TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

LongDongSamspon Archive

View 3 posts and 339 comments by LongDongSamspon on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
9

It is obvious. That is what the term “Industrial Revolution” refers to historically. Actually I said there was no movement or women’s groups concerned with gender equality or going into what were seen as male roles. Obviously women have always had some desire to seem themselves protected by law - but this was always related to things within their traditional gender roles (ie some kind of marriage law so their husband couldn’t kick them out on the street). There is quite literally no writing by o…
/r/MensRights26/11/24 05:25 AM
15

Obviously the Industrial Revolution beginning in the 1700’s and going through the 1800’s and all the technological and societal changes which followed (and continue to follow). Literally all the things your talking about are well after that time. That’s right - there is literally zero evidence or reality of women’s movements for anything like gender equality before the past few centuries, actually there’s no movements for anything like gender equality in the workforce before the 1900’s (even ear…
/r/MensRights26/11/24 03:51 AM
14

That woman in the 1960’s and 70’s? That woman in 1910? Do you know when the Industrial Revolution was? Because both all those things you’ve mentioned were long after it. In fact mens universal suffrage with voting rights only came after the Industrial Revolution as well. Here’s the reality once more, there was no ideals of gender equality pre Industrial Revolution, women were not struggling against gender roles for all history at all. We simply did gender roles as do all other species until adva…
/r/MensRights26/11/24 03:32 AM
11

What a load. There was inequality for example when catching women up to men in college attendance and they were favoured and prioritised over men as per your suggestion - then they became equal in number. And the favouritism continued. Now they’ve been a majority in number for 40 years but still feminists like you are arguing women need favouritism to correct for the past. Reality is it’s a bullshit excuse for favouritism.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 03:01 AM
2

Richard Reeves is just a “mens activist” made palatable to feminists who have an irrational dislike of men. He never talks about men or boys issues without kissing feminist ass first.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 02:58 AM
13

Who cares? That’s not relevant to a boy and girl in school today, it’s only relevant in the minds of demented feminists looking to excuse favouritism for women. And the reality is until after the Industrial Revolution, gender equality in terms of education and doing the same jobs didn’t even exist as an idea. Both women and men had no concept of it nor desire for it, it arose as possible because of more technologically advanced societies which could support it.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 02:57 AM
22

It is literally discrimination - all gender based initiatives for more students, gender based funding and scholarships and the majority of advertising is going toward women when they have been a majority for 40 years in universities. It was implemented when they were a minority supposedly to catch them up, that was the jumpstart - but hasn’t ended, which is the issue. It should have been stopped by all logic in the early/late 80’s. Men also aren’t “the majority” and especially aren’t the majorit…
/r/MensRights26/11/24 02:55 AM
4

Wasn’t she just complaining she didn’t have enough money to retire? How is losing money like this gonna help that?
/r/MensRights24/11/24 06:49 AM
26

It’s not that they can’t see it - it’s that their ideology justifies it. And that’s kind of a chicken and egg scenario, because women who want to be hypocritical are unwittingly drawn to feminism for that exact reason - because it enables them to act out their own shitty personalities while feeling morally superior about doing so. That’s true of many ideologies and those that follow them most fervently.
/r/MensRights19/11/24 02:21 PM
30

Jesus Christ what long winded drivel. Can you imagine living with a boring gasbag of a woman like the one who wrote this? Anyway, the reason the modern gladiator is much worse than the first with a shitty main character - is because Ridley Scott is really old and has lost his marbles. Case closed.
/r/MensRights19/11/24 02:19 PM
7

Reminds me of the old British Empire press ganging people.
/r/MensRights19/11/24 02:41 AM
24

Stats show this - it’s women who lurched massively left with the rise of social media. It basically tracks with the years Twitter, YouTube and Insta became popular. If you look at men’s political opinions they haven’t changed. Perhaps they’re more anti immigration, but that’s because immigration has gotten so high, it’s not come out of nothing.
/r/MensRights18/11/24 03:11 AM
21

Well they killed Han and had him divorced from his beloved Leia (which was THE love story of the original trilogy). Who the fuck wanted that?
/r/MensRights18/11/24 03:02 AM
3

Anonymously written by a 42 year old “schoolgirl”
/r/MensRights16/11/24 02:47 AM
3

I was on a sub where this had loads of comments and many many triggered women annoyed by the idea. Thankfully it also had many people who were in broad agreement that boys were being failed, who seemed surprised at the instant rage of feminist women over the idea.
/r/MensRights15/11/24 03:11 AM
29

Lol, as if the women whining about this online are actually overly caring girlfriends or wives. Give me a break.
/r/MensRights13/11/24 03:19 PM
2

Who raised this crazy bitch? Jesse Pinkman?
/r/MensRights13/11/24 02:12 PM
2

I knew I would be the UK as soon as I saw the headline.
/r/MensRights12/11/24 03:17 AM
5

Yeah, one big thing of the time was they also killed a blind man and his dog with some kind of crude explosive - Arthur Conan Doyle (author of Sherlock Holmes stories and the Lost Word) gave a number of anti suffragette speeches and articles and mentioned all this stuff as indicative of the nature these movements took on.
/r/MensRights12/11/24 03:02 AM
1

Arthur Conana Doyle (author of Sherlock holmes amongst other things) gave a number of speeches and wrote a few things very similar to what you’re describing in the same time period, as well as going into some detail of feminist/women’s rights methods of the time (which was revealing given how they’re seen in such positive light now).
/r/MensRights10/11/24 03:00 PM
1

I mean it may be true, considering the types of lunatic women who are drug abusers and god knows what else are also the most likely to either lie about this, or be in abusive relationships and just be the greater of two evils.
/r/MensRights10/11/24 10:17 AM
51

Richard Reeves is the watered down little bitch “masculinity researcher” the feminist left roll out because he’s the only one quiet and meek and inoffensive enough that they can stand it. He absolutely can’t stand tia acknowledge that yes, in fact feminists favouring women over men is bad for men. Fuck him. The fact he’s even published in the Guardian says it all.
/r/MensRights10/11/24 04:44 AM
16

This is true, but Richard Reeves is such a quiet little pussy who wants to seek inoffensive to feminists I still say fuck him.
/r/MensRights09/11/24 01:53 AM
9

Lol ain’t that the truth. They’re also madams pimping out theoretical women as sex objects to reward men with - you’ve probably noticed it when they make comments like “you’ll end up alone/no one will have sex with you if you think that” when they don’t like your opinion.
/r/MensRights08/11/24 01:50 PM
3

Because Penis Envy was dealt a heavy blow today
/r/MensRights06/11/24 01:39 PM
2

Lol who cares, they can suck it. America today, tomorrow the world.
/r/MensRights06/11/24 11:19 AM
7

Lol what? Why the hell wouldn’t you wear cargo shorts? No one will judge you unless they’re really weird or you cut them off and jam them up your crack or something.
/r/MensRights04/11/24 07:00 AM
7

What do you expect? This is the type of woman who enjoyed Barbie most. Anyway, wonder how long it is before she goes full Megan Fox and puts him in a dress because of her feminism. You know it’s coming.
/r/MensRights04/11/24 01:40 AM
18

Lol no. Plenty of man haters in power here. As to rape victims there’s a big push by feminists ongoing with some success to lessen the burden of proof required for a conviction, pushback against this is usually described by woman hating by such feminists. For instance our news reports any accuser of rape as being a “victim-survivor” regardless of a guilty verdict. No normal Australians blame women for getting raped and that’s not an acceptable attitude (except perhaps among some immigrant commun…
/r/MensRights01/11/24 04:57 AM
6

Reeves is a fuckin pussy. Case closed.
/r/MensRights30/10/24 04:46 PM
5

You say that but a quick look at the show and actors comments reveal it’s feminist slop.
/r/MensRights26/10/24 12:27 AM
7

Lol, I knew this would be British as soon as I read a few comments describing the show and sure enough it didn’t disappoint. Just more pc “topical” slop from the most boring and man hating Island in the world. Sad, they used to be so good at bringing old classic stuff to life (and making new shows) in the 80’s, 90’s and early 2000’s. Fucking idiot actress in her interview talking about how many people are in favour of a curfew. That Island is gonna be in for a hard wake up call.
/r/MensRights26/10/24 12:26 AM
1

It’s horseshit. All just a feminist woman’s opinion on what is best for men (hint hint, be more emotional because that will somehow lead back to helping women). I resent this feminist shit being suggested here.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 01:40 PM
5

Leg kicks and side kicks - basically things that keep you out of range and hurt and stop people but don’t smash the head to hard. If you know any karate style martial arts legs and gut kicks are the best way to defend yourself against people you don’t think you need to go all out to effectively defend yourself against - as they’re not gonna result in the person cracking their head on the ground and dying or being kicked or hit in the head too seriously, so you’re not at risk of getting in seriou…
/r/MensRights23/10/24 03:12 AM
2

It didn’t move the goalposts, it was simply always about favouring women and that’s all it could ever be about - it’s just that that didn’t seem as bad when women were behind in the things they got favoured in. Feminism is just a modern manifestation of the idea women should get special and gentler treatment. It doesn’t matter if they’re behind, equal or in front - they will always demand it.
/r/MensRights22/10/24 06:04 PM
1

The early “feminists” (claimed by feminism today) didn’t even call themselves feminists. Feminism wasn’t really a known quantity with an actual ideology until the late 50’s.
/r/MensRights22/10/24 12:21 PM
12

Yes. Even if feminism was as good as advertised and about “equality” (which it’s not it’s much worse and that’s just a facade even if some believe in it) I don’t support it. Because what does “equality” even mean? It means in any situation where men are perceived to have “more”, they are the seen as owing women and equal share of whatever they have, regardless of if they created it and worked for it and the women didn’t. Feminism is basically a shotgun marriage of women to men across all section…
/r/MensRights22/10/24 12:16 PM
9

Fatty
/r/MensRights22/10/24 06:42 AM
6

Good. There is no reason for the social sciences to exist. Arguably there’s also no longer any reason for things like English lit to exist in an internet age where that information is readily available to any one who wants to learn from it. It made sense in a time of yore where the information was only available physically at a university library and via teachers, but it doesn’t know. The irony is that universities are attempted to expand when logically they should be downsized. Anyway universit…
/r/MensRights18/10/24 06:42 AM
7

I love the way the solution to all the psychological stalking and terror is just Clint punching her through a window off a cliff then the movie ends with zero follow up lol. And how Clint is always an asshole who sees the cops as square pigs and won’t give them any information even though his life and others lives are in danger (because I guess that was seen as hip in the 70’s). Anyways, fun movie with a unique atmosphere - anyone who hasn’t seen it you should. Especially if you like extended mu…
/r/MensRights17/10/24 08:25 AM
44

Damn, hope she didn’t grow up watching play Misty for me.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 03:55 AM
16

That’s a woman?
/r/MensRights16/10/24 06:30 AM
2

It’s a shaming tactic - typical of all humans but especially prevalent in female dominated circles. It’s the equivalent of calling someone a “(race slur) lover”. The idea is to smear the person as liking something bad, so they will either be ostracised or change what they’re saying.
/r/MensRights15/10/24 02:59 AM
7

In Uganda they likely still do both. In fact they’re not even near the top of a list disturbing things done in Uganda. Keep in mind this is a country where in some places, witch doctors cut off children’s body parts for Magic (this is real, you can look at news reports) and think ground up albino bones cure erection problems.
/r/MensRights13/10/24 01:12 PM
20

Men would, many women would - feminists who want favouritism and for society to indulge their bizarre theories would not. Although perhaps they could get the help they needed. I don’t believe in feminism at all. I believe in some women’s rights which have long since been achieved (in the west strictly speaking, obviously there’s a lot of shitholes in the world which treat women like crap, not just in terms of opportunities, but also how they’re treated even within traditional gender roles). The …
/r/MensRights13/10/24 05:20 AM
25

There is nothing that could convince me as a man to vote for a left leaning party in the western world - aside from some kind of internal purge of every feminist nutcase which has ruined said parties over the past few decades.
/r/MensRights11/10/24 02:49 AM
9

None, just state what I think of specific issues or overall more general issues.
/r/MensRights09/10/24 01:44 PM
3

Lol our government is retarded and blows money on the most useless of shit. They like doing that because if they had to spend the money at home, they would actually have to plan on how to do it and show positive results. I wouldn’t say no one calls it out - this won’t even make the news, if it did it would be unpopular with most people. The government has massively fucked it’s public perception in its first term and needs to win a few seats in western Sydney where most Muslims live - so they do …
/r/MensRights06/10/24 06:40 AM
7

I suppose that would depend on what it showed the reasons society failing women as. Some people will call literally anything female focused in any way feminist though. Anyway, I don’t understand the relevance of your question.
/r/MensRights04/10/24 05:34 AM
16

The movie really isn’t feminist like you’re saying, it’s just making a point nobody cares for or wanted to watch in a Joker movie. Gaga herself also doesn’t seem like much of a man hater, whether you enjoy her music or not.
/r/MensRights04/10/24 02:46 AM
0

Not really no. Australian law is very non specific about this kind of thing. You would have to argue it in court. There are a bunch of male only things - largely those men’s clubs and lodges with political and judicial connections though. They’re just kept low key, but all have exemptions to discrimination laws.
/r/MensRights27/09/24 09:45 PM
3

Highly unlikely seeing as the current left wing government is headed toward minority government at best and and several left wing governments state wise are on the verge of being voted out. The chances of them doing something this radical when trailing in the polls isn’t high.
/r/MensRights25/09/24 08:35 AM
11

Britain really is the lamest country (well outside Sweden). I know people say Canada and Australia - but even in those places something like this is virtually unthinkable.
/r/MensRights25/09/24 04:41 AM
16

Why did it “need to”? If less boys wanted to be Boy Scouts then just let it become a less popular version of the same thing, it wasn’t supposed to be a department store run entirely for profit no matter what.
/r/MensRights12/09/24 12:00 PM
2

She’s just some fat ass woman trying to tell men what’s best for them, what the hell would she know? Well anyway, she’s dead and we’re not so she can suck it.
/r/MensRights10/09/24 05:00 PM
9

You can be. Perhaps you can’t go on an unhinged rant saying demented things and get away with it like a feminist could, but you can say this stuff. It won’t get you thrown out the field - might piss some people off but who cares.
/r/MensRights10/09/24 04:56 PM
4

Why do you think they can? They’ve been invented, run and operated by men. Your assumption is if women just copy men they can do it to. You have no clue if that’s true or not. Well then your just making up your own even more fantastical post, which I have no reason or interest to engage with.
/r/MensRights02/09/24 03:33 AM
12

I think he’s talking about one city, not a gender split of the entire world.
/r/MensRights01/09/24 04:54 PM
12

Yes, issues like a functioning power grid, legal system capable of enforcing law and supply network. I don’t think OP is talking about splitting all humanity along gender lines, just a bunch of women with one city. So extinction of the human race really isn’t a factor in this hypothetical.
/r/MensRights01/09/24 04:54 PM
14

Let? Buddy the entirety of gender “equality” is set up to prevent them ever having to prove any such thing. It’s not about emancipation as they used to say, if they believed in that you would see a huge amount of new female industry and the like - instead you see laws requiring businesses to hire and give women power and so on. The whole point of feminism is for women is to remain attached to mens success and benefit from it, not to have to go off and succeed or fail on their own. Case in point …
/r/MensRights01/09/24 04:48 PM
19

What’s the same time? Isn’t two years about a normal sentence for rape or is it different in the UK?
/r/MensRights01/09/24 02:15 AM
1

Yeah sure, till she comes out with ground breaking “research”, that female violence is caused by the patriarchy or whatever bs. If you’re in this area of academia at this point you’re 99.9% likely to be a lost cause and have feminist sympathies if not be an outright feminist - if you weren’t, you’d have been kicked out.
/r/MensRights31/08/24 09:07 AM
6

Exactly - the article makes it sound like supporting feminism was once the status quo among men in order to try to make feminism seem like the norm (so something people should get back to supporting), when in reality it never was. If you read the terminology it also never outright states that the 40% of young men who are included actually call themselves feminists - they will likely have been asked whether they support gender equality or whatever and then the study or article records them as fem…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:14 AM
6

They don’t, if you read the article it’s a sleight of hand with the terminology. The men will have been asked generic questions about supporting gender equality then labelled as feminists if in support - they don’t self identify as feminists, the article and study designates that description on them if they believe in gender equality (or whatever questions were asked). It’s done in order to inflate feminism’s popularity as a way to try to get more people to support it, by making it seem like doi…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:11 AM
5

It’s not really accurate though - it inflates original support for feminism amongst men by labelling men feminist who will have been asked generic questions about supporting gender equality. You can see it in the sleight of hand where they don’t actually report men calling themselves feminist, but that “feminist ideal describe them well” whatever that means. The whole thing frames the issue as though most men once loved feminism and are going away from that status quo, when in reality they never…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:08 AM
5

These surveys while indeed identifying growing hostility toward feminism and gender politics - begin with a lie anyway. There is no way 41% of young men claim to be feminists or ever have, the surveys are manipulated in the language of asking various questions about whether the men support this or that aspect of gender equality then taking that and calling them feminists as a result, in order to make feminisms supporters seem greater in number than reality and to give the impression it has wides…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:04 AM
30

The thumbnail looks like someone prompted an A.I for a picture of two women with personality disorders.
/r/MensRights23/08/24 05:32 AM
14

Wrong - they didn’t use to do this shit and movember was huge. Could easily have been again as the main thing about it is growing a 70’s cricket type moustache and giving a little money. It was totally apolitical and even the politics of it in this time aren’t known by most who aren’t aware of this. The sole and only reason for this is it’s become a big bureaucracy which no doubt includes those feminists pushing this shit. Don’t let these dickheads off with a pass when they’ve fucked something w…
/r/MensRights22/08/24 02:38 PM
15

Why don’t you try to post reasonably on any feminism sub and see what happens? Then realise the nature of feminism. (Hint - They will all ban and delete your posts)
/r/MensRights22/08/24 05:13 AM
5

I love how they always randomly add on racism out of nowhere because they don’t think the other bullshit is convincing enough so they have to put a bit more sauce on.
/r/MensRights21/08/24 04:38 PM
36

Of all first world nations England is quickly became the most retarded of them all. And that’s saying something.
/r/MensRights19/08/24 12:32 PM
5

Lol not these dorks again. The two examples they give are purely because one is a left wing political candidate and the other is dating Taylor Swift - you could take the same two guys, switch ones politics and have the other not date a female favourite singer and they would be called “toxic” (and in reality the way Kelce treats sideline staff is clearly a massive dick). Masculinity is what it is, it’s really rather stupid to get into pointless pontificating about it as a way to counter feminists…
/r/MensRights19/08/24 04:35 AM
1

They didn’t forget, they never knew. It wasn’t like feminists came up with the presumption of innocence. Men living long ago did.
/r/MensRights14/08/24 07:02 AM
42

Reeves is a weeny and anyone that thinks Obama even reads or listens to half these lists is a moron, it’s just some social media crap. I looked at his list for his “summer music” and half or more is modern pop crap for teenage girls - there’s no way a middle aged (or older) man has a “summer playlist” like that. Here’s what Reeves can do for men - speak softly and apologetically why making no positive changes and getting walked all over by feminist women. What is Reeves big idea? Does he want to…
/r/MensRights14/08/24 06:53 AM
-14

No, Toxic Masculinity is a concept pushed by women with hysteria - from your own post “are you nervous, or unreasonable? Subject to sudden tears and violent outbreaks or tempers? These are often symptoms of feminine upsets!” Yes indeed they are, hysteria is what’s powering all this, that and Penis Envy. Freud had it all right 120 years ago.
/r/MensRights12/08/24 12:30 PM
8

Who gives a shit? Don’t worry about why these fools hate men, might as well ask why Orcs are gross jerks from Mordor who want to hurt Hobbits. It’s what they do, it’s what they’ll always do.
/r/MensRights09/08/24 10:42 PM
58

Lol, what man outside of the biggest feminist weeny sees masculinity as “fragile and needing to be maintained” whether he’s a father or not? That’s academic feminist language for morons. These sociology based idiots pretending to be real academics and researchers are a joke, now and forever.
/r/MensRights05/08/24 01:55 PM
1

She absolutely has been charged as the article says, that’s why she’s on bail.
/r/MensRights04/08/24 10:54 AM
1

Ha ha yeah, I just work here sometimes so no real biggie for me. Can’t even vote. Just thought I’d point it out.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 05:54 AM
5

I didn’t mention him, I mentioned her and said it was hypocritical and sexist and so is progressive support of it. And it is.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 04:29 AM
8

And? I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of a progressive and her progressive fans who are supposedly against using gendered slurs in a stereotypical way (man up! Be a real man and do what I say! Etc) using them. It exposes the whole feminist progressive message of supposedly being against that type of thing as a hollow sham. They’re just against it directed at women and go on using it toward men.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 04:28 AM
5

Lol you’re seriously overthinking it. Would you be ok with a male politician telling a woman they weren’t lady like enough? Because Kamala and progressives wouldn’t be. That’s the hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 04:26 AM
5

There’s no way progressives would be okay with a gendered slur directed at a single female candidate not “all women” - because it tells people it’s ok to use that kind of language if you don’t like someone. And moreover - whether it’s against someone they don’t like or not, it’s still hypocritical, they’re supposedly meant to be against that stuff. Would you be ok with a racial slur directed at a candidate if you didn’t like that candidate? I wouldn’t because coming from a presidential nominee t…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 04:22 AM
15

So if men go around telling women they’re not lady like or woman enough that wouldn’t offend women lol? Get real. By the way calling peoples masculinity fragile is the same kind of pathetic tactic. It’s just a new feminist way of calling someone weak or a pussy for not being a strong enough man. You know, the type of gendered spurt progressives are supposedly against and wouldn’t except directed at women. You are showing the hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 04:18 AM
23

Nope - she is trying to shame him by suggesting he’s not a man if he doesn’t act as she wishes. No different than some victorian era dude in the olden days telling a woman she’s not lady like to try to get her to conform to what he wants her to do. Lady Like in that context is a positive to be aspired to, as man is in your context. Is trying to shame people by claiming they’re not the positive aspects of their gender if they don’t act as you want them to not sexist? Of course it it. At this poin…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 01:22 AM
28

She’s using gendered slurs against a man as a presidential candidate - that normalises the language. It’s like saying a candidate using racist slurs against someone you consider to be bad is ok because it’s directed at one individual. No it tells your supporters the language is ok to use against people you don’t like.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 01:19 AM
14

It’s not remotely positive. It’s a woman trying to shame a man into acting as she wishes by saying he’s not being a man if he doesn’t. If someone was trying to make you do something and saying if you didn’t you wouldn’t be a woman or lady - they would be trying to shame you into acting as they wished. That’s not positive. But your are proving my point - you have issues with gendered language used toward women but are fine with it used toward men. Even when men tell you it’s hypocritical, you car…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 01:07 AM
25

It’s misandric because it is trying to shame a man by telling him “if you don’t do this thing I want you are not a real man”. It’s no different than men trying to change a woman’s actions by telling her she’s not a real lady or a real woman if she won’t act as they wish. Man, some progressive women will defend any obvious sexism against men. I’m not really even bothered by the phrase, just pointing out the hypocrisy of it coming from progressives and your comments tying yourself in knots to expl…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:58 AM
13

The context is unimportant - the gendered slur and negative reaction to it would be the point. Stop trying to deflect.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:56 AM
21

So if there was a black candidate who was using slurs against white people it would be ok in your book to publicly use any manner of racial slur against him? Can you not see how that normalises the language as ok?
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:35 AM
17

Of course it’s being sexist lol. And coming from a progressive it’s also being hypocritical. If this was some trad wife saying it it would be sexist but also in line with her values - but coming from a progressive woman who would hate the same directed at women, it is sexist and hypocritical. So it’s okay if Trump says Harris needs to be more lady like? That’s basically the equivalent. And we both know full well you and progressives would hate it.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:34 AM
15

Yes it’s a different strategy - a misandric one. That’s the point, that it’s being used against Trump doesn’t somehow mean it’s ok because it filters through society as ok to use when someone you support does so. Would a racist strategy be ok if it was just used for a really bad candidate you don’t like? Or do you think that would normalise racism further if a presidential candidate did it openly? Saying it’s a provocative strategy in no way excuses it nor is it a logical defense of it. You’re a…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:18 AM
15

No it must not - if this person is in the running to be and may be the president, then them using these types of slurs says it’s alright for anyone to do it to men, if they feel justified. That it can hurt Trump or upset him is irrelevant, I’m sure Kamala or a progressive woman would be upset and respond if a male candidate said some gendered insult to them, claimed they weren’t a woman or lady or whatever - and I’m sure their supporters like yourself would have a major problem with that. The po…
/r/MensRights03/08/24 12:03 AM
22

Don’t care, the point isn’t to butter up Trump, it’s to point out the progressive hypocrisy at the highest level when it comes to this kind of thing.
/r/MensRights02/08/24 11:59 PM
14

I wonder how many great female athletes have been this in the past and it’s just got undetected or they didn’t even know it was a thing? You’d have to think quite a few.
/r/MensRights02/08/24 12:16 PM
68

It’s truly weird how she associates Trans (which the boxer isn’t it’s way more complicated) with some patriarchal mens movement when in reality they’re about as outcast from anything like any kind of traditional patriarchy or whatever you want to call it as they can possibly be. And she ignores all the female to males who I assume feel similar to the males. Whatever you think about all of it, if you really associate being Trans with being in a men’s rights movement you’re a moron or way down the…
/r/MensRights02/08/24 12:15 PM
66

Yes, this is a common thing. Scientific studies suggest those individuals with higher estrogen (even among women and lesbian couples) are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their partner regardless of situation. Ain’t that a kick in the head.
/r/MensRights28/07/24 11:31 AM
42

Nah they’re just morons.
/r/MensRights28/07/24 05:51 AM
2

Yes - too many feel that not being provided for by a man (or men in general via special treatment and consideration in this working context) equals being mistreated. That’s why feminist women get so angry when someone suggests things like women not being owed to be part of corporate boards (if not promoted by the men who start those companies or make them successful) or removing gender requirements in hiring. After all - if they really believed in equality why should they care? At this point the…
/r/MensRights25/07/24 01:14 PM
3

I strongly agree. This will sound arrogant, but you’re the first person outside of myself I’ve seen suggest or understand this so blatantly - gender “equality” in the workplace and industry is driven by the same feminine instinct of seeking male provision as has always been present in our species, it’s simply removed from the home and transferred to the wider workplace (not saying all women do it but as an overall societal trend that’s how things have gone) by many women because they see (or rat…
/r/MensRights25/07/24 11:08 AM
1

In those days it mostly meant centred on a female protagonist and her inner world and fears - back then a novel clearly for men (or possibly slightly later) was simply one about men with obviously militaristic or adventure themes. Everything else was just generally targeted without real thought to the target audience, since that was always limited to a generally lower middle to upper class urban class anyway, as that’s who could read well or at all (though there are exceptions). The difference b…
/r/MensRights25/07/24 10:46 AM
5

Yes, the large reason for women reading more (and having done so since the late 1800’s) is the incredible amount of romance style novels they read of which men have no notable equivalent. The equivalent of that type of more pulpy stuff for men (which still wasn’t as popular as romance for women) was largely western and detective style novels which once movies began to make the same content, began to decline. Outside of the romance genre men may actually be reading more fiction than women (I beli…
/r/MensRights25/07/24 04:21 AM
26

Yep exactly. Some wanky asshole isn’t radicalising men (well mostly maybe some stupid fucks), reality is “radicalising” them. And by radicalising I mean they are appropriately pissed off about unfair treatment and never supported it in the first place so they actually haven’t become more radical in any way - rather the feminist women have.
/r/MensRights23/07/24 03:16 PM
0

Well if some dude wrote a book about how women love assholes who treat them bad you might call him a scrote. And that’s fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/24 05:10 PM
0

Wrong, men do want a nice girl doormat mother who cooks for them. The book is written by some coping hag.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/24 09:11 AM
4

Yeah same - well except the 70’s original movie, that rules!
/r/MensRights13/07/24 01:14 PM
51

WestWorld season 1 was great - then in the first couple of episodes of season 2 it was like some feminist ideologue had taken the show over, about 20 dicks, nude guys being bossed round by the female characters etc. Didnt watch past that.
/r/MensRights13/07/24 05:06 AM
2

Whatever this guy occasionally says in support of men, overall he’s a total weeny who dares not speak above a whisper too strongly for men, or too strongly against feminism. Fuck him.
/r/MensRights09/07/24 01:39 PM
1

If it comes as part of a completely traditional gender interaction then no - as women were also expected to do and have their own gender specific ways of beneficially treating men which weren’t immediately returned. If the woman is still doing things like that then it’s ok. If she’s not doing anything femininely gender specific to help you or men in general which isn’t reciprocated, then yes it is. It would be wrong of any woman to ask or want chivalry if she doesn’t follow a specific feminine c…
/r/MensRights09/07/24 10:01 AM
1

Lol whatever. I literally could not give a shit whether she progressive or conservative as I’m neither - but she is a feminist whose bigoted against men which is the problem. But regardless, you can not be a feminist who buys into all the feminist ideology she clearly buy into and be conservative - because believing all that shot means radical ongoing change which is not in the least conservative. Her work isn’t rich, isn’t moronic bullshit for feminists like her. Barbies feminism aside, it’s on…
/r/MensRights07/07/24 03:50 PM
2

Lol, no.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 11:37 AM
2

Everyone got the “jokes” - whether I’m Barbie land or the real world men are shown as stupider than women, in need of moral correction and the butt of the joke - if it was a true role reversal then women would be the idiots in the real world, but nope, they’re smarter than men there too. It was bigoted man hating crap.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 11:35 AM
8

Barbie the movie as a concept was Mattel’s marketing strategy to basically say to the public of women buying dolls for their daughters - “hey, remember that controversy about whether Barbies cause bad body image in girls? Well forget it and look over there, aren’t men toxic?” - it was a sleight of hand to get feminists on side and like morons they lapped it up. Barbie as far as the movie made by Greta Gerwig - is a negative portrayal of one identity group (men) which is basically the equivalent …
/r/MensRights07/07/24 11:25 AM
1

Lol Greta Gerwig is a massive feminist she’s not conservative. She portrayed men as stupider than women because that’s how she really thinks.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 11:19 AM
5

Got nothing to do with being made about women and everything to do with the gender wide negative portrayal of men.
/r/MensRights07/07/24 11:18 AM
2

What unhinged lunacy. These are the type of nutters they used to put in the Asylum, not reward with a doctorate.
/r/MensRights05/07/24 03:05 PM
11

This is basically what all University ads are like where I am. It truly does show that equality is not the desire of these people and so shouldn’t be supported by men either, as those that do are only helping someone who uses that help to use them to advantage without return.
/r/MensRights01/07/24 02:00 PM
15

I am so happy the Spanish slaughtered these freaks. Could not have happened to a more deserving people. Mayan culture, though interesting, is best enjoyed long dead.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 03:26 PM
45

I do care and I did call him that.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 08:22 PM
119

I hate the Guardian. Also the article is just fucking weird - this guy projects his own insecurity about being a self hating man into his son just asking normal little kid questions. Literally nothing the kid did suggests he is suspicious of Father’s Day, he’s just asking kid questions because he’s curious. Too bad he’s got a pussy dipshit for a father.
/r/MensRights16/06/24 05:02 PM
5

Bill to draft men lead by a woman. This is the exact kind of logical reasoning as to why they shouldn’t vote in the first place - why should people who won’t have to fight and die for their country, make decisions and have control over those who do? Fucking bullshit.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 07:08 AM
26

Yep - “we advertised the military to women for 10 years straight now not as many men are joining!” No fucking shit
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:30 AM
16

Ignoring all the other issues, this is a problem in a bunch of western countries including mine - and if they’re anything like mine all the advertising basically exclusively targets women. So if you don’t advertise to the men who used to join at all of course they will join less. No fucking shit. What’s funny is it seems all the increased push for women to join over the last decade has made zero difference to their numbers other than to see less men enlist.
/r/MensRights15/06/24 05:16 AM
14

Society and the changes within it are the crisis.
/r/MensRights14/06/24 03:29 PM
13

Woman writing book about how boys need to be - being interviewed by a woman who wrote a book about how to be a stay at home dad lol. Says it all. These turd women really believe they have the right to tell men what they should be in a way they would be mortally offended by in return. They can get fucked.
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:21 AM
13

Imagine “studying” all this just for that result. Utterly pointless. It’s sad these morons are government funded.
/r/MensRights11/06/24 03:52 PM
16

Lol - this is awful work. First she doesn’t even bother to study women just says it’s “established” they have higher animal empathy. Second she makes claims that men who are abusive are abusive to animals half the time - except her proof for this is a study on a population (unspecified where or who) of males in America, when she’s in Australia. And all this to conclude that pet owners tend to have more empathy for animals - something a 10 year old could have guessed.
/r/MensRights11/06/24 03:51 PM
12

Not exactly that in the old days I wouldn’t say - as they undoubted were harsher on men because they rated their capability and hence culpability higher. The issue is “equality” basically sees women continue with the positive for women aspects of that mindset, but totally rejects any which are more positive toward men (if not inverts them).
/r/MensRights07/06/24 02:35 PM
171

So often it’s a female judge with these sentences - as it is here. You can see her saying it’s not the usual domestic abuse or similar in her sentencing quotes, she would never say that for a male offender. That’s common - men, even (perhaps especially) in the old days took a paternalistic attitude toward women in Justice which was often empathetic to them as victims or perps. It’s clear from this female judges comments her sympathies lie entirely with the female perp as she was cheated on - and…
/r/MensRights07/06/24 01:55 PM
34

I think it’s more than that and that’s not quite true. Men in general don’t tend to indulge and revel in as much victim hood as these feminist type groups do, it’s a downer and goes against their nature - so it’s better that men’s rights and similar be a part of a wider agenda/movement which is more dynamic. Feminism makes gains by celebration of victim hood and emphasising it, as well as leaning into the traditional instinct to protect the “fairer” sex. That’s not in men’s nature to the same ex…
/r/MensRights05/06/24 07:29 AM
26

Yes, they’re following the lead of western feminists but it sounds like they’re also implementing the ideas in a more traditionally based legal sense when it comes to marriage as well.
/r/MensRights03/06/24 05:55 PM
14

This is foolish. There is no pendulum, the real world doesn’t work like that. Things can change politically quickly, single issues don’t play out over generations in the way you’re describing. Simply because feminist overreach took a long time to develop that isn’t a logical reason to think that solving that issue should also do so. Pendulum theory is nonsense, just trying to make sense of the world with bullshit.
/r/MensRights03/06/24 05:53 PM
2

No you’ll be alright this is just media and political bullshit. But the rent and housing situation may be a greater concern for you coming here.
/r/MensRights02/06/24 02:46 PM
7

It won’t fail because it doesn’t actually do anything other than a few stupid programs in schools which already existed. I mean I’m totally against it but it’s not going to fail horrifically because it’s not actually attempting any kind of real change other than a horribly named position and more needling of men.
/r/MensRights02/06/24 04:16 AM
1

I don’t know. More American cultural influence perhaps?
/r/MensRights01/06/24 06:16 AM
3

It’s not a tactic, they’re just selfish and stupid and too many people let it pass.
/r/MensRights01/06/24 01:20 AM
52

Just another stupid smug feminist type woman saying something she knows is insulting (she talks in an obviously inflammatory joking way in the articles quotes). These women can’t help themselves. They would never make similar cruel blase statements about their own gender. People wouldn’t talk that way about women getting breasts cut off to avoid cancer. If you encounter her kind of piece of crap at work and/or needing help or wanting to work with you, or even simply converse or engage with you. …
/r/MensRights31/05/24 06:37 PM
8

More than 10 years old but nonetheless, there will always be some “rationale” for why the female lead advisory board or feminist initiative or whatever demands special treatment for women. The reason is irrelevant and will change from year to year - but the demand for special treatment and less responsibility on the basis of gender when beneficial will remain.
/r/MensRights31/05/24 06:27 PM
6

Like I say, people simply aren’t politically engaged here at all. Most people will be totally unaware and uninterested. There are no big firebrand type leaders here ala the US whether that’s Trump or AOC or anyone on any side of politics. All major politicians here look and speak like middle management and are incredibly uninteresting. Charisma and public speaking ability are basically non existent on any side of Australian Politics so very few announcements or speeches actually gain much attent…
/r/MensRights30/05/24 11:59 AM
11

Feminist bullshit. Lists a bunch of ways boys are behind like educational outcomes - and instead of offering practical solutions (such as the same gender focused attention girls have gotten compared to boys which caused this problem), says boys need to be taught to be more emotional. How the fuck will that help? Like sure you may be failing in school and whatever else, but feminism can teach you to cry about it. Loser book, loser article, loser idea.
/r/MensRights30/05/24 11:02 AM
8

There is wide variety of political opinion here which is incredibly polarised. There are the wokest and most agressive feminists (like Clementine Ford) and HR type Karen’s in politics. There is also still a very strong macho type male culture many places which hasn’t really changed since the 80’s, plus a lot of women which are basically out of the same time period in opinion. Most people in Australia are possibly the least politically engaged or politically passionate of any western country. Tha…
/r/MensRights30/05/24 10:34 AM
4

Yes they suck ass lol. Then these morons wonder why they flop. Shit who would have thought the action watching male audience would prefer Mad Max to Furiosa and can’t be convinced otherwise? It’s a puzzler.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 08:42 AM
2

Yeah, there was some study that of all the western and a few Asian countries Australia has the “worst” (by which I too to mean best) ranking on men’s (especially younger Men’s) various responses to questions about gender equality and feminist statements. But in this case I’m going more off actually knowing a wide variety of Australian men.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 03:38 AM
23

I predict it will happen in Australia first. Huge disconnect between the average man and the media/gov on this stuff.
/r/MensRights28/05/24 12:47 PM
3

Equity doesn’t mean equal opportunity though in any way it’s actually used in practice. Equal opportunity just means women can interview for jobs as well, Equity means you must be sure to hire 50% of women (which ends up amounting to generational discrimination in favour of women if the workplace has more old men in power positions). I would define that category of person who thinks that way and calls themselves a feminist as inconsequential, as they are part of a broader movement and have taken…
/r/MensRights27/05/24 03:39 AM
5

That’s nice - but it’s literally feminists who advocated for a system where the mother is advantaged. In my own country feminist and women’s groups just got a system of assumed shared custody removed with the argument it wasn’t best for the children. So nice thought random internet woman, however I’ll judge whether I want to support feminism by the actual practical actions it takes. Perhaps if feminism was defined and run by you it would be alright, perhaps not, but it’s not, and the overall eff…
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:31 PM
4

Yes - but that’s my point, it’s mens dream of equality, which is rather different from the feminist ideals of constant equity programs etc. If men and women are in fundamental or instinctual disagreement over what equality actually would like like - then what’s equality?
/r/MensRights26/05/24 09:17 AM
14

Feminists want what’s right for men as decided by feminist women. That’s not really what’s right for men, it’s just self serving and deluded bullshit.
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:46 AM
3

Virtually nobody here supports feminism what are you on about?
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:45 AM
1

That show is equality as written by a man. It’s wishful thinking for the best from a man’s point of view. Great show, but not reality.
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:44 AM
6

Lot of talk of feminism fighting nebulous “systems” of “patriarchy” that hurt men - in reality feminism is what caused fathers to have less choice over a child than a mother, it’s what denies them grace to be sensitive and human while rewriting history to pretend men have never had that, when in reality they always did, it’s what consistently advocates for laws that always see instances of couples fighting as “male abuse” of females. The issue isn’t just bitter misandrists - it’s feminists like …
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:42 AM
9

It’s the total lack of protection against most types of laws being made - American has many faults, but what you can and can’t do in law is more clearly defined in the bill of rights and constitution than in countries which are inspired directly in a line from British parliamentary systems.
/r/MensRights24/05/24 12:36 PM
15

It’s because there isn’t much in the way of constitution of bill of rights protecting against anything much here. So under the guise of “protect the women”, political Karen’s can get away with a lot. Of course that’s also easy to reverse because there is nothing really stopping anyone making pretty much any law banning this or that or favouring so and so.
/r/MensRights24/05/24 12:34 PM
16

Court that made the decision was 2 females 1 male btw.
/r/MensRights24/05/24 12:32 PM
2

He shouldn’t be locked up anyway. He shouldn’t have to disprove her story with evidence - she should have to prove it with evidence.
/r/MensRights23/05/24 02:01 PM
3

Exactly - the reason this guy got off was because video evidence showed him innocent. What if there had been no video?
/r/MensRights23/05/24 02:00 PM
2

Yeah they would - If some grown man has sex with a student who was 17 I’d say it was too much. That’s beyond the age of consent in most places - her being a student would make it worse but it’s still too much. You can’t seriously tell me this is worse than manslaughter or death by dangerous driving or a violent robbery, or even violent rape - all of which often if not usually get a lesser sentence.
/r/MensRights21/05/24 09:13 AM
1

Yeah I agree - but you gotta remember this is from America. Weinstein was convicted for like a 1000 years and there’s a lot of insane sentencing.
/r/MensRights21/05/24 05:23 AM
1

Yeah that’s what I think too - I’m all for women doing the same time as men but 13 years for sex with a 17 year old seems insane to me.
/r/MensRights21/05/24 05:21 AM
1

It seems excessive regardless of gender - 13 years for sex with a 17 year old is a hell of a lot. There’s killers who get less time.
/r/MensRights21/05/24 05:19 AM
2

I don’t know - I’m all for women getting sentences like men, but 13 years for sex with a 17 year old sounds insanely harsh to me whether it’s a man or woman. But then again this is from America where Weinstein was sentenced to a billion years in galactic jail for the casting couch and that conspiracy guy got sued for a billion dollars or whatever crazy amount it was.
/r/MensRights21/05/24 05:18 AM
22

It’s worse now with the feminist influence but the reality is the dudes who started it were into women and far more interested in them, almost like muses of a kind.
/r/MensRights19/05/24 08:43 AM
8

You will, it’s also most prominent (albeit less hysteric) in female politicians for reasons they can’t fully explain.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 08:11 AM
3

Feminists never think long term, they merely act. I think believing this is all product of competence or evil genius long term planning would be vastly overestimating those behind it.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 12:31 PM
1

It’s not Australian, it’s American.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 12:27 PM
2

This is from America and the department of homeland security and the McCain institute.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 12:06 PM
24

All these studies include things like drunken sex as assault.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 08:16 AM
1

They won’t support you - they are turncoats who have got theirs and are happy to dick over younger generations of men. The fact they are “elite” and desperate to maintain a politically correct image is why this has happened and why they are susceptible to pressure like this - they are the example of what not to be and why you never ever give into this kind of pressure or let feminist types have the slightest amount of influence in anything you do. Sometimes it’s good to have a moral example of w…
/r/MensRights13/05/24 05:56 AM
8

I get it - 15 years is still way too much jail time given the respective ages regardless of whether it’s woman teacher male student or male teacher female student.
/r/MensRights12/05/24 06:27 AM
9

To be honest she shouldn’t get 15 years jail time for sleeping with a senior when she’s 25 - a man shouldn’t either. It’s far too much.
/r/MensRights12/05/24 05:02 AM
15

If you want nudity then just hire those willing to do it, shit you could probably just audition only fans girls, many would have at least as much acting talent as many “real” actresses. Very few actors and actresses are actually charismatic or talented enough to be irreplaceable.
/r/MensRights12/05/24 01:49 AM
9

Macron is the victim of a groomer teacher twice his age and he’s been with her ever since, there’s very few people like him.
/r/MensRights11/05/24 04:28 PM
-1

Old geezers want to throw away their sad club let ‘em. Younger generations of men can do better and hold them up as an example of what not to be.
/r/MensRights11/05/24 03:20 PM
3

It has the widest disparity between the feminists pushing this shit and mens opinion in general. A while back it showed the greatest gender divide on opinions on a number of subjects out of all surveyed countries (which was all the western ones and most of the east).
/r/MensRights09/05/24 08:58 AM
8

Lol, bet the boys think that’s super cool. Hey kids, don’t be toxically masculine and remember rock n roll is bad for you and masturbation sends you blind! Ha ha ha! People on this sub have the wrong idea about Australia though, they think this is happening because feminism has taken more with the younger generations of men, it’s not so - it’s the opposite, it hasn’t and those pushing this bs are worried lol.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 08:55 AM
2

What a pointless and hollow piece of propaganda - they basically defined being a “traditional” man as needing to be homophobic and aggressive toward your female partner ffs. These people are shameless grifters.
/r/MensRights03/05/24 02:43 PM
1

I get it, but I don’t mean chemistry like romantic chemistry, characters can have chemistry with an enemy or a frenemy (ala Jodie Fosters character and Hannibal Lector in Silence of the Lambs) - it just means that whatever kind of pair they are, they have charisma on screen together that makes you want to watch them. For me these two didn’t have that and that likely starts from neither being interesting to watch on their own. Perhaps they could have been played by other people, but as cast and a…
/r/MensRights02/05/24 01:44 PM
1

Overrated movie imo. The two leads were so damn boring and had no chemistry, maybe it was a good story but I couldn’t get past that.
/r/MensRights02/05/24 09:16 AM
12

It’s quite simple - She’s a moron.
/r/MensRights29/04/24 04:19 AM
12

Exactly lol, he’s protesting for what exactly? He’s in power lmao. What a complete tool, although those glad to see him there are even stupider.
/r/MensRights28/04/24 11:56 AM
12

It’s weird - rallies and protests are peoples way of making their voice heard to power. What is the prime minister protesting for? He’s the one in power. Just an asinine gesture for the women’s vote.
/r/MensRights28/04/24 11:54 AM
52

Aside from the obvious travesty of the false accusation being taken seriously without evidence, what is with these insane US prison terms lol? 99 years? WTF?
/r/MensRights27/04/24 02:14 AM
8

I did and you are making lame excuses for it now.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 03:40 PM
36

He may well have been obnoxious and patronising - but if a man responded to an interruption by an obnoxious and patronising female colleague by going on a sexist rant about all women, do you think that man would be found not guilty of gender based sexism in the workplace? No chance.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 02:18 PM
2

Because those who coin and use it are obsessed with whose in charge and who has power. It’s the same reason “female led” and “team leaders” became a thing in business whereas when it was all men they just used to be called managers (or whatever job title). There’s something seriously wrong with these freaks and they can’t be satisfied.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 11:00 AM
23

Nah - I’m against feminism totally but bitches like this have been with us for all history well before feminism or gender equality was ever the remotest idea to anyone.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 08:57 AM
2

MLB also doesn’t want to draw attention to Bauer as being vindicated (because they hate him for many reasons outside of this). Believe me MLB still operates like it’s 1992 - if this was Shohei Othani or Aaron Judge they would be rushing to broadcast it and cover up the original allegations.
/r/MensRights19/04/24 03:05 PM
28

It’s bad in that it’s intentionally discriminating against men and doing something negative in the short term to them. In Australia if you look at any university advertising 95% is focused on female students (always female voice overs as well), it’s clearly intentional. It’s good in that it’s going to break University for all but the most serious of degrees eventually, because the simple reality is the internet and modern tech has rendered most creative degrees useless, you can easily get the in…
/r/MensRights18/04/24 08:48 AM
6

Article is nothing but quotes from female researchers and politicians. All fools - they can’t stop this because the problem isn’t some nebulous influencers who will go away if you censor them, the problem is them and they are creating the negative reaction in men, the influencers they mention are just some loudmouth and often idiotic men who talk about it on social media.
/r/MensRights18/04/24 05:32 AM
2

From “business insider”
/r/MensRights18/04/24 02:51 AM
5

That’s likely because her book doesn’t reveal much. I’ve read her columns before - she waffles on without any fucking point at all.
/r/MensRights15/04/24 09:14 AM
4

You can not be a feminist (a real one not just someone who uses the name thoughtlessly) and support men. If you believe in any feminist ideology about men you are instantly unsupportive toward and degrading men. But if you must - don’t listen to other feminist women when they diagnose mens problems or the solution for them. After all what would they know? Why would they understand men better than men do? They would not.
/r/MensRights11/04/24 09:19 AM
79

What is with women and all this obsession with “beating” men in asinine ways? It was the same when Caitlin Clark “broke” pistol Pete’s college scoring record. They’re two different leagues, male and female. You don’t see men running a bunch of articles about how Lebron James leads all female players in pro basketball scoring and is beating the brakes of those female player records. Bunch of jealous and petty freaks.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 01:01 PM
87

This moron chose to air this to the public?
/r/MensRights10/04/24 12:01 PM
3

The men’s clubs started as truly secret places - the answer is to continue them that way and make a difference, it isn’t to engage in stupid joining of some lame women’s association nor is it to continue to belong to a club which admits women.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 03:55 AM
17

Lol, look at them all thinking they’re taking part in some genius feminist performance art. What absolutely pretentious wankers.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 05:27 PM
17

The main draw of the lounge was it showed Picasso’s as well. You’d think they could have at least have displayed female artists if they wanted to do this.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 05:26 PM
42

They don’t like school boys being insulted by feminist teachers because of their gender or race - do you?
/r/MensRights06/04/24 01:15 AM
8

“Media literacy” with no further response. It’s funny how so many feminist or “progressive” types hear the term media literacy about half a year ago and think saying someone has none in a disagreement is actually an argument in of itself. It’s not - it’s showing you have zero ability to articulate any counter argument and can only lean on a phrase you’ve heard lately and seen repeated.
/r/MensRights04/04/24 01:41 PM
-10

This looks like some feminist Trojan horse bullshit.
/r/MensRights04/04/24 09:50 AM
3

Nothing. It’s an asinine term used to insult men.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:44 AM
12

It’s a movie children saw because it’s a children toy - but if you watch the movie and have children it’s pretty obvious young children will be bored by the movie. I saw it with family and my little cousin started crying because Barbie and Ken were fighting, then she got bored and did something else because she had no idea what most of the dialogue was about.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 04:28 AM
5

Despite all the disadvantages placed in their way by feminist maniacs - you love to see Australian men succeeding against the odds in “male led” industries and surging ahead. Looks like women will just have to try harder and stop resting on their University education privilege. That’s gonna start meaning less and less.
/r/MensRights01/04/24 09:24 AM
1

It won’t happen at all. There is no ultimate AI on the way. Just better AI which will always be imperfect in different ways.
/r/MensRights31/03/24 02:25 PM
24

It wasn’t really understandable in the 60’s and 70’s - women like Germain Greer and the types of theories they came out with were equally if not more insane than those today. It just seemed more reasonable because some of the things women didn’t have at the time it seemed fair they should have. But many aspects of it were and have always been completely insane or asinine.
/r/MensRights31/03/24 09:52 AM
1

That she can even pass any physical test to become police is the greater crime. Can you imagine being some old frail person reporting a burglary in process and this demented chunky dumper or a woman shows up to “defend” you?
/r/MensRights19/03/24 04:29 PM
6

It actually wouldn’t be that shocking in China if they did one in the same vein. If you’ve ever watched their dating shows they say all kinds of shit to women without a second thought that wouldn’t fly in the west (not just today but basically ever).
/r/MensRights19/03/24 04:09 PM
19

Lol - whole article says nothing, this Flood guy is just repeating lame talking points looking to appeal to feminists which help no one. What a dork! One good part is the article apparently considers younger Australian men more “misogynistic” than ever. Given that probably means not doing what feminists want them to do it can only be a good thing.
/r/MensRights14/03/24 06:53 AM
30

Lol, the UN and their asinine predictions. “300 years till gender equality!” How the fuck can they possibly have a clue what will be happening in 300 years? To put how dumb predicting things 300 years into the future is into perspective, 300 years ago Australia hadn’t been discovered fully, electricity wasn’t used, the Industrial Revolution hadnt happened and 80% of people lived rurally and a majority couldn’t read or write. What a pointless organisation the UN has become.
/r/MensRights13/03/24 04:06 PM
5

Wow a whole 180 people signed a guardian (of course) petition! What an eruption!
/r/MensRights13/03/24 02:57 AM
7

Lol “I do a lot of solo hikes”. A trip to the fridge ain’t a hike sweetie.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 02:27 PM
22

If only it was separatist and they would just fuck off and do their own thing like the Amish. It ain’t separatist - they want to remain forever joined to men and use them, but just in a way that benefits them without having to give a shit about men.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 02:25 PM
2

More like most degrees will lose all value.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 02:05 AM
0

Part of the problem is men not going is actually a solution. Aside from things like medicine and other practical areas why bother solving it? A vast majority of these degrees shouldn’t even exist.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 02:04 AM
2

Merkel for much of her time seemed a competent place holder and bean counter, but now I’m certain her foolishness regarding immigration is gonna give her a terrible reputation as someone who made one of the biggest political blunders of her time, (wherever it all leads). Not unlike Neville Chamberlain, her name will become synonymous with her particular mistake and I do think it will be held up as one of the dangers of more feminine leadership as well.
/r/MensRights28/02/24 12:53 PM
13

Lol, female school teacher approved influencers - I bet the boys think that’s really cool!
/r/MensRights27/02/24 09:48 AM
3

No they don’t, that’s wishful thinking.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 06:27 AM
6

From the article “In our recent experience of working in schools delivering and evaluating an educational session designed to address harmful sexual behaviour in schools, we asked the young people how many would identify themselves as a feminist. In response, there were often just two or three hands raised, often accompanied by an odd snide comment from one of the boys.” This is the real majority perception of and reaction to feminism until “researchers”, “explain” to the children that they actu…
/r/MensRights24/02/24 10:44 PM
2

Reeves is a weeny afraid to really speak up for men. Matter of fact he’s afraid to speak out loud. He’s the only men’s advocate somewhat palatable to feminist types and that says it all. The guy will achieve nothing.
/r/MensRights19/02/24 12:04 PM
1

He’s too big of a mangina to do that lol. Guy can barely speak out loud.
/r/MensRights19/02/24 12:03 PM
23

Same reason feminism is obsessed with men, same reason the Barbie movie was obsessed with men and Ken and shallow about women. Freud solved the riddle 100 years ago. They have Penis Envy. Case closed.
/r/MensRights17/02/24 01:24 AM
1

I know this isn’t the the answer you were asking for when you asked the question and meant do feminists think they are legally and socially inferior to men, but I’ll answer your first question differently - Yes feminists really believe they are inferior to men deep down. That’s why they are so desperate to keep and increase anti discrimination policies and policies pressuring men to hire more women. It’s why they’re so desperate to keep policy which favours women in college and education and so …
/r/MensRights16/02/24 12:41 AM
43

Highly unlikely they were directly asked if they’re feminists. More likely they asked “do you believe in gender equality” - and reported that as affirmative to being feminists. The study claims 35% of men call themselves feminist as well. Does that sound likely to you?
/r/MensRights15/02/24 03:23 PM
1

Exactly - the prominent personality type of feminists has always been the same foul bullying shaming type of woman (I believe personality disorders are much more common among feminist women). It was just easier to ignore when they seemed to have less than men and some of their demands seemed reasonable. But whatever they want, absurd or reasonable - that feminist personality type never changes.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 05:56 AM
2

A lot of it. You watch how prominent feminists act, many of the most famous seem to have personality disorders. There’s something they do with calling men “fragile” or “toxic” or “incel” etc when they don’t meet their expectations which is very in line with just old fashioned shaming of men for not being man enough. The do the same with women who disagree with them by calling them “pick me’s” or saying they have “internalised misogyny”. It’s all just shaming as a form of control. I have a theory…
/r/MensRights15/02/24 05:51 AM
3

It was never used by most women.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 03:14 AM
19

They never have - all the studies claiming massive amounts of people are feminists always ask “do you believe in gender equality” - then when the results are publish claim those people are feminists as it’s the “definition” of feminism. It’s just a sneaky tactic to push the idea feminism is a commonly held philosophy so you’d better get on board. When the reality is and always has been, it’s a bunch of loud malcontents psychos dragging society in the direction they want.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 03:13 AM
7

Only idiots claim to know in detail what happened in pre historic Stone Age times that long ago in that much detail. He has no idea what he’s talking about. How could he? It’s called pre history for a reason. You are correct that he is only providing pseudo theories. To be blunt he’s talking out his ass. The closest we can get to knowing pre history is reading about first contact with Stone Age tribes in more modern times. They don’t act the way the lecturer described at all and if you believe i…
/r/MensRights12/02/24 03:00 PM
13

Ha ha, in the US one of the biggest arguments out forward by those women campaigning for the vote was that they could balance out the black man’s vote (doesn’t make sense since black women got it too but that was their argument).
/r/MensRights10/02/24 04:35 PM
38

You are. The fact you won’t go along with what they want to throw on you makes you a menace to the society feminists would have you live in. Embrace it brother, just don’t flip out, be smart.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 08:22 AM
11

Is anyone looking into girls schools? Does anyone care? Teenagers ragging on the other sex is very common. But The Guardian and ABC wouldn’t be reporting that coming from girls as some huge hate crime. So you don’t want boys schools to exist but are fine with girls schools? Tell me buddy, do you find yourself using the words “toxic” and “problematic” often? This is all pretty ironic coming from someone who makes comments ripping “white soy boys crying” like yourself.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 08:34 AM
9

Who says they’re sexist? Their views haven’t even been mentioned. Upper class girls schools also exist you know? Given that boys are doing worse in education and seemingly nothing gender specific is being done to help them in the same way it has been for girls, perhaps boys schools aren’t such a bad idea for some.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 08:01 AM
14

They have more controversy. The boys schools are just a convenient target for a few reasons - one, feminist types love to bash on anything “all boys” and two, everyone hates privileged private school kids regardless of gender and loves stories of them acting badly. Worse happens in regular schools every day of the year it’s just not a story anyone gives a shit about.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 05:45 AM
14

Yeah because lads culture only exists in co Ed schools right? I garuntee I saw worse behaviour from male students to female students at my crappy public schools than anything dreamt of at these posh all boys schools.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 05:24 AM
4

Movie was man hating turd. Aside from the man hating, it also came across like it was written by a chimp with ADD who couldn’t focus and kept changing both the point of the movie and couldn’t write consistent character development (Barbie goes from hating physical imperfection to calling an old wrinkled woman beautiful all because she looks at people for a minute ffs)
/r/MensRights03/02/24 04:55 AM
5

The message wasn’t good and nor was the filmmaking. Movie sucked and morons enjoyed it, so what?
/r/MensRights03/02/24 02:32 AM
24

The Guardian is truly appalling journalism. The article is all over the damn place and although she obviously lacks understanding of what she’s writing about, even in her ignorance she still fails to even summarise what she’s on about or make a coherent point. Hell the title and sub header are about Barbie, but the first half of the article is comparing Taylor Swift and Donald Trump and Barbie isn’t even mentioned until paragraphs in. It’s like she just wrote an article of random thoughts withou…
/r/MensRights02/02/24 12:55 PM
7

I don’t even believe these stats. Not but a few years ago you had similar “studies” showing more than half of young men had negative views of feminism and other issues, I find it difficult to believe the exact same men have suddenly become so much more receptive to it in a few years. What you usually find is it’s either specific groups being polled or else instead of using the word feminism they’ll say “gender equality” and just swap feminism when they report the results - so supporting “gender …
/r/MensRights01/02/24 05:17 PM
1

Lol, it showed all male characters as morons relative to female characters, the butt of the joke and in need of moral correction. It was hateful and bitter about men. It also sucked aside from that, the writing consistency was awful even for a light movie like that.
/r/MensRights01/02/24 08:09 AM
1

How old are your kids? Barbie was man hating trash.
/r/MensRights01/02/24 04:53 AM
5

Richard Reeves is the living embodiment of limp. He’s the only male advocate the left can (barely) tolerate, soft spoken, inoffensive, apologetic and barely there. Pay no mind to the weeny.
/r/MensRights28/01/24 05:41 AM
20

They’d at least put a child in a psychiatric ward for a while.
/r/MensRights25/01/24 01:02 AM
7

Just have a well thought out plan for how you will maintain assets and what you will say to get custody, or as much as you want if things go south. Pre nups are mostly pointless for regular people. You will take a hit which will be unfair, but if you want to mitigate that and get on your feet quickly think about how. Second property? Be prepared to really tell why you should get custody etc
/r/MensRights22/01/24 01:54 PM
8

You love to see it
/r/MensRights18/01/24 04:52 AM
6

To be fair they’re not capable of an honest discussion because they get upset very easily
/r/MensRights16/01/24 03:05 PM
6

This woman is a moron
/r/MensRights15/01/24 11:38 PM
15

I think slapstick moron men are fine - the problem is the lack of much else. Also that given the power to feminist women will whine and be offended until everything that portrays women in any similar way will be removed. So what your left with is portrayals of idiot men which aren’t balanced out with any of similar women as the butt of the joke, or by much positivity around men. But I didn’t think we makes should stop enjoying dumb humour at these characters expense - that would be sinking to th…
/r/MensRights12/01/24 03:43 PM
2

Lol, that’s right they did, and none of them were conducive to women hunting as much or more than men. In what possible way does the weaker and slower physiognomy become conducive to women hunting more or equally to men in any environment? Especially with pregnancy going on at the same time? On top of that there is literally no tribal Stone Age people who were reached or recorded in which women hunted like men, which is exactly where our ideas about this come from. Yet somehow, these discoveries…
/r/MensRights21/12/23 10:53 AM
1

Lol what? You realise when we talk about prehistoric humans we mean when they had human physiology and brain size right? Not back when they were still more ape than man. Prehistoric humans and modern humans were no different, and prehistoric humans didn’t casually run 28 mph lol. You really are extremely ignorant on the subject.
/r/MensRights21/12/23 04:36 AM
3

Peer review means nothing when everyone reviewing is of the same cracked up disposition and beliefs as you.
/r/MensRights21/12/23 04:33 AM
14

I mean he’s guilty of what they actually said (injuring her while throwing her back in the car and snatching his phone back), but she’s guilty of taking his phone from him, following him, pushing and abusing him down the street The truth is in the old days cops would have just said “we don’t give a fuck about your volatile relationship”, which is what should have happened here. Cos that’s what this is, just two fuckwits having a go at each other and cheating on each other, no different to the li…
/r/MensRights19/12/23 04:29 AM
0

They’re power mad so I guess evil, but in a way they’re not aware of and can’t understand - because they’re stupid. However the average early 20’s or teen girl parroting feminist talking points without being actively involved in the movement isn’t evil. She’s just stupid and immature similar to kids who think communism or whatever other dumb thing was cool in the past. And yes, people will be saying they’re not stupid but I disagree, I think they’re incredibly stupid, it’s just that old geezer m…
/r/MensRights17/12/23 07:53 AM
3

It’s important to recognise that feminism is just doing what it’s always done and demanding advantages for women. It’s irrelevant whether they’re in a position of disadvantage or advantage, this is what they will always continue to do because that’s the personality type of the woman who becomes a feminist advocate - she myopically pushes for advantages for her own group regardless of whether it’s warranted or even if it’s a good long term idea.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:22 AM
2

I think it will influence main stream right wing political parties to a massive degree - but I don’t think you’ll ever see something called “men’s rights” in the mainstream, but rather the mainstream (right or unforeseen parties and factions) will share its major points of view and wants and probably blur them with some kind of simple traditionalism because a lot of people are too dim to follow complex or in depth topics.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 02:55 AM
2

The mental load in the context we have been talking about it referred to hearing the other persons emotional problems. If the article or your or my comments had of referenced anything else I would have talked about that. But they didn’t, so it’s really rather pointless to try to redefine the concept within the scope of this conversation and comments section into something which wasn’t being discussed. Literally all the things you’ve mentioned feminists “helping” men with are examples of the kind…
/r/MensRights14/12/23 04:17 AM
1

You have no idea if that’s true. What is definetly irrelevant is discussion about implementing Islamic law in the west as that is far more unrealistic than things being changed to be better/fairer for family law for men, either based on something new or what the west has already done.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 08:18 AM
3

Gulf Arabs concentrate relatively small wealth in the hands of the few, the (recent) prosperity doesn’t reflect in the overall society progressing accordingly (it will if it trickles down to the rest). Modern richer societies have failed right now, that hardly means they’re hopeless. Goverments, total political systems, all kinds of things have fallen and been replaced in western society over the centuries according to what suits the people. These things are in flux not a fixed state.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 05:15 AM
2

You sound like an immature kid
/r/MensRights13/12/23 05:12 AM
10

Hell to the no. Even if she loved men, she’s clearly displayed by believing in such things that she’s a moron.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 04:54 AM
4

Nah, we just need better laws for men and a return to some accounting of fault in divorce proceedings, not to become dark ages fuck wits with two wives.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 03:57 AM
1

That’s total bs. Most women did not have jobs, only the very lower classes and unmarried. History is full of a mass of middle class and lower class women who absolutely didn’t work outside the home at all. That’s just a feminist thing to say “women always worked it was always this way” to make it seem as though there isn’t another way possible.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 03:52 AM
3

Because they’re poor and haven’t reached the same state of prosperity as others. It’s something the richer better societies will have to work out. Lost Amazon Tribal societies also have managed to protect traditional values, it’s not because they’re intellectually superior to others.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 03:50 AM
2

Im afraid I have to disagree with your first paragraph and no offence, but you have missed the point a little bit. The point was for the vast majority of men, they don’t see their girlfriends or wife talking about her friends messy breakup as “a mental load for him to take on” and aren’t secretly resenting it in the way many (feminist at least) women seem to be. They don’t get mad or frustrated or turned off that their partner has told them something emotional in that way. They don’t have a grea…
/r/MensRights13/12/23 03:42 AM
9

Women dump their “crap” on men all the time. My partner and girlfriends in the past have all come crying to me without giving a single thought to what kind of time it was or what my capacity to listen was, they’re just upset so they do it. It never occurred to me to see that as a bad thing or to get angry or turned off by them. I never thought “oh my god, how can she dump this mental load on me to carry day after day, I just can’t bear up under the pressure” - I’m yet to be in a relationship wit…
/r/MensRights12/12/23 05:51 PM
42

What you’ve gotta understand is this is more common amongst feminists not less. That’s the irony. A normal woman may or may not prefer a little less emotional man, but it’s the feminists types who are like “oh gross this angers me”, the they come up with dumb names like the mental load or fragile masculinity or whatever to justify their dislike of it. You can already tell this woman is an idiot because she uses the phrase “the ick”.
/r/MensRights12/12/23 03:13 AM
4

What complete fantasy. The reason the “pendulum swing” of boys underperforming is happening is precisely because of feminist types who demand favourable treatment for women in Stem (and everywhere). There is absolutely no indication it will even out naturally. If it could have it would have been addressed decades ago when women were already a majority in college - instead those types of women just got louder and more aggressive and the problem got worse. We have growing societal political incohe…
/r/MensRights11/12/23 04:11 AM
27

She just goes with the flow of what’s popular with young women on social media - whatever way the winds blowing that’s where she’s a going. She used to sing all these songs for the loser girls about light hearted competition with other girls and pining for the guys, and now the man hating empowerment thing is hot so she sings songs about that - but if it wasn’t she’d be singing about something else. Like many holywood types, don’t overestimate her commitment to any cause other than her own succe…
/r/MensRights09/12/23 10:38 AM
2

It doesn’t work. Men were right to do their own thing in the first place.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 06:08 AM
4

Yep and not to downplay any rape case - but her charges are much much worse than the Lehrmann guy who is the reason these laws were made. 80 counts including rape and assault and torture, a chaplain on schools ffs. It’s horror movie stuff but it would be a sensation if she were named so we can’t have that screwing with the narrative.
/r/MensRights01/12/23 07:47 AM
1

Because he’s a moron
/r/MensRights30/11/23 02:30 PM
0

Napoleons story was kind of re-invented as him being slavishly dedicated to Josephine well before this movie (which I think is in the movie). In reality he left her. Having said that there is absolutely nothing interesting to me about a character study of a man who wants to conquer and dominate the world whether that’s Napoleon or Alexander the Great. The time period and events surrounding them are more interesting.
/r/MensRights25/11/23 03:19 AM
28

No, but based on the thumbnail she looks youngish. But I could be wrong I don’t know much about her. The point isn’t that they’re not qualified on paper, but more generally that they aren’t ready but are fast tracked because the older generations in charge are mostly men so they’re the only women around. But rather than wait for the current generations to organically become ready and be promoted they promote the women ahead of the time. I’m not suggesting they pull bums of the street and make th…
/r/MensRights20/11/23 12:55 PM
63

Female CEO’s (and other high up positions) are shown to be years younger on average than males. Reason being they are being fast tracked for more gender parity because all the old geezers who are in control are men and there’s few women their age with the relevant experience. So they promote women into these positions with less experience than they would usually accept from men.
/r/MensRights20/11/23 12:10 PM
2

Films are so driven by PC committee that’s why. Adventure time is probably a good example of something more recent that skews young you could show to little kids that’s about a heroic boy.
/r/MensRights20/11/23 08:07 AM
9

Yes it is
/r/MensRights18/11/23 03:50 AM
1

She dumped her kids dad (don’t ask me why any man would have a kid with her) because he didn’t help enough around home lol, all after previously bragging on how feminist he was
/r/MensRights17/11/23 11:33 AM
14

No I would not call out some random drunk yob calling his missis a bitch because it would instantly start a fight, which I would either lose and get hurt, or win and potentially get in legal trouble. What kind of idiot would call out every negative thing they overheard some stranger say?
/r/MensRights17/11/23 11:10 AM
25

No I would not call out some random drunk yob calling his missis a bitch because it would instantly start a fight, which I would either lose and get hurt, or win and potentially get in legal trouble. What kind of idiot would call out every negative thing they overheard some stranger say?
/r/MensRights17/11/23 11:09 AM
1

She used to be Miss Marvel, they killed the male character off and she inherited the title. Captain Marvel was always Marvels lame Superman knockoff anyway. It’s not really a great character.
/r/MensRights17/11/23 04:45 AM
2

Captain Marvel used to be a dude lol
/r/MensRights16/11/23 09:47 PM
1

Literally nothing is stopping women from creating their own characters and stories in a genre. No we don’t need “equality” in the media by turning male characters female. Hell that even goes for Captain Marvel itself.
/r/MensRights16/11/23 09:42 PM
1

Once you watch enough older stuff you realise it’s not actually slow, it’s just that todays entertainment is bombastic and jumpy because it assumes no attention span.
/r/MensRights16/11/23 09:36 PM
1

It’s weird coming from him as it’s sure as hell isn’t present in any of his books from the 70’s, 80’s or 90’s. don’t know about more recently.
/r/MensRights16/11/23 09:29 PM
1

“They” are a small amount of women who see men have made something successful and want to push into it despite no moral justification for it and will use any argument they can to do so. It’s the same as having female commentators added to men’s sports, it makes no sense and has no moral justification yet many feel entitled to it and they are catered to at the expense of what the actual audience wants.
/r/MensRights16/11/23 09:27 PM
2

Ok, why don’t you take those boys place then if you feel you need it. What are you even arguing about? First you imply the program isn’t feminist because it’s from the government - now you seem to admit it is yet it’s a good thing.
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:35 PM
5

None of those negative things you list are more or less masculine than the positive ones you also list. They are simply dumb. But they are no further along some spectrum of masculinity which reaches into “toxic” as no such thing exists. Though I do love the attempted insult of my supposed ignorance - it doesn’t take long before feminist types become triggered that people aren’t bowing down and acknowledging their superiority of ideas so they like to pretend to themselves people just can’t unders…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:33 PM
1

The Australian government produces programs like this because academic and other orginizations push for them. It’s quite clear this is a feminist slanted program from the talk about toxic and healthy masculinities - the field of “masculinities” itself in the “academic” context is an offshoot of gender studies which is based in feminist theory. Are you seriously trying to deny the program is one of feminist idiology and viewpoints? Have you read the articles explaining it?
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:28 PM
7

It’s clearly a feminist initiative. I am commenting on the women because the program as reported currently states it is going to show male role models (or whatever idea the program has of them). Then some feminist academics got mad at the feminist program for not being feminist enough and showing female role models and role models “of all genders”. I am commenting on what is being reported in this article. Already before the program even starts there is argument that the program for boys to supp…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:26 PM
26

And then they wonder what they get out of enjoying “toxic” influencers. They know Tate is a shithead, they enjoy crap like that as a fuck you to everything that’s been rammed down their throat. If it wasn’t for feminist dipshits like those pushing the program Tate wouldn’t have an audience.
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:22 PM
11

I feel feminist women thinking they can understand teen boys and how they need to change and then devising a program to “help” teen boys arrogant in the extreme yes. Especially as the stated goal of the program is actually to benifet women and girls by eliminating gendered violence. Perhaps grown men should be running a program to stamp the toxic femininity out of teen girls and explain to them what positive femininity is - all in the aid of helping boys and men? No? Would that be seen as condes…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:18 PM
3

I already did explain why but you chose to ignore it. What I know do the program is what has been reported. It is very clear the program operates with the idea that masculinity needs to be redefined in a “healthy” way because much of its current state is “toxic” - this is a feminist idea pushed mostly by feminist women who could never understand or help these boys - and to a lesser extent pushed by men who are outliers and mistakenly think other men feel confined by normal masculinity in the way…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:15 PM
5

Lol what? “Masculinity when pushed to extremes hurts men”? What bs is that lmao! Masculinity is simply being a man, there is no extreme version of it. Made the guy with a super deep voice is at an extreme end of masculinity, it doesn’t hurt him. Your ideology that masculinity can somehow be too masculine is the problem and is truly and utterly absurd.
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:09 PM
7

It’s clear from the articles that “masculinities” in this context is a stem of academic feminism and all the talk of healthy masculinity only exists within a framework of belief in toxic masculinity and discussing that. Reading this article and several others 3/4 of the people discussing this and what it should be are clearly feminist women who wouldn’t have a clue about these boys but simply want to push their ideology on them in the mistaken belief it will stick or help the . If it were simply…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 01:01 PM
11

Read the article and you will see already people are saying women need to be added in to the program. Actually most of those talking about it are feminist women.
/r/MensRights28/10/23 12:58 PM
55

“Hey boys don’t listen to rock and roll teacher says it’s bad for you.” “Don’t watch the UFC, it’s promoting violence lads.” “South Park is bad for you so don’t see the movie children” Lol, it really shows how out of touch these academic feminists are that they honestly believe this bs will work. Did anyone catch the part in the article where feminist types were already arguing amongst themselves that the program shouldn’t just try to give boys male role models but those from a diverse variety o…
/r/MensRights28/10/23 10:29 AM
1

The general public has never really stood by feminism. Feminism and the accompanying changes to society were pushed by a minority and enabled by a minority of men. There’s a bunch of people for it and a bunch against and a whole lot in the middle who don’t think deeply about anything but their own lives.
/r/MensRights28/10/23 10:16 AM
1

Not all society, not in the long run, just the elements that give way to it.
/r/MensRights27/10/23 12:56 PM
1

It’s made up. Look at the people making the “discoveries”, read their bios and areas of study and you will see they have a bias and find what they want to find. That’s not to say women can’t hunt anything but from all we know about first contact with undiscovered tribes in colonial times they were very very far from egalitarian in anything.
/r/MensRights20/10/23 11:57 AM
1

Lol, that’s made up bs. There is absolutely no evidence to think they were more egalitarian and looking at modern day tribes plenty of reason to think they were less egalitarian.
/r/MensRights20/10/23 11:56 AM
1

It was extremely cherry picked evidence largely looking to arrive at that result.
/r/MensRights20/10/23 11:55 AM
29

The first example is a woman smashing up the cricket stumps and yelling after she got give out then claiming that would be seen positively in men ffs. No it would be seen as one of the most unhinged and funny things to happen in men’s cricket for years and replayed over and over.
/r/MensRights16/10/23 09:38 AM
2

Not really - they believe in getting female privilege, they actually believe in male supremacy, that’s why they want so much special treatment, they don’t even believe in equality much less their own supremacy.
/r/MensRights10/10/23 08:15 AM
26

I even saw the Australian Guardian referencing “women and children” being harmed in the attacks but not men. And the Guardian is super feminist all about equality blah blah blah If you’re going to go with that “women and children” stuff you’d better be a total traditionalist who doesn’t think women should be in the armed forces or police or politics or anywhere were they could be in danger otherwise you’re just a massive hypocrite who believes in nothing.
/r/MensRights10/10/23 01:54 AM
14

So you married a feminist
/r/MensRights09/10/23 02:59 PM
1

Limp Richard. He’s laughably meek and afraid when you actually see him speak.
/r/MensRights09/10/23 10:56 AM
2

Between that and quoting that Limp Richard Reeves as some kind of authority I tuned the fuck out lmao
/r/MensRights09/10/23 10:56 AM
2

That’s what I see too. So many women just seem to fall into doing everything and don’t really kick up a fuss over it at all. You see the ones that complain more because the happy ones don’t say nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/23 02:04 PM
2

Ikr, I’m mixed and have had feminist women on here telling me where my privilege (or lack of) ranks compared to theirs lol. Unbelievable arrogance.
/r/MensRights27/09/23 09:53 AM
1

It’s partly just arrogance and partly divide and conquer (even if unintentional).
/r/MensRights27/09/23 09:52 AM
1

Also it’s Conor McGregor. He’s nuts.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 06:09 PM
1

Conor McGregor also knocks out mascots at basketball games. He’s not a good baseline for a normal man. Bezoz and Gates wives left them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 06:08 PM
9

Gotta be. Dude actually says something like “I’m a politics student so I know what I’m talking about”. If ever a line was meant to seem obnoxious it’s that.
/r/MensRights12/09/23 03:34 AM
8

Movie was man hating
/r/MensRights12/09/23 03:32 AM
5

Lmao! “Believe me I’m a politics student”! Says it all.
/r/MensRights12/09/23 03:32 AM
1

That’s his point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/23 11:28 PM
1

I find the studies that marriage is good for men and bad for women usually to be from highly suspect sources and researchers who essentially confirm a already held feminist opinion with their “research”
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/23 11:22 PM
-1

Nope - she chooses to stay home then if she chooses to dump the husband he doesn’t have to go on providing for her likes she’s still his stay at home wife. Get a job in a supermarket or wherever else she can. Not hubbys problem anymore, as she wanted it. If you don’t need the man then you don’t need his money.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 04:30 PM
0

You should be able to marry someone who doesn’t earn the exact same amount of money and stays home with the kids without ending up locked out of your house if she chooses to leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 01:38 PM
–

Yeah because that data is being taken from older men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 01:37 PM
–

And yet when more men graduated college that was seen as oppression of women and we had decades of focus on increasing female graduation rates and programs to get them in more specific subjects.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 01:36 PM
–

Psychology is now female dominated at younger levels. Yet your talking about stem needing female representation and it being a good thing psychology has more female representation. Is psychology not respected? Does it not need unique male insight in order to treat males? Why is it not a problem to you that psychology is female dominated and that only gets worse. Why is it some women can only ever see more female representation where men are a majority as a good thing and something that needs to …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 11:46 AM
–

Except there isn’t - are grading or teaching methods being changed to help boys more? No. Because when girls were behind things were changed to help girls. The problem is for boys to become equal in schooling then that means girls will not be doing as well improving at the same rate as boys and women and some men can’t stomach that - so boys remain behind.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 11:32 AM
–

Education isn’t doing anything to help boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 11:28 AM
1

They clearly aren’t meant as a critique of feminism. They’re supposed to be in mens role in the real world. And what if the real world men being dumber than the real world women? Here’s a thought - perhaps Greta Gerwig just wrote all the male characters from the Kens to the real world men to Gloria’s husband as dumb and the butt of the joke because that’s how she sees them and it’s not much deeper than that.
/r/MensRights19/08/23 06:21 PM
1

The movie writes all the Kens and real world men as dumber than their female counterparts and in need of moral correction.
/r/MensRights19/08/23 01:08 AM
1

One thing, this movie and it’s success but also the angry unbidden reaction to it shows is for many this is the straw that broke the camels back in media. Teen boys and whoever else that will also create things will see this and just stop giving a shit about offending feminist type or whoever else. Because it’s so obvious that that helps nothing.
/r/MensRights19/08/23 01:06 AM
4

Everyone understands that - but regardless all the real world men and Kens are written as stupider than their female counterparts and in need of moral correction (even the main human female characters husband is mocked for no real reason). If you make a movie which is a commentary on gender in which one gender is written as stupider than the other, in need of moral correction and changing their ways, as the butt of the joke etc - then that movie is bigoted against that gender. And that it’s deli…
/r/MensRights14/08/23 09:45 AM
1

Lol ok. Don’t read it then if it gets you upset.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 11:00 AM
1

It’s clearly feminist and not meant as a negative critique on feminism at all. If you are in doubt just watch interviews with the director. There is no intentional call out of feminism.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 10:34 AM
1

They spent a reported 150 Million on the advertising budget
/r/MensRights12/08/23 10:28 AM
1

No. My username refers to my love of the dong currency.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 05:09 AM
3

It sucked, was badly written and bigoted in top of that.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 04:30 AM
2

It was man bad woman good in that all the male characters are written much stupider than their female counterparts and mostly in need of moral correction.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:35 AM
3

They say “It’s satire” as a defence against it. Yeah I get it, racist cartoons were satire as well. Bigoted satire. As is Barbie.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:29 AM
0

Well you’ve got an easily impressed woman there so congratulations, that makes life go smoother.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:28 AM
1

Who cares? A billion flies eating shit doesn’t prove it tastes good. It’s a huge IP. Mario just made a billion as well. Most popular toy ever, most popular video game ever. Gee how did that happen?
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:27 AM
1

A billion flies on shit don’t prove it tastes good. It’s the most popular toy of all time. We just saw the most popular video game of all time make a billion as well. Who cares?
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:24 AM
2

What message? Women are smarter than men and men need to change their patriarchal ways?
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:22 AM
1

The movie is basically reliant on bigotry for laughs. It’s no different from old racist cartoons of the 30’s or 40’s. Yeah it’s satire, but the satire is in being biased against a huge group of people and laughing at their expense.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 03:21 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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