wrong?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:39 PM
-3

A person's feelings do not need to be acknowledged of they are expressly counterfactual. First, why not? They are still feelings. Second, how is this "proven wrong"? What is "counterfactual" about your "proof" here? Even if you want to quantify this, we are still talking about probabilities. Even if, statistically, a woman would be more likely to be hurt by an individual bear (obviously it matters what kind of bear here, since it would be extremely unlikely you would be attacked by a lone black …
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:24 PM
-1

No, they are not. You are comparing the capabilites of grown women, to children. I have more respect for women than to infantilize them so hard You are being willfully obtuse here. Do you not think that the average man could physically overpower the average woman? You seem to have trouble with reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. Very sad for you.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:18 PM
-1

You said 'children', and 'strangers'. Not 'adult women' and 'adult men'. I know fully what I posted. Are you saying that these are not analogous situations? The reason you tell a child not to approach an unknown stranger is that you know they are nearly powerless if that stranger turns out to be a bad person, not because you think all people are bad. Your average woman can absolutely be physically overpowered by your average man. I am not suggesting that women are like children; I am suggesting …
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:46 PM
-22

When I tell my children to avoid strangers, am I telling them that all people are bad?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:36 PM
1

Ooh, good comeback champ.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:23 PM
-29

Those who say "all men" are bad, aren't thinking about ethicities, they are thinking about gender. You are the one being thick. The scenario isn't positing that "all men" are bad. I tell my children to avoid strangers--that isn't me saying all people are bad.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:21 PM
1

If missing the point were a sport, you could go to the fucking Olympics man.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:08 PM
-6

over me (I am a monster, just a friendly one when you get to know me) But it's not you. It's a random unknown person. I don't know how you are not getting this. I tell my kids all the time to avoid strangers. Do you take that personally?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:07 PM
–

if you read LGBT forums it's pretty patentlly obvious behind the facade of "we're victimized" that they're just people who failed in the hetero arena and want revenge A gay person is a "failed hetero"? Jesus, what the fuck are you talking about? How fucking stupid can you be?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:01 PM
1

My tip is to get off this sub. The vast majority of posters here are misogynistic assholes who just want you to be as bitter and hateful towards women as they are. If you are serious about your mental health, seek real help, not the losers on this sub.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 01:00 PM
1

Buddy, you couldn't have offered better proof of why a woman wouldn't want to randomly meet you alone in the woods.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:54 PM
-2

Because most women are in fact, useless in the woods. Holy shit that's not what the scenario is about.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:46 PM
2

You could try pointing out how men, on an annualized basis, experience rape and sexual assault at rates similar to women and watch her brain break; probably wont resolve the conflict though. I don't think it would "break her brain," because the point is about when she feels and does not feel safe. I don't think more men being raped makes her feel safer encountering a random unknown man. You get that, right? It's not about who is worse.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:45 PM
-17

A) She doesn’t see me as a real man, so there’s nothing to be scared of. Men are monsters. B) She sees me as a monster but one of the friendly ones. Any other woman would be right to fear me and choose a bear. Men are monsters and so am I. Did this female say that she didn't want to meet you alone in the woods, or that she didn't want to meet a random, unknown man? If it's the latter, then why are you taking this so personally?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:39 PM
1

Never take at face value anything a woman says, the Bear vs. Man thing actually showed that clearly. The irony here is that you demonstrate pretty clearly the kind of man a woman doesn't want to meet alone out in the wilderness.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:38 PM
-19

Har har. Yeah, women being killed is funny. Gee, I don't know why men's rights gets such a bad reputation...
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:37 PM
2

No. The dumb question didn’t “raid a sacred relationship”. It exposed your cousin as a dummy. Do you honestly think you are doing anything helpful for OP by calling their cousin a "dummy"?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:36 PM
-2

Get ready for your downvotes.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:35 PM
-4

because most women would be useless in the woods. Just dead weight. Huh? You realize that the scenario is not about teamwork. It's about a random encounter with a stranger. How could you get this simple scenario so wrong?
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:35 PM
-45

Men includes Arab men. Your point doesn't make sense unless you think that Arabs are as different from, say French people, as men are from women.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 12:16 PM
0

Brother, I never dated in high school. I first kissed a girl in college. I was short, nerdy and unathletic. But, I was smart and had a sense of humor. I had a few girlfriends in college, and then shortly after graduating I met my wife, and we've been happily married for 13 years. Let me be frank: I thank God that, when I was in your position, there were no spaces like this garbage dump of a sub. The circle-jerk of bitterness and misogyny, the trafficking in egregious stereotypes, the unhealthy f…
/r/MensRights11/06/24 11:46 AM
-1

I don't think you understand what irony is.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 05:30 PM
-18

And yet, I don't think it has impacted you at all. It's not like they can't draft you if you don't sign up-#it just makes them easier to find you. I don't think you have "signed your life away."
/r/MensRights10/06/24 03:33 PM
-16

You signed your life away?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 03:23 PM
11

Yes, all that malevolent anti-war propaganda. If they had there way, few men would lose their freedoms and die needlessly. Horrors!
/r/MensRights10/06/24 03:21 PM
-1

Oh God...
/r/MensRights10/06/24 02:38 PM
-5

I don't know about the Italy example? but it's weird that your are framing the New York thing as women protesting men. This just seems like NIMBYism. Can you give me a link for the Italy thing?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 02:19 PM
-3

No wonder you recommended a book 50 years old. Seems like you need to update your sources.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 12:37 PM
-6

How old are you? Do you have children? What is your expertise in psychology and/or education?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 12:26 PM
-2

Har har
/r/MensRights10/06/24 12:16 PM
-1

You literally just dismissed men's mental health as a problem.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 11:32 AM
-6

So, you are saying that men's mental health is not an issue? Did you read the article? "No known mental health problems." It's the lack of awareness that is the problem. How many of these men do you think had undiagnosed problems?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 11:22 AM
-9

Challenge: try to support men's mental health and lift up other men without attacking women. Impossible?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 11:04 AM
-9

Yeah, men's mental health is not supported enough, but look at this fucking sub. Every time someone brings up something about men's mental health, it becomes a frenzy of blaming women. It's hard to take seriously people who claim to want to support men by posting on this sub drenched in bitter hatred.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 11:03 AM
3

I don't think the quality of men decreases due to being told that they are bad, but due to the lack of potential attractive women. This is one of the weirdest ways I have seen to blame women for men's issues. What do you think the source of this problem is?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 11:01 AM
1

And cool tips for trafficking women.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:59 AM
-5

Women need to stay in their lanes. And what is there lane exactly?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:59 AM
-5

The very concepts of 'adversity', 'challenge', and even 'knowledge' must seem alien to the many women who will milk life advantages through the possession of even moderate sexual attractiveness. Explain to me how being shitty to women lifts men up.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:58 AM
-7

Hahaha. This is hilarious. "Women are the problem because they didn't like when I was punching my cousin." For Christ's sake, can we acknowledge that being a man is more than just physical aggression?
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:58 AM
-5

The endorsement & encouragement of 'single motherhood', where 'strong & independent' mothers are supported by welfare will eventually destroy such a society. What percentage of single mothers are single mothers by choice? I don't think that there is an upsurge of people "choosing" to be single mothers because they are encouraged to be by society. If a woman becomes a single mother because the dad abandons the child or if they need to leave an abusive domestic situation, then they certainly deser…
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:55 AM
-8

I’ve said this a lot in this subreddit but feminists are the biggest polarizers of men. Here is a challenge: how about we build up and support men without putting down or attacking other groups. This is why the mainstream doesn't take men's rights seriously. Many people here come off as bitter women-haters who spend a lot more time justifying using the word "female" in creepy ways than supporting other men.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:50 AM
-7

Around me it is more an event for cis women and the trans community and others are not really welcome anymore. Honestly, I don't know what you are talking about. I am a cis man and I have always been welcomed in pride spaces.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 10:47 AM
0

You are missing the point.
/r/MensRights10/06/24 08:51 AM
1

A dodge? I addressed every part of your post. Are you having difficulty reading? You asked: Is it logical to expect accountability from a group that is not held accountable? And I went step-by-step through your post to contest the premise of the question--that the "group is not held accountable." I'm not sure how you could have missed this.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 07:24 PM
1

Haha. Again, you have nothing other than to say "nuh uh" and then the appeal to motives. I'm not even sure why you keep posting, since you have nothing to say and no thought to offer.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 07:21 PM
1

Yeah, you've just fallen into empty contrarianism and dismissing everything I say without actually thinking or engaging. You seem incapable of having a substantive discussion about this. Instead, you fall back on what imagine my motives and feelings to be. "Whataboutism" is not a leftist talking point smart guy; it's a logical fallacy, as is the Appeal to Motive. Ultimately, you have no actual thought here, just fallacies poorly stitched together. Very sad for you. I hope someday you'll try to p…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 07:00 PM
-2

Yeah, I think that sentencing should be equitable. Just like I think sentencing should be equitable between white defendants and black defendants. Do you think that the currently existing racial disparities in sentencing mean that white people hate accountability? Reproductive responsibility? A woman absolutely must take reproductive responsibility, either for a birth that might be dangerous and traumatic, or for undergoing an abortion, which can be an emotionally taxing process. No, I don't thi…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 06:55 PM
1

Let me answer that with, Men's Rights doesn't have any rulings. Nor does feminism, at least that I'm aware of. So, whataboutism? Got it. But that's not the question. I didn't ask what the rules are. I asked what denigrating women has to do with men's rights. What is the relationship there. Try, really hard, to answer my question, if you can. This is a men's rights sub, right? So maybe you shouldn't hide from questions about men's rights. You're simply just offended that women were involved here,…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 06:28 PM
1

Tell me why men's rights means we should denigrate women. I think this is the third time I am asking you this. I am not the one avoiding a genuine conversation.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 06:04 PM
-1

You don't think that there is a difference between saying "women are, on average, physically weaker than men" and saying "women hate accountability and are only interested in taking money from men"? Over sensitive? Hahaha. Jesus Christ. For a sub on Men's Rights, you bros are sure ready to turn on a man at a moment's notice for not hating women. Again, tell me how advocating for men's rights must necessarily mean denigrating women.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:49 PM
3

Yeah, I figured.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:37 PM
-6

Why are you saying I'm an ignoramus? "Less positive"? They said something straight up hateful. Pandering? Are you kidding to me? Is that really what you think I am doing? First of all, I sincerely doubt that there are many if any women reading this sub, so pandering doesn't make sense. Second, calling out hate is not pandering. If I call out racism, am I pandering to black people? If I call out misandry, am I pandering to men? Third, the sub is called "Men's Rights." Explain how this means we sh…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:37 PM
-1

What a dark and bitter outlook. Maybe sign off once in a while, if that's what you think is happening.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:32 PM
3

Have you considered the possibility that it's not there ignorance, but rather your overgeneralizing?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:23 PM
-4

Yes, I am sure that your research skills are top notch.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:11 PM
-5

You know all of them?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:08 PM
-5

We're all acting all the time. The difference is that I'm not acting like a misogynist asshole.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 05:08 PM
-32

I mean, is self-acceptance bad?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:34 PM
1

Society complains that young men look up to Andrew Tate, David Goggins and Myron from Fresh n Fit, yet society simultaneously coerces boys and young men that they always need to be better, harder and badder than yesterday, so which is it then, because you can't have both? I don't know all these people, but people justly criticize Andrew Tate for being a rampant misogynist. I don't think anyone attacks the concept of self-improvement for men--the point is that this shouldn't come at the cost of d…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:33 PM
-22

Because accountability is kryptonite for females Come on man. You're doing a bit, right? This is just too on the nose.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:29 PM
-2

I have also been ridiculed for worse things as a man but I knew masculinity had nothing to do with it. It's always the people/humans or this cruel society, who are toxic. I described to you a situation in which people are criticized for not being "man enough." How could you logically say that masculinity had nothing to do with it? We are literally talking about men policing each other's masculinity. As OP says, "This doesn't mean we should force it on men or ridicule them for defying masculine t…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:27 PM
0

To bring us full circle, I believe dropping such terms as toxic masculinity will help in that regard, as policing men’s behaviour in unhelpful and degrading ways does not help women or men This is the thing that makes no sense to me. It's the policing of others' masculinity--that they are man enough and not a p*ssy--that is toxic. When OP says "This doesn't mean we should force it on men or ridicule them for defying masculine traits" are they policing others' masculinity?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:18 PM
2

Are you denying they exist? Just how untethered are you from reality?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:36 PM
1

"The point is that the pressures on men to be aggressive, to dominate women*, to not talk about their feelings, etc., are bad and harmful to both men and* women*."* Yes, harmful to men when men pressure each other to be sexually aggressive. That's a men's issue. No woman I have ever known has ever criticized me for not being masculine enough. I've only had that from other men. Guess what: I don't want to be told I'm not a man if I don't dominate a woman. I don't want to be mocked as a "p*ssy" if…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:36 PM
3

Explain that this nonsense with zero proof that you spewed off the top of your head and that flies in the face of the obvious evidence of billions of loving and lasting relationships is nonsense? I think you are confused about how the burden of proof works.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:30 PM
1

Toxic masculinity is not a "women's issue."
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:29 PM
2

It's not a problem for me at all. And I am certainly no Christian. It's just nonsense.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:26 PM
1

Surely I will; you were not going to stop me. That obviously wasn't the point. The point is that you seem to have some unreasonable aversion to a useful term.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:23 PM
1

Yeah, I use the term, because it is descriptive of something that even OP talked about: the bullying of men who are deemed not masculine enough. It also includes unwelcome sexual aggression and a fear of vulnerability. Are you denying that these are phenomena that exist? Are you denying that things like the sexual exploitation of women and the bottling up of "womanish" emotions are sometimes included within people's ideas of masculinity? Fuck, when I was growing up I was made fun of because I li…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:15 PM
3

Monogamous marriage is also a problem because the feeling of love, which is nothing more than a fortuitous convergence of sexual and sentimental impulse, lasts very little, while the marriage union, by convention, can last much longer, forcing both parties to persevere in a burlesque farce. Oh boy.... Honestly, I don't want to criticize anyone's lifestyle. I know people who are nonmonogamous and polyamorous. I fully accept that love and marriage might not be for everyone, but for Christ's sake..…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:11 PM
0

You are clearly one of them. Them?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:05 PM
0

Well, there you go. Deep thinker here.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:04 PM
1

Maybe the problem is that you are only fixated on the most fringe beliefs like "#killallmen." There are always going to be people saying incendiary things on the internet; that doesn't mean these views are particularly widespread or have a significant existence outside of the chronically online. There is no reason why men's rights and feminism would need to be diametrically opposed. It's not a zero sum game.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:03 PM
-4

Toxic masculinity is a garbage term used by the ultra-modern yet closeminded people who think every inch of masculinity should solely serve women and is toxic if not so. Nice strawman. You clearly don't actually know what people are talking about when they discuss "toxic masculinity." Try to actually understand what people are saying before flying off the handle.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 11:59 AM
-6

I didn't move any goalposts. The point is that very few people are criticizing "masculinity" in general--instead, there is a rightful critique on toxic masculinity. OP states repeatedly that men should not be bullied or criticized for not conforming to this form of "hypermasculinity," as they call it--that's the exact behavior that is being discussed when people talk about toxic masculinity. That doesn't mean that masculinity broadly, or things like grip strength, are seen as the problem. Get it…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 11:37 AM
-10

1) It's a very useful term. It is not outdated at all. 2) Do I need evidence that it is problematic to be super aggressive and seek to dominate women?
/r/MensRights09/06/24 11:27 AM
1

My point is that even an accurate identifier can be creepy.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 11:24 AM
-11

There is masculinity and then there is toxic masculinity. Who is saying that physical strength is bad? The point is that the pressures on men to be aggressive, to dominate women, to not talk about their feelings, etc., are bad and harmful to both men and women. This isn't rocket science.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 11:06 AM
0

Wow. Very petty. Nah, I think I'll keep my tenured position at my respectable private university.
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:31 AM
0

Oh boy. Is this an academic dick measuring contest? Haha. My doctorate exists and was earned regardless of what some Reddit bro thinks, so there is that. Oh, am I not acting enough like a PhD for you? Hahah. Please, feel free to present your credentials. To be frank, you don't express yourself like an academic; you sound like a "wannabe," if you will permit me to be so vulgar. I suspect you will permit no such thing. Oh well. But my point never hinged on my credentials. I only mentioned it becau…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 12:28 AM
-1

Good job. You get a a cookie.
/r/MensRights08/06/24 11:35 PM
-1

This may be an astonishing news flash for you, but male and female humans are biological entities, and homo sapien sapiens are animals. First of all, I was quite careful to distinguish between humans and non-human animals, so there is that. Please read more carefully in the future. Second, my doctorate is in English, so I know how language works, thank you. You insist on the primacy of context, but you somehow miss the fact that clinical scientific discourse is not actually applicable in this si…
/r/MensRights08/06/24 11:33 PM
0

Take the sentence you quoted to me and read it in isolation. Aside from the reference to "crime," you wouldn't be able to tell whether it was about humans or nonhuman animals. "Males are more violent than females." Is this about people, or animals that are objects of study? The difference is that female is a clinical term for a biological sex; woman is an identifier of personhood reserved for humans. They have a very different connotations.
/r/MensRights08/06/24 11:11 PM
6

I don't know man. I'm Jewish, but I'd be a little uncomfortable if some acquaintance I just met said: "what do you think, Jew?" To state the obvious, the way you are referred to matters, even if it is technically accurate
/r/MensRights08/06/24 09:21 PM
-1

Hilarious that you are being down voted for this. It's true!
/r/MensRights08/06/24 07:47 PM
-10

Seems kind of rude that you assume OP's friends are assholes.
/r/MensRights08/06/24 07:46 PM
14

The difference is that you are using male as an adjective. It wouldn't make sense to say "my men best friend," no more than it would sound right to say "I saw a male on the street." In the latter case, you are using it as a noun, which is when it doesn't fit.
/r/MensRights08/06/24 07:46 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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