TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Inquiz_ Archive

View 17 posts and 506 comments by Inquiz_ 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)
281

discussionInquiz_/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 11:01 AM
218

GeneralInquiz_/r/MensRights22/01/26 09:42 AM
183

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:05 PM
171

Social IssuesInquiz_/r/MensRights04/01/26 09:41 PM
151

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:52 PM
136

discussionInquiz_/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/07/26 10:52 PM
133

media & cultural analysisInquiz_/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 01:40 PM
97

media & cultural analysisInquiz_/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 06:53 PM
59

media & cultural analysisInquiz_/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/05/26 08:52 PM
46

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:12 PM
45

GeneralInquiz_/r/MensRights20/01/26 10:52 PM
40

social mediaInquiz_/r/EverydayMisandry12/02/26 09:52 AM
32

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 07:38 PM
30

Social IssuesInquiz_/r/MensRights01/02/26 08:25 AM
8

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 08:32 AM
4

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 08:46 AM
1

DebateInquiz_/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:07 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Open the thread please. It was malicious policy based on fabrications and lies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/07/26 09:49 PM
4

Feminists want an apologetic simp or gynocentric follower of 20th century woman-centric Western masculinity. Not a 'partner'. Feminists are by and large misandrists, to varying degrees, and 'tradwives' are not 'trad' in any way beyond cosmetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 05:10 PM
3

Thanks for sharing!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/07/26 08:24 AM
1

The women on this sub have the tone of near stereotypical sheltered normie cosmpolitan liberal types and yet it takes the subtlest of scratching past the surface to reveal a deeply dehumanizing view toward males in general on their part. To say nothing of younger women in the West, who increasingly sound like the "racists of gender" in how they talk about men and boys and consider the aforementioned normie feminists of older age to be too soft toward males. I agree with 99% of your post, OP, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:54 PM
–

It truly doesn't make sense. Just like the majority if not totality of feminism's common talking points. But it does have a certain 'logic' behind it - the logic of female narcissism that feminism stokes nonstop. Their "me me me me me" mantra. How dare they have to do labour for someone else? They should be paid! Forgetting that it's your fucking duty to take care of the family you create by bringing children into this world.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 03:48 PM
–

It's an objectively ridiculous standard rooted in contemporary female maximalism adopted in all their dealings with men
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 10:50 AM
–

You only believe this because as a woman you probably surround yourself with "self love" and "you are always right" style echo chambers. The bubble will pop one day as it would for anyone else self-deluding.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 08:19 AM
–

Please define "short". Because modern women's supremely deluded contemporary standards deem anyone under 6 ft to be "short". There's no medium or average standard. Like for real I always cite height as the one best example of how delusional modern women have gotten in matters of dating - and the most common/recurring responses I get when I bring this up just ironically affirm this.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 08:18 AM
1

The feminists and bluepilled gynocentrists in this sub can't argue a single point they make so their comments are like 99% spam whenever I see them. Like literally just ignore everything you say level crap.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:16 PM
2

Feminism is the largest and pre-eminent hate group on the planet
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:56 PM
102

INCELS ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE OR RIGHT WING for God's sake. Incels do not have nearly the same degree of ideological conviction that the radfems in these femosphere spaces have nor are they nearly as numerous.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/26 08:49 PM
1

Baseless impossible gibberish claim
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 10:53 PM
–

The Red Pill is absolute horse shit and it takes an especially stupid person to believe in any of what it says
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 08:48 PM
7

And any time women act badly toward men it's "patriarchy" too. Very convenient.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 08:06 PM
2

Is that anyone a suicidal person who needs to be treated with absolute gentleness so they don't off themselves...?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 08:01 PM
6

It is. You haven't addressed any of what she said. And you likely won't either. So it's just ad hominem.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:56 PM
0

There is no 'manosphere'. Watch Paul Elam argue with Rollo Tomassi on Twitter.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:54 PM
6

I most certainly will never support feminism. Imagine supporting a movement that sees you as lesser beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 06:44 PM
10

Male erasure accompanies virtually everything feminists say and do
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 06:03 PM
3

One of the greatest lies of this last century is the notion that feminism is egalitarian. All its work shows otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 06:02 PM
11

>I think that they're right to feel worried about the possibility that a suicidal man may become abusive, They're right to? Is that why they needed fraudulent research to justify this? Clearly not
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:56 PM
25

While I expect them to be like this it never ceases to amaze just how little humanity the average Western woman (and gynocentrists/simps) see males as being owed. I genuinely cringed reading several of the comments here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:54 PM
4

So not suicidal women reaching out to suicide preventions services. Your comparison, as I repeat, is invalid and also crassly insensitive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:51 PM
3

Very happy to see that tag of yours good sir. Egalitarianist anti feminism is THE need of the day.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:39 PM
2

... Do you get suspected for non criminal things?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:36 PM
1

They aren't? The important ones are all up as they should be
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:35 PM
5

No, it's a policy informed by the bullshit research that was literally the pretext for the MARAM framework because as it turns out you need to create lies to justify policies that torment suicidal men. Which I've pasted like 50 times here now. You are pointblank lying. And anyone capable of reading the OP text can see that. >If violent, family killing men are less offensive to you - Person that's OK with suicidal men being pushed past the brink based on fabrications and lies
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:02 PM
6

So you admit you're just strawmanning here. Feminist #348324832 that can't defend their shitty movement lol
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 11:59 AM
3

Ok cite the law that mandates that suicidal women be insta-flagged as potential abusers
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 10:42 AM
1

They advocate against men and boys.
/r/MensRights29/06/26 10:39 AM
2

What the fuck does this have to do with suicide and the risk of killing yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 10:31 AM
4

Can you defend the research she breaks down? No? Then this is meaningless ad hominem
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 10:02 AM
3

No, they don't get put on a list for suspected abuse of others - both past and/or future, which is next level draconian - and this isn't happening with suicidal women but suicidal men only in Victoria.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 09:04 AM
4

It's like "are you blind" or "can you read" are gonna be the only responses I consistently need to copy paste at you guys.... They are monitored, which means they are on some sort of list quite obviously. What a pointless literalist question to ask. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:33 AM
12

You are misogynistic /s
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:31 AM
–

I have never once seen you not try to wholesale change a topic away from that to which the OP text belongs. You are quite honestly the worst spammer on this sub and I remember your username now for it too
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:29 AM
13

Misrepresentation of what? You guys actually gonna address the content or nahhhhh The author is Australian FYI.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:28 AM
6

>but I do *kinda* understand where it *might* come from: suicidal people have nothing to lose It is based on fraudulent research. There's no logic behind it else it wouldn't need said fraudulent research to be pushed through. >But I don't think that's where it's coming from You don't need to be guessing - it's coming from misrepresented research used to fabricate a BS association. Did you read the article?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 07:27 AM
–

Yes it does? Is saying "learn how to read" going to remain the only response I need to you people's comments?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:21 PM
3

Aaaaand another one that cannot read or pretends the content of the linked source does not exist. Do you all have the same pre programmed responses or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:20 PM
3

No you fucking aren't. You're ignoring what actually happened and replacing it with "duhhhh what's wrong with background checks and balances". You proved with your first two comments that you did not even read the OP text and you continue to show you haven't read it and are instead just endorsing a blatantly evil policy that any sane person who actually bothers reading what it is would condemn. I repeat: this is about suicide. Have some fucking shame. "I haven't had time to delve into the claims…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:10 PM
4

You literally ignored everything I said AGAIN. I repeat: "Feminist organizations pushed the most transparently bullshit research to claim an association between men being suicidal and being abusers. This was then used to ensure that men on the brink of literally killing themselves, upon reaching out to mental health bodies or the police or whoever, are instantly labelled suspects and grilled about whether they have abused someone. Instead of, you know, being prevented from fucking offing themsel…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:04 PM
2

And put them on a criminal suspect list to be monitored? No
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:58 PM
–

Can any of you fucking read properly? I asked if you would be INSTANTLY reported to the authorities as a CRIMINAL SUSPECT. The answer is no on both accounts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:57 PM
2

Do you think it isn't extremely obvious you haven't read the damn thing? The questions you're asking here show me you haven't even bothered verifying what is going on. "OK let's discuss" lmao Feminist organizations pushed the most transparently bullshit research to claim an association between men being suicidal and being abusers. This was then used to ensure that men on the brink of literally killing themselves, upon reaching out to mental health bodies or the police or whoever, are instantly l…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:52 PM
1

A slightly longer comment that addresses nothing, refutes nothing. Can you guys at least spare a topic like this one - about the fucking issue of suicide - this shameless "nuh uh" style of commenting? Legit if you have no argument to make then don't bother? You put draconian in air quotes yet you don't explain how these laws aren't draconian, the entirety of your comment is so shamelessly void of any substance whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:39 PM
5

Nothing-comments like this are just a confession that you've not got anything to contribute to the discussion. Just par the course for the feminists and feminism-apologists on this sub. Anyway: "As one of Australia’s first sex therapists, Bettina Arndt began her career discussing sex on television and training doctors and other professionals in sexual counselling at a time when such topics were largely taboo. Her current – and even more socially unacceptable – passion is exposing Australia’s unf…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:26 PM
11

Precisely. Partially my fault for not adding the second half of the article in the text itself but I've since added it and also posted it in several comments. And the kind of cognitive dissonance it's triggered is just fascinating to watch. Like you can physically see the brick wall that forms around these guys' brains whenever they're confronted with examples of evil wrought by feminists.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:44 PM
1

Are we allowed to share threads from other subs here? As in, not crossposting but np links?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/26 08:43 PM
9

Do you get reported to the police because of your gender, regardless of what your answer to that question is?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:35 PM
3

>That's what we see in radical feminists Most feminists are like this. Mainstream feminism certainly is.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:34 PM
7

Do you ever stop spamming? Your comment in the other thread was whataboutism/spam, your comment here is spam, like seriously I don't think I'll ever seen you in particular make a comment that wasn't whataboutism/spam/topic shifting. It's honestly pathetic
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:31 PM
-2

So she'd be reported as a potential abuser of her family and thus made a suspect for investigation for the specific crimes associated with this? No - she wouldn't. Her comparison is absolutely ridiculous and lacks all the defining dynamics of the Australia case.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:28 PM
11

>How is increased coordination between agencies and higher level monitoring “pushing men past the brink”? Again: are you people legit blind or do you just not read? Like for real what's the deal here? <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:27 PM
-3

Are you reported to the police regardless of your answer? No? Then stop making flimsy comparisons
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:54 PM
5

I should've posted the part addressing the shit research that was used to justify this draconian policy in the OP text itself. My bad, seeing as I inadvertently created a (even if limited) window of opportunity for the resident feminists of this sub to begin claiming that an actual association between being suicidal as a man on Australia and abusing your partner or kids had been established. It wasn't. And yet the policy became law anyway, because that is what feminists are about - trying to cau…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:52 PM
6

I've seen this too lol. Nothing, truly nothing matches how entrenched hatred is in feminism. Also, notice the downvoting brigade arriving. These threads are eye openers for anyone who wants to see how badly feminists fail to defend their movement.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:43 PM
13

You didn't get the point. Did lobbyist groups tell your therapist, after presenting bullshit research as their backing/evidence, that she absolutely needs to report you to the police based on some BS association said bullshit research came up with? No? Then your comparison is ridiculous
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:37 PM
10

Did your therapist report you to the police as a potential abuser and hand them your private documents
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:28 PM
8

So police in general base how they handle these situations off of the prescriptions of lobbyists waiving about fraudulent research? Yeah, no
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:22 PM
10

Why would a scheme based on a horseshit, fabricated association be good for anyone ever (except misandrists frothing at the mouth at the prospect of harming men)?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:07 PM
5

It's cultural and even historical analysis. It belongs in this sub more than any other.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/26 07:06 PM
6

I think the mods are fine overall but they need to recalculate on this particular issue.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/26 07:04 PM
6

Do you have anything of substance to say or nah
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:57 PM
15

It's a program based on fraudulent research deliberately misused to further morally abhorrent policy
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:53 PM
11

The literal article is a "public scrutiny" of it you absolute genius
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:46 PM
9

Yeah, feminism's bioessentialism puts racists to shame.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:41 PM
13

Can't wait for the ummm akchually replies justifying this
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:34 PM
12

You missed everything, apparently 😂 the author makes it pretty clear that the association between suicidal men and abusing others is weak and yet has been bogusly used to justify anti-male policies like what this thread's about: >Lots of suicidal men later become wife-beaters, this research suggests. Note we are not really talking about any sort of physical abuse at all. Most of the domestic violence perpetrated by these men is emotional abuse. Nearly a third (32%) of men in the ‘Ten to Men’ res…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:32 PM
17

I slipped in the Mary Koss reference for a reason. Another evil feminist who influenced laws to harm males and boys. Wonder how many of our resident Blue and Purple Pillers know about her?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:22 PM
15

Oh shocker, another Purple/Blue Piller just ignores my comment and its point altogether. Tiresome. I added the necessary text that shows that fraudulent research was used to justify this policy. The policy is shit, and evil.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:19 PM
10

Okay I edited the OP text to adjust it in. The bogus research is now there for everyone to see.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:14 PM
12

>Sack the people in the department who came up with it. Feminists
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:09 PM
17

Bullshit. . . Almost a year ago, I exposed misleading research from the Australian Institute of Family Studies which claimed one in three men reported being violent towards their partners. Somehow the institute forgot to mention in its report on this ‘Ten to Men‘ study that almost a third (30.9%) of the men surveyed were victims of similar violence, which included both physical and emotional abuse. It turns out that this ‘Ten to Men’ study is also responsible for one of the key statistics underp…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:01 PM
6

Longer the post the less likely people read ANY of it
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:00 PM
9

More like a nothingburger comment posted in place of where a condemnation would've been had you not seen feminism as a holy cow that's beyond critique
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:59 PM
8

They've internalized the dehumanization of males that's intrinsic to feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:58 PM
9

I've stated several times it was to keep the word limit in check
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:57 PM
19

Are you blind? <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:56 PM
12

Did you read about the research used to justify this policy that the author addressed in the part of the article I didn't post the text of
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:52 PM
14

What is this nothingburger comment
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:48 PM
25

"Don't bother them with citations of irrelevant research" the actual research that was used to justify pushing suicidal men past the brink with this horrid policy is addressed in the part of the article I didn't quote, to stay within the word limit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:48 PM
10

Cont'd: . . Almost a year ago, I exposed misleading research from the Australian Institute of Family Studies which claimed one in three men reported being violent towards their partners. Somehow the institute forgot to mention in its report on this ‘Ten to Men‘ study that almost a third (30.9%) of the men surveyed were victims of similar violence, which included both physical and emotional abuse. It turns out that this ‘Ten to Men’ study is also responsible for one of the key statistics underpin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:47 PM
10

They're bullshitting. The research that was used to push this repugnant policy is cited and addressed in the part of the article I don't quote.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:47 PM
28

I won't even ask for a source because this justification of the misandrist policy is kinda... Irrelevant. The part of the article I didn't paste to stay within the word limit addresses the actual research used to justify insta flagging suicidal men as abusers and it's fraudulent, just like feminist interventions in policy and lawfare tend to be: . . Almost a year ago, I exposed misleading research from the Australian Institute of Family Studies which claimed one in three men reported being viole…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:45 PM
2

This is a topic on women's fantasies. If you want to discuss men's then make a different thread?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:57 PM
5

You missed the rape part
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:54 PM
2

Is this thread about women's fantasies or men's?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:53 PM
1

>Why haven't the MRAs in the US done anything MRA is an internet subculture and has no institutional power IRL. You are, once again, being extremely dishonest.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:11 PM
1

Do you think people discuss this in IRL interactions
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:03 PM
–

I don't know, I don't bother indulging in extremist ideologies from the 20th century obsessed with slapping some ridiculous all-encompassing singular label on human history as the oppression of Group A upon Group B
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:02 PM
–

... She did not offer anything that evidences a 'patriarchy'. I'm not interest in whatever detour from that which you are suggesting we take here.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:57 PM
2

Yeah being abducted by a vampire millionaire is 'romance' the same way the Swan Princess was /s
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:54 PM
–

No, I don't. She didn't speak of anything systemic or normalized. Every society on earth sees sexual assault as a bad and punishable thing so her pseudoexample is bunk.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:52 PM
–

Yes, the 'patriarchy', as in the closest fucking thing I can come to gleaning to a definition, doesn't exist. i.e., A society that props men up on the oppression of women, this in turn being because women are seen as lesser. Doesn't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:07 PM
1

Do the purple and bluepill women's comments on this sub ever amount to anything beyond "nuh uh!" "not me!" "not all women" etc? Someone needs to sit these people down and explain to them that this is the age of mass visibility and we can very much identify overarching trends in how particular collectives think and act. Like stop using these tactics as an excuse to kill discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:56 AM
1

No because I do not pay any attention to this. And what even is your point? Men watch degenerate porn? What the hell does this have to do with your tirade against the 'nice guy'? You are just topic-switching here and also relying on one of the weakest feminist 'points' which is holding porn usage as some sort of shameful thing that men do. Women watch degenerate porn, rape porn, violent porn too, and - ironically - the 'new romance' women are so heavily gobbling up espouses these as themes as we…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:50 AM
15

Yeah but they'll literally not accept submissions that go out of their way to demonstrate that it is most certainly not your average dating type discourse. I posted a thread about the extreme pickiness of contemporary women and placed it in the context of a thousand years of the progression of the original romance/courtly love - which pedestalized women and had significant connotations of class/sociopolitical hierarchy. And they're like nuh uh this is too dating-centric.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/26 08:47 AM
–

"Patriarchy threatens women" Shit that never happened. Nor would it justify women being blanketly obnoxious to all males
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:18 AM
2

You either misread my post entirely or you are just being obstinate. I did not say that. I said there is indeed a big trend of weird romance among women that glorified the type of male figure I brought up. And that the guy that thinks women do not like him because they find nice guys drab or whatever does indeed have something to go off on. We make our guesses based on what we see and he is not just crossing his arms and saying women bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 11:26 PM
1

No and you know quite well that is not what I am saying. Nor is establishing that necessary. It is simply a trend and a visible one. When one group wants to understand another the best thing they can do is look at the popular trends the latter is immersed in, get an idea of what is shaping their psyche. My point: the dude isn't going off of nothing and isn't just engaging in totally baseless assumptions. As for your "the manosphere told me" bit, you are playing the same trick you always do. No, …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 11:13 PM
2

Yeah except these dudes have a very, very valid basis to believe this. Which is, paying attention to female discourse. Women romanticize the bad boy and women's romance is increasingly just "please kidnap and rape me oh 6'5 billionaire vampire". But sure, just go ahead and frame the grievance as basic-bitch misogyny lol
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 10:53 PM
30

You are lucky the mods let this through. While this sub is by far the best for this particular niche I've seen, there is I feel a slight blindspot on the part of the mods regarding the utility of intersexual dynamics, dating and the like in terms of how they function as heuristics for investigating broader trends in gender issues and gender roles in the modern day. When you think about how, over the span of a few decades, male heights like 5'5 or 5'6 or 5'7 have gone from being seen as just aver…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/26 10:21 PM
0

It isn't absolute but it's still something they'll hold out for for a considerable amount of time and also 100% a standard looming large over the head of every dude that doesn't meet it even if he's in a relationship. Seen many "he's perfect but he's 5'8" threads/posts/comments by women before too many times.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:28 PM
-1

The 6 ft height rule thing is the best hyper-specific example of women's delusional standards. Their attempts to deny it fail before they even begin, since they never question the actual standard and its inherent ridiculousness (seeing all heights under 6 as "too short") itself, they only deny that many or most women have this standard. So you can tell they mostly have internalized the ridiculous height standard precisely because it's real and ubiquitous.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 09:43 PM
2

Needs to happen again
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/26 08:02 AM
1

Look at this 😂😂😂 <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 08:19 AM
1

Each time I see women in TikToks, Insta reels etc being bitchy about men's looks they're mid or below mid
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:38 PM
1

The short guys in the video are celebs...
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:41 PM
1

Those are celebrities lol what is your point here and what do you mean "from hot women"?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:11 PM
1

What? Heightism in dating is a 100% woman invention
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 03:21 PM
1

It's an American woman* idiocy that's spread around the world. South Asia, South East Asia, Africa... It's everywhere now lol >look at positive subreddits showing happy couples, Heightism was less prominent in older generations. It's gotten exponentially worse since the 2010s.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 02:04 PM
1

>yeah, the most common standard when you consume ragebait. Now you are simply being dishonest. To repeat what I said earlier: >"Any man under 6 ft is short" is a literal global cultural staple at this point. We've all heard of it, it's just a thing. It's an IRL thing and even predates the internet, which helped force multiply and propagate it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 01:51 PM
1

Yeah I don't look at this sub everyday lol
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 01:36 PM
1

It isn't "some". It isn't "most" either in any strict numerical sense, but see it this way: it is the consensus. The most common standard, the most accepted one, the assumed one. "Any man under 6 ft is short" is a literal global cultural staple at this point. We've all heard of it, it's just a thing. You just can't play dumb over this thing anymore. We're living in the era of mass media, the internet, social media; accessible to most everyone is this gigantic cyber canvas upon which literally mi…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 01:34 PM
0

Didn't see that, got a link?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 12:53 PM
2

The height messaging has 100% come from women, men just observe.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 12:52 PM
3

Always the same one sided "women are perfect and don't need to change anything about themselves" account from you, OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 12:51 PM
7

My mind will remain restless until one very niche yet supremely important space is created: males against hostile feminism and its encroachment upon traditionally male spaces and activities like gaming. The arts are extremely important and it's time for a proper response to feminism's hegemonic behaviour in the world of books, TV, games and so on.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/26 09:30 AM
3

No, they aren't just manosphere tropes, I've seen women share those tropes nonstop on social media and get huge "omg yass queen" reacts to it endlessly. Women are where the former got these tropes from lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 07:20 PM
2

There exists a Trope that leftist men are effeminate. And liberal men. There exists also a Trope that anything on a spectrum from "arrogant and aloof bad boy" to outright abuser is, bizarrely, attractive to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:41 PM
4

You do know the only men with the guts to mention this in today's climate are dudes who are good looking enough to be successful with women right?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 05:41 PM
3

>Most modern women pretty explicitly prioritize egalitarian relationships Is that why modern dating is such an extreme, lopsided social institution? What a ridiculous statement to make - if modern women truly prioritized egalitarianism in dating and/or relationships things would look a lot different to what they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 01:31 PM
3

Indeed
/r/MensRights22/06/26 09:54 AM
–

This is still violence and most women are far less willing to commit violence than men because they're simply unaccustomed to it
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 07:20 AM
-7

This braindead sexism you're pushing is nonsensical. Women are less violent because they're less physically capable of violence and less capable of dealing with reciprocal violence should they act violently toward another. They aren't morally superior or whatever BS
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:53 PM
-5

Been plenty female murderers driven by these motivations, don't make dumb blanket statements. Ironically I saw news about a woman throwing acid in a man's face somewhere in Asia a few days back lol
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:26 PM
-6

BS. Feminist inspired misandry predates the exaggerated manosphere by years and has far deeper ideological roots. It's also a lot more extreme
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 05:31 PM
3

Nigga you need to be brought up to speed
/r/MensRights15/06/26 05:36 PM
6

Because they're just crypto-feminists/gynocentrists...?
/r/MensRights15/06/26 05:02 PM
13

Conservative/right wing princess complex women grifters do not count
/r/MensRights15/06/26 01:54 PM
0

The Redpill = Useful idiots for feminism and gynocentrism. I cringe each time I see feminists sharing Redpill talking points to show how deluded men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 02:57 PM
–

Feminism is male-hatred incarnate. They will justify or downplay any extent or degree of misandry, forever, using their favorite forever-excuse 'patriarchy theory'
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 09:54 AM
–

It's reached the point where this particular standard cookie cutter response is just offensive to me. I wasn't born yesterday. Feminists can be and often are misandrists. Misandry is also visibly the bedrock of feminism - yes, all feminism. Bioessentialist collective guilt proscription upon all malekind is the bedrock of patriarchy theory. Such low effort, low quality responses.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 09:25 AM
9

Have faith in the unhinged-ness of mainstream feminism. It'll give people the push they need.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/06/26 02:18 PM
0

Yeah and they could certainly use a break from feminists baying for their blood 24/7 too framing them as rapists and abusers
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 08:23 AM
1

Patriarchy does not and has never existed. If it did I'd have seen an application of this term with its intended meaning intact at least once before. Instead, with how it's used, one might as well start calling hiding the TV remote patriarchy, or ringing someone's doorbell and running patriarchy etc. Never seen any usage of it that indicates anything beyond "it is bad" lol
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 09:29 PM
3

So you're saying you didn't try to center women into a discussion about a male issue, but rather you tried to just wholesale shift the discussion entirely to the patriarchy? That hardly makes it better lmao But regardless, you very clearly did the former and not the latter. Almost like am in built feminist defense mechanism, very trained-response-like.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 01:36 PM
6

I gave you an example of a type of dehumanization specifically aimed at men. By women. You dishonesty and ludicrously claimed that this is patriarchy or its equivalent near enough that we should just shift discussion to the patriarchy overall. Which would inevitably center women as the subject of our understand and sideline men since patriarchy is ultimately women as the main victims. The fact you think this attempted erasure of male struggle - as is the trademark of feminism- was subtle is quit…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 12:46 PM
1

Men have no equivalent for feminist brainwashing convincing them thay they are the good gender and women the evil one. Feminist discourse constantly does this to brainwash women
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 12:37 PM
3

Famous and respected feminist. Foremost expert on sexual violence in the US. Helped tweak laws on rape around so that raped men/boys would not get the proper justice they needed.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 12:29 PM
7

>i mean, if you’re worried about dehumanizing people and people being reduced to inanimate entities that only serve singular purposes you would be much better off fighting misogyny Instantly dismisses the dehumanization of males and demand women be made the recipient of the understand instead. You cannot make this shit up man 😂 How the hell did you read this: >The fact that this barebones, base, puerile, almost trollish logic of "but did it kill you?" is used to shut down men's concerns so often…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 12:27 PM
–

If these are big words for you then it reflects on your own low intelligence
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:26 AM
–

No, dumbass, your rebuttal to the Ukraine thing is quite literally unto itself a bioessentialist/genderessentialist talking point. By claiming the tyranny in Ukraine is done "by men" and leaving it at that, you tie it to their gender/sex, and this basically means that both the 16 year old boy being physically dragged out of his home to go die in a war he wants no part of and the men in authority who issue the decree basically share the culpability because they're both male. The sheer popularity …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:25 AM
6

Because like brainwashed ideologues, they're equipped with that wonderful "forever excuse" called 'patriarchy' to just dismiss all of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:22 AM
3

Mary Koss.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:19 AM
3

Can you understand without external prompt how this comment of yours espouses bioessentialism?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:18 AM
9

It is, by its very design, an open-ended way of blanketly dismissing any and every type, scale and magnitude of discussion of bad female behaviour toward men. There's no parameters to this shit. It can just be used as much as the ill intentioned wielder of this canard wants and that's the point. The fact that this barebones, base, puerile, almost trollish logic of "but did it kill you?" is used to shut down men's concerns so often is in and of itself incredibly telling of the prevalence of misan…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:11 AM
2

Is there a single discussion into which your kind won't irrelevantly shove MUH RIGHTS? So fucking tiresome I swear
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 10:58 AM
7

Aaaaaand we have the same standard sequence of non-responses from the resident feminists. "Don't talk about that!" \pointless gibberish about algorithms** "Well um misandry doesn't kill misogyny does!" (ridiculous open ended rule that can conveniently be used to shut down any discussion on women being shitty toward men anywhere at anytime) The deflectionism and dishonest is quite symptomatic of what a guilty, wretched movement feminism is.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:43 AM
4

Not what I said. I said it causes harm. And this has been seen when feminists have been in positions of power and acted directly to harm men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:35 AM
3

They do not, or rather they have not for most of history until these anachronistic times. The "provider" burden remains mostly men's still
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:32 AM
3

Women actively support upholding a culture that tells men they're worthless unless they check out a bunch of superficial 'success' boxes while telling women on the other hand that they have intrinsic worth. And then have the nerve to describe this state of affairs as a 'patriarchy' in their classical "oh that's patriarchy ok bye" excuses.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:30 AM
11

>Misandry sucks, misogyny kills. Y’all forget that far too often. Your point being? Anything bad that's short of that which causes direct death isn't worth talking about? FYI misandry has done harm to men on a mass scale in ways outside of just 'killing' but that's a tangent that's not necessary to go on. This puerile "but does it kill?" excuse is a very, very weak one to justify not discussing misandry. The excuses, man. Women on this sub and their flimsy excuses when it comes to feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:25 AM
7

Same old excuses, every single time. "The algorithm!" "people on the internet aren't real!" "that's not REAL feminism!" Your comment is also off topic. The topic here is how feminist spaces normalize dehumanizing men. If you don't want to participate just say so, don't urge the OP not to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:23 AM
6

You miss the point. The point is how feminist spaces normalize man hating so much that these responders can't just state the obvious and say hey that's a fuckedup generalization...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:22 AM
5

I don't see how this bastardizes feminism. It flows logically from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:21 AM
1

Yeah I can't stop being "obsessed" with a now near universal standard that will be applied to me regardless of whether I want it or not...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 06:32 PM
1

I am not "around" these women. Dunno if you've noticed but we live in the era of screens. Mass media. The internet. Social media. Every one of us sees more things said in one day than a person half a century ago might have seen said in 10 years. Discourse is a thing and men's height features heavily in female discourse... You are not being honest here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 05:17 PM
5

I'm not right wing, but I have yet to see a right wing ideology that is truly as toxic as feminism when you account for the scale/institutional power etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 04:32 PM
1

>Thinking most women have these strategic prerequisites is dishonest Not what I said. I said, with carefully chosen wording: "You know very well that - possibility of compromise down the line or not - the height obsession is across the board. Exceptions notwithstanding. It's ubiquitous.". The height thing is an albatross around every not-very-tall-guy's neck in dating. Regardless of whether it actually strangulates their prospects completely or not. >The only women I’ve seen in real life who hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 04:26 PM
27

I really want to see a feminist reacting to this. I need to see the justifications or downplaying/dismissiveness lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 04:19 PM
1

>Then stop chasing height queens. Do not be dishonest. You know very well that - possibility of compromise down the line or not - the height obsession is across the board. Exceptions notwithstanding. It's ubiquitous. Women keep this shit hanging over men's heads nonstop, even after they start dating them.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 04:15 PM
1

Because you guys provide offensively false, gaslighting and misleading 'feedback' aimed not at helping/advising in good spirit but rather preserving the ages-old pillar of female social hegemony which is the notion that women are fair and just and pure in matters of love and romance.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:36 PM
1

Yeah men are the ones who decided to get women to institute increasingly stringent pre-requisites for them to even get a chance to date to begin with. Be this tall. Pass some esoteric vibe check on the apps. Mention supporting these and these causes or w/e. It's all women. Romance has literally always been a woman-pedestalization affair. Women make the rules, women make the realities on the ground.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:35 PM
–

False. Chasing women and making a grand show of how desperate you are to them is something expected of men as a gendered duty, under the romantic paradigm. Romance as we know it was expressly tailored to preserve this dynamic and it has shaped women's expectations for centuries now.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:20 PM
–

Your own reported anecdote notwithstanding, the expectation of men 'pursuing' them is still generally prevalent among women. And by design, seeing as romance as a cultural concept has always emphasized the men pursuing, even at the expense of various other priorities in his life, the woman because the woman is placed on a pedestal.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:18 PM
13

It isn't men who've declared every man is a sex icon while every woman barring the top 10% is 'below par'. It isn't female attributes applicable to the vast majority that've been declared, these past few decades, as 'subpar' the way has happened with male heights for example. Don't know what dimension you're living in.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 09:43 PM
25

Gen Z women are also the most extreme of feminists/misandrists online so there's that too
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 01:35 PM
–

>And those on the top are... men or aliens? You really choosing their gender as the meaningful similarity when they're oceans apart in their degree of privilege and power, their 'SMV'? Doesn't make much sense. >More and more both men and women are "out of the game" Again, quite inaccurate. Men are out of the game increasingly due to being incapable of meeting ridiculously inflated looks standards. Women are out of the game because there's not enough 'Chads' for all of them to share forever. >bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:40 AM
1

For the rendition of 'evolutionary psychology' I see peddled around by the Pill people, most certainly yes. Humans are extremely different to other creatures, we are far more complex and we act on impulses that go far beyond just survival and other such rudiments. What would be rational behaviour for animals would be in humans highly irrational.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:32 PM
1

Women's contemporary dating behaviors are not driven by evolutionary psychology or any kind of instinct but by social engineering
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:21 PM
1

I did, it's cultural factors and socially constructed trends/social engineering. Separate from biological or evolutionary explanations.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:15 PM
1

>have you heard at least popular phraze "men are the gatekeepers of relationships/commitment/marriage, women are the gatekeepers of sex"? And how do the Pill people reconcile this with evopsych (or the particular version that is popular with them)? In their depiction, only a 'minority of men' ever reproduced, yet most women have always gone after - or wanted to go after - whatever the top type of men in their time were. And, of course, this is how they say things are now. So, if most women are f…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:14 PM
2

The main point is that the things the evopsych explanations the Pill people keep offering for modern human sexual dynamics are far, far better explained by cultural factors and socially constructed trends
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:02 PM
1

There was no conspiracy, no secret rape cult. Just a few 1000 degenerates in a Telegram group. It was a hoax. Also, women tend to enjoy rape porn more than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:14 PM
-2

What I attack is evopsych explanations being cited for behaviours that do not possess any degree of rationality behind them whether you use evopsych or hypergamy or any other framework to understand them. Especially when far more banal, obvious explanations lay bare in open sight. >I have a bad feedback for you: don't come here with "revelations", if you cannot even properly distinguish blackpill and redpill. Redpill: is prescriptive, suggests strategies/tactics to deal with hypergamy and claims…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:13 PM
1

You downplay it - which makes you part of the problem >But you are talking to people who have actual policy makers talk about it everyday, casually, on public TV. Worse, actually doing it! Actually taking away women's reproductive rights, right now, as you and I are chatting it up on reddit Justifies female celebs calling boys rapists?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:11 AM
1

Are any of you capable of the slightest amount of free/critical thought? 62 million monthly visits was the total monthly traffic of the website The specific rape porn genre had far less, like low 1000s iirc The 'telegram group' had barely 1000 people\ Holy mother of brainwashing....
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:10 AM
2

I asked you if there was literally forced impregnation of women going on. There isn't. That is not the same thing as abortion which comes after someone is already pregnant. I mean do you even read what I type properly or are you just in red alert defend feminism at all costs mode? You guys will spew literal gibberish and then upvote each other, goes to show how honest you are about any of this
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:08 AM
–

I don't think it's dying just because men and women know too much about each other. I think it was always somewhat of an unsustainable 'bubble', an exaggeratedly lopsided tradition that pedestalized women and was simply waiting for the correct circumstances to essentially collapse on its own weight. Those circumstances are the modern era, of dating apps, social media and so on inflating women's egos past what standard romance already does. I made a thread about the history of this a while ago, c…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:04 AM
1

She literally says men's waywardness is a collective choice of theirs. Collective. Choice. Can you guys stop being so dishonest for once, she defo DID generalize
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 09:10 PM
10

No it is used to describe the ample and growing number of women who go on misandrist rants 24/7 on the internet
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 08:33 AM
5

Yeah, it's more abundant than misogyny at least in the Western world and also not properly seen as a bad thing yet so its advance continues unabated
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 08:22 AM
1

Literally justifies declaring all boys rapists-by-default
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 07:46 AM
1

She built the path to the conclusion then stopped at the end. Changes nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 07:45 AM
1

Dude is acting like a PR agent lmao. What is this wifeguy tier crap
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:24 PM
1

You, one person? Nothing? I don't know? Might never see your username again?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:00 PM
1

And play chameleon ("that isn't REAL feminism!" even if it is as textbook feminism as it gets)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 08:48 PM
-2

18 are still boys although young boys does sound a bit inadequate a description tbf
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 08:47 PM
2

>But patriarchy has and still does exist. That’s undeniable No it's a bullshit claim made by an ideology that's a century or a century and a half years old. Not any universal truth or science. Classical ideological extremist/brainwashed person, take your dogma, lift not a finger in effort to try and prove it worthy, and simply demand others fall in line. >Male collective guilt is some sort of bogey man that’s haunting your dreams though. Again: literally her fucking words lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:23 PM
0

She was a eugenicist with a special focus on culling 'unfit' men. But I think she wasn't specifically a misandrist, you're right on that. It's not out of the question that I am mixing up names now. >You have not found 3 mainstream current feminists who supported violence. Will it do if I find 3 current mainstream feminists who promote verbal abuse and psychological abuse of males? Or is physical violence the only type of violence? >What is your excuse for insisting that men like Tate are sweetie…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:22 PM
1

Yes it is? It's feminist historiography she is citing, you are at this point simply lying through your teeth
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:06 PM
1

... And now you're justifying the shit you claim she wasn't ever justifying. Lol Please spare serious people the time wastage if you're just gonna end up doing this in the end. Pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:05 PM
-2

Your literalist wordplay gimmick isn't half as shrewd as you think it is
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:04 PM
2

SHE LITERALLY SAYS MEN MADE A "COLLECTIVE CHOICE" TO BE PIECES OF SHIT AND DESTABILIZE SOCIETY. I am quite literally QUOTING her. Jesus
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:03 PM
0

"It's satire" is her weak plausible deniability. Nothing else. That men do in fact deserve, emphasis on D E S E R V E, a draconian state imposed shock therapy was established for her over the entirety of the video which I watched and you probably did not.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:01 PM
0

Indeed, it's satire, which is why she cited feminism to lead up to the conclusions with perfect logical flow. She must be a fake feminist to whom feminism is a joke. :LOL:
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:00 PM
-4

No, there are no state ordained forced impregnation programs. Stop making lunatic shit up. Not taking a single comment of yours seriously after this
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:56 PM
-6

God your username gives me PTSD. Holy fuck how is your comprehension/reading this bad lol >Mate, you literally said, and actually fucking bolded, “she is citing established feminist doctrine to justify what she says.” Yes. >Now suddenly it’s “well duh, feminism doesn’t explicitly say that, it just creates the logic for it.” Also yes.... Where is the contradiction? Are you some sort of hyper basic literalist? Feminist doctrine establishes men as something so vile that they do in fact deserve coll…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:55 PM
1

>Margaret Sanger Promoted misandry. But that's OK I guess. >three mainstream current feminists who supported violence What's this bizarre fixation on violence? You get there's other ways to harm people outside of, I dunno, punching them?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:52 PM
1

It's not satire. If it were she wouldn't have deployed feminist reasoning, logic and history to establish that men collectively fucked society up as a choice (yes, collective choice is the wording she used) and that an institutionalized state ordained shock therapy is needed. Not satire. The only satire was the extent of the draconianness of some of the proposals.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:49 PM
2

Let's normalize women-getting-raped jokes/humour then? Can we get your stamp of approval for that too since "it's just a joke" applies as an excuse here too?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:46 PM
3

She establishes collective (yes she uses that word) male guilt for fucking society upon, establishes the rational justifications (feminist rationality) for punishing them for it in an institutionalized way then says briefly at the end "oh this channel doesn't endorse these proposals". And ends the video. Yeah. Pretty blatant plausible deniability.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:44 PM
-1

It's attempted topic derailment. Like the "men die, women most affected" meme. Not indulging it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:41 PM
-1

I clearly spoke of a dystopian cartoonish literal impregnation scheme. None of the precedents that were used once upon a time to justify child marriage, no rationales no nothing. You speak of something else.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:40 PM
2

>Do you think I can't pull up a dozen examples of men saying that silly shit online right now? Ok. Show me a rival for the popularity of the #yesallmen hashtag and the numbers it garnered. It needs to have the same engagement numbers, be the same kind of hate etc. Try? >I'm saying it's inevitable & useless to care about some morons on the fringes who have no powe Yet you'll shriek endlessly about incels, shut-ins who have less sociopolitical or economic power than any other group conceivable lma…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:39 PM
3

Sigh. Your reading and comprehension skills again... >Which feminist doctrine specifically says boys should be forcibly sterilized? Duh it doesn't outright say that. It, however, establishes the logic that can be used to promote such vile things. Is this a language barrier? I regret sounding arrogant but I really need to ask because this wasn't remotely hard to understand. Stuff like this makes the prospect of responding to the rest of your comment tremendously exhausting to think about.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:37 PM
-1

I've posted a summary and breakdown of the entire video in a long comment. It's by the book feminism, feminist history and feminist logic, applied to lead to the conclusion that state ordained forced course-correction for males is necessary. It's not a bit and it's not "satire". Only the extent of the draconian-ness of her proposals is satirical.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:34 PM
2

Hey man it's all algorithms and the internet doesn't exist /s
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:33 PM
-1

Only the extent of the draconian-ness of her proposals is satirical. Nothing else.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:32 PM
1

"I don't believe in patriarchy theory but I am a feminist" "I don't believe in Jesus but I am a Christian"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:29 PM
-4

As usual, as always, like clockwork... As with any example posted of men/boys/males being subjected to vile bigotry - the overt sort, not conveyed through implication as virtually all feminist discourse does - there's a whole lot of cognitive dissonance regarding this feminist YouTuber's intentions on display here. Manifesting in attempted topic derailment, downplaying (as happens with misandry, since males are to bluepillers and feminists lesser humans) and dishonest misportrayal of what the mi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:29 PM
-4

Stop changing the topic, which is about feminists saying vile things about literal children (boys) to Tate or whatever fake boogeyman Women should definitely oppose it, but also recognize that these dudes are either apolitical media celebs (Tate) or politically fringe (Fuentes), and that their gender views are nowhere near becoming law, and hence cease raking them up as a way of silencing men criticizing misandrists
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:51 PM
0

She literally did make a bunch of serious points though? Your apologetics for her grow more senseless with each passing comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:49 PM
0

No, anyone can not call themselves feminist. You are spewing nonsense now. A feminist has to, at the bare minimum, believe in patriarchy theory. I can't stand this chameleon act, it's so dishonest.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:48 PM
-1

And they're smaller yet than Jameela Jameel. Posting again: British actress & feminist Jameela Jamil's tirade against boys after the '62 million rape academy' hoax: is it not deplorable misandrist/bigotry to insinuate that literal children are rapists-by-default? : r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates This woman has won awards from feminist magazines
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:47 PM
-3

>for forcibly impregnating or sterilizing women, that wouldn't highlight anything interesting at all, really. That's a real thing that happens still What the actual fuck? Please provide me evidence of the US government forcibly impregnating women or refrain from blatantly making up hysterical crap. Genuinely...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:47 PM
-1

The seed's planted. And do not make such general statements as 'no women has done this yet' when 'jokes' like "men should start in jail when they're born and earn their way out" have gone viral on Instagram before. Can't just blanketly say that setting a bad precedent won't lead to bad down the line.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 05:45 PM
1

Yeah so you can't claim she's not a feminist. She is one. And this video is part of her feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:51 PM
-2

"A 20 minute long video where the entire logical basis to justify an evil thing is just a joke because it says jk at the end" No. It's tongue in cheek hatemongering. >Your dumb ass analogy bombs because it mirrors absolutely nothing It mirrors her using her sick ideology's twisted reasoning to justify something evil, actually, and does so pretty well.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:51 PM
-1

Yep, didn't address what I said. It's very clear that this YouTuber deliberately armed her audience with the ammo they'd need to promote the wretched idea of forcible sterilization of boys and then suggested she was just spitballing or whatever at the end for plausible deniability. You're just cognitively dissonant about this because it's a feminist woman saying sick crap about men and not the other way around.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:49 PM
0

I also reminded you that they're not remotely as big a deal as feminism and they have not already helped create actual laws and policies that harm men like feminism has (hint: Mary Koss).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:47 PM
0

Some fringe ones do I know. Fuentes and the like. They aren't remotely as big a deal as feminism is, and feminism predates them by like a century or more. Molehill vs mountain
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:34 PM
1

>Again you are being lazy as the OP to tell everyone to watch a 20 minute video when clearly you can’t even explain her argument coherently I did precisely that. In a tl;dr way. She cites feminist talking points to act as the logical justification for forced sterilization of boys. What more do you want me to say? Read the video's transcript if you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:33 PM
9

For the nth time, she is citing established feminist doctrine to justify what she says. She builds the argument, takes it forth using feminist logic toward the horrendous conclusion that boys need forced sterilization... Then at the end apparently implies this was all just one big 'thought experiment' or 'satirical polemic'. No. You know very well what she did. You choose to act naive to it. She literally gave those who'd want to truly pitch this horrible idea all the ammo they need, all the tal…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:32 PM
-2

My fingers tire from typing the exact same responses to this "it's satire" excuse. Once again... Analogy time. Say I make a video, whereupon I employ a particular theory/theoretical framework, ardently and passionately believed in by my target audience, to build up logically, step by step, to a conclusion. And that conclusion is that women should be forcibly impregnated if they don't have kids by age 30. Then I say at the end "lolz jk" See what I did there? Or will you like so many other bluepil…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:29 PM
1

She is citing directly from feminist theory. Before declaring her an extremist please try and debunk her claim to being a feminist. If you can't, don't slyly dismiss her so you can cleanse feminism's image.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:26 PM
-1

By watching the video? Patriarchy, the notion of collective male guilt, that's literally from the feminist textbook. Was only a matter of time before you resorted to the "nothing is REAL feminism!" fallacy. Apparently patriarchy theory isn't real feminism lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:25 PM
-2

She cites talking points she knows her audience believe in ideologically to build a logical (twisted/evil logic to a non feminist but nonetheless) case for forcibly sterilizing boys. She can literally blow a party horn at the end and say "He he gotcha! It was a joke" and it won't change what she did.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:14 PM
1

Anything to do with patriarchy being a thing at any point in history, any mention of or allusion to male collective guilt for female vulnerabilities (real or perceived) etc. I don't see the point of this discussion honestly
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:13 PM
2

Eh having to give the same response to everyone so 'quoting' myself I guess: Say I make a video, whereupon I employ a particular theory/theoretical framework, ardently and passionately believed in by my target audience, to build up logically, step by step, to a conclusion. And that conclusion is that women should be forcibly impregnated if they don't have kids by age 30. Then I say at the end "lolz jk! Let's not do that because umm, we're nice ^__^". Would you be able to understand what I'd done…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:09 PM
-5

I guess since seeing men as humans warranting a bare minimum of humanity is so hard for you guys I'll give you an analogy of what this YouTuber did and why the "it's satire" excuse is bullshit. Say I make a video, whereupon I employ a particular theory/theoretical framework, ardently and passionately believed in by my target audience, to build up logically, step by step, to a conclusion. And that conclusion is that women should be forcibly impregnated if they don't have kids by age 30. Then I sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:08 PM
0

The feminist logic she employs (BS version of human history, proscription of collective guilt upon malekind etc). And so, obviously, do I disagree with the notion that forcibly sterilizing boys would ever have any justification
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:04 PM
2

So you agree that boys being forcibly vasectomized is justifiable?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 04:03 PM
2

13 or 14 minutes... She also makes an entire logical (twisted feminist logic) case to justify it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:59 PM
-1

Wanting men culled is a mainstream opinion in feminism and among feminism's most senior figures like Sally Miller Gearheart, Valerie Solanas, Margaret Sanger and more. This isn't new. And Tate FYI calls women 'queens' and says men's biggest role in life is to serve their wives so miss me with that irrelevant diversionist crap, Tate also isn't remotely as big a deal as the feminists I speak of.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:58 PM
-4

- She makes a case for vasectomizing boys as an 'exercise' of sorts - The talking points and claims she uses to justify this tyranny are literally straight out of feminism - Her audience are feminists - She is implicitly conveying the acceptability within a feminist framework of endorsing such tyranny against males without saying it outright "It's just satire" is a weak, weak excuse, and very shoddy plausible deniability for this woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:52 PM
2

That is? "One actress"? Her audience are in the millions, the people patting her on the back for saying this shit are in the millions and she's using her platform to spread the worst bigotry against males imaginable. And then people like you'll have the gall to pretend that 18 year old incels saying "women are shallow" on some niche ass website in some corner of the internet is a titanic issue and needs to be made a big deal. What horrid double standards
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:50 PM
0

Yeah I did some days back. The "it's satire" excuse being used by the people in this thread are weak. This YouTuber used standard, general feminist talking points and claims to build a logical case (a twisted, morally repugnant logic to be clear but only non-feminists would see it as such) for forcibly vasectomizing boys. That she says or implies "jk lolz" at the end doesn't mean squat.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:48 PM
1

And it's not mine that you have a blindspot for female bigotry
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:46 PM
1

Oh great, would you then be A-okay with some male YouTuber saying "women should be blanket banned from working" or w/e because there's no chance of that happening (in the world outside of freaking Afghanistan)?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:46 PM
1

Did you watch the video? She does an exercise where she builds a 'logical' case for forcibly vasectomizing men... Entirely based on feminist talking points. Her audience have no reason within their ideology to not endorse the idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:42 PM
4

British actress & feminist Jameela Jamil's tirade against boys after the '62 million rape academy' hoax: is it not deplorable misandrist/bigotry to insinuate that literal children are rapists-by-default? : r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates Another example, bigger one this time, this same actress FYI compared men to 'human shit' some time ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:41 PM
-2

Again, very clever, or maybe you're just intentionally averting your mind from the fact that this feminist lays down all the justifications for forcibly vasectomizing boys in heir video, justifications which in turn are based on specifically feminist claims. She can say "just kidding lolz!" at the end, it doesn't matter because she paved the way for this horrific conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:40 PM
0

Watch the video the case she makes for vasectomies for boys sans their consent is literally built on core feminist talking points and propaganda.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:38 PM
2

Very sly. She narrates mainstream feminism's exaggerated claims about 'patriarchy', affirms the collective guilt of malekind for it, and then uses it to justify restricting men's reproductive right via measures like forced vasectomies. Your and the other bluepiller's excuses for this are quite weak and only reveal your own view of males as lesser humans.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:37 PM
-1

She rattles off the core feminist talking points about history and 'the patriarchy' and lays down the justification for imposing forced vasectomies on boys. You know very well what she's doing, you make excuses for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:35 PM
-3

"Government bad so it's ok for feminists to say psychotic shit about boys"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:33 PM
0

'Some women' The theoretical framework they use to churn out the misandry is universal to feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:31 PM
-2

Wanting to forcibly vasectomize kids out of your hate for their gender... I think virulent's a fair word to use for said hate don't you think? What even is your point here?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:26 PM
-3

Do you imagine I don't have more? The most famous and respected figures in feminism were all proud, unabashed misandrists: r/TheAntiMisandry Wiki: Misandric Feminist Quotes And no, for those who won't even open the link, it's not just 'Andrea Dworkin'. And seeing as we presently live in the era of the internet, an unbelievably vast cyber canvass - the likes of which has never existed in human history before - upon which millions upon millions of people create and are drawn to content based on sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:22 PM
3

Down to acting like you can't comprehend plain English. This went precisely how I expected it to
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:12 PM
6

Lord I just knew this gibberish excuse was coming, can you at least try? The algorithm brings you stuff that is real and organically engaged with by humans because it appeals to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:03 PM
8

You need me to start sending screenshots or will you have the honesty to simply log in to Twitter, click literally one of these misandrist profiles and then sit and watch as the algorithm brings you countless more with high engagement, lots of followers, lots of affirmatory comments etc?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 02:46 PM
10

We must be living in different dimensions then (or you're from an older generation) because 'I hate men' and 'misandrist' are among the most popular and trendy social media bylines among Gen Z women
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 02:33 PM
3

"The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her." Literally from the Declaration of Sentiments, I'm guessing you've never heard of it? >play at war "Play" war is apparently a fun game 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 02:03 PM
3

>No they don’t dude, that’s just incel shite or back up your own claims Sure take a look! This is feminism - pushing for forced vasectomies for men. The comments even push for it for 12 year old boys. : r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates 800+ comments in agreement with this psychotic feminist on the video btw
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:57 PM
9

>women calling for mens rights to be stripped Feminists already believe fathers should have no say in their kids' lives or in matters of abortion etc. And demands for draconian measures to be taken against men/boys in general have been growing in feminist discourse for ages now. >Until we have female shootERs Ding ding ding feminist resorts to bioessentialist bigotry again. Apparently being a 'shooter' is tied to the male sex? Not something any sane person can generalize.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:44 PM
3

No, you believe that all men across all human history conspired to create this patriarchy thing to oppress women because they're misogynists
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:35 PM
3

What incels say in their niche spaces about women pales in comparison to what women say in full mainstream spaces about malekind
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:34 PM
12

I have rarely seen women step up for men when feminists make hostile generalizations about them. And in the few instances I've seen it happen, they have gotten dogpiled on and pushed back against.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:30 PM
1

Boomer and millennial men are like this. Gen Z is changing, thankfully.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:16 PM
–

DING DING DING feminist resorts to bioessentialism example #3358439328532325328 >“respected male figures” Male and....? Got any other modifiers to narrow down who you're talking about? I was talking about feminists but here you respond with the broadest possible "male figures" lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:36 AM
–

Yes I am denying the existence of the non existence cult. 62 mil was the total views on the porn site combined. A few thousands (very small numbers porn sites-wise) was what the specific rape category got. And then like barely a thousand people were in the telegram group watching the rape porn. So yes, as is the honest thing to do, I deny its existence. Cults aren't that small and random. The horrific story was something that happened many years prior, with the woman from France. This ridiculous…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:33 AM
–

Anyone with a functioning brain and eyes can notice recurring patterns, staples and generalities. It's like feminists have no defense to critiques of their movement and/or ideology other than to claim that this isn't real feminism, that isn't real feminism etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 10:14 PM
0

Holy cognitive dissonance, I am giving you evidence from the literal mouth of the horse itself what more can you ask for?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 08:42 PM
2

Feminism DOES have a central doctrine: patriarchy theory. And I have never, in my 2 decades plus of witnessing potentially millions of feminist comments, posts, content of all forms and statements, seen any significant clique within feminism that doesn't deploy patriarchy theory as anything but a collective guilt proscription upon all of malekind (bioessentialism).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 08:18 PM
0

There's way more than what the dude you're replying to posted: r/TheAntiMisandry Wiki: Misandric Feminist Quotes
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 08:13 PM
1

She is objectively a respected figure in the feminist world. Nor are there strains of feminism built around rejecting the misandry she and a whole host of other similarly-respected feminist figures espoused.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 08:13 PM
0

What a socker /s It's like mainstream feminism produces these rape hoaxes once every few years
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 01:39 PM
3

Okay then black men go to jail longer. What's your point? Your race is a disadvantage, your gender an advantage. I can't say about Roe v Wade because I've never participated in the "is abortion murder or not" debate before.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 01:33 PM
-1

How? Women have as many rights as men and more protections (less jail time for the same crime etc)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:19 AM
0

Women, particularly women in their 20s and 30s in the West, can be accurately described as an anti-male political bloc in this day and age.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:14 AM
0

What was the sample size of this study and was it yet another lazy hoax like the '62 million rape club'?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:13 AM
-1

Get radicalized Do NOT fall for redpill horseshit Do NOT fall for blackpill horseshit (much better than redpill, brilliant actually, but falls off at the end) Avoid boomer-dominated MRAs Make Gen Z/younger millennial-specific anti-feminist movement This is what men need.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 10:32 AM
0

The femosphere is a century older than the manosphere, is far bigger by a huge degree, and believes far worse things about men than the manosphere does about women.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 04:20 PM
1

They started the MRA movement after typically boomer experiences like horrid divorces and stuff like that. I've seen a few members of this movement and their discourse as well as their occasional politics don't seem that relatable to the Gen Z male experience today.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/26 11:17 AM
3

Subs like this need to compromise on red tape where necessary to enable quality posts
/r/MensRights20/05/26 04:58 PM
5

Let me be frank. Europe gets immigration from the uncivilized lower classes of third world countries, not the educated, civically-upright middle classes. That's about it. lol
/r/MensRights17/05/26 04:27 PM
–

That all malekind is an enemy class of all femalekind is a concept intrinsic to feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 10:43 PM
1

Need context lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/26 04:41 PM
1

A 13 year old boy faces more gendered struggle in his life than most adult women lol
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:20 PM
1

This was incredibly hard to read - very sorry you went through all of this but I'm glad you came out of it having learned a lot and having salvaged what you could of your family. Feminism truly is the world's foremost 'hate group', although the word group is quite inadequate here since it's more like a gigantic ecosystem. I'm yet to see a single feminist call out Mary Koss, Ellen Pence or any of the myriad misandrists that're held in high regard by feminists overall. They likely exist, but seein…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/26 02:11 PM
16

Because of the feminist zeitgeist we live under. Always Blame Men
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:51 PM
–

>Well, the men who aren’t dating/romancing women were never attractive to women anyways so why does it matter? Do you see the irony in this? Women have, in recent decades, raised the minimum for what they consider a dateable guy ridiculously high. Looks, status, income etc. Mainly looks. So many men realize that it's increasingly pointless and stop trying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 09:54 PM
–

Or you can just learn how to read
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 08:17 PM
–

I'm literally talking about men not dating, they don't have girlfriends. FACEPALM
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 08:02 PM
–

Plenty of data evidencing the decline of men's participation in the romantic rat race
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 07:50 PM
1

Redpill = total BS Blackpill = good observations, lose it with the evopsych BS MRAs = don't really know, kind of boomer-ish fixation on divorce/traditional gold digging etc The manosphere is not a homogenous thing at all. They even have clashing beliefs/belief systems
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:23 PM
8

Couple of weeks ago a very non-toxic, non-combative, non-angry, very normal feminist on the AskFeminists subreddit told me that "boys need to be taught not to be bad while girls are born decent" and received 100s of likes while I got mass downvoted and soon banned for pointing out the bioessentialist bigotry that this is. Hatred of men and boys for being male is fully normalized and even assumed in mainstream feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:30 AM
2

>You call it brainwashing bc the alternative is accepting that many women’s dislike, distrust and fear around men is an organic reaction to living among them. Caution is one thing. I'd be cautious of male strangers in general. If I was a woman, purely because they can physically harm me and I've no resource unto myself against this (as opposed to relying on the law, the police or w/e). But outright hatred? The kind that makes you polemicize 24/7 against the male sex? No - that isn't rational, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:18 AM
1

Man gets this close to identifying a REAL issue (romance and its unsustainability for men)... Then veers off into the wrong turn (biological explanations). Sigh
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 10:45 AM
10

It's probably because older women's misandry is less overt and extreme than Gen Z women, who wear "I hate men" as some sort of 'rebellious' badge of honour
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 09:05 AM
0

Sexual violence against women gets called out. Women making jokes about sexual violence against men doesn't near as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 08:49 AM
6

Instead of dancing around the matter and asking secondary or tertiary questions that help illuminate only partially the answer to why so many women are clearly misandrist OR use misandry-based talking points, why don't we ask the ONE question, the primary question, that'll give you the single furthest reaching explanation? That question is: is feminism in general misandrist? And the answer is fairly simple: yes, it is. It's bioessentialist, like almost a 'racism' of gender, suggesting that all m…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 08:32 AM
8

I see mention of 'biology', I run
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 07:56 AM
–

I literally answered you on that. And I did so despite you ignoring every fucking thing I actually type, concoting your own fake account of what my point is and condescending to me. Not repeating myself again. I'm done with this. Learn to read and learn to discuss/debate in good faith. >then women participating in them isn’t some uniquely female moral failing. What a fitting way to end this because I LITERALLY NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED THAT Jesus...
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 06:04 PM
0

Theirs is a brainwashing-induced gender-jingoism that manifests in them simultaneously believing women are too high and mighty to truly hate men and insisting that hating men is fully justified because of "patriarchy"
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 05:09 PM
–

Yeah no you can't really act as if typical women's discourse toward dating isn't rife with entitlement toward exaggerated displays of adulation from men. "The bare minimum" "if he could we would" "as he should" is typical messaging directed by and toward female audiences when it comes to what to expect in men. >I’m in favour of my employer giving me a raise and 8 weeks vacation, that doesn’t mean I think I’m entitled to it. See how that works? ... Is there a near 1000 year old social contract be…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 01:18 PM
–

Is it really so hard to understand that I am critiquing a norm? "You're describing normal dating dynamics" DUH? This entire thread is about unpacking the rather extraordinary roots and precedents of what is, today, absolutely normal. It is beyond exhausting to be, as the person who cited historical works and analysis of historical literature in the OP text, constantly condescended to by people like you not even bothering to make the smallest of effort to understand what I'm saying or what is poi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 12:54 PM
–

This is a weak cop-out. Dating is a largely unavoidable pathway toward certain ends that virtually every one, myself included, needs (LTR, marriage, companionship, sex etc). Dating as a veritable social institution unto itself has been designed in an extremely lopsided manner and creates needless disparities that I as a male am disproportionately affected by. "Hey, nobody's forcing you to... Partake in one of the main endeavours of a human being's life. Tee hee!" Disingenuous. >This just sounds …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:01 AM
–

The consensus among women remains in favor of the man doing the approaching, the complimenting, the pedestalization, all at the very beginning/the first date. I don't know why you apparently doubt something so evident/visible. This is the status quo
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 10:58 AM
2

Women hate men questioning the dating status quo because the dating status quo is one of the greatest sources of social power for women. It's privilege-guarding. Hence why their ill-tempered, dismissive responses to it being brought under question reek of a kind of 'elitism'.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 10:45 AM
–

Once again the topic is not even addressed. Really did something taboo by making this thread it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 07:13 AM
–

Having to do virtually all the initial legwork in terms of pursuit to get the woman's attention and earn from her the gracious agreement to... Let you continue to jester for her. For one. This largely remains the case with dating, exceptions notwithstanding. There is little surprise that you see a lot more men express fatigue with this status quo than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 07:08 AM
–

Women by and large see chivalry and romantic pursuit by men as a norm in dating
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 07:07 AM
3

What do you mean wash your hands if you're Dutch?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 09:01 PM
19

One person? A celebrity, with a huge following, using her platform for misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 04:54 PM
7

Usually? Or officially? Are these femicides (iirc that is the word, not femINIcide) determined to be due to gender? How?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 04:45 PM
31

Yeah a lot of the times you can switch gender with race and feminists sound identical to racists. It'd be funny if it wasn't demented.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 04:45 PM
1

An assumption of feminism perhaps. I don't buy into it until I see proper case studies/examples.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 03:16 PM
5

Oh is Stewart a misandrist too? Haven't really paid any attention to her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 02:55 PM
18

I always wonder what these dudes must be like. As in, the ones dating loud misandrist feminist women. Probably the "silently agree" himbo sorts who their bigoted gfs parade around as an example of a 'good' housebroken man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 02:14 PM
24

Tying negative traits/evil behaviour to one's biology (maleness in this case).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 02:13 PM
16

*Erases male homicide victims*
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 01:17 PM
21

'Boys' includes toddlers.... And yeah a leftist page would probably oppose bioessentialist hatemongering!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 01:15 PM
38

Do you have any comments for Jamil's views on boys being rapists by default?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 01:14 PM
3

She has a bf I think
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 01:12 PM
1

Yeah and it quite literally is always consistent with feminism/patriarchy theory
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 10:26 AM
0

>As long as women suffer more than men, I will support their side, despite the imperfections. This reads a lot like blatant apologism for bad conduct from women because they all have that eternal victim card to play
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 10:26 AM
-1

Yes the case that feminists do not use their considerable institutional/lobbying clout to do anything about issues like this can be made but I still see this as an unnecessary tangent. The reasons for wars are complex and have little to do with the gender of the architects of the conflicts. So it matters little.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:42 AM
3

They don't need to read them, they just need to be exposed to the ideas of these women - who BTW feminists by and large do not call out for their bigotry - passed down through the generations. Young women wear "I hate men" as a badge of honour now. Political lesbianism (i.e., I hate men so much I wanna change my sexuality) is thriving. Misandry has skyrocketed decade on decade. These women's ideas are fully embraced by women too.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:48 AM
3

Betty Friedan... Or Valerie Solanas... Or Sophie Geerhart... Or any of that rather concerningly large list of feminist misandrists who are adored, beloved and followed with ideological vigour by feminists around the globe. Sorry, you can't dismiss them as something fringe. YOU are the fringe here. They're mainstream, their ideas (bioessentialist misandry) are mainstream and it means quite literally nothing when you guys drone robotically about how "feminism at its core is about crushing the patr…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:43 AM
0

Can you please explain how Australian feminists lobbying to have the state treat suicidal men as abusers-until-proven-innocent is "the patriarchy" as you so ridiculously asserted?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:41 AM
-1

No, it isn't. Does the matter of who made the decision change the fact that Ukraine allows women to escape as refugees to Europe/the US etc but literally dispatches its intelligence agency to kidnap Ukrainian men who flee abroad to be dragged back to the frontlines? Absolute non-logic on your part, the males of Ukraine are doing the brunt of the suffering while the women get off remarkably easy
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:39 AM
3

Mainstream feminism IS the 'chaff'. Mainstream feminism's best known icons were all raging misandrists, and proudly so. r/TheAntiMisandry Wiki: Misandric Feminist Quotes
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:03 AM
-4

Who made the decision is not the point... The point is the men suffer 10x while the women live on easymode compared to them. Afghanistan is obviously total oppression of women. But Afghanistan is hardly a generalizable example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:59 AM
3

Please take a glance at Ukraine where 15 year old males are being dragged out to the frontlines to die while the women party hard in Europe for an idea of which gender suffers more
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:57 AM
1

So this is what equality means? Condemn everyone born male for the 'crimes' of their gender (wow collective guilt, nice)? Seriously?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:56 AM
1

You literally responded "it's the patriarchy" to a case of feminist lobbyists pushing anti-male policies/policies harmful to men. Is there any debating with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:56 AM
3

You comment under a literal example of FEMINIST ORGANIZATIONS lobbying for anti-male policies and... Blame the "patriarchy".... Absolutely brainwashed
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:25 AM
1

What is that dogma
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/26 07:23 AM
5

<See example of feminist groups lobbying for draconian policies and laws against men <Downvote and say it's "not feminism" Standard feminist MO. Can't defend your toxic ideology's beliefs or your toxic movement's actions so you just downvote and complain angrily
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 07:23 AM
-2

They got the same rights ages ago, in the Western English speaking world. What feminism pushes for now is to turn males into third class citizens. Saw this making the rounds on Twitter today: Kicking a Man Whilst He's Down – The Daily Sceptic. Feminism, mainstream feminism, loathes males and is more than willing to wield its institutional/lobbying power to harm them. Welcome to the latest triumph of feminist policy innovation. A system that looks at the man standing on the edge of the abyss — th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 10:47 PM
0

No I am not. You are another person who can't read, doesn't want to read what I said properly, are jumping to assumptions OR have horrid comprehension skill. I raised historical evidence for the sheer privilege of women in romance/dating, and the underpinning hierarchy or notions about hierarchy it's based on. Yours is just another trashy low intelligence ad hominem response that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. >You can’t just buy a woman to marry and own anymore. Oh boy I really offen…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 06:30 PM
-2

Complete and utter irrelevant spam again. Look at what the topic is and look at your comment
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:48 PM
3

Bullshit they can never substantiate
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/26 02:54 PM
0

Yeah classic brainwashed ideological dogmatism. Really confounds me how people can be so programmed like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 10:51 AM
-1

They're not just not engaging they're literally convulsing with cognitive dissonance. The sheer number of people who apparently can't read at all and are claiming things on behalf of the authors/writers whose works we're discussing is just sad to see. Like anyone can open the link and verify for themselves but alas, it's to be expected when you're essentially just doing damage-control for your dogmas.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 09:11 AM
0

That's the point. Women have been 'spoilt' in matters of romance for so long (this depends on what part of the world we're talking about though) they think that having a dude essentially lower himself to the status of a vassal for them is a bare minimum.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 09:03 AM
-5

>They are mad they have to appease their appliance ?????????????? ????????? ????????????? Who are you talking about? Who? Who is the "they" here? Your comment is, in its entirety, off-topic spam. Can you even pretend to talk about the topic at hand or are you just going to derail with random rants? Is there absolutely no rule on this sub about spamming/constant off-topic comments?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 08:59 AM
0

It originated the way they were practiced and most defo originated the feudalesque nature of the new tradition. If you look at the link in the OP text, CS Lewis also describes how these French poets with their wealthy female patrons took inspiration from a Roman poet, Ovid, who way before these guys described very similar behaviours to what men display in pursuing women... In a satirical/comedy sense. The joke, of course, being that men lose themselves, their priorities and their stature in desp…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 10:24 PM
0

You've continued to state things that are objectively false, like the idea that courtly love wasn't novel and just "stylized" pre-existing (and pre-normalized/mainstreamed) behaviours when it quite literally is the first time said behaviours were properly codified/canonized into a coherent tradition (romance/courtly love). >But symbolic elevation inside a romantic script is not the same thing as women literally occupying a higher relational class over men. ... Please tell me how many languages y…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 05:35 PM
-1

I am not mistaking it for anything nor, as you assumed at the start, making it a bigger deal than what it is. And it is quite literally hierarchy. Repeating for the nth time: the woman as the equivalent of a feudal lord and her pursuer as a subject, a lesser, a subordinate is literally an underpinning of courtly love. You don't get to just say "Ummm no" to this... >And courtly love didn’t invent male devotion or pursuit. Another thing I never said or even implied. >It stylized behaviours that al…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 05:20 PM
1

You gonna actually say something on-topic I can even respond to without extending this 0% relevance detour of a comment thread? I won't bother with another comment from you that literally says nothing about the topic of courtly love and how its elitist pedestalization of women endures to this day.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 03:19 PM
-1

"Men pursue women" vs what I, and CS Lewis, described, which is "men making their pursuit of women going out of their way to stick their noses in the air and ensure they act like duchesses so graciously accepting the adoration of a lesser". I do so wonder why you put it so, reductively? Do not omit important details please. >Male competition for female attention did not start with medieval French poets. The terrible comprehension continues. 1) This thread is not about male competition for women …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 03:04 PM
-1

>Why do you think men allowed themselves to be turned into such pathetic gynoslaves? Is it just the imbalance in sexual desire between men and women? I don't want this particular thread to become the host of this discussion, would be better off with a separate one I think.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 02:35 PM
-1

>You’re taking a niche medieval romance tradition and trying to use it as proof that men are some oppressed lower caste today No, I am not. Not anything that dramatic or severe. >Courtly love was mostly aristocratic literature and fantasy, not society as a whole. False. It wasn't some aristocrat's eccentricity, it has been woven into storytelling and broader culture at large irrespective of sociopolitical/socioeconomic strata. For example, take romance, adventure and action movies marketed to bi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 02:35 PM
0

No they made outright false statements debunkable by minimum effort's worth of reference to the source material linked. When you're down to lying about something that takes a simple mouse click and a little scrolling to see the truth of you really do have no argument to make. Your own comment like most of the other blue and purple pill ones has 0 substance, 0 reference to what has even been posted.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 02:15 PM
-4

It's not true, she like virtually every other commenter in this thread that is blue or purple pill are just convulsing with cognitive dissonance at seeing that not only is the extreme female privilege in dating today real, it actually goes back. Way, way back. Albeit in times past it was tempered with reason quite often and normalized as time went by. Whereas the post-social media era has just created rather extreme circumstances again. And worse part is they're also downvoting me for having to …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:53 AM
0

Do I need to repeat myself a third time with more words now? The literal people who invented courtly love, not CS Lewis a millennium later, explicitly modelled it on the relationship between a feudal lord and his serfs. Can you stop pretending like you're incapable of the barest minimum comprehension?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:07 AM
-1

>Men invented courting as a rebellion against the religious arranged marriage type TIL Eleanor of Aquitane was a man lol. And what biological sex invented it doesn't matter and isn't the point. The point is it quite literally pedestalizes women above men. News flash: men can be, to use the modern lingo, simps. The honest thing to do here would be to admit you didn't bother reading the OP text or the historical works it cited and just saw the word 'privilege' and went from there. Not only was thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 10:56 AM
-1

You are hijacking a thread about the lopsided and inequitable tradition of courtly love and making it about women's reproductive rights.... Either contribute to discussion of the actual topic the OP is about or don't outright spam? I repeat: men as literal serfs/peasants is the stated, intentional outcome of courtly love. If you find this hard to process then take your time but please do not derail the thread and make it about women's issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 10:43 AM
-1

I repeat: I have linked the literal historiography of courtly love. Can you stop unilaterally turning it into whatever you want it to be? I'd say this is bizarre but it's really the kind of overtly obvious cognitive dissonance I half expected when I decided to present hard historical evidence of just how privileged women are over men in the context of romantic interactions. Nowhere has it said that vulnerabilities specific to women do not exist. Can you now stop derailing the thread into discuss…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 10:04 AM
1

You are commenting on a thread which literally presents the history of modern romantic practices, rituals and activities as going back at least 900-something years. Did you even bother to read anything in the OP text? "It has been recent" ????
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 09:37 AM
-3

Look at the responses. Some of the most blatant cognitive dissonance on display that I've ever seen. Truly remarkable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 09:35 AM
2

Yet to see an actual relevant comment from women on the actual topic of this thread. What was the thread about and what have you guys been discussing; two different topics lol He is only taking into account young, single, attractive women Who are you even talking about? Like, literally, who? Me? CS Lewis? The troubadors? Courtly love was explicitly intended for all women, not just "young attractive women". If you can't address the actual topic just say so?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 09:33 AM
-1

The replies by women to this are kinda telling. Of the some 10-15 comments made so far they essentially all constitute some level of topic derailment or attempt to change the topic into some sort of claimed female vulnerability that'd require a whole other thread to discuss. "We're expected to have kids!" type basic excuses (like men don't have any responsibilities in that regard but I do not want to digress further than this). I made a post, first, about women's privilege in dating, and highlig…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 09:21 AM
0

Women have, quite literally, a near thousand year old tradition alive and kicking and continuing to inform modern dating in their favour. They most certainly do have it better.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:08 AM
1

Was courtly love about "making men put in effort" or was it about turning them into a subordinate class and women into their superiors? Literally every comment by women on this thread is 100% dodging the actual historical evidence provided and coming up with their own interpretations of courtly love. You didn't invent courtly love. The people who actually did tailored it expressly to make men prance about wildly to the whims of women because women were deemed superior/higher beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:07 AM
1

Can you contribute to the actual topic?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:03 AM
-1

This is an incoherent, garbled rant. You like any other woman living in a culture with a European past or influence, which is kinda most cultures in today's world, have the romantic privilege. That you have other forms of vulnerability doesn't discount that. Please don't derail the thread. It's about courtly love. Not poverty. Not mental health etc
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:02 AM
0

Why are you arbitrating what courtly love was and wasn't about when it isn't you who designed it? The women and men behind courtly love very clearly meant it to be a universial, unconditional privilege, and CS Lewis literally describes the pre-courtly love and post-courtly love era as an entirely new chapter of human history and attributes courtly love with making the European Renaissance look like a "mere ripple on the surface of literature" when it comes to impacting how we behave. Total cogni…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:01 AM
1

You aren't even addressing the actual topic. Courtly love is predicated upon the woman being a 'higher being' and the man being her literal feudal subject. I don't know who constitutes "y'all" here but it certainly isn't the people who invented the courtly love tradition nor those that follow it. Another derailing reply I'm going to chalk up to severe cognitive dissonance at the sight of major historical evidence for just how privileged women are when it comes to love and romance.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 07:58 AM
-4

These are incredibly lazy dismissals. Courtly love was for men of lower and middle classes. You can click open the source and read it if you need but please do not just reactively make such claims because you want to doubt women being privileged. Not only was it for men of limited economic means to follow but that is quite literally what we see happening today whereby the need for following the romantic template is one shared by all men of all strata. ETA: People downvoting me for correcting the…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 07:24 AM
–

If young men growing up in the most gynocentric, feminist-dominated sociopolitical regime in human history are turning less progressive it's because they're tired of being designated eternal foes by virtue of their biology by mainstream feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:36 PM
–

On a meaningful scale, it didn't happen. No millions. Not even 10s of thousands. And again: rape porn is more popular among women than men. So there's no feminist/misandrist angle to be extracted from this misbegotten hoax.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 10:49 AM
–

Here, read this common-sense debunking of it: No, An Online "Rape Academy" Did Not Receive 62 Million Views, Let Alone 62 Million Members Tl;dr dumb people can't differentiate between views and people views per month and participants in a Telegram group and a whole lot more rudimentary things. Because their brains are clouded by misandrist hysteria. I already summarized the actuality of what happened, but you're free to read through the substack.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 10:45 AM
–

No it was NOT. It was 62 million total page views on an entire porn site called Motherless, one of those many porn genres was groping sleeping people (i.e., rape). 62 mil (in one month, btw) is a small number for a porn site when it comes to views. So yeah, another feminist hoax deliberately made to mass slander men and boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 09:48 AM
–

Yes, it WAS a hoax. It was never 62 million individual men to begin with, just 62 million hits/views (smells of bot farms tbf), and the CNN investigation was into a Telegram gorup that had barely a thousand followers. So, 62 million VIEWS. You know rape porn is a popular category among women, don't you? Don't just believe hoaxes because they affirm your misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 09:30 AM
22

Literally the opposite of what happens, whereby women invade men's spaces and demand men discuss their issues through the lens of feminist dogma
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 09:03 AM
–

The "online rape academy" was a hoax yes
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 07:07 AM
1

What does this change about what I said? You've simply stated reasons for women being more organized. I talk about their organized politics being anti-male and contributing to the issues men face that women don't really face to the same extent.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 04:21 PM
16

Patriarchy theory is their ultimate dogma. Contrary to the normal order of things whereby you come up with a theory or a theoretical framework and then apply it to a large number of appropriate samples or case studies to prove its veracity, feminists will just set patriarchy theory as a starting point and then argue from there. It's bizarre, but typical of ideological cliques.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/05/26 02:03 PM
1

Women, in the modern West at least, are a veritable sociopolitical bloc. Galvanized into such by feminism as the glue holding the bloc together. They are extremely influential in dictating modern cultural and gender trends, far more so than men. And after the bioessentialism you've played another very common feminist tactic, which is to act like women are completely inconsequential and cannot have major trends which affect everyone revolve around them and their whims. No, men should not bow to t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 01:50 PM
32

No ideology is perfect. And this sub calls out blatant hate, unlike feminist subs which call out all critique of their dogma as hate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/05/26 10:19 AM
2

How is "whining about women being more privileged" = "veiled misogyny" lol >came from the majority male ruling class….which is still majority male Same lazy bioessentialism feminists thrive on. Their maleness is the least of the multitude of facets to their identity that define their exploitation of the common man. Really shocking how quicky feminists out themselves with bioessentialist takes so quickly. >Where are men encouraging more men to get into the education and mental health careers? Spe…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 08:18 PM
0

They don't even pretend to be traditional and they if anything oppose 'trads'. They come quite close to a lot of important points but always end up fixating on their PUA stuff.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/05/26 09:02 AM
1

Engaged with it loads
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 07:19 AM
-1

Feminism is bioessentialist misandry turned into a whole doctrine
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:13 PM
1

Yes pls
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 10:57 PM
-1

The person I responded to is a feminist so the comment is warranted. Also believes men's issues should never be discussed unless they bow down to feminism's core dogmas first.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 10:52 PM
2

I've only seen the blatant low quality grifter content being called out and women who under the guise of 'male rights' or w/e push soft-core misandry or delusion tailored to securing a positive image of the modern woman among their male audience (so basically, not really helping them but their own 'tribe' per se). And r/MensRights does not have frequent whore-calling. Don't make things up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 10:51 PM
1

No it's quite simple. Woman X shows up in a particular men's space, claims to follow the belief system that binds them, turns out she's just saying basic unimaginative shit while showing a lot of cleavage and occasionally her ass. That kind of stuff. "My culture isn't your costume" kind of thing
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:56 PM
3

>other women under the bus As opposed to partake in gender-based sociopolitical tribalism and view men as "the enemy" instead?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:49 PM
0

This is wrong. They criticize those women for being grifters. Completely different to what you're alleging, which is that those women "do so much for them". These women are in fact often grifters who wear various ideas they think will help them garner a male audience as a skinsuit. That's offensive. I've even seen women set up an OF funnel by starting out as 'sympathy for struggling men' types. It's insidious.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:46 PM
2

>because 52% of DV is non reciprical, and 71% is initiated by the wmn Could I have the source for this? Would be pretty useful
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 05:44 PM
1

Too boomer-esque. Too little relatability to Gen Z. It's the Gen Z guys need the guidance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 03:31 PM
2

Black Pill encourages its users to see themselves as 'evolutionary dead ends' and subhumans while Red Pill is full of sex pests.... >You don't even know what their 'current preoccupations I am literally talking about the people who spend a lot of time in these Pill communities.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 01:58 PM
0

>Its not for you to decide what they need. Your own comprehension skill is pretty awful - I was never 'deciding what they need' in some sort of inquisitory way. Just giving my two cents on the harmful direction their current preoccupations lead them to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 01:47 PM
-1

They need to spiral toward suicide?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 01:03 PM
4

I think centering trans people - a very tiny percentage of the overall male (or born male? idk what to say) population - in opposition to misandry is very ill-conceived and evokes a hypocritical social justice totem pole whereby the regular straight male is at the absolute bottom and bigotry against him cannot be called out for his sake alone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 09:32 AM
6

It most certainly is not. Nor could they ever look half as bad as feminism looks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 08:37 AM
0

99.99% of the internet is not dedicated to this specific issue so that doesn't matter. The Red Pill, Black Pill etc are standing directly in the way of the kind of discourse that their participants need.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 08:37 AM
2

Weak excuses tbf
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/26 07:38 AM
5

Thank you! And wow that's really odd that she was involved with the creation of that sub. It's a shitty one for sure, and will ban you when you ask questions they can't answer without acknowledging feminism's darker aspects.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 10:43 PM
12

Oh no don't get me wrong I'm all for opposing militant, aggressive feminism in practice. These 'manosphere' (I hate this term lol) types don't do that properly at all
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 10:36 PM
8

Do you not see the "I hate men" style messaging and how big a part it's become of, for example, contemporary Gen Z 'girlbossing'? I've seen "proud man hater" in so many le quirky Twitter bios and Insta handles I've lost count if ever I had it. You can't be oblivious to this
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 10:33 PM
26

Oh and speaking of lesbianism: the idea that someone would literally change their sexual orientation by sheer force of their hatred for men is crazy to me. For what it's worth, the few times I've come across lesbian communities on Reddit, the misandry has been off the charts. Fully serious threads like "how are you decentering men in your lives?" and it's all women describing how they go out of their way to be standoffish if they're interacting with men and so on. Crazy stuff.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 09:40 PM
7

They clog the airwaves and waste space. The issues they're obsessed with require accurate commentary on intergender dynamics. And these people either aren't interested in that (Red Pill) or fall off the deep end into self-dehumanization (Black Pill).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 09:00 PM
45

Feminism embraces them all and will brook no criticism of them for the most part
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 08:14 PM
21

Their misogyny, actual or perceived, usually pales in comparison to misandry these days.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 08:13 PM
7

Does anyone have links to some of Straughan's more, idk what word to use, academic work? She had some videos from 2011 where she was talking in considerable granular detail about things like male disposability and I'd love to check out written/text forms of that (I prefer reading to watching videos).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/26 04:46 PM
2

Do you recognize this while being a feminist? Are you a feminist? Sorry if this sounds 'interrogate-y' but just asking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 09:58 PM
4

Horrendous cynicism but in political terms this is sadly something you can expect from mainstream feminism
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 09:28 PM
10

Indeed, the hypocrisy is quite frankly astonishing. I've always considered doing something of a 'first' in this particular context and making a sub or some sort of online space where examples of online/social media misandry and bioessentialism scoring major engagement among women are posted routinely so it can become a go-to source of evidence that this bigotry is indeed thriving - and largely unopposed - among women today.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 07:19 PM
4

I've seen like three in my whole life lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 06:57 PM
31

This comment is PERFECT. I feel so relieved every time I see another person point out just how close feminism is to fascist ideology. Thank you for posting this, truly. And before that, another part of your comment is very relatable to me today: >It's also bioessentialist in the sense that they're appealing to patriarchy theory - that basically anything negative that happens in society is because of society being controlled by men. Which I know isn't what patriarchy theory is supposed to mean ac…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/26 04:49 PM
1

No, it's BS they all believe because they log into their socials and are brainwashed by feminist hoaxes like the recent "62 million men rape academy". Pure hysteria
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:13 AM
1

>hundreds of millions of women who are raped every year Stop spewing nonsense
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:09 AM
1

Nah no they don't, but I suppose it's in character for feminists to make horseshit claims
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:08 AM
1

This is barely applicable to most females. Whereas most females ARE indeed living in the "boss bitch IHateMen tee hee women good men bad" culture of today.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:35 AM
3

Women created a hate men group that predates any men's group by decades and decades
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 10:52 PM
0

Redpill is horseshit and girls who ride that bandwagon are just grifters
/r/MensRights27/04/26 08:40 AM
2

I am saying that a person so much as willing to rape is a gulf apart from normal people and yes this bears out perfectly. Rapists are a very small portion of the population
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 07:36 AM
1

I have eyes and can observe
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 07:35 AM
9

>Why do you think so many women are cold and standoffish towards men? Feminist radicalization via the internet and 24/7 "you're perfect queen slayyy" ego-pumping from their friends, which is a staple feature of contemporary intra-female social dynamics
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 10:10 PM
1

Men are complaining about things which are objectively worse for men than women
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 10:08 PM
2

Absolutely psychotic. Shocking that this kind of talk is given a pass
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 10:06 PM
6

It's the bioessentialist bigotry innate to feminism behind them doing this. Feminists are genuinely brainwashed enough to think there's some sort of connection between a normal man on the one hand and every rapist that's ever existed on the other. Wish this shit got called out more.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 07:15 PM
0

The entire ritual and template of romance was codified in the late 10th or 11th century by French noblewomen who believed a contract similar to what exists between feudal lords and their serfs should also exist between men and the women they pursue. Men have loyally upheld that contract ever since, continuing to this day. One of the most obvious examples of which is the man bowing on one knee to propose to 'his superior'.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 10:38 PM
3

>"women farm men's attention" etc. It's reductive and unkind. It's objectively true though? Not to generalize but this is a BIG part of modern intergender dynamics. Pretending it isn't harms men and pedestalizes women. >But looking at my actual high schoolers, You belong to an older demographic so you likely don't see this as ubiquitously as younger cohorts do.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:42 PM
6

>There are no blue pill communities or podcasts. Because it's the mainstream
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 12:24 PM
1

Nobody spoke of a grand conspiracy. Quite the inverse, given that the privilege they're guarding is a status quo
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:23 AM
1

I did not say subversion is happening
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 10:10 PM
10

>First of all, why do women even need to provide advice for you on how to get them Do you realize the irony of saying this when you are of your own will taken up the Blue Pill Woman flair? Half the comments on this thread are seemingly denying the existence of the Blue Pill. A very odd reaction this topic's induced.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:24 PM
14

I think it's a subconsciously trained (by the culture they find themselves in) response. "You can't succeed in the modern woman-dominated, woman-centric dating scene? You must, err, be misogynistic or something!"
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:15 PM
1

I'll read up on this later because for now this detour from the topic at hand has proceeded quite excessively already.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:08 PM
2

I don't buy into the idea that it existed long before this unprecedented contemporary period. Yes I've seen the studies tossed here and there about how some neanderthal's remains show that 40% of men banged all the women or something. >there is no mention as to why only 20% of males (or less) throughout human history have ever passed on their genes How can something of this magnitude be claimed for all of mankind lol
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:07 PM
1

Learned from their surrounding environs - entirely artificially created or historically unprecedented environs. Nothing to do with biology or survival instinct.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:52 PM
4

Can you elaborate why you're turned off by this "attitude"?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:44 PM
-2

My usage of the word instinct is not a reference to biology. It isn't 'evopsych' for women to reactively defend a fairly recent/modern day privilege (internet/social media/dating apps era).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:39 PM
9

The generic "be nice and have emotional intelligence" package. You can hardly pretend that the bluepill isn't a thing. And while this may lie outside what the term 'women's dating advice' encompasses, I refer additionally to the ardent denials that're generic to bluepilled dating advice regarding the things that the pill people talk about (contemporary women's 'bad boys' obsession e.g.,); very 'damage control' and 'PR' type of behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:28 PM
0

Doesn't matter what it says on the brochure, it matters what it translates to in terms of actual discourse and actions. I'm sure the evilest ideologies have a nice intro and byline too. >“big net loss” Just gonna repeat what I said earlier in response to this. >by claiming it is you’re saying that women being oppressed is better since there’s no big net loss I didn't? "Big net loss" is not my words it's someone random being quoted here not me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 10:20 AM
1

No I am not, there is no combination of words I have said that could be interpreted that way. Classical feminist dishonesty
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:12 AM
102

Gen Z women are addicted to misandry
/r/MensRights19/04/26 09:46 PM
-1

No, it does not. "Big net loss" what word in there alludes to moral qualification? I am sure you are well aware of the fact that in matters of contemporary dating and intergender sexual dynamics, people like to throw around a lot of superficial numbers and stats-like terminologies. "Big net loss" here just means a reduction in men who succeed with women. It hasn't also gone and said that the answer to this is to reduce women's economic freedoms so they can be forced to be dependant on men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:29 PM
-1

No. You are being most visibly dishonest. This statement: "hypergamy, women's voting rights and their ability to choose a partner and leave him at will has been a big net loss" without any further elaboration or context provided is simply stating a fact without saying anything about whether the person thinks this is 'morally' right or wrong. Or whether these voting rights etc should be undone or not. Need that part to be clearly said to classify it as chudness.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:17 PM
-3

I'm ecstatic that someone finally pointed out the obvious re: orange rapist and Israel. But at the same time I do wish the Epstein crap would stop being used by obnoxious feminists to extract some kind of commentary on gender when those rapists were all elite rapists and the dynamics of their evil are simply not extrapolatable to the masses.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:10 PM
-3

>as you aren't any better than an Afghan warlord then This is such female supremacist nonsense it's laughable. Your bizarre gender-jingoism picked up from feminism is why you can't fathom that women can be prone to following shitty trends that entail crappy behaviour or views towards men. In reality it's a very human thing and it is 100% observable in the women of today but your feminist dogma doesn't let you see that.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 08:58 PM
9

Yeah the more privileged women are (e.g., Western women) the more misandrist their collective psyche tends to be. It's really an eyeopener
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 10:52 PM
7

I loathe feminism but would never agree with Fuentes' views on the female role in society. And I think even for him it's a stance he will probably let go of in some time because it makes such little sense
/r/MensRights17/04/26 10:10 PM
1

Western problems. In the West boys are encouraged to make their whole lives about women. Gynocentrism and all.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 09:45 PM
1

I would not project modern Western gender dynamics onto the rest of the world just yet
/r/MensRights10/04/26 09:46 AM
1

This is the most useful feminism related thing I've read in a long time and puts to words, with the proper historical reference, a picture that'd been forming in my mind as an assumption for a long time. Specifically this part: >Even without feminism women's rights would've equalised sooner or later naturally because women became a huge part of both the skilled and unskilled workforce and therefore started gaining the social power to start demanding equal treatment in the eyes of the law and the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/26 09:50 PM
2

Feminists are not all black and white. Feminism is unfortunately largely misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/26 09:43 PM
1

Plot twist: you don't need feminism to agree with giving women the same rights as men
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/26 09:35 PM
1

Less extreme? No, misandry I see is a lot more extreme. There's genuine "abort sons" and "get your son a vasectomy" movements in mainstream radical feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:47 AM
2

Then you live under a rock.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 07:39 AM
-9

I don't really think this one is beyond talking to she's quite a bit better informed than your typical feminist
/r/MensRights07/04/26 07:38 AM
9

Why? It's just one example btw
/r/MensRights07/04/26 07:38 AM
98

u/AmandaPea well this is one example of misandry being prevalent and quite a popular art form too (Sabrina Carpenter's music and her rhetoric). Doesn't matter if it's "tee hee" colored
/r/MensRights06/04/26 08:09 PM
9

They are an excuse for women's existing misandry to be vocalized louder. Existing misandry in turn coming from their superficial judgements of the men around them as belowpar in whatever way. "NORMALIZE CALLING BROKE MEN LOSERS!" "Omg why do short men have SO MUCH CONFIDENCE!" etc
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:22 PM
4

I don't like the dude, he seemed like a total stereotypical Murican boomer with his behaviour
/r/MensRights05/04/26 10:29 AM
7

Isn't this line of thought common among lesbians in general
/r/EverydayMisandry24/03/26 02:51 PM
1

Have you read Peter Wright's stuff on this topic?
/r/EverydayMisandry21/03/26 06:06 PM
10

It honestly boggles the mind how transparently hateful an ideology feminism is and yet so many women blindly take it as a universal truth
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/26 10:27 AM
1

Hate-based galvanization is always strong... But the bubble is prone to popping
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/26 10:35 PM
5

The problem is ideology. So much of what ideologies like feminism focus on is only understandable using good old common sense. Put ideological goggles on and things get foggy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/26 04:25 PM
1

Holy shit people actually say this shit?
/r/MensRights09/02/26 12:23 PM
2

He most certainly did traffic young boys
/r/MensRights09/02/26 07:08 AM
6

You forget to specify young BOYS alongside girls are you a feminist cuz erasing male suffering is kinda their thing
/r/MensRights08/02/26 07:16 PM
9

Mandatory reminder that Epstein was a pedophile cabal first and foremost and not some sort of gendered male on female or whatever abuse
/r/MensRights08/02/26 10:01 AM
0

You seem to have very weak comprehension skill. One of the main traits of the 'average guy' the whole discussion's about which makes him average is his 5'6-5'8 height lol. >Height standards are always the result of a combination of natural selection and sexual selection. No they fucking aren't. Natural selection would be based on rationality. It is literally irrational to consider a perfectly normal height like 5'6 or 5'8 which is in no way a health defect or health problem like say being overwe…
/r/MensRights05/02/26 10:29 AM
1

The tweet it is retweeting mentions height Contemporarily inflated height standards have nothing to with "natural selection" and everything to do with artificiality. So tired of this evopsych BS
/r/MensRights05/02/26 10:14 AM
6

A growing trend of advocating collective punishment of men and boys* I don't know why you fixate on this particular example
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/26 10:41 AM
5

She has a following and her ideas are gaining widespread tract, have been for a while now (not her ideas as in literally hers but the same line of thinking)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 10:03 PM
14

You do not. I've always kept my eyes open and the amount of women calling this shit out is disappointingly low + there is definitely no organized counter-movement to this kind of hatemongering from within feminism. If there is, please show me
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 10:03 PM
10

Brilliant comment, and the collective guilt concept which feminists as a group undoubtedly use toward men (like racists use toward the races they hate) is one of the most crucial aspects about feminism that needs to be highlighted across communities that are interested in exposing mainstream feminist hatemongering. I'd love for a sub like this to have a "feminist claiming collective guilt upon malekind" post of the day compilation type of thing, just to put it front and center that feminism toda…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 08:37 PM
3

Where are the feminists who have the requisite amount of free-thinking left sufficient to engage communities like this, when stuff like this gets posted as evidence of how hateful mainstream feminism is?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 08:19 PM
0

Good job @ everyone missing the point of OP's post entirely by discussing the Ukraine v Russia "who started it" angle lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 08:15 PM
11

There is no such thing as "men's transgressions toward women". Collective guilt shouldn't ever be levied against anyone (the way feminism does with men/males).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/26 08:35 AM
3

Any sentient being can develop unconditional love. But in romantic relationships I think this comes a lot slower compared to family/platonic relationships
/r/MensRights26/01/26 09:33 PM
14

This is precisely the type of attitude that we should NOT adopt. "Haha I'm safe in my teeny tiny little corner they can take over the whole world outside idc"
/r/MensRights22/01/26 10:06 AM
19

Nothing to 'fix' in gaming. Gamers have always been a lot more 'progressive' than people think too. Never been any kind of widespread gamer agitation against important female characters e.g., and for all feminists claim about those dirty misogynistic gamers you can dig into decades-old gaming franchises and find them filled with very important female leads/female characters
/r/MensRights22/01/26 10:01 AM
2

Have you guys ever wandered out of curiosity onto one of the lesbian subreddits? Holy hell is the misandry there insane and unhinged
/r/MensRights22/01/26 08:32 AM
2

u/Rude-Relation-8978 might be of interest to you
/r/MensRights20/01/26 03:48 PM
78

A BRILLIANT example of how patriarchy theory inevitably leads to virulent misandry
/r/MensRights20/01/26 01:35 PM
1

Conservativism is one of the most naive and shallow schools of thought ever
/r/MensRights19/01/26 09:14 AM
1

That is the feminist claim, that they can never substantiate and which flies in the face of what men see in their actual lived experiences. Men have no invisible hand of patriarchy propping them up. This is a delusion rooted in hatred and resentment
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/26 09:05 AM
12

UN Women yes the UN as a whole? No
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/26 08:23 AM
1

Good that you understood it then. I wish the mods did. They absolutely didn't, and thought the social justice aspect was subordinate to the dating aspect (in reality it was the inverse).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/26 02:28 PM
1

It was primarily about social justice not dating Jesus fuck why cant anyone see this
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/26 02:06 PM
1

Between men and modern Western* women
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/26 11:35 AM
24

God in Heaven I did not need to see this WTF
/r/MensRights16/01/26 06:30 PM
4

It's a hate cult bro. Not being reductive or edgy. It is, quite literally, a misandrist hate cult, even if it can oft be marketed as something else, something more noble. There's a reason mainline feminist stances on various issues skip past the plethora of uncontroversial, common sense explanations for said issue and beeline straight to the "men bad" or "men did this", "men made this problem to screw women over" explanations. Then call you a misogynist when you debunk them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/01/26 08:55 AM
1

The left needs to separate from feminism. It's about time
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/01/26 08:46 AM
3

News flash: the question of relationships becomes a progressively bigger and bigger part of a guy's life as he ages
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/01/26 05:56 PM
2

This is quite spectacularly inverse of the reality: it's the romance/relationships aspect of the 'male loneliness' phenomenon (call it male celibacy maybe idk) that gets swept under the rug by dishonest discourse. Because addressing it requires recognition of the extreme inflation in women's contemporary standards for physical appearance and other superficial attributes in men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/01/26 04:39 PM
17

More like the opposite. Women and feminists love dismissing male romantic need and going, just be single all your life bro
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/01/26 06:18 AM
13

Nah most women thinking they each deserve the most good looking man is collective delusion
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/01/26 06:05 AM
20

Seriously though your insertion of the Israeli Diaper Forces into that comment is probably the most embarrassing instance of "subtle" Hasbara I've seen lmao. The world's most cowardly child murdering 'army' being equated with MEN'S causes xD
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/26 07:21 PM
14

Why did you slip the IDF in there lmao
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/26 06:41 PM
98

Well DUH men are only single because they're horrible human beings tee hee Women's standards can't be too high tee hee Women are perfect ^__^
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/26 06:09 PM
11

Feminism is largely a man hating ideological cult
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/26 08:10 AM
2

You are only discredting yourself further with your flimsy non-excuses. Dating/romance are inextricably linked to the bodyshaming of men - does this mean you will just shut down any discussion of them that doesn't censor this crucial aspect out like feminists would do? LOL
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/26 11:27 AM
2

You literally did just that though?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/26 09:42 AM
4

I did and they didn't respond
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/26 08:03 PM
3

Who is Aileen Wuornos?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/26 07:02 PM
62

I made a great thread about the double standards on this topic and for some mysterious reason the mods of this sub didn't publish it. Let's allow men being bodyshamed to suffer in silence amirite ETA: Look at the mod's absolute joke of a response. A new Rule 10 policing dating discourse, but what do you do when dating is inevitably tied to a broader, non-dating specific issue? Just censor the whole thing? Female heightshaming of short men is obviously fucking linked to dating contexts so are you…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/26 07:00 AM
4

They fat shame each other
/r/MensRights05/01/26 10:49 PM
7

No. We mustn't engage in doomerism and just give up and say "we'll huddle into this one little corner of the internet and cede all the space to the ideological extremists"
/r/MensRights04/01/26 10:39 PM
17

Wonderfully observed. The regular hetero dude is literally subhuman to these people
/r/MensRights04/01/26 10:26 PM
9

True but this is not dating discourse. This is about the massive gap in empathy
/r/MensRights04/01/26 09:56 PM
3

Yeah but the OP text is talking specifically about women gaslighting short men
/r/MensRights04/01/26 09:50 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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