TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Kraskter Archive

View 1 post and 196 comments by Kraskter 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)
84

social mediaKraskter/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 10:45 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Holy whataboutism batman
/r/EverydayMisandry21/08/25 12:30 PM
-2

I think you might just be gay man.
/r/EverydayMisandry06/07/25 03:22 PM
1

Sure, if the murderer was in the area and seen with similar uncommon clothing they have cause to check you. Problem? That’s how it’s supposed to work, literally the ideal situation
/r/EverydayMisandry14/04/25 11:20 PM
1

Bullets are all serialized over here at least, and places that sell them have to keep track of who bought them. Also, why wouldn’t there be dna on a bullet you shoot someone with, they’d literally be covered in their dna. But that aside that’s irrelevant. The point is there’d be enough evidence to check if he’s guilty or potentially put him on trial. That’s what probable cause is.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/04/25 05:49 PM
1

You can track where a bullet was obtained, who obtained it, and what guns could have fired it. Or it could have been a knife, I never specified gun. And all of that to say that’s why we check. Probable cause isn’t an admission of guilt or proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Does that help you understand?
/r/EverydayMisandry14/04/25 05:42 PM
1

Okay let’s say someone was murdered. “This guy… exists, and lives nearby” is not probably cause, because it’s perfectly reasonable for him to have not done it. “This guy has the murder weapon/was seen entering and exiting the scene before and after the murder likely took place respectively” is probable cause. It’s probable enough the guy did it that it’s worth checking.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/04/25 05:23 PM
4

The study they’re referencing was retracted due to a data collection mistake that made the results count deaths as leaving. And the men died first frequently.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/04/25 02:00 PM
-16

Because the movement attracted bad people beyond its original purpose. Also, the idea of men’s activism is itself already controversial.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/04/25 08:06 PM
-6

This sub is off its rocker half the time. This is tangentially related in the sense of wanting to discuss how men aren’t overwhelmingly more abusive or whatever but not on its own…
/r/EverydayMisandry04/04/25 10:31 AM
1

In which part of the original post is it stated that the woman in question is uncomfortable? It's not, it's assumed, so At best half correct, but you contradict yourself here. -Men are, historically, more violent and aggressive women due to socialization, our culture, and biology. The abuse and aggression of men against women creates an obvious precedent that breeds fear and mistrust. If you aren't abusive or aggressive, you still need to understand this precedent because no woman who isn't your…
/r/EverydayMisandry02/04/25 02:06 PM
1

Men creating distance from women is an overcorrection to that. Which isn’t what you said, and is also itself a dumb statement. If someone is uncomfortable around you(whether it is your fault or the fault of people who look like you), the prevailing advice is to give space. To make a similar analogy to the one before, it would be like in response to knowing fighting a random person is a bad idea, the person takes the route of not fighting at all, and you claim both that fighting is a bad idea for…
/r/EverydayMisandry02/04/25 06:51 AM
1

Well yes, that’s a non-sequitur when you only respond to half a statement when the full statement changes the meaning of that half. And more armchair psychology, lovely. The statement you responded to complained about being always in the wrong not about not being able to be close to women. Considering that the post is a complaint about a woman saying that men keeping their distance isn isolating, the latter thought is genuinely idiotic to take away from it. You’d have to deliberately ignore half…
/r/EverydayMisandry02/04/25 06:03 AM
3

What a non-sequitur response. This would make sense in the context of someone complaining about rejection or about women being on guard around men, but it’s literally the exact opposite. Further, no part of that has anything to do with a lack of self reflection, why the fuck would that cause someone to complain about you not interacting with them? If you lacked self reflection the result would be the exact opposite. Which you correctly indentified in your comment, making the statement utterly st…
/r/EverydayMisandry01/04/25 11:43 AM
1

First off nobody is proclaiming with these examples that women do most rapes or are the main rapists of men, they are just saying women are capable or raping men so stop ignoring female perpetrators their male victims, they literally had to say that 10% is possible so literally admitting it. If a woman faces some sexism bs from other women like expectations to never repeat outfit I doubt they would be like 'Men don't do it to you so not a real problem' When counting the rape men experience as ra…
/r/EverydayMisandry10/03/25 11:09 PM
6

“Harder than I meant to” is not “I accidentally”, she meant to hit him. That’s on her.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/03/25 06:46 PM
6

I think they were suggesting that not being gay is toxic masculinity here rather than the other way around.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/01/25 11:39 AM
9

Obvious rage bait is obvious
/r/EverydayMisandry26/01/25 12:05 AM
1

Honestly(though not sure if this breaks the rules here to directly link the post), I agree with OOP here. The cousin’s behavior is pretty fuckin obvious if you read the post. The only way to conclude different is if you assume OOP is lying about the context given, and that’s a pretty minor reaction honestly.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/01/25 01:08 AM
10

The comments under that first post are golden. Disgusting but expected.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/01/25 06:31 PM
3

No, they answered your question while clarifying their original point. They’re wrong, but that’s being factually incorrect rather than moving the goalpost.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/01/25 04:16 PM
3

Why yes, anyone being worse negates the issues a group does have! Surely.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/12/24 08:25 AM
5

Wtf is this hellhole of a country
/r/EverydayMisandry27/12/24 06:00 PM
6

These are such comically out of touch responses that it’s hilarious
/r/EverydayMisandry26/12/24 05:23 AM
1

By saying they hate being lonely and asking what they’re doing “wrong”, take posts from r/venting as an example.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:15 PM
5

It requires a certain degree of intelligence to be able to parse and address what someone says logically. They lack that.
/r/EverydayMisandry20/12/24 02:07 PM
64

“My 13 year old was violently attacked by a classmate and did nothing because said classmate was a girl and I taught him to and my concern was with not being good enough in the future. He was raped when he was 4, so he should think like I want him to.” Jesus fucking christ, what the actual hell????
/r/EverydayMisandry19/12/24 05:49 PM
2

I see people to this day use the original. Wild work
/r/EverydayMisandry17/12/24 02:56 PM
1

https://voiceformenindia.com/women-rights-activists-threaten-dharna-over-rajasthan-state-commission-for-womens-order-to-prosecute-all-who-file-false-rape-cases/ This?
/r/EverydayMisandry12/12/24 11:11 PM
16

Well no, the guys there would get bullied relentlessly by other guys.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/12/24 10:56 PM
1

No, don’t discredit them too much. Sometimes they’re just really into self flagellation.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/24 01:37 PM
1

I mean arguably a new writer should get feedback from other writers. An experienced writer just needs taste stuff from an individual reader because they have the fundamentals down from other readers or writers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 01:57 PM
15

I pity them tbh. Clearly something went majorly wrong in each of their lives for them to resort to self flagellation to fix it
/r/EverydayMisandry06/12/24 04:13 AM
8

I’m sorry that happened to you… fucking infuriating.
/r/EverydayMisandry06/12/24 04:06 AM
1

Yeah I don’t disagree with that. Assuming 100% of accusations not proven false are proven true is even worse than assuming they’re all false when not proven true.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/12/24 11:51 AM
1

I disagree on the front that it’s less likely for people(especially when it’s a stranger) to single out some random guy and lie about them committing rape than for it to be true that the guy committed. You would expect the remainder to be weighted towards being true rather than false as a result, it’s just a particularly difficult crime to prove.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/12/24 11:36 AM
2

Incorrect in the minds of most people. It would be right to kill someone who will kill more people if you don’t, or who in a less realistic scenario is threatening the world or something. Same with if it was in response to something worse. This only really applies to killing someone though.
/r/EverydayMisandry29/11/24 05:14 PM
0

No, I agree with this actually. In a story death and killing can have a compelling purpose, and in real life it can be moral. Neither is really true of rape.
/r/EverydayMisandry29/11/24 02:30 PM
4

No, it’s honestly debateable. The scars will be permanent either way, just one is a permanent loss of all experiences in general(or even better if you’re religious or something and believe in an afterlife) and the other is permanent psychological trauma. That said I have people around me that would rather I still be here so I’m with you but not for that reason.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/11/24 09:50 PM
2

The thing is subreddits like this usually die as soon as they go into transphobia territory consistently. Being this unapologetic about it is even more of a death sentence. Just report and move on.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/11/24 07:57 PM
36

So… men are nothing but a resource, but people who aren’t them who are seen as more than a mere resource in this instance… are the real victims?
/r/EverydayMisandry23/11/24 09:09 PM
5

Not really. The first is only by a definition which excludes women as perpetrators. Else, it’s nearly 50/50 somehow, which is wild as shit.)
/r/EverydayMisandry20/11/24 06:14 PM
14

Honestly fucking moronic. Yeah, so? Most men unshockingly are not aware of their friends, if they are predatory, being predatory. If you tell them with no evidence, not even just another eye witness, no shit they won’t believe a stranger over their friend immediately, 99% of people wouldn’t either, the people who say this shit wouldn’t if one of their girlfriends were accused by a guy. Is that because they hate male victims or find rape fine? If so they defeat their own point and if not, they al…
/r/EverydayMisandry19/11/24 11:00 PM
0

Not really. Among our current generation, sure, maybe, but among older generations prejudice is beyond common. Predjudice against women is just called misogyny, not really a rejectable term. And by statistics you can find a small pay gap unaccounted for by job choice and work ethic
/r/EverydayMisandry17/11/24 02:21 PM
3

Some, yes, though I think the explanations and effects proposed are wrong. We do have a “rape culture” in the sense that most people have a view that “minor” contact SV doesn’t matter, but not really anymore in that anyone thinks rape isn’t abhorrent. The gender pay gap exists in that some bosses are misogynistic inevitably, thus will view women as less qualified and pay less, and future bosses will pay based on that previous reduced pay, but these future bosses aren’t really doing this because …
/r/EverydayMisandry16/11/24 04:57 AM
3

Fight back… how? If you’re strapped to a bomb or “fighting back” against a government that has no issue physically slaughtering you because you’re… one fucking guy, what choice do you have? What a fucking moronic take.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 03:19 PM
5

I half agree. A foul statement for a foul statement is fine generally speaking.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 03:11 PM
1

…I said that in my second paragraph?
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 11:48 AM
-4

Looking at this, it looks like you’re both talking past eachother. These two statements aren’t even mutually exclusive. There are in fact a number of men who are disabled(mentally or physically) thus need caretakers. This says literally nothing about men who aren’t disabled and don’t have or need caretakers. I would argue it’s more misandristic if it’s going from that angle, that being unable to take care of yourself as a man makes you useless, because virtually no one would have that opinion of…
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 10:18 PM
3

Okay, so any given conflict a woman starts in any capacity, we should send exclusively women to fight in? Gotcha. Oh, and they should be forced to fight too. Fyi that would include this war too. No man rules alone.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 01:30 PM
11

So he was just forced to take up to 25 years, or die?
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 01:22 PM
9

After a certain point of abhorrence being a joke isn’t really a defense anymore. This is there.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 01:16 PM
9

…Brother… I mean like I respect the point but that’s diabolical work.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 01:16 PM
1

No, that last one was being sarcastic I think.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 12:31 PM
12

No. Because any sort of rhetorical skill is lost on them.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 12:30 PM
1

If I recall, his point was that often conversations about real issues are never really solution based, only grievance based.
/r/MensRights10/11/24 03:53 AM
1

Not really. Why would you want to have any sort of relationship with such people anyway?
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 09:37 PM
13

To be honest she does realize she’s not going to change anyone’s mind talking this way, right? Say this was true, that rather than actually being alienated and ignored, men were just “not being coddled” Why yes, surely this will change our minds.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 05:47 PM
0

…A supporter of the movement? She could, and likely otherwise is, a misandrist on some level for being in that sub, but this post is a terrible example.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 02:33 PM
2

That’s cool and all, but then there would be no need to use the post.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 02:32 PM
1

Considering layoffs are already happening and prices are already going up to prepare for such policies now, I don’t think it matters what he does later. Ultimately the economy just isn’t really the reason. Little change that is good is much better than slightly larger change that is bad for the vast majority. There is no real success at this point for trump’s plan, buisinesses will just raise prices instead of increasing domestic production a lot of the time. The reason Kamala lost is because he…
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 03:44 AM
-2

I kind of agree with that logic? But also I’m more used to the female separatist sub, and this is a hell of a lot more tame. She even feels bad about cutting off her dad for this. That’s the opposite of misandry, at least by the content of the post alone.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 01:04 AM
5

Exaggeration, sure, but if I say “black people have been oppressed forever” I’m not implying nor saying that the issues non-black people face are less important. Same here. Honestly I would have expected something way worse out of a 4b subreddit so this is a pleasant surprise.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 01:02 AM
7

Oh well? Honestly a difference that stark in opinion causing her to cut her father out of her life isn’t misandry.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 12:56 AM
6

Actually fucking vile people.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 12:55 AM
1

A change which would worsen those issues? As opposed to policies which would actively combat them? At best looking into it is a decision born from ignorance, and at worst an excuse. Understandable but ultimately illogical.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/24 12:51 AM
6

Economically kamala was the better candidate for most people. Her policies boiled down to “lower taxes for most people but tax the exceedingly wealthy more” Trumps were “tax the exceedingly wealthy even less and put in place a ton of tariffs to drive up domestic production” So… the latter is going make things vastly more expensive for most people than kamala’s policies would, while doing little to help. In what universe is the latter better from a purely economic standpoint?
/r/EverydayMisandry08/11/24 12:54 PM
7

I feel like I’m going insane. Like yes, the left sucks balls at messaging to men, but they still hurt less men than maga would. How is this even an argument that this sub is having?
/r/EverydayMisandry07/11/24 11:22 PM
6

Better
/r/EverydayMisandry01/11/24 06:11 PM
7

No, tragedy can also refer to bad things happening at the hands of bad people. Blunting the blow is blatantly idiotic, but not because they called it a tragedy, but because they neglected to call it what it is, a woman committing a murder-suicide on her own children. There’s nothing tragic for her, just for her children.
/r/EverydayMisandry01/11/24 06:11 PM
7

I remember talking to whoever this was. To think she’s still spewing the same already disproven bullshit… Edit: No, just realized these are older than I thought. After I spoke to em I think.
/r/EverydayMisandry27/10/24 07:24 PM
29

…Right, hatred and discrimination against men and boys as a term is… made up. The sebrenica massacre and wider bosnian massacre of course just didn’t happen. The ukrainian war, which, by necessity or not, forced the vast majority of ukrainian men unwillingly into the forefront of the war, killing tens of thousands(and that’s just the soldiers, not the men taken from their families because they could not leave who died in countless civillian bombings) The rwandan genocide just didn’t fuckin happe…
/r/EverydayMisandry22/10/24 02:21 PM
7

The monkeys paw shall unfurl
/r/EverydayMisandry12/10/24 05:04 PM
2

Even then, no, as a dog isn’t deathly afraid of all humans(they don’t need to be) but plenty of other animals are. The base instincts become fundamentally different too, as species are pressured by different external factors. Because shockingly we don’t differentiate between animals for no reason.
/r/EverydayMisandry03/10/24 06:20 PM
7

Yeah, so can a dog fly? It’s an animal just like a bird is. Should said dog try to? Of course not, because different animals have different characteristics, so trying to act as other animals do(under different circumstances no less), or appealing to their actions is an illogical thing to do.
/r/EverydayMisandry03/10/24 03:37 PM
1

Japan and South Korea require the father to sign off on an abortion, because he has a legally recognized contribution to the creation of children, and so has legal say in his offspring that is not superceded by other parties. That is actual equality under the law. This you? You definitely did bud. You can call whatever you want an emotional outburst, but it kinda looks pathetic to be that willfully wrong. That, and the projecting, the adhom in your comment is telling, and the strawmen too > You …
/r/EverydayMisandry02/10/24 06:53 PM
1

I think you need to reread my post, you assumed the opposite result was the result of the opposite thought process, which it isn’t. Okay, then let’s make that legal appeal. I don’t mind, but you didn’t make a legal argument here anyway, you went to other place’s law codes. That doesn’t hold water as legal precedent for anywhere that doesn’t operate like that. Until the child is born(or really second to third trimester) it isn’t legally recognized as human, firstly, cause it isn’t conscious. Thus…
/r/EverydayMisandry02/10/24 10:42 AM
-2

No, what? It’s a very simple principle which most of our society works on. We find it okay for something to happen only when both parties consent to being part of it. One consenting and one not isn’t okay. For example, a sanctioned boxing match where only one boxer wants to fight isn’t okay, that’s just assault. The reason an abortion is fine isn’t because “the mother has all the rights, the father has none” or “the father isn’t valuable” it’s as simple as we as a society find it abhorrent to fo…
/r/EverydayMisandry02/10/24 05:42 AM
2

I don’t even disagree with you, I have feminist friends and colleagues outside of reddit who aren’t… this bad. But ultimately at least online there is a complete and utter lack of any suitable response whatsoever to anything like this. If silence is complicity then the movement is absolutely complicit to radical people like this.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/10/24 02:29 AM
4

Because women physically carry the child. Now, should a man be forced into fatherhood without his own consent? Of course not, but a woman being allowed to opt out of an unwanted pregnancy is perfectly just, as much so as a man being allowed to opt out of fatherhood.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/10/24 02:21 AM
24

Deadass. Like wasn’t it just the other day that a man was falsely accused and almost convicted purely because he was black and she knew that? Mfs be out of touch with reality atp.
/r/EverydayMisandry29/09/24 08:08 PM
3

Genuinely what the actual fuck is she smoking? I rarely get angry at the audacity of these people, like, genuinely angry, but this woman genuinely has the audacity to look at all the discrimination we face, from descrimination from our own governments to having lesser job opportunities and being stuck at a base with far less on average to being gunned down in the streets by our own civil protectors, and call it FUCKING MICRO-AGGRESSION AT WORST?????? She’s projecting, she fucking has to be, ther…
/r/EverydayMisandry27/09/24 04:49 AM
105

“Your kind does” “Omg I meant to be misandrist, not racist!” Bro what
/r/EverydayMisandry24/09/24 04:54 PM
1

Not really. Venting about consistent bad behavior someone noticed with younger people in general doesn’t automatically include hatred or predjudice outright, and certainly doesn’t in context. If she said something like “I see this therefore boys are all so disgusting, the respectful ones are probably just waiting” etc. etc. then sure but she didn’t. Watering down the definition we use just serves to make it useless and ignorable.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/09/24 04:51 PM
12

I wonder if a lot of these tactics for these people are for coping mechanisms rather than out of genuine belief it’ll work. Like the key weapon thing, that’s just not really working if your attacker isn’t a cripple, most likely just going to result in further injuries, but are they so terrified that anything, even something that unlikely to work, feels necessary at all times? Feels like it’d help however little? (Seriously get a lanyard or something at least).
/r/EverydayMisandry24/09/24 01:16 PM
7

You shouldn’t include subreddits in posts here. That, and honestly this isn’t that bad, nor really misandry.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/09/24 01:07 PM
3

What the hell? That shit is real? That’s… huh? How would that have gone anywhere?
/r/EverydayMisandry19/09/24 05:07 PM
3

Brother is delusional
/r/EverydayMisandry18/09/24 09:36 PM
24

Unsurprising given the community tbh
/r/EverydayMisandry17/09/24 05:47 PM
14

We kinda know this already, but it doesn’t make the statement better nor excuse it. If a man only ever saw misogyny mentioned as a whataboutism to his own issues, which we see here often, does that make him saying misogyny isn’t real right? Understandable, sure, but right? Hell the fuck no. This logic extends to any other kind of hate, the only purpose of saying things like that is to excuse such hatred and predjudice. It’s wrong no matter what. Even this post you’re sharing here is a good examp…
/r/EverydayMisandry13/09/24 02:16 PM
5

Thing is a girl was a perpetrator here. One of the few times they can be charged with rape in a lot of cases.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 09:35 PM
5

Genuinely vile shit not gonna lie. They’re too far gone. They’ll take one-off stories of which there are many then use that to direct their behavior towards unrelated likely completely innocent children.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 05:06 PM
4

I saw your reply, and I invite such conversation. Not to villainize, but to discuss why we disagree with such so vehemently. u/comfortable-wish-192 Fact of the matter is regardless of circumstance if a person fails to obtain enthusiastic, knowing, conscious, and capable consent beforehand or ignores the revoking of such consent during, that person has committed rape(or “made to penetrate” because the legal system is perfectly blind and just). Full stop. No, a physiological reaction is not consen…
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 01:27 PM
2

Ah, good point… not sure what we can do about it now then.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 12:38 PM
13

Those people are just… sad. There’s nothing to be angry at. It’s like a crackhead yelling slurs at you. They’re too far gone to be worth caring about.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 06:08 AM
1

One thing I’ve noticed is that this happens a lot regardless of hate. Reddit lets some hateful shit slide, then other hateful shit go through perfectly fine, seemingly at random. I’m betting it depends purely on what admin is going through the post.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 06:03 AM
9

There’s no fucking way you’re being a rape apologist right now. No, 80 pounds extra(if even) don’t matter if you’re drugged or otherwise incapacitated, and they certainly don’t matter in situations where physically fighting back isn’t an option. No, saying “no” does not work in such situations. We know it doesn’t because that shit happens in utterly terrifying numbers.) Yes, the psychological wounds are similar if not the same. Let’s not pretend that rape isn’t rape.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 05:56 AM
1

I suppose, but in exchange less people will adopt those ideas and be further radicalized by them since it’s not a public sub.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/09/24 05:24 AM
1

That sub went private? Let’s fucking go, big W
/r/EverydayMisandry10/09/24 09:09 PM
9

What the fuck? How do you even begin to rationalize that???
/r/EverydayMisandry10/09/24 12:39 AM
28

Look, I don’t even necessarily disagree, we don’t do much to help these otherwise maybe saveable boys and men to not end up like this, and we certainly don’t do enough to stop those we can’t help, but… You don’t really see Gunwoman Because they’re called gunman. Gun/Human. 💀💀💀
/r/EverydayMisandry07/09/24 02:19 AM
3

This is sort of true, but for the longest TERF views were just normal mainstream feminist views, for instance. They caught on for a reason. It would be fallicious to say “all” but certainly not so to say “the ones we see doing stuff a lot of the time.”
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 10:07 AM
12

Yikes the hell is that place?
/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 06:13 PM
17

Respect No hatred, bigotry, assholery, misogyny, misandry, transphobia, homophobia, racism or otherwise disrespectful commentary. Please follow reddiquette. Totally enforced though, trust trust, that sub could never be misandrist(according to its mods and users)
/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 03:20 PM
5

I’ve never heard of this man, what the fuck????
/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 03:07 PM
3

Maybe?
/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 03:05 PM
17

Not allowed to say but it has an X in the name
/r/EverydayMisandry03/09/24 12:10 PM
14

Yeah, but one of these is a safer concern to sidestep. Put simply, if someone wants you not to do something, it often has social, legal, and moral consequences if you do that thing. It someone wants you(not needs, but wants) to do something, the social, legal, and moral consequences are on them if they pressure you into it. It’s that shrimple.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/09/24 08:36 PM
3

FELLAAAAS IS IT MISOGYNISTIC TO APPRECIATE WOMEN!?
/r/EverydayMisandry02/09/24 01:15 AM
2

I never said it was. The study compared modern societies with other modern societies. If gender roles were the problem, a society 70 or 100 years ago, that had the strictest gender roles possible would have more men committing suicide, and modern society with laxed gender roles would have less men committing suicide, however the complete opposite has been happening. Not necessarily. Multiple things can contribute to suicide rates, such as access to methods to actually kill one’s self. Regardless…
/r/EverydayMisandry01/09/24 05:55 PM
4

Then why, statistically, would suicide rates consistently rise the more societies strictly enforce those roles? This take just isn’t accurate to our research on the subject. Before the industrial revolution, the nuclear family didn’t even exist really as a concept, and around that time the suicide rate increased rather than decreasing. Where are you pulling the information that it’s purely relationship troubles, if any, that are causing men to commit suicide? And as far as I can find there’s no …
/r/EverydayMisandry01/09/24 05:01 AM
3

The right isn’t trying to “improve men’s image” you confused the majority of the right wing with male advocacy with the right, the right has more vested interest in making sure men are continually cogs in the machine. And fun fact, the same harmful (yes they directly correlate with higher suicide rates) gender roles(being a protector, provider, and useful to your corporate overlords) are pedaled by both the right and left. Only difference is the left is more socially mean, whereas the right push…
/r/EverydayMisandry01/09/24 03:39 AM
4

Because a lot of their “embracing masculinity” comes at the cost of directly increasing suicide rates and descriminating against men intentionally(men having to go to war when drafted or take heavy punishment for not registering is an invention of mostly the right, not the left, and men not being counted as rape victims half the world over is both in equal parts).
/r/EverydayMisandry01/09/24 12:45 AM
11

Nah they’re both about the same in misandry(against most men), two sides of the same coin there really. The left just prioritizes other groups more.
/r/EverydayMisandry31/08/24 07:13 PM
11

The right is (And has always been) just as misandristic as the left if not more. Pulling yourselves up by your bootstraps, masculine gender roles, etc. are things the right supports. They just happen to hate everything other than rich men not gonna lie.
/r/EverydayMisandry31/08/24 07:07 PM
3

Several have been tbf. I was just commenting on why the original commenter would say that.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/08/24 07:20 PM
9

You. That’s why it would be banned.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/08/24 07:14 PM
17

Straight people aren’t a “protected group” as men aren’t here on Reddit.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/08/24 07:10 PM
5

The rest of the paragraph doesn’t sound like a desire to, so calling it misandry + androphobia is more accurate than just androphobia
/r/EverydayMisandry30/08/24 07:02 PM
4

sweden Edit: other link was dead, mb
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/08/24 05:02 PM
4

I feel like india hates everyone, man or woman.
/r/EverydayMisandry29/08/24 01:20 PM
2

Blur the username and sub. This is like the average r/foreveralonewomen post. This doesn’t seem bad.
/r/EverydayMisandry29/08/24 12:44 PM
4

I don’t think this post is misandry. It might have been posted by a misandrist, but the contents of the post don’t look bad tbh. Is the description of the game inaccurate or something?
/r/EverydayMisandry29/08/24 12:40 PM
5

When will the left learn that the first step toward toxic conservatism is always a push, never a pull. They can’t get it. To them, they’ve done nothing wrong. “Women saying mean things on the internet can’t possibly make a good(read: properly subservient) man go on and be hateful.” They say words have consequences but then deny their own consequences for their words.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/24 11:49 AM
2

Ultimately a lot of the left is simply different in purpose from spaces like this. Not bad perse, after all fighting for the rights and protection of women is naught but nobel(…80% of the time), just unchecked and blind to anything else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/24 11:42 AM
1

like, y'all sought this shit out? This suffering(however large or small) is all we’ve ever known methinks. Anything else would be alien and feel off to us. Glad that’s not the case for you, though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/24 11:37 AM
60

“1 in 4 suicides are women”
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/24 11:33 AM
1

I dunno… as a black man(I’m gonna mention a lot of shit that affects all men, not just us, disproportionately) Unconditional(both in law and practice) voting rights, equal access to scholarships, welfare programs, domestic violence shelters, and legal reproductive rights, as well as bodily autonomy from birth(circumcision). Add in equal access to effective mental health professionals and equal sentencing for the same crimes, as well as the ability to more consistently avoid being shot by police.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/24 11:12 AM
2

I think ya’ll might be talking past eachother. Thunderjaw(I think) agrees with you that the feminists who insist it’s about men are to be ignored, and their covering is to be ignored too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/24 09:33 PM
17

At least over here radical feminists are a lot more common(from the sounds of it) and very rarely even considered radical. This is the case in a lot of other places too. The “fem” part of “feminist” stuck shockingly hard when people protested against gender neutral rape laws in India, Israel, and Nepal, and when they repealed affirmative action for university applications when it started benefitting men instead. That part’s stuck since its inception really. Now, obviously individual feminists or…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/24 09:29 PM
0

I would argue that if a movement in practice is constantly “internally dominated” by things against the definition of the movement, the definition simply isn’t accurate. Which is my thing, it isn’t. Never has been. For a new directive I think you’d need a new movement as most of the people following the current one in practice will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, and likely would see no reason to change names.
/r/MensRights28/08/24 05:17 PM
7

Jesus christ this is kinda horrific.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/08/24 03:56 PM
0

American values dictated that all men were created equal. That same country enslaved african men extensively for over two centuries, not counting the involvement of older countries. In practice they did not focus on egalitarianism and still do not is my point. The name stuck. Also, the equal pay movement, while valid, is built to ignore factors like hours worked(side note America fuckin sucks on this front holy shit-). Thus, if the descriminatory part were completely eradicated, the movement wou…
/r/MensRights28/08/24 03:54 PM
1

“Blacks” Regardless, incorrect. Slave owners argued that if given the chance slaves could be dangerous, thus they should never be given the chance. Segregationists were similar. There’s a very obvious reason we don’t think like that anymore. If we say that women abuse men as much as men abuse women you still can't get past the fact that men commit 95% of murders and nearly 100% of rapes. more like 85%) and 60-50%.) But either way that’s only a tiny, tiny, (less than a) percentage of all men in t…
/r/MensRights28/08/24 02:57 PM
-1

That’s a beyond favorable interpretation of her statement not gonna lie. Especially considering her other statements around the same time. Black women are shockingly also black after all. That said, I don’t even have to look to actually influential feminists, like Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s “We [women] are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men” or the White Feather campaign. All you have to do is look to the declaration of sentiments. It’s not for men, why would it be? They had no interest in men’…
/r/MensRights28/08/24 02:37 PM
3

That’s the same argument the Nazis used for their hatred. That confederate leaders used for theirs. The issue is you cannot define individuals that way, and in this case it’s rare for strangers regardless, rare enough that this mindset doesn’t really make sense unless someone gives you a reason to apply it to them, which applies regardless of the person’s race, sex, or any other distinguishing characteristic.
/r/MensRights28/08/24 01:11 PM
1

The core tenet of feminism is equality. …through specifically the empowerment of women. At the start, specifically white women at that. For example, the leader of the suffragette movement, Susan B Anthony, stated this word for word during a meeting with an abolitionist. I will cut off this right arm of mine before I will ever work or demand the ballot for the Negro and not the woman. Or this cartoon from the suffragette movement as well. The women’s supremacy isn’t very hard to find in modern or…
/r/MensRights28/08/24 12:58 PM
2

That’s exactly why this is a dumb point. Alternatively you could do the same as the nazis and apply the same exact point but to jewish people and word it as “poisonous mushrooms” instead of m&ms.
/r/MensRights28/08/24 12:40 PM
2

To be frank this is literally a nazi propaganda point. Like literally nearly word for word. https://echoesandreflections.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/02-02-08_Student-Handout_NaziPropaganda-Examples.pdf I wouldn’t use it tbh. It’s bad on principle. It can also be applied to any group whatsoever, whenever I meet a human period I don’t have the telepathy to tell if they’re dangerous or not. Does that mean I assume they are? Of course not.
/r/MensRights28/08/24 12:22 PM
11

This is half true, but men also tend to be more willing to take risks for the hell of it even independent of depression. Seemingly small risks, but still risks. Probably not significant enough to result in a much lower life expectancy alone though.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/08/24 12:15 PM
10

I think I need to internalize this more. People aren’t inherently bad, just in bad situations or hurt, most of the time.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/08/24 10:18 AM
7

You should blur out the username.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/08/24 12:33 AM
-5

I mean there are rights that men don’t have that women do, and vice versa. For women, the right to physical reproductive bodily autonomy in several places, the right to usable safety equipment(e.g air bags don’t use female test dummies, which results in a higher rate of injury for women), the right to usable medical equipment(e.g artificial hearts are sized for men, which means they fit far fewer women). This is just legal rights of course, workplace descrimination is still a thing irrespective …
/r/MensRights27/08/24 10:45 AM
17

Simple. These pieces of human garbage are heavily underreported. Lots of people have this immensely fucked up perception that while an adult man preying on a minor is horrific(as it should be), an adult woman doing the same is(if it’s a boy) the boy “getting lucky” or (if it’s a girl) simply not a thing. Kids are brought into these same mindsets by the people around them. Their friends, social media, adults, etc. To the point that a boy being raped by a teacher might rationalize it as a good thi…
/r/MensRights26/08/24 06:55 PM
1

I mean the thing is there’s things that are “obviously off” with actual cases too(like the victim not remembering details, or switching dates or details around), because the trauma makes the brain want to forget. At least in the US, we kinda understand that much, and Kavanaugh was found civilly liable for that reason, because the testimony lined up enough. Which is the thing. Same in this case, out of necessity, the barrier to getting a conviction is not “having nothing ‘fishy’ about the case” i…
/r/EverydayMisandry25/08/24 03:37 PM
18

A. Distancing yourself doesn’t hurt anyone either. To be frank when john beats his wife unless I at least indirectly help him, “Oh, but john’s a good man, he’d never do that”, I’ve done jack shit. I know not of his abuse nor support it in any way. You could say the police do when they ignore the report(they won’t most of the time), or I would if I ignored John’s wife telling me of his abuse, but otherwise I’ve done nothing and it is in fact factually correct to say “I’m not really part of this i…
/r/EverydayMisandry25/08/24 12:55 AM
6

Yeah no problem :). I find that especially in cases like this most people aren’t being malicious or even stupid when they say disagreeable things. Often they’re either coming off wrong or simply have a different experience. That, and like you said people’s views are never changed when you simply call them dumb and nothing else. The poster in particular I think was referring to a post on a certain subreddit that said what he was mocking, that false accusations affect so few men that you’re more l…
/r/EverydayMisandry25/08/24 12:12 AM
7

I remember that post lmao.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 10:39 PM
9

I’m get your overall point and mostly agree, it’s ridiculously bad in some countries, to the point I remember a post on r/NoahGetTheBoat that showed a video of I think Indian(?) civilians unironically believing that rape was “on the woman, too”. Actually fucking disgusting. So I don’t disagree with your point, just your argument. A few per 100000 would be practically never. Yet that’s not even what statistics say. False allegations can happen even irrespective of police, and telling an entire fr…
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 10:38 PM
6

Sure, maybe, but that’s easier said than done, especially in a lot of areas of the US. In the south there’s a good chance you get a partially or significantly racist jury so you need proof that you’re not guilty anyway, and furthermore you’d be less likely convince such a jury regardless. And in a lot of other areas most people are more sympathetic towards women than black men, so in this case the “she’s just being racist” defense won’t work relative to most people thinking you’re frankly just l…
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 09:27 PM
12

As far as the justice system goes the race card practically doesn’t exist. It treats men in general more harshly but a ton of that is black men. You’re unironically fried less if you’re white and have the same defense.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 08:19 PM
5

Right, like, huh?????
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 08:18 PM
3

No no, you have to understand two X isn’t misandrist! They have a rule against that! /s
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 08:17 PM
5

Unless you’re a man. Then you do, of course.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 01:29 AM
6

Honestly I find that it’s simply people rationalizing an opposing viewpoint as not possibly ever right. They view these spaces as their enemy(even if we’re not) and are blind to their own faults for it(they have an enemy to take issue with, why would they do that to themselves?) Same dogmatic arguments of any spaces really. Kinda sad.
/r/EverydayMisandry24/08/24 01:27 AM
1

Mood
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:43 AM
1

Honestly I find that in most settings other groups specific to them would be more effective at addressing the issues most lgtbq men uniquely face. This isn’t to say their issues aren’t worth talking about, but just that that wouldn’t be the most effective place. I’m speaking to being a black man and being in a similar boat here. Like as an example I wouldn’t really expect a men’s advocacy movement to focus on issues specific to black people. That’s what movements like BLM are for. They’re more e…
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:42 AM
2

Yesn’t. As I said, the right won’t tell you “go kill yourself” or that you’re inherently bad for being a man(until they find out you’re a trans or gay(or black in some circles) man but I digress) Instead, they’ll do as I mentioned above. They still hate anyone who isn’t rich. Who hasn’t “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and stopped complaining like a pussy.” So like they still hate men, even cisgender straight white men, just not as much.
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:29 AM
1

True, you’re not wrong. At least for a very specific part of the left. The part I was referring to generally just thinks “Cisgender heterosexual man = bad”. And like I mentioned the right hates everyone.
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:22 AM
5

This is another example, if a little more subtle. Unless I’m completely misunderstanding of course, I’m mad tired. A lot of the left goes: “Shut up men, you’re not black(or at least they do in my experience before learning I’m black), a woman, trans, gay, or any other protected class, you don’t HAVE issues! Thus we get to bash on and discriminate against you!” Or basically a form of “shut up and take it like a man” The right does the exact same thing, just worded more like “Shut up and stop bein…
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:13 AM
8

The concept of double binds I notice are quite prevalent in our culture. If I parsed the meaning of this post correctly. two examples could be: A woman told “You should talk less” when she’s talkative will often be underestimated for talking less. A man told “You should express your feelings more” will often be shunned as weak, trauma dumping, or all manner of things for doing so.
/r/EverydayMisandry23/08/24 03:04 AM
11

It’s even worse than that. Some don’t even just not care about men’s issues. Some directly deny they exist. Like this interesting lady I found Same woman who said “Men’s issues don’t exist” outright said “Oh you should go vote feminists into office to fix your issues!” These people are genuinely dangerous
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/24 02:54 AM
8

That’s… kinda wild to think about.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/24 06:30 PM
3

Ah, my bad then. I thought the term just referred to the study of how ethnicities, sexuality, and gender relate to societal disadvantages, though in practice it often becomes like you said. Even so… maybe, but I see about equal focus on men and women as part of BLM in practice, if not a bit greater focus on men(like with George Floyd), rightfully so.. Should probably be moreso men, but you run into issues of the movement then having to deal with trying to not be shut down by feminism, or being c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/24 08:13 PM
2

I’m sorry but “this ethnicity gets hit with more police violence, we should fix that” isn’t really intersectionalism by definition. It’s just acknowledging a statistic. There is separating advocacy, even for black people, and patriachy theory, put simply. Hell feminism itself has racist roots, there’s definitely separating intersectionalism and patriachy theory. Edit: And if you mean in practice the most prolific members of the movement are black… how could their concern be from anything other t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/24 07:52 PM
1

Yeah, because however slight relative to discrimination against men in general, discrimination against black women by police does exist too and is prominent. Why would the movement shoot itself in the foot, make itself less sympathizable with, and ignore part of its issue by ignoring black women? That sounds incredibly inefficient and ineffective. Yet, even in doing so, no part of that mentions anything to do with patriarchy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/24 07:43 PM
2

BLM exists fine without intersectionalism, looking at police brutality rates for instance stands on its own. So I don’t think patriarchy is accurate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/24 06:17 PM
41

Creepy woman is creepy in an environment that enables her bs. Nothing new.
/r/EverydayMisandry20/08/24 12:37 AM
1

JK Rowling. Not verbatim(i think, she might have actually) but essentially.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/24 01:19 PM
1

Even if you view them as “men with issues(gender dysphoria)”, the view of “men can never be victims, only women” is so incredibly stupid that this statement still doesn’t make sense.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/24 12:47 PM
5

I mean people have hated and been predjudiced against other people since the beginning of human consciousness. That said, the premise is dumb. Being predjudiced is not a valid reaction to hatred. Being careful is, sure, you do you, but not predjudiced. It’s argument the nazis used to justify their hatred of jewish people, and white people in the US used to justify segregation. It’s fundamentally a bad point.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/24 12:37 PM
2

It’s also still wrong since they can be charged as accomplices, and they do.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/24 12:33 PM
3

I think this is the simple fact most people miss. Yes, that “mean comment” you made makes a boy who sees it go “Ah, you’re a loon, gotcha” and go support the exact opposite of your cause.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/08/24 12:30 PM
11

Simple. The current social climate has made it acceptable to deny such through fallacious arguments and it takes some of those people’s agency in being bad people, which makes them feel less like bad people. In other words, they can make their hatred acceptable so they do.
/r/EverydayMisandry17/08/24 01:57 PM
4

“But he was funny though” Would never be a valid thing to say in the context of talking about a man who sexually harassed someone, nor should it be. Nor would “But he was on camera, he wouldn’t actually do it.” I don’t see how they would be valid defenses here, kinda sad this person thinks like this. Though I do think the essay format was the wrong way to get this across, just makes people defensive.
/r/EverydayMisandry16/08/24 11:05 PM
1

I found the post, and christ that made me genuinely lose faith in people. Genuinely idiotic, toxic, and utterly lacking in basic self reflection.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/08/24 11:02 PM
1

Also even then the MTP defenition is less complete. For example, being forced to penetrate a toy is SA, not MTP.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/07/24 05:35 AM
1

The funniest thing is when you bring it up to them they act like it’s their moral responsibility to belittle male issues, since it “decenters” the conversation otherwise. After all, if you acknowledge men can be raped by women, you… apparently deny women can be raped by men? Or something, I dunno.
/r/EverydayMisandry28/07/24 05:32 AM
1

I mean to be fair both are legitimate concerns for guys, we just don’t really talk about the former. Not that it’s a contest, but still.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/24 10:51 AM
1

Then how do we know the questions they say they use are inaccurate to what they actually use? I don’t doubt them lying perse as a possibility but I can’t find evidence to support it, which I would love to honestly because it would be hilariously depressing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/24 03:49 AM
3

Probably because they’re not asking if it’s okay, they’re asking if it’s effective. It’s not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/24 12:24 AM
2

To be black and a man is to see both sides of this coin and know them. 13%/50% and all, the same paralleled stats for men’s violence of all kinds, never served as a means to vilify the black community, hell the idea itself is rightfully seen as racist. But when it’s men? All of that out the window. So many men’s issues wouldn’t fly if they were issues of an ethnic minority(at least in the US), or of women. And I know that for a fact because parallels can be made like that one to show it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/24 11:53 PM
1

Bit of an older post but I can’t find anything on this unless I’m missreading. https://www.ocadsv.org/sites/default/files/resource_pub/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf I don’t doubt it’s true, but I might be looking at the wrong thing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/24 11:07 PM
2

I’m actually curious about what questions they did use? I can’t find anything anywhere about what they actually used if not those questions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/24 10:57 PM
4

We worshiped the black Madonna and not Jesus. Meaning we worship the mother that made the Christ and not the Christ himself. I'm an atheist now so I'm saying this just as a factual representation of what I grew up with. What we are doing on the left comes from that culture which stems from black people. White people do not have a culture of exalting women, but rather idolizing. But in the black community black women are King. It's a quiet little secret that has never been addressed publicly outs…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/24 10:16 PM
2

Of course, but again, it wasn’t that simple. It would be more accurate to say people had different roles rather than women were oppressed, which would explain why men were similarly stuck in their roles too(you wouldn’t really find that if, again, they were exclusively oppressors oppressing another group.) The unfair part isn’t so much what those roles got as the roles being forced upon you of no fault of your own. After all, a man has to sign up for the draft to get the right to vote(prison tim…
/r/EverydayMisandry14/07/24 10:34 PM
2

And I don’t doubt that there were always some misandrists in the movement- I just don’t think that’s representative of the early waves (whereas modern feminism is filled with misandry, and that’s clearly representative when those in feminists who merely stick up for men get isolated and kicked out of these circles) Well, no, practically speaking it was misandrist since conception. Patriachy theory never really considered much nuance. The declaration of sentiments was based heavily in the idea th…
/r/EverydayMisandry14/07/24 07:47 PM
7

So a 7 year old clipchimp of a dumb 2nd wave, out of touch, old b!tch who hasn't been academically relevant for at least the last decade? Really? A radio clipping, if im not wrong, with a description like this Whose talking points are repeated verbatim by countless people to this day? Most notably by those trying to try a scale on “rape culture” and the like. To act like she isn’t impactful is just blatantly ignorant. But again, do you want other examples both old and new? Or are you simply goin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 08:34 AM
5

Mary P Koss, Leading Expert on Sexual Violence, or well, that whole blurb at the bottom tells you all you need to know. https://clyp.it/uckbtczn I could go on(if you would like) and name more examples, but A. the leading CSV expert in the US is plenty, and B. this isn’t exactly a “fringe” bad actor. This happens. To say it does doesn’t say the movement as a whole is worthless, but to never consider it would frankly be stupid.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 06:03 AM
7

What about not fully trusting the participants same movement that had male rape victims not legally count as rape victims for years makes this space not leftist exactly?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 05:32 AM
8

I mean maybe? Maybe not? As the commenter below me said, it’s not like the movement has a good track record.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 01:29 AM
36

It makes sense if they view men as an “other”. Obviously you won’t sympathize with those you see as the enemy to any degree. You won’t view the reactions of those you view that way as right under any circumstance, instead you’ll rationalize how perfectly reasonable reactions are actually fully malicious and wrong. It’s depressing to think about, but probably accurate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/07/24 10:08 AM
22

I find it a bit frustrating, there’s really no one to check these people to any degree. Reddit won’t. Their userbase won’t. No one here really can, at least in a meaningful way. They’re terrible but they can simply silence opposition.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/07/24 09:45 AM
73

These mods are genuinely terrible people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/07/24 09:18 AM
1

I’m curious, did you get the examples you were looking for? Edit: Also, side note, but your claim wasn’t logically sound to begin with. The claim you responded to was “reddit tolerates misandry far more than misogyny”. You responded “Here are a bunch of banned mysogynist subreddits” And then continued moving the goalposts when shown a bunch of commonly misandristic subreddits. Including the one this post is about. I dunno, that seems weird to me? One wouldn’t need to do that if their claim were …
/r/EverydayMisandry05/07/24 07:57 AM
1

At least there it would take a fair amount of work considering most leading experts only consider rape even traumatizing, thus worth considering serious, when you are penetrated. E.g mary P koss. https://clyp.it/uckbtczn
/r/MensRights03/07/24 06:40 AM
-2

Well yeah, sometimes. Enough? Hardly, but sometimes, like with Wade Wilson. Optimistic but there’s probably hope at least there.
/r/MensRights03/07/24 06:38 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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