TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MCAlleycat Archive

View 3 posts and 188 comments by MCAlleycat 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)
3

A cuck is a man who lets his wife sleep around, so, on the grounds of the very definition of cuck, you are wrong. Worse yet, they describe the cuckold way perfectly in the quote I already cited, but you failed to read. You can’t read. Or learn. I haven’t made anything up, you are actually making stuff up and projecting that onto me. I copied and pasted a paragraph from the article, so I have evidence and you have lies.
/r/AntiFeminists26/08/22 03:23 AM
3

The article… is about cheating… and I am moving a goalpost? Within the article, that is about cheating, they talk about cuckolding as an alternative to it. How are you this stupid?
/r/AntiFeminists26/08/22 03:12 AM
6

I said turning cheating into cucking. Maybe it’s just that you can’t read after all.
/r/AntiFeminists26/08/22 12:13 AM
16

This article is written by someone who is pro-cheating. You can tell. Read the “looking after lust and libido” section, where they discuss how to cater to cheating women by turning cheating into cucking, for fucks sake. Read this last paragraph here: “Imagine how much better relationships would be if couples understood that when a woman starts to feel sexually bored, this didn’t have to mean the end. Think of the marriages and relationships that could be improved if women could discuss their des…
/r/AntiFeminists25/08/22 11:36 PM
4

But also, yeah, just don’t cheat… anyone! Relationships inherently come with a commitment underneath. That’s really the problem to begin with. Accept the responsibility of your partner.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 10:01 AM
5

What’s wrong with your take? You are applying to standards that don’t contradict each other at least, which is good. “Don’t cheat, don’t hit, don’t overreact, don’t overcomplicate.” As long as you are applying this to men, and women, it’s okay. Like, if a man slapped a woman because she cheated on him you would say, “he shouldn’t have slapped her, and a slap isn’t abuse, especially if you cheated.” As long that’s the case, then you’re consistent, which is good.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 09:57 AM
3

What is your point? Are you changing the subject to move on? I was only trying to discuss the relationship that value and ease don’t have, but I can also talk more about what I mean about the value all women start with. You’re saying it takes two to tango, but, women do control the family, not men. Firstly, if the woman says, “you’re out” for any reason to the man, she is going to keep the children. That’s just modern law. Secondly, the woman physically commits more to the child, through preganc…
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 09:40 AM
4

No, it doesn’t imply that. Strong soldiers are valuable. Do they have it easy? But what about their strength? Isn’t it easier, then? No. They have challenges. They have different changes to other professions. High Value ≠ Easy Women naturally have familial direction. Women start the family. This is the value they start with by default, but does not imply they go through life without challenges. Their challenges will be different than a mans challenges.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 09:26 AM
3

People who lose their jobs over a lie are whining about it, and aren’t traumatized? Your takes are hot garbage. You can’t defend against hearsay. It’s a completely successful tactic. It works 100% of the time. If anyone wanted to, they could go to your work, start a rumor, and you would lose your job for sure, if such a thing happened. The existence of charges [guilty or innocent; doesn’t matter] is a bad look.
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 09:05 AM
5

How about you shut the fuck up? Having ones reputation come under attack for no reason is traumatic. It’s life ruining. You could lose your house, car, or all your money, because you lose a job over charges. This can happen even if you are innocent, too. Grow the fuck up. Realize that you need to have a standard for women too, not just the people here. You want the people here to shut up and grow up, but you don’t want women to tell the truth? Give me a break. What the fuck are you talking about…
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 08:58 AM
4

What happens if you are falsely accused? You’re telling men what to do, but it has nothing to do with men. Being cautious around women is excellent advice. Most women are at least influenced by feminism indirectly. At its worst, they practice it. As a result, women - in their minds - have these unspoken expectations of men that are self contradictory, so the man can’t win. To “rectify” this, women feel like they need to lash out. Underhanded tactics like lying about what happened, can come about…
/r/AntiFeminists14/08/22 08:50 AM
6

Lol, I must’ve been out of it for this post, but thank you for clearing it up. Alimony when the wife makes more… what a concept! I might check out the documentary.
/r/AntiFeminists01/08/22 08:10 PM
7

So wait, this one might just be so crazy that I’m missing the point. What is she saying in the tweet? I know marriage in India is not designed for men, in general. Passout? What does that mean? Masters degree? Entrepreneur? Who? I don’t know how much 5 crore is. Who’s paying who? Dispute? Does she mean divorce? If so, why is the reason for the divorce income based if alimony is also assigned? Because I don’t know the other stuff I’ve mentioned, I genuinely can’t tell if “hail feminism” is sarcas…
/r/AntiFeminists01/08/22 07:17 PM
14

Vasectomies aren’t always reversible. And that’s just one thing wrong with vasectomies.
/r/AntiFeminists22/07/22 08:38 AM
7

Why are men incels for posting something a femcel said?
/r/PussyPassDenied20/07/22 07:30 PM
1

Lol “pro life = pro slavery” What a take.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 09:34 PM
11

It’s just a spread-betting strategy to make the average argument convince the most people it can. It has nothing to do with consistency.
/r/AntiFeminists11/06/22 10:18 AM
1

While it would be an over generalization to suggest all women are like amber, it is also an over generalization to suggest no women are like amber. There’s nothing wrong with suggesting that the majority of women are like amber, it’s just about in what ways. Do most women shit on beds? Probably not. Do most women wear makeup? Probably. What I’m getting at is you’re trying to distract from the fact that women are women, and there will inevitably be similarities between them. I think women premedi…
/r/AntiFeminists03/06/22 02:30 PM
4

In formal logic there are what’s known as fallacies, and I’m sure you’ve heard of them, but specifically there is a subcategory of fallacies that have to do with relevance. Really, addressing anything but the argument is considered irrelevant. So for talking with feminists it often has to do with claims about men. Suggesting something about the man that the feminist is speaking with is irrelevant. It doesn’t make any sense. They have to address the actual point you’re making. But they won’t.
/r/AntiFeminists03/06/22 01:44 PM
7

The comment you responded to was a hypothetical scenario, emphasizing the worst kinds of people that are excused according to the article. It’s an example, that happens to be possible. Then, you responded with another hypothetical, which dodges the original comments point, “well what if it’s just casual sex.” The possibility of bad people getting away with bad behaviour is the problem, not the possibility of it just being casual sex. Do you understand?
/r/AntiFeminists11/05/22 11:38 PM
16

You’re being disingenuous, by using the actual definition of a word they’ve used in the article, without addressing the underlying message and overall goal of the article. This article is suggesting to hide something from your new partner, which is a problem on its own, but it also makes it more of a problem when the thing you are trying to hide has to do with sex. So, keeping secrets or lying when asked about your past is a problem, and it’s worse when you keep secrets and lie when asked about …
/r/AntiFeminists11/05/22 11:09 PM
6

That’s probably another reason why she’s after the new man.
/r/AntiFeminists11/05/22 10:59 PM
12

Who else thinks the FDS members just started using fourthwavewomen?
/r/AntiFeminists04/05/22 12:38 AM
1

Digestibility is important! Not everyone shares the amount of effort required to understand a complex position. I don’t mean pressure in an escalation sense. It’s more like “confrontation.” They are forced to make a reply directly or ignore what you said altogether, which looks really bad in debate. You can apply more “pressure / confrontation” and ask, “why didn’t you answer my question?” I don’t think that escalates it too much. If you don’t want things to escalate, just remember, they are usi…
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/22 08:14 PM
3

I agree, people don’t listen to raw logical reasoning. They don’t respond well to invalidation, or having something core to them undercut. I often use named fallacies here in r/antifeminists, because it’s more about me reaching out to open minded people on the fence about pro/anti feminism, and for those looking for reasons to know for themselves. Think about it like this, it’s not about changing the feminists mind all the time. Sometimes it’s about figuring out exactly why they are wrong, and t…
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/22 07:51 PM
7

Just to give you some support, I will go over the mistakes that the user made when confronting you. You started out by talking about the wage gap debunk, and other “statistics tricks” that people use to try and justify a need for feminism. Fair enough, and a valid objection. When someone says to you, “I have been studying this, therefore I am right about this subject,” even if they have been studying it, it is called an Argument from Authority Fallacy, or an Argument from Accomplishment Fallacy.…
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/22 04:54 PM
13

The screenshot shows you say, “you must be sexist if you disagree.” Then when he says that you said, “if you disagree you’re sexist.” You replied with, “that’s not what I said.”! You’re not even in the conversation really, child.
/r/AntiFeminists08/04/22 01:48 PM
2

All I want to add: The fact that somebody getting slapped is a controversial and newsworthy story in the first place, shows how little actual prominent events like WW2 mean to the people of today.
/r/MensRights30/03/22 04:58 PM
-1

It’s all good man, not everything one says will be received well all the time. I like to think there are reigns I can grab for myself and my community even if there are some people who are beyond saving. There may be only so much I can do about it, but I’m going to do what I can. I’m glad you see it that way too, and I wish you the best of luck with your community.
/r/MensRights25/03/22 01:07 PM
3

It’s called a Two Wrongs Make a Right Fallacy when someone brings up another wrong in response to an argument seeking to identify a wrong. It’s simply invalid.
/r/MensRights25/03/22 05:17 AM
-9

If you’re asking what the point is of fighting for society to be better, it’s the same reason why life has meaning. I’m no nihilist, and I believe that nihilism has fundamental logical problems, so when I say life has meaning, then society has meaning. The people who live after you have meaning. Would you torture them with inaction during your life? That might seem like I’m using guilt to make you see it my way, and that’s okay if you think that. The people who lived before us definitely sacrifi…
/r/MensRights25/03/22 01:42 AM
20

Had you considered that the people who created this situation for men, also want men to respond the way you did? Hear me out. I think they want to push out men with strong values and influence from society, to deliberately destroy it. Think about it. You’re exercising strong values by suggesting you want a fair relationship with society, and you are being strong enough to respect yourself and walk away if those terms aren’t met, BUT, that is exactly the goal. If I truly want to break up with som…
/r/MensRights24/03/22 10:58 PM
1

I tend to agree with minus 774 over there a bit. Men are biologically equipped differently than women. Arguably better than women. That’s why I think it’s important that men are rewarded more by society, and they take on more responsibility than women. But that will never happen. People already disrespect and hate men too much for their sacrifices to be worth it. That would need to completely 180 and feminists would need to all say they were wrong about equality in order to go back to the previo…
/r/AntiFeminists14/03/22 01:41 PM
3

I’m saying you should just forget the definition. If I defined a rock as a piece of paper, you’d clearly throw it away, even if it was written in a book. Feminism is not about equality. Say you believe in equality if you do but don’t try to change the definition of feminism back to equality. Bad actors have control, and you’d be battling too hard to have them undo all of your expressive effort in the end. Say your beliefs and how you mean them, and try to orient yourself how you believe is fair.…
/r/AntiFeminists02/03/22 02:31 PM
7

Feminism is a movement. That’s the best way to describe it. I will explain how movements work. That definition is loaded. Ever heard of first wave, second wave, etc? Ever see the people saying #KillAllMen is a feminist hashtag? Ever see feminists in your life call all men pigs but somehow you and maybe their dad are the only exceptions? Ever been forced to pay by a feminist, who says men are equal to women but you have to pay for your privilege? The very definition you provided is clearly not ho…
/r/AntiFeminists02/03/22 12:50 PM
3

And you don’t have to be a religious person either! It’s just a really good way to get people to see the difference between a movement with strict rules that members must assimilate to, and a movement where anyone can take it over and modify what it means. Feminism turns into distinct waves of meaning and even then, particular beliefs shared along the way become associated with everyone who affiliates. Everyone reinforces any idea, no matter how bad. Of course I would support you, as you were fa…
/r/AntiFeminists28/02/22 09:40 PM
13

To acknowledge yourself as a feminist, you must agree with the actions and beliefs of other people who also stand behind the self proclaimed “feminist” title, because there is no concrete unification structure behind the movement. So if you say you are a feminist, you are anti-men, and pro-male abortion, and other ideas that feminists suggest is part of “their” feminist expression. Not all movements nor affiliations work that way. Christianity doesn’t work that way, for example. The bible and cl…
/r/AntiFeminists28/02/22 02:42 PM
4

They are trying to deny having made the generalization to save face. It’s virtue signalling doublespeak. If someone punched you in the face and then says “I didn’t hit you, I pushed you.” They are only trying to confuse the way you see it. When someone says “men are pigs, but not all men.” It’s the exact same trick. They get away with the broad stroking generalization of what they want to assert, by denying that their assertion contains negative qualities. You can’t claim or believe in “all men”…
/r/MensRights21/02/22 11:04 PM
2

It is because women are more likely to be feminist than men, and feminists are more likely to hate men, than men are to hate women. Women as a result as well, are more likely to believe that the views that men hold are wrong, even if they both believe the same thing. Another problem is that women are more likely to think words mean different things than they do, because feminism is about redefining what certain words mean. Like equality, if feminism meant actual equality, the movement would have…
/r/MensRights15/02/22 03:33 PM
3

You know what, I have noticed a trend. Look at these: Bumble: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/bumble.com/the-buzz/virtualdatingtools%3famp=1 Number 3 [Making Virtual Dating the New Normal]: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/relationships-during-a-pandemic-how-dating-apps-have-adapted-to-covid-19-160219 Just the fact that OnlyFans women are trying to get paid by men without being in relationships [No Link] It’s just a load of bullshit, where people are starting to assume you can’t d…
/r/AntiFeminists14/01/22 04:37 PM
1

Nah, I really do mean equality. Treating things equally when they aren’t equal is wrong.
/r/AntiFeminists09/01/22 10:57 PM
1

Equality refers to outcomes. Equal rights = equal outcomes for rights. Inequality refers to when things aren’t comparably equal. You’re wrong.
/r/AntiFeminists09/01/22 04:19 PM
1

Equality = equality of outcome. Inequality = equality of opportunity. I was very specific.
/r/AntiFeminists09/01/22 04:11 PM
1

If you read what I actually said, you would know.
/r/AntiFeminists09/01/22 11:45 AM
0

I’m anti equality. But I’m pro women, pro women’s rights, and anti feminist. Men and women are not equal. They have to be treated differently; according to their strengths / weakness, and abilities / inabilities. It’s obvious that women with have rights and responsibilities around pregnancy when working and men don’t, so if people are so blind as to handle the situation the same way for men and women [equality], I regard them as less than myself in terms of functioning common sense and intellige…
/r/AntiFeminists09/01/22 07:56 AM
5

I don’t think inequality is anti woman. I don’t think men and women are equal. Rights come with responsibilities attached always, so when men had more responsibilities in society, they had more rights to exercise onto the system. That did not mean it was a bad time for women. They were privileged so as to not need to exercise rights nor responsibilities as much in order to have a good life. Not saying that’s right, but I don’t think inequality ever hurt women systematically. It’s always been men…
/r/AntiFeminists03/01/22 12:02 PM
21

Because it doesn’t fit in #TheNarrative
/r/MensRights29/12/21 09:52 AM
9

Just say things that are the way you want them to be while dodging all responsibility and consequences, and get people to join your team… Sounds good to me /s
/r/AntiFeminists29/12/21 07:53 AM
21

Men and women are brainwashed by feminism. Women are also being told to fabricate problems for themselves so they can all join together under the same struggle they’ve all made for themselves.
/r/AntiFeminists29/12/21 12:31 AM
2

I honestly hate this argument. Feminism is a social movement. A cultural movement. You have to be able to openly cite ANY AND ALL cultural, and social examples of feminist principles, even if they are not explicit. Additionally, it doesn’t matter what they define feminism to be, if their actions don’t match their description in reality.
/r/AntiFeminists21/12/21 05:17 PM
1

Because it’s not funny when feminists try and argue serious things illogically. They are trying to educate the audience instead of the audience knowing the truth. Humor is only achieved when the audience is better than the presenter, at the discretion of the presenter. It’s different from intentionally getting something wrong, because they mean it. They aren’t playing a character who got it wrong when the audience knows better. The feminist is also knowing better than the audience which is the o…
/r/AntiFeminists17/12/21 02:13 AM
7

Feminism is anti-women. The following are two syllogistical proofs chained together: 1: - Men need women and women need men for human existence. [Pro-Human] - Feminism demonstrates the lack of need for and celebrates independence from men. - Therefore, feminism is anti-human. 2: - Feminism is anti-human. - Women are human. - Therefore, Feminism is anti-women. Most Feminists are stuck on premise 2 of syllogism 1: “Feminism demonstrates the lack of need for and celebrates independence from men,” b…
/r/AntiFeminists03/12/21 11:08 PM
1

I see your point, but there is a counterpoint that ultimately makes it so you shouldn’t ever think your way. The counterpoint is that if no one teaches their kids, then it can’t and won’t get better. Do you understand what I’m saying? Everyone’s called to do the most that they can do themselves.
/r/AntiFeminists02/12/21 09:22 AM
0

Well yeah. The problem with the poll is some people think they align a certain way, but their actions and biases make their self perception unreliable. I’ve met self proclaimed centrists who are just left wing extremists, really. No matter the poll results I stand by what I said. Feminists hate the idea of western ingenuity and exceptionalism because it is mainly mainly male driven. Men used to work FOR women to give women the privilege and protection they deserve for having to be the half of ou…
/r/AntiFeminists30/11/21 05:41 AM
8

Generally speaking, feminists and Marxists have common interests and tend to share allegiances under the mask of “woke.” Feminists attack something they call a “patriarchy” and have been known to openly criticize capitalism. My point is it makes sense that antifeminists are not woke, lol. Woke people can be anything left of centre, or the centre, I find.
/r/AntiFeminists29/11/21 04:14 PM
2

It actually breaks down the mainstream narrative of consent, which never stood to reason to begin with. Really, once you drink, you are consenting to everything that happens to you until you are sober again. Not like the mainstream narrative, which tries to say that the drunk person somehow cannot consent / agree to anything. It’s because when you are sober, you are responsible for every decision you make, but getting drunk is a decision that further surrenders accurate decision making. So, when…
/r/AntiFeminists26/11/21 03:44 PM
3

Ah. Well, from what they are saying, would you rather improve their argument and help them, or alienate and isolate them? Personally, I would want people to read what I said, learn how to say it correctly - it might be what they are trying to say - and with that optimism, there can be a better opposition to the true logical problems with feminism.
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 11:20 PM
3

I said all women are influenced or affected by feminism. I am correct. It works out such that there is basically always exposure women get to feminist ideas. Through people and media, directly and indirectly.
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 11:13 PM
28

Have you ever heard of a type of fallacy called an Ad Hominem? There are subcategories as well like a Poisoning the Well Fallacy, and an Appeal to Motive Fallacy. Even if you have, I still have a point to make. The more and more that speakers speak of characterizations, insults, and labels, the more that common women start to employ that language in dealing with men in their life. The idea is the speakers want to create an environment where they can win without evidence. They have to win without…
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 09:33 PM
5

What do you do when most women and some men stand for immoral principles? It might not be all women, but all women are influenced or affected by feminism. I stand by women who oppose feminism. It’s origin, where it is, and where it’s going. The women that oppose the origin of feminism, understand that women did not have a “raw deal” when men used to work “for” women. Things are different now, but opposing the origin is about respect, not necessarily going back. Edit: also, going back wouldn’t be…
/r/AntiFeminists18/11/21 09:19 PM
12

Women don’t benefit from feminism. Feminism pushes good, strong men away, and encourages weak, bad valued men stay. Women lose. Women need men and men need women.
/r/AntiFeminists15/11/21 09:40 AM
0

Oops yeah I meant of a person on the basis of their sex when I was trying to talk about women. I’m still right.
/r/AntiFeminists14/11/21 11:39 AM
1

What is, having preferences?
/r/AntiFeminists14/11/21 11:36 AM
-20

No. Sexism is defined as “unfair or unjust treatment of a person based upon their sex.” You see, don’t confuse “preference” with “discrimination.” I can date “women” of particular “colours,” but if that has something to do with sexism or racism in anyone’s books, they have defined the terms I am using, wrong. Shopping is no different; it’s a preference. A basic error in modern attempts at reasoning. Edit: I realized a typo is causing downvotes lol
/r/AntiFeminists13/11/21 07:56 PM
4

The problem with feminism as a whole is it is unadoptable, logically. Because the movement is allowed to be changed. Without founding principles, it means that anyone can hijack and sabotage the movement towards extremism. It also means that different feminists will have different answers for what feminism stands for on certain issues; it leads to the logically contradicting aspects of feminism. Also also, it means that all one has to do is say they are a feminist and they are, and if you say th…
/r/AntiFeminists10/11/21 11:38 PM
7

They don’t know he is guilty. Because like you said, that sign would have evidence on it, not a dumb slogan.
/r/AntiFeminists09/11/21 05:23 AM
1

“Communists are conservative”! Blocked.
/r/AntiFeminists08/11/21 05:28 PM
1

Oh and here’s something for you to read.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 09:10 PM
2

Feminism and Marxism are allied. They are both woke and I have seen enough evidence to believe it. Given how this page uses the term “right wing nut jobs,” I can tell it’s obviously a marxist page, lol. Because more moderate people would use the term conservative, and conservatives prefer the phrase “normal people,” or something similar, to describe conservative. Nice try commie. It becomes real tricky when socialism and gender issues get discussed. I know. Also like I said, people can claim the…
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 09:09 PM
1

Lies. I’m not a tradcon. Christianity denounces feminism; the bible warns against giving women too much control over society and that society will collapse if that occurs. Chivalry is to serve women who serve men, so you have it wrong. It smells like socialism in here. Socialism is obviously wrong. You don’t understand service, and the dynamics around giving before receiving. Men work and run the world for women, take the sacrifices and the risks for women, because women are supposed to serve me…
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 07:44 PM
0

You’re certainly ascribing to me beliefs I don’t hold. Women don’t rule the world. Are you suggesting that traditional values promote feminism? A hard sell.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 03:34 PM
-1

I’m not a tradcon. I’m close. So it doesn’t apply. It’s also a way to label and attack people instead of arguments. The genders aren’t equal. Progressive values are largely mistaken. Men comprised leadership in the economy and government. That is what I meant mr Strawman.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 02:47 PM
1

Tradcons… interesting. You know, if you refute feminism you need to replace it with something. When women had privileges and men had to earn and work for women with no privileges, but ran society as a result of that burden, that was the most fair system, which accepted gender differences. That doesn’t mean you have to draft anyone by the way. Men need some leverage over women, but currently women work independently from men, and accrue status independently from men, which means most women outcla…
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 02:12 PM
1

Women have ulterior motives because it turns out people have ulterior motives and we can articulate what most women’s motives are and talk about it. Especially if evidence is presented.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 03:40 AM
2

A: Definition clarity doesn’t prove nor disprove what you said; my argument did. B: I think his intentions are “not all women, but most women.” I happen to see a truth in “too many women care only about height,” and so I want people to see it in a good light not a bad light.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 03:22 AM
0

Just try to word your messages well. Good luck, and hopefully you find someone who doesn’t care about or is comfortable with your height.
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 03:16 AM
7

Sexism = discrimination on the basis of sex. Discrimination = unfair / unjust treatment of someone or a group. Sexism = unfair / unjust treatment of someone or a group on the basis of sex. How is it unfair, or unjust against women, to make an argument about their nature with evidence of their nature and how you experience them? He showed a pic of a fairly annoying and common situation. Before you say “not all women” just know, that doesn’t make his comment untrue, because he’s making a statement…
/r/AntiFeminists07/11/21 02:41 AM
2

No, don’t say: “make up your mind.” This is not a decision. This is a double standard contradiction and they intentionally have both. It’s the “Women are Strong” and “Women are Vulnerable” contradiction. The movement pushes both narratives so depending on the woman’s situation, she can use either to win an argument with someone, depending on which is required. It’s very manipulative. You need to be saying that feminism is illogical, and can’t be adopted with a clear conscience, not asking them t…
/r/AntiFeminists05/11/21 09:25 PM
26

“A real woman wouldn’t cheat” is a textbook example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy. We can show a valid counterexample where there are women who stand by cheating on certain men or all men, just because they believe in infidelity itself. Really, never make an argument like this. There is no need for arguments about all women nor all men, because the human species should not be attacking itself fundamentally, yet here we are.
/r/AntiFeminists04/11/21 06:57 AM
6

Yeah, I understand where you’re coming from. The issue is what are you going to do about it? There are countries where feminism, and other woke ideals are becoming unchallengeable and the new status quo. Personally, I don’t see a future for human kind when humans target themselves and they way they work.
/r/AntiFeminists04/11/21 06:53 AM
25

“Why the Hell do feminists get so pissed at guys who want rights?” The answer: - Because they think social treatment under the law [rights] is a zero sum game. More for me = less for you. When people view things as zero sums when they aren’t, it generally correlates with expressions of anger. It’s the same reasons why socialists get angry at rich people; they falsely think that money and wealth is a zero sum game. The more you have = the less I have. There is no evidence in either case that thes…
/r/AntiFeminists04/11/21 06:14 AM
12

The problem is feminism is in denial of men’s rights. It’s like a Jewish person in nazi Germany saying “I don’t like nazi bashing but we need to stop supporting oven companies.” It takes a lot of weakness to hold such a position and it just isn’t enough of a response. Feminism if enacted beyond what it is saying, would commit so many human rights violations that it would be hard to keep track of. New stuff is being invented daily.
/r/MensRights03/11/21 08:24 PM
2

Feminism relies on more fallacies than just Ad Hominem Fallacies, too. A common one is the No True Scotsman Fallacy, which they would try to say that extreme, self identified feminists are somehow not true feminists, when really they advance the movement towards more supremacy related ideals. We cite the valid counterexample, and they illogically deny it. Feminism is full of contradiction and fallacious thinking.
/r/AntiFeminists03/11/21 08:01 AM
8

None of the claims you’ve listed are valid for the reasons you’ve given. This is mainly because of improper premises, but also the arguments don’t even follow the faulty premises properly. It should be noted that there are more mistakes than I’ve cared to write about. Premises being used, and the respective errors: - Assuming that “male” and “female” are not both necessary for a sexual species to exist; suggesting that “only women” need to exist, and suggesting that the “mutation that happens to…
/r/AntiFeminists02/11/21 04:43 AM
2

Can you make a mega thread like the ones anti-vegans have?
/r/AntiFeminists29/10/21 05:24 PM
1

Well, just because people badly represent an idea, doesn’t mean the idea is untrue. That would be a Fallacy Fallacy.
/r/AntiFeminists29/10/21 05:22 PM
1

First Paragraph: So, when you say my ideas are inspired by my religious views, that is a Genetic Fallacy, because the origin of my claims is a distraction from the actual claim. The claim is reachable with pure logic as well, and it’s how I reach out to atheists. In my other comments, I described how another commenter was using a Strawman Fallacy as you are here to suggest I am arguing that there is a creator / designer. I am not. I am saying that humans have a design. Designs don’t imply design…
/r/AntiFeminists29/10/21 04:21 PM
1

Paragraph 1: Ad Hominem Fallacy / just irrelevant. Paragragh 2: Confusing attraction with duty. We want to benefit people in society who contribute and make society exist. If everyone was gay because sex was only a leisure, humanity would end. Paragraph 3: Ad Hominem Fallacy. Examples of abnormal defects don’t affect arguments about what is normal. I am arguing about what is normal. Overall, you seem to be bringing up a lot of things that are irrelevant / attacking me instead of the argument pre…
/r/AntiFeminists28/10/21 11:22 PM
2

You have made an Either Or Fallacy here. In reality there are more options than two. There are more than I’ve listed. Options: - Ignore Them: this is an unintelligent option in terms of strategic benefit. It means you know less about their strategy, and less about why they do something. You need to know everything they are saying and know the debunk or counterclaim necessary to show it’s invalidity if there is invalidity to the claim. I have proven that there is invalidity to the feminist moveme…
/r/MensRights28/10/21 11:48 AM
24

Unfortunately, people just use invalid definitions of “misogyny” and “sexist” to dismiss and remain on their side of “the isle” when presented with objective reasons why there is no “isle” about male mistreatment by society.
/r/AntiFeminists28/10/21 11:25 AM
5

Mostly, you can rely on logic rather than researching what others think about it. For example: Feminism is a decentralized movement of voluntary membership. This means that anyone who says and acts on behalf of the movement can sabotage it or progress it in undesirable directions. This means that people are going to try and say “that’s not a true feminist, that’s just a female supremacist” or something and you reply, “that’s a No True Scotsman Fallacy” because the movement is a decentralized vol…
/r/AntiFeminists28/10/21 10:51 AM
0

Saying humans weren’t designed is a Strawman Fallacy, because your arguing about the designer, and not the design that humans are. It’s a different argument than mine. Duty is implied just because you and I and people only exist due to heterosexual inputs / contributions. The word duty describes and lumps together similar actions that produce a certain result, to prove a point. I don’t care if you don’t like the word choice, and talking about overpopulation and unchecked breeding is called a Vac…
/r/AntiFeminists28/10/21 10:17 AM
-1

There are a few ways to understand it. The first way is called the design argument. Humans are designed a certain way. You can’t identify as older than you are or different than you physically are. You can’t claim you are 1000 years old because you verifiably aren’t. One of the designs that humans are is straight. That is the way that humans exist, is through straight and heterosexual interactions. The only way to understand the previous paragraphs is to understand the mistake that people are ma…
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 11:35 PM
1

Okay
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:59 PM
1

Well not always this. What about wanting a family?
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:58 PM
8

It’s not about trust anymore; although I agree with your position. Let me explain. Even trustworthy women and women who are actually more reasonable and even anti-woke; they are going to be influenced by at least one feminist friend, at least one woke friend, and at least one media source that is woke. Because of this, their overall position will shift woke no matter what and even if they are on guard. So I guess I’m trying to say it’s less about individual trustworthiness and more about cultura…
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:55 PM
1

I’m not offended, lol It’s my informed opinion that humans are objectively straight by design, and only behave in gay ways illogically; against their design.
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:49 PM
2

I think it is. Most of society think they “won” but I still have the opinion that being gay is illogical. That’s not homophobia by the way, to have a rational anti-gay position and think it is wrong.
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:46 PM
2

Unfortunately, you didn’t mention a standard to prevent woke things from coming up in a food sub. If someone says “look at this pride cake I made” you should ban it, if you aren’t a hypocrite.
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 07:38 PM
9

Cultural acceptance of man hate was caused by feminism
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 08:10 AM
6

I’ve been saying this for a long time. Equality is immoral when the things that you are trying to equalize are not equal. 2 = 5 is immoral. Men = women is immoral. Men and women are not equal and are both capable and specialized to do different things, so giving women the rights to work independently from men unfairly offsets the gender balance. Men should work for women and women should continue to be happy with that privilege they used to have. Women can be engineers and stuff if they enjoy th…
/r/MensRights27/10/21 07:08 AM
1

It has to do with attraction. Male and female attraction is objectively different. Men typically use visual standards, and women typically use competency / status standards. More men prefer more of the women, and more women prefer less of of the men. This creates a situation where women date up / above themselves in the dominance / competence / status hierarchies, and men date down / below themselves in terms of dominance / competence / status.
/r/AntiFeminists27/10/21 01:06 AM
4

You don’t need to use statistics to back up logical arguments if formed well. If the conclusion follows logical premises without fallacy, the conclusion is always true. One way to prove that the wage gap is not real is the legal argument; that companies would be fined more if they were actually paying women less for the same exact position, which is not occurring. Another argument is the efficiency argument; that they would only hire women if they were actually a cheaper alternative to men, whic…
/r/MensRights20/10/21 09:51 AM
3

Again, I’ve said this before, this is similar to spread-betting. They are throwing out ideas and see what will stick / conflict. It’s a strategy to determine which principles can be used out of desperation to obtain power.
/r/AntiFeminists19/10/21 06:13 PM
8

They are allied with feminism
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 10:45 PM
11

They are allied, unfortunately. One doesn’t come without the other. Trying to ignore this problem is like not talking about driving or parking in a car subreddit like the cyber truck one.
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 10:44 PM
4

Well I don’t think you should ever let your “guard” down. You should always have some form of filter to select like-valued partners from. Additionally, university is a terrible place to meet women. Just too feminist overall as a place.
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 10:38 PM
7

Your chances are even lower because even sensible women going to university are going to influenced by at least one feminist, and therefore you will endure at least “secondary source attacks” through any woman you meet
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 06:11 PM
4

Saying “actual feminist” is a No True Scotsman Fallacy because they are trying to exclude the valid example of the extremist feminist from being an actual feminist.
/r/AntiFeminists18/10/21 05:34 PM
1

A component of the culture war is the persistent influencing of a false ideology on everyone in their day to day lives.
/r/AntiFeminists17/10/21 10:59 PM
2

Listen. If you don’t know what this is, then you aren’t ready for the up coming civil war. Think about it. Most of society is rationally ignorant - meaning they choose not to fully inform themselves as much as an expert - and when most of society gets polarized, identified, and dehumanized, then you have the ingredients for genocide.
/r/AntiFeminists16/10/21 02:53 AM
2

Women used to like men, and men used to like women. Both of these were true without feminism around. Feminism caused this to change; nothing else.
/r/AntiFeminists15/10/21 07:33 PM
17

Unfortunately for them, trying to argue “all men” when there are valid counterexamples to suggest “not all men,” means that their position is indefensible. They are wrong. It’s a Cherry Picking Fallacy to represent some men onto all men, and it’s a No True Scotsman Fallacy to exclude valid counterexamples, which is actually most men. Their position is invalid, and therefore they have to resort to using their emotional state as an excuse to dismiss their mistaken position.
/r/AntiFeminists15/10/21 07:30 PM
1

No no, don’t use the word “good.” I know this post is old, but hear me out. They are holding on to the “female benefits” of traditional conservatism, and rejecting the “female responsibilities” of traditional conservatism. Confusing “good” with “benefits” implies that responsibilities are bad, instead of a requirement for fairness within the traditional system. Men worked and earned for women. Their is no privilege if it’s earned. And it is done for women. Women birth, raise, and educate childre…
/r/AntiFeminists14/10/21 11:51 PM
1

Well, technically it is their responsibility to try to convince you. Just tell them you haven’t heard a good reason to be a feminist yet, and explain that it is illogical to be a feminist to begin with. Highlight any or all or anything I have missed from the following to them: - The “Women are Strong” and “Women are Vulnerable” contradiction. - The “Women are Victims of Men” and “Women are Proud Abusers of Men” contradiction / Two Wrongs Make a Right Fallacy. - The “Women are Scared” and “Women …
/r/AntiFeminists14/10/21 11:36 PM
6

It’s not true. Men of the same muscle size and density, and same combative knowledge as a woman will always win a fight [for example] against the woman. Men physically outperform women. Men have biologically faster auditory, visual, and muscle neuron firing speed, than women. It’s a physical genetic difference between men and women. Testosterone also boosts muscle development in men. This is a physical and chemical difference between men and women. What this person has to do to argue these false…
/r/AntiFeminists14/10/21 11:09 PM
1

True, but then we are getting into semantic differentiation between “murder” and “self defense.” When I said “killing someone” I meant murder, and murder has to not be self defense.
/r/AntiFeminists03/10/21 10:25 AM
7

No, killing someone for any reason is morally unacceptable.
/r/AntiFeminists02/10/21 02:54 AM
4

Already have 😉
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 04:33 AM
9

Cherry Picking Fallacy
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 04:15 AM
4

Don’t confuse women with feminism, and don’t confuse women with people. I’d look at this as a women doing a good thing, or maybe just as a person doing a good thing. She didn’t do that because she’s a feminist or because she’s a woman. She did it because she’s a good person. Feminism largely is anti-men, pro-violence, female supremacy etc, by their own decrees.
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 03:41 AM
8

OP commented # KillAllMen to me, I think he’s just a feminist troll. I downvoted this post though
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 03:38 AM
6

Honestly, I’m surprised that a feminist was able to post invalid propaganda, here…
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 03:27 AM
5

This subreddit is full of them. It is you’re responsibility to determine the validity of your claims before you make them. Asking me to provide evidence when you are the OP making a fallacious argument is also fallacious, and is called a Burden of Proof Fallacy. Basically, it’s not valid to make the unfounded claim that feminism is good unless other people show you that it is not good. It’s like saying the world is flat, unless people show you it’s round. It doesn’t make any sense because you do…
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 03:17 AM
6

I disagree, feminism is a clearly defined movement with an excess of evidence to the contrary of this post, and allowing feminism to infinitely absorb the good deeds of women and infinitely exclude the bad deeds of women is called a Cherry Picking Fallacy. You have my downvote, sir.
/r/AntiFeminists29/09/21 02:46 AM
8

It’s a shame that we can’t make something especially for women without it being offensive.
/r/AntiFeminists28/09/21 07:56 PM
8

The argument shouldn't be that men or women are oppressed. What a dumb argument. Life is full of suffering, and suffering that is not created consciously. It is built into human design. Women have to at least raise children, and men have to at least serve their families. Feminists are ungrateful of the service that men have done for women and society before feminism existed. They blame any pre-feminist problem on men, not realizing that those problems are inevitable.
/r/MensRights28/09/21 07:24 AM
11

Literally the reason why men don't want to work, is because women are allowed to work for enough money to not require men in their lives. People are useless unless they do labour. Women are useless unless they at least raise children [labour only available to women]. Men are useless unless they at least work and earn [the only labour left for men]. THAT DOES NOT MEAN women can't go to school or be engineers or something AS WELL, it means that if men can't force male values into the family by bre…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 04:01 AM
1

Sorry, I forgot to reply until now. I'm not afraid of anything. I am warning you, and everyone that the results of toleration of the experiment won't be as you expect and I am citing history, tactics, and reasons why what I'm saying should be heeded. This one case will be used for playbook justice. That is, once something has been accepted once, it can now be accepted another time. This obviously repeats.
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 03:09 AM
1

Property, is not an indicator that you need to vote. Park usage, [some] social issues, etc; the reason why men also only needed to handle this, is because they were performing a leadership duty for society and it's protection for women and children of society. Surely, not a hard concept to grasp for someone as stupid as you are.
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 02:16 AM
1

Saying that I’m wrong without evidence or reason is an Ipse Dixit Fallacy. Please explain what the relevance of: “you don’t need to work to own property.” How do you want me to respond? With “duh? This is irrelevant.”?
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:45 AM
1

No, it is, you fucking moron, because I’m saying you only needed to vote if you’re working, and you are saying you don’t need to work to own property. The only way I can respond to this, so it’s relevant to my original comment, is to connect your idea to mine which means you’re implying that if you own property but do not work you need to be voting. Which leads to my question. Otherwise YOU are making the irrelevant reply to my original point.
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:37 AM
2

Please stop spouting lies and false accusations and answer the question: “You need to vote if you own property?”
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:27 AM
1

I asked you a question, making it your prerogative to answer it, before I can continue.
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:25 AM
-16

No, it is. I responded directly to your lame effort, and gave you related context.
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:22 AM
-15

Okay, and? You need to vote if you own property? I don’t necessarily think so. But let’s focus on something else first. The family is necessary for the human biological organism. It’s the only way to introduce the next generation of human beings. This requires women and men to commit to this task. Unfortunately, that means the design on your society has to force men and women to be together. This is best done when men working earn and when women accept privilege. Because we don’t want women to d…
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 01:14 AM
-21

I disagree with this because the guy in the first picture has it wrong. Women didn't need to vote, because voting only impacted workers. It's not unjust that we don't ask people to make a decision about something who it doesn't concern. Imagine a company resolving a business decision, which should only concern the members of the meeting, but they ask random people on the street? Does that make sense to you? Now, because of feminism they are involved in the workplace, and didn't like being privil…
/r/AntiFeminists26/09/21 12:06 AM
4

What you don’t realize [maybe] is that feminism is built on logically contradictory principles. They are essentially juxtaposing yet opposing principles which allow any convenient excuse to seem valid. To name a couple: The “Women are Strong” and “Women are Vulnerable” contradiction. The “Women are Victims of Men” and “Women are Proud Abusers of Men” contradiction. The “Scared” and “Brave” contradiction you named. The “Women are Capable Earners” and “Women Need Men to Pay” contradiction. The “Wo…
/r/AntiFeminists24/09/21 09:14 PM
2

An easier and more accurate way to explain this to them is to say that their belief system and worldview is logically invalid. You do this by identifying that FDS calls men derogatory names and that FDS claims they don’t like getting called derogatory names, and then cite the Two Wrongs Make a Right Fallacy. They are conscious members of an invalid set of beliefs.
/r/AntiFeminists22/09/21 11:37 PM
0

No, feminism is not about equality. Intellectually, you are leagues behind where the arguments are between feminists and most men.
/r/MensRights22/09/21 03:40 AM
1

Sorry, what do you mean?
/r/AntiFeminists22/09/21 02:03 AM
1

I don’t like the language of “equality of opportunity” and “equality of outcome.” Here’s my translation: Equality of opportunity = universality. Equality of outcome = equality. The nuanced purpose of this might seem purely semantic, but it’s actually important because people will automatically associate equality with being a good concept or a default concept; when actually, in most cases, it is unwarranted.
/r/AntiFeminists22/09/21 01:57 AM
-3

While I understand you are proposing a position that confronts the counterposition, did you ever consider that two wrongs don't make a right? Why are you abandoning the position that abortion is wrong because you are killing someone? Anytime someone tries draw a line on when to kill them, it ends up drawing a logically invalid line that also applies to developed adults.
/r/MensRights22/09/21 01:10 AM
0

I don't agree that women and men are the same. I don't advocate for gender equality. Universal rights are what I advocate for. Rights that don't identify a gender in them. Women and men are not the same. There are differences between the genders. Before feminism, men had to work for women. There are three bolded words in that sentence; "had," "work," and "for." Had = not a choice, work = earning, for = to privilege. Earning an income was not a privilege for men. Having money is only a privilege …
/r/AntiFeminists22/09/21 01:04 AM
2

Well, the truth - unfortunately, for google - is that not all of google can be politically wrong or indoctrinated, because that would just mean google is manned by people, not algorithms. Really, algorithms can't lie, unless they are designed to hide the truths they observe. Too many people see the problem with FDS and therefore the algorithm will somewhat represent what most people search. It's hard work for google staff to rig it's engine results, so they don't always get away with it.
/r/AntiFeminists14/09/21 07:31 PM
2

I don’t understand why you are okay with it? I see so many people take this fucking lazy, reclining armchair position. “Let them try out their experiment.” No. If you let them try and EVEN IF it fails, history will be scrubbed in a way that lets them keep using the discriminatory system. Think about socialism, history is continuously being scrubbed so the Soviet Union and nazi Germany and maos China are not valid examples of the system clearly not working. You should call out this sexist ploy. N…
/r/AntiFeminists14/09/21 06:09 PM
1

You obviously missed the level, on which, I am criticizing you. I am telling you that the use of irony itself is helping advance the feminist movement and agenda. Irony / humour / acceptance of anything in the hopes to watch it fail, all because you don't think they will be successful, is a very bad strategy. In this case the 'anything' is feminism. I understand some people try to use humour to defeat a position, somewhat socially, but it doesn't work for this, because they are attacking the rea…
/r/AntiFeminists13/09/21 11:30 PM
-10

Why does this have so many upvotes? You aren't an anti-feminist, and this isn't an anti-feminist position. Saying "great," implies you accept feminism, rather than reject it and it's principles.
/r/AntiFeminists13/09/21 03:29 PM
27

"What happens when girls believe hollywood portrayals of women vs men in a fight"
/r/AntiFeminists11/09/21 08:52 PM
1

Truthfully, the reason why women didn’t work or fight in the past, and still never really should today, is because men are better suited to earn that task to privilege women. Women are the more important gender to protect, as time from them is required to create the next generation of humans. No time is required from men in this regard, and so it only makes logical sense for men to be physical labourers and women to be familial labourers. This doesn’t mean that women can’t do what interests them…
/r/AntiFeminists11/09/21 08:19 PM
1

Have you never seen a movement before? Do you not understand what an agenda means? It means that you add however much you can contribute to the movement's agenda so that over time the movement succeeds in carrying out it's agenda. While sally is gone, there are others pushing the pro-male-abortion idea. Let me give you a timeline example of an evil feminist agenda taking some time to implement: Oct 22 2001 "Poses ethical questions" - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-79711/We-create-babie…
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 03:20 PM
1

"By that logic, married women who doesn’t want to get divorced are all anti-feminist?" This invalid rhetorical question is an example of a Fallacy of Composition. You are assuming that what I am saying is true for some women would be true for all women in the opposite case. That is not logical. I said that feminism promotes divorce as a good thing that people should try to do, rather than recognize it is a tragedy as normal people should. Even though some people might express happiness after the…
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 02:05 PM
6

Imagine a cult, that you are oblivious to, that continually professes the joy that all women could supposedly find in divorce, and that would be more accepted, if not for this sub. You are pathetic.
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 01:07 PM
13

Feminism is pro-divorce, and anti-marriage.
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 12:24 PM
17

Unfortunately, even though you seem to be associating this with "pilling," let's say, I'd have to agree with OP that feminism is very pro-divorce, and anti-marriage.
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 12:24 PM
8

I'm pretty sure everyone does something with their life... You're just mad that there is advocacy and voices speaking truths. You would prefer that people stopped taking a few minutes from their rather long days, to post about the bullshit that Feminists, themselves, have been taking a few minutes to say.
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 02:20 AM
8

It's not barking, it's a call to action. Abortion is the means of killing men. The idea is to keep the action unspoken. It's an indoctrination technique that allows the populous to get the mission, and understand it, without it breaking the criminal "call to action," law. Basically, the plan they have is for women to find out the gender of their child and assess the temperament of her husband. If he's gone or weak-valued, she can trick the child into thinking it's a girl, and call it a sexist, t…
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 02:10 AM
1

...That's what I said...
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 01:59 AM
1

In your mind, two wrongs make a right? Surprising. Just because it is confusing now, doesn't mean you should be allowing that to continue. Why not use your voice and tell people to not accept sexism? If enough people react the way you did, you realize that there won't be enough people to take society back to the way it was, right?
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 01:56 AM
1

While I understand there may be humour here, unfortunately, I would advise people not to take your advice. You'd really give in and confuse society more?
/r/AntiFeminists10/09/21 01:20 AM
4

What feminists, BLM, communists, and other groups that are built off of the idea of categorical oppression, just can't understand is that people born today did not contribute to past oppression, and are therefore innocent. Keep trying to assign the blame chain.
/r/AntiFeminists28/08/21 03:28 PM
0

No, actually. I bold words that are the most important ones to read, and my entire message is intended to be read with the same intensity. It is your fault if you are offended, or feel shouted at, for being wrong.
/r/AntiFeminists06/08/21 09:55 AM
3

You probably only think that because Ben is more right wing than Jordan, and you just don't know how difficult it is to contribute to the culture war without being hated. Ben just has a different attitude, but that does not affect the fact that he is smarter than you about many things. They are both highly intelligent, and they both understand many fields like economics, psychology, education, and politics. Even more than that. If you actually asked Ben what his views are, he will break it down …
/r/AntiFeminists06/08/21 09:50 AM
1

Oh no! Computers are wrong! How will I ever write a comeback to your claim?
/r/AntiFeminists16/07/21 12:36 AM
8

Why create derogatory words?
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 11:53 PM
19

It's a derogatory, gaslighting term used in the front lines of the culture war.
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 11:51 PM
1

They were likely shaming dad bods because they are something men are not worried about and feminist tactic involves gaslighting and schemes to confuse men who don’t think things through logically. It’s like they are using a modified “shit test” in the culture war. Personally I am against dad bods, because I am pro fitness / exercising. Personally I believe the scientific studies that show it makes your organs like your brain and heart work better.
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 11:01 PM
2

You understand incorrectly. A dad bod does not mean overweight, because shape does not mean weight. A dad bod does not mean plus sized, because shape does not mean size. Dad bods refer to the shape of a guys gut; lacking abs. It only means shape. Dad bods can record / measure a healthy weight medically. That's the weight part. Dad bods can wear normal jeans, medium t-shirts, etc. And that's the size part.
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 08:50 PM
2

Here's the logical problem with your concerns. 1: Intelligent species don't demonize, hate, or betray the other gender; who are both responsible for the existence of their species to begin with. 2: Do you seriously believe God - the most intelligent [omniscient] being - would take the side of feminism - a logically errant system - and doom intelligent humans? Take these points together and you have nothing to worry about.
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 08:37 PM
9

It's a cultural problem. So the ties are inherent to the attitude and person regardless of their actual opinions. The issue is most women are covertly feminist and have been indoctrinated to hate men in a culture that has been slowly shifting towards female supremacy from a place where there was no gender supremacy to begin with.
/r/AntiFeminists15/07/21 08:13 PM
8

Fair enough, ain’t nobody got time for negative vibes in the wild
/r/AntiFeminists14/07/21 02:08 AM
11

I’m like surrounded tho. Family and friends are all compromised and feminist by default. It might be easier for some people but it depends where you live
/r/AntiFeminists14/07/21 01:44 AM
17

But like, how do you even talk to a feminist about it? They have the worldview and assumption built in when their assumption is invalidated by your worldview. Their assumption is that all women are being disrespected by all men, meanwhile a sizable and unspoken majority of women are highly respected, which invalidates that position entirely. Clearly this means they are in denial, and people in denial are just going to ignore your feelings and how you are likely respected by people in your life. …
/r/AntiFeminists13/07/21 11:57 PM
5

Your idea won't work, and do you want to know why? Evil beats good on the earth. You could grab your lab coat and try to turn this one around on them tho: https://flo.health/getting-pregnant/trying-to-conceive/fertility/how-to-get-pregnant-without-a-man It'd just be without a woman this time, and to see how they like obsoletion.
/r/AntiFeminists28/06/21 05:22 AM
15

No True Scotsman Fallacy. Those feminazis are valid examples of members of the feminist movement, and they do sabotage the movement, but the movement is then sabotaged. You can't logically preserve a sabotaged movement that took a dark turn and tolerates extreme members. Catholicism cannot be sabotaged this way, because the principles of Catholicism outline when someone is not being a catholic. But, because feminazis call themselves feminists, and these "real feminists" you are imagining as less…
/r/AntiFeminists26/06/21 09:50 AM
-25

Women are more physically attractive than men. This is one of the differences between men and women that feminists deny. This comes from two places: one, that women themselves tend to be healthier on average, and two, that men tend to visually select women more than women visually select men for attractiveness. Attractiveness has subjective qualifiers (people like different things, and men and women tend to like different things), but is an objective metric (attractive people are selected, so we…
/r/AntiFeminists22/05/21 08:09 PM
18

You're insulting innocent grains of sand, lol
/r/AntiFeminists22/04/21 01:20 AM
2

Echo chambers are controlled platforms of speech and only reflect the will of the chambers’ design. You literally can’t change an echo chamber that is designed using human femininity as a focus. They don’t care about masculinity.
/r/AntiFeminists02/04/21 11:51 AM
30

Is there even ONE film where the antagonists are feminist or woke? And this film also has to feature a red pilled, or enlightened protagonist. Name one. If you can.
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/21 11:51 PM
6

Men can be against men's rights. I'm not sure I would take your position.
/r/MensRights27/03/21 05:29 PM
1

What's your point with the "ews"? Do you deny the implicated premise or conclusion or method of the post? This post identifies a valid concern, affecting physical health of developing children.
/r/AntiFeminists27/03/21 03:20 AM
8

However, she is now using the leverage of the Feminist movement for stage two and three: https://www.aclu.org/issues/reproductive-freedom/abortion https://flo.health/getting-pregnant/trying-to-conceive/fertility/how-to-get-pregnant-without-a-man
/r/AntiFeminists20/03/21 08:23 PM
6

99% of men have not all had sex.
/r/MensRights18/03/21 09:46 PM
5

Imagine what would happen if one of the two genders in your species began to weaponize withheld sex until humanity was extinct! Oh wait: https://www.aclu.org/issues/reproductive-freedom/abortion https://flo.health/getting-pregnant/trying-to-conceive/fertility/how-to-get-pregnant-without-a-man Nvm. They know exactly what they are up to. Abort men and birth women. No sex no rape! After all everything is being called rape.
/r/MensRights18/03/21 09:38 PM
2

Oh, lol well I didn't get your other comments at the time I typed mine. Late 20s to early thirds is when it should happen lol. and yes, 40 is last minute in my mind. Don't downvote me, you are correct.
/r/AntiFeminists18/03/21 09:03 PM
1

No actually, emotions speak nothing logical to me. What is logical, is the understanding that even arguing about this distinction in the first place, means you are advocating that women take advantage of single life until the last possible minute, implicitly. When you are arguing an irrelevant difference of 5 years with your relative reference being the last possible chance, then this proves an implicit assumption that kids should happen close to this due date. I hate biological clock arguments …
/r/AntiFeminists18/03/21 08:44 PM
28

Honking at another vehicle is catcalling? Feminists are truly lost.
/r/AntiFeminists07/03/21 08:54 PM
19

Technically, equality itself is immoral, lol. Equality of opportunity is universal and unequal and moral. Equality of outcome is relative, equal, and immoral.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/03/21 02:49 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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