TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Logos89 Archive

View 0 posts and 96 comments by Logos89 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
13

Same.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 11:25 PM
2

No, HIERARCHY is a position of power and authority. Hierarchy may or may not be OPPRESSIVE. You're an insane person. Most males do not have power and authority. This is factually incorrect on its face. . I'm done with this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 06:46 PM
7

You're using the word oppression way too lightly then. You've made a mockery of the idea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 12:48 PM
4

That's cool. Wanna hear about the invisible dragon living in my garage?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 12:47 PM
7

Stop. You're deflecting. ALL members of an oppressor class are called oppressors. You said that men are oppressors. This is binary, you either still agree with this statement and therefore I'm an oppressor in virtue of being a man, or you no longer agree with it, in which case there's no issue, but you have some internal unpacking to do. But you're not going to call me an oppressor in virtue of my immutable characteristics and then tell me that I can choose not to be oppressive. This statement i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 05:31 AM
7

"You’re as inherently evil in leftist or anarchist theory for being a man as you are for being an adult, a parent or apart of the global north" Wait, so parents OPPRESS their children? If that's where we're going with this, then Moorean Shifts are in order and this thing was off the rails before it began. "It’s not moralistic it’s an impersonal social structure" That's a copout. Slave owners oppressed their slaves, and they were evil for doing so, even though slavery was "an impersonal social st…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 05:26 AM
2

"I’m clear-sighted enough to see that objectively we live in a patriarchy." I'm gonna stop you riiiiiiiight there... Women can sense your self loathing before you even walk into the building. Calm down, figure out what things you can and can't take responsibility for (as far as evils in the world go). Pick a thing, and focus on it. I think your issue is probably charisma. Talk to a coach / therapist that specializes in interpersonal communication skills, because I guarantee that's what's getting…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 05:19 AM
5

"Is folks are telling you that you are inherently evil then they are no feminist of mine and are apart of the problem. Essentialistic and rigid beliefs don’t belong in the left" Oppressing other people is an act of evil. All oppressors oppress other people. Men are an oppressor class (your claim) All elements of an oppressor class are oppressors. C. Men are evil Your only out is to deny 3.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 04:54 AM
7

"You are a human being not an “oppressor”" You literally just said that men are from an oppressor class. All members of an oppressor class are called oppressors.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 04:51 AM
4

"This is the same thing woman do when they excuse their “misandry” because it was a response to misogyny and patriarchy, we don’t stoop that low" They don't need to excuse it. Culturally entrenched feminism celebrates it. "plenty of people care about men they are in positions of power, wealth authority and privilege and have their views given higher presidencies, there is a reason the term “male as default” exists it’s even in language," Apex fallacy. "but in irl there is still plenty of misogyn…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 04:49 AM
10

"Ooh, gotta choose the belt." "Nah, I always chose the wrench, 'cause fuck him." I'll be damned, that really does describe my politics!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 04:39 AM
8

"How is feminism a supremacist movement? I’m coming here in good faith give me proof?" I can give you two examples from my field (education). Half of me thinks this is a waste of my time, because no one who comes into a male advocate space uttering the word "patriarchy" can actually be in good faith, but against my better judgment - fuck it. Women are dominating men in every category in K-12 education except math. Is the Feminist response: A. We should help men do better in other categories whil…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/25 04:35 AM
16

Oh, you again. "Hi, I browse this sub semi-regularly." You do more than browse. "What I don't get is, it seems obvious to me that we live in a world where women are discriminated against." As you've said the last 3 posts you've made. "Based on what I've heard from women both online and in my personal life, the majority of women have faced harassment and/or violence at the hands of men." Sexism = power + prejudice and we're talking about systemic discrimination. See what I did there? "The majorit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/25 04:46 PM
14

With great power comes great responsibility. You're being blamed for things you had no power to change, thus you're not responsible for the outcomes. That's all it takes is to remind yourself every day that you're not responsible for the bad behavior of other people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/08/25 07:56 PM
1

Right, which is why the OP didn't actually find a contradiction.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/25 03:21 AM
16

I've been hearing "man up" on the left far more than the right recently.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/08/25 12:25 AM
19

Yeah the new feminist retort to get around this is: "It's not all men, but always a man".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/08/25 12:24 AM
4

In no western country whatsoever? Seems pretty convenient that your political position just so happens to never have power when it's time to take accountability. Almost like it's a rhetorical tactic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/08/25 04:07 PM
-1

"I’m sure most men have heard women say things like: “Girls are smarter, more mature, and less violent than guys.” Yet, often those same women also argue: “Society holds women to higher standards, while men get away with more because they’re expected to be dumb, gross, or careless.”" This works as a contradiction only if you assume intelligence is INNATE. But they assume that intelligence is socially constructed. So to reconcile these, they'd say: "Women are smarter than guys, because they have …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/08/25 03:00 AM
16

The causes to this are multifaceted: . More financial resources for women (due to Feminism) . Initial gen-ed requirements often being very anti male, resulting in men thinking the college environment is "not for them" (Feminism) . Men disproportionately needing to financially take care of family members, etc. (arguably vestiges of Patriarchy in which men are given familial responsibilities without the social resources to carry them out, unless the men got a woman pregnant and she can't work shor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/08/25 01:28 AM
15

The struggle is multidimensional, each part having different causes. You'd have to start with one in particular.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/08/25 01:10 AM
11

"That's actually not true though. The right has warped ideals about tradmasculinity such: "being man of the house", "willing to die for family", "serving your country", "protecting the women and children". Even the alt right (known for a bit of misogyny) is that same type of "man up, protect women and children, sacrifice yourself" type of people." You're leaving out half the story. The right says: You should be willing to die for your family, BUT you should be able to have a family (if not, some…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/08/25 11:19 PM
24

The vague unfalsifiable hypothesis anthropomorpized with male characteristics is the problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/08/25 10:47 PM
2

No, this is an edge case scenario. The point is how easy it is for a woman to relinquish all financial responsibility if that's what she wants to do. What men worry about is being financially strapped to a child without an equivalent way of relinquishing the responsibility because that's what's actually common.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 10:51 PM
3

Jesus, you don't know how to be anything other than pedantic. Blocked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 10:32 PM
3

Implicitly it was assumed to be court precedent for decades. If we want to be pedantic about this, it's trivial to reword my point: When abortion was IMPLICITLY law insofar as it was assumed court precedent, were people MORE susceptible to arguments in favor of paper abortion? No. So why should we believe that this would change if it were formally, rather than informally, codified into federal law?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 04:57 AM
2

Nope. Let's say a woman has a baby, and anonymously abandons it at a nearby fire station. She doesn't tell the father where she abandoned it, she can't be compelled (by law or otherwise) to tell him. Anonymous babies get abandoned all the time. He'd have to call every fire station, see about DNA testing every baby, and hope that his is still there to be tested and reunited with him, rather than processed by the system and moved to a hospital or orphanage somewhere else. Now suppose the roles wer…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 04:55 AM
2

Yeah if this were the situation, I don't think the OP would have an argument. I'm good with the "children first" philosophy as long as both parents are held to it equally. Glad the chat was helpful, have a good one!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 02:42 AM
1

Yeah if that were the standard I think people would be less upset. So long as the rules are the same for "either parent" once the baby is born (emphasis again, so we're not talking abortion / autonomy) then people would be fine.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 02:04 AM
2

Once the baby is outside her body, any arguments about her body are irrelevant. The asymmetry is about her ability to give the baby up for adoption, while he has no symmetrical out. No argument about what happens during pregnancy undermines that asymmetry. Once again, the risks argument is a good argument for more support from the state during pregnancy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 01:51 AM
1

Right, if the rule is how you described it, there would be no argument. If the man wanted to keep the child, the woman would be obligated to help support him. That's an equal dynamic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 01:49 AM
5

"1 - A woman can abort a child unilaterally because it is her body and the integrity of her body is a human right for her as an individual." I didn't mention abortion, I mentioned adoption. A woman can put the baby up for adoption once it's born. Hell in many areas there are legally designated "baby drop off" locations so she can wash her hands of this parenthood responsibility "literally" no questions asked. "2 - The child has a right to be provided for/have its wellbeing and needs met." Again,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 01:04 AM
3

No one said anything about infringing on anyone's bodily autonomy. Let's go through the flowchart together. She doesn't want to carry the baby -> abortion She wants to carry the baby, but doesn't want to keep it -> adoption She wants to carry the baby, and she wants to keep it -> parenthood Now from the male perspective: 1a. She doesn't want to carry the baby, but he wants to keep it -> she has bodily autonomy 1b. She doesn't want to carry the baby, and neither does he -> no conflict 2a. She wan…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 12:53 AM
2

We're past the pregnancy and giving birth part. Again, your arguments are fine for bigger social safety nets during pregnancy. After the baby is born, she can put it up for adoption. What is the male equivalent of that?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/25 12:31 AM
3

"Men can wear condoms, get snipped, and other things to prevent pregnancy. To pretend this is a double standard is laughable, because men aren't doing the things needed to prevent it." And women could just abstain from sex if they were really worried about pregnancy. Therefore there need not be any abortions! Oh wait... "Pregnancy happens TO the woman, and the man has nothing to do with it. You don't participate, you don't bear the burden, and you aren't affected. If a pregnancy goes south, your…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 11:38 PM
2

The pregnancy is sunk cost. You can't undo that, so appealing to it is a dead end. The ethical question is: what's the male equivalent of putting the child up for adoption once it's born? Condition on the fact that the child has been born, one party can give up their financial responsibility to it, and the other cannot. That's the issue.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 11:34 PM
4

Absolutely not. So long as women get to put the baby up for adoption, and men can't do likewise, this is asymmetrically favoring women over men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 11:32 PM
6

But the mother can put the child up for adoption, so that argument holds zero weight.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 11:30 PM
8

When abortion was codified into federal law, were people any MORE susceptible to arguments in favor of paper abortion? No. This is literally a non-sequitor.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 11:30 PM
6

If you think young men look to Tommy Robinson for being a role model or life advice in general, I don't know what to tell you. That's insane. The problem with people picking "positive role models" for men instead of men picking their own role models, is that you're basically implicitly imposing gender expectations on what young men are "supposed to be like - look at this guy" while society cries over and over again that we live in a post gender society. If we live in a post gender role society, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/08/25 05:11 PM
17

She likes broadly left economics. Good enough for me, not dealing with leftist purity spiraling.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/08/25 04:41 PM
51

Yeah Shoeonhead pointed this out too lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/25 03:47 PM
5

"You're acting like I said 'we need to admit we don't have things as bad as these other groups'," No I'm not. I accused you of language / tone policing via blatant double standards - not saying our lot isn't as bad substantively. "which is the exact opposite of what I meant and is clarified by reading the rest of the paragraph." Which would be why I didn't make that accusation. But way to start by poisoning the well. "I'm not saying other isms are 'privileged', what I meant is that men's experie…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/07/25 03:47 PM
11

"Even in this sub, I feel like it strays too far into the pathological critiques which are the root of reaction and you guys sometimes have trouble maintaining the detached objectivity that we should be coming to the table with. I don't particularly like the term 'misandry', I think we should really try to stress that we're not trying to draw any kind of equivalence with misogyny or other oppressed people's experiences, because everyone's experience under the universally oppressive conditions of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/07/25 11:18 PM
2

https://www.jstor.org/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/07/25 09:05 PM
20

Economically for sure, but socially speaking, it's "man up and figure it out" for everyone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/25 02:46 PM
55

It's pretty simple: The mainstream left says bootstraps and social darwinism for men, social empathy for everyone else. The right says bootstraps and social darwinism for everyone. Men notice.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/25 01:57 PM
25

Haven't you heard? Good behavior is just "the bare minimum"!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/25 01:53 PM
4

Evidence "for" what? As someone with graduate degrees in stats, I can tell you that the assumptions you make in setting up the model, what kinds of data are taken as evidence for it, and how you interpret the results as being this kind of data, or not, are the core factors which make science work. Data without interpretation is dead. I have no problem holding them to their own standards, thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/25 06:50 PM
4

A toxic chemical is toxic because of the type of chemical that it is, and not merely due to social expectations around the chemical, dingus. Blocked for lack of reading comprehension.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/25 02:21 PM
2

If it were just this topic, you'd have a point. For the trans discussion, the same pattern reveals itself. The mantra is that "gender is a social construct" but what's meant by that is that classification of behaviors as gendered is a social construct. But, once clarified, this no longer has anything to do with the discussion, because gender isn't being grounded in performative behaviors, but rather subjective qualia. But once again, there's a rhetorical advantage the left gains from the ambigui…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/25 12:52 PM
12

Here, let's state his point in a more ironclad way. Either standpoint epistemology is true or it isn't. If it is, a woman has no business writing studies ultimately grounded in the epistemic experiences of men. She has no "standpoint" to properly vet her narratives and data to verify she's getting the whole picture. If standpoint epistemology is false, then women have nothing unique to say about "patriarchy" or any other social dynamics, and feminism loses a lot of its theory instantly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 03:02 PM
19

So many of the left's problems exist because they try to conflate gender roles / expectations, with gender itself. If this concept would have been called "toxic expectations of masculinity" then that would be one thing. By calling it "toxic masculinity" it opens the door wide open for rhetorical sleight of hand that gets us where we are now. The difference is subtle, after all, between: "you've been hurt by toxic expectations foisted on you, and hurt people - hurt people" vs "You've internalized…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 03:00 PM
2

I came just to say this, thank you!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 02:56 PM
30

It's their way of pulling up the ladder.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 05:25 PM
7

Convenient, but not unexpected. Blocked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/25 07:25 PM
5

This doesn't clarify it at all, it looks like blatant equivocation on the term - at best. "I think if you spend a day living in basically any other time in history, I think you'd disagree with present day you quite adamantly." This is conflating quality of life with scarcity in a way so dishonest, there's no way that even you believe this. In my area, there are no houses available for rent. New houses for rent get snatched up so quickly that people who want to move here feel like they're in a vi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/25 06:37 PM
8

Anytime someone talks about things not being zero sum, they lose me. We aren't in a post scarcity society, so every resource A gets could have been spent on B instead.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/25 03:50 PM
4

Patriarchy is an unfalsifiable hypothesis.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/25 03:34 AM
8

This is like asking how you solve crime and prejudice. You can't, no movement can - especially not feminism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/25 04:51 AM
39

Fellas, we had a meeting about this. We were supposed to choose the TREE remember? AI induced psychosis isn't going to be fun.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/07/25 02:20 PM
4

You were here asking these questions before. The answers aren't going to change.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/06/25 08:15 AM
1

Toxic masculinity is an unscientific hypothesis to begin with. "Nu-uh!" doesn't deal with the objection. You're not sorry, you're blocked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/25 02:20 PM
3

"One can be victimized without seeing oneself primarily as a victim," So bootstraps, got it. I'm going back to my original comment. This is splitting hairs for the sake of appearing morally virtuous.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 09:59 PM
2

Sure, but reading your initial post (again, to make sure I'm not missing anything) vs your current post, it feels to me like some goal shifting is going on. In your first post, what you said was: "Rather than saying, "we want to be treated as well as women in all areas (specifically parenting/family law, value of life, law and punishment)", I've seen a lot of posts that express the thought, "we, too, are victims!"" And: "The entire critical theory/postmodern/intersectional leftist problem is tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 09:27 PM
5

The "can" for hormones here is so important. My point in saying the toxic masculinity hypothesis is falsified isn't to say that that upbringing has no influence on how we process emotions. It's merely to say that we don't know that upbringing isn't THE ONLY cause of how we process emotions. We simply don't know that because a man has a hard time processing emotions outside of anger, or bottling things up, etc. that this is because they're raised on strict gendered ideas about "proper expression"…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 09:08 PM
3

OK but these battles aren't inconsistent with each other. The point of critical theory (and I'm on the right, I'm hardly a fan of critical theory) is that it attempts to mechanistically explain why systems don't change and get better for people in the presence of empirical evidence that they're being hard done by. Oppression is a conclusion generated AFTER a system with particular empirically observed inequities persists DESPITE its surface commitment to fairness in these dimensions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 08:37 PM
2

Are you saying that oppression can't be grounded in empirical facts?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 06:15 PM
28

I think this is oversimplifying things. It's not a matter of trust, it's a matter of untangling variables to rule out harmful hypotheses. Hypothesis: men are trained by society to bottle up their emotions. Competing hypothesis: men have physiological reasons, independent of their upbringing, which dictate how emotions are processed. How do you adjudicate? Find a subject raised "without toxic masculinity" (in this case raised as a girl) and induce a physiological stimulus which makes them fit the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 03:29 PM
12

If men aren't treated as well as they 'should be" in the areas you listed, what would you call them? This post strikes me as attempting to gain the appearance of moral virtue by endlessly splitting hairs.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/25 03:17 PM
8

Some animals are more equal than others.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/25 11:21 PM
4

It can be justified in the sense of hypothetical norms depending on one's assumptions about society. But nothing can ever be justified in a moral vacuum (see is / ought gap).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/25 10:41 PM
3

"Definition: Patriarchy is a system that uses an artificially enforced sex-gender binary to maintain a hierarchy where women are subservient to men. Failure to adhere to the standards of the system will be punished. Anyone can be punished for this failure, including straight, cisgender, perisex men." If it's enforced, who enforces it? If it's women, why are they forcing men to make them subservient to those same men? Who does the punishing? If it's women, why are they punishing men for making th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/06/25 02:14 AM
2

Nah I knew where you were going with the title (you weren't going to blame men or anything). I was just thinking "I wonder if he's going to bring up the deflection that happens when men DO successfully articulate their feelings". And you did! My friends are typically right wing (either moderately or a bit further). They don't really think about these issues much (more focused on things like employment and other aspects of their own lives) but I can generally convince them of almost anything with…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/06/25 01:44 AM
2

Yeah, when I saw the title of the post I was going to bring up the pathologized point. I'm pretty sick of male loneliness, or confusion navigating social situations that others think are easy, being called "entitlement". Like, imagine someone had dyslexia, they had massive struggles with reading, and the response to their frustration that they couldn't read as well as their peers was "What, you think you're entitled to just comprehend texts? To get A's? Maybe try being a better person!" No one t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/06/25 12:55 AM
1

This is insane. Before this discussion goes any further, I'm going to need you to define falsifiability for me and explain why it's important to a theory. Because you're saying virtually everything except addressing the actual issue taken with your model.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 04:05 AM
1

I have a master's in Economics. We try very hard to make our theories falsifiable, and kick out the ones that don't behave (Austrians). Do not slander my discipline as a social science by comparing it to your quasi-religion to bolster your credibility. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 03:44 AM
2

"Life is complicated, but that doesn't give us any useful point to tackle any issue." Neither does Patriarchy until we can find some fact which, if it were false, would falsify the Patriarchy hypothesis. Until then it's literally in the same post-hoc deepity category as the above.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 03:34 AM
2

"This is not unfalsifiable at all. Men can have the privilege of being the breadwinners and having economic control of the household, but that comes with the oppression of how a lot of companies treat their employers." You're conflating the effects with the causal mechanism. Suppose we hypothesized that the cause of these effects you're talking about is: "Social systems change slower than technology forces them to" and we predict as the result of that hypothesis that people are going to gain and…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 03:15 AM
3

This just sounds like a blatantly unfalsifiable hypothesis at this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 03:06 AM
1

I hear an apex fallacy waiting to reveal itself.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/25 03:04 AM
21

I've seen that on this subreddit too lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/06/25 11:30 PM
21

Went to college. Still lonely and in debt.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/25 06:22 AM
6

This is blatantly incorrect. The UK had a panel of experts who study incels from various angles give testimony (video in this subreddit, search for it). The TL;DR: . Most incels are left wing. . They have in common a fatalistic view that they'll never be good enough to form relationships due to genetics and other factors, not a belief about what others ought to do. . Incels are far more likely to hurt / kill themselves than other people. Edit: https://youtu.be/c8bZ7up1BRg?feature=shared
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/25 06:14 AM
7

"You don’t get to kissing and cuddling phase if all you do is expecting a girl to fall in your lap because you play video game and watch TV and that it." Some do, it's just a matter of luck. "To build meaningful relationships, you have to do more than be content with what comes easy for you." Either "meaningful" is doing a lot of work here, or this statement is incorrect because it assumes that introverted partners don't have meaningful relationships. "You gotta put in the work to define who you…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/25 06:02 AM
15

"I always encourage these guys to get active in their communities, join work happy hours, join fitness groups, and take up adult martial arts classes, or SOMETHING. But they always twist it into "I don't wanna be that dude who took up salsa just to hit up women," then don't be that guy. Why do these guys always feel that they're just doing these things to get laid instead of just doing them because they want to do them?" Because a lot of guys aren't looking to collect a bunch of new hobbies just…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/25 02:45 AM
5

Wait, are we just trying to pretend that 2014-2016 never happened? How many modest events that tried to focus on men's issues got absolutely shut down by feminists on college campuses? Women have made it extremely clear that only they're allowed to set the narrative culturally. They can't then get on men for not pushing for our own movement.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/25 06:52 PM
49

Based. It's always bothered me that people who believe we don't have free will decide "bootstraps" and "personal responsibility" is fine for some people. We should think of people suffering this like drug addicts caught in a physiological spiral that will destroy them without proper intervention.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/25 04:27 AM
10

But have you considered that some animals are more equal than others?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 04:25 PM
3

I'm not sure that Red Pill is "pro male" at the systemic level. It seems to me that its claims are descriptive (they can be false) rather than prescriptive about systemic change for the benefit of men. That context noted, what they seem to be saying is "here is how the system evaluates you whether you know it or not, you might as well adapt". Is that "pro-male"? Not sure.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/25 08:02 PM
14

Who is the patriarchy? Be specific.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/25 08:55 AM
7

As someone who fits your husband's characteristics, this is it. For us, friendships are legitimately exhausting. So at this point we really do need to separate the topic out. There's social problems for general men forming relationships and then there are particular problems with ND individuals that add extra barriers. These aren't the same problems or solutions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 08:15 PM
3

I think one thing you're missing here is that romantic relationships are also status symbols for men, cultivated by women. Men who have wedding rings report getting hit on by women WAY more frequently than when they were single. It's to the point now where PUAs sometimes wear fake wedding rings (real rings, no marriage) to improve their prospects with women. Society sees men who have a successful romantic relationship far differently than men who don't. That's not something us men can fix intern…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 08:09 PM
7

I don't disagree with this response politically, if we zoom out far enough, but I don't think it fits the narrow scope of the topic at hand. The problem is that childcare is stressful enough, that a lot of relationships need more "date nights". It's a far tougher sell to plan weekly friend meetings for each person in the relationship. The real issue is that we've lost our social networks so that other people can watch your kids (and you reciprocate) so you and your spouse can be whole people out…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 07:30 PM
13

Men who start out with friendship circles see those circles ripped up as their friends start marrying and having kids. It sends a message that friendships are transitory even if you wish they weren't. I know guys that have a boardgames group they keep going, but they can only meet once every couple of months due to family obligations. Once every couple of months is not near frequent enough for meaningful connection, but it's the best they can do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 06:45 PM
9

Social darwinism for everyone on the right. Social darwinism for straight white men on the left.
/r/MensRights18/01/25 10:24 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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