TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Iceman_Hottie Archive

View 0 posts and 842 comments by Iceman_Hottie 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

They are opposed to equality. The principle is anything that gives us power is good, the rest is evil. Read up on how the values of the French revolution came about (spoiler by inverting what was valued in the past, like equality and justice).
/r/MensRights21/07/23 10:07 AM
1

Advice: at uni join clubs that require 1 on 1 time or phisical contact, like dancing or martial arts. In that time look for girls that are with you at that moment, as opposed to checked out. Ask those ones out. Let me know how it goes and if you need further details.
/r/MensRights19/07/23 08:26 AM
1

The issue is open-mindedness. The Western society has become open-minded enough to accept a factually incorrect "feel good" narratives, all of which follow the same logical structure and originate in the French revolution's left-wing. Examples of this are feminism, nazis, communism, etc. Following the same core principles are the Eastern societies, with the focus being tradition, which becomes increasingly disfunctional as society progresses, because it does not create a pressure to improve. Fun…
/r/AntiFeminists02/02/23 08:58 AM
1

No worries, none of this is time sensitive. In general it's a very broad subject, but you can boil it down to an empirical approach (evidence supremacy) vs dialects (narrative supremacy). The drawback of the dialectical approach is that by disregarding the facts in favour of narrative it consistently ends up creating a structure based on terror. The destruction of not just itself but all those around is caused by the simple fact that any opposition to the narrative invalidates it, and as such ca…
/r/MensRights18/01/23 05:24 PM
2

A friendly debate is always welcome. There was a time when I thought the same way you do, so none of this will be intended to insult. My road to becoming an anti-feminist was two-fold: 1) the actions of feminists and the narrative of feminism simply promotes a different type of sexism, rather than helping to solve anything. 2) feminism is factually incorrect, to the point of inverting verifiable reality. And the big issue is that the negatives of feminism are at the core, rather than fringe indi…
/r/AntiFeminists13/01/23 01:14 PM
1

Yet another thing proving that feminism is a left-wing ideology by prioritising their narrative over reality.
/r/AntiFeminists30/12/22 08:39 AM
1

It's a part of the base assumptions that make their whole ideology make any sense. Namely, this is Rousseau's position on society and is at the core of all ideologies based on it, feminism being just one of them.
/r/AntiFeminists24/12/22 12:43 PM
1

Thanks. I know.
/r/AntiFeminists10/12/22 06:11 AM
1

your proof?
/r/AntiFeminists04/12/22 11:58 AM
2

From what I notice it's a combination of many factors, some of which are social and others biological. A huge part is the FOMO of finding a better partner, oxytocin vs vasopressin responses between the sexes, and the plain old dopamine hits heitened by adrenaline. Another part is that most people are not taught and encouraged to navigate these things in a healthy and positive way, and are instead encouraged to split up.
/r/MensRights20/11/22 12:28 PM
2

Glad you are doing well.
/r/MensRights17/11/22 07:18 PM
3

The issue is that it works only one way. To get more attention men need to better themselves, whereas for women it's accept the advances. In effect its a type of bandwagon fallacy that women are instinctually more susceptible to. In terms of couples therapy it only works when both parties want to solve the problems, but usually one partner is fully checked out.
/r/MensRights17/11/22 08:46 AM
3

Terrorism originated from the "reign of terror" period in France immediately after the French revolution. Feminism is based on socialism itself based on Marat (the main mind behind the mentioned "reign of terror").
/r/AntiFeminists16/11/22 11:47 AM
2

Expected from feminists. Overall my perspective on Emmett Till and his mother, that it's what you get if you base judgement on hierarchy. The majority people more than happy to keep this up as it seems beneficial to them. It is also foundational to both religious zealotry and left-wing ideology (same patterns; neither exist without it) making them as helpful to human flourishing as stage 4 cancer. Reminder to all about politics Jim Craw was a left-wing position, a democrat position. And that the…
/r/MensRights16/11/22 09:39 AM
14

Both the word terrorism and feminism (ideology) have the same origin.
/r/AntiFeminists14/11/22 12:15 PM
9

I agree, but it's not eugenics it's self-selection. Also a huge issue is indoctrination into that cult. Solution: allow them to become radicalised so that they no longer have any overlap with normies?
/r/AntiFeminists14/11/22 05:42 AM
2

It's an ideology based on romanticism philosophy. Anything that supports it is good, anything against it is bad. Helping each other out is a huge threat to their cult.
/r/AntiFeminists14/11/22 05:32 AM
1

1) the pay gap: The main reason for the impact is the fact that women demand premium products and more of them than men. 2) abortion: the entire argument is a falacy, since the majority of the pro-life side are women. The point of it is that you should be responsible with all of your actions, as in don't risk pregnancy if you aren't ready to be a parent. Almost no one is arguing against abortion in cases of rape/incest/saving the mothers life, which total up to <5%. 3) gender dominated field: it…
/r/AntiFeminists12/11/22 06:46 AM
1

I do get through to some and that's worthwhile to me. I do not expect to see the results of pointing this out, but I hope it starts building a culture that considers where their ideas come from and become "immune" to such swindling. Rambling is good, I ramble as well. =)
/r/MensRights12/11/22 05:36 AM
1

I try to not be time sensitive. Left-wing is a reference to a logical framework that came into action with the creation of the left/right divide, and subsequent French revolution and "reign of terror" genocide that followed (its where we get the word terrorism from; and explains why calling someone "right-wing" is a call to violence, rather than a statement of fact). This reference point is not relative, making it resilient against sophistry. The problem with it that it is based on romanticism p…
/r/MensRights11/11/22 04:40 AM
7

It's not basking in privelege, it's if you disagree anything is justified. Explanation: It originated during the creation of the left-wing with either enthusiasm (Robespierre, Marat, etc) or approval/non-opposition from the rest. This is inherited by modern left-wing movements such as feminism, and is absolute rather than relative. The problem for most people on the left is that the left of their perception only applies if you follow the narrative. The response OP got is what you see if you look…
/r/MensRights08/10/22 05:10 AM
6

It's tribalism vs meritocracy. Tribalism relies on lower level cognitive ability (that developed earlier in the evolution) and it is mostly instinct driven. Meritocracy relies on our ability and habits of overriding instinct. You could argue that meritocracy is what separates humans from animals, and most of popular political and philosophical movements have relied on disregard for merit to become popular. The problem is that it makes those movements as useful as stage 4 cancer. Feminism and oth…
/r/MensRights25/09/22 02:30 PM
15

The only issue with it is that it will require recognising that a lot if not most women are abusive (to various degrees). Most people would rather let the abuse go on, than to accept reality and responsibility.
/r/MensRights25/09/22 08:28 AM
5

It's not, but most people like to be a part of a "feel good" ideology and they justify and dismiss reality to prevent cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights25/09/22 08:24 AM
0

What matters is factual correctness. Consensus shifts based on the group's intelligence and groups relying on concensus tend to be unintelligent. Fundamentally, there should be an opportunity for men to void the rights and responsibilities, same as women have with abortion. The problem is in implementation, as women can easily hide the child, robbing the father of the opportunity to decide. The situation broadly leaves 2 solutions: 1 neither parent has the option to dodge the responsibility and …
/r/MensRights25/09/22 05:45 AM
1

"the feminist notion of" patriarchy" stems from Simone de Beauvoir trying to normalize abusive relationships, so she wouldn't feel bad about choosing to stay in one (she was willing and an abuser herself) to become famous. Now it is a gaslighting tactic used to justify abuse. Men not caring about women is incompatible with human biology, as men have a neurological response to women showing socially significant emotions." Its just a way for abusers to abuse more people. I can dig up the links on …
/r/MensRights24/09/22 03:09 PM
1

You are correct. Most people project their thoughts and expertise onto others, and don't consider that it could be an outlier. It's a good point to start looking into things, but it's very unreliable and can't be used to draw conclusions.
/r/MensRights11/09/22 04:29 AM
1

Reffering to a pro is a legal defence/prevention tactic. A very necessary thing to do. Even the pros don't do it outside of work for friends for the same reason. A lot of the attempts at helping backfire, when any emotion gets involved or anything is unclear or omitted. That's why you don't go blindly helping people, and you have to be extremely careful when you do.
/r/MenSupportMen04/09/22 05:58 PM
1

Most professionals are at least vaguely competent, and will try to truly help. Psychological issues are very complex and trickle down into many things. Another part of this response stems from legalese, so as not to get targeted for malicious prosecution. Its not necessarily about winning a case, but using the judicial process as punishment and providing a cheaper settlement. To most people even the settlement will be devastating, so the settlement will be extremely tempting if not the only opti…
/r/MenSupportMen04/09/22 02:21 PM
2

Part of the point. She also signed a letter petitioning for eliminating age of consent in France in 1977. Most prominent leftist in France at the time did. My problem with her is that she uses a logical framework based on accepting factually incorrect assumptions, thus being in itself and example of delusion and gaslighting.
/r/AntiFeminists28/08/22 04:41 PM
1

Incident - obviously fucked up. People like that will be attracted to working with children, so the best way would be to get the children to a point where they can recognise it and seek help. Key to a solution would be to establish an explicit code of conduct known by all parties, which would simultaneously protect all playing by those rules and make violations blatant. A huge part of a solution that could make a dent in this is strengthen healthy parent-child relationship and mandatory educatio…
/r/AntiFeminists28/08/22 01:30 PM
1

Life is the same in that regard. Very few people know where the things they believe originated and oversimplify things to the point of counterproductivity. The ideas discussed on the Internet later mature into irl action, both for better and worse. Hence escapism only delays things, and we have to make that kind of people lose. I try to make things better by educating those willing and courageous enough to listen.
/r/MensRights23/08/22 12:46 PM
1

That sub has an ideological sycophant as one of the mods and apparently its not a sentiment shared by others. Was banned for "participating in a brigading sub" and got re-enstated ~2 weeks after. I would suggest you push back on the ban via messaging mods, so it highlights to the sainer mods the cancer one of them is pushing. It's the same principle as dripping water cutting through rock.
/r/MensRights23/08/22 12:28 PM
10

Men's rights is a subset of egalitarianism focused on men. Women's rights are also a subset of egalitarianism. Feminism is a supremacy movement and has been from inception, therefore is in direct opposition to egalitarianism. Conflating between women's rights and feminism is on a standard tactic to swindle people into supporting feminism.
/r/MensRights22/08/22 08:16 AM
2

Some general advice: Fearing death is part of a normal human psychology and it is a part of the self-preservation instinct. At 17 it is fairly normal, because your brain is still developing (untill late 20s) and biologically you are at a point where you are establishing a more complex understanding of self, which exacerbates the fear of death. As time goes on your priorities will most likely change to be more focused on others than they are now, making you fear death less. With struggling now, t…
/r/MenSupportMen21/08/22 09:18 AM
1

Specifically on optics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Paul_Marat#Conner1999 "Once again, Marat requested the Academy of Sciences review his work, and it set up a commission to do so. Over a period of seven months, from June 1779 to January 1780, Marat performed his experiments in the presence of the commissioners so that they could appraise his methods and conclusions. The drafting of their final report was assigned to Jean-Baptiste Le Roy. The report was finally produced after many delays …
/r/MensRights20/08/22 08:39 AM
1

It's not a win in the way you think. Those wins are not from the turning of the tides, but from feminism etc. going insane too quickly. The issue that it doesn't tackle the underlying problem and those ideas slowly become acceptable. It's the same story as people accepting the outright inversion of what actually happened. Simplest version is "feminists don't hate men" and "fourth wave feminism is bad", when baring a few exceptions most of them did from the inception. The same book applies to the…
/r/MensRights18/08/22 01:15 PM
1

It would be a very long conversation explaining our positions and ending up on more or less same page. In most cases if I argue something, I am impossible to win against without lying and not engaging the argument. Parent/child situation neither get those outs. The left (any branch; not limited to them but that's the situation in the post) needs that attitude to maintain the echo chamber necessary for their worldview to make sense. People on the right tend to almost always engage with the argume…
/r/AntiFeminists16/08/22 06:09 AM
1

2 tanks, both have space for all of them to breed. All are around 3 cm (~1 inch) as adults. Blue jelly Neocaridina davidii shrimp + Japan blue Endler's live bearers (same family as guppies) + otocinclus affinis. Looking to add some pigmy corydoras. Sakura red neocaridina + Boraras maculatus. They are very fascinating when you see them interact with you and one another. All are stunningly intelligent.
/r/MenSupportMen15/08/22 05:21 PM
2

Recently got back into aquariums. Have shrimp and some similarity sized fish. Very relaxing and interesting to watch.
/r/MenSupportMen15/08/22 06:54 AM
3

I get what you mean, but I wouldn't call it extremist because its a core belief. Probably never. It plays really well into human biology, namely: 1. The desire to rebell in teenagers and young adults. 2. Gives an excuse to indulge in things that are held as taboo (theft, murder, violence, pedophilia, ...) effectively creating an addiction. This is why it's extremely hard to find someone who will engage with the argument, rather than chant their rhetoric.
/r/AntiFeminists15/08/22 06:45 AM
2

Both descended from the left-wing of the French revolution. All 3 use the same rules, rhetoric, disregard for reality and calls for violence against those daring to disagree, with the main difference being the identity of those they call for the extermination of.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 09:25 PM
2

So same kind as the suffragettes? I would suggest you actually examine them in detail.
/r/MensRights14/08/22 05:21 PM
3

It's a logic that is not designed to create anything, only to destroy the old. Follow those who created civilization, not those constantly seeking to destroy it. By encouraging men to create you aren't taking anything away from women. Feminists and others like them can't figure out what creating something is, only how to take away from others.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 02:00 PM
9

In psychology there is a type of approach called Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), which uses conscious effort to help with psychological issues like depression, anxiety. I think feminism (and other left-wing schools of thought; separate argument) is an example of the same principle to induce insanity, specifically paranoid delusion and a lack impulse control (anger issues, violent outbursts, etc.). Thoughts?
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 06:34 AM
2

A romantic view of what they want and denial of reality. This is standard procedure for any ideology, that assumes romanticism philosophy is correct.
/r/MensRights14/08/22 06:22 AM
-1

The more I think about it the more it looks like it's not the issue of arranged marriage, but the mercenary attitude of people in it. My attitude is/always was: it's often the help of your SO that puts you over the edge and is critical to achievement. Stuff like calming them down when they are frustrated, giving them a chance to relax around you,...
/r/MensRights12/08/22 12:32 PM
2

It's not somehow, it's a conclusion of feminism's base assumptions (things you need to accept for it to make sense). Specifically, the inversion of traditionally held virtues, such as the Magna Carter (idea of equality under the law), Judeo-Christian virtues, etc. This same philosophy gave birth to terrorism. Interestingly, the same people (Marat in particular) also opposed to the scientific method and tried to disprove Newton. This actually explains why it is so toxic and why anything based on …
/r/MensRights11/08/22 06:30 AM
1

The big issue is that infringing on human rights against men has been normalized. Traditional cultures typically try to compensate for it, progressive ideologies (any that follow the framework of the left-wing from the French revolution) do that without compensation. First one is flawed and not fully sustainable, second one is irredeemable.
/r/MensRights24/07/22 07:13 PM
2

On the sub - very little hate towards most people. Towards this sub - lots. That's because we point out that groups like feminists are toxic and have been so from it's inception, and if you point those things out it makes it hard for them to scam, strong arm and blackmail to get more money and power. Erin Pizzey has told a lot about it, simply because she tried to truly tackle domestic violence issues and exposed that women perpetrated it to a very significant degree. In the cases of single side…
/r/MensRights24/07/22 02:36 PM
1

Depends on how much you know about it. I would say it started at different times and has a different pace, but the dynamic is exactly the same. Specifically, bolsheviks until roughly 1930s did almost all of the exact same things that modern leftists push. Having laws that a woman could not refuse to have sex upon showing a party membership document. Jailing people for being married. Advocating for abortion. Frequent and indiscriminant hookups. If I remember correctly, not long before his death L…
/r/MensRights22/07/22 08:38 PM
1

One of the main things Marat (pretty much the brain behind forming the left) tried to do was attempting to displace religion and the scientific method (Kant's philosophy, came up with the scientific method we use) and Newton. Most leftists since have been opposed to the actual scientific method and that it has to be paired with religion to be able to fully grasp things. In a way science is an appropriate tool for some things and faith does the rest. It's a framework that started with Kant, and u…
/r/MensRights22/07/22 08:25 PM
1

The demonic cult is what the original left-wing (Marat, Robespierre, and so on) tried to implement/advocated for. It's very sobering and fun once you know what they actually wanted to do. Turning the values upside down was exactly how left-wing values came to be. The idea behind Magna Charter is one of such values. Is there any wonder why things are the way they are? Based on stories from my family and mine. In terms of USSR they stopped with deliberate famines around the 60's (still called them…
/r/MensRights22/07/22 06:19 PM
2

The controlled context varies the cut-off point and the conditions that constitute success. In a left-wing framework (communism and post ww2 capitalism) the narrative matters more than merit or fact. In communism the fastest way to improve your situation was to send your neighbours to a gulag (effectively enslavement) and steal their stuff, regardless of guilt. That became a factor in getting to the top of the distribution (how many slaves can you give to the party), rather than benefit through …
/r/MensRights22/07/22 12:34 PM
1

Yep. Totally agree. That's the point I was trying to make.
/r/MensRights22/07/22 12:02 PM
2

Pareto a property of any statistical distribution, making it unavoidable. The issue often comes at what is the cut-off point and culture. People who over-prioritise SMV are no less toxic than the ones that try to burn everything to the ground. There are many reasons why smart monarchs and nobility funded a lot of public schools, scientists, artists, etc. out of their own pocket.
/r/MensRights22/07/22 11:17 AM
2

It is a good question. Once you know the dangers your instincts tell you to be afraid. Overriding those instincts with will in my opinion is what makes you truly above an animal. IMPORTANT: A word of advice, a skill you may not know you need to learn is: gently explaining things. If you go too harshly about it, people will try to hold onto their beliefs and not engage with the facts (it's a lengthy thing). For example it is factually correct to say that at the core left-wing movements are lying,…
/r/MensRights22/07/22 08:19 AM
1

Thanks. I'm on a similar path. Trying to get my career back on track takes priority. Second is mental health, since it massively handicaps my ability to lift and consistency + using full muscle strength are key. I went more into philosophy, so I can have an interesting conversation with just about anyone on most topics, and usually from several perspectives. Let's me make girls pleasantly speechless. Have a couple of good moments. The whole mechanic of being infuriated by your partner being grea…
/r/MensRights13/07/22 09:23 PM
6

It's a lot worse than you have stated. Most people are taught only to care about themselves and their immediate consequences. My story: was in a 5+ year relationship, helped her with med school (one of the top students) and a lecturer failing her because of her name. Talked her out of suicide more times than I can count, recovered her from clinical depression in ~1.25 years, taught her English, helped her get into a biochemistry program in the UK and tutored her to being the top of her year + be…
/r/MensRights13/07/22 07:34 AM
13

And that's a well reasoned way to approach it, as opposed to panic and appeasing others. More often than not the thought process behind any decision is much more impactfull than the decision itself, as it impacts the tragectory of the future.
/r/AntiFeminists12/07/22 06:38 AM
6

Standard procedure. They know they aren't capable of winning an argument, so to avoid looking stupid they regress the toddler level of psychological development and throw a tantrum by banning.
/r/AntiFeminists10/07/22 10:18 PM
2

Stems from having romanticism as a base assumption. In short the more you accept these things the more delusional and more miserable you become. Read up on what are the base assumptions of feminism (assemble the full list). Spoiler, Rousseau's views are accepted, and read up on his views on human nature and society, narrative over facts, and use of violence. Brings perfect understanding why any philosophy following a left-wing framework (feminism is only one of them) will never work, never be fa…
/r/MensRights10/07/22 04:03 PM
3

It's a "tell me you are an idiot without telling me you are an idiot" type of thing. That entire worldview is designed to make people miserable. From a biological point men excel at some things women at others, and both are critical to a functioning society. Psychologically, constant competing is simply stressful and appreciated acts of service towards your SO increase happiness in both. Conclusion, men and women complement each other, and there is no way around that.
/r/AntiFeminists10/07/22 03:47 PM
3

Because if you start thinking and digging, you will realise that they are not connected to reality and are simply using it to gain prominence/power. This puts them into 2 groups: ignorant (often willfully; enable the other group) or malicious. Neither are a positive thing.
/r/AntiFeminists10/07/22 06:57 AM
-1

It is based on 2 main things: How women establish hierarchy among them selves. It's called a pecking order for a reason, and this is a part of human nature. Women (with very few exceptions) are not taught and do not learn a lot of things crucial to socialisation. Namely impulse control, theory of mind (understanding how others think differently), behaviour around the opposite gender. This is caused by using a logical framework that accepts the "noble savage" idea as a basis. It effectively boils…
/r/MensRights10/07/22 06:46 AM
1

Been thinking along the same lines. My solution would be to focus helping out the 20 something get on their feet, and raise them with the understanding that they have the obligation to pay it forward. This helps those who need it and builds a strong sense of unity within the society. It is a part of human nature that some would violate these principles to game the system, and the solution I came up with was to cut them off from all societal interaction (trade, Internet,...), very similar to exco…
/r/AntiFeminists07/07/22 06:40 AM
1

Spot on. Untill 70s or 80s US medics performed open heart surgeries on newborns without anesthesia, believing that they don't feel it/can't remember. Part of my point. I want to know more about lashing out as a reaction and its coupling with people not reaching emotional maturity. It's mostly about trying to qualify the damage done rather than establishing it, so that it would be possible to make the nesessary corrections and not invert the issue. In most things I lean towards use good education…
/r/MensRights05/07/22 04:36 AM
7

It's a very multi faceted. But the gist is that it is not what it claims to be, is almost always exclusively cosmetic and has a high probability of negative side effects. From an ethical perspective its effectively a violation of the Hypocratic oath. In a lot of the cases it is done either without the informed concent of the individual (during childhood) or due to societal pressure. I would like to see some properly good studies going into detail on how this trauma is carried into the individual…
/r/MensRights04/07/22 10:34 PM
0

Again I don't follow a narrative. I don't follow a narrative based logical framework entirely. Glad you are safe. Hope everything goes well for you. Also, in 2 month in Mariupol more civilians died than in all 8 years of ALL deaths from both sides. That is inevitable during a full scale war, when proper evacuation procedures aren't used, mixing civilian and military targets (I think this is a direct violation of the Geneva convention by Ukraine, which would then void Russia's obligations to upho…
/r/MensRights04/07/22 05:44 AM
0

I don't have a narrative, I care only about what is true. I simply understand both languages and know people on both sides, including civilians that escaped Ukrainians shelling Donetsk not long after the euro maidan. Go back to wherever you came from.
/r/MensRights03/07/22 09:37 PM
4

Feminism is based on that double standard. It's a key feature of the logical framework that leads to feminism. Try looking up and writing down what is a base assumption and what are feminism's base assumptions. Thus far, I tracked it down to Rousseau, the main features of whose philosophy were narrative over fact and whatever benefits me now is a good thing (including violence, betrayal, disregarding equality under the law, etc.). From Rousseau it was put into practice by the left-wing of the Fr…
/r/MensRights30/06/22 07:04 AM
20

Making them feel like their stupidity is intelligence.
/r/AntiFeminists29/06/22 07:02 AM
4

Don't know the other subs. This one however is going to be hard for them to tackle, since we mostly point out that feminism is trash and always was so + a very good chunk of us can back it up with references. The only hatred here is towards bigotry and stupidity (both actions), rather than anything to do with identity. If something difficult comes up - let me know, I'll help as best I can.
/r/AntiFeminists29/06/22 06:57 AM
2

Roe was overturned because it was built on a bad argument, so it was always a matter of time. It also comes up against the issue of termination of an innocent life on a whim. To "gain" reproductive rights we have to present a very clear argument, with clear delineation. It's a very complex idea I've been thinking about for a while. The easiest way to make it work would be enforced monogamy and mandatory paternity testing, and consistent pregnancy testing. Meaning that pregnancy and paternity wou…
/r/MensRights27/06/22 07:04 AM
2

Why should ending of a human life be done on a whim? Who should have the right to end your own life just because they felt like it or because you are an inconvenience? Apply the same standard as you would want to be applied to you. Being more responsible includes contraception, and as I mentioned the morning after pill if something seemed off. It also includes monitoring the cycle and doing periodic checkups. It simply minimises the harm done not least of all to the woman herself.
/r/AntiFeminists25/06/22 09:47 PM
2

Things like eqal treatment under the law are what the left-wing was created to oppose. Once you start accepting a logical framework every base assumption will become part of your logic. Read up on what the original left-wing thought and what inspired them. Overall my opinion is raise people to be responsible enough to not need things beyond the morning after pill. It makes for a better society. And once you get to that point of self control a lot of relationships things become accessible that ca…
/r/AntiFeminists25/06/22 06:48 AM
1

Probably not all that good, but still: Its why you do not tolerate all those who praise their sophistry as wisdom, or trumpet lies as though they're true and covet ignorance as virtue. For they will never seek what's good, that can be felt fought the ages maligning all that's beautiful and pure, so we can't see their misery. And they have constantly betrayed all those who trusted in their fairness. So stand with me, support the truth, and grab a cold one in the evening.
/r/AntiFeminists24/06/22 09:16 PM
1

Not just feminism, but the logic and rhetoric that it is based on.
/r/AntiFeminists24/06/22 08:41 PM
6

Stems from one of the base assumptions of feminism - Rousseau. If you want to go the war route (be careful with it though): Ask her why does she support pedophiles, and point to the letter for abolishing the age of consent in France in 1977. Some of the people who signed it were de Beauvoir (came up with the feminist "patriarchy theory"), Sartre and Foucault (both also feminists, that shaped feminism). If they start arguing, point out that it is not a matter of opinion but of fact. (not letting …
/r/AntiFeminists24/06/22 11:48 AM
1

Awesome bit of research! Keep up the good work!
/r/AntiFeminists24/06/22 06:29 AM
2

Just another attempt to normalize abusive relationships and feel less guilty about being abusive to people who care about you.
/r/AntiFeminists24/06/22 06:19 AM
1

And this is why I warn about the nessecity of looking at what you have to assume for your worldview to make sense. Pretty much any thought pattern can be thought of as a line with a starting point. As long as you can connect a few dots you will be able to find where it stems from and without that starting point the line would be different. Primacy of narrative over fact and rejection of evidence are key for feminism and left-wing more broadly to make sense. (note a statement of fact, rather than…
/r/AntiFeminists23/06/22 09:09 PM
8

You get stuff like that because you accept Rousseau's position on society and human nature as a base assumption, and disregard evidence to the contrary. Most people don't know where and how the ideas they have came about. Sounds like a conspiracy theory until you understand the argument and look up the facts.
/r/AntiFeminists14/06/22 06:01 PM
10

In terms of unilateral DV 70+% is female perpetrated. Data from 2014 UK and USA. Sadly, 50/50 is too optimistic. (disclaimer ideal case no DV occurring)
/r/AntiFeminists12/06/22 07:30 PM
4

Men and women evolved to complement each other, with women specialising in infant care and child bearing. Men on the other hand are better suited for creating the resources (by a lot), but those at the earliest stages of life are not really accessible to infants and need to be adapted via women. In the conditions humans evolved, women would not be capable of being self sufficient, thus creating a mutual need for each other between men and women. In that argument she picked only the side that hig…
/r/AntiFeminists09/06/22 10:56 AM
1

Feminism was always a supremacy movement based on lies. And yes, they are correct that egalitarianism is the movement for equality, and feminism directly opposes it.
/r/AntiFeminists09/06/22 06:27 AM
1

Shows that you haven't read it. It's a guide for clinicians aggregating 100s of actual papers and total data sets over 100k. Remember evidence is not on your side. If you want to argue, raise your IQ above 0 and learn to read at least at a pre-scool level.
/r/AntiFeminists08/06/22 06:51 AM
6

The issue is that the legal equality was fought for by other groups, rather than feminists, hence nobody needs feminism. Feminism is based on those imaginary situations, so there is no way to separate the two. From what I know about it, what India needs are massive cultural shifts that are likely going to take several generations.
/r/AntiFeminists06/06/22 05:35 AM
16

The thing is that those aren't radicals. Those views are at the core of feminism, hence feminism is never a good thing. You are buying the rhetoric (what they say they do) and not looking at the real actions.
/r/AntiFeminists06/06/22 05:24 AM
1

> What? Where did you pull that from? How is a women talking about her experience with sexual assault painting all men as rapists? Where did you even get that from? How do you single them out? This is what happens: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/brauer-college-school-assembly-boys-stand-up-apologise-gender-backlash/ > No one is making ANY such laws. US VAWA (violence against women act); Australia domestic violence legislation treats women as victims by default; Mandatory arrests in DV cases (those p…
/r/AntiFeminists05/06/22 09:09 AM
1

Ulrich Schnyder (ed.), Marylène Cloitre (ed.), Evidence Based Treatments for Trauma- Related Psychological Disorders, 2015 Any source for your stupidity?
/r/AntiFeminists05/06/22 08:25 AM
2

No I did not, that's why I mentioned exceptions. It is also why I mentioned concrete actions such as timeliness and police reporting. Without those it simply paints an entire group as if they were offenders, even if an overwhelming majority of that group are innocent and would have come to your aid. By doing what you do you are effectively running interference for the abusers, and needlessly depleting the good will of others that would help those in distress. Men have a neurological response to …
/r/AntiFeminists04/06/22 11:32 PM
1

Which is where timeliness and criminal procecution are critical to minimise harm to others. Comming out only on social media is just an easy way to garner sympathy and too easy to abuse. Those who can genuinely come out like that are extremely rare, and should be treated as an exception that proves the rule.
/r/AntiFeminists04/06/22 08:22 PM
1

According to basic psychology and neurology. And you are someone who knows something about it?
/r/AntiFeminists04/06/22 08:03 PM
13

It's just pointing out that one of the ways people tend to cover up lies are by being vocal to shut down any decent. People lie to take advantage of others, and blind belief in either side is damaging to actual victims as it diverts resources and attention away from where it is needed. People who make their lives about being a victim of something are very often liars (as otherwise they would not be able to maintain salinity due to psychological damage). Most victims just want to move on and put …
/r/AntiFeminists04/06/22 07:00 AM
23

Boys and girls tend to gravitate towards different things in education. Very few can adapt to suit both, and most teachers focus on the girls because they refuse to understand boys. When I was participating in a public event we had a table on one side a smoke generator with an "airzooka" (launches smoke rings) and on the other much quieter things to explain how salt absorbs moisture from the air, surface tension. Boys tended to light up with curiosity around the smoke generator, girls around the…
/r/MensRights04/06/22 06:36 AM
2

Without lies they have no legitimacy and without violence and abuse no other way of acting. This is why I point out that these are some of the main features of anything that uses romanticism (Russeau in particular) as a base assumption.
/r/AntiFeminists03/06/22 05:18 AM
1

This should be a part of an FAQ on why feminism is evil and any non-abusive person should be against it.
/r/AntiFeminists31/05/22 02:17 PM
1

There are things that are easier to keep within a gender group and having a person of the opposite gender present can destroy the necessary dynamic for the desired effect. This is instinctual. So leave them be. One of the reasons such spaces are needed for men is because often women who find out about the insecurities of the men in their lives will on instinct destroy them. It's a combination of several instincts and crucially a lack of skill in self control and a lack of habit of creating a the…
/r/MenSupportMen30/05/22 07:10 AM
17

In terms of philosophy, denial of reality in favour of narrative is one of the base assumptions that need to be made for feminism to make sense. So it's no surprise that they either have no basis in reality or are a mischaracterization of it.
/r/MensRights28/05/22 07:25 AM
2

No worries. Best if you post it in this thread. Its a bit of a failsafe.
/r/AntiFeminists27/05/22 08:00 AM
0

Stuff happens. We get lots of vitriol targeting anyone on this sub. Do you have any questions about this sub you want an answer to?
/r/AntiFeminists27/05/22 07:01 AM
0

The problem is that we deal with people who try to subvert things on a daily basis, and there isn't a lie that feminists won't use to paint people here as evil. A while ago we had a comparison of how much support a post about hating men got they tried to do the inverse here and got extreme backlash. The mass-reporting has likely come from a feminist sub and in most of them joining this sub or even posting here gets you permanently banned - no need to even post a thing. Lurk here a bit more, don'…
/r/AntiFeminists27/05/22 06:13 AM
4

It's a reflection on us. You can oppose (and destroy) someone and praise them when they do something worthy. In terms of opposing feminism, a good chunk of people here were at some point feminists and are now adamantly against it. It's a way to change views when it's possible. The only caution is against infiltration and subversion. That's countered by maintaining a principled position and integrity regardless of everything else. After that we can discuss what the principles are. This also disqu…
/r/AntiFeminists27/05/22 05:49 AM
20

Being factually correct is not included in their worldview. It's a feature of how their logic came to be (base assumptions).
/r/AntiFeminists22/05/22 07:03 AM
2

Thanks. I come up with those ideas in an "easy to digest" form from time to time. No worries, that stuff happens to everyone. Happy to help. Focus on what's controllable and overcoming oneself - main features of stoic philosophy. I think you might enjoy it. Written a long time ago, but the principles are helpful to this day. I myself have a few plants on the window most of them flourish. Cacti are just easier to get started with.
/r/MenSupportMen19/05/22 02:09 PM
3

I know how you feel. When I get stuck in that cycle I use this chain of logic: If nothing matters - neither does my suffering. But, some of the small acts of kindness can have a disproportionate effect on others. Therefore it is possible to help others and use yourself as a stepping stone on the way to create a society that pays it forward and prevent others from being in this place. Other things to help get something to take care of, for example a cactus (great introduction to plants). Taking c…
/r/MenSupportMen17/05/22 05:48 AM
1

Because many mods are ego driven and it gives them an ego boost to ban people. It also follows the mentality of I can ban you therefore I am right (a version of might makes right). Glad to have the mods we have here.
/r/AntiFeminists13/05/22 05:57 AM
1

You can roll point 1 and 3, and 2 and 4 into 2 points. It's the more some live a lie the more others have to compensate to keep the entire system from collapsing. For example unilateral domestic violence is perpetrated mostly (70+%) by women, however DV shelters and services are geared to exclusively help women. The only reason that this is not addressed is because most people will have to admit that they were wrong. Hence more and more pressure needs to applied to keep up the lie, to the point …
/r/MensRights11/05/22 02:19 PM
2

It's a good to have a clear definition. Try making it more succinct. The issue with a lot of this is that most people take the comfortable truth over reality. That however comes at the cost of forcing a specific sub-set of people to pick up the slack, effectively making them slaves (same principle as the janissary in the ottoman empire). As people get used to it things get ever more lopsided until things are pushed past the breaking point leading to a societal collapse. Here is my take on a phra…
/r/MensRights11/05/22 06:18 AM
2

Because integrity is not a part of their worldview, and they will disgard men as soon as it becomes inconvenient. Kind of the reason I point out the philosophy of things.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 04:31 AM
2

Yes, that's definitely part of it.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 12:28 PM
2

There are multiple causes to it. Two simpler ones: Traditionalists want to preserve the ritual without evaluating it on merit. From a religious standpoint (Judeo-christian tradition) science is a way understanding God (see Blaize Pascal, Louis Pasteur, etc.; and scientific discovery being a type of divine revelation), hence if we find a factual contradiction (as opposed to moral) it must be thoroughly examined and accurate science should win. The issue here is that the acceptance of anything new…
/r/MensRights04/05/22 04:29 AM
–

No, but the comment in the first post has some similarity to this one.
/r/AntiFeminists01/05/22 09:04 AM
2

Simple: it's an excuse to justify being abusive and setting men up as subhuman to justify using men as slaves. This is a framing that was there from the start and there are ~3 prominent feminists in total that deviated from this framework. Of the top of my head I remember only Christina Hoff-Summers.
/r/AntiFeminists01/05/22 05:26 AM
–

It's a sign of a culture and a society in its terminal stage. For such things to be stated without severe opposition is simply the stage when it's hard to not realise that a society is dying, and there are many steps on that path that resulted in this. It starts very small and compounds until everything is destroyed.
/r/AntiFeminists01/05/22 05:15 AM
–

It's a sign of a culture and a society in its terminal stage. For such things to be stated without severe opposition is simply the stage when it's hard to not realise that a society is dying, and there are many steps on that path that resulted in this. It starts very small and compounds until everything is destroyed.
/r/AntiFeminists01/05/22 05:15 AM
–

A lot of it depends on the severity and how you deal with it. At a severe stage you would not be able to write a post, so there are likely strategies to mitigate the downsides. A lot of people simply panic after hearing the diagnosis, which is not helpful. One of the the kids I teach (at a school) has autism and is at the top of his class. Let me know if you want another 2 cents of mine.
/r/AntiFeminists01/05/22 05:08 AM
27

There are a lot of things that contribute to this. Here's a few: Because the way left-wing ideologies have created their values and virtues was not by looking at what makes people fulfilled in life, but by inverting those that were before them. You can see it in the original left-wing of the French revolution (prior to them there was no left/right separation) and in this today. Moral relativism creates a constant need for escalation in order to maintain the same levels of emotion, which later re…
/r/AntiFeminists30/04/22 12:54 PM
1

It violates the expectation that men are to be strong. Violation of expectations in a non threatening way is one of the principles of how comedy works. Does it make it moral to do so - absolutely not. Why are feminists promoting it - because it is a way of normalising abusive behavior, same as feminists (a core principle the left more broadly was founded).
/r/MensRights29/04/22 05:26 AM
2

It's because they can't win on merit. It's not about quality, you are simply the wrong person. Being correct is just another justification to hate and abuse you. About your response, not bad but doesn't strike at the heart of the issue and allows for a lot of sophistry from your opposition. Make your arguments tighter, so that they either have to contradict reality (overtly lie) or admit being wrong. The reason why birth control was developed for women is simple: women typically have a pronounce…
/r/MensRights26/04/22 01:47 PM
1

Because their base assumptions are demonstrably false, and a fair and open debate will make them loose. What you mention is based on three logical framework features inherited by feminism from romanticism (there are a couple of steps in between). Narrative over fact. What makes them win is the truth, regardless of evidence and merit. Kind of why showing them the data will not convince them that they are wrong. Death of nuance. By omitting critical details it becomes easier to make things catchy …
/r/MensRights25/04/22 06:58 AM
1

The well know version is with cake (cake as a desert came later), and it conveys the idea and the malicious disregard, same as in the criticised comment. I will take a look at if it was brioche. If its true, thanks for pointing it out.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:58 PM
1

Education. We should help people to better their lives through understanding and not falling for deceit. There is a thing called Dunning-Kruger effect, and we need to help people over the low expertise - high confidence barrier. Yes, I am working on that end on a system to help anyone learn better (a hobby of mine). Examples: feminism having legitimacy or being beneficial is a lie. Left-wing logical framework is based on a lie and is made attractive via lies of omission (not exclusively) - which…
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:28 AM
11

It's a version of "let them eat cake" (note cake refers to stuck refuse, as opposed to desert). To luminescent a man is less than human. Everybody falls and we all may need help to get back up. It is a sign of a dying society when people refuse to help those closest to us. When it comes to helping wheelchair users (and lifting things) proper technique makes things much easier.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:58 AM
1

I would say that we have been on this trajectory for 200+ years. Possibly since the renesance. Midwitery of what later became the right made it possible for other midwits to feighn intelligence which created the left. What we see now socially is the compounding of the errors done by both. The possible gamechanger is the Internet and modern computers. The Internet has the capability to quickly share information and quickly expose midwits and malicious actors. Computer technology can be used to ru…
/r/AntiFeminists22/04/22 06:15 AM
2

Disclaimer I am not a professional therapist. Yeah that reaction in your edit is a fairly normal part of a grieving process. Those emotions are a defensive reaction to abuse, and an indicator of a healthy mind. My advice take time. Those emotions will be coming back, do not let them control you and don't fear them. As they come up time and time again you will slowly learn to deal with them better and better. Meditation can help. Try looking into stoicism philosophy (Marcus Aurelius for example).…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 06:14 PM
23

Sadly, in the eyes of many both justify further abuse.
/r/MensRights21/04/22 02:20 PM
1

No worries, that stuff happens. I'll be happy to re-visit this if and when you want to. When I originally looked into the connections between the French revolution, left-wing politics and romanticism it took me a couple of months to come to terms with it. If you want an interesting view on religion I would recommend looking into Louis Pasteur and Werner Heisenberg, both great scientists with very interesting thoughts on God (both devout Christians).
/r/AntiFeminists21/04/22 12:39 PM
2

And it is my hope that we can make something in the centre that doesn't go insane and has enough flexibility to adapt and adjust itself to change.
/r/AntiFeminists21/04/22 08:14 AM
1

Slightly out of order: Ideas can evolve over time. It is stupid to think they can’t shift in more or least intense positions. Movements and ideas change. Base assumptions are the things that make things make sense, if you get rid of them or change them your ideology will stop making sense. So no amount of evolution will be able to overcome having incorrect base assumptions. This is why you struggle to follow my logic - we do not use the same base assumptions. Having a rigid logical structure sim…
/r/AntiFeminists21/04/22 08:11 AM
3

The problem is that the premise of feminism is falce, rather than just the "patriarchy". This makes it a problem of not contracting reality, and cannot be done within the framework that created it in the first place. The problem of that broader group of ideologies is that it completely disregards everything outside of itself as evil, never judging on merit as then it would loose.
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 04:48 PM
1

Your shortcomings in knowledge and reading comprehension are a reflection on you, not my argument. Don't go in to insults it's annoying. There are two positions: Any movement or philosophy that at any point descended from the ideology of the left-wing of the French revolution is by definition left-wing. Calling feminism not left-wing is factually incorrect. If you base your logic on something factually incorrect you will always be incorrect. Ignoring this is a core principle of any left-wing ide…
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 02:18 PM
7

Just pointing out that some factually correct things are dismissed as a conspiracy theory. The "Hunter Biden laptop" thing was labelled a conspiracy theory because it was inconvenient despite being true. Feminism is a supremacy movement and "patriarchy theory" is an excuse to justify abuse. Therefore less conspiracy theory more the same as eugenics. Both follow the same framework. Calling them conspiracy theories makes them seem less malicious than they really are.
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 01:55 PM
0

It's incompatible with human biology and is actively contradicted by historical evidence. You just know only what the propagandists have told you. The only thing it ever was was Simone de Beauvoir's way of making money, trying to normalize being in an abusive relationship (projection) and trying to cope with choosing fame over being married and having kids (she really wanted those).
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 07:40 AM
4

Saying that someone believes in a conspiracy theory is just a way to dismiss them. Pointing out commonalities and something factually correct that most people don't dig into is often dismissed as a conspiracy theory.
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 07:30 AM
3

Feminism is based on socialism making it left-wing (descending from the left-wing of the French revolution). You are just labeling anything you don't like as not left-wing, or just accepting the re-normalisation which destroys any meaning. Fundamentally all left-wing ideologies have to accept Russeau's position on human nature and society to make any sense. That is demonstrably false, hence why (not the only reason) all left-wing ideologies fail. Another aspect of it is using fiction as if it is…
/r/AntiFeminists20/04/22 07:26 AM
5

I would add (none of them are exclusive to women : nagging (a type of abusive behaviour) letting emotions get the better of them. There is a time and a place for emotions, but it's not everywhere and not always. Sometimes you need to maintain that mental clarity to let the other person get some catharsis. taking arguments from ideas to personal assaults. A subset of the previous point. This often ends up becoming an unmitigated disaster in milliseconds and does irreparable damage to that relatio…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:29 PM
2

It's not feminism, it's human biology. Same thing as with swimming in freezing cold water, if you lack the conditioning to handle it you will be extremely sensitive to that stimuli.
/r/AntiFeminists14/04/22 10:54 AM
3

🕯️
/r/AntiFeminists14/04/22 05:50 AM
1

Men's Rights Movement
/r/AntiFeminists14/04/22 04:53 AM
2

It's not a level playing field. They have the sympathy advantage (literal symps), we don't. Edit: it also allows blame others for your mistakes and consequences of your toxicity. That's why they are at the moment mainstream, and we will most likely always be the underdog.
/r/AntiFeminists14/04/22 04:52 AM
8

Menslib is feminist and has consistently been a subversion of the broader MRM movement. I would suggest looking at how others handle situations and that "owns" often backfire. By being too confrontational a lot of people will disgard merit of your position. It's a natural tendency that humans have, the downside of which is not being able to improve oneself.
/r/AntiFeminists13/04/22 10:14 PM
1

I think it's more complex than what you put in your hypothesis (thesis is a different thing). I would add 2 extra dimensions to it. The fact that a large proportion of people do not consider the logical framework they use to come to conclusions. The two biggest flaws here are one is based on contradicting reality and the other is based on things that have already changed. Neither is capable of addressing the current situation and are making things worse (first one exclusively, ie there is no sit…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:41 AM
1

Well said.
/r/AntiFeminists09/04/22 07:52 AM
1

With what he is known for: He's books are very important introductory step to things like stoicism. He also brings up a lot of good topics in a way that most people can accept and follow, which improves their lives. He's lectures on psychology and religion show an amazing perspective on the topic. Downsides: he is very introductory which leaves people in a state where they know enough to think highly of themselves, but in actuality they don't know enough to discerning, hence open to manipulation…
/r/MensRights09/04/22 07:41 AM
3

If you could convince any type of feminism to stop hating and abusing men, they would stop being feminists.
/r/AntiFeminists08/04/22 06:26 AM
2

It's one of the main features of the framework feminism is using. That and being mutually exclusive with reality are some of the key ones.
/r/MensRights08/04/22 06:21 AM
1

And the point is not to give them legitimacy. If you go somewhere with the purpose of getting banned you make their position seem more justified to outsider's.
/r/AntiFeminists07/04/22 03:57 AM
1

Please don't as it would give people who want to get this sub banned an excuse, as if we are brigading.
/r/AntiFeminists06/04/22 06:26 AM
13

Get a lawyer.
/r/MensRights05/04/22 09:45 AM
4

That's a problem not just with that individual, but with the culture of that specific university. I'm surprised it's not reported on more often.
/r/MensRights05/04/22 08:51 AM
1

Don't take things out of context. I was pointing out that Ukraine stands to benefit from it, in an attempt to bypass NATO and EU deciding not to accept Ukraine as a member. Pointing it out is not siding with Russia, only not siding with Ukraine. Yes, I actually am. Untill there is an independent investigation neither should be taken at face value. Another thing to point out is that the coverage sympathetic to Ukraine has not been truthful from day 1. They have lost all credibility. Who are the o…
/r/MensRights04/04/22 08:39 PM
1

An article that can be edited by anyone is not a balanced one. You can say the exact same thing about US and drone strikes, and Vietnam War. Should we then condemn all US troops as criminals for the actions of outliers. Go look at how Majid Nawaz is covering it. A good expose was done at the start of this conflict by Jeremy YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnFWPg11oPw Or that the corporate media has consistently lied (like the ghost of Kiev; or the famous photo of a man sending his daugh…
/r/MensRights04/04/22 02:45 PM
3

That's the parts they don't tell you about being a man. Wellcome to the club. Word of advice find someone who would be willing to be your mentor and teach you the basics. Those will differ somewhat based on where you are. In a lot of cases you are considered a threat by default. There are many things that women do that are considered creepy when they come from a man and would be a cause to beat the isht out of you.
/r/MensRights04/04/22 06:13 AM
2

Again it's a bullying tactic. Use a falce claim (falce flag if you will) to force you into submission.
/r/MensRights04/04/22 06:01 AM
2

Again with the fog of war we do not have accurate information on who is responsible. All of these outlets are writing propaganda. For all we know it's the Ukrainians who did it, as they stand to gain from it. If you consider the broader context of what those two countries are it logically make sense that it's a false flag. Kiev is one of the major cities where Russia as a country was born. There is also no animosity towards Ukrainians in Russia which would be required for people to do this and R…
/r/MensRights04/04/22 05:58 AM
1

100% aggree.
/r/MensRights03/04/22 08:56 PM
9

This is a report from a war in Ukrainian calling Russians evil. In my opinion it reads too much like propaganda. To the Russians these actions would be counterproductive (psychological damage to their own soldiers for example), and would hinder justifying military action to their own citizens.
/r/MensRights03/04/22 08:54 PM
2

It's because men's sacrifice is what makes a society function. Women's sacrifice for men makes it sustainable. Older generations sacrificing for the younger ones makes a society flourish. Taking care of the elders that sacrificed for you to flourish helps pass those values down to the next generations. There are a few very specific and critical roles men cannot fulfil. Outside of those there are hard, dirty and unpleasant jobs that create the infrastructure for our society to function, which are…
/r/MensRights03/04/22 07:27 AM
5

Not OP, but still. I think it might refer to Ruth Bader Ginsburg defending a man's rights against state overreach. Don't remember too many details off the top of my head.
/r/MensRights02/04/22 03:15 PM
2

The thing with these types of questions is that its very dependent on the circumstances. So there isn't a right or wrong on this topic. My advice do not let an emotional reaction or preconceived notions override your logic.
/r/MensRights02/04/22 11:38 AM
1

Glad to see that you have an open mind. Men's rights is one side of a debate, that focuses on extending human rights to men and oppose those who seek to infringe on them. Ideally we would reach a situation that men are treated justly and we can do other things. A blatant example of this is the draft. In the US men got the vote in exchange for the draft, whereas women are under no such obligation. Otherwise its to call out lies and deceit, as most of the problems discussed here are the result of …
/r/MensRights02/04/22 06:08 AM
0

Indeed.
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 09:54 AM
2

I am sorry that you went through that. Society is a term describing a combination of cultural and social pressures that are not descriptive of any specific individual but describing the generalities. This is effectively an application of Russeau's views on human nature and society. What you described is that without thinking about what is true and what is what we want to be true people do a lot of harm. Your intentions do not matter if your actions are an evil thing. In terms of Sweden, the enti…
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 08:45 AM
1

The instant vs delayed gratification. Its also not just financial. Humans need human contact and not having a good family leads to detriments on a biological level. The human brain needs pressure in order to mature properly, familial obligations (to siblings, parents, children) and a culture that balances the importance of others and your own wellbeing are close to the only thing that can achieve it (there's a lot nuance in this and both left and right are wrong). The overall Marxism issue is a …
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 07:24 AM
2

Yeah, I tend not to take my words lightly. The pay dearly part is that we are likely going to pay for this foolishness (from one side) an spinelessness (from the other side) with a series of events with a casualty rate comparable only to the black death (~70% of the total population; in comparison ww2 was roughly 3-7 % of the total population). A point to note that the impact tends to be compounding and exponential, as well as this is just the deaths. The amount of suffering is beyond what a hea…
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 06:33 AM
10

We as a society will pay dearly for letting such people become prominent especially in the eyes of teenagers and young adults. Many of them will take her as a role model and do irreversible damage to their lives. She herself will realise in time that what makes a good parody or caricature (actually all art) is that the things highlighted have to be true, otherwise it will not stick. In this case - because of her actions she will end up living a miserable life. In psychology (I am not a professio…
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 06:07 AM
2

I own a copy translated by Kenji Tokitsu. https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Book-Five-Rings/dp/1590307976 My reasoning was: both Japanese, both martial artists (Miyamoto Musashi was a sword saint - unquestionably best swordsman of his time), Kenji Tokitsu has a doctorate in a relevant area. Read and re-read it a couple of times, been quite happy with it.
/r/AntiFeminists31/03/22 04:49 PM
4

Absolutely appropriate. I appreciate you bringing this up. The reason why you can't find books on this topic is because it is counter to most narratives. A big one is based on assuming that the "noble" savage myth is realistic (aka Russeau's views on human nature and society). This plays very well into the instant gratification mechanisms in our brain. Women more often than men act on an emotional impulse which is part of the instant gratification. It also puts pressure on women to perform and b…
/r/AntiFeminists31/03/22 04:58 AM
0

It is a set of ideals that have been useful, time and time again. You can engage with it on the level of quotes and soundbites, or read the philosophers in depth to understand their reasoning. You point out how people are abusive with the terminology, and then go and do it again yourself. At what point am I abusive? Do I change the meaning of the term - no. Do I force you to adopt language that I change on a whim to suit my position - also no. You not knowing the meaning of the words you use is …
/r/MensRights30/03/22 09:51 PM
1

Its ok that i use shaming tactics and mess with the psychology of children, because it makes them "productive" So, why can't we abuse little girls into being more "productive"? Can we slice up their genitals, too? Since abusing children makes them "productive" (and yes, even implying that a man has to act a certain way to "be" a man is abuse) You could just say "Hey, being stoic is the way to go, its great for these reasons, try it!" and not be a manipulative abusive misandrist piece of shit, bu…
/r/MensRights30/03/22 07:02 PM
-1

Stop projecting and taking things out of context. Manipulation and shaming are some of the things to oppose. This is why it's an instant gratification vs long term gratification issue. Manipulation, shaming taki things out of context all produce short term win at the cost of a compounding benefit of self-improvement. Point 2. I never said anything about there being only one way to be a man. The second bit refers to being a good one. It is also rooted in the types of behaviour that actually impro…
/r/MensRights30/03/22 06:52 PM
7

Standard leftist purge of decent. Same as the "reign of terror" and every time leftists got in control of a government.
/r/AntiFeminists30/03/22 07:09 AM
2

There are two approaches to this that are often lumped into one: The one you identify and call out. You are correct that it is a bullying tactic. People who use that are simply abusive. Nothing to add. There is the philosophical approach to what makes a good man in stoic philosophy. That bit boils down to a set of behaviours that are overall productive and help you improve. These include admitting when you are wrong, standing up for what is just, not using fallacies or gotchas, doing your due di…
/r/MensRights30/03/22 07:04 AM
6

All children need fathers. Both girls and and boys benefit from having a good father in their lives. There are aspects of the nuclear family model that are a negative, but having strong families are always a + for societies.
/r/MensRights29/03/22 07:41 AM
1

It's part of a liberal mindset to allow anyone the liberty to call themselves a liberal. The problem is that it allows malicious actors to thrive under its cover making them not that much better than the actually malicious people.
/r/AntiFeminists28/03/22 09:31 PM
1

Neither am I, but calling them liberal makes them seem better than they are.
/r/AntiFeminists28/03/22 09:26 PM
4

Don't call them liberals, what they do is the exact opposite of liberalism. Also never give the bullies any ammo. Calling them liberal makes them seem normal and reasonable to those who know only the rhetoric rather than action.
/r/AntiFeminists28/03/22 05:09 PM
0

Same here, but without the antifaminist sub membership. Literally, never posted or commented on r/Mademesmile.
/r/AntiFeminists28/03/22 05:05 PM
2

Yes. Balancing this out was the preview of society. And it's not that women are incapable of developing the skills to be good partners, but that everyone is told that they are perfect and don't need to be better. If I say the answers I will be told that I'm nuts, so I will ask it as 3 questions: 1) What philosophical school does Russeau belong to? 2) What are the main points of this school? 3) What political movement used accepting Russeau as the basis for its formation and feminism is a part of…
/r/MensRights27/03/22 05:43 PM
15

It's comes from projection. This is one of the reasons I try to make people look at where their thoughts come from in politics, etc. Here is the gist: Men and women have different reactions to the same stimuli and men tend to act based on emotion less (indicating a higher degree of control over rather than absence of emotion). There are situations where each of those can be advantageous and a critical disadvantage in others. The women that say that phrase project themselves onto men, without rea…
/r/MensRights27/03/22 06:04 AM
1

It's because most people implicitly accept Russeau's views on human nature and society. It's an easy way to feel good, and allows justifying doing horrible things to others. Misandry is one example. A very significant number of political ideologies are based on assuming that Russeau's position is correct, despite evidence to the contrary. This also explains why they invariably lead to negative outcomes for most people, and that real X has never been tried.
/r/MensRights26/03/22 07:10 AM
1

This is a philosophical issue of what stems from human nature and what stems from society. If you want details it's Russeau vs Locke. Here is the short version: Russeau: human nature is good and kind, with society being responsible for things like abuse and everything else we call evil (for example KAM). This is a feel good position which allows putting the emphasis on you being a good person and someone else making you do the bad things. Locke: human nature is self-serving with a tendency towar…
/r/MenSupportMen26/03/22 06:18 AM
2

Tis all of them starting from the original and first wave. The one sidedness is a core feature, along with with lying and faking.
/r/AntiFeminists25/03/22 07:35 AM
2

Suffragettes - actual bombings. Solanas. Dworkin. Core to the feminist movement, none self-proclaimed. Feminism would not exist without them. Stop throwing a tantrum when evidence shows that you choose to defend a movement of liars and psychopaths. You do realise that the only reason why you don't have more is because the MGTOW people prevent almost all of them?
/r/AntiFeminists24/03/22 06:42 PM
-1

Read about the suffragettes. Text book domestic terrorism. Also not to be confused with the suffragists (the ones who actually got women in the British Empire the vote). Milicent Fawcett was the Head of the suffragists and described how the suffragettes did a lot of harm to that cause. Valerie Solanas attempted murder. She is one of the most important feminists of the so called "second wave". A few very vocal feminists called and still do for example Andrea Dworkin. There is no pushback against …
/r/AntiFeminists24/03/22 04:46 PM
3

It's an issue with all feminists as for the notion of it to exist one must accept things that are factually incorrect as true. This makes it feminism a way to swindle people regardless of the sub division. In terms of violence - the non-violent ones cover up for the violent ones rather than helping in making it distinct.
/r/AntiFeminists24/03/22 12:15 PM
1

The expendability of anyone is often picking up the slack for others. Doesn't make it right to do so. The problem with all leftist positions is not that they make sense, but they are based on assumptions that are at odds with reality and no ammout of making sense can save it. This is also why every mass left-wing movement has resulted in a long term negative outcome. With feminism it's the assumption of society built at the expense of women. The assumptions that the left-wing is based on are abo…
/r/MensRights24/03/22 12:06 PM
1

I think our differences are mainly in the small print. If you look up whom the original left-wing used as a reference you will notice a lot of romanticism philosophers. That feels before reals mentality is at the core of left-wing philosophy rather than a modern add-on, which is why you will never come to a positive outcome through a left-wing ideology. It's attractiveness comes from claiming that it will quickly and without effort improve the life's of its followers, something they will never b…
/r/MensRights23/03/22 02:24 PM
2

My criticism is on principle and applies to both left and right. I am also not American. Part of the incorrect assumption on the left is what you call "universal humanism" and stems from accepting Russeau's perspective on human nature and the influence of society. It is a re-packaged version of thee myth of the noble savage. The problem with it is that it claims that abusive behaviour is an artifact of society rather than human nature. The problem with it is that it is also seen in animals and i…
/r/MensRights23/03/22 12:02 PM
1

The problem with the left is that for it to work things that contradict reality need to be true. The right simply admits that it needs to use men as something expendable, whereas the left cover the same thing with class and gulags. Both are disfunctional, with the right being factually correct at least once in a while. Hence neither are actually useful.
/r/MensRights23/03/22 11:23 AM
-1

The left it refers to set of beliefs and a logical framework, with everything that evolved from it being a left wing ideology, rather anything relative and no point in arguing is if it is truly left-wing. This also highlights that there are base assumptions that need to be made for it to make sense that most people never question, but when they do and find proof to the contrary it completely shatters their worldview. With feminism it's the assumption that men created societiety at the expense of…
/r/AntiFeminists23/03/22 10:41 AM
3

That's why the "fraud and a hate moment" applies to all left-wing movements and some right-wing ones. It's a very easy way to get power, but requires either constant escalation or repeats the cycle of revolution (why we can see all leftist movements turn on each other).
/r/MensRights23/03/22 06:34 AM
6

I would prefer a forum rather than discord, so I can engage with it at my own pace. + gives newcomers a self-help library.
/r/MenSupportMen23/03/22 06:28 AM
3

Part of the issue is that what you criticise feminism for are just applications of the principles that make left-wing ideology left-wing. Claiming that something is right-wing is simply a tool to dismiss an argument without engaging it on merit. Leftists also tend to muddy the waters by changing the meaning of words and definitions, also gotcha moments. Fundamentally, the right-wing is also to blame for violating men's human rights. The difference is people on the right tend to engage with the a…
/r/MensRights23/03/22 06:23 AM
3

Less the French, and more anyone who puts narrative above fact. In that particular case - leftists (all of the sub sets).
/r/AntiFeminists22/03/22 08:27 PM
2

Glad to have you on board. A lot of the things feminism is criticised for are also part of the things you say you support (leftism/progressivism), but to each their own pace. Some may not like my approach, but the only way to solve the issues we bring up in the long run is through helping people to better their lives and education/good and polite arguments (as opposed to gotchas and propaganda).
/r/AntiFeminists22/03/22 08:23 PM
9

To continue beating the same drum: this is not limited to feminism. This is a very specic application of a general principle that underlies things like progressivism, and stems from how the values of the French revolution have been created/chosen and is inherent to everything founded on it. A big part of it is the opposition of previous values, despite those being grounded in verifiable reality (something that actually works/is useful). Hence, the bs in this and feminism.
/r/AntiFeminists22/03/22 06:57 PM
3

Knowledge and integrity are what leads most people to become anti-feminist. A lot of the advice would depend on the details of the topic you are writing about. On the anthropology and religion end of things: the emphasis on the connection of God via the father/husband of the family, can be rationalised by: That men worked outside of the house and to see the majority of the fruits of their labour one would need to seek it out. This was to balance things out, as the work that women did was very ea…
/r/AntiFeminists21/03/22 06:52 AM
7

It's a bullying tactic. By forcing the use of their terminology it allows them to change the meaning of the word to suit whatever they need it to be, including the opposite of the word's meaning and apply that retroactively. This is basically the use of if you disagree with me you are wrong and must accept my position as superior, regardless of merit. You can see this in every cult coming from the leadership. It also allows them throwing a tantrum be a sign of them being correct. Technically, in…
/r/MensRights20/03/22 03:27 PM
11

Even more still.
/r/AntiFeminists19/03/22 06:58 PM
1

To a large degree this is the result of trying to resolve an issue with the logic that created it. People are trying to do the same thing expecting different results. This applies to every philosophy that treats itself above verifiable truth (both leftism and unthinking traditionalism).
/r/MensRights19/03/22 02:44 PM
27

More than you think
/r/AntiFeminists19/03/22 02:23 PM
34

Brief reminder: the first step of a genocide is to treat the target group as less than human. Most people just can't connect the dots that it's not that the target of that tactic is bad, but the tactic itself.
/r/AntiFeminists19/03/22 02:23 PM
9

A bit off topic: thanks for leaving a link to that sub. I like looking at graphs and data.
/r/AntiFeminists19/03/22 12:54 PM
1

There isn't one for vegetarianism. Reminder the original claim was pro-vegetarian, the burden of proof is on that side. A very simple and easy to verify argument: human anatomy is much more similar to carnivores/omnivores rather than to herbivores. Therefore claiming that humans are suited to live of a herbivore diet is the same as forcing it onto a carnivore on to such diet and leads to similar results. If your assumption would be true the ratio of our digestive system to the rest of the body w…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 09:40 PM
1

1 in that paper. That is what a good research paper looks like, not the link you had sent me. 2 in my original reply/one of the replies to you. 3 a body of work, rather than a single paper. If I stumble upon the papers I will link them, in the mean time look up other papers from these authors - at worst you will learn something.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 06:06 PM
1

It's built on the basis of socialism, which is built on the French revolution. At least get you facts straight.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 05:57 PM
1

I never said I considered things outside of that binary, in that specific statement. So giving you the benefit of the doubt - a case of miscommunication. You could make an argument about antibiotics and disease - but then you would have to consider pesticides and fungicides, neither of which are exactly healthy. Don't go in to insults about short circuiting. Be better!
/r/MensRights16/03/22 02:19 PM
1

It's been a while since I looked into those. Here is one on a ketogenic diet in open access: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6732196/ (in short it helps healing from trauma; with actual hard science) I will keep an eye out for them, and be glad to help on the science bit. I read these from time to time for fun.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 01:59 PM
1

Inserting not eating meat in a choice between factory and free-range. My position was out of the two sources of meat free-range is preferable to factory. If out of the two you do not have the option of free-range use factory. You are trying to use the same tactic as feminists, you support equality - that means you are a feminist. That entire framework is bad, not just those whose side is using it.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 01:45 PM
1

The guys at MIT have actually good data on it. I would be happy to see you disprove it on the merit, education and qualification - are not included in that. If you look into things there are old peer reviewed papers claiming benefits from smoking, and the paper that sparked the whole vaccines causing autism was originally peer reviewed. Beaten up example: nazis believed that the holocaust was scientifically justified. A part about masculinity is more about not accepting fallacies, bullying and s…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 01:34 PM
1

Stop trying to strawman my position. It makes little sense to you because I follow a different logical framework. If you cannot make a moral choice then it is not on you to be moral or immoral. It's when you can - choose the farmers market over factory farms.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:14 PM
1

Look up papers from MIT on the carnivore diet. In that link there are suggestions that it might - nothing in terms of proof.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:07 PM
1

Farmers market/ homesteaders.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:05 PM
1

The burden of proof is on the op, I. E. The side claiming that vegetarianism is healthier. Also read MIT papers on the carnivore diet.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:04 PM
1

Or I just have a PhD in STEM and see methodological errors in them. Sadly bad science is often not called out enough because it fits a narrative, and is often career ending to the ones who call it out due to politics. It is easy to prove people wrong it becomes much harder when the same people decide whether to give you funding or not.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:58 AM
1

Bring hard data and solid methods - then claim. Spoiler: proponents of vegetarianism never do that, as there is a possibility that they will be proven wrong and a scam.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:52 AM
1

No. Its if you can buy free range, if you can't buy what you can.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:49 AM
1

The meaning of the phrase is that they are too different for a meaningful comparison.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:46 AM
1

In that link there are only very vague links, rather than something solid. It's a cause to investigate that aspect, but too much information is not considered, potentially making it an apples to oranges comparison. There are ways of doing that type of research via large sample sets and a type of latent variable analysis (a type of thing that is underlying multiple things but cannot be directly measured). It's not especially hard to do, but it's hard data that makes it hard to push a specific nar…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:28 AM
1

It's not a requirement, just demonstrates that with availability being equal meat is the better option (unless you process everything into pills/nutrient paste, and then you get psychological conserns of eating only that), and that there is not enough evidence/too many gaps in any arguments that vegan/vegetarian diet is healthier than a meat eating diet (both being balanced). With the harm you still have a balance of that with joy that comes from being alive, and the suffering during the killing…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 11:16 AM
1

Yes I known, regardless thank you for the information. A bit more complex than that. The human body requires 20 specific amino acids in correct ratios to build our proteins, and our bodies cannot produce all of them. Other animals have a very similar protein structure (often the same amino acids in a slightly different ratios/sequence) whereas plants have other amino acids, rather than just the ones we need (so do animals but a lot less). So it's not just getting what you need but also avoiding …
/r/MensRights16/03/22 10:30 AM
1

Not every type of toxicity is lethal. There are plenty of things that do not kill you outright on the first try. Smoking for example. You are just not used to examining your beliefs. You can do it, it may not be easy or pleasant, but you can start seeing through lies and manipulation in general (not just this topic).
/r/MensRights16/03/22 09:38 AM
1

A correct ratio of amino acids. It's not that you need to just consume enough but also not overdose (chronic rather than acute) on others. Fairly basic principle of toxicology. Putting nutrients only in terms of vitamins is a way to manipulate people (by omission). Beef is not the only meat that exists. Just making sure that you know.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 09:34 AM
1

Providing that veganism is healthy is on you, my proof is human anatomy, basic biochemistry/chemistry/toxicology. Reminder: the bandwagon fallacy - is a fallacy. Not just proteins. There are many more other nutrients in meat than just proteins. Second proteins are an extremely broad category, but the proteins in meat are similar to the proteins make up the human body. Basic textbook biochemistry: the human proteins are massive structures consisting 20 amino acids, some of which cannot be produce…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 09:22 AM
1

Those nutrients are accessible only through meat or supplements. That still changes nothing about our biology being evolved to a primarily for the consumption of meat.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 08:56 AM
1

Stop acting like a psychopath. I never said enjoyment. Bring them into existence means that we simply help them not to die pre birth/ hatching that part is morally neutral. The rest is they do not have to worry about food/water/shelter/health (ironically that's what UBI and socialists claim to want for people), and a quick death when the time comes (if you use modern European means). None of it is for pleasure (that would indicate sadistic/psychopathic tendencies), but understanding and acceptan…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 07:15 AM
1

I never said that it is only about protein, stop trying to conflate things. If you have a team of medics monitoring your diet and taking a boat load of supplements then maybe. Without that he will be out of commission very quickly. Another point to add is not all people are the same, and his may be what allows him to be vegan and be a powerlifter easier. That however does not apply to almost everyone else.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 06:48 AM
1

It descended from the left-wing of the French revolution, therefore by definition left-wing.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 06:37 AM
6

Human biology dictates that we eat meat, otherwise our digestive system would be many times larger. In terms of nutrition - meat is the best thing to build and maintain muscles. It is also not pure protein as we need much more than protein alone. If you look at extreme examples - athletes, if they want to be any good they eat a substantial proportion of meat, as it is the best when it comes to muscles. When it comes to the average person the difference is less extreme but it can be seen in the l…
/r/MensRights15/03/22 10:55 AM
2

There are things without which the term left-wing is meaningless. A lot of it can be sumed up as a fruit of the poisoned tree type argument. A very specific part of left-wing philosophy is the interaction of human nature and society. The left-wing formed they implicitly assumed Russeau's position was correct. In short his position is that human nature is good and it is society that makes people behave in evil ways (slavery, abusive behaviour, false accusations). The problem with it is that we ca…
/r/MensRights14/03/22 07:50 AM
1

The issue is more complex than that. In terms of the left - a lot of the same criticism that we see here for feminism applies to all left-wing ideologies, because it was created on these flaws. A big flaw with lefties in general is that next to none of them know the first thing about their ideology and what the people that shaped it support and will not go anywhere near logic and evolution of their thought (how those ideas came to be) when they start to be proven wrong. And yes, after lurking in…
/r/MensRights13/03/22 11:36 PM
1

It is the general and unchecked toxicity of people, rather than purely feminism. In short: we get a hit of dopamine as part of instant gratification, this however undermines behaviours of delayed gratification (for example not being toxic). A good society promotes and pushes for the delayed gratification behaviours, as that is the only way it will prosper in isolation and without a slave class. Circling back to feminism, one of the base assumptions that it inherits is the inverse of that, which …
/r/MensRights13/03/22 07:36 AM
2

My list is in no particular order: Female, over 18 (as I want a family at some point within a child-bearing age range), alive, we like each other, and not toxic. None are hard to achieve.
/r/AntiFeminists08/03/22 09:40 AM
5

Feminism has always been a supremacy movement.
/r/AntiFeminists07/03/22 06:35 AM
1

The philosophy take is: CA is run by the left-wing politicians. When the left-wing formed it formed in opposition to everything that was done before. That includes equality under the law. Why would you expect that the current left-wing would undermine the core ideas that make them distinct from the right-wing and centrists?
/r/AntiFeminists06/03/22 08:01 AM
2

It's a good test to see who to cut from your life. The only exception to even consider is your children (if you have any). This can be broken down into 2 things: It's an abuse tactic that tries to gaslight you. This patten of behaviour is often done by abusers to hide their own actions. Most people rarely if ever critically examine their beliefs and are able to admit being wrong. Most of the time they regurgitate whatever someone they like or view as an authority say, exactly like a prayer. Admi…
/r/MensRights05/03/22 07:41 AM
2

Yes, because that has always been the point - gaslighting.
/r/MensRights03/03/22 09:48 AM
8

I agree. Keep up the good work!
/r/MensRights03/03/22 07:26 AM
2

To the edit (not really criticism but a couple of things to point out): the term civilian allready covers children and makes child soldiers distinct. Trying to add more terms to it just muddies the water allowing feminists and the like to push their agenda. If you point a gun at a soldier you are not a civilian, regardless of everything else. A bit of a rant I need to get out of my system: In terms of the propaganda on both sides my advice: take a look at what Ukraine's government is trying to d…
/r/MensRights03/03/22 07:24 AM
1

There is only one case when a draft/conscription would be appropriate - the invaders committing/advocating for/following the same ideology that committed genocide. In every other scenario a draft/conscription do long term damage to the culture and economy making sure that future conflicts are lost. In the case of the conqueror - the less damage they do the easier it will be to maintain control.
/r/MensRights27/02/22 07:29 AM
1

It massively depends on the country. The general theme is that in most cultures men are more disposable, that the average man is stronger thus better suited to fight in a war, and utilities the male instinct to provide and protect. Historically drafts were used only when the opposing force was aiming for genocide, in every other scenario the economic disruption caused by a draft would make the territory easy to conquer and defeating the purpose of the draft. Most people also didn't have a lot of…
/r/MensRights25/02/22 09:24 AM
2

Not quite. Traditionalism is less quickly self-destructive. Its more like they min-maxed the hell out of all of the bad parts of traditionalism. Traditionalism withstood a lot of time, but is no longer appropriate (due to technological and scientific progress), so we can look at all of the parts of traditionalism that feminists/leftists didn't take up and there are likely some really useful things we can use to make things better long-term. Building strong families, creating loving relationships…
/r/MensRights24/02/22 06:33 PM
5

We still need to point that out, to make sure that no-one responsible gets a pass.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 05:36 PM
10

That's why feminism is not solely responsible. Feminists do, but the traditionalists enable.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 03:48 PM
5

That's a type of education most people don't think about. Education is not just about knowledge, but also habits and the framework we use to think. Part of the culture taught in the Russian imperial public school system (funded exclusively out of pocket by the nobility) was the formation of familial bonds including the understanding of fatherhood and what makes a good man. In effect it was a more direct way of explaining the importance of men than the idea of the father in Christian trinity (fat…
/r/MensRights24/02/22 02:22 PM
21

Not quite singlehandedly, but it is a part of a philosophical framework that does the overwhelming amount of damage. Fruit of the poisoned tree argument, feminism being only one of those fruits. A lot of this can be countered with actually good education, something along the lines of the public school system in imperial Russia. Most people now are told to memorise and regurgitate rather than creating an understanding and ability to utilise that knowledge. A part of this is why people keep gettin…
/r/MensRights24/02/22 12:22 PM
38

It's something most don't know. In any case it's a bullying tactic and needs to be opposed regardless of who does it. Feminism is not the sole cause of all men's rights issues, although they are responsible for a lot of them.
/r/MensRights24/02/22 12:02 PM
1

With the flow of money - that fits very well into Putin's background. To some extent this is not a bad thing, as it can be useful to prevent malicious actors from sabotaging things as bolsheviks did while Russia was fighting WW1. I can't say I fully support that, but I understand the logic and that for Putin it's something that he will have the best chance to pull off. If Putin fails Russia will fall into either another 90s (rampant crime) or be conquered by China who will kill everyone (as left…
/r/AntiFeminists17/02/22 08:13 AM
2

Slightly towards asked. I prefer roses, and not a big fan of tulips. Not something I am not going to appreciate in any case.
/r/MensRights15/02/22 04:37 PM
1

Once. During an art exhibition (had a couple of landscapes in oil) I was a part of. Was quite happy about that.
/r/MensRights15/02/22 04:32 PM
1

That's why they always need a bad guy, and Russia recovering from communism would expose the people in power. the current people in government believe most of the same things and follow the same logical frameworks as communists and fascists (both Mussolini and Hitler brands of it), which will only lead to suffering and plunder of the people. With the educational system in Russia, there was a massive push (in the 19th century) from the nobility and royal family to create a school system for the g…
/r/AntiFeminists15/02/22 09:55 AM
1

Get her to admit that those who throw tantrums has lost the argument. Then ask her to prove that it exists, when it contradicts human biology. Namely that men have a neurological response to women showing socially significant emotions, which is mutually exclusive with patriarchy. I can add some links to papers with data.
/r/MensRights15/02/22 07:22 AM
1

It's the democracy that is the easiest to corrupt and always devolves into mob rules, rule of terror and oligarchy. In effect direct democracy is a death sentence, read Plato's Republic on how and why. The term Liberal is now semantically overloaded and carries two mutually exclusive meanings that is why you see the difference between 1980s liberals and 2010 liberals, neither of which are actual classical liberals nor hold liberal values, only claiming to be that. That is why it is crucial to un…
/r/AntiFeminists15/02/22 07:15 AM
1

My source on centrism are Machiavelli and Marcus Aurelius. The notion of a left-wing didn't exist when they were alive, and both were extraordinarily good at what they did. With the December uprising it is based on the same logic as communism, and not having a harsher backlash is one of the major things that contributed to the ability of the slightly educated to be coersed by communism. In terms of rulership, rulers were taught and trained from childhood, really focusing on the first two heirs (…
/r/AntiFeminists14/02/22 08:20 PM
1

Too much of anything is a bad thing. The comment about society is not that you should live your life in service to society, but that it is a good thing if you do pretty inconsequential things for those who may not be able to repay you, as to that person it might make all of the difference. Its not 1 big thing that create a good society but thousands of little ones. Personal example I was (and still am) looking for a postdoc position to change research fields (from physical chemistry to biophysic…
/r/AntiFeminists14/02/22 07:46 PM
1

I have. You are lumping 2 political axis together. Corruption is a function of human nature, rather than strictly political outlook, although some are more prone than others. With Russia, I would put the blunder that started that road on the decembuary uprising (восстание Декабристов) as they used the same basis as the French revolution for their outlooks and as part of the fallout not the intended man got the throne. Based on how Nikolay Konstantinovich (was originally in line to be emperor) go…
/r/AntiFeminists14/02/22 01:33 PM
1

This is a delusion, and a serious one at that. Centrism is always a path to corruption in government and, most importantly, in the economy. Please elaborate. A bad centrism scenario leads to a dictatorship, as in Russia. Dictatorship is a different axis on a political compass. Ironically in recent years Russia has been less and less tyrannical, especially with the COVID-19 response. There are a lot of issues there that can only be dealt with over multiple generations. The USSR has done that much…
/r/AntiFeminists14/02/22 06:44 AM
1

Was there a comment in between? My position is mostly leftist always end up destroying the planet and conservatives lets them do it. A real path to a better future is centrist, somewhat along the lines of classical liberalism on the left-right axis.
/r/AntiFeminists13/02/22 07:30 PM
1

Is someone forcing you to?
/r/AntiFeminists13/02/22 05:32 PM
9

It is fairly easy to understand: it's a tantrum because they don't want to be responsible for the negative effects of their actions. They chose a instant gratification and want the benefits of not doing so. The reason why people prefer virtuous people (it goes both ways) to be in a relationship with is that those behaviours create habits of delayed gratification, making them more stable in all situations (especially valuable in tough times and tempting situations) and allows more long term plani…
/r/AntiFeminists13/02/22 11:58 AM
1

It's not an "if" it's a "when" the left-wing will become genocidal based on a deluded narrative. Kind of an unavoidable feature of it being based on romanticism, rather than directly enlightenment.
/r/AntiFeminists13/02/22 08:06 AM
2

Kudos for being able to admit that you were wrong. I think more people should read more stories like yours.
/r/AntiFeminists13/02/22 08:01 AM
1

It's a way to get power, by portraying the people who actually are on your side as being your enemy and praising you for trying to destroy them they get power and then get rid of anyone in their way. Same tactic as French revolution used to gain support (founded left-wing politics/philosophy), created USSR, nazis, etc. and what Justin "Blackface" Trudeau and Biden/US democrats are using against decent. Once you start recognising and admitting patterns in logic and behaviour this become much clea…
/r/AntiFeminists12/02/22 07:45 AM
4

A small but old chanel on YouTube: HoneybadgerRadio. A bit ranty, but extremely underapreciated, some of their interviews are in "the Red Pill" by Cassie Jaye, they are involved with most of the MRM (rather than manosphere content) things cited by others. They do a tonnes of work and comment on news, culture and everything else related to men's rights. I can add a link if you are interested.
/r/MensRights12/02/22 06:55 AM
1

The last bit is mostly to recognise the tendency of men to want to provide and protect, and a description of the things that created our current society, rather than a prescription of what a man should do. It is also to recognise the effort that your ancestors put in to create the things that you have. You didn't need to discover fire, drink bleach to know that it is not a good idea, stuff like that. That includes society. In my opinion we should act in a way that creates a better future for tho…
/r/AntiFeminists11/02/22 11:14 PM
12

Let's unpack things. If I remember correctly, there is a technology in its infancy to replace a sperm cell and fertilse an egg cell. But it is barely beyond proof of concept, so not really useful. There multiple angles this can be approached from. If you want to go the biology route (I personally don't like it): embrios that start to differentiate from similar organisms tend are considered more complex and a higher stage of evolution than those that remain the same. There are more differences be…
/r/AntiFeminists11/02/22 07:01 AM
2

Thanks.
/r/MensRights07/02/22 06:24 PM
5

Please clarify.
/r/MensRights07/02/22 03:53 PM
20

In general they blow any legitimate issues out of proportion to the extent that their environment is a net negative to everyone but them.
/r/MensRights07/02/22 03:52 PM
5

To distract people from their actions and gather support based on the rhetoric, until they are in charge and can use force. If they do not distract people will notice that they are liars and do not act out what they say they want, as they will be exposed and jailed if not executed. Their goal is to get as much as possible and get out before anyone notices. Same as theifs. A great example of this how the left-wing formed, the "reign of terror" they enacted, and how the last king of France tried t…
/r/MensRights07/02/22 03:50 PM
78

It's a feature of the logical framework feminism is based on that to maintain the delusion/lies it requires constant escalation. That escalation starts causing evermore harm to people leading either to its rejection of that framework or societal collapse. A wellcome sight, but not surprising.
/r/MensRights07/02/22 12:29 PM
3

Something like "black dolphin" (I don't know if I remember the name correctly) in Russia. Execution is much more humane than some of the things that can be done legally in a prison.
/r/AntiFeminists07/02/22 11:16 AM
9

The man deserves prison for his actions. This is another part of why feminism needs to be opposed, as they pushed to abolish the age of consent in France. How is abolishing the age of consent is going to prevent these situations from happening?
/r/AntiFeminists07/02/22 09:28 AM
6

Sure. The biology/neuroscience of why the premise of feminism (that men oppress women) is incompatible with reality and some evidence for explaining how the behaviour feminists say men do is abnormal thus does not apply to the majority of men. https://www.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/sc8fgi/comment/hu6j76y/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 Here is a link to my previous post with references of why the feminist narrative is historically inaccurate. https://www.reddit.com/r/Egalit…
/r/AntiFeminists06/02/22 01:11 PM
8

Wellcome. Wouldn't say that this sub hates stuff outside lies, abuse and double standards. Women and women's rights are not synonymous with feminism. So it's not just that we don't have a reason to hate women, but we actually like and support women, with the exception of individuals who abuse others and throw tantrums. If you browse the sub a few months ago we had an awesome post comparing the attitudes of this sub and FDS, showing that we are actually pro-woman just not at the expense of everyo…
/r/AntiFeminists06/02/22 07:57 AM
1

Do you want to be disillusioned about the real actions of feminism (from the beginning)? The problem with feminism is not just the people, but the narrative it pushes. Those who call them selves feminists and support feminism give power to the ones who do the horrible things, thus contributing to the problems discussed on this sub. This is why we need to not give a pass to any feminists, and educate those who are not hateful on what they have supported and why leaving feminism betters their live…
/r/MensRights05/02/22 08:14 AM
1

Suffragettes - a domestic terrorism organisation, that massively hindered the movement for getting women in the British Empire the vote according to the leader of the suffragists (separate movement) Milicent Fawcett.
/r/MensRights05/02/22 07:57 AM
5

Did you mean the ones that bombed post offices and lied ("first wave") or the ones openly calling for gendricide of men ("second wave")? Would demonstrating that feminism was always based on gaslighting (an abuse tactic) show that they were never "good"? Feminism was never the thing they say it is/was.
/r/MensRights05/02/22 07:52 AM
0

This is the same tactic as used by the original left-wing during the "reign of terror" (where the term terrorism comes from). What you see is the real face of the left-wing. I can go into detail on how and why this inevitable in that logical framework, but its long and sounds hard to believe to those who don't know the relevant history and philosophy.
/r/AntiFeminists04/02/22 06:52 AM
2

That's definitely one reason, with maturity it's always a combination of actions with brain development. A lot of people stagnate at that level. At 18 her actions are understandable, but not excusable. If she is willing you could teach her to be more mature by asking questions like: "what would you think/feel/do if it was done to you?"; or stating that you are really bummed out about it, because you have other things to do and to have a chance at a relationship you put them on hold, but a relati…
/r/AntiFeminists03/02/22 10:48 AM
4

This comes from not being emotionally developed into adulthood. I believe that this is called "theory of mind" - an understanding that the person you are interacting with is also a person with thoughts and feelings, same as you. Having a date cancel on you is hurtful to anyone, man or woman. Second bit is the narcissistic idea that only your efforts matter, when you do not notice the effort others put in. Again a sign of not being past mid-teens in terms of mental development. My strategy on thi…
/r/AntiFeminists03/02/22 07:18 AM
2

It's a way of using gaslighting to get power. Literally the same tactic as the original left-wing during the French revolution and the subsequent "reign of terror" (where we get the word terrorism from). What needs to be noted is whether an issue can be identified to be the core part of a culture/philosophy and follows the same logic as what has consistently led to things like genocide. This is similar to Locke's views on human nature society, with the added not all societies and cultures are th…
/r/AntiFeminists02/02/22 06:38 AM
1

It is actually the fruit of the poisoned tree, rather than poisoning the well. It's 2 separate things. The similarity to poisoning the well tactic is to be a response to the opponent doing the same, as a way to call them out and force an engagement on merit. It is also not irrelevant as both nessesitate abuse. Definitionally, a poisoning of the well is impossible by pointing out relevant information. An abuser using and advocating for several types of abuse and justifying it, as is required to p…
/r/MensRights01/02/22 09:30 PM
3

No worries.
/r/MensRights31/01/22 10:18 PM
4

That was my point.
/r/MensRights31/01/22 10:16 PM
8

The you are correct on the basic premise, but the "patriarchy" as feminists use it was created by Simone de Beauvoir in 1920s (if I remember the date correctly).
/r/MensRights31/01/22 10:06 PM
6

Short form/lazy version: If you are going to judge all men on what a few do: then why are you a pedophile? All things that feminists have actively supported. The one that came with "patriarchy theory" - Simone de Beauvoir - actively advocated for pedophilia. The longer version. My take is that the "patriarchy" delusion is 3 things: Gaslighting - as it is contradicted by human biology, specifically men having a neurological response to women showing socially significant emotions, making human bio…
/r/MensRights31/01/22 10:02 PM
3

I don't think it's ignorance, that would be not caring to know that men suffer. It's hatred being justified. Basically a whole tonne of copium, as none of them are capable of creating any kind of non abusive relationship and want others to follow the same path.
/r/AntiFeminists30/01/22 08:40 AM
13

Not willful ignorance. Willful ignorance would be in ignoring the hatred. That is a great example of malice.
/r/AntiFeminists30/01/22 12:03 AM
14

The feminism you want it to be never existed, and you are just staring to notice it for what it is. In Fourier's formulation/translation (which is effectively the basis of feminism) it is a supremacy movement. If you look at the claims of all "waves" of feminism - most of it is either misframing or unsubstantiated claims. This makes feminism - a scam and it always was so. I can send you a couple of links to back this up.
/r/AntiFeminists25/01/22 11:00 PM
1

There are ways to mitigate the risks, the problems with that are: 1. It requires accepting responsibility for doing the things that mitigate the risks. Basically - become an adult. 2.In doing so you will gain the habits and knowledge nesessary to solve your own problems, thus having no need for outsourcing that responsibility. This makes you harder to control and scam, which is the bread and butter of all of the groups that seek to propagate the men=bad narrative. That also means that if you thi…
/r/MensRights25/01/22 10:50 PM
2

On physiological response of males to crying females (in open access): https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2017.00111/full A quote from that paper's abstract: "Environmental experiences and genetic characteristics are associated with adult males' physiological responses to socially meaningfully stimuli." It would be impossible to have this response if "patriarchy theory" or the "declaration of sentiment" of 1848 Seneca Falls Convention were anywhere close to truth. The behaviour a…
/r/AntiFeminists25/01/22 05:58 PM
5

There is biological evidence to it not existing (mutually exclusive). The "patriarchy theory" is explained as an attempt to normalize abusive relationships and pedophilia by Simone de Beauvoir. If you are interested I can go in more depth on both aspects.
/r/AntiFeminists25/01/22 01:43 PM
3

Standard leftist tactic, they can't handle any argument on merit - they try to dismiss you or shut you up. Basically a tantrum. Edit: ironically, I don't think I'm banned on any subs yet.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 09:35 PM
5

The movement for equality is egalitarianism, with men's rights and women's rights being branches of it addressing men's and women's sides of issues. For the most part majority of the issues that have priority for egalitarians are men's rights issues as they are much more agregious than current women's rights issues. This can be summed up to feminism has and is pushing for depriving men of basic human rights such as due process rights in court, presumption of innocence, legal definitions that exc…
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 04:11 PM
1

Narrative over reality. Comes from romanticism philosophy which gave birth to left-wing philosophy and later feminism. Same brand of gymnastics as used by political left-wing movements use to justify genocide and claim that liberalism is left-wing (historically liberalism is one of the things the left-wing was created to oppose. Most people never think enough to get past the lies and rhetoric, down to actions, logic and merit.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 02:00 PM
5

Yes, that's why we make them look rediculous and help the people in our community better themselves and their lives. Only ~7ish % of people support feminism, by making them look rediculous in the eyes of the "normies" and showing that a better alternative to feminism exists feminism will go further and further past the breaking point, following the same path as the KKK in the US. The KKK is an accelerated scenario and follows the same tragectory as the rest of left-wing movements (not exclusive …
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 01:01 PM
2

Depends. Most don't understand what they are supporting and why they are doing the thing they do. They say things like mysoginy, oppression, etc conveying no meaning behind it and serves as a mixture between witch hunting - burn the heretic - prayer/incantation. The few that know and understand what they are doing it to get power and money. Most feminists at the top of the pyramid make lots of money, just by keeping up the scam.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 12:51 PM
12

They make me laugh. They think that they have something because they never examined their beliefs, and when they try to present an argument it is rediculous and just shows them as biggots.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 12:35 PM
2

It's a power grab. Feminism positions itself as being for equality, but when a movement for actual equality comes in they need to silence it, as otherwise they will loose legitimacy and power to enrich themselves.
/r/AntiFeminists24/01/22 07:47 AM
1

I think that this serves as proof that the default position should be: feminists are pedophiles until proven otherwise. Side note this is why I point out philosophy, its not if but when will the movement start supporting the most radical ideas. Left-wing - this is your future.
/r/AntiFeminists23/01/22 08:31 AM
2

My point exactly. There are a lot of examples that follow the same logic. Not every one who helps you is a friend, and not every one who opposes you is an enemy.
/r/MensRights22/01/22 11:42 PM
1

That's why I called it lies and swindling. The concequince of supporting that lie is the destruction of families and lowering of happiness in women. That is one of those things that propagandists will never tell you. There is plenty of examples of that.
/r/MensRights22/01/22 05:44 PM
1

The winner never dictates whether their worldview aligns with reality. If it doesn't their wins are less a win and more a delayed loss.
/r/AntiFeminists22/01/22 09:55 AM
3

There are multiple ways to go about this. We can pass our values on and teach them to the point of being able to resist the propaganda and pass this on. The key difference is that our position is sustainable and produces a functioning society - theirs don't an as time passes requires ever escalating amounts of force to sustain. In time they will collapse due to basically choking on their own refuse. Our wins are not immediate, but inevitable. It is hard that our wins take a long time, but there …
/r/AntiFeminists22/01/22 09:50 AM
12

Because men systemically oppressing women was never true and is contradicted by human biology. It is just a product of propaganda that is used to swindle people. In the case of feminism as a philosophy it comes from a tradition that not only accepts but glorifies swindling.
/r/MensRights22/01/22 09:23 AM
1

OK. I. Your loss.
/r/AntiFeminists21/01/22 05:23 PM
1

It's an ego thing. It's very hard to admit that you supported a group that has never upheld the values they claimed to uphold. Very few people are willing to admit being wrong. Same problem in politics: all left-wing movements are based on lies and delusional logic - hence will never have a profoundly benefitial outcome on a 1000+ people scale. Feminism is one of those. If you want I can link to a comment of mine where I have references to neurological and psychological research pointing out tha…
/r/AntiFeminists21/01/22 06:38 AM
6

You being anti-feminist is like a light shining on their bigotry and desire to abuse others. You help expose them for what they are and they hate you for it. So, stay strong, stay yourself and we will have your back as much as we can.
/r/AntiFeminists20/01/22 10:04 PM
1

And you are correct.
/r/MensRights20/01/22 06:49 PM
3

Do you mean the left-wing ones that abandon liberty at the first sight of it being a hinderance? Or the ones that until recently were considered far-right, and actually upheld the values of liberty? If you read about the second ones they were one of those groups that the left was created to oppose, and have a completely different philosophical framework that rejects Rousseau in favour of Locke. Evidence agrees with Locke, and he has been the inspiration by US Republicans used to fight a US democ…
/r/AntiFeminists20/01/22 05:38 PM
4

Edit: In terms of BDSM, the dominant partner is supposed to deny the submissive partner things that will have a permanent effect on them, that is where morals and functional philosophy comes into play and why it is so important to have a good basis to the rest of your life. I think that a lot of it comes down to a lack isolation from family structures and education on moral values and philosophy. In years past most people lived relatively close to their extended family and it was common to stand…
/r/MensRights20/01/22 04:42 PM
2

Depends on a few nuances. I think it's more deriving joy from the suffering of others and getting away from it, less on getting attention. Really depends on the specific person in question.
/r/AntiFeminists20/01/22 03:33 PM
5

Less politics more philosophy they are based on. If you start with something that defies verifiable reality and cannot accurately predict cause and effect - do not be surprised to see double-standards. The big difference is how the nature of humans is considered and what assumptions have to be made in order for a framework to make sense. The the left-wing is simply a convenient term, and puts into perspective the outlook on things. When the left-wing was formed the Rousseau's philosophy was used…
/r/AntiFeminists20/01/22 03:30 PM
2

Thanks. I can go deeper into things if there is someone interested.
/r/MensRights20/01/22 07:40 AM
5

It is a byproduct of not being taught how to enforce boundaries on the male end. On the female end a lack of habits about watching whether you are crossing those boundaries and not being accustomed to accountability for crossing boundaries. Your example is extremely blatant in highlighting this, and to a lesser extent this is present in everyone.
/r/MensRights20/01/22 06:59 AM
20

It's never been pro-woman. What feminists (and the left-wing more broadly; not exclusively) fail to understand is that equality cannot be achieved by holding on to past grievances. Happiness is the same - it cannot be achieved when your partner is suffering, because that is a psychological disorder namely psychopathy.
/r/AntiFeminists20/01/22 06:52 AM
8

All dipshits deserve mocking for their dipshittery. Including those on our side ours, you know who you are. A good chunk of them are just trying to bait us into a situation that can be spun into a reason to ban us. When in doubt use the people are people argument and good critique is the only way to become better. If you want help let me know, I'd be happy to help.
/r/MensRights18/01/22 12:33 PM
3

Did you mean the genocidal psychopaths (some of the key second wave personalities who shaped the philosophy) or con artists (namely the "declaration of sentiment" of Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, making a baseless assertion that men historically oppressed women)? There are only a few individuals who call themselves feminists and have integrity. Namely Christina Hoff-Summers, Camile Paglia and I don't remember the name of third one. 3 people that's about it.
/r/MensRights18/01/22 11:16 AM
2

Feminism never had anything to do with equality. From it's inception all it was was based on lies, not even bias.
/r/MensRights18/01/22 11:07 AM
2

It is because we value the things we do and tend to take for granted the things others do for us when we are not around. Add to that the aspect that women tend to complain more and you have that situation. In relationships these complaints based on perseption psychologically prime people to have more and stronger complaints about their partner and starts a negative self-re-enforcing loop that makes you dislike your partner. Not a death sentence in of itself, but starts taking things in that dire…
/r/MensRights17/01/22 09:01 AM
1

To whom?
/r/MensRights17/01/22 08:50 AM
3

No, my statement doesn't imply any moral judgement, merely that the followers are led and manipulated by the people who run it. Following on from the first point it's saying that whilst the followers create a problematic situation, being part of that movement doesn't mandate bad intentions. A part of my point was to a large extent that there is difference between an enterprise and a fraud scheme. Feminism being the later of the two. The defining difference between the two is that an enterprise d…
/r/MensRights16/01/22 07:39 PM
7

Fair point. Thank you for pointing that out.
/r/MensRights16/01/22 04:00 PM
8

Try watching Cassie Jaye's interviews how her relationship with her then boyfriend improved after she abandoned feminism. The common thing with former feminists is regret about their actions and significant improvements to their mental health. Same thing as with a religious cult. This is can be explained by the perspective necessary to justify feminism/cult is so incompatible with reality that it essentially requires to one torture oneself to believe it (repeating it like mantra). When the perso…
/r/MensRights16/01/22 03:17 PM
13

I don't think the vast, vast majority truly believe that they're fighting for supremacy They are however actively supporting those who do, and that's the issue. The movement cannot be separated from the people that shaped it and it is the supremacists that did. Hence by aligning themselves with the movement they slowly adopt the ideas of the supremacists, and act in a way that make the movement a supremacist one. Feminism is just another industry and it does what they all do. If you use that log…
/r/MensRights16/01/22 03:07 PM
10

No worries =)
/r/MensRights16/01/22 10:02 AM
25

My response to being called a mysoginist is: yet somehow abandoning feminism improves the lives and mental health of women and everyone else involved. So who is the real mysoginist?
/r/MensRights16/01/22 10:01 AM
56

Other way around. Based on actions feminism is a supremacy movement. The movement for equality is egalitarianism.
/r/MensRights16/01/22 09:57 AM
5

The whole point of feminism is that you have to accept those assertions. The way you described your beliefs align with egalitarianism (the movement for actual equality) rather than feminism, but you have yet to encounter the arguments and data demonstrating that feminism is anti-male and anti-female. There is no shame in not knowing, but there is in remaining willingly ignorant. Inequalities women face are 90% simply because women weren’t in the room when decisions were being made. Less that mor…
/r/AntiFeminists16/01/22 09:46 AM
19

What you try to quote is the rhetoric of feminism, the issue is with the fact that the actions of feminists are the opposite, are always based on verifiable lies, and is most often used to justify abhorrent behaviour. If feminism was concerned with a level playing field it would address the fact that most of the people responsible for sexual exploitation and human trafficking are women who are doing it on their own volition. I would suggest that you look up Erin Pizzey, to see that feminists are…
/r/AntiFeminists16/01/22 12:12 AM
23

Missing factual accuracy. The men bad is first wave. It started with the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848 and its "declaration of sentiment". That's where the "men constructed society for the benefit of men at the expense of women" lie comes from. Voting rights - in the British Empire the feminist movement of suffragettes actively harmed the universal suffrage movement (the suffragists) according to the head of the suffragists Milicent Fawcett. The problem with the equal rights part is that the c…
/r/AntiFeminists15/01/22 11:38 PM
2

Depends on the person in question. In my case - I actually want a family - wife, kids, hobby machining workshop. Is it the smart thing to do? Not in the slightest, then again that is something I want in my life, so as with everything else in life - be fully prepared, mitigate as much risk as possible, have fail-safes and emergency procedures in place. To help me in this I have figured out a few ways that could help. A fairly significant one is that one should have influence on who your partner i…
/r/MensRights12/01/22 09:40 PM
10

If you take a deeper look at BLM and feminists the tactics and rhetorical devices used are the same with the majority of the difference coming from what the chose as a dividing value. They are also based on the same philosophical framework, with all major feminists also being socialists (Charles Fourier; de Beauvoir; etc.) and the leaders of the BLM movement being Marxists (which is based on socialism). For these movements to oppose each other would necessitate bring attention to their shared na…
/r/MensRights11/01/22 04:16 PM
10

Assault is assault regardless of the perpetrator's gender. They should press charges against her. Not wanting to defend oneself is situational. Most men will jump in to defend her even if she is the perpetrator and the guy was acting in self defence. Being attacked by a crowd is very dangerous, as it often emboldens even more violent behaviour and it is harder to prosecute as the charges need to be brought against each individual and each of their actions must be proven. Personally, I think that…
/r/MensRights11/01/22 11:16 AM
62

Being valued for the good that we bring to others.
/r/MensRights11/01/22 09:37 AM
5

Opinions aside, prior to mid 20th century, there were expectations pleased on both to make sure that their partners sexual needs were met. This is a justification to alter the default social contract, and reducing the expectations only on one side. Now for the opinion: if you are not in a committed relationship they are correct. If you are in a committed long-term relationship (like a marriage) the phisiological responses produced in both as a result of sex help maintain the psichological bond b…
/r/AntiFeminists10/01/22 09:26 AM
1

In the one that you don't examine your base assumptions and don't understand the framework that your philosophy is built on. I. E. Base your thoughts on garbage - and you will always produce garbage ideas.
/r/MensRights09/01/22 05:52 PM
1

Yeah. Most people stop when they have a narrative in which they can feel like they are "the good guys", rather than seeking out the truth.
/r/MensRights08/01/22 12:09 PM
5

They start with the falce assumption that men think about women the same way as women think about men. Men doing things are focused on that thing and men's thoughts don't dart around the same way as women's do. That is a part that most women don't get, if a man is focused on taking a good shot with the camera (unless objectification of the actress in the shot is the objective) men will not give a rat's ass about the actress in the shot being female. Where this comes from: Feminists use a common …
/r/MensRights08/01/22 08:56 AM
6

Let me know if you want someone to talk to about it.
/r/AntiFeminists07/01/22 08:18 AM
12

My logic on this is if you want to die - no amount of suffering you endure in this life matters, as after some time you will be dead regardless. To a large extent you are where you are in life because there was no one to help you and you can not change that. What you can do is to become that someone who made someone else's life better and prevented them from suffering as you did. Plant the trees under which you will never sit, so that others would. If I understand Indian culture enough - doing s…
/r/AntiFeminists07/01/22 08:15 AM
3

One of the big things about FDS is that they start by accepting things that contradict reality, their own actions and the things their movement consistently stood for. FDS is just a more in your face example that is easier to recognise. Do we have people around here who do the same thing in other aspects of their views - yes, however this sub is about the consistent application of human rights and legal rights of men and boys. Differences in perspectives should not prevent civility or solving is…
/r/MensRights06/01/22 09:16 PM
3

Their egos are boosted if you just ban them. And if you use the same tactics as them they will beat you with the double standards. If you struggle gaianst them - tell me or I can link to some of my posts to quote. They only two options they have are show everyone that they are biggots or shut up. Only thing to add to make it more effective is meme that to oblivion to normies (90+% of people) . That also gives us proof that we are not like them and if that doesn't matter - nothing you do matters,…
/r/AntiFeminists06/01/22 11:32 AM
-1

A bit more nuanced than just one or the other. I think that there should be a choice within a fairly small window of time, but it should never be taken lightly or be considered as not taking of a human life. There should also be a choice for men as well, but I think of it as part of legal equality between men and women, rather than child and parent as with abortion. On that part my advice is be an adult and prevent being in that situation.
/r/AntiFeminists05/01/22 03:47 PM
2

Aggreed. A lot of people excuse things from people they aggree with. If a movement has consistently advocated and done for horrible things, while claiming to uphold some values only to abandon them when they become inconvenient it should be fought against. Most people here will agree that this applies to feminism. I apply this same logic to everything, not giving a "pass" to others who do the same. The second bit is unpopular.
/r/MensRights05/01/22 03:37 PM
8

Hating men is a mainstream feminism position. See the adoption of the views of Solanas and Dworkin by mainstream feminism.
/r/AntiFeminists05/01/22 09:11 AM
3

There are many sides to this. But to a large degree it's a matter of principle to not be anything like our opposition, rather than a different flavour of the same base thing. Showing that we are nothing like what they try to portray us as is extremely valuable, as it can win the hearts and minds of others. It also serves as a good sanity check to make sure that we ourselves don't become toxic. Lastly, trolling is not an objective measure as it relies on the emotions stirred up in the reader. By …
/r/AntiFeminists05/01/22 09:08 AM
10

Another "but it's OK when we do it" type thing. That's why that whole logic should be opposed, not just this one application.
/r/MensRights05/01/22 08:36 AM
7

Wake up and see that the chocolate you like so much is just a turd. You get the 99% because you clasify it as a different thing if a woman perpetrates it. The different legal treatment is part of the law that feminists lobbied for. That is what feminists really do: they malign things to get power, never solving any problems. On the abortion: Its mostly women on both sides. The medical nessecity and product of rape/incest are <5% (rape/incest is <1%), with the rest being bad family planning (~12%…
/r/MensRights03/01/22 01:01 PM
6

Translation: Whah someone is calling me out on my bullshit! Whah. Calling it gibberish is a tantrum. Group up. What behaviour ? You mean not all men physically oppress women ? I agree, it's mostly men in power who oppress women with misoginistic laws. The behaviour of directly oppressing women. It's only feminists/socialists who consider everything to be oppression. It's usually opportunism and not gender specific. Like how feminists in Spain is separating murder by victim's gender and charging …
/r/MensRights03/01/22 12:04 PM
3

Explain why you think it's gibberish. Rephrasing: the behaviour that "patriarchy theory" ascribes to all men, is scientifically described as a set of abnormal behaviours - meaning it is not the norm. It is studied on a biological level, and cannot be epigenetically induced through socialisation over a short period of time (short in anthropological terms; 10k years being short). On the merit of these biological factors the feminist assertion of "patriarchy" is bs. The "patriarchy theory" was firs…
/r/MensRights03/01/22 10:58 AM
5

Please explain.
/r/MensRights03/01/22 10:01 AM
6

What is even this gibberish hahaha Translation: Oh no, someone is calling me out on pedaling bullshit! Quick, I need to bully them in to submission! At least get the facts straight.
/r/MensRights03/01/22 09:56 AM
5

And oppressing women negatively impacts men on a biological level. Kind of basic neuroscience. Once you start examining the base assertions of feminism you quickly find that feminism never had validity and was always a way to get power for the few feminists at the top at the expense of everyone else.
/r/MensRights03/01/22 09:27 AM
9

I attack it in two ways main ways: There are women in my life I care about. Why the F would I do things to hurt them? Then I can explain the idea of "patriarchy" as the attempt by de Beauvoir to normalize her relationship with Sartre. This use of the word patriarchy also semantically overloads it, and the real role of a patriarch cannot be achieved through suffering of those whom he is in charge of. It contradicts empirical evidence. Historically, in European cultures women where not bared from …
/r/MensRights03/01/22 09:21 AM
5

The human personification of rabies after the symptoms show. Destroys her own life and tries to spread it to others. Just like Simone de Beauvoir.
/r/AntiFeminists02/01/22 10:03 AM
20

It's a bullying tactic. By doing what you do you demonstrate how wrong/toxic they are. In order to silence/discredit/dismiss you they apply a label that states that you only say those things to get attention. The aim is to use social pressure (could be considered social violence) to not engage with you on merit. It's a fun rabbit hole to see where this playbook comes from.
/r/MensRights02/01/22 09:18 AM
4

Happy New year! Hope it will be better than we can imagine!
/r/AntiFeminists01/01/22 11:43 AM
3

Not a bad start. Good on you! Some things you can try to dive into next: the philosophies that feminism evolved from; feminism being contradicted by neuroscience; feminism having no historical or factual basis; the core of the people that shaped feminism were abusive, pro-pedophilia, and wanted to kill men; the improvements in mental health and personal relationships of those who abandoned feminism. Let me know if you want any pointers to start.
/r/AntiFeminists31/12/21 08:48 AM
36

Sorry that you had to go through all of that. Just to check up on you: are you out of that situation now? Have you managed to get help to avoid such people and not let that ruin the rest of your life? I'm here if you want to talk to someone.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 07:47 AM
2

It is a question of how you define morality and reality. Most people don't think about things beyond the initial statement, and oppose looking at reality because it is hard. It is also very hard to convince people to look at it because it's not pretty and it is much harder to convince people that they were wrong or that they are using the same logic that got us into this mess. It is a bit of a black pill, but the silver lining is that due to the disengagement from reality they are incapable of c…
/r/MensRights30/12/21 08:05 PM
6

It's a long and interesting topic. The TL;DR talking about straight men and women, women are arousing to both men and women, whereas men are only arousing to women. I wouldn't call that discrimination though.
/r/MensRights30/12/21 08:08 AM
16

Isn't feminists being delusional a given? =)
/r/MensRights29/12/21 08:31 AM
2

A lot of this depends on who you are, what you want in life, etc. I'm the kind of guy who wants a family and kids, but currently not in a place where I want to date (need to sort out a postdoc; deal with some mental health issues, so it's not too much baggage in my next relationship). Currently I'm trying to figure out what to look for and how to avoid the mistakes I made. In terms of pressure, it's there culturally (due to the way I was raised), societally (most of my former class mates are mar…
/r/MensRights29/12/21 08:20 AM
2

Facing cognitive dissonance is very painful (very similar to phisical pain). This is why it can be used as a test whether you reasonable (OK with being challenged) vs in a cult (can't change your opinions or be challenged). Applies to all sorts of things.
/r/AntiFeminists25/12/21 06:26 AM
2

A slight correction: the left-wing should not be in quotes. It is the same playbook for the French revolution (the people we get the word terrorism from), and fascists, and feminist and every major movement based on the same things as the original left-wing. Its a long and surprisingly interesting story. This is what happens when issues are ignored. You don't challenge mild bigotry (or flaws in logic) and it gets more support and becomes more extreme, and to avoid facing cognitive dissonance bet…
/r/AntiFeminists25/12/21 06:07 AM
3

Thanks.
/r/AntiFeminists24/12/21 11:21 PM
1

They are just abusers that don't want their victims to escape.
/r/AntiFeminists24/12/21 06:23 AM
22

It's a bullying tactic. They establish themselves as moral superiors and use that to justify abuse. My advice call them out if they persist walk away. Be warned calling people out and pointing out the issues in logic and logical framework can be perceived as an existential threat and most will double down or try to dismiss you.
/r/MensRights24/12/21 06:19 AM
1

The one thing feminists never mention is that a majority of abusers and violent individuals are not normal based on their neurology (this is heritable).
/r/AntiFeminists23/12/21 07:16 AM
5

Feminism (and other things following the same philosophical framework) incentivise and justifie psichopathic behaviour. Its no wonder that they are all damaging to themselves and everyone around them. I wish more people would see how abhorrent some of the things they support based on a narrative are.
/r/AntiFeminists23/12/21 05:22 AM
6

Not sure what you meant. On this sub we mostly point out the lies and bigotry of feminism, some on topic comparisons, but we don't support hatred based on immutable characteristics like gender. We do however point out the absolutely deranged (not based in reality) and psychopathic nature of the feminist movement and judge people on the merit of their actions, which is pretty much the inverse of the logic underpinning feminism. We do get feminists popping up now and again, which can be divided in…
/r/AntiFeminists22/12/21 11:18 PM
14

Or concentration camps and gulags /sarcasm
/r/AntiFeminists22/12/21 04:26 PM
73

Feminists and FDS seem to be incapable of comprehending a lack of hatred towards opposition as a whole rather than the actual behaviour. A left-wing tradition dating back to it's inception.
/r/AntiFeminists22/12/21 07:26 AM
6

It's rhetoric that people who don't care about what they support as long as it sounds good buy. Same as the "feminism is for equality" narrative most people accept without getting to know what it truly is and ignoring when such information is presented to them. At best - "snake oil salesmen".
/r/MensRights22/12/21 07:20 AM
7

Yeah, for the manufacturers it's about bringing the total number of casualties down, not a specific group.
/r/AntiFeminists21/12/21 08:42 PM
5

Most people here like women, a fair few are women. That has nothing to do with the deserved pointing out of facts about the gaslighting (Seneca Falls Convention of 1848 and its "declaration of sentiment") , genocidal (Dworkin, Solanas, the "scum manifesto") pedophiles (de Beauvoir, Sartre, Foucault) most people call feminists that have defined feminism and its philosophy (I.e. Where "women were oppressed" and "patriarchy" type of garbage comes from).
/r/AntiFeminists21/12/21 08:36 PM
31

Her husband could have died from a broken rib puncturing his lung. When somebody yells "help [crime]" both accuser and accused are to be brought to law enforcement, otherwise if it was a falce accusation they would be complicit in committing the crime (in this case kidnapping) and should serve jail time.
/r/MensRights19/12/21 10:45 PM
2

A lot of these thing a read a while ago so I don't have the exact ones I've read. This is also considered fairly basic (admittedly my area of expertise is physical chemistry, neuro stuff psychology and philosophy are hobbies), so it's mostly buried in textbooks on the subject The abstract of this study puts thing really well, linking violent behaviour to neurophysiological abnormalities: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/641182/ (sadly I don't have the access to the full paper) This abstract point…
/r/MensRights18/12/21 12:09 PM
14

Not just psychopaths. It is actually quite hard to comprehend a completely different mental framework.
/r/AntiFeminists17/12/21 07:05 AM
6

Alison Tieman. The HoneybadgerRadio on YouTube is where I came across a lot of these things.
/r/MensRights17/12/21 06:58 AM
9

And we will either learn from the past and create a self-maintaining social system (politically neither right nor left) that accounts for human nature and pushes people to become better or repeat the same thing every few dozen to a hundred or so years.
/r/MensRights15/12/21 12:24 PM
1

A good reason to talk about failing is self-reflection. To learn from that mistake. Sometimes people need to say it out loud or even to someone to connect the dots.
/r/AntiFeminists14/12/21 11:47 AM
1

MensLib from what I've seen are grifters. The LWMA mean well, they are just willfully oblivious that they hold onto the same logic as the one that gave rise to feminism and a huge number of other abhorrent movements. That logic has consistently (one of the very few consistent things it ever did) produced and empowered all kinds of awful people (the first time it was put into practice was were we get the word terrorism from). Meaning that its not a flaw in application, but a flaw in the principle…
/r/MensRights14/12/21 11:05 AM
1

Not quite. They just cling to the same things that gave birth to feminism and other movements that consistently commited genocide, disregarded human rights etc. Not really bad people, just covering their ears and shouting "la-la-la-la" when presented with evidence that doesn't support them.
/r/MensRights13/12/21 09:33 AM
0

And you haven't addressed any of it. The criticism still stands.
/r/MensRights13/12/21 07:24 AM
0

Less ideological, and more logical. Try mapping one on to the other and see it for yourself.
/r/MensRights13/12/21 07:19 AM
3

You make some very good points. I think that one of the issue the is human evolutionary desire for instant /quck/low investment gratification. It is hard to accept that what you hold true follows the exact same logic and reasoning as the things you hate just directed at a different group, as it brings up existential dread, due to humans being a social species and being deprived of a group we used to be a part of was effectively a death sentence. Most people (not just men) have been raised to be …
/r/MensRights12/12/21 11:10 PM
3

A significant number of MRA's are women. Act with integrity and support men's rights, are pretty much the only requirements. About being "brainwashed" - this is a bit nuanced, but it is often used to dismiss arguments along with calling it a conspiracy theory and judging things on rhetoric and sentiment, disregarding the overwhelmingly negative effects of the same movement. In terms of respect, a big distinction needs to be made between its common use and actual meaning. True respect has to be e…
/r/MensRights12/12/21 08:17 PM
9

Glad to have you on board. If you have questions - don't hesitate to post it, most here will genuinely try to help (we do so for everyone including the feminist that stop by). Hope you have a good good experience here.
/r/AntiFeminists12/12/21 08:00 PM
9

I wholeheartedly agree.
/r/AntiFeminists12/12/21 07:18 AM
1

You hold the rhetoric of what the left-wing claims to be, rather than looking at it on merit of it. Calling yourself left-wing gives credence to the logic and tactics used by those you oppose creating a situation where you may be able to change something, but you also create extra inroads for for example feminism to re-emerge. This ultimately leads to reducing, but prevents from solving the problem. To solve the problem as best as humanly possible, you have to abandon what got you in that mess i…
/r/MensRights12/12/21 07:14 AM
1

All of which were discarded by the left-wing during its formation. Calling your self left-wing just gives credence to the same tactics and other left-wing movements, one of which is feminism.
/r/MensRights12/12/21 06:51 AM
1

Then why are you calling yourself left-wing if you don't hold left-wing values? And if you do, at least know what it stands for, not the rhetoric.
/r/MensRights11/12/21 11:23 PM
1

Do you understand what you are really supporting then? Because that's the pattern of those who called themselves the same thing and said the same things. It is the same tactic as saying "feminism is a movement for equality", which is why I said that you don't fully address all of the issues. Metaphorically, I'm simply pointing at the sign saying that you are not on the train that goes near where you want to go. I really don't want go into highlighting the same framework in almost universally and…
/r/MensRights11/12/21 11:20 PM
1

Enlightenment produced romanticism. Every significant founder of the left-wing philosophy was inspired by that specific branch of the more general enlightenment. I don't refer to the enlightenment simply because the issue is with that specific branch, rather than the entirety of the enlightenment.
/r/MensRights11/12/21 11:04 PM
0

Sorry, but that is factually incorrect. If you go through the philosophy of the founders of it they were inspired by romanticism. In early sources the left are also reffered to as "sons of Voltaire". One of the noteworthy points inherited by left from romanticism is that lies that help their narrative effectively swindling people are considered good, which is antithetical to classical liberalism as that is infringing on the liberty of informed choice. Individual rights, equal treatment under the…
/r/MensRights11/12/21 10:58 PM
6

Feminists and more broadly leftists have openly supported it, seeking to abolishing the age of consent completely. https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/qg4s0j/in_1977_french_intellectuals_including_foucault/ How is it hateful to point out what feminists verifiably did and hold them accountable? Side-note: Had a run in yesterday with someone trying to bait me to write a hateful. Needles to say it didn't work. Edit: link
/r/AntiFeminists11/12/21 04:08 PM
0

Disconnected from reality and disregard for critical aspects. This results in deception through a lack of expertise. There is a reason why you should always ask your MD about health decisions. A problem of scalability. On a small scale (~100 people) the system is easy to tailor to mostly suit everyone, and it is easy to see the benefits of small personal sacrifices because you run in to the beneficiaries of them daily and care about them. On a large scale (1000 +) it is impossible to taylor thin…
/r/MensRights11/12/21 08:32 AM
3

In practice, you are simply stripped of it if you don't register. At least here in Lithuania.
/r/MensRights11/12/21 07:51 AM
3

This is why both parties are bad, and only individual politicians are decent. In my opinion, this all comes back to founding philosophies. In terms of US Democrats and more broadly left-wing philosophy, fairness and consistent application of principles were thrown out the window in order to gain power, giving rise to things like identity politics, collective justice, etc. In this case they are simply supporting a left-wing ideology - feminism. The US Republicans result in a similar thing through…
/r/MensRights11/12/21 07:49 AM
1

It is psychologically damaging to hold a mercenary attitude towards everyone, as it creates a psychological state similar to that of prolonged solitary confinement inducing a huge list of mental health issues. Plus, I like to give good advice and help people, just not at the expense or to the detriment of others. And also there are women in my life that care about me and I care about them. That's kind of called having good friends.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 11:46 PM
1

So the question is how to deal with it and make sure that during the hormonal-crazy time women don't f up the rest of their lives.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 11:27 PM
0

Not hijacked, left-wing philosophy was that from the beginning. That's why I pointed out where its roots of the problem lie. Best ideas like what? How to put total psychopaths in to power? Or the various ways of destroying peoples livelihoods? My issue that it always was good sounding sentiment, always leading to evil outcomes, because it is by design easy to malign. Taking a look at history the guys who created the left-wing were a genocidally inclined version of the last king of France, meanin…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 11:24 PM
1

There is benefit to them as well. One is that it is much easier to develop hormonal birth control for women, compared to men. And men also have hormonal states, so all of it is just something to take into consideration. The million dollar question is: how leverage our strengths, mitigate weaknesses, and work together towards something profoundly better?
/r/MensRights10/12/21 11:07 PM
-1

And if you don't know their foundations how do you know what they will uphold? Have you heard - there are politicians who lie? Or do you think they all tell the truth and keep promises all the time? And people should care where it comes from, since the left has always committed genocides after getting sole power (the right is not completely innocent of this either). What makes you think they will not come for you or that this time its different? If you know where they come from (foundations) and…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 03:33 PM
-1

That's why I talk about philosophy, rather than politics. Left-wing politics are born from left-wing philosophy and the foundation of left-wing philosophy is romanticism, namely Russeau and Voltaire. Thoughout history there are very few decent people in all of politics. And I never claimed that political right was the answer. Stop trying to missrepresent me for your advantage (hint: this is part of how philosophy based on romanticism, make a strawman and attack the strawman, never the actual arg…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 03:05 PM
0

Just the historical information and what they wrote. Funny how a King of Sweden (1st of the Bernadotte dynasty) had a tattoo across the chest "death to all Kings" from his days as a revolutionary during the French revolution. Also funny how the difference between the claims of the original left-wing are just a genocidal version of what the last king of France tried to do. Same with the December uprising in Russia.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 02:18 PM
-1

There are core beliefs that make them [insert ideology], differences between the groups in different parts of the world notwithstanding. The point is you cannot build something good on a bad foundation. Read up on people like Robespierre and who inspired them. If all they wanted was better conditions for workers the "reign of terror", and a lot of executions would be unnecessary. If you take a deeper look at Louis 16th he tried to do the same without the bloodshed but didn't have enough politica…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 02:12 PM
1

The right is guilty of the same, never said they aren't. Unquestionable belief in either never leads to anything good. My position is actually centrist. I do not criticise to "own", I do it to help people be better than before. As simple as that.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:50 PM
3

Classical liberalism comes from a completely different philosophical framework than left-wing. Stoicism as opposed to romanticism, to be precise. I will not close the door for those genuine ones, because I was one of them. And I will shine a light for them so they can find a way out of the darkness with less pain than it took me.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:42 PM
1

I reserve judgement towards either side until evidence is presented. Humour: yes the fence is comfy. No I'm not jumping on either side until I figure out which is mud and which is an opened septic tank.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:37 PM
2

Not on hand, but I'll see what I can find over the next couple of days.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:32 PM
1

The background philosophy (philosophy is much more my wheelhouse than pure politics) may be secondary, but not tackling multiple related issues at once will be just delaying what you are trying to prevent, not solving the problem. And that's my point. MensLib advocates for feminism, LWMA advocate for left-wing, a feature in common that historically both attracted abusive individuals and covered for them. Not an exclusive issue to those groups, but something not to be disregarded. I will definite…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:31 PM
1

So why do you call yourself left-wing if you are against the principles that founded it? That emotional/narrative drive is what created the left-wing, "woke" simply take it to the extreme. It was necessary for the left-wing to have it and create a rift between people based on class during the French revolution, otherwise people would find out that the king and a sizeable portion (but not the majority) of the nobility aggreed with them and wouldn't let the ones who started the revolution to have …
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:14 PM
1

I'm in European. Native Russian speaker. I know that it is normal, my point is most people who support it ignore the stuff it leads to and uncritically accept that narrative. (same goes for any other uncritical viewpoint) it just happens to be against the political left-wing more often (the things I stumble upon), but the principle applies to all.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 01:07 PM
1

It is on an ideology level not really anything in terms of moderation. It's less to castigate either of the subs, and more to point out that your actions do not lead to where you say you want to go. (years ago I considered myself to be on the left, even feminist, then started to look at things deeper and now want to help others find what I found, saving others at least some of the suffering along the way.) The main philosophical framework underpinning it, namely acceptance of romanticism philoso…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:59 PM
3

Not necessarily. Both positions need to be looked at I'm more detail for a definitive statement.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:29 PM
0

I wholeheartedly agree that it's not a political issue, but a human rights issue. What I am trying to highlight is that to make good progress on it, we need to accurately assess things as they are which is not fully possible in a framework based on romantic philosophy. Not an exhaustive list, just one of the major ones that cannot be mitigated.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:26 PM
3

And what I pointed out is they may be against feminism, but they are simply playing a loose-loose game, rather deeply analysing the issue finding out the cause and dealing the cause not just the symptoms.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:20 PM
-4

Not immediately, I simply know what ideas the left-wing was founded on and that framework invariably leads to a negative outcome. Both MensLib and LeftWingMaleAdvocates are based on left-wing philosophy which is based on romanticism (Voltaire, Russeau, etc) and maintain a core principle of valuing narrative over facts (the whole point of romanticism). My gripe is that you try to cling to something that caused and exacerbated the problems you are trying to solve, because you are used to that fram…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:13 PM
-2

So they call them selves left-wing, yet disregard the foundational principles of left-wing philosophy? The critical issue I pointed out is that left-wing philosophy is based on romantic philosophy, and as such inherits the core principle of denial of truth in favour of narrative from romanticism. (See the ideas the left-wing was founded on, and inspired by; also the origins of terrorism). This is the main and crucial bit people don't know of or ignore.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 12:02 PM
-7

They operate on the same framework, so it's not surprising. They value their narrative above reality and view anything that contradicts them as evil, regardless of merit. In that framework things like integrity and justice are also not part of the equation.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 08:40 AM
-7

And both philosophical frameworks are based on ignoring reality and "cherry picking" data. You are basically arguing having which type of negative is better, I'm pointing out that both are negative and we need to find a third - actually positive one.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 08:03 AM
-4

And both ignore the same issues, and just try to grab more power rather than standing up for men's rights. Feminism is based on left-wing ideology, left-wing ideology is based on romanticism philosophy, a core idea of which is that reality and data can be disregarded to further a chosen narrative. This makes them both argue with one another based purely on semantics, and ignore a methodical yet slower and less polarising approach of taking account of reality -> making an accurate model of it and…
/r/MensRights10/12/21 07:58 AM
71

I don't think it matters whether it men or women, as long as the values are good, logic is there, and they are reasonable. That being said my comments about MensLib and LeftWingMaleAdvocates is that both willfully ignore the things that created the issues they claim to fight against in the first place.
/r/MensRights10/12/21 07:35 AM
4

The statement "men have created society at the expense of women" can be broken up in two: "men have created society" - not entirely incorrect, the efforts of BOTH men and women created it. "at the expense of women" - this is contradicted by both history and neuroscience. Namely, men have a neurological response to women suffering, which is re-enforced by social conditioning "men must protect women" and "never hit a girl". This makes men experience a state similar to being in pain in response to …
/r/MensRights10/12/21 06:38 AM
13

I am glad that you are interested in equality, however I am quite conserned that it is a stance contradictory to the nature and history of feminism. I also don't like people being swindled. Some advice: I would suggest that you look into where feminist ideas came from and what else did the most influential thinkers of the movement support. Less in terms of character attack, more in terms of the biases they had, and by adopting their views you are adopting those biases as well. Spoilers: the inve…
/r/MensRights09/12/21 12:05 PM
5

Feminists are doomed to fail, as they never account for a pesky thing called reality. So it's closer to feminists loose or humans go extinct (likely taking the rest of the planet with us).
/r/AntiFeminists09/12/21 09:40 AM
5

A huge problem endemic to left-wing political philosophy (feminism being a subset of it; the flaw is 1 step before left-wing ideology) is that it has never been grounded in reality. This allows it to be easy to sway people with propaganda, but inevitably ends up in a system collapse due to overlooking almost everything critically important to its maintenance. This lack of a basis in reality is what allows feminists to ignore that most people that keep our societies running on a day to day basis,…
/r/MensRights08/12/21 02:32 PM
5

Not a moral judgment, just something to keep in mind. From my observations a big difference between female - female friends and male - male friends is the frequency of contact. Female friendships rely on frequent contact, while male friendships are not as sensitive to it. This can be based on how on average women are more driven by their emotion - which makes their behaviour fluctuate faster and to a better degree, and nessecitates more frequent communication for maintaining a friendship. The re…
/r/MensRights08/12/21 09:59 AM
2

No worries, happy to help. =) Message me if you need anything else.
/r/AntiFeminists05/12/21 01:21 PM
1

The short version is there is no proof for the base assumptions made by feminists, namely the historical oppression narrative (asserted without merit in the "declaration of sentiment" during the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention) and the "patriarchy" garbage (Simone de Beauvoire projecting her abusive relationship on to all men throughout history). This was used to push for laws and policies that serve to strip men of human rights, such as presumption of innocence and due process. Another thing to no…
/r/AntiFeminists04/12/21 10:37 PM
1

Glad you found someone good to be with.
/r/MensRights04/12/21 08:25 AM
-1

I dug deeper into history and philosophy, and found that this stems (amplifies and promotes this behaviour) from romanticism philosophy. In it and every philosophy that descended from it (such as feminism, and all branches of left-wing political philosophy) a chosen narrative is more important than reality. In this specific case the narrative is men cannot be victims, and any evidence to the contrary is to be vilified. The hard bit about it is that it plays into base human instincts, namely hedo…
/r/MensRights04/12/21 08:23 AM
1

Short version or a bit more in depth?
/r/AntiFeminists02/12/21 09:32 PM
4

It all stemms from what their philosophy is based on. A philosophical predecessor of feminism and left-wing philosophy is romanticism. The core essence of romantic philosophy is putting a narrative above truth and verifiable data. This makes it easy to push propaganda, playing on the emotions of the general population and glorifies all actions that support their narrative. Sciences in general have a strong tradition of giving claims the benefit of the doubt, which is extremely beneficial to huma…
/r/AntiFeminists02/12/21 09:23 PM
12

Woke anything is the absolute death of it. Leftist put a woke narrative over everything else including quality, so it's no wonder they are incapable of creating anything worthwhile.
/r/AntiFeminists02/12/21 07:42 AM
1

Just as I said incremental improvements. You can control yourself and to a degree how you affect others. Make others look up to you as they see how doing something good fills your life with purpose, especially when contrasted with the hollowness brought by hedonistic pleasure. Once they follow and improve their lives, that improves society and creates a positive feedback loop with personal and social benefits re-enforcing one another. Learn from those who built civilisation, as they know how to …
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 04:05 PM
1

Less ad hominem, more analisis of claims. An easy to understand example is with dogs. Small dogs have the need to attack everything and and always try to dominate, because they are weak. large dogs are stronger and have the confidence that they can handle whatever comes at them, thus having no need to always dominate everything. Good criticism helps improving oneself, that's why "git gud". A weak man would stop at that solution, rather than pushing himself to find a better one. we men Can use lo…
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 03:21 PM
2

Upon further interaction, I can aggree that your judgement was correct. Mea culpa (Latin). Apologies for not looking deeper into it.
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 02:54 PM
2

Logic is the thing that allows us to harness our genetic proclivities in order to create a better future. That is what differentiates humans from animals and is known as free will, the basis of all successful societies. This is the part of culture that is being eroded, and has always lead to the downfall of societies. Which is why we need to raise better people both men and women. Don't be so pathetic and weak, so as to put your self in a state of paranoid delusion trying to control and dominate…
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 02:34 PM
1

I understand his point, and I think you are trying to read too much in to things. I don't fully agree with either. A huge problem with our society is that the ability to enforce personal boundaries in the way men tend to do it is being eroded. The pervasive issue of the current zeitgeist is "it is not OK to ever use physical violence", which disproportionately disarm men. Women on the other hand, tend to use psychological violence rather than phisical violence, which under the same structure in …
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 01:35 PM
3

A very short version of a very long argument. TL;DR: not having the ability to be violent allows people to easily abuse you, and sometimes people need to be reminded (not necessarily through violence). Men have a tendency to use physical violence, whereas women tend to use psychological violence. I would argue that the psychological violence is far worse, as it is a lot harder to recover from.
/r/AntiFeminists01/12/21 06:57 AM
2

Happy to help.
/r/AntiFeminists30/11/21 10:43 PM
24

One thing to note: from the way you put it you are conflating women's rights and feminism. That distinction is very important to egalitarians, as both men's rights and women's rights are subsets of egalitarianism and rely on verifiable data. Feminism from it's inception relied on deception and malignment of data in favour of a narrative (not necessarily beneficial to women in the long term). Please keep that in mind. It's a very long subject.
/r/AntiFeminists30/11/21 03:28 PM
1

I don't think it helps women in the long term, as it makes them afraid of something that never existed such as "the patriarchy". From what I understand, in other cases this is diagnosed as a mental health issue, namely paranoid delusion.
/r/AntiFeminists29/11/21 08:18 AM
1

What both feminism and toxic femininity do is rob women of opportunities to improve themselves. This ends up as an easy way out in the immediate, but those who take it end up paying a terrible price later. This is "the dark side" of compassion and sympathy (and similar attitudes), which is fundamentally applicable not only to feminism and toxic femininity, but to all cases of helping someone needlessly or too much.
/r/AntiFeminists29/11/21 08:15 AM
1

No, I think it's a fair assessment. My advice don't try to force him out of his beliefs when he is happy. Instead try to talk about it so that you both can have a deep and more conscious understanding of yourselves and each other. Fundamentally, those gender roles were effectively the default social contract between the individual and society/spouse/etc, which made everyone the most productive and happyest. A lot of these have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years, and are based on how to h…
/r/MensRights28/11/21 07:54 AM
3

The way I see it TwoX is just women sabotaging the lives of other just not to feel bad for choosing to act in a way that makes their lives miserable long term, and deprives them of profoundly good deeds that lead to fulfillment and helps keeping the mental health in a good state. Same applies to feminism, political left-wing and extreme right-wing (and pretty much everyone who chooses doctrine/narrative over reality and data). On the end of cooking, I'm a guy and I'm a better cook than my mom (b…
/r/MensRights26/11/21 02:20 PM
2

That is exactly how nazis justified it, and feminist, and communist, and socialists, and the original left-wing (during "the reign of terror" aka the first thing the left did after getting power). And why none of them will ever create a long term functioning society. This applies to right-wing as well, but not to a similar extent.
/r/AntiFeminists23/11/21 04:30 PM
3

And that is why true centrist positions (disregarding the bloat of the left-wing) are the way to go. Hope that dude succeeds.
/r/MensRights23/11/21 09:43 AM
5

Conveniently leaving out female rulers like Queen Mary the first (nicknamed "bloody Mary") and Elizabeth Bathori (inspiration for Dracula; did much worse things than most can imagine). Just like everything else that uses romanticism as a basis, narrative is the only thing that matters. This is why most feminists cannot be reasoned with.
/r/AntiFeminists23/11/21 09:37 AM
1

I think I may have figured out where we differ. Have you challenged the base assumptions made by feminists, i.e. what if they were wrong?
/r/AntiFeminists21/11/21 09:28 AM
2

Their position is unsustainable. What we need to do is build culture, skills and wisdom to survive the inevitable and unavoidable collapse and make sure to not repeat the mistakes that got us there in the first place. Until then avoid needles overt confrontations, change the hearts and minds of those around us. A problem that we need to figure out how to build lasting (through generations) resilience to propaganda, bad faith actors and the banality of individual actions that together make up som…
/r/AntiFeminists20/11/21 10:23 PM
1

I go down the rabbit hole of who inspired who, eventually leading up to Voltaire and Russeau, some of the most prominent romanticism philosophers. Key feature of romanticism is its disregard for reality in favour of a chosen narrative. When you point this out, all branches of philosophy derived from it collapse in to fiction and propaganda - both easy to read and have no connection to reality. One such branch of philosophy is feminism. A noteworthy thing to point out is that those who used roman…
/r/AntiFeminists19/11/21 10:32 AM
1

Previously: https://www.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/qr77rf/comment/hl7sdcp/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 Part 2 Purity culture, which is incredibly sexist and while is often mandated by religion, it also exists among those who aren't religious due to sociological consequences. Primarily demanded and enforced by women. As I mentioned, it is a tool useful for female social hierarchy climbing. Several manospheres that perpetuate misogyny that are present within the online sys…
/r/AntiFeminists19/11/21 09:38 AM
1

Nether-the-less, I’ll attempt to humour your ignorance Likewise. (note you started the insults, not me). lets break all of this down. I can answer these because it it is fa from the first time I came across this. Women are vastly under-represented in politics, business, media, and the public sphere in general. This includes leadership roles. Is it possible that this is due to personal preferences, i.e. women CHOOSING not to go there? If there was a systemic barrier it would be impossible for wom…
/r/AntiFeminists19/11/21 09:31 AM
3

They both signed a letter in support of it (if I remember correctly it was signed by a tonne of other socialists). If you look into Sartre's biography he was an extremely reprehensible person, and was more of an influence on Simone de Beauvoir rather than the other way around. I wouldn't call it nonsense - as it is fundamentally a form of abuse similar to rape, as both violate consent and psychologically damage someone. It also stems from denial of legitimacy of hierarchical structures (like par…
/r/AntiFeminists19/11/21 06:04 AM
17

A way to disregard you, since they have no facts or logic to back up their claims. If you want to use a tactic on the same level call feminists pedophiles (de Beauvoir, Sartre, Foucault were instrumental to feminism and openly supported pedophilia),and you will also be more correct than they.
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 09:32 PM
3

Here is a key thing to add to it: how much of the toxicity is done by women against women and how much personal choices and work ethic affect pay. Once you factor that in the conditions and outcomes for women will be better than that for men.
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 01:52 PM
3

It's not toxic feminism that's core feminism. This is what you get when your philosophy/ideology is derived from romanticism - you ignore reality in favour of your narrative (it's not limited to feminism). The "patriarchy" is just projection of the relationship between de Beauvoir and Sartre on to all men, effectively stating that abusive relationships are the norm. A key aspect of romantic philosophy is idealising, which allows projecting the actions of some on to all, justifying injustice agai…
/r/AntiFeminists17/11/21 09:19 AM
1

What are the human rights violations against women that egalitarians should talk about? There have been discussions about it being skewed towards men's rights, but in the western countries there is nothing even close to the injustices men face. How has feminism protected the rights of men? Was it with the baseless assertion that men oppressed women (declaration of sentiment)? Was it when Simone de Beauvoir projected and tried to normalize abusive relationships between men and women with "the pat…
/r/AntiFeminists17/11/21 07:37 AM
2

In the English language the word "man" is gender neutral and is simply reffering to being a part of mankind. The narrative of feminist "patriarchy" was created by Simone de Beauvoir, and is a better reflection of an attempt to normalize abusive relationships (Simone projecting her relationship with Sartre onto all men), rather than a description of reality or healthy relationships. A better description of a healthy relationship between men and women is the relationship between Piere and Marie Cu…
/r/MensRights16/11/21 09:49 AM
6

"the patriarchy" would be Simone de Beauvoir projecting and normalizing abusive relationships, simply so she didn't feel so bad about hers with Sartre. That narrative never had a strong basis in reality. If you want an example of how good men treat women look up how Marie Curie won her first Nobel prize (spoiler: her husband refused it unless they both shared the glory, because they did it together).
/r/MensRights16/11/21 09:40 AM
2

Sincerely, good luck!
/r/AntiFeminists15/11/21 03:33 PM
1

Researching is a skill and like all skills it can be learned/taught. I'll see what I can dig up.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 10:43 PM
2

This is not an area I have a particular interest ot expertise in. However there is an argument to be made that in most countries only men must register for the draft and your civil rights will be massively curtailed (possibly a criminal offence) if you don't. Therefore registering for the draft is a pre-requisite for men but not women. In the case of South Korea, they have mandatory conscription for men, who previously had the option to use relevant military experience to gaining credit towards …
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:41 PM
3

Not an expert on this part, so I don't have links at the ready. In general look up British Parliament's Representation of the People Acts. In the 1918 one provisions for ww1 veterans allowed them to vote earlier, otherwise it the voting rights were tied to property. The link between draft and voting rights is easiest to find in the US. There was a recent thing about getting women registered for the draft. Until a certain time men could pay a fine or send a substitute in stead of being drafted. O…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 02:57 PM
6

To some extent this is engrained into our psychology so deep it is effectively instinctual. We should still try to change it, but don't expect it to change drastically at the drop of a hat. Societies depend on men for its basic structures, electricity, food and water, protection, etc. Weakness of those people means a higher chance of failure which can result in death, hence it must be eliminated. Because it is impossible to say that there is a problem if you can not see its symptoms. One side of…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 09:38 AM
3

Most likely humans wouldn't be able to use fire, let alone anything else.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:13 AM
1

Most women can't handle men having emotions outside of hungry and horny, as it is a weakness women exploit in their social hierarchy climbing. These women feel unsafe as they see someone bigger and stronger than they are show weakness, which is one of the major factors of why they are attracted to men (in general, assholes and "bad boys" in particular). Most men have to hide those emotions as only a small minority of people will not think of them less for showing them, and it's typically only a …
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:11 AM
5

The policies he implemented like shutting down the pipeline construction, baning fracking on federal land, through other ones increasing inflation have had a knock on effect of increasing gas prices. So while he did not set them directly (he does not set the price of anything) his actions lead to the price increase.
/r/AntiFeminists13/11/21 06:21 AM
47

That's part of the issue with voting rights. Initially they came about only for men as compensation for the draft. Historically, men were well rewarded with money and /or land for military service by local rulers and had a right to refuse (in some cases), however they had no voting privilege. A system to an extent similar to what you propose was until not too long ago implemented in South Korea, but feminists made sure it came to an end. One could argue that with women getting the vote without h…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 06:10 AM
1

Close but not quite, but they agree a lot. Egalitarians are for equality, men's rights hilight men's side of things. Both recognise that core feminist philosophy seeks to deprive men of basic human rights, destroy families as a societal structure, is of benefit only for gaining political power in order to abuse others, and had close to none historical legitimacy. There are a few notable exceptions to this such as Cristina Hoff Summers and Camile Paglia, but they are the exception not the norm. T…
/r/AntiFeminists12/11/21 02:45 PM
2

The reason why she said what she said and you couldn't convince her is that her basic assumptions dictate her views. If she values truth, one of the things you could do is ask her to explain why does she think that with guided questions. It's a bit more general, but the principle should work. For example where does the concept of "patriarchy" come from? Could it be that Simone de Beauvoir was projecting her relationship on to others so that she didn't feel as bad about her choices (staying with …
/r/MensRights12/11/21 06:11 AM
20

Before you record anything check the local consent law. If you have a recording go to your parents first, the school second. Also if you are not the only target of this do so jointly with other parents. To the parents: consult a lawyer and the cops on how to handle the situation. An ounce of prevention now could save you a ton of cure if something bad happens, but hopefully it will not come to that. To both, keep a paper trail, if you can try to have everything in writing.
/r/MensRights11/11/21 11:54 AM
2

So egalitarian?
/r/AntiFeminists11/11/21 11:43 AM
1

If I would, she wouldn't be a feminist for long.
/r/AntiFeminists11/11/21 10:46 AM
2

Do not missplase your anger. It's less to do with sexuality and more to do with philosophy. There both good and bad people on both sides. If I remember correctly there are very distinct neurological differences between normal people and abusers (pedophilia being a form of abuse). Such differences cannot be found between straight and homosexual people. I know a lesbian couple that raised their children absolutely normally, and there are plenty of examples of traditional couples doing horrible thi…
/r/AntiFeminists11/11/21 10:43 AM
2

Out of curiosity, what makes you say that you are a feminist?
/r/AntiFeminists11/11/21 04:53 AM
1

Thank you. I'll need to go over it in more detail. From the first glance, the abstract in reference 4: "I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution."
/r/AntiFeminists10/11/21 08:05 AM
1

They are referencing other blog posts not research papers or raw data, i.e. it's not connected to actual research. It's a fairly common deception tactic. Edit: deception on their part, not yours.
/r/AntiFeminists10/11/21 07:38 AM
1

Neither of these provide references to the things they cite, are themselves research articles, or are peer reviewed. You should be extremely skeptical about any scientist who writes an article and doesn't provide references.
/r/AntiFeminists10/11/21 07:29 AM
2

Yeah that pretty much sums it up. Feelings over facts. That is exactly why one should avoid everything downstream from romanticism (there are a few steps from that to feminism but the flaw remains). 1
/r/AntiFeminists09/11/21 06:53 AM
5

It all comes primarily from 3 things (short version). Feminism was only ever useful to gain political power, as its foundational principle is narrative over reality (a critical flaw shared by all philosophies based on romanticism). Using 1, Feminism, as a movement has started with an unquestionable assertion that men have historically oppressed women (which based on effectively biology near impossible and falce based on historical records). Doing so it allows them to not judge people as individu…
/r/MensRights08/11/21 10:49 PM
17

This behaviour is not radical (not an outlier), but the norm for feminism since "the 1st wave", namely the suffragettes (feminists and terrorists, who harmed the cause of women getting the vote; not to be confused with the suffragists - the non violent movement that got women in the British Empire the vote). "Second wave" feminists were extremely open about this in the "scum manifesto".
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 07:34 AM
7

Fundamentally feminism never had a basis in reality, due to it's ancestry being romanticism which prioritises narrative over facts. Namely it makes it OK to "cherry pick", misappropriate, and outright lie to create and preserve the chosen narrative. An easy example of this is "selling" wifes in 18th century Britain. The feminist narrative is its because men oppressed women. Historical documents state that it was a way of divorce for most people (and wifes "sold" their husbands), as it would cost…
/r/AntiFeminists06/11/21 07:33 AM
2

First of all I would thank her for being polite and taking the time. I would question about the gap between educational achievement (in schools and universities) and practical achievement (positions of power) being due to other factors? For example that educational achievement being designed to skew towards the way girls and women learn (if you measure something with an inaccurate tool you will get inaccurate results). Another example, if the top university achievers are female is it possible th…
/r/AntiFeminists05/11/21 06:32 AM
1

That's why rulers historically never promised, as there was a cultural understanding of the average citizen seeing only a very small fraction of all what the country is, and the rulers were typically taught by family members that it is in their best interest to benefit the people they rule over as it will also benefit them (the ones we know about the most are the ones who failed). Key point what's beneficial isn't always popular, as the big picture can dictate different actions than the small pi…
/r/MensRights04/11/21 12:05 PM
3

It will most likely lead to an economic collapse. The way the companies want to elect their C-level executives (CEO, CSO, CTO,...) is on merit rather than anything else, as otherwise it will cut into the profits and leading to collapse. If this is done by government fiat, it will continuously knock out a large fraction of the countries manufacturing basis, leading to shortages especially in the cities. Anecdotally, there are a few examples of companies that were run along the feminist lines, all…
/r/MensRights04/11/21 11:49 AM
1

That's the point. Most people live in large nations and what works for a micronation will be disastrous for larger ones. So if there are small communes (under 100 people) that have successfully implemented socialism it is not a predictor of viability for larger societies. Its actually the same principle as compound interest, saving and total error calculations, small additions over many iterations make up a a large sum. Same with people small adjustments need for socialism to work on a small sca…
/r/MensRights04/11/21 11:35 AM
9

Neither had a factual basis to begin with. Feminism was always a system of judging a society based solely on the benefit it brings women, note that equality or men being treated as human beings was never part of the equation. A critical point was the "declaration of sentiment" document of the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention states without evidence that throughout history men have oppressed women. What modern feminists provide as evidence, was never done in malice or to oppress women in any way, the…
/r/MensRights04/11/21 07:03 AM
1

It is definitely interesting, and a point to look at. My problem with it is that an approach working at that scale, cannot be scaled up. There are quite a few communes operating like this, however they strictly limit their numbers. This is critical to maintaining cohesion within the group and after a certain scale it becomes impossible to maintain. It then comes down to experience and education, of the person in charge to understand larger and more complex systems. the skillset needed to run a h…
/r/MensRights03/11/21 09:35 PM
1

To the pro-feminists among us I want to know why? My position is: how can there be peace with someone who demonises you and advocates for violence against you?
/r/MensRights03/11/21 02:32 PM
1

By discussing it we can hone our skills and by doing it with others we can spread wizdom and hopefully, those who come after us will have enough to avoid the mistakes we did and live better than we today. Until people realise that winning in the short term as did the US with the revolution (The French funding it was a major contribution factor to the economic crisis that provoked their own revolution) and USSR with its creation have been both the start of a very slow demise. Neither had the foun…
/r/MensRights02/11/21 06:35 PM
1

I recently came across a post on reddit that went in depth on the letter in support of pedophilia by a longer list of socialists, those three are the ones I knew about before.
/r/MensRights02/11/21 06:02 PM
1

The destruction of the Caspian Sea was started during the soviet times and was a pet project of a soviet researcher (can't remember the name). So the farms created by Nikolay Konstantinovich didn't have a significant ecological impact, the ones that did (intentionally) were stated by the Soviets if I remember correctly in the 50s.
/r/MensRights02/11/21 05:58 PM
3

Not an expert on this, so take it with a grain of salt. Depends on how you define it. From a certain perspective they aren't wrong, they are assholes and stupid. If you look only at the overall phenotype (how it looks) until a certain stage of development both are more similar to females than males. If you really want to to go this route you can point out that at early stages of foetal development it is hard to distinguish between different species (humans and chimpanzees look almost identical u…
/r/AntiFeminists02/11/21 06:37 AM
2

You are welcome. =)
/r/MensRights01/11/21 12:33 PM
1

And they deserve to be judged for it. It is the principle that matters, not which side of the political compass you are.
/r/MensRights01/11/21 07:25 AM
1

All 3 (Sartre, de Beauvoir and Foucault) were feminists and socialists. Simone de Beauvoir coined the terms "patriarchy" in its popular meaning.
/r/MensRights01/11/21 07:23 AM
1

I have two beliefs: God probably exists (complex and more nuanced position, a bit like Louis Pasteur's an Werner Heisenberg's). Even if the just world falacy is untrue, we should strive to make it true. Everything else is logic and data, so new evidence and data can convince me.
/r/MensRights01/11/21 07:21 AM
1

After the revolution it went marginally better almost exclusively for factory workers. Farmers were intentionally put in a position where few could survive and it was by design that a lot of people outside the cities died of starvation. The "holodomor" in Ukraine was only one of many. Anyone who worked hard to earn a better living was to be considered an enemy of the revolution and was stripped of everything. The reasoning was that a lot of farmers understood and had great relationships with loc…
/r/MensRights01/11/21 07:15 AM
1

Bad guess. I'm from Lithuania, studied at English universities, have a lot of relatives in Russia. I know perfectly well why left-wing philosophy shouldn't be followed and what it leads to, not because of propaganda but because my great-grandfather was almost executed for preventing a famine in his village (kolhoz) intentionally caused by the communists.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 11:50 PM
1

Which specifically? I'm fluent enough to write a PhD thesis at an English University, but I still make mistakes.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 11:40 PM
1

Yep. However it's a feature, rather than a bug caused by philosophy which was used to found the left-wing. Genocide was the first thing the left-wing did after they got the power after the French revolution, a time known as "the reign of terror". The issue is not with the people, but with the logic and how it is relatively easy when compared to right-wing and centrists to twist left-wing philosophy to justify and glorify abuse of all kinds up to and including crimes against humanity. While it is…
/r/MensRights31/10/21 11:35 PM
3

I made a comment that will help: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/qhesvk/comment/hied1t8/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 ​ It has links to my other comments, the second one has a lot of good references. Ask away if you have any questions, I'm happy to help.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:53 PM
1

My position is both right and left are bad, both are trash. The difference being one is recyclable (the right built our civilization, but is too inflexible to adapt to technological development) whereas the other one is nonrecyclable (the left has been responsible for destroying cultures; notably I had two (50-60 year olds) native Russian speakers look up how nobility spoke and how they educated their children from before the soviet revolution - both replied "we have never spoken a word of Russi…
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:50 PM
1

We can agree on that. ​ My point is that the critical flaw is "upstream" from what we see today, so anything "downstream" of that flaw will inherit it. Metaphorically, we should treat the cause of the illness not the symptoms, in this case both feminists and nazis being a symptom.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:42 PM
1

Part of the point of arguing is to create a basis for the country to last rather than it phase in and out of existence every 70-ish years. That's why discussing it matters. ​ same objectives + different methods = vastly different outcomes
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:37 PM
2

I think the point was while both ask for the service of men, traditionalists give something back in return, while progressivists consider the benefits that men's services bring an entitlement thus it doesn't even compute that men are human ad deserve something for their service.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:31 PM
1

It's not progressive feminism, it was and always had been feminism from the very beginning.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:26 PM
1

Except feminism does not benefit society nor women.
/r/MensRights31/10/21 05:24 PM
-12

And that is why a class based approach (in the way it is used by the left; socialists and feminists in particular) to people is always doomed to fail. Merit is merit and no amount of posturing will change it. Individuals with attributes male and white on average have been the primary drivers for creating societies where most people could flourish, and it is now being positioned as that the ones who created these societies are evil in order to strip them of opportunity to continue improving it an…
/r/MensRights31/10/21 03:48 PM
3

And having a good father present in the life of a child vastly improves the life of a child past the age of 6 to the point that cannot be compared with almost any mother. Get her to read about the influence of fatherlessness on drug addiction rates (having a strong relationship with a father lowers the probability several times, while mothers have no positive influence on it; I don't remember the number, but I think it was some where like 19 times). A good way of finding research articles is by …
/r/MensRights29/10/21 03:46 PM
7

It's called postpartum depression, and still not a reason to kill a newborn.
/r/AntiFeminists29/10/21 03:27 PM
87

Glad you are still with us. Not a specialist, so take it with a grain of salt. Testicles are actually quite from other organs, because they need a slightly lower than body temperature to function. When it comes to research a lot of it is done indirectly, meaning that doing research on for example hormonal contraception yields data useful in hormone replacement therapy. In this regard women are a lot (many orders of magnitude) easier to study, due to having a pronounced reproduction cycle. Anothe…
/r/MensRights29/10/21 10:59 AM
1

Family and being a good parent are the number one thing anyone can do, man or woman. "New dads are 'losers' if they take 6 months paternity leave, prominent venture capitalist says" He may know how to make money, but has yet to understand its value. Warren Buffett says a lot very smart things on the topic. We imprison ourselves under ancient ideas of what it means to be a man. And the reason why those ideas survived is because they are pretty much the only thing that works long term. The key is …
/r/MensRights29/10/21 08:22 AM
6

I think it's a "symptom" of the destruction of family and pathologising parenting behaviour. Looking at history there were traditions of valuing being a parent, and it was implied rather than started overtly. In contrast, in the current climate we have to state everything overtly and huge numbers of people support those seeking to destroy families (a major point of feminism and present in socialism) so that people would work more, resulting in spending less and less time to build relationships w…
/r/MensRights29/10/21 05:28 AM
1

Why would they then put national socialists in charge? The Nazis were created to oppose communism, but they still stem from a socialist tradition. Try looking up John Rabe, he very clearly pointed out that Nazis were a branch of socialism. Part of my point is that its also not stemming from socialism, but from romanticism (like Russeau) which was used as a basis for left-wing philosophy and in turn used as a basis for socialism. So I kind of want to point out that by starting with a false assump…
/r/MensRights28/10/21 09:24 PM
1

My guess would be you are referring to left liberal as opposed to classical liberal?
/r/MensRights28/10/21 09:11 PM
9

Tackling the basic feminist strategies: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pbfxxk/comment/haecd69/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 Walls of text with links (looking for other sources to replace Wikipedia): https://www.reddit.com/r/Egalitarianism/comments/pnxjmw/comment/he3970s/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/pussypassdenied/comments/p2pyju/comment/h8p5xjd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 A brief case for feminism being anti-…
/r/MensRights28/10/21 04:30 PM
11

"patriarchy" is an assertion, that has to be proven not really the other way around. My explanation for it is that it is an attempt to normalize abusive relationships by Simone de Beauvoir as she willingly chose to be in one with Sartre. If I remember correctly de Beauvoir does not examine the inverse of her narrative and avoids accurately describing history like the plague. Fundamentally, the assertion that women were misstreated by men comes from 1848 Seneca Falls Convention and the "declarati…
/r/MensRights28/10/21 09:49 AM
1

Don't be afraid, a lot of people here are aggressive because of the injustices and hipocricy, but in general most will try to explain things. Subs to look at would be r/egalitarianism (the actual movement for equality and always has been; totally incompatible with feminism) and r/mensrights (the male side of things; pretty much egalitarianism from the men's side). Some people to look up Erin Pizzey (all of her work) and Cassie Jaye's the "Red Pill" (she was a feminist who wanted to "expose" men'…
/r/AntiFeminists28/10/21 06:26 AM
1

Foucault, Sartre and de Beauvoir were leftists, socialists to be precise, so there is some merit to examining that train of thought. There have also been recent scandals with Labour in the UK and in Germany on the same topic. Fundamentally, if you view everything in an oppressor/oppressed framework and nessecitate that the oppressed must be liberated from the oppressors you get: men oppressing women, business owners oppressing their employees, and parents oppressing their kids. Such line of thou…
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 03:26 PM
1

A noteworthy point to make that Foucault, Sartre and de Beauvoir (don't know that much about the other 3) were also quite prominent in socialist philosophy and left-wing politics. Let the dumpster fire burn.
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 02:57 PM
22

If you look at only the men/women side of things we will be on the road to societal collapse, but it will take longer than 5 years for it actually to happen. In my opinion, the current political climate in general is is inching closer and closer to a major conflict, most likely ww3. I think that it will most likely be devastating enough for a serious re-evaluation of everything including the roles and laws of men and women. The thing I hope for is that people will give it enough thought not to r…
/r/MensRights27/10/21 05:53 AM
8

This is why I'm a centrist. I think both should be drafted, fulfilling the roles they are suitable for and have basic understanding and training as part of mandatory school education at all times. By having this training it will be easier to use culture to balance out the sacrifices, and the ability to understand what tremendous sacrifice it is. A bit like Romans did during the Republic and early Empire period.
/r/AntiFeminists25/10/21 02:27 PM
1

Pretty much. The original role of a patriarch is to make everyone in the extended family or clan prosper via coordination of efforts and cooperation, which cannot be achieved by abusing anyone.
/r/MensRights25/10/21 12:05 PM
2

Sartre was an arrogant d#ckhead! That's an understatement. If I remember correctly Sartre was de Beauvoir's first relationship. She also had relationships with better men than Sartre, but chose fame with Sartre over having a good relationship and family. Throughout her life she wanted Sartre to marry her and have children, but Sartre would never even consider it as that was opposed to his socialist views. In the end using Sartre as an example of "normal" behaviour was a way of coping with her ow…
/r/MensRights25/10/21 09:06 AM
5

She coined the terms use in that way. Looking in to her biography it's a description of her relationship with Sartre, that de Beauvoir extrapolated on to all men as a coping mechanism as she threw away opportunities to have healthy one's in favour of fame by staying with Sartre. The relationship with Sartre was psychologically abusive, to reiterate she willingly chose to be in it, and was herself abusive. A point (inherited from romanticism) in her works is a a lack of historical analysis of wha…
/r/MensRights24/10/21 04:32 PM
2

Really depends on the people. A lot of aristocrats and politicians in the past funded (out of pocket) arts, sciences, public schools (very prominently Queen Olga Konstantinovna of Greece) and spent a lot of time working to improve the lives of their subjects. There are good and bad people in every group, and some did enjoy wars, but trade was much more profitable for most rulers. Push the region towards prosperity and tax them (pay the ruler for the administration and more or less executive lead…
/r/MensRights24/10/21 10:42 AM
1

Same as you. Its not seem worthy its reliability.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 08:48 AM
27

Not entirely. Does everyone suffer - yes. However humans are predisposed to favour women and laws favour women often to the detriment of others. Men do not enjoy such bonuses. So it is patently false to say that women suffer (and have ever suffered) to the same or greater extent as men.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 07:10 AM
25

That "patriarchy" is just Simone de Beauvoir's way of normalising abusive relationships.
/r/MensRights24/10/21 06:58 AM
1

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, for example an activist trying to hide that Hitler was a socialist, and there is no right-wing or centrist socialism. That's why it's a horrible source for anything near politics (it's been steadily degrading in general), and cannot be used as a reference if you want to be taken seriously. That's why I pointed towards Hitler as a source about Nazis. Another person to point towards is John Rabe, a fervent supporter of Hitler and the Nazis, whose actions during the Nanji…
/r/MensRights23/10/21 11:06 PM
2

Probably not the nicest suggestion, but keep the records and when they get older if they ask about what happened between you and your ex say nothing just show them the court documents. Until then maintain the "it was not done lightly, but right now you are not ready to fully understand what happened and I do not want to missrepresent things" position. Is this kind - no, but very just. Good luck to you.
/r/MensRights23/10/21 02:27 PM
1

If my arguments are so stupid they will be easy to refute with evidence. The sky is blue because of a combination of how light refracts entering the atmosphere and the spectrum of light emmited by the Sun (black body radiation; also how we known the temperature of the sun and why hot steel glows red). The colour blue is simply the name we give to certain wavelengths of light. See, not that hard.
/r/MensRights23/10/21 06:00 AM
1

The Nazis weren't liberals, they are a branch of socialism. Feminism is another branch of socialism. So is communism. All 3 glorify initiation of violence against anyone criticising it, so the flaw is upstream. Should I continue this trail of thought?
/r/MensRights22/10/21 10:28 PM
1

I don't try anything, it's the way I am most of the time. You've just been throwing a tantrum the entire time and haven't presented any arguments. Try looking up the things I mentioned, not for the sake of an argument, but for yourself. Once you start digging you can find ways to better your life, I hope you find them. Best of luck to you.
/r/MensRights22/10/21 09:07 PM
17

Really hope they manage to help the victim recover as much as possible.
/r/AntiFeminists22/10/21 03:23 PM
4

Simone de Beauvoir's own writing. It's in her autobiography.
/r/MensRights22/10/21 06:07 AM
4

Try looking up Simone de Beauvoir around the time she was a teacher. She taught 16 year olds, but still it's a minor and an abuse of power. She was grooming her students, and later wrote about it as if she had done nothing wrong.
/r/MensRights22/10/21 05:58 AM
5

On Simone de Beauvoir, it's her biography. Another prominent one (at least an advocate) is Michael Foucault, who tried to abolishing the age of consent. Edit: Anything else specific?
/r/MensRights22/10/21 05:51 AM
1

My point was not that everyone who's bad is left wing or that all left-wingers are bad, but that left-wing philosophy enables the behaviours of abusers and terrorist by giving them an excuse. It's human nature (right) vs human nature + added pressure (left). Both do horrible things, the left simply glorifies it a lot more and resorts to it almost immediately. The "black book of socialism" is not in opposition, but in addition to the "black book of capitalism". Almost all goals that the left-wing…
/r/MensRights22/10/21 05:46 AM
9

Because a very significant chunks of feminism were created by pedophiles, namely the "patriarchy" delusion was created by a pedo, Simone de Beauvoir. She is not the only one, so most feminists are happy to cover for them, and if the victim is of a class they are fighting against it becomes not just OK, but a moral good (in their perspective). The majority of people do not think about things deeply enough to recognise the damage caused by the things they tolerate. There is also a general empathy …
/r/MensRights21/10/21 09:56 PM
1

Never used him as a source, I'm there for the jokes. To me, he lacks depth on some very important things. As sources, I actually read a lot of the books myself. Most of the people who formed the left-wing were fans of Russeau (romantic philosopher) and used a lot of his work as a basis for forming the philosophy of the left-wing. Part of the issue is that by doing so they romanticised committing violence on anyone who disagrees, and basically go into a loop of "I am right because I said so" disr…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 09:19 PM
1

I know way too much, so someone with whom I have a large enough gap in knowledge cannot differentiate.
/r/MensRights21/10/21 03:49 AM
1

I never said I supported a side. Just pointed out that left-wing philosophy is not a viable basis for a society. I have tons of criticism for them as well, the difference is they are willing to be polite, change their minds when presented with a good argument and even if we oppose each other want both to have a good life. Contrast this with your own conduct.
/r/MensRights20/10/21 05:42 AM
1

Verify who did "the reign of terror". That alone should have been enough.
/r/MensRights19/10/21 08:36 PM
1

I don't need to I have facts. Delusions are on your end. Let's end this here.
/r/MensRights19/10/21 08:01 PM
1

I know a lot of wierd things, but am not always too good at explaining and can miss a few steps that would be crucial to helping others understand. About Marx from his biography, specifically after following his ideas written in "capital" were instrumental in his daughter's suicide (not the only cause, but a critical factor). If you had any idea of what the centre or the right stand for you would not be able to call Hitler anything other than a leftist, possibly progressive. Mass murder was the …
/r/MensRights19/10/21 07:38 PM
2

I will need to look into that deeper. Thanks.
/r/AntiFeminists19/10/21 06:27 PM
1

Why try to advertise something bad with another bad thing? He tried making it more palatable by paying lip service to nationalism, not socialism, and it was the nationalism that initially drew the people in, as germans at that time tried to prevent communists from taking power. Fascism formed as a branch of socialism to oppose Marxism (ironically that's what Marx spent the last years of his on, as Marxism brought misery to everyone Marx cared about). The idea of treating people as a collective, …
/r/MensRights19/10/21 06:26 PM
1

According to Hitler. And according to national socialism, being a subset of socialism, with socialism in turn being a subset of left-wing philosophy. National socialism is on the right most end of socialism, but no where near centrist or right-wing values and philosophy.
/r/MensRights19/10/21 04:27 PM
1

On a personal level or exact time wise, yes it is impossible. On a statistical level and reaching logical conclusions, it is very doable. Its a bit closer to the realm of psychology, but look up "cold reading" and "hot reading". Things that come into play for a decision that make prediction unreliable Human behavior is not random. Neither are our thoughts. Both have parents, one pattern type is effectively the mechanics of human cognition and culture (+ language), the second is personal like moo…
/r/MensRights19/10/21 04:21 PM
1

I'm the type of person who needs time to think of a response, so written messages are a better way for me, but yeah we can go into dm. When you prioritize natural Law, you can't go wrong. Not really familiar with natural law. I'd say a bit closer to yield to the truth uncovered through methodical observations of cause and effect, be willing to admit that you were wrong, and don't lie. Plus, German economy was meritocratic, there was"winter relief" and unemployment benefits but with full employme…
/r/AntiFeminists19/10/21 03:48 PM
1

Been there, done that. There are 2 critical flaws with national socialism, that make it non-viable, outside of most left-wing movements turning genocidal after they obtain power (see "the reign of terror", Nazi Germany, communists in Russia and China). Flaw 1 it is socialism and as such will always prioritise narrative over reality, same as feminism. This is an easy way out to pretend that you are always correct, making people loose sight of reality leading to an eventual and unavoidable societa…
/r/AntiFeminists19/10/21 01:33 PM
1

Let the dumpster fire burn! Fire - good! Frankfurt school - bunch of delusional psychopaths.
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 12:46 PM
2

You support their views? Not in the slightest. Why do you ask? To adjust my commitments: If you oppose them - we can simply roast them. Otherwise, we can have a polite discussion on the topic, to try to change your opinion or at least understand it.
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 11:30 AM
1

To clarify, are you in support of the frankfurt school?
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 07:09 AM
4

Both stem from the same thing, namely socialism. The violence however stems from up stream from socialism, namely from left-wing ideology (see the "reign of terror" period as evidence).
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 07:07 AM
1

Most books on philosophy do exactly that, they explain the thought process behind decisions, with most philosophers not based on romanticism (which was the basis of the left-wing) were most often extremely productive outside of philosophy, for example Marcus Aurelius (one of the best emperors of the Roman empire), Nicolo Machiavelli (very successful diplomat), Miyamoto Musashi (one of the best sword masters in Japanese history), etc. . Most books on history document actions, from which you can d…
/r/MensRights16/10/21 06:02 PM
1

It also allows you to understand the thought processes of others, both on a personal and societal level, which allow you to within reason predict future actions of others on an individual and societal level. This is kind of the idea of science in general: you take measurements, create a predictive or descriptive theory, and test and apply it. A simple analogy: if you measure the average speed of a car and you know the path to its destination you can estimate when it will arrive at its destinatio…
/r/MensRights16/10/21 05:27 PM
8

You aren't completely wrong, but focusing only on that aspect isn't overly healthy. Other useless weak or stupid men live just like trash. There are also things that require a mass of less remarkable people for those great warriors and scholars to achieve greatness. For example I vaguely categorise scientists in two broad categories: those who create accumulative knowledge (the less remarkable), and those who use that knowledge to create broader theories and change paradigms (those we consider g…
/r/MensRights16/10/21 09:27 AM
2

It is because these averages include death during child birth, and in poor countries they lack the health care to prevent it.
/r/MensRights16/10/21 09:06 AM
3

It's just a way of getting more power. When you say OK to a small ask, you are more likely to do something bigger, eventually leading up to things you wouldn't do otherwise.
/r/AntiFeminists16/10/21 05:54 AM
0

If you know the past, future actions become very clear. Past behaviour is a good predictor of future behaviour. To avoid bias apply principles of stoicism, that way you can see the data clearly and get a clear view of things. This is why one needs to learn the philosophy on which civilization was built. Part of the point of creating the left-wing during the French revolution was to oppose those values. With that in mind is there any surprise that the the left frows away individual justice and pr…
/r/MensRights15/10/21 09:21 PM
1

It's that most forget the past and are duped again for supporting stuff that's not in your best interests. Like you can expect a leftist to never apply a consistent standard or break the law as soon as it is convenient, see Biden in the US.
/r/MensRights15/10/21 06:22 PM
1

Then please stop insulting/mocking others in the first centence, as you might come across someone who knows something you don't and isn't too good at conveying that knowledge.
/r/MensRights15/10/21 05:42 PM
9

Feminists - never fail to insult and dismiss, as if it was part of a long standing tradition... =)
/r/AntiFeminists15/10/21 05:02 PM
2

I've been reading history and how the first thing the left-wing did after winning the French revolution was "the reighn of terror", where they were executing tones of people without trial. So did a lot of left-wing people who got in to power, like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro. Are you basing your knowledge of left and right on their respective actions a philosophy or just American "republican/democrat" charade?
/r/MensRights15/10/21 04:37 PM
3

A lot of people don't know what left-wing and right-wing stand and stood for, and fall for rhetoric, rather than making an informed choice. For example: consistent application of principles and being polite despite dissagreing, were always things antithetical to left-wing philosophy. If I understand correctly the philosophical basis for MRM is in classical liberalism (itself based on stoicism), which was opposed by (and is foundationally incompatible with) the left-wing since the left-wing forme…
/r/MensRights15/10/21 04:27 PM
3

I suggest you take a look at the founding principles of the left-wing and you will feel better about leaving them. And you don't need to be right-wing, you can be centrist, your character and actions are much more important in both (right and centre) than affiliation. With Bezos, is it the character of the man or the total worth of his companies (where most of his money is tied) are unethical?
/r/MensRights15/10/21 04:11 PM
3

Centrist. No more of anything than it is efficient and beneficial. Some laws, regulations and government are necessary for social cohesion, but all of them should act as a framework for a meritocratic society. Don't like the left because of its base assumptions and that it inevitably (and invariably) promotes some form of genocide, abusive behaviour (like Sartre, de Beauvoir and Foucault promoting pedophilia), and destruction of a family. In short left-wing philosophy is based on faulty reasonin…
/r/MensRights15/10/21 03:58 PM
3

An argument can be made for social safety net based on right-wing values is: stress reduction (leading to higher productivity) and reducing the opportunity cost to stand up for virtue/do the right thing (against corruption, deception, incompetence, etc; in the phrase "do the right thing" the word right does refer to political right-wing values and it being synonymous with good and just, and that left-wing philosophy is based on its opposition to right-wing values such as being good and just).
/r/MensRights15/10/21 03:35 PM
1

Another part of why this is brought up is that feminists and more broadly left-wing philosophy are collectivist, to some extent due to their roots in romanticism (which oversimplifies and malignes things to suit a narrative) and that values and virtues of the left-wing being derived from opposing right-wing values, one of them being individual justice otherwise it is not justice. What they are doing is trying to falsely equate being male with being a perpetrator, combined with collectivism allow…
/r/MensRights14/10/21 06:06 AM
5

The modern school system is trash. It is a failure at sufficiently engaging students both intellectually and personally, as well as fail to teach thinking skills, general philosophy and the skills needed to efficiently function and thrive in society. All of this leads to immature behaviour and as a result will lead to a societal collapse, as seen in the Roman empire.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 11:12 AM
3

An artifact of left-wing philosophy, namely "tribal" support for left-wing ideologies in this case feminism, above consistent principles and data.
/r/MensRights11/10/21 08:59 AM
2

I think this might be part of why you are feeling so down. There are things where there can be no compromise, one of which is human rights. To some this comes naturally, while others have to learn that complete conflict avoidance is at best naive and a lack of resistance allows malicious actors to thrive. This is hard, but necessary to protect the the things you care about. You are met with hate, because you highlight their malice and they want to see themselves as good. So advice to you deep br…
/r/MensRights11/10/21 08:54 AM
10

I think a lot of this is down to a lack of sufficient knowledge and education to withstand propaganda and not be tricked in to acting in a self-destructive manner. If you look at my recent post history I point out that some of the flaws that we see manifested in feminism come from it's philosophical predecessors namely left-wing political philosophy and romanticism. The lack of knowledge and education comes in with not knowing that a consistent position and not admitting fault do not stem from f…
/r/MensRights11/10/21 07:13 AM
1

Part of the issue is the general apathetic attitude towards men in society. What you have described is simply the whole data, and most people here would be happy to help anyone who is unduly suffering, regardless of who they are. The issue is that there is a philosophy that actively dehumanises men and lobbies for infringing on the equal application of human rights, while claiming to be for equality - feminism. The gist of it is, feminism has always been a supremacy philosophy and a movement bas…
/r/MensRights10/10/21 11:19 PM
2

Thanks my dude, and likewise. I try to look at politics in terms of what's creating a flourishing society, practically doable an could withstand both adversity and the test of time. The capitalist argument for a socialised healtcare system and an overall robust social safety net (like Denmark) is stress reduction and cost of opportunity mitigation. Having a robust social safety net artificially creates a system where if something goes terribly wrong there is something in place to help, thus you …
/r/MensRights10/10/21 07:54 AM
2

True. My point was that left-wing philosophy is not a good basis for anything. Right-wing philosophy also has its drawbacks, but it was used to create our civilization, therefore has done something right. Learn from those who created civilization, as they know how to create, not from those who destroyed it, as they know only how to destroy. If it is of interest, I have a few ideas of how to approach left-wing goals (such as socialised health care) without relying on left-wing logic. Let me know …
/r/MensRights09/10/21 09:28 PM
20

No, and never claimed it to be. It is human nature vs human nature + additional pressure. The point is that the philosophy that was and is foundational to the left-wing ideology is exacerbates the issue. Another difference between the two is that the right has a fairly static virtue system, which at least to some extent acts as a counterbalance to bloodthirsty tendencies. The the left-wing was founded on opposing having right-wing values, therefore having no such counterbalance and allows comple…
/r/MensRights09/10/21 12:23 PM
25

It's because not approving of a left-wing (feminism being one) cult often got people killed, and it seems to an ingrained feature, making any mention of a decenting opinion synonymous to at least an insult although more typically a mark for abuse or execution. Examples: the "reign of terror", Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 07:33 AM
2

That's why anything based on romanticism, such as leftism, socialism and feminism never have a chance of working long term, as they destroy the society and people they need to survive. Learn from those who built civilisation, as they know how to create, and not from those who destroyed it, as they know only how to destroy.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 07:11 AM
5

It comes from a combination of "acceptable" by the general public misandry coming out from feminism and popularity of romanticising things (also where left-wing philosophy takes it's routes). Romanticism is not only about making things look good, but about polarising, overgeneralisation and disregard of reality in favour of narrative. This allows disregarding the individuality of (in this case) men and doing whatever it takes to support the the accepted narrative, making it constantly move towar…
/r/MensRights09/10/21 06:55 AM
1

Yes. Although most mental health issues can be navigated successfully given proper behaviour, attitude and support.
/r/MensRights08/10/21 05:10 PM
3

We want intelligent and principled women, like Marie Curie, Millicent Fawcett, Olga Konstantinovna Queen of Greece, Adda Lovelace. All of which would be offended by existence of feminism. What you fail to realise is that being against feminism is being pro-woman as well as pro-men. Abandoning feminism consistently improve mental health, relationships and families. A crucial feminist Simone de Beauvoir, who originated the "patriarchy" delusion, was normalizing abusive relationships and promoted d…
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 03:07 PM
2

Many thanks.
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 02:43 PM
19

Translation: Oh no, someone is pointing out that feminists are biggots who never had a connection to reality! Quick, I must throw a tantrum like a toddler, and spout bullshit, baselessly asserted in feminist propaganda, despite evidence that feminism only hurt all of those causes!
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 01:05 PM
12

You are welcome!
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 07:54 AM
44

I'd say be proud of yourself. You acted like an adult with integrity, and that merits respect.
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 07:43 AM
1

Feminism has evolved from the ideology left-wing of the French revolution via socialism. Charles Fourier who came up with feminism was a socialist philosopher, so was Simone de Beauvoir (came up with "the patriarchy" concept), and the list goes on. The left-wing of the French revolution defined itself on being opposed to any right-wing (and centrist) values, such as individual justice, merit, integrity and principled position. In terms of actions this resonates with the darker traits of human na…
/r/AntiFeminists08/10/21 07:35 AM
3

A principle retained from the left-wing of the French revolution (philosophically up stream from feminism) and the "rain of terror", its good only when we do it.
/r/AntiFeminists07/10/21 09:04 PM
7

Understanding a profound truth requires effort and delaying gratification. It is much easier to fall for a comforting lie, that's seems pleasurable in the short term but over time leads to ruin.
/r/MensRights07/10/21 03:55 PM
2

Well put!
/r/MensRights07/10/21 03:29 PM
3

Sounded crazy to me when I first connected the dots. Read up on history my dude, it's one hell of a journey. It has led some people I know say that they have never truly spoken a language they are native speakers of. Nazis (German fascism) and fascist are national-socialists, created as a socialist branch to oppose communism and Marxism. Socialism itself evolved from the values of the left-wing (that's where you get the term) during the French revolution and the first thing they did was "the rai…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 03:15 PM
2

a) They do not have enough power, because having that much power will endanger government. And than riot police is deployed. b) terrorism will lead to them being put down at once because a). Government does not like competition. Any government. They operate using the same tactics as most politicians. If politicians crackdown on feminists, they create a precendent to be put in the same position, so their survival as things currently stand depends on the survival of feminism. The time where this w…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 02:25 PM
3

Not quite pointless, just a hard to get people engaged, because it requires thinking and looking at data rather than a propaganda slogan. And the easiest way if by comparing and contrasting with feminism. For example highlighting that accepting feminism leads to depression, worse relationships, and being in a community that supports you when it should try to stop you and constantly turns on it's own. Compare that to MRM and how we challenge each other when we think they are doing something wrong…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 01:57 PM
1

What they gonna do, shoot people? Yes. Terrorism is how they got started. Feminism is based on the left-wing of the French revolution, and the first thing they did after winning was the "rain of terror". Many get angry at me for pointing out that feminism stems from the same philosophy that produced regimes that slaughtered people by the millions simply for political convenience (Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao). Many prominent feminists have called for genocide and reducing thee male population to 1…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 01:36 PM
3

So, essentially bend down. Closer to know where and when and be strategic about it. Actually, you do not have to respect anybody unless you have reasons for it. You both conflate respect with being polite and having manners. The issue is public support. Si Vic pacem para bellum, only works when you have overwhelming force. By nature of being nuanced, MRM is unlikely to gain that quickly. Thus the much more feasible option is to build a culture of resilience to propaganda on a person by person ba…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 11:15 AM
25

Feminism is the thing most dirrecly responsible for or preventing from tackling men's rights issues. I point out where I can that the issues that feminism created have their roots in the creation of the political left-wing philosophy and romantic philosophy. Flaws at their cores that ensure that everything derived from it such as feminism will invariably lead to horrible outcomes. Most people do not fully understand the positions of various philosophical schools or their histories. Most people d…
/r/MensRights07/10/21 10:29 AM
30

There are many accounts of women leaving feminism and becoming happier, significantly improving their lives and relationships, and improving their mental health. So, yeah, being pro-female means being anti-feminism. On the other hand supporting MRM is also pro-female, since in a healthy relationship a man will naturally strive to make the woman that cares for an values him as happy as he can. This leads to a positive self-re-enforcing loop between the two, leading to happyness for both.
/r/MensRights07/10/21 09:55 AM
1

She is incapable of thinking other terms as misogynist, or conceding If you are an adult, go no contact, and see if you can get legal advice on getting a restraining order/child abuse on the legal record. If her actions led to you getting pregnant at 11 she should be in prison. She has shown you only callous disregard, repay her the same. Otherwise, still go NC and lead the best life you can!
/r/MensRights06/10/21 06:22 PM
1

I really don't want anyone to go the psychopath route due to expediency, especially from this sub, or hurt the cause. A huge part of the issue is we need to create, and not let them in. Feminists have only been successful at destroying things, and every single female-only business or any other attempts at creating have been spectacular failures. So the only thing we actually need to do is build up society, and not let them parasitise it. After that it is a small nudge, maybe a march, but not nes…
/r/MensRights06/10/21 06:03 PM
1

That's why you also need strategy. Know where, when and how. you won't get to enjoy it I suffer from clinical depression, I am effectively incapable of enjoying anything. I am also not egocentric, and if the things I create bring about a better world for my loved ones or their loved ones (and so on), that is a good enough reason to do it. If I was only after benefit for myself I would not be an MRA, but it is a matter of principle and duty as a human being. Study those who built nations, as they…
/r/MensRights06/10/21 04:40 PM
1

"Diamond is forever" was a lie to market diamonds. It is also quite recent, and it is allready falling in popularity. my point is once it's accepted. it'll be as it is. and when you accepted it even in silence it's not true. it's as good as true. that's why you struggle to prove something that's true against something that's accepted. nobody is going to be with you. and it's not a movie. it takes force to change something that is accepted if not impossible. especially when it's something that's …
/r/MensRights06/10/21 04:02 PM
1

The problem of the post-truth delusion is that it requires an ever increasing use of force to maintain. The truth is the ONLY thing that can work long term, that's why it's the truth, not a truth or someone's perception of it. This is how hard science works. That's why we must be on the side of truth, not ideology. Who said protests are the only thing? We can have gatherings and conferences, rise to positions of power and expose the truth (my choice). You are limiting yourself to the same things…
/r/MensRights06/10/21 03:12 PM
8

I managed to avoid feminism until I was ~23, when I saw an elective seminar about "helping women in stem" and started digging. At the seminar I pointed out the hipocricy and that they were advocating for the same things they said were abhorrent. After that seminar the professor came up to me and another guy who pointed out similar things and said "thank you, I never noticed" and that was the last time such a seminar existed. Most people in general don't think about where their ideas come from an…
/r/MensRights06/10/21 02:54 PM
10

Can't say I know how to say this, but thank you. This gives hope for a briter future.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 02:30 PM
3

Because having protests are next to uncomfortable. Send in a few people to provoke a riot, and the opposition will have the excuse to label MRM as a terrorist organisation, and start political procecution. We are not dealing with people who will put any principle above their desire for power, as one of the foundational belief of those opposing men's rights is "there is no truth but power". This belief also ensures that any method of destroying anyone who does not support them is good, same as th…
/r/MensRights06/10/21 02:25 PM
2

Glad you are OK with with it. The point is genital mutilation should never be forced on anyone and done without express informed consent. A lot of people are pointing out that it doesn't have medical benefit, and is in fact in many cases harmful.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 11:41 AM
3

I think that part of the issue is his belief in left-wing philosophy. Going back to the French revolution and the creation of the left-wing, the left-wing wing was created to oppose all of the right-wing values. One of such values is maintaining a principled position even if you don't want to, a product of "there is no truth but power" philosophy. It is really facing how people believe something without looking at how those thoughts and values originated and evolved.
/r/MensRights06/10/21 08:08 AM
1

And the position on that right wing hierarchy is contingent on their obligations to others. A king is the Head of a kingdom and it is his job to rule, if that person does not want to/or is incapable to rule they abdicate or be assassinated. Same with any other position in a right-wing hierarchy. Not maintaining the rights - obligations balance is definitionally a left-wing position. So feminists swing about but only on the left side. Same can be said about aesthetics and the concept of beauty. C…
/r/MensRights04/10/21 05:41 PM
1

That's the issue. Thank you. According to Hitler they were leftist, closest to right wing as socialism gets (nazis aka national-socialists, founded as a branch of socialism in opposition of communism), but still distinctly left wing. Classical liberalism is just off center and even more right wing when compared to nazis (only considering right-left, not authoritarian libertarian axis). That's why I don't really draw distinction between leftist ideologies, as the problems they induce stem from th…
/r/MensRights04/10/21 05:21 PM
1

At what point do they swing right? Part of what defines the right is an emphasis on propriety, part of which is the aim to act like a gentleman/be ladylike, and an emphasis on obligations to you from other being contingent on your obligations to them. Keeping only one side of the obligations is antithetical to right-wing ideology. I think that we are miss communicating a bit on the right - left political compass. A good litmus test is: whether nazis (just very telling, not for an emotional respo…
/r/MensRights04/10/21 04:57 PM
1

Sir, liberalism is not politically left. It is centrist, steming from stoicism, whereas leftism stems on romanticism, a key point of which is its opposition to stoicism and factual data. The reason why there are so many branches of left-wing philosophy is that it is not bound by necessity to be productive or use all evidence available if any. It is easy to write just something, it is a lot harder to demonstrate that it is a good idea.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 04:39 PM
1

Feminism is a subset of left-wing philosophy, which evolved from socialism, which in turn evolved from left-wing philosophy of the French revolution. Not all leftists are feminists but all feminists are leftists. (And neither are classical liberals, who have a different philosophical basis all together.)
/r/MensRights04/10/21 04:08 PM
1

Thanks for letting me know. So different factions of leftist?
/r/MensRights04/10/21 03:52 PM
1

From what I know menslib comes at things from the politically left-leaning perspective. I think the similarities you notice might be explained by their philosophical approach being the same, I.e. they think using the same logic and tactics as feminists, thus their arguments sound the same and have the same flaws.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 02:40 PM
1

It is the mental gymnastics that you get with philosophy that evolved from romanticism. (the evolution being: romanticism - > political left - > socialism - > feminism). None of them deal with facts or reality, and inevitably devolve into justifying whatever hedonistic or abusive behaviour that they deem fit or will give them more political power.
/r/AntiFeminists04/10/21 02:01 PM
2

The idea that women were uniquely oppressed is just a power grab. It is a baseless assumption accepted during the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention and stated in the "the declaration of sentiment", with historical data suggesting the opposite. At least learn where the ideas you say came from, rather than simply be a "useful idiot".
/r/MensRights04/10/21 01:44 PM
5

They are not incorrect, they are just deceptive arsehats. ~90% of both men and women hold a bias towards women, it is a positive bias known as the "women are wonderful" effect.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 01:31 PM
3

You are correct, it is a men's rights issue and we care about it, but it is focused on by intactivists, rather than general men's rights. From what I have seen this sub is more general.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 01:07 PM
2

Not a bad point, however you miss a key factor: in CCP occupied China the care for elderly parents is the responsibility of sons. Daughters are supposed to help their husband, so there is no obligation on their part to provide for their elderly parents. I believe the same is true for traditional Indian families (as opposed to parts that embraced British culture). Another reason why men can be preffered over women in those countries is the necessity of physical strength for performing the jobs. M…
/r/AntiFeminists04/10/21 07:48 AM
7

If you go a level deeper, the primary role of a patriarch/matriarch/head of a large extended or clan is to coordinate the people, bringing everyone as much benefit as possible. The "patriarchy" concept of feminism originates with Simone de Beauvoir, and her normalizing abusive relationships and sexual abuse of minors, and being a massive cope because she chose to forgoe all healthy relationships and family for fame as a feminist and socialist (she was also extremely anti-family).
/r/MensRights03/10/21 06:15 PM
6

Other way around. They claimed to be feminists, their organisations were promoting feminism and the public figures who supported the violence against them were long time feminist activists. At what point do you believe them? I do not give a rat's arse which movement you support, if you are doing something bad I will criticise you for it. The issue with feminism is that the flawas are foundational to it and we are discussing that. If the MRM ever veers off into supremacy I will criticise it with …
/r/MensRights03/10/21 11:02 AM
13

Feminism was built on the use of violence. A blatent example of this was that the feminist movement of suffragettes was using bombings to further their agenda. The movement that got women in the UK the vote was the suffragists (two distinct movements), with the suffragettes distinctly harming the efforts according to the head of the suffragists movement Millicent Fawcett. This has not changed, as you can see the use of violence aimed at Erin Pizzey, who pointed out that a huge fraction of domest…
/r/MensRights03/10/21 10:43 AM
9

But they do call for androcide, an easy example to point out is Andrea Dworkin - one of the most prominent feminist ever. The same notion is carried by the "declaration of sentiment", the "scum manifesto" and the rest of the feminist movement. See how popular the "#killallmen" is, and how there is no inverse. What is wrong with pointing out that both feminism and nazi ideologies have the same philosophical routes, follow the same logic, glorify violence against decent (for example see the story …
/r/MensRights03/10/21 09:56 AM
8

He actually did coin it, and his defenition was that feminism judjes a society solely based on the benefit it brings women. Note a distinct lack of consideration for anyone or anything else, including equality or justice.
/r/MensRights03/10/21 09:38 AM
14

Read the original definition by Charles Fourier (the one who came up with it). It was always a supremacy movement.
/r/MensRights03/10/21 07:57 AM
10

My problems with this article: Its not extremists - it's all of the core individuals that defined/created the philosophy and movement. Disregard for that is one of things that allows feminism to appear morally just to the lay person and get support, despite being absolutely horrible when presented with facts and data. Feminism follows the same intellectual flow as any other dehumanising philosophy such as nazi ideology, because they are both based on the same philosophical basis, namely romantic…
/r/MensRights03/10/21 07:55 AM
2

Yes, harder than one would expect based on fictional knowledge.
/r/AntiFeminists02/10/21 11:48 PM
6

Rant away. Maybe a way you could reply is: no just being an adult and putting the actual needs of others above my wants, instead of throwing a tantrum like a toddler not being allowed to eat rat poison. How does that sound?
/r/MensRights02/10/21 08:21 AM
1

An interesting thought: With respect to emotional development, their behaviour patterns indicate stagnation at older child (someone has to fix things for me) and teenage (egocentric worldview) stages of development. That's why they constantly throw tantrums and never take responsibility for making things better or the consequences of their actions (which would be an indicator of adult emotional development, along with prioritising others and extended delayed gratification). Thus the proper respo…
/r/MensRights02/10/21 08:14 AM
2

It is surprisingly hard to kill someone/yourself intentionally. There are plenty of cases where people survived shooting them selves, and surprisingly there are cases of accidentally poisoning them selves with absolutely innocuous things even water (not contaminated with anything).
/r/AntiFeminists02/10/21 07:57 AM
23

Because MRA is a morally good and just cause, but it forces you to put your ego aside and engage intellectually with the world (which due to ego investment is next to psychological torture). A lot of people tend to go for the intellectual shortcuts of using emotions as justification and not thinking critically or thinking of the way ideas originate. Instant gratification caused by using these shortcuts, leads to popularity of using them, but leads to ruin over generations/long term. It is hard t…
/r/MensRights01/10/21 10:34 AM
2

Not necessarily deeper. If I remember my forensics classes correctly, when it comes to brain injury the angle and location are much more important. With the brain a huge trick is the blood brain barrier, which prevents direct contact of blood with the brain cells. Disrupting it leads to massive damage to the brain and in an area critical to the brains function immediate death. Damage to the frontal lobe is typically survivable, whereas damage to the hippocampus leads to instant death (the brain …
/r/AntiFeminists01/10/21 10:09 AM
10

This can be situation specific. For example I am "gunning" for an academic career in STEM, where the list of your publications is vital. It can then be a consideration of maintaining a profile, however there are ways of navigating around it and comes down to personal choice.
/r/MensRights30/09/21 08:09 PM
2

Because their economies still depend on the countries that colonized them. How does the economy of India depend on the UK? An argument could be made for that when India was a colony, now it is an independent nation and is capable of standing on its own and has been for decades. It is now on them to make something of themselves, and to an extent they are doing it. India has been making trade deals independent of the UK. I agree, but there is a reason you can't start off with building good adminis…
/r/MensRights30/09/21 07:57 PM
2

Only if you don't look at the fact that former European colonies that embraced European values are much better off than the one's that didn't. Raw resource extraction does not bring nearly as much value as added skilled labour and good administration (and you can not extract either). Compare India and Cambodia. Or North and South Korea (South Korea embraced European values). You can also compare Japan pre and post WW2, and how big of an economic boom it had since embracing European values. It ma…
/r/MensRights30/09/21 05:07 PM
2

A big issue is the cultural differences between the populations with people being not interchangeable on a population level. There is nothing outside of culture (engrained through 100s if not 1000s of years) that would have prevented those countries to be as advanced or even more advanced than current European countries. By simply putting culturally ill-equipped people into prosperous countries the country along with all of its prosperity will be destroyed simply due to miss management (lots of …
/r/MensRights30/09/21 08:23 AM
3

Most people struggle with critically analysing things and are easily brought by rhetoric. Taking the time and effort to find out the truth and figure out a profoundly beneficial approach to life is simply too hard for most, they become ego invested in those beliefs and cannot separate themselves from the ideology. This makes it exposing them to reality somewhat akin to torture. It is the same principle as to how an addict will need to go through the withdrawal to beat their addiction, but in thi…
/r/MensRights28/09/21 09:16 PM
2

Thank you. Its also a life of delusion based ignoring inconvenient reality, and pretending to be competent with power. Both genders can be good and bad at it, the key is to make sure that competent people of good moral character rise to prominence. There are a fair few females throughout history who brought up amazing ideas and had great contributions to humanity. From what I understand all of them would be insulted by the notion of feminism.
/r/MensRights28/09/21 08:44 PM
5

Feminism did not evolve in to anything, it was this from the start. The problem is that feminism and other branches of philosophy rooted in romantic philosophy (pretty much everything politically left of classical liberalism) concern themselves only with "winning" and do not care about destroying everything in its path. Basically it's a dangerous temper tantrum, invariably leading to only death and destruction.
/r/MensRights28/09/21 09:05 AM
2

Not surprising in the slightest. The use of terrorism is an integral part of the philosophy that feminism is based on, and an oversimplified view of all issues will inevitably result in calls for violence against any opposition (eventually including their own supporters).
/r/MensRights28/09/21 08:28 AM
2

Those are the same thing.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 07:46 PM
2

The proof is the "scum manifesto" and the works of Andrea Dworkin (and her supporters, not knowing who she is is your fault) . You yet to provide any evidence or sources for your claims.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 06:59 PM
1

Read the "scum manifesto" then. It is now on you to know what you are talking about, namely the specific text in question.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 06:51 PM
2

Less written (although the list of authors is also pretty long) , more signed on to and aggreed to by effectively every every feminist thereafter.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 06:46 PM
2

Read the "scum manifesto" then and the writing of Andrea Dworkin. Both prove my point.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 06:38 PM
3

Along with the rest of their movement, the idea is repeated by feminists in mass and the only example that can be pointed out against blatant misandry is Christina Hoff Summers. Some additional texts to point this out are the "declaration of sentiment" of 1848 Seneca Falls Convention and the more blatant "scum manifesto" both of which are an integral part of the philosophy (I. E. Feminism cannot exist without them). Do you know the origin of feminism and what was its original definition? Have yo…
/r/MensRights27/09/21 06:12 PM
3

The source is Andrea Dworkin herself and the fact that her viewers are the core of the feminist movement. It is in all of her writing, therefore pointing out her as a whole is more appropriate. Here is a sobering thought for you: why was Erin Pizzey attacked (murder attempts) for speaking out against feminism (by pointing out that women initiate domestic violence) and why did feminists threaten to bomb venues showing "the Red Pill" by Cassie Jaye? Why do feminists protest talks about male suicid…
/r/MensRights27/09/21 04:20 PM
7

It did. As it is implied to be true and used as a base assumption, it is effectively being accepted by all feminists, therefore being indistinguishable from feminism. One outlier from this is Christina Hoff Summers, and she is an outlier because of her actions and criticism of Dworkin, with Christina receiving massive backlash for speaking against gendricide.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 01:52 PM
2

Sorry to hear that you are going through all of it. You made a big step in splitting up with her and you will be going through hell to get used to not being in that situation. Prepare for long haul and that she will start lying about you to make her seem like a good person (common tactic). If you want some help/advice ask away, I'll be glad to help!
/r/MenSupportMen27/09/21 07:54 AM
6

And the one that is supported by the rest of the movement. What you fail to realise is that the everything is at some point started by a single person, whose ideas are then accepted and become the core of the philosophy, making it redundant to point out others. Dworkin's work is also extremely prominent in feminist philosophy and serves as an implied basis for most of the newer works. The argument here is the "fruit of the poisoned tree" - what is based on faulty logic will itself be in error, t…
/r/MensRights27/09/21 07:27 AM
10

Source: Andrea Dworkin. I have 0 need to missrepresent feminists.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 10:42 PM
8

The core of the feminist movement advocate for gendricide, namely reducing men to a small fraction of the population. A notable example is Andrea Dworkin, who advocated reducing the male population to 10%. That is allready on the same magnitude as the nazi/fascists based on biological traits, so there can be no defence.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 09:32 PM
1

I remember, thanks! Got a lung infection on top of it but I'm staying fairly well on top of things, so things are not too miserable (annoying mostly).
/r/MenSupportMen26/09/21 07:07 PM
3

You are welcome! Exposing your self to ideas and maintaining a leveled head is the best way to grow as a person.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 12:49 PM
3

Likewise. This is a good conversation. Fundamentally, all of the philosophical frameworks mentioned , be it socialism (all forms, Marxism and fascism included) political left-wing and feminism stem from the idealized world view of romanticism, and do not deal with the actions of the people but the labels they claim to support. This in turn leads to violence against anyone decenting being seen as a moral good, and disregard for the crucial benefits of the opposition. An interesting thing to point…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 12:36 PM
6

Nothing super particular, her biography speaks for her quite loudly. She sexually groomed her students, and was extremely bitter about her choices of choosing fame over being married, which relegates her critiques of the family structure to the dimension of a massive cope. Try also looking up Andrea Dworkin, she is particularly blatant in her hated of men. In general, I think that the issue is not only with feminism, but also with the ideas it is based on, namely left-wing political ideology and…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 10:29 AM
7

And it has always been about hating and exploiting men. Starting from Charles Fourier who came up with the term.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 08:34 AM
6

Same here, I just like to add that Simone de Beauvoir's (the one who originated that use of "patriarchy") pedophilic actions and if you take her own life choices in to account its more trying to cope with and justify abuse than anything related to reality.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 08:30 AM
1

Thanks!
/r/MenSupportMen26/09/21 08:24 AM
3

Fighting Covid-19. Should be fine in a while.
/r/MenSupportMen26/09/21 08:05 AM
2

Thanks for the sanity check. That's why that phrase alone disqualifies them from my dating perspectives.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 07:53 AM
0

On a slightly more positive side of this, I don't get why but most women who know me profile me in to "going to be an awesome dad category". Any ideas why this could be the case?
/r/MensRights25/09/21 09:38 AM
4

A bit of a catch 22. To teach masculinity you would need to teach things directly opposing socialism (and CCP in particular), and that will absolutely destroy them.
/r/MensRights25/09/21 09:16 AM
3

Those numbers reffer to conviction due to false accusation. It is extremely different from being aquited in court. For a case to fall in to that percentage, not only does the person has to be not guilty, but the accusation has to be so blatantly malicious that the accuser is sent to prison. Rape by nature is heavily reliant on a he-said-she-said situation making it virtually impossible to prove that the accusation was made to knowingly and diliberately cause harm. I think this percentage is high…
/r/MensRights17/09/21 03:40 PM
4

Fruit of a poisoned tree. Feminism evolved from a deluded world view, therefore any branches of it are also delusional. Both women's rights and men's rights evolved from liberalism, which is in strong opposition to the philosophy that was used to conceive feminism.
/r/MensRights14/09/21 03:59 PM
4

You are welcome to borrow both. =) Let me know if you want some references/details for A.
/r/MensRights14/09/21 10:18 AM
6

I agree with him, with 0 sarcasm in sight.
/r/MensRights14/09/21 09:17 AM
5

That is the real feminism. From inception it only cared about bringing benefits to women and justifying supremacy. The female vote was hindered by feminism. Women were not sold as property (it was a way of divorce for common people who couldn't afford it and often wouldn't make the money to do so in a lifetime). Women not owning properly was to simply the tax system. Almost all feminists that created and shaped feminism are horrible people gifting on to women's rights to twist everything to just…
/r/MensRights14/09/21 09:03 AM
6

My reply to this stuff usually goes along the lines of: A) why are you defending biggots, racists, terrorists and pedophiles? B) why are you against universal application of human rights? And once I lay down the facts and references there is nothing they can reply that puts them anywhere near a moral high ground. Edit: let the dumpster fire burn =)
/r/MensRights14/09/21 08:53 AM
1

Wellcome to this sub. To an extent this is part of human nature, there are very few people who would be able to give up power to do what is good and just. There are also very few people who would oppose a double standard if it benefits them.
/r/MensRights13/09/21 08:24 AM
1

Yup. I'm in STEM so it's I'm not in the minority, but the people in STEM have habits of looking at the data and admitting that they were wrong. A story about this: a while back I went to a feminist training on women in STEM. IT was led by an engineering professor and an admin. During the workshop I and another guy pointed out that by continuing doing what they are doing they are the same as what they proclaimed to be evil. After the workshop the professor went up to us and thanked us for pointin…
/r/MensRights13/09/21 04:36 AM
1

I agree, it's not a good strategy. To tackle this issue we need to focus on both excising the woke and on building the new. I happen to be better at the later.
/r/MensRights12/09/21 09:22 PM
1

I know. That's why it is important to be resourceful. I am aiming to get in to higher education. I am good at recearch and teaching, I am also very persuasive, so my aim is to establish myself as ultra-valuable , start saying no and highlight the insanity of wokeness to the point of outing them for being the frauds they are.
/r/MensRights12/09/21 09:17 PM
1

... until they actually figure out what had destroyed the companies before, and avoid repeating the same mistake. Part of the issue is that they will have to learn to fight like their lives depend on it, because eventually it will. And they will have to learn that it is not a one and done situation, but a continuous situation even if its just maintenance. Wokism and woke people are like classical zombies: unending, unrelenting, have no standards, cannot do anything but destroy, and roughly the s…
/r/MensRights12/09/21 04:39 PM
5

That point was not about men and women at all. It was about how people of all genders are content with simply doing what is perceived as good, despite evidence to the contrary. Both biology and upbringing are important in how people think. I view it as biology being the driving force and upbringing the direction. If you unquestionably follow a word view, no amount of biology will be able to help. When one considers only biological diversity, as described in the original question, it can be only …
/r/MensRights12/09/21 01:04 PM
5

Talking about governments it is a question of scale. On the scale of a year - no. On a scale of a century its a different story. The last people who tried this it collapsed in ~70 years. They have no long term future and judging by how much force they need to apply to keep things up they are on their deathbed (optimistic) or about to enter the room it is in (pessimistic). The question is now how can "fight back" with persuasion, resourcefulness and integrity, and make an actually permanent chang…
/r/MensRights12/09/21 12:39 PM
17

And an overrepresentation of compitent people in jobs, leading to an overall benefit. Once you break through on merit there is next to nothing they will be able to do. A huge problem is that a lot of politicians will never stand up for what is right but unpopular, hence why democracy is never a good idea (read Plato's "Republic" and Olga Konstantinovna, Queen of Greece). Fundamentally, I don't think that this is the battle itself, but the fallout of a much greater issue. A lot of people people t…
/r/MensRights12/09/21 09:02 AM
44

The best people are quiting, ideally starting a similar business or going to a company that values them, and those old companies are going the way of the dodo bird. It is a storm that shall pass in the companies much faster than in the government and academia. I am trying to get my foot into the academic research (I'm my thesis I have written about a few extremely important questions, that I would not be able to pursue in a the industry). This is why I hope that this political correctness collap…
/r/MensRights12/09/21 06:48 AM
80

From the way you had described things, the behaviour is not sustainable long term. Incompetent people will make mistakes and eventually eat into the company bottom line enough to make the board of directors choose: abandon the practice or go bankrupt.
/r/MensRights12/09/21 06:31 AM
4

Congratulations! And good luck with the next stages!
/r/MenSupportMen11/09/21 06:57 AM
3

Honestly, a sizeable portion of women do not provide the "love and companionship" aspect of the relationship. In part this is because they have never thought about sometimes prioritising the needs of others, fear of missing out on a devil may care attitude or the nessecity of keeping their promises, integrity and reciprocating good things done to them. Sorry, this hits a bit too close to home.
/r/MensRights10/09/21 08:20 AM
3

Not specifically fascist. It is simply one of the movements that prescribe violence against anyone in opposition, as it is narrative based rather than fact based. The core issue is whether violence is permissible at the first sight of disagreement or when there is a threat to life and wellbeing, and there are no feasible alternatives. Feminism is therefore better grouped with religious zealots and all branches of politics left of liberalism, such as socialism (often a good sentiment, but due to …
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 05:40 AM
4

Those extremists are the ones who created almost all of the feminism. For example Andrea Dworkin and Simone de Beauvoir.
/r/MensRights10/09/21 05:00 AM
2

Feminism has attacked everyone who dared to go against their narrative. For example Erin Pizzey, after she found out that the majority of DV perpetrators. Another point against feminism is specifically Simone de Beauvoir, and how she has justified her sexually predatory behaviour and abuse of authority targeted at minors (aka sexually grooming her underaged students). Her work is what is now become the "patriarchy" bs. So my good shock question is "why do you support pedophiles?". Last, but not …
/r/MensRights10/09/21 04:54 AM
4

Sadly, that is the case. A significant fraction of women focus only on what others provide them, and do not care about what they do in return or about keeping up commitments/loyalty. Another thing to point out is how many women only have double standards. A good question to ask is are they willing to discuss things, and have enough humility not to start a tantrum (let alone admit) when they are prooven wrong? Can they maintain an interesting and engaging conversation? What these examples demonst…
/r/MensRights09/09/21 08:44 PM
2

I am glad that this sub helps people. Good luck and godspeed!
/r/MensRights09/09/21 04:33 PM
13

Part of the issue is that a lot of women (not all) barely have that to offer in a relationship. It is a sad state of affairs, but something that needs to be pointed out so that at least some could become aware and have a chance to improve. This can be done via messages like this or by experiencing it from men in their lives.
/r/MensRights09/09/21 03:50 PM
1

Yes. Sorry for the spelling error.
/r/MensRights08/09/21 08:48 AM
1

Generally, I think he is a good read/watch for a beginner in psychology. A lot of what he wrote and said not about religion is a good way of applying stoicism and will be helpful to many people and can serve as a great gateway to for example Markus Aurelius. His work on religion is something really awesome! It explicitly states the more nuanced positions implied in religion and puts them into a factual context. Where I think his drawbacks are is not enough depth on the philosophy and logic end, …
/r/MensRights08/09/21 06:39 AM
1

The topic itself is not pretty. Part of the issue is that its not only the woman's body, but also the life of another human. Fetus - stands for offspring (unborn) in Latin, and zygote - is a stage of development rather than a separate entity same as newborn, teenager and adult. Both in this case reffering to humans. Thus, denying them human rights is the same rhetoric used to justify genocide and concentration camps. I have looked into this further (and don't remember if it is in this article), …
/r/MensRights04/09/21 05:34 PM
1

Proof? Scientifically it is. Historically it is. Logically it is.
/r/MensRights04/09/21 03:40 PM
1

Thank you for the information and sources.
/r/MensRights03/09/21 11:24 PM
7

I'm building my cv to be able to pull that off. There are a few things that need to be researched before artificial gestation. Probably somewhere around 50ish years ballpark before it could be achieved.
/r/MensRights03/09/21 11:22 PM
1

And I never said that health reasons were the main factor? I listed a reason among a ton. You have never mentioned anything else to me. The bill also provisions for abortions before a heartbeat can be detected. My angle here is protection of human rights for all humans. In this case rights of children, aka human offsprings, aka the definition of human foetus. By eliminating human rights for a subset of humans, you are doing something that was used to justify genocide and racism. By your own stan…
/r/MensRights03/09/21 04:34 PM
0

It is designated with a Latin word Foetus. What is it's definition in Latin? (Spoiler: it stands for offspring; if unspecified, most commonly human offspring) So the question is then: do human offspring have human rights? Remember you are the offspring of your parents. You do realise that by denying human rights to humans you are almost repeating the rhetoric responsible for genocide?
/r/MensRights03/09/21 09:11 AM
2

Do you think women getting abortions are doing it on a whim? Something horrible must have happened during the pregnancy like a defect that would alter the baby's life forever. Factually incorrect. The overwhelming majority have nothing to do with a medical necessity or rape. Read this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pgbsb5/scotus_allows_texas_abortion_ban_to_proceed/hbaravt?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 You're sick if that's what you believe. A) Stop projecting…
/r/MensRights03/09/21 09:00 AM
1

Likewise I respectfully disagree, as we are not dealing with it alone. I simply apply a uniform standard, that no life should be ended on a whim, regardless of whose it is. In this case my position is adults agree on conception, after that the child rights are to be taken in to account by at least not taking things lightly. Autonomy is not freedom from concequince, and again you are only considering one side of the argument.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 09:04 PM
1

And you are also ending a life started with the help of another. Until we are capable of in vitro gestation, interests of all involved should be protected.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 07:41 PM
3

It is often not medically necessary, and my point it cannot be taken lightly. My answer to this is a culture of accountability and a society that makes people capable of supporting a family in their 20s. Shift happens and adults need to be capable of dealing with it, otherwise the world will collapse.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 04:36 PM
-2

And since when did feminists started to kick out people calling for murder or pedophiles? Only those who find the evidence contradicting their narrative, and support men's human rights. It is. Same as the "kill all men" narrative.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 04:29 PM
3

Good point. That is why I advocate to consider all things. How about overlapping methods and multiple redundancy? Keeping things in check? For example some medications reduce the efficiency of some methods of contraception, hence while taking them extra measures need to be taken to avoid pregnancy. Having a habit of keeping this in check will help to have more similar habits, thus less likely to make errors. I am currently looking into habits (as a hobby) and how to use them for more intelligent…
/r/MensRights02/09/21 03:32 PM
5

A woman isn't the vessel for a man to have a child unless they both agree to that. Women are not livestock. Don't jump to conclusions. I never said anything to this effect. I simply presented some aspects to consider. In my opinion both birth and abortion should be mutual decisions, and no party should be allowed to violate this unilaterally. Secondly, there is still the aspect of the child being aborted, that it is human and cannot be denied rights. In terms of men's rights passing this law wil…
/r/MensRights02/09/21 03:15 PM
0

Likewise. My point about men's rights being political, etc. was that it's no an excuse not to discuss it. If it is your choice - own it, and at least I will respect you for doing so. And who are the fathers to those children if not men? Why do they not have a voice? What about the boys being aborted? All of these are thee issues of men and boys, and deserve to be discussed.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 03:00 PM
5

And fringe situations are not to be ignored, because they set a precendent allowing to go further and further, in this specific case in to eugenics. The aborting of male children is fairly mainstream feminism, so it is not really a fringe example. In my opinion we should raise people (all, not just men) to be good enough not to need abortions outside of medical emergencies. Abortion restrictions (in this case ban) will push towards that.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 02:51 PM
10

An aspect to consider. For example how does this affect the men who want that child, and their wife /girlfriend aborts out of spite? How about the horrid rhetoric that boys should be aborted? And I specifically worded my response to not judge whether its good or bad. My personal opinion is that there should be no illusions and that abortion is taken too lightly. More restrictions on abortion will force people to take it more seriously, and making it more convenient for people to avoid the situat…
/r/MensRights02/09/21 02:38 PM
6

And no body is bringing anyone down. The question here is about parental rights of the father and the child's right to live vs convenience. There is effectively no opposition if it is a life and death situation, but often it is a lack of responsibility and convenience.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 12:56 PM
1

It is part of life, and such discussions need to happen. Men's rights are by nature political, ethical, complicated, and to most ideologies controversial. It is not based on romanticism (which simplifies things while making everything useless), but on empiricism making almost any issue complicated. And if you want to opt out just don't participate in specific threads.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 12:49 PM
1

Depends on what you consider life. An argument can be made on human dna, as it is different from both parents. And that is one of the few consistent standards, which do not open up a eugenics argument. + scientists stay on the side of caution. Most of the best scientists were religious, so a religious argument is not completely invalid.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 12:32 PM
6

Some times you just need to rant. Not going to judge you for that. In terms of seeing a psychology specialist: to prescribe medication you need to be a medic, psychologists can't prescribe meds. It is also well understood that the way to use meds is in conjunction with therapy, to help you get to a point where you can actually do the things that therapists ask. A lot of psychologists are garbage, but you can find a good one if you try. Honestly, your family seems overly pushing, which is doing l…
/r/MenSupportMen29/08/21 06:09 PM
56

Feminism not being a hate moment is only the rhetoric, and is very different from the reality and data. What is proclaimed as "patriarchy theory" was simply a way for Simone de Beauvoir to explain and justify her abusive relationships (with her being both abuser and abused). Also being rooted in romantic philosophy, and assuming that the romanticised worldview is the correct one, is not conducive to being factual and actually looking at reality.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 07:39 AM
20

Women's suffrage stems from the egalitarianism movement, not feminism. Feminism was never about equality. Read Charles Fourier, the man who originated feminism. From the very beginning feminism completely disregarded the wellbeing of men and children in favour of women. Erin Pizzey was originally a feminist until she looked at the fact that the majority of women in her shelter were the aggressors and abusers in their relationships. When she tried to create shelters for men - she was kicked out o…
/r/MensRights29/08/21 07:28 AM
2

Now you just need to ride it out. Good luck!
/r/MenSupportMen28/08/21 02:08 PM
1

Not really sure what you meant. MGTOW is a choice not to engage. Being redpilled is simply awareness of these things and not settling for comfortable lies. Both MGTOW and being redpilled are only harmful to abusive individuals and scam artists.
/r/MensRights28/08/21 09:43 AM
2

There is also a community to help you with anything thing specific, and support you. The world is going to s really fast now, so something will break fairly soon. "May you live in interesting times" definitely sounds like a curse.
/r/MenSupportMen28/08/21 06:54 AM
3

Some happy stuff: got a new laptop (managed to find a fairly cheap model, the standalone gpu on it's own retails for the same price) with an rtx 3070. Am really happy with it. =)
/r/MenSupportMen28/08/21 06:46 AM
5

Sorry to hear that. This is not medical advice, just a point to check out. Try asking your doctor about vitamin C, D and Zinc supplements to help boost your immune system. Vitamin C is a chemical precursor for a lot of stuff. Vitamin D and Zinc - heard that they are helpful with getting better if you are down with the sickness. Good luck and and hope you get better soon!
/r/MenSupportMen28/08/21 06:37 AM
3

My advice: learn their tricks and how to counter them, and have hard data to back it up. Some examples: If they even touch "patriarchy" with a flagpole, bombard them with: a) Simone de Beauvoir, who coined the term in that context was a pedophile, who used it to justify her abusing others. Why do you support abusers/pedophiles? (and keep the narrative around this, to maintain the moral high ground) b) factually incorrect, the acceptance of feminism has drastically reduced the levels of happiness…
/r/MensRights26/08/21 07:32 AM
1

Yup. Most people don't realise that a "victory" by any means leads to things worse than "defeat", not realising the larger context and precendent set by their actions. Here is a good question: how many people are willing to loose and admit that they were wrong, to be able to follow someone to an even greater benefit to both?
/r/MensRights25/08/21 08:31 AM
13

I think a very important question is what is considered as harassment. Was it just some super awkward man making a complement, not realising that some boundary has been crossed or just being unattractive to that girl?
/r/MensRights25/08/21 07:01 AM
2

This thing is not all that gendered, a good chunk of MRAs are women. There is data to support that the modern way of life is bad for both. The real divide is whether you understand what is happen or just buy into the rhetoric. And it's not just about feminism and it is not that clean cut (this can go on in to politics, Yuri Bezmenov brought up some good points). Any type of person can be useful, the point is how to be effective, and not fall for bs artists. The current stuff is not sustainable a…
/r/MensRights24/08/21 09:21 PM
1

Sure!
/r/MenSupportMen24/08/21 07:08 AM
3

I would be happy to talk.
/r/MenSupportMen24/08/21 07:06 AM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights23/08/21 07:50 PM
4

It's a bit more in your face on mass media, but there is still a lot of it irl, especially in the bellow 30s population. This is also dependent on country.
/r/MensRights23/08/21 08:36 AM
5

Social sciences are not my area of expertise (I am finishing my PhD in STEM). In terms of methodology, 73 people are not a representative sample, hence should only be a basis for further investigation and cannot be used to draw conclusions. Secondly, the methodology fails to describe in detail the formulation of questions, thus failing to address nuances between the understanding of the question by researchers and participants. This leaves the entire study open to bias and ambiguity. In addition…
/r/MensRights23/08/21 06:23 AM
64

This is what happens when an ideology is derived from romanticism, it oversimplifies well past the point of loosing connection to reality and nurtures hatred of people rather than their actions. Its not really new, it is just so much in your face that you cannot ignore it. In my opinion, this should have been dealt with and destroyed at its inception, not allowed to fester in to what it is now.
/r/MensRights22/08/21 09:01 PM
2

Have a similar story from a few years ago. Went to a seminar at uni, raised a couple of questions. The crucial one being: "so how is what you are doing different from what you claim to hate?" the secretary leading it got mad, the professor leading it was a bit shocked and came up to me after the seminar to thank me for pointing that out. That was the last (also first) time they tried pulling it off. Most modern leftist and left-wing ideologies are incapable of taking criticism or any research go…
/r/MensRights22/08/21 08:13 PM
5

True, but I doubt most toddlers will be able to pronounce "domestic relationship", let alone use it in a conversation. In any case, this type of behaviour should be discouraged even in toddlers. And I got the joke =).
/r/MensRights22/08/21 06:37 PM
2

I wonder how long it will take for this system to fail, due to its disconnect from reality, and will we be able to build one without these same flaws.
/r/MensRights22/08/21 02:23 PM
21

Agreed. The points I wanted to get across are: 1) she acted like a toddler, and needs to grow up. The OP should not feel bad about it. 2) there is a point were you need to cut your relatives out of your life. Not a good idea in this situation, but realising that it is an option helps setting healthy boundaries leading to a better life overall. This is counter to the notion of "we don't choose our families", which is often used to continue abusing people.
/r/MensRights22/08/21 02:01 PM
75

But you can tell them to go to hell, and if they are being abusive you should do so.
/r/MensRights22/08/21 11:21 AM
151

She was trying to put her self in a position of power, and you didn't let her, so she threw a tantrum. Ask your self, do you want that kind of person in your life?
/r/MensRights22/08/21 10:51 AM
5

These people are a good way of showcasing why feminism is evil to others. They are brain dead, so they will defend feminism and all you need to do is highlight that the people who defined their philosophy did so to try normalize and justify their abhorrent actions. On this sub its just good practice. P.S. "give us a shout" if you want me to chime in on a conversation.
/r/MensRights22/08/21 07:03 AM
9

Nothing, but it has undercurrents of misogyny and treating women as objects to be conquered and manipulated. If someone "fails" at pick up artistry they may internalize this as women oppressing them and this is why they may look to male empowerment (I.e. men's rights) PUA is by definition antithetical to misogyny, as if they hated women they would not try to get their attention. The PUA is based around a bellow 10% success rate fot the best of the best, so it teaches a how to deal with failure w…
/r/MensRights22/08/21 06:44 AM
1

The 2-8% is of women convicted of falce accusation, which is incredibly hard to prove in a he said, she said situation. In most cases it is impossible to prove that the falce accusation was done with a malicious motive, which allows some (I don't have the numbers; likely a number massively above the proven 2-8%) falce accusers cannot be convinced and walk away. People lie to get what they want, women are no exception. There are very few people who have strong enough moral principles.
/r/MensRights21/08/21 06:21 AM
6

In my opinion, it is because the philosophy they follow is based on generalisation, oversimplification and romantisation of whatever they are thinking about. This creates a polarised view of the situation, that is easy to follow and feel good about following, but divorced from reality. The issue lies with the fact that following such philosophy leads to crucial ideas such as nuance and critical assessment not even coming up as a thought. In turn, this leads to not having basic logic and the pote…
/r/MensRights21/08/21 06:04 AM
3

Anything of substance? Or are you capable of only pathetic insults?
/r/PussyPassDenied20/08/21 09:53 PM
2

I am currently in Eastern Europe +3 GMT, its 18:45 here. Just send me a chat message once you have read some of their works.
/r/MenSupportMen20/08/21 03:46 PM
2

Will be happy to discuss it with you as well.
/r/MenSupportMen20/08/21 12:26 PM
3

Based on your p.s. I can add to other comments look up philosophy in general. My top 3 are Miyamoto Musashi, Markus Aurelius and Niccolo Machiavelli.
/r/MenSupportMen20/08/21 11:47 AM
3

You are welcome! Little by little learn, make a portfolio to track your contributions and have something to show off your skills. I think we all need mentoring to become better men. I didn't have anyone irl, so I went in to philosophy and am glad to mentor others.
/r/MenSupportMen20/08/21 09:44 AM
4

You are at a time in your life where things seem hopeless, I am in a somewhat similar boat myself (mental health, finishing my PhD in STEM, am struggling to find a postdoc/job, waiting on my fellowship application where the reply will be expected around March 2022). There will be difficult times in everyone's lives, and it seems like giving up is the best way. It seems like every one's doing better than you. The issue is hitting your stride. The hardest thing is to break through. That first step…
/r/MenSupportMen19/08/21 07:35 PM
1

The hard science articles (that can't be politicised) are fairly good + it's an easy point to start researching from. Some of the same criticism applies to many of the left-leaning ideologies, with feminism being a sub-group.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/08/21 10:05 AM
13

Part of the issue is Wikipedia can be edited by anyone which makes it easy to smear people, with activist editing. Another issue is a lot of people believe that being anti-feminist means being a misogynist and being against women's rights, both of which are factually incorrect. A huge flaw in this is not understanding that feminism was from it's inception and is a supremacy movement, is harmful to society, and was never based on reality. See my replies in this thread to u/Fencboi for the argumen…
/r/PussyPassDenied19/08/21 08:19 AM
9

We are here to talk
/r/MenSupportMen18/08/21 06:45 AM
7

Here are some sources I keep on hand: https://www.history.com/news/england-divorce-18th-century-wife-auction#:\~:text=Author%3A%20Erin%20Blakemore-,Between%20the%2017th%20and%2019th%20centuries%2C%20wife-selling%20was%20a,headed%20to%20the%20nearest%20market.&text=So%20some%20lower-class%20British,they%20sold%20their%20wives%20instead https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/divorce/ https://workingtheflame.com/female-blacksmiths-in…
/r/PussyPassDenied15/08/21 02:07 PM
8

Please link the source if you find it.
/r/MensRights15/08/21 08:10 AM
7

Read my next comment in the thread about feminism. I know what I'm talking about. When did I say anything about who I was? Stop assuming things. MGTOW wanted to be left alone. Why attack those who want to be left alone? Why then protect feminist subs that stir up hate?
/r/PussyPassDenied14/08/21 11:39 PM
3

Thank you for your compliment and you are welcome. I personally try to find how things started and how they have evolved, tracing back to what went wrong, and trying to prevent things getting out of control. I started looking up feminism when something started to seem off about it. I would also suggest you take a good look at egalitarianism, because the conflict between egalitarians and feminists is actually quite large and important. The egalitarian sub reddit is actually very good.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/08/21 11:29 AM
14

In terms of feminism most people barely scratch the surface of what it is and was radical from the very beginning. What you call the radicals are the ones who created and are in control of feminism, with what you believe about feminism is an illusion. The movement for equality is egalitarianism, not feminism. Starting from the writing of Charles Fourier who developed the term and philosophy behind it. His definition was along the lines of: (I do not remember an exact quote) "a society should jud…
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/21 08:28 PM
41

The problem of MGTOW is that to someone who wants to find misogyny it will be very easy to make that claim. The difference is the core of the MGTOW is not to be like those who harmed you and walk away, rather than anything malicious. So at worst they will say that women deserve apathy, however hating or harming is actually against its core principles and is seen as counterproductive, and if someone is that angry they will have a safe place to rant and guided towards self-improvement. What reddit…
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/21 02:27 PM
43

MGTOW - men going their own way, a philosophy of disengaging from the society at large and relationships with women due to being not worth the effort or toxic. Basically, I do what I want and I will be doing my own thing. A lot of people who join it have been severely burned (metaphor) by let's say their ex abusing the court system, and are angry about it. Ultimately, most of them want to be left alone. ruqqus - forum platform like reddit.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/21 07:43 AM
8

In my opinion the situation is unsustainable, and lead to a breaking point (I can do a very long post on the politics and philosophy of it). My plan is to put myself in a position where I can make a difference, and by then have a really good plan to tackle the issue. The wolf needs to be trapped, to do so we need to set a trap and only then lead it to it's end.
/r/MenSupportMen11/08/21 07:53 AM
3

Try looking up general literature on abuse as a whole, there is a common thread to all of it. There are some good highlights of the general though pattern if you look up documentaries on female psychopaths (can help you understand their twisted logic). I find listening to some of the Honey Badger Radio shows can help, and they do shows on men's mental health. Hope this helps.
/r/MenSupportMen08/08/21 03:30 PM
3

In my case I was lucky that my mom pushed me to be around men. A lot came from my grandfather and the neighbour that taught me woodworking. I also read about what differentiates men from boys, and philosophy. Reading Miyamoto Musashi and Markus Aurelius helped me learn to be and listen to myself, taking control over what kind of person I am. Now more than happy to pass this on to anyone wanting to learn it.
/r/MenSupportMen08/08/21 07:54 AM
2

No worries and thanks for the advice!
/r/MensRights07/08/21 09:52 PM
2

Thanks.
/r/MensRights07/08/21 09:15 PM
2

Would you mind posting a link to the book? Seems like something I should read at some point, and it's good to read things from a different perspective. I would disagree with the viewing sexuality as a cliff, and using a polarised view of the subject. In my opinion it should be viewed as a bed, with men and women in it. In this analogy the bed is reality and the baseline human condition, common to both sexes. The man and woman on the bed are the perspectives of men and women respectively, neither…
/r/MensRights07/08/21 09:00 PM
2

Good bot.
/r/MensRights07/08/21 04:31 PM
5

A huge part of the problem is that you consider feminism to be a movement for equality when it has always been a supremacy movement (from it's inception). The second problem is common to every philosophical movement that can be eventually traced back to romanticism (for example Rousseau), is that it doesn't deal with reality as it is but with it's romanticised version. Concepts like the blank slate, all children are born good, ect. They all assume that the romantic version of reality is true, wh…
/r/MensRights07/08/21 04:30 PM
1

Good question, OP. As already mentioned there is no one way of being a man. One of the things I consider to be manly is avoiding double standards, for example if I consider a behaviour bad it is still bad if I do it, and something I shouldn't do. This applies other types of behaviour such a weaseling out of responsibility, keeping my word, avoiding lies, etc. This tends to simplify a lot and makes you sensitive to relationship (not necessarily romantic, but all types) red flags,and helps you to …
/r/MenSupportMen05/08/21 08:33 AM
3

And that is why there are things you never compromise on.
/r/MensRights04/08/21 07:16 AM
64

As a straight man, I am glad that you don't have some of these issues and deserve respect for supporting those who do.
/r/MensRights29/07/21 06:36 AM
2

How?
/r/MensRights23/07/21 08:35 PM
2

Again the tolerance paradox. Once an intolerant philosophy (such as socialism) takes over it will shut down any opposition by force, and therefore it must be prevented from doing so to preserve all other types of thought. I will be more than happy to talk if you disagree provided that you try to understand, providing good criticism, and stop with the strawmaning. Maybe you could even convince me that I am wrong? I do not conflate them, I opose them due to the common principles underpinning their…
/r/MensRights23/07/21 08:35 PM
2

Stop trying to make a strawman and fight it. Have you ever heard of the tolerance paradox? So no, you are the hypocrite. And how do you know what my political ideology is? Who said that I blindly support anything? If its a good idea with good implementation and good logic why not support it?
/r/MensRights23/07/21 05:53 PM
3

Stop strawmaning me as a fascist. I opose all forms of socialism be it communism, fascism, Marxism, etc on the basis that they all malign any good sentiment through delusional logic and unavoidably violent implementation, when implemented in larger groups. The reason I pointed out communism was due to its relation to the international women's day. What made me an authoritarian? The fact that I have a different opinion than the one you want me to have? Or the fact that there needs to be no tolera…
/r/MensRights23/07/21 05:46 PM
3

By opposing communism? An authoritarian ideology that praises the use of terror and violence against all who do not support it?
/r/MensRights23/07/21 05:17 PM
1

In terms of academia and intelligence, STEM is dominated by men because of a lack of interest from the women. In addition to be a decent scientist you have to be disagreeable, as conformism prevents you from seeing flaws and research opportunities that truly do something, hence this is one of the parts why the overwhelming majority of Nobel prizes is awarded to men. So for society to prosper it would be better to have men take up the less social roles while women take up the more social roles, i…
/r/MensRights23/07/21 02:14 PM
2

The international women's day is a communist holiday, in fighting communism the US forbade it as well. Personally I side with forbidding it same as any other communist implementation of any idea. There may be benefits to the parental leave, but it really depends on the implementation. It can be used as a measure to incentivise people having children, and counter the feminist narrative. Otherwise, I agree with all other statements.
/r/MensRights23/07/21 10:15 AM
19

It is the point point of a female supremacy movement, to lie, cheat, steal and corrupt everything they can get their hands on to benefit themselves and treat all others as below human. After all, the distortion of history was one of the major points of the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention, one of the major roots of feminism.
/r/MensRights22/07/21 07:15 PM
0

I don't think that all women are bad. The issue is with the fact that a lot of of women accept feminist lies and rhetoric to get along in stead of pursuing the truth (e.g. feminists were against the female vote in the US until any obligations were dropped, un like men who were drafted and sent to die for theirs; feminism was and is a supremacy movement from it's inception). This plays into women (on average) being more agreeable (a tendency not to push back as hard, to try to get along) and the …
/r/MensRights22/07/21 08:45 AM
1

Well you at least have us for support. If you ever want someone advice I'll be glad to help.
/r/MensRights22/07/21 07:29 AM
4

This was true from the very beginning of feminism.
/r/MensRights22/07/21 07:25 AM
6

Sorry that happened to you. Hopefully, it was no one important.
/r/MensRights09/07/21 08:37 PM
7

A way of abusing people. Nothing more. This tactic would only work on those who wouldn't rape in the first place. The ones who would don't care about it being bad, criminal, etc.
/r/MensRights09/07/21 06:39 PM
3

Yes, I am aware. Violence used as a tool to further a political agenda. I believe there is a term for such behaviour starting with the letter t, ending with an ists, and some kind of error in the middle. =) insert funy joke here I try to joke about, because reality is depressing.
/r/MensRights08/07/21 09:22 PM
13

The overwhelming majority of the issues MRM deals with is caused by feminists. You are working on the assumption that what feminists claim is true, whereas if you look "under the hood" you will see that it's anything but true. Try looking up Cassie Jaye's interviews about her "the Red Pill" documentary, and how she was disillusioned, and then hated by feminists for speaking about her conclusions.
/r/MensRights08/07/21 09:42 AM
10

Try searching for mental health support groups in general. There is a fair bit of overlap between different mental illnesses, so for example some of the advice for anxiety and depression could be useful, but it really depends on your specific case. Hope this helps. If you have any questions ask away.
/r/MensRights08/07/21 09:29 AM
8

At least get your facts straight. Feminism from it's inception was nothing but a supremacy movement (see Charles Fourier) based on lies and deceit (see 1848 Seneca Falls Convention). That includes the so called first and second wave feminism, with the "Declaration of Sentiment" and the "Scum Manifesto" respectively. If you cling to the vote: in the US feminists were opposed to it until all obligations were dropped (men were still subject to the draft for their right to vote) and in the British E…
/r/MensRights08/07/21 09:15 AM
3

Yup. Sexist. On the side note, in certain things I (M) am way more picky than women.
/r/MensRights07/07/21 12:52 PM
5

No it's not redundant. It was a cancer on society from the very beginning. A brief reminder: feminists opposed the female vote untill any accompanying obligations were dropped, while men were and are drafted for their right to vote.
/r/MensRights07/07/21 12:49 PM
24

Being a conservative (not really my cup of tea) never meant opposing all progress, just trying to keep the good bits. MRM cannot butt heads with classical liberalism, a fairly centrist ideology, because they both are focused on giving people equal treatment and as much liberty to do what is right. The problem here is the high jacking of the term by leftist extremists in order to gain power using liberalisms previous reputation.
/r/MensRights06/07/21 09:47 PM
0

I suggest comparing the coverage of false accusations towards Biden and Bret Kavanaugh, and how the media treated both. Biden a Liberal? Nothing he did in his career was liberal, or benefitial for the US.
/r/MensRights06/07/21 09:55 AM
1

I think a big issue is that in the modern political discourse every thing has been shifted to the left, in order not to seem to be extremists. This shifts Jimmy and Glenn to the right, despite their positions being fairly centrist from your description, and the right does not shunn them.
/r/MensRights06/07/21 09:45 AM
32

Sadly in my opinion there are too many women who only have double standards, and not enough people who stand up to them.
/r/MensRights03/07/21 04:53 PM
3

Sure....
/r/MensRights03/07/21 04:29 PM
3

Have you seen yourself in the mirror?
/r/MensRights03/07/21 04:26 PM
4

Simple. None of them have ever done anything else or even worthwhile. Hence they complain about what they know to get people to give them something, and not realise that they are only damaging societies around them.
/r/MensRights03/07/21 04:06 PM
9

The whole patriarchy thing is a way to justify abuse, and was always a lie. Always was always will be. Why do you support abusers?
/r/MensRights03/07/21 03:50 PM
7

She is admitting it, and joking about it. Why are you supporting abusers? Are you seeing your own actions in hers?
/r/MensRights03/07/21 03:30 PM
15

Why are defending abusers?
/r/MensRights03/07/21 03:13 PM
2

If they don't testify their accusations are worthless. You can accuse someone of crimes they didn't do, that doesn't mean they should suffer for it. Emmett Till is a good example of why one should not believe accusations.
/r/MensRights03/07/21 08:24 AM
1

Yup
/r/MensRights02/07/21 08:49 PM
1

Same on the draft. My point is that the secondary effect is treating men as second class citizens. In my opinion either both genders get the vote with some kind of obligation or both get it without (i.e. the draft should have been stopped as soon as women got the vote).
/r/MensRights02/07/21 07:56 AM
1

I terms of conspiracy, there is none, and it's not my wheelhouse. It is just how philosophy shapes us and our societies. There is no need to conspire if you seek similar things through similar means, and such groups will cover up for each other to the extent it benefits them, and will throw each other under the bus as soon as it is convenient. I think the problem to a large extent started with the draft and the voting rights movements. In the previous system where land ownership gave voting righ…
/r/MensRights01/07/21 05:20 PM
1

Yes, but setting up a system where only one gender has to do something to get it sets up men as second class citizens. It is worse than just the draft.
/r/MensRights01/07/21 05:04 PM
1

I think it's multiple malicious groups covering for each other. Feminism was always filled with bad actors and with the current economic system they are very good at distracting and being perceived as having the moral high ground. I believe there is a quote: " evil preaches tolerance until it is in charge". Most people are willing to sacrifice things to get along and tolerate bad behaviour, slowly corrupting society from within. People also buy in to rhetoric rather than evaluate on merit, which…
/r/MensRights01/07/21 10:40 AM
2

The constant growth model allows for a lot of shady things to be done financially. Things are ever-changing, so finding and punishing foul play and underhanded becomes very hard. It is a boon to feminism as those are their methods, and feminism can be used as a diversion target to steer people away from dealing with real problems.
/r/MensRights01/07/21 10:04 AM
3

A lot of people are oblivious to the fact that feminism from it's inception was a female supremacy movement.
/r/MensRights01/07/21 07:35 AM
7

Part of the issue is that feminism was never good or beneficial. For example the vote in the UK there were the sufragists (non-feminist) who got the vote, as opposed to the suffragettes (feminists) a domestic terror group. In the US feminists opposed the vote until obligations where dropped, while men were still drafted in exchange for theirs (and there was no law prohibiting women to vote, the voting right was based on land ownership). I draw the distinction between the oblivious and malicious.…
/r/MensRights01/07/21 07:30 AM
1

A lot of this stems from philosophy in general and political philosophy in particular. Its a very long discussion. Education plays an important part as well, and it is a whole other can of worms I would avoid touching without invitation.
/r/MensRights12/06/21 06:55 AM
5

A huge part of the issue is that there can be no compromise on certain things as it would defeat the purpose. There can be no middle ground with supremacists, as anything other than equality would be a supremacy of one of the groups. "masculist"? Do you even know what the term stands for and how it originated?
/r/MensRights11/06/21 03:37 PM
58

Kind of looks like feminism is a supremacy movement...
/r/MensRights11/06/21 06:57 AM
2

In my opinion both yes and no. A lot of the issues the men's rights community faces are at least exacerbated by feminism, and tackling it will get the MRM over a major hurdle. By discussing this internally we can prepare our arguments when it comes to convincing the public, taking out a chunk of their support. Giving feminists no legitimacy simply ensures that the MRM does not get easily subverted. Personally, I am very bad at live debates, as I think a lot about what I say and not having a quic…
/r/MensRights11/06/21 06:54 AM
11

Why not point out that they are the hate group, and press them with evidence to admit that they are one, exposing them for what they are? My logic is give them no legitimacy, frustrate them to the point of admitting their supremacy ideology, expose them to the public, play up the damage feminism is doing to the men women care about (father's, sons) and how it destroys men women want to be with (beating down the men before they become the men women want to date; confident, approaching, sucsessful…
/r/MensRights10/06/21 09:27 AM
10

Part of the idea I was trying to convey is that feminism was always a supremacy movement , and feminists will do what ever it takes to keep perpetuate it. This nesecitates playing on people's emotions and painting the MRA as evil regardless of the truth. Therefore to sucseed the MRA must expose the nature of feminism and give feminism zero moral ground. For example countering the "feminism is for equality" with "why did Erin Pizzey who established domestic violence shelters in North America had …
/r/MensRights10/06/21 08:51 AM
18

One of the biggest problems with feminism is it's subversive and supremacist nature (see Charles Fourier for original concept; 1848 Seneca Falls Convention for the decision to distort history; sufragist and suffragette movements for the examples of the use of domestic terrorism and and taking credit for the achievements of other movements). A mistake people make is not thinking critically about the missmatch between actions and words, the background of people and how they came up with their idea…
/r/MensRights10/06/21 08:06 AM
26

Does paranoid delusion fit the bill?
/r/MensRights09/06/21 07:08 AM
20

In my opinion feminism also induces a type of of paranoid delusion (due to fear of losing power, lying about the truth, and believing that "might makes right"). Kind of like cognitive behavioural therapy but inducing a mental illness rather than helping to get rid of one. This is not medical advice and I am not a therapist, just an educated enthusiast.
/r/MensRights09/06/21 07:05 AM
16

Still better than being you. =)
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:56 AM
19

Good luck with your bigotry endeavours.
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:52 AM
7

And we are glad to have you and help you when you need it! It is an interesting but unpleasant rabbit hole to go down, and there are many interesting points to consider.
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:49 AM
23

No we just hate lies and abusers. The original formulation of feminism was "a society's moral good, judged by the benefit it brings women", which allows treating men children and anyone who disagrees as subhuman. The fact that you only know a slogan of a supremacy movement, and believe it on its face value, demonstrates at best nativity, and at worst malice. See Charles Fourier for the origins of feminism (he came up with it) and the story of Erin Pizzey for what feminism truly stands for.
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:43 AM
38

You spelled female supremacy wrong.
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:33 AM
11

Feminism from it's inception was a supremacy movement, with express tactics of lying about history and relationship between men and women, along with grifting (claiming the achievements of other movements) at it's core. Feminism expressly allows dehumanising anyone disagreeing with it (and sacrifice of anything for the benefit of women). See Charles Fourier (original formulation of feminism) and Seneca Falls Convention of 1848 (decision to re-frame history as if women where oppressed). A lot of …
/r/MensRights03/06/21 09:32 AM
10

I am starting to think that feminism is the inverse of therapy (psychological/psychiatric) inducing a mental illness along the delusional axis. The re-framing of reality based on the assumption of a conspiracy theory ("patriarchy theory"). Along with general belief of "there is no truth, but power", necessitates that: A) as long as they have power they are correct B) who ever is correct has the power, rather than simply accurately describing reality The two combined suggest paranoid (fear of los…
/r/MensRights03/06/21 05:19 AM
10

Agreed. However meds on their own are not a really good long term solution, and are a part of therapy along with things like cognitive behavioural therapy. A lot of people conflate small issues (like seasonal depression) with serious ones, each requiring their own approach, with the wrong one being potentially dangerous. I am not a therapist, and this is not medical advice.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 08:25 AM
24

Really good therapy could help him cope with his situation (disability?). Most people will avoid taking the responsibility of unintended consequences, but the fact that she caused it remains. Doing all you can does not always absolve you of consequences. And I agree with you on the in laws matter. In any situation if you f up seek help and be transparent, to avoid more harm than the absolute minimum.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 07:00 AM
1

Should cops be better people in both cases, wholeheartedly yes. On other bodycam footage shown in court it was determined by the chief of police (prosecution's witnes) that the knee was on the shoulder not the neck. Chemical asphyxiation is the cause of death during a fentanol overdose. And homicide refers to an unnatural death (such as died in his sleep) in the presence of someone else (not necessarily responsible), meaning it was a type of homicide, specifically an overdose.
/r/MensRights21/05/21 05:20 PM
2

The report ruled out damage to the airways, they use "asphyxiation" where they should be more specific stating "chemical asphyxiation" which can only come from drugs.
/r/MensRights21/05/21 05:09 PM
-1

And one of the jury members was openly an activist and another had to drive through the riots to court, so I wouldn't trust them to be objective. Second I watched the trial (court video) and based on my knowledge of toxicology (master's) and martial arts, a person not on drugs would not have died from that. Fundamentally there are 4 ways of suffocating someone: vascular constriction (what they called it a "blood choke", a person passes out due to lack of oxygen to the brain within 10 seconds and…
/r/MensRights21/05/21 05:05 PM
3

To add to the list, One that got me thinking about men's rights was Honey Badger Radio.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 07:22 PM
2

I would slightly disagree on the perspective. Part of the issue is that the core philosophy of feminism is sexist, which exacerbates the pathological behaviour of people by giving them an excuse for their actions. (short version) Fundamentally, people want to feel like they are doing something positive (so to say "being on the right side of history") and getting as much as possible for the lowest amount of effort. This serves as a backbone for (among other things) hedonistic and opportunistic be…
/r/MensRights12/05/21 01:30 PM
15

You shouldn't hate to say that feminism is a supremacy movement. It always has been, starting from it's original formulation. Most of the notable people in that movement where abhorrent people (e.g. Simone de Beauvoir was sexually grooming her students ages 15+; she is also known for developing the patriarchy philosophy feminists use, which is better explained as projection of her own abuse than anything to do with reality). People like to support anything that gives instant gratification, and o…
/r/MensRights01/05/21 06:37 AM
1

The criticism still applies. Do not castigate people for the actions of others. What would be the point of me purposely misinterpreting?
/r/MensRights19/04/21 12:36 PM
7

Now I see your perspective. Thank you for clarifying. In this case it is a strawman. You are adding a reply to a statement that was not made in this conversation. When such statements are made, it is fair to counter them. This is not the appropriate place for it. The "manosphere" is not a hivemind, there are simply some issues that we happen to agree on. There is no dogma to the "manosphere", and everyone here is an individual first and foremost. Hence, we can only bare the responsibility of our…
/r/MensRights16/04/21 10:23 PM
6

No, I will not just downvote. An argument is a crucial step in finding a way to come together to fight all of DV, and make the world a better place for all. =) No one said that all women are bad, that is a strawman. Simply that when it comes to DV with only one person (as opposed to mutual violence) being violent 70% of the time it is a woman.
/r/MensRights16/04/21 09:12 PM
27

The downvotes are for missing the point and downplaying the situation. To elaborate, this data demonstrates that women are significantly more likely to be the sole IPV perpetrators, which is rarely talked-about outside of men's rights communities. This rases two points: 1) A significant portion of legislation is designed to treat males as the perpetrators regardless of the actual truth. This means that in the disproportionate number of cases the victim is abused by both the perpetrators and the …
/r/MensRights16/04/21 08:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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