TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ManUpManDown Archive

View 51 posts and 376 comments by ManUpManDown on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
629

Edu./Occu.ManUpManDown/r/MensRights16/09/15 12:24 PM
490

DiscriminationManUpManDown/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:02 PM
315

Social IssuesManUpManDown/r/MensRights01/10/15 01:12 PM
151

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/12/15 05:58 PM
83

GeneralManUpManDown/r/MensRights04/03/26 08:23 PM
83

NewsManUpManDown/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:31 AM
82

Legal RightsManUpManDown/r/MensRights27/04/15 05:08 PM
68

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights28/04/15 02:21 PM
56

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:59 PM
55

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights11/02/15 12:35 PM
50

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights06/02/15 12:50 AM
48

Edu./Occu.ManUpManDown/r/MensRights09/09/15 03:46 PM
44

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights14/12/13 03:02 AM
44

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:43 PM
38

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights21/03/14 08:20 PM
35

StoryManUpManDown/r/MensRights22/12/14 05:50 PM
32

Legal RightsManUpManDown/r/MensRights05/04/16 10:12 PM
27

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights09/02/16 05:46 PM
26

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights28/05/15 08:57 PM
25

Edu./Occu.ManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:42 PM
24

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights26/03/14 03:26 PM
22

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights16/02/16 09:45 PM
19

RagebaitManUpManDown/r/MensRights25/02/15 08:19 PM
19

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights08/12/14 06:05 PM
17

Edu./Occu.ManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/09/15 09:02 PM
17

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/03/15 09:11 PM
17

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights02/01/16 02:31 PM
15

Legal RightsManUpManDown/r/MensRights28/04/15 10:44 PM
14

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights18/05/15 09:28 PM
13

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights30/05/15 04:59 PM
12

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/12/14 11:40 AM
11

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights08/02/15 02:14 PM
11

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights06/03/15 10:18 PM
11

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights07/03/16 06:17 PM
9

OpinionManUpManDown/r/MensRights16/02/15 05:48 PM
9

OpinionManUpManDown/r/MensRights19/01/15 06:59 PM
8

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights09/02/15 06:10 PM
8

FeminismManUpManDown/r/MensRights22/05/15 05:28 PM
8

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights05/09/15 12:07 AM
6

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights15/02/15 11:19 PM
6

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:25 PM
6

Edu./Occu.ManUpManDown/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:15 PM
5

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights11/11/13 06:03 PM
4

Anti-MRAManUpManDown/r/MensRights17/03/15 04:54 PM
3

Blogs/VideoManUpManDown/r/MensRights18/09/14 05:12 PM
3

False AccusationManUpManDown/r/MensRights10/09/15 03:46 PM
2

StoryManUpManDown/r/MensRights13/03/15 07:35 PM
2

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights09/12/14 02:11 AM
0

ManUpManDown/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:24 PM
0

GrovellingManUpManDown/r/MensRights11/03/15 03:43 PM
0

False AccusationsManUpManDown/r/MensRights03/03/15 01:46 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

I'm 50. Been there done that. Always remember there is a happy life after this. Any other impressions are just illusions.
/r/MensRights20/05/26 07:20 PM
1

See: https://www.newmalestudies.com/OJS/index.php/nms/issue/view/44 and https://irlaw.umkc.edu/faculty_works/1059/ This seems to be the closest we've got.
/r/MensRights14/04/26 11:34 AM
2

Indispensable is Karen Straughan's video Feminism and the Disposable Male
/r/MensRights09/03/26 02:01 PM
1

Masculinity didn't go anywhere. It's all over the place. It is whatever men naturally do. We don't need more than that. Instead of imposing on men a prescriptive construct of masculinity, let masculinity just reveal itself through trends in men's behavior.
/r/MensRights17/12/25 07:51 PM
3

I see man vs. bear posts on Facebook daily, and what stands out the most is the venom directed at men who object to women choosing the bear. A man claims it's anti-male, and women respond not by calling the man ignorant or dumb, but with sexual shaming: the man is a "creep," he's an "incel," he is a "weak little man," or such men are "the reason women choose the bear." Puerile and sexist are so many of the responses from women. All of this brings to mind what Alison Tieman terms "the threat narr…
/r/MensRights09/05/24 06:35 PM
5

In considering whether to include women in the selective service, Congress concluded that it would demoralize the nation to see mothers and daughters shipped away to fight, while some men stayed back at home. Male disposability.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 06:22 PM
1

Toxic masculinity is real. Sorry. It's real, and it's primary victims are other men.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 05:35 PM
2

Liberal here. MR is profoundly progressive in my eyes, as it calls for the enlargement of society's compassion circle, which, in turn, can facilitate genuine equality between the sexes.
/r/MensRights26/03/24 07:56 PM
14

What the ACLU employs here is a so-called "sly inversion," in this case meaning framing a law that's clearly harmful to men only as really sexism against women. Of course, the ACLU doesn't say it harms exclusively women, but the implication that the sexism against men harms men and women equally is still grossly problematic. It's a perfect example of feminist ideology in action.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 09:47 PM
2

My response to this argument is to ask if they feel that way about black-on-black crime.
/r/MensRights02/02/24 10:03 PM
3

Exactly.
/r/MensRights31/01/24 07:41 PM
15

I suspect that men in general, including me, have an instinct to protect women and children. Can't do anything about that, and perhaps, to a certain extent, we shouldn't do much about it even if we could. However, I reject the canonization of this impulse in social norms and expectations. I certainly don't feel it's my *obligation to protect women. Sadly, however, at times men can be seen shamming each other for not putting women's safety first.
/r/MensRights29/12/23 10:23 PM
1

I'll get downvoted for this, but MRAs often distort what feminists mean by this phrase "toxic masculinity." It's a strawman to say that the phrase TM is used to call masculinity IN GENERAL toxic. Rather, the phrase refers to a TYPE of masculinity that is toxic. TM is real, and for two reasons it behooves MRAs to recognize this. First, by having a better understanding of what feminists mean when they say TM, we make it more difficult for them to dismiss us as just being clueless. Second, TM is a …
/r/MensRights19/12/23 07:32 PM
1

Another false accusation against grapes. How many sweet concords have to go down before we do something!
/r/MensRights14/12/23 10:21 PM
1

I think TM and TF are useful terms, as they correspond to real and important phenomena. I think the "not structural" flash that a lot of feminists throw out reflects the (problematic) premise that men control the various systems or "structures" that make up social life, and therefore men's toxicity is more consequential. This, of course, is bullshit, probably roughly for reasons you allude to. BTW, what do you mean by TF? How would you define it?
/r/MensRights08/12/23 10:35 PM
1

Any links you can share to illustrate this? Very curious.
/r/MensRights07/12/23 06:58 PM
1

How do you think the presidential candidates fund their election. Why was every president since 1949 at least a millionaire? Because it's difficult and risky running for public office; those with wealth can afford to do it? That's just one possibility. BTW, why isn't the same true for legislators? Wouldn't you think the rich would want to control the Senate just as much as the presidency; actually, more so, given that Congress makes law? But, more to the point, there is no reason to assume (susp…
/r/MensRights01/12/23 10:27 PM
1

You make the common mistake of conflating your hyper-cynicism with being truly awake to hard and cold reality. Sort of like how a radical feminist assumes that she's one of the few who "really gets it." For example, almost every state has a law requiring the electors to vote according to who won the popular vote in that state. So I don't see rich families controlling the electors. Therefore, I see no patriarchy . . . using your definition.
/r/MensRights01/12/23 08:39 PM
2

Definition of patriarchal: relating to or denoting a system of society or government controlled by men. So yes we live in a patriachy. That's a bit of a leap. Yes, men hold far more positions of formal power in western governments. But notice the definition you use states "controlled by men." What does control mean in this context? What about the fact that most voters in the U.S. are women; that is, women have more political power than men, at least in a certain sense. What about the fact that m…
/r/MensRights30/11/23 04:56 PM
0

Because I believe that the left is generally more compassionate, less anti-intellectual, and less reflexively resistant to new ideas--new ways of seeing the world. My antifeminism is geared toward "cleaning my own house," rather than a departure from the left.
/r/MensRights26/11/23 09:39 PM
2

The right isn't making misandry a pillar of their ideology. Are you sure about that? MRAs' primary problem is not feminists; it's gynocentrism. And traditionalists are just as guilty of perpetuating gynocentrism as feminists are. They just do it differently.
/r/MensRights13/11/23 08:15 PM
2

Agreed. I'm on the left and I'm antifeminist. I cringe every time I see someone treat the MRA outlook as inherently conservative.
/r/MensRights13/11/23 08:13 PM
2

Like Warren Farrell says, "women are human beings, men are human doings."
/r/MensRights13/11/23 07:53 PM
0

Just FYI, feminists don't claim masculinity is generally toxic; they use the phrase "toxic masculinity" to refer to SPECIFIC TYPES of masculinity that are toxic. As someone who calls himself an antifeminist, I'll be the first to admit they're right. Toxic masculinity is real; what feminists don't say is that toxic masculinity causes more damage to men than women.
/r/MensRights12/11/23 08:50 PM
18

I usually don't label myself an MRA; I just make MRA arguments. That is usually met with contempt of some kind, and a bafflement that I would reject the feminist worldview so fundamentally. Like I'm a flat earther or something.
/r/MensRights06/11/23 08:12 PM
1

De-platforming is a dirty way of fighting.
/r/MensRights04/11/23 08:22 PM
3

Absolutely. I'm on the left. I consider the MRM to be is some ways radically left wing, as it advocates for true sexual equality, which is more "extreme" than what feminists, as a practical matter, push for.
/r/MensRights31/10/23 02:10 PM
1

they're
/r/MensRights25/10/23 08:48 PM
-1

such a phrase places women at the same "power level" as a toddler. How exactly? Two things being categorized together as valuable doesn't mean the two things share everything in common (such as power levels). Why can't the "female perspective" be one that focuses on who's really being degraded by "women and children"--men. After all, men regularly recognize women's oppression in certain contexts without turning it around and making it about men.
/r/MensRights18/10/23 07:30 PM
1

. . . and the Oxford comma.
/r/MensRights12/10/23 07:24 PM
3

Glick and Fiske. They have actually nurtured one of the biggest sly inversions in existence; "benevolent sexism." They are one of the main reasons social science researchers have a hard time recognizing female privilege. In my study of their material it has become obvious that they have radical feminist sympathies (very MacKinnon-esque in their framing language sometimes) and have conducted their research accordingly. I'm actually writing a paper about this now. Here's a link to their original a…
/r/MensRights11/08/16 11:21 AM
16

Thanks for the link. But it's common for people to over-read these court decisions. The Second Circuit merely held that the claim of sex discrimination under Title IX is plausible if we assume the truthfulness of the allegations in the complaint. It did NOT rule, or even come close to ruling, that "university officials acted with anti-male bias."
/r/MensRights02/08/16 12:20 PM
1

I bookmarked this a while ago; hope it helps: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2014/02/female-genital-mutilation-and-male-circumcision-time-to-confront-the-double-standard/
/r/MensRights28/07/16 04:20 PM
3

Word porn: "The slur “misogynist” has become a compliment for genuinely free thinkers." But the title phrase is particularly intriguing: "Antifeminism is the New Feminism." This is both problematic and golden at the same time. Processing.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 01:20 PM
5

Folks, upvote this and read the study. Academic-study evidence of male disposability is not as great as it could be largely because the feminist orthodoxy in academia gets in the way. When we see it, we should print it out, study it, invoke it intelligently, etc.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 05:58 PM
1

I don't have time right now to watch/listen, but I can only hope you're wrong in characterizing what the HBs said. Fingers crossed.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 03:25 AM
3

So the fuck what?
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:02 AM
2

This doesn't surprise me at all, and I have no less respect for WF than I did before. He clearly has problems Clinton's worldview on gender, but why should this keep him from supporting her? As much as I care about gender issues and feel that men get screwed via both law and social norms, I don't dance to only one tune. I don't want Trump in charge of the button, and a MRM can have a dispassionate belief that what makes HC so detestable is what also enables her to "get things done" (contra Sande…
/r/MensRights20/05/16 12:40 PM
0

Who are your friends?
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:28 PM
1

Wow. This guy is gynocentrism personified; it's perfect, really. Like a subtle parody by an MRA. Everyone, keep a note of this link; it will come in very handy in the years to come as a demonstrative of an important but usually ignored dynamic. Here, that dynamic is so concentrated and explicit, unlike with most men, who demonstrate gynocentrism without being aware of it; like I said, just perfect. It's interesting how this guy thinks he's tapped into something spiritually transcendent, when he'…
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:02 PM
1

I'm not sure if your problem is with communist or marxist commentary, or whether you're assuming they're the same thing (hint: they're not). I for one encourage MORE MRAs to post comments from a marxist point of view. This is not because I agree with Marxism, but rather because such posts help illustrate that the MRM does not necessarily represent "right wing" impulses as feminists would love people to believe it does.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 12:49 PM
7

"Trickle down gender equality." Oh, I like it.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 10:32 PM
1

You've got guts; great job.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 10:17 PM
2

It's more accurate to say that the title of the LA Times headline is misleading (if that is indeed true). My title simply tracks that.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 09:00 PM
9

Bingo. A goal of this movement should be to bring more people like Farrell to the forefront. The folks at CAFE come to mind. I have always tried to give Elam the benefit of the doubt, and I do genuinely respect him for his efforts. After all, no doubt he has done a lot for the MRM. But increasingly it seems he's just fumbling. Banning women from an Ear for Men (that kind of blew me away); having right-wing articles not directly related to men's rights posted on AVFM; writing a "spanking" piece t…
/r/MensRights27/07/15 05:09 PM
1

Thoughtful response. I agree with much of it; other parts I think are very debatable. To take one example: Where feminism - and the assertion - go very wrong is the presumption that correlation implies causation. Masculinity isn't what leads to people choosing to use violence - the ability use violence successfully to get what you want is what leads people to choose to use violence. These propositions are not necessarily in tension, so both can be correct. In any event, I happen to think that pa…
/r/MensRights27/07/15 02:32 PM
6

As an MRA, I ask genuinely: might this assertion actually be true? I think it is very plausible. Is the problem with feminism not assertions like this per se, but rather feminism's explanations for WHY the problem exists and what to do about it? I think it's important to remember that a broken clock is still correct twice a day.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 12:39 PM
1

Sure. Marxism probably has a few things to lend MRA theory such as the ideas of false conscioussness and historical materialism.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 05:13 PM
1

"But the collusion scenario in this case requires no irrational and groundless malevolence. If Nungesser is innocent, it is entirely plausible that Sulkowicz and Natalie, who met at a party and discussed their history with him shortly before they filed charges, may have genuinely goaded each other into the conviction that he abused them (or, as Sulkowicz put it to Jezebel, "Together, we [came] to a better understanding of our shared trauma"). It is also entirely plausible that Josie and Adam eit…
/r/MensRights20/05/15 05:19 PM
3

Oh, fuck yes!
/r/MensRights20/05/15 04:44 PM
1

Very good read. Thanks for posting.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 03:12 PM
1

Hey good for you! Ignore that alum below; most here would admire you. Regarding fine thing, near the top I would emphasize that the discussions about the relevant issues would take place outside the confines of feminist theory and suppositions. You might even call them non-feminist "consciousness raising" meetings pertaining to men's gendered experiences, though perhaps that's a bit much. But you get the idea.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 02:21 AM
2

Explaining Postmodernism by Stephen Hicks. One cannot truly understand the radical feminist mindset without understanding the intellectual confluences that have produced the current madness. This book is fantastic in this regard, though it's not a fast read it you have no background understanding of philosophy. Get some. It'll be worth it in the long run.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:23 PM
2

Note the reference to "falling down" trying to attribute both danger and irrelevancy simultaneously. Good observation.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 08:10 PM
3

It is remarkable how simple-minded academics can be; remarkable given how often they look down on others for being so simple-minded.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 05:48 PM
6

Jackson was a bit of an asshole. So if this happens, might as well be him.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 02:55 AM
4

120 is not low by any means. You must look at score ranges in terms of standard deviations. 120 from what I recall is about the average for medical doctors. You don't need anywhere near a 120 to go to, and do reasonably well in, college.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 05:51 PM
5

Indeed. I feel this primal urge myself sometimes. It's wiring. Once you're self-aware enough to recognize it in both yourself and in others things do start to seem dystopian.
/r/MensRights22/02/15 04:10 PM
5

Gynocentrism, one might say, subsumes it. But, yes, they do seem to be for most practical purposes synonymous.
/r/MensRights22/02/15 04:09 PM
1

You’ve mostly simply repeated what are in my view your most problematic assumptions rather than make them more convincing, save for explicating your logic chains which, coming full circle, contain too many assumptions. In any event, we must agree to disagree. I don’t disagree that male disposability was at one time an imperative for survival, an imperative imposed by nature. I disagree about the upshot of that truth for modern societies. For you it seems to be simple: those same truths are timel…
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:35 PM
1

Not as much of one. There will be less women and therefore less babies. Over several generations, this will lead to being ripe for being conquered by a society which did protect it's women more than it protected it's men. There are way too many assumptions built into your assertions, this being a great example of such a pregnant (pun intended) assertion. For one, you assume protecting men and women equally would lead to fewer women, and I see no reason to think this is true . . . which is the en…
/r/MensRights19/02/15 07:43 PM
1

Ok, then we have to first determine if this is true: Do women have inherent value to society? Well, no we don’t need to first determine if it is true that women have inherent value, because nobody claims women lack such inherent value. Given that they have wombs, they do. Those wombs have to be protected if you want to have a next generation. So, if we protect men to the same degree we protect women, we won’t have a next generation? As such, gynocentricism (that women have inherent value while m…
/r/MensRights19/02/15 07:12 PM
2

Can you give me a quick and dirty definition of gynocentricism Quick and dirty: as the term structurally suggests, centering females and their perceived needs. It is the notion, subtextual in all societies, that females (and even more so, children in general) are inherently more valuable to society, and thus that the primary goal of social norms and projects should be the alleviation of females’ suffering and the increasing of their well-being, regardless of the costs to males (especially men).
/r/MensRights19/02/15 06:22 PM
8

I do agree that MRAs can get tunnel-vision in thinking that feminism is the primary and ultimate enemy. It’s not; gynocentrism is. But it does nevertheless make perfect sense for MRAs to focus their energy on attacking feminism. Why? Because feminists are the primary front-line troops fighting to perpetuate and expand gynocentrism. Traditionalists and other non-feminists will complacently/passively defend gynocentrism because it just seems to “make sense” to their reptilian brains, but feminists…
/r/MensRights19/02/15 05:49 PM
2

I'm getting a vibe . . . that you haven't been completely sold on queer theory.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 08:42 PM
4

Great framing. This, BTW, for others here, is MRA theory. We need more of it.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:19 PM
12

Incisive bit: The key is the dubious notion that the young woman somehow figured out, some time after the fact, that she was assaulted. . . . Would you know it if you were being mugged? What is being described here is having negative feelings about something in retrospect, and there’s a very different word for that: regret. What these women are really expressing is regret for sexual encounters they wish they had not engaged in. I have observed before the weird juxtaposition on campuses of a flam…
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:04 PM
5

Best entry in the comment thread: "I LOVE YOU PAUL!"
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:40 PM
4

Nungesser should start carrying a mattress around to symbolize his violation by both Emma and the university.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 10:58 PM
2

Holy fuck.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 01:11 AM
21

Yes he was. It's great he's also a part of the more general campus due process movement. Interesting times.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:44 PM
19

He will be interviewed live on CNN about this in about 2 minutes.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:25 PM
5

Agreed. I really like the work Mike does, but he is too unthinkingly reflexive in suggesting that online activists don't "do," but are rather merely "keyboard warriors" (I've argued about this with him before). His view seems to be based on an old-fashioned conception of what activism is. The essence of activism is raising awareness, and in the 21st century raising awareness can result significantly from online battle-fighting.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 01:48 PM
2

Fuck yes.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 12:54 AM
8

Ms. Sulkowicz, whose high profile has made her the target of innumerable online attacks, says she has learned that women’s safety is expendable. That's right, folks. WOMEN'S safety is expendable (hint: the biggest problem with this assertion is not the bad grammar).
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:03 PM
1

Oh for fuck's sake people, is the sarcasm really that subtle? Stop down voting.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 08:02 PM
1

So what? If "due process" only serves to ensure that the status quo of power asymmetry remains constant through the adjudicative process, and manifests as a product of it, why should feminists not seek to undermine "due process"? Results are what matter, and when prevailing institutionalized principles of “fairness” really just serve to perpetuate male hegemony, results are what feminists must fight for. #knowthyenemy
/r/MensRights20/12/14 05:58 PM
1

Well put.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:09 PM
6

Your use of the phrases "post-modern", "cultural Marxism", and "Frankfurt School" is a bit unclear. I have never seen an MRA post anything that I would characterize as any of these, and simply invoking the basic concepts of group conflict and context-specific marginalization (or even "oppression") doesn't qualify. Expounding on social reality is indispensable to MRA theory. We should do more of it, even if it leads to the use of terms, commonly used by feminists, that are useful tools to frame t…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 02:02 PM
1

Someone, I don’t remember who, recently described the current situation with the MRM, and its increasingly destabilizing effect on the gender zeitgeist, as products of "an awakening." Simple enough phrase, but so on-point; it has really stuck with me. There have been “men’s movements” in the past, but beating drums in the woods is pseudo-awakening. What’s happening now is the real deal, and you’re one of the main faces of it. Exciting times indeed.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 08:04 PM
2

Awesome. Given how well you speak on these issues it would be great to hear you on such programs more often.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 05:38 PM
9

A much needed post. The concern troll charge is too often used to circumvent thoughtfulness about the proper MRA course of action. The very availability of the phrase tends to invite glib dismissals of any "concerns" expressed by those who genuinely care about the movement. Sort of like how we hear "because patriarchy!" drawn from the feminist holster without reflection.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:31 PM
3

Ok, I refer you to pretty much any MRA argument about how law enforcement treats men. Oh wait, not what you had in mind? Such concerns must be racially focused or they don't substantially relate to the profiling minority men face? If so, it seems you're operating with problematic analytical rules. We are MEN'S Rights Activists. Thus, our focus is on the various injustices that are a common denominator of men's experiences. Do you think minority men would be profiled if . . . they weren't MEN? Sp…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:11 AM
3

Of course it is.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 03:55 AM
3

And the problem is what exactly?
/r/MensRights21/11/14 06:23 PM
2

Excellent article.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 12:24 AM
2

Halley is a queer theorist, and her writing shows why MRAs should NOT assume feminist theory and queer theory to be peas in a pod. MRAs can probably find queer theory quite useful.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 01:54 AM
2

Aren't there still AVFM articles around about attacking courthouses? Are there? And does AVfM represent the MRM? If you think the last question was a dodge, do you believe similarly when a feminist argues “that prominent feminist/organization doesn’t speak for me or all, or even most, feminists”? What about those promoting violence against women, as a form of satirical entertainment? What about the fact that the purpose of the article was to mock an article wherein feminists virtually brag about…
/r/MensRights24/10/14 03:01 PM
16

For a second there I thought a woman might be expressing concern for men's well-being because she cares about . . . men's well-being. Silly me. It seems, rather, that ending the systematic denigration of men in western culture is needed to maintain men's gallantry and protectiveness toward women. Baby steps, folks, baby steps.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 04:57 PM
31

"Men’s rights groups foster violent ideology." Violent! Lock your doors everyone, the MRAs are coming! Would someone please think of the children! Seriously, if there's one thing about feminism that MRAs hone in on through their critiques it's the utter irony of feminist thinking and behavior: “Traditional gender roles and expectations are unhealthy, and we shou . . . crap, those VIOLENT MRAs are coming, someone please help us feminist damsels in distress and presume angry men to be threatening …
/r/MensRights22/10/14 06:03 PM
1

The adoption of this model by feminists seems to be at least as much a projection of female psychology onto men as anything else. Now THAT is fucking fascinating. Definitely something worth exploring more. If we are to go by these two examples Well, we probably shouldn’t. After all, there are certainly men who eroticize the domination of women, and the last thing they would want when slapping the salami over such domination is the respective woman’s genuine embracing of her subjugation: it’s her…
/r/MensRights20/10/14 06:57 PM
3

since gendered perceptions operate through different psychological schemas than classism or tribalism This is one of the most important propositions to the MRM’s attempts to undermine the core of feminist theory and thus practice. So often I see MRAs throwing around too loosely the term “Marxist/ism” in describing feminism, as if feminists are generally Marxist in the aspirational sense. The real Marxism is in the assumptions that feminism has successfully embedded in modern intellectual “common…
/r/MensRights20/10/14 05:27 PM
5

This is a classic and an indispensable source of MRA theory (even though the author is not an MRA).
/r/MensRights17/10/14 12:08 AM
7

This is very interesting and insightful. My angle would be to start aggressively and with an unapologetic tone, but not necessarily intentionally offensive. Perhaps just recklessly offensive. : )
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:07 PM
2

Exactly.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 09:34 AM
11

“We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes, but I can see that they are. And that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence.” Yes! . . . oh wait, I see what you did there!
/r/MensRights22/09/14 05:49 PM
1

R.I.P actual thought. Ah, but what is thought? And is feeling really different than thought? If not (translation: "it's not, because . . . because, fucktard!") then my perspectivist approach is just as valid as your "thinking." Sincerely, Average Feminist "Thinker"
/r/MensRights11/09/14 03:31 PM
1

Yes, well that's one kind of anti-feminist. Not the kind I generally see in the MRM.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 07:42 PM
1

This is stupid.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 02:03 AM
1

It's the primary point of the movement.
/r/MensRights17/08/14 01:11 PM
2

I've come to realize (after a similar crisis of political identity) that being independent and truly progressive minded can "hurt so good" by leaving one feeling free, but also isolated. But the MRM is growing fast, and one of its main lessons is that there is no contradiction between being socially progressive and anti-feminist. In fact, as one MRA has famously said, feminism can be characterized as nothing but "patriarchy in lipstick" given its reliance on chivalry (male disposability).
/r/MensRights17/08/14 01:02 PM
1

Coincidence? Did your studies bring you to this site and/or introduce you to the MRM?
/r/MensRights17/08/14 12:49 PM
2

Yeah that was a stretch, but I take his broader point: that male disposability and patriarchy are not mutually exclusive but rather drive one another. Both tend toward a good degree of (but obviously not total) gynocentrism.
/r/MensRights17/08/14 12:01 AM
5

AVFM has officially endorsed it.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 11:51 AM
1

For some background on a person who now appears to be a genuine advocate for systemic change: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fuck-you-judith-grossman/
/r/MensRights06/07/14 12:41 AM
3

Not only is there her WSJ piece, there was this by Paul Elam: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fuck-you-judith-grossman/ Seems she's in it for the long haul, and good on her.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 12:39 AM
1

Oh, I understand completely. Nothing you wrote is in tension with what I wrote.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 09:56 PM
5

Yes. Which is why I donate mostly to CAFE. Though I will also say that AVfM is doing some really cool things and should have a significant place in the movement. I would just rather see CAFE at the "head" of the MRM.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 12:08 PM
1

If you want to see this notion in action to a parody extreme read this: http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/573/
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:05 PM
1

Right-wing people can be very down with the anti-feminism part from the get-go, but their eyes will glaze over if you start talking about things like rape of men by women, or anything that acknowledges men's needs or weakness. Interesting and importent observation.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 03:38 PM
1

Their.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 12:41 PM
37

Holy fuck. BTW, notice use of the term "castrate"? I wonder what would happen if MRAs casually wrote of the need to "slice the clitoris off of contemporary gender theory"?
/r/MensRights01/04/14 01:10 AM
5

Someone posted calling MRAs whiney losers. Response: "Thank you for your comment. It will help me to teach the audience how to further recognize sexism, misandry, and so forth. To my readers: Notice this commenter calling me a “loser.” In a way, a person calling a man a “loser” is a lot like calling someone a woman “slut.” It is sex-based shaming language. In other words, it is sexist. Notice that women are rarely, if ever, called “losers,” whereas men are often called this. Women, by contrast, …
/r/MensRights31/03/14 04:55 PM
29

Thanks for posting these. The compilation page in particular is something all here should bookmark. And Jonathan's response in the comments section to the guy who labeled MRAs "losers" reflects exactly the kind of incisive analysis all MRAs should employ in responding to common shaming language used against men.
/r/MensRights30/03/14 08:18 PM
5

It might have been a good idea to also praise Janice Fiamengo in this. You can tell from the video last night that she was getting stressed out big time, but she soldiered on.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 04:49 PM
3

I'm a bit confused. CAFE tweeted that they were able to continue in another room and got most of the way through the presentation, then tweeted that they were shut down. Were you there?
/r/MensRights29/03/14 02:53 AM
7

Oops,wait. I was thinking of the speech last night at Queens. Haven't seen the one from tonight. Just saw the video for the above link where no speech was given because the feminist protesters were acting like complete bullies. Too many videos to keep track of . . . .
/r/MensRights29/03/14 02:42 AM
5

Glad someone reposted this as the first posting drew surprisingly little activity. Many here opined that she didn't do very well, and that feminists essentially hijacked the event. Then I watched it. I thought she did really well actually, and I think the feminists were fairly civil. For feminists that is. I actually think this is a great example of what needs to happen more often. In fact, the event would not have been as good without the feminist detractors. Yes, there was a lot of tension, bu…
/r/MensRights29/03/14 01:11 AM
2

Love it!
/r/MensRights27/03/14 09:31 PM
7

I have to dissent re Heather MacDonald. It's great she took on RC as a real thing, but eventually she reveals herself to be the flip side of the same old coin: advocating a return of chivalry and the notion that men are responsible for women's well-being. Anyway, it's interesting; the feminist cited stats highlighting the degree to which men are subject to sexual assault, but neither of them so much as hinted at men as victims. How can feminists be so unaware of their irony? I mean, you want to …
/r/MensRights25/03/14 05:10 PM
5

No. I would have pushed back, at least quietly by leaving the table to talk to the manager. I actually had a waitress at IHOP explain once, when I objected to her "ladies first," that "women always come first, just like when a ship is sinking, because they need to be protected to care for children," etc. She was dead serious. This was the overarching philosophy of hers that inspired her ordering policy. It sounds like the kind of thing an MRA would make up just to make a point, I know. My wife a…
/r/MensRights23/03/14 06:15 PM
1

I read it. There is some flat out misogyny in the book. I don't think it's a great book for MRAs. It is pretty thin on analytical substance and thick on impressionistic stridence. Read Warren Farrell instead.
/r/MensRights22/03/14 02:00 AM
14

Oh I'm pro-choice as well. But my view on abortion does not make this situation complicated for me. The pro-life students have valid concerns (even if I think their conclusions are wrong) and have every right to express those concerns. The feminist professor assaulted them for doing so. And, given her responses to police questioning, it appears her conduct was the culmination of the utter arrogance nurtured by academic feminism. She's clearly the bad "guy" here in my eyes.
/r/MensRights21/03/14 08:55 PM
8

And if you haven't seen this discussion of the police's interview of this professor, it's a must read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/20/uc-santa-barbara-professor-steals-young-anti-abortion-protesters-sign-apparently-assaults-protesters-says-she-set-a-good-example-for-her-students/
/r/MensRights21/03/14 08:27 PM
3

Word.
/r/MensRights20/03/14 10:35 PM
0

The phrase "aggressive weakness" is rhetorically and conceptually brilliant (though the phenomenon in the abstract is nothing new to MRA theory—see Karen’s arguments, Allison Tieman’s “threat narrative” videos, etc.). It is a phrase MRAs should weave into both their theory and casual arguments. "Damseling" doesn't quite get all the way there the way this phrase does. In my view, it ranks up there with the other major MRA conceptual and rhetorical mechanisms, such as male disposability, hypoagenc…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:26 PM
6

You just "put up" for me. Look closely at the second one you yourself linked to. Right above "Don't Be That Girl" there is some smaller text. I could read it this morning on my iPad, but here on my office desktop zooming in and reading the text has proven difficult.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 06:07 PM
4

Zoom in on the posters.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 03:35 PM
4

The images of the posters; it's at the bottom in relatively small text.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 03:31 PM
8

"Whiny bitch ass"? Really? I mean, c'mon.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 01:45 PM
10

Agreed. Makes it too easy to make comparisons to "White Pride."
/r/MensRights14/03/14 10:33 PM
0

This is quite interesting.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 03:32 AM
2

Keep in mind that when people argue this, they generally point to heavy civilian casualties during various wars. Of course, the argument is still bullshit and does not undermine the male disposability premise, but one must be prepared to counter the argument with more than just citing to the fact that only 8 of the 58k U.S. service-persons who died in Vietnam were women.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:50 PM
2

This is the kind of stuff we need more of. The MRM must be an intellectual movement, not just an issue-focused social justice one. My understanding is that you have a degree in gender studies. I'd love to see you leverage that pedigree and write a book. That's probably what you indeed have in mind already?
/r/MensRights01/03/14 02:59 AM
24

Yeah I noticed how, for example, she would turn to her left, put her hand on the chair next to her as if to create a circle that didn't include Karen, and talk to the women on her left and the audience in lofty, inspiring terms, as if she was "owning" the place.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 01:21 AM
49

Karen was fucking awesome here. I must admit I wasn't sure how she was going to handle face to face heated engagement. As good as she is in her videos and in writing (man can she write), I did fear she might feel intimidated next to the likes of people like NW, and thus hold back. On the contrary, she kept her cool, stayed assertive, and wasn't afraid to go head to head with a very respected, well-published, and sharp feminist. This is saying something given that NW herself is one of the better …
/r/MensRights28/02/14 12:42 AM
9

This shit has gotten surreal.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:00 PM
19

Ok, I totally understand the good intentions behind, and the theoretical utility of, this thread. But I really don't think this is helpful. Karen has come out of obscurity to being invited to panels with internationally known feminists, all in a very short period of time. Considering everything, she's been awesome, and she was awesome last night, and I am not particularly inclined to start telling her why she's not perfect. Get me? She's not our mascot.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 02:58 AM
29

Fantastic. MRAs like you--young, bold, smart, articulate, presentable--are going to make things very interesting in the coming decades. Congrats.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 01:52 AM
6

Bingo.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 02:02 PM
2

Don't let one person frame the MRM for you. Many MRAs including myself do believe that NAFALT, in that many have good intentions even if they're misguided. I predict that in 10 years a huge chunk of those who currently call themselves feminists will actively support the MRM. I know women for whom this is already true. People like certainty when it comes to their world views, which leads to people being reductionist and absolute. That happens. But it doesn't reflect something inherent in the MRM.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 01:05 AM
3

This is fantastic; I look forward to reading more of your writing. The entire time I was reading it I couldn't get Catherine Mackinnon out of my head, as she seems a poster child for your analysis of the feminist psyche (at least the psyches of many of them) in this context. I was curious what your thoughts are, if any, on her quest to make pornography illegal.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 03:25 PM
1

PP, you’re the gift of tenacious irony that keeps on giving. Projection: (4) “vitriol” – really? “Stupid,” “dumb,” “sand-in-vag whiner”? You initiated this kind of language; (5) hyper-sensitivity – really? That I had the nerve to rather dispassionately point out your unfair presumptuousness (toward edtastic primarily) inspired such defensiveness in you; a peculiar bitterness evident in the “tone” of your posts (eg., see the vitriol point above). Regarding your other arguments, you just repeat, i…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:55 PM
4

Hymowitz would like men to organize their lives around maximizing their usefulness to women and children. Hey, what woman wouldn't? . . . . Purely as a biological matter, individual male lives are expendable: A man's biological capacity to reproduce is easily replaceable, unlike a woman's; and it is in society's interest--in this context meaning the interest of the reproductive enterprise as a whole--for men to take risks in the defense of women and children. Men are instinctively risk-seeking f…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 06:16 PM
1

PP, you not only have a short-term memory problem, but also a problem with projection – again, just like a feminist (btw, this isn’t “ad hominem.” Words have meanings, and their precise meanings matter. This is more accurately characterized as “snark.”) You, using snark, asked if I understood “conversational English,” but then later termed my focus on plain English a “quibble” once that focus became inconvenient. The very language you originally invoked to prove your point (which is curiously di…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 03:47 PM
1

No, that is wrong. The point of the exchange is to discuss the relevance, if any, of internet comments when we're faced with a case of an innocent man imprisoned based on SJW reasoning. Why do you keep dodging that question? Again, you reveal your short-term memory problems. Fortunately, it’s all in writing for your review. As such, I suggest you refresh yourself on the posts between you and I: I chimed in when you implied that edtastic and I were making a “more than” claim. That egregious logic…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 01:46 AM
1

No, that's quite wrong. You were the one who introduced the unnecessary quibbling. What you term an unnecessary quibble is in fact the entire point of our exchange: what edtastic’s post communicated on its face in the context of other posts. You want to at once suggest I don’t understand “conversational English,” then ignore the plain meaning of edtastic’s conversational English when you realize it’s in tension with the simplistic indignance that your initial rhetorical stridence represented (an…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:33 PM
1

Good grief am I on candid camera or something? Your lack of any short-term memory can't be as bad as it seems. YOU, along with another poster, very unnecessarily introduced the quantitative angle into the conversation. THAT has been entire point of my posts aside from my first one. Remember your words? Not only did you use the "worse than" phraseology but you even preceded it with the word "objectively," as if edtastic was making such a more/less-than argument. Then, strangely, in the next breat…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 02:33 AM
1

Do you not understand conversational English? The irony of this question is glaring. You're right that edtastic was disagreeing that the comments are "nowhere near as disturbing as the article." So far so good. But do you see how this "conversational English" does not equal "I think the comments are WORSE than the article?" Hint: the key phrase is "nowhere near."
/r/MensRights14/12/13 09:18 PM
1

After questioning the claim that the comments were worse than the subject in the article. Context indeed. I think you meant to type something else but, in any event, a corrected version of this assertion would still be wrong. Let me remind you of your words, to which I responded: There is absolutely no way a reasonable person could ever think that some blah blah words on the internet is objectively worse than a real world action with real world consequences. Of course, edtastic was not claiming …
/r/MensRights14/12/13 07:04 PM
1

REALLY.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 04:34 PM
1

Context. Remember this sub-conversation began with my suggestion that some of the comments on the linked page are disturbing. Edtastic provided an example of what I was referring to. What followed was some really bad logic by others: "complaining about X means you think X is worse than Y." Reminds me of feminists when they argue that when MRAs treat false rape allegations as a serious problem, it follows that MRAs think false allegations are worse than rape. C’mon people.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 04:33 PM
1

Anyone else find some of the comments in the linked page seriously disturbing?
/r/MensRights14/12/13 02:41 AM
6

This is a view that I’ve shared for some time, though I don’t think I’ve ever seen it expressed by MRAs. Yes, this “afraid of/threatened by women” charge implicitly leverages the traditional expectation that “real men brush it off,” and thus that feeling “threatened” somehow signals a personal fault with the man, and thus with his views. With women it’s the opposite: people are MOST likely to listen to and empathize with them when they claim to so much as feel threatened—ie, even when it is rath…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 05:56 PM
3

Interesting, even if tedious, read. MRAs generally need to try to read more material like this. McKinnon is a major feminist theorist so reading her material most certainly gives one a better understanding of many feminists' method of perception and of acquiring knowledge (ie, their "epistemology"). The intellectualization of solipsistic impulse it may be, but know thy enemy nonetheless.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 02:40 AM
2

Hey assuming you're the same person who runs the femdelusion blog, I'd love to see you resume postings. Your work on there was excellent.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 01:50 AM
0

Agreed.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 01:17 AM
45

Best comment following the article, from Matt Ford: "Amanda, here's a thought-- people might be disagreeing with your message NOT because they are filthy, sociopathic, rapey trolls, but rather because what you are saying is awful. nearly everything you write with regard to gender issues is absolutely drenched in toxic, bigoted bile. you have all the sophistication and subtlety of a bratty 3rd grader orchestrating a boys vs girls spit-ball fight at recess. you ripped out your "input" feed decades…
/r/MensRights08/10/13 05:12 PM
7

Oddly enough, feminist groups say exactly the same things about CAFE as they do about AVFM and MRE--that we're sexist, racist, anti-gay, fascist, neo-nazis, white-supremacists, hate women, hate transpeople, are a hate-group, etc. My thinking is this: feminists’ similar responses to CAFE and AVfM tells us little if anything about whether the two approaches are equally effective. Feminist responses tell us more about the nature of feminists than anything else. It seems that what matters is how the…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 08:29 PM
2

Yeah, that Duckman guy: shit, he's doing more than me, so who am I to get too uppity. But he sure is immature. I love his energy and commitment; just wish he would not try to be provocatively funny as if he's trying to come across as some edgy teenager. "Rape is funny." Geesh.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:41 PM
2

I recommend that all here follow SYABM's tumblr page. I check it regularly.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 07:08 PM
6

Someone complimented Karen sometime back by describing her as "the kind of woman feminism promised but never delivered." This always stuck with me, as I think it best encapsulates what we are all about but without the phrasing being too long winded and thus inviting interruption and misunderstanding. Punchy, cutting, and question-begging for those who presume we are all raging right-wingers. When I heard you shout this in the video I found myself wishing this were the main phrase on your signs, …
/r/MensRights29/09/13 08:04 PM
2

Yeah I have to disagree with the "lean right" comment as well. I sense a slight majority are left of center.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 10:54 PM
3

This is a good idea. I offer my short answer in case others are finding that their articulations do not do the movement justice (or worse, make it seem like something it's not). Here’s my short elevator version (say, from floor 2 to 3): “Well, fundamentally, the MRM seeks to highlight and combat the widespread under-empathy for male suffering that leads to systemic male disadvantage in various social and legal contexts.” Here’s the floor 2 to 15 version: “Well, fundamentally, the MRM seeks to hi…
/r/MensRights17/09/13 05:56 PM
4

Excellent post. I think there's a lot here. I remember reading something previously about how black women are "masculinized" in the eyes of society relative to white women, such that they are deemed to have greater agency and to be more of a threat (as men are) when they're angry, etc. Interesting stuff.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 08:43 PM
1

Awesome! I'll have to check these out. Thanks again.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:53 AM
1

Excellent thanks!
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:27 AM
11

Perfect. On so many levels, especially given the term "happier."
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:26 AM
2

Interesting posts. The claim about literary theory in particular intrigues me. Can you point me to material further discussing it?
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:15 AM
3

I don't have experience with the old version of the site but I think it's currently a great site. I do wish they allowed comments though. I'm curious as to why they don't.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 07:54 PM
9

I'm an MRA. But this IS an example of victim blaming (assuming she was in fact raped). Just because we're MRAs doesn't mean we have to bend over backwards to avoid recognizing victimization of women when we see it.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 02:24 AM
4

This is really bad. It's like a parody . . . but sadly it isn't. This is a goldmine of perverted feminist reasoning in action. Bookmarked.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:39 PM
1

Nice!
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:36 PM
1

In light of Karen's post it appears the concept originated as a product of MRM intellectualism, rather than being borrowed from establishment dogma. Goes to show the brain-power we have behind this movement. Anyone who thinks the MRM is just about beating drums in the woods and pouting over women golfers playing at Augusta is in for a rude awakening when they realize one day that our ideas are seeping into the mainstream. See, for example, James Taranto's references to hypergamy.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 08:43 PM
1

Office Space, an otherwise great movie. "Federal pound me in the ass penitentiary." You can find the clip on YouTube.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 11:02 AM
2

We need more students like you in the classrooms. Definitely don't drop the class.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 11:00 AM
3

People don't fight over the definition of "square" as a geometrical shape. There's a reason for this.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 02:38 PM
3

I'm actually enjoying reading these. Thanks for posting.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:16 AM
6

Here's an article that discusses feminists' attempts at silencing accurate data about domestic violence. http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf I think Christina Hoff Sommers has good anecdotes in Who Stole Feminism if I remember correctly.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:57 PM
1

Speaking of the sentencing gap, here's an interesting academic paper: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1767508 You can download the whole thing for free. It's been a while since I read it and I remember it having a slant at times, but there's some interesting data in the paper nonetheless.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 05:00 PM
4

Was anyone else frustrated that WF didn't make stronger arguments here? I felt he was pulling his punches.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 05:37 PM
2

Whatever residual innocence I had left from childhood dissipated upon reading this.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 11:24 AM
2

What?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 11:09 AM
3

Fuck. I really hate Mika. She's like a parody. AVfM should write up something about this one.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 03:18 PM
20

"My point is that I was writing for women because I wanted validation from women." And there it is. Thousands of years of self-destructive male motivation summarily explained by none other than Hugo Schwyzer.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:51 PM
7

Exciting times, folks. More and more people in the mainstream are starting to realize that being "progressive" and "on the right side of history" may mean rejecting feminism rather than embracing it. These people are finally starting to see that feminism should be defined not by what it abstractly claims to be, but by what it manifestly does. Actions speak louder than words; imagine that.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:30 PM
16

Nice response! THIS is an intelligent MRA argument, both in terms of substance and style. We need more of this in everyday life.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 02:33 PM
1

Hey, good point. Wasn't trying to start a fight but sometimes the peeves get the best of me, so much so that my corrections are also wrong. But since you threw in the personal snark, I'll play: It looks like we BOTH need to go back to school, as "there's" is still objectively incorrect in your post. The correct contraction would be "there're" because you are using the plural "two" afterwards.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:20 PM
1

They're.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:52 PM
3

All net.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:30 AM
2

Its not really a single pendulum. Think of it more like numerous pendulums representing many differing areas. I agree with this modification of an otherwise too simplistic a metaphor. After all, even when men had the alleged single pendulum "swung in their favor," they were still manifestly disposable utilities. Thus no single pendulum in the first place. And the single pendulum idea makes us come across as if we pine for the good old days when some ideal equilibrium was reached. Never happened.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:27 AM
2

One thing I'd say is that you probably have faced discrimination in some way for being a man without realising it. This is an important point, and recognizing the subtle but systemic ways in which males face discrimination on a daily basis is an important part of the full gender-consciousness that most men lack.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:21 AM
1

I'm sensing a vibe.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 12:57 AM
7

Bingo.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 12:54 AM
2

Great reply; thanks for sharing. The reactions by your female friends don't surprise me. Women are often more receptive to MRA ideas than men; that is, once they realize there is a different way of viewing things.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 03:31 PM
1

Awesome!
/r/MensRights27/05/13 04:05 PM
2

I also agree. As an MRA against chivalry, it appears to me that he was trying to be a jerk here.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 05:00 PM
1

Awesome.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 04:26 PM
1

This is exactly right and it's the first time I've seen someone else state it this way. The value of our occasional pugnaciousness is the double standard that the responsive indignation highlights. I call it "meta-sexism": or sexism inherent in a given conception of sexism itself.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 12:25 PM
-4

I'm an MRA. The older man was in the wrong and started it. They are not equally to blame. Let's not start acting like feminists and making excuses for problematic conduct when it is directed at our opponents.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 11:55 AM
1

Haha, nice!
/r/MensRights06/04/13 09:30 PM
12

Pierce you kick ass. I follow your comments following rape articles and without fail you always out maneuver your feminists opponents with solid evidence, focused reasoning and powerful rhetoric. And your opponents always fold with really half-assed responses as Martha appears to have. Keep up the good work. And if other MRAs want to see how to effectively argue with feminists, follow Pierce's remarks and the blog he's involved with.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 11:31 PM
2

Awesome post!
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:53 PM
3

Kevin, as an MRA, I appreciate your efforts. Please try to ignore folks here who provide extremely non-constructive responses. To the extent you're not aware (and forgive me if other posters have already made this clear) the MRM is not only an issue oriented movement but also an intellectual movement, meaning, like feminists, we have a theoretical prism through which we view and describe historical and contemporary reality. Though I obviously can't speak for all MRAs, for a taste of this theory …
/r/MensRights03/03/13 01:20 PM
2

"Blaminess." Perfect.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 12:50 PM
5

Other people have latched on to the "whiny" thing, as have I. This is an important dynamic. Men are not supposed to fight women. It's considered very unmasculine. It's not a conscious judgment by other men and women, but rather an instinctive one. The "masculine" thing to do is to just blow off hostility against men by women. Otherwise, you show you're not a utility up to the task, but rather are too sensitive; weak; silly. This is especially true when it comes to complaining about misandry spec…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 08:02 PM
9

These are the small daily skirmishes that are important for us to fight in a thoughtful manner. Well done!
/r/MensRights23/02/13 02:42 PM
4

I disagree. Cowardice is a common characteristic. They may appear bold at times, but remember that they suffer very few consequences for their boldness. When it comes time to step up and debate in a neutral forum where they can't, for example, ban dissenters, they usually can't handle it. Brashness does not equal courage.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 12:12 AM
1

In theory, yes that's what mansplaining is. But not in practice. I see quite regularly feminists respond to well-reasoned, measured, and civilized arguments, with a charge of mansplaining. No actual talking down is necessary. It is indeed mostly a term invoked to non-substantively respond to what is otherwise an incisive counter-argument by a man.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 05:47 PM
2

Part of the problem is that men try to measure women's mental strengths using the same stick that measures men's intellectual strengths. This is one of the most insightful statements I've read in a while. I'd love to read more about it. Perhaps that's a good subject for elaboration on your blog.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 01:20 PM
0

Jesus why is anyone upvoting this?
/r/MensRights09/02/13 01:16 PM
3

I particularly like the last one.
/r/MensRights07/02/13 11:34 PM
2

This is my main concern with AVfM's advocacy for the ERA in its original form - no Hayden Rider is necessary for it to lead to screwed up results for men. We (in the U.S.) already have an Equal Protection Clause facially meant to prevent unequal treatment by the government on the basis of race. Yet this hasn't stopped the courts and many other legal thinkers from concluding that the "spirit" of the Amendment is to help African Americans as a class in light of historical experience, and therefore…
/r/MensRights07/02/13 05:00 PM
0

Who Stole Feminism? - Sommers. This is second only behind Myth. I'm shocked nobody has mentioned it yet.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 12:50 PM
-13

Oh shut up.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 06:36 PM
6

Well they're not FACIALLY gendered terms but they are culterally gendered. How often do you hear women referred to as assholes? It happens, I know, but the issue here is frequency, which matters a lot. Edit: I see omega has already made the point so nevermind.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 01:53 PM
3

No seriously the board really does say that. It's fairly clear if you zoom in.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 12:27 AM
5

Awesome! Scroll down to the bottom of the page where they show the free speech wall, zoom in on the left side of the wall: "Men's rights issues are regularly ignored by the mainstream media."
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:34 PM
2

Just blew my mind.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:49 AM
7

Nice! Thanks for the ammo.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:42 AM
5

I thought your response was great. There is no doubt that Farrell has influenced my arguments. The Myth of Male Power blew my mind. Hoff-Sommers and various scholarly sources also heavily influence my views.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:13 AM
4

Umm . . . what?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:12 AM
1

Yes a free goat lunch. Apparently, though, it should have been a goad lunch according to some.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 12:29 AM
12

My response to her latest reply to me; sorry it's so long: I understand your theory, you've done a great job of explaining it here. But it's based on a cherry picked set of facts and a simplistic view of history. And this to another poster: I guess my whole point is this is more complicated than you guys and some feminists are trying to make it seem, and going over why again at this point in time is exhausting. You seem to think your arguments are more sensitive to nuance and context, and less s…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 10:59 PM
11

Agree regarding "feminazism." I cringe whenever I see that or some derivitive written by an MRA. OP, if you're trite and hostile with your terminology, people will assume you're also trite and thoughtlessly hostile in your thinking.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 12:44 AM
2

Excellent. Now how about some videos?! One covering the topic of your last post above would be perfect. You would get a lot of hits and perhaps make a little money as well.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 01:51 PM
3

I have no idea yet what use this will be but one never knows! I wish more MRAs would appreciate the importance of making the movement not just a activist one but an intellectual one as well. Thanks for the ideas.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 04:00 AM
0

I don't think Durden was an MRA. In fact he seems like quite the opposite.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 01:24 PM
4

Awesome.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 01:40 AM
5

Hey awesome! These little victories cumulatively make a difference.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 01:24 PM
3

I think this is awesome but I would definitely change girl to woman.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 01:54 PM
1

And the fact that you think that helps prove ours.
/r/MensRights02/12/12 12:33 AM
2

Hey it's these sorts of skirmishes that in the aggregate represent the new normal for many men: actually standing up to sexist bullshit for a change. So it's good you took this stand (pun intended). The goal is to get women to the point where most men are; you know, to have a least some self-consciousness in insulting the opposite sex such that they realize their sexism is better left unstated or, better yet, un-thought.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 02:31 AM
4

Right on!
/r/MensRights28/11/12 02:21 AM
4

Emma what is it exactly you think we should be doing regarding feminism? Ignoring it? Actively embraceing its intellectual foundations and premising our arguments on the "patriarchy hurts men too" sentiment? I'm curious. I rarely see posters like you; those who claim to be sympathetic to the MRM to some degree, yet react so strongly to MRAs' attitudes toward feminism. You do realize that we are an intellectual movement, not just an issue-oriented activist movement, and therefore we insist on ent…
/r/MensRights28/11/12 01:28 AM
3

Oh I like this. I hope to see you pop up a lot.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 02:28 AM
11

Interesting. Now, I would like to see both researchers shocked until they're howling in pain. I guess we know who to enlist to press the buttons, thanks to their research: female animal lovers.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 12:20 AM
2

I really would not worry about this were I you. Anybody who matters, and who cares--and not many people will satisfy both criteria--will realize she's just a nut and that you're pretty rational and intellectually curious.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:00 PM
0

Try to focus a bit more on editing and on clarity in your word choice and sentence structure. Use GWW'S posts as examples of really good writing if you need examples. You gave this person a good fight and, at the end of the day, that's what matters most. Feminists are so unaccustomed to having to really defend their premises; we're changing that.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:26 AM
-1

Yeah.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:45 AM
3

I really don't understand all the hate you're getting here. Keep making the signs; I like them.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 01:21 PM
2

I can't agree with you more. Men's rights is not inherently right wing or otherwise wedded to a political ideology; those who insist otherwise will pull this movement down.
/r/MensRights19/11/12 05:50 PM
3

This is great; love the photos!
/r/MensRights09/11/12 05:52 PM
2

Second Ignatius; it takes time for grassroots movements to develop to academic status: first, they need a solid descriptive theory that will, in turn, undergird "normative" theories dealing with the empathy gap that men suffer from. Those theories, in turn, influence future leaders when they're minds are malleable--mainly when they're in college. This is why it always bothers me when someone here writes something like: "I'm only concerned about men having equal legal rights, and therefore casual…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 05:09 PM
10

What?! No.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 12:08 AM
4

What? I didn't quote that part of your post. "Bitch an little and get it off your chest" versus "holding grudges and generalizing an entire gender" is a false dichotomy. While the latter is unnecessary, so is dismissing complaints about ostensibly "minor" acts of discrimination as nothing but unmanly and “self-entitled” whining.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 05:43 PM
10

We're men, start acting like it. Bitch a little, get it off your chest, and then move the fuck on. This is the kind of attitude that has led to many of men's problems.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 05:07 PM
7

I was with you until you got to implictly defining what "real issues" are (or are not). At that point, I started figuring that you just don't get it.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 05:05 PM
2

Thanks for the response. I didn't down vote you btw. Just asked a question. Notice that you went from saying that you disagree with our "tenants" to saying that you don't mesh with mr "at least its radical form." Can you tell me what specifically about mr's view of the "power/super structure" you disagree with?
/r/MensRights21/10/12 01:44 PM
2

What exactly are our "tenants" refusedzero?
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:08 AM
0

Awesome!
/r/MensRights18/10/12 04:16 PM
0

Just out of curiosity, which video did the teacher use and what was the lesson context?
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:09 PM
0

you want to sit here and play semantics games and ignore the facts you are too dense to realize they are bad points amazing... someone who backs up their claims with evidence! LOL, are are just one little bundle of irony, aren't you cymrich? I do fear that you simply don't get my argument. And it is not "trolling" to claim, and explain why, your assertions are confused. Please look up the term "trolling" before using it so loosely.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 04:58 PM
17

Great letter. This is how one represents the MRM. Not with invective and references to "feminazis."
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:56 AM
1

yes, passenger planes have so many lifeboats that the women use while the men go down with the ship You mean to tell me that your beef with GWW’s phrase was specifically about LIFE BOATS, and not her obvious reference to what the lifeboat scenario represents: putting women and children first in life-threatening situations? If so, your argument is more about technology than about historical and deeply-embedded norms. Or are you just being cute with this line? Yes, it’s the latter. When the plane …
/r/MensRights16/10/12 04:22 PM
0

wow . . . was good reading right up until the lifeboat comment which just destroyed your credibility...if you actually researched the "women and children first" thing then you might find out it was also applied in situations such as the crash landing of a passenger plane in the Hudson River a few years back; more importantly, you might find that we use the phrase "women and children first" as a metaphor for everyday life and public policy, not to imply that the lifeboard scenerio literally happe…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:46 PM
1

We're working on a pop-up graphic version for our "special" readers like you.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:30 PM
6

Regarding a book, I think she already has that on a burner. But my impression of her is that she is also quite cautious and she wants to make sure she really knows her stuff before taking a next step. Don't fret, though, as we see her steady trajectory when we look at the big picture. For example, have you noticed that her posts on reddit over the past month have drastically decreased in both number and length, while her videos have increased in both number and length during the same time? I tak…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 12:17 PM
7

I'm betting many MRAs hate this page as well. It doesn't help.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:36 PM
2

Bingo. I don't see why it's so hard for people to see this isn't just about the joke per se; it's about what it represents. It's about what the context of its telling signals about relative value and respect.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 04:18 PM
9

In particular watch her video "Feminism and the Disposable Male." It has become a classic in this movement and is the number 1 YouTube return when one searches for "feminism." That is how popular it has become.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 12:06 PM
2

And that's how you do it: know your shit, stay cool, and don't back down. When they react that way you know you've won. Each one of those exchanges is a chip at the fortress.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 02:42 AM
3

What affiliations, exactly, are you referring to?
/r/MensRights11/10/12 12:26 PM
1

Touché!
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:27 AM
1

Awareness. How is she benefiting?
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:25 AM
2

Indeed. NAFALT is true. But it won't always be.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:24 AM
-1

No it has bowed to pressure generally. I am no feminist; women should not be excluded from Augusta.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:17 AM
2

Actually, it's "bowel-faced lie."
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:11 AM
5

No, of course it's not "ok." Don't be so dramatic. It's just that it doesn't really MATTER as much, that's all.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:04 AM
2

Agreed x 10 with both you and pundit! Every MRM needs to think of his or her self as a human relations rep in the greater public. We need to have threads devoted to this type of strategic thinking, and less of a bombastic and adolescent "I'm keeping it real so fuck what everyone else thinks" attitude. We need more than passion; we need brains and political dexterity. As far as everyday conversations go, I would add that one should be simply rational and polite in both tone and substance. Don't y…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:29 AM
8

Please take the damn "socialist this/that" shit somewhere else. There is nothing inherently right wing about fucking men's rights.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 09:33 PM
28

Absolutely brilliant indeed. This is particularly applicable to feminism given how seldom feminists are willing to truly debate their ideas with those who share very different premises. "Debate" to feminists usually means just a gentle disagreement among themselves within their insular "safe spaces" where fundamental assumptions go unquestioned; the disagreement is usually over how best to clean the mirrors rather than whether to rebuild the engine.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:33 AM
-2

Ah, I see, it's a parody of the childishly simplistic and intuition-driven feminist dismissals of the MRM; thanks for the clarification! Very well-done indeed. Do you do balloon animals as well?
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:56 PM
-3

I'm not sure if you're actually serious or just trying to parody the ridiculousness of those who so grossly misunderstand MRAs. If it’s the latter, well done sir or madam, well done! If the former . . . well, that’s even funnier.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:40 PM
0

One of the most common phenomena that MRAs encounter in debating feminists online is the incredible amount of irony in their arguments, and their seemingly utter lack of awareness of that irony. This isn’t a snarky jab; rather, we think their lack of awareness of the irony itself makes our point—about an unconscious bias—for us. I won’t bother responding to everything you write, as perhaps it’s more constructive to focus narrowly on one or two of your points to illustrate mine. Take this languag…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 03:08 PM
1

Kradiant, you sure do have all the buzzwords and conceptual tropes down: "rape culture," "level the playing field," etc. Once you have hung around here long enough, though, you will come to realize, as you seemingly have not yet, that the more serious arguments we make against feminism do not amount to conspiracy theories about the conscious intentions of casual feminists, or simple dismissals of feminists as being fascists. Rather, the devil is in the premises, and what we believe are the mostl…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 01:20 AM
20

Bingo. This really sums up why many politically progressive men are becoming not only MRAs but anti-feminists.
/r/MensRights07/10/12 07:17 PM
-3

The.
/r/MensRights07/10/12 07:13 PM
2

given you're a woman, your reasons for being repelled cannot as easily be dismissed Just a couple of weeks ago a guy told my girlfriend that she had been co-opted by men because she thought the drivel he was spouting was ridiculous. Yes, and this reaction to your girlfriend inspires laughter, and posts like typhonblue's, precisely because dismissal of your girlfriend's views is in this context was so ironic. No doubt feminists dismiss both men and women who don't agree with them; but it's easier…
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:52 PM
49

There's also the fact that, given you're a woman, your reasons for being repelled cannot as easily be dismissed as just being because you hate women/don't empathize with women's experiences, etc. When a dissenter from feminism is a woman--ie, among those who benefit from feminism in certain narrow ways yet still see it as a net problem--that dissent is given extra weight for good reason. So, yes, it makes perfect sense.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:53 PM
4

Puke.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:31 PM
1

Hey, congrats!
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:29 PM
1

[I]f we accept that there's a huge gap between the theoretical goals and the "human institution" in some groups/people, can't we make at least two assumptions? [One]: The movement has to have members somewhere that are closer to the aforementioned theoretical goals. Sure, which is why I already stated that, but, in any event, it matters little. Again, we believe it’s best to focus not on feminism’s theoretical goals but rather on consequences. We’re empirical here, as we believe it is best not t…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:01 PM
3

Hi notwist, Yes you will unfortunately find here an indictment of all feminists, regardless of how good the intentions of some feminists are. Things can get a bit sloppy; we are after all a fairly new movement, still feeling our way toward an intellectual homebase. As an MRA, my take is this. When MRAs say “feminism” what they mean is not the purported aspiration of feminism, or its theoretical goals stated in the abstract. What we have a problem with is the human institution itself, which manif…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 01:59 PM
2

Agree with BeingDS. I'm a man, an MRA, and, thus, an equalist. Those who want us to giggle and applaud rank male chauvinism like this should go somewhere else lest you undermine our efforts. And if some of you are thinking of calling me a “white knight” or some such for this simple proposition, please save that for the men who really deserve it . . . like Joe Biden.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 04:53 PM
4

Great idea. I look forward to reading future entries. Subscribed.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 02:07 AM
3

2005 law school graduate here. Winks is right. His/her "type of person" explanation is spot on; it appears you may not have understood it. It has little to do with how "hard" a subject is. It's how we're wired that matters, and, yes, we hone that with practice exams.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 10:46 PM
2

"this was a thing." sorry if this is a dumb question but what do you mean by that?
/r/MensRights25/09/12 10:35 PM
6

Perhaps post a copy here as an example for others to do the same; using craigs is a good idea.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 12:54 PM
-1

The "sigh" shit gets really old. Seriously.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 04:36 PM
3

Welcome!
/r/MensRights22/09/12 07:29 PM
4

Yeah he makes himself seem like the ass here.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 10:52 PM
1

Seems like you don't disagree with her at all: Her: I laugh and cringe every time I see something on the ‘war on women' You: The whole "war on whatever" hyperbole is getting really old. War on men, war on women . . . . No. She's not saying women are never disadvantaged.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:13 PM
8

Well, I noticed this same contradiction as well. But is the other poster really the same person who on Jezebel blamed MRAs for the threats? If Jezebel was just making it all up, then no, and, when reading the post on jezebel I had a nagging feeling that it was just that - made up.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 09:43 AM
5

It's really sad that I had to scroll down this far before seeing this assertion. I have a hard time believing that someone with that username is not TRYING to hurt us.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 04:29 PM
1

Wait, THIS would be a lot worse (can't believe I didn't think of this first): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLa_beHZfws
/r/MensRights13/09/12 03:37 PM
2

Good point; suggesting that men like Ron Burgundy best represent the MRA and what it stands for would be dangerous indeed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20l-od6lvaA
/r/MensRights13/09/12 01:07 PM
1

Now that is interesting. Never thought about it that way before . . . Hmm.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 12:14 PM
2

Agreed. The agency that feminism denies women is a great example of benevolent sexism; or "neo-chivalry" as I call it. Which is why MRAs find it so ironic when feminists complain about it. And what also infuriates us is that feminists refuse to see how benevolent sexism hurts men far more than women; they tend to view women's experiences in a vacuum.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 12:01 PM
5

And feminists like those in the video would likely think it is essentially impossible for folks like you to be an MRA. So ironic; they are just as simplistic as men who think that the only people who are feminists are ugly women who hate men because they can't get laid. Now I'm off to eat some raw meat, feed my pit bull and throw darts at a photo of Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 02:21 AM
1

Um, no she's mocking the trope itself. She's making the point that it's just a stupid and blanket insult to dads tossed around to make moms feel better about themselves.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 02:10 AM
3

Glad to see she's making videos!
/r/MensRights11/09/12 11:51 PM
1

My advice is that you either drop the class or stay in and be very vociferous when you have a valid point to make. Do not back off under social pressure. Easier said than done, I know. Do not back down from making substantive points (in a civilized and mature way of course) even if the professor pulls you aside and claims it is becoming "an issue" (feminist professors do this a lot; they often think their classes should be "safe spaces" for female viewpoints, not fora for rigorous intellectual e…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 10:03 PM
11

Very good advice indeed.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 09:54 PM
12

I too thank you for our open-mindedness. While I, as a man, have always (since a boy) felt that mistreatment of men is way more common than society has been willing to recognize, I too have always assumed that women are, and have always been, "more oppressed." I don't anymore. Hang around here long enough and you will, hopefully, gradually adopt a social and historical narrative that reveals how patriarchy theory tells only half the story, and thus hides half of the oppression doled out by human…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 09:27 PM
3

Yep, that would be racism alright. Yet it remains on his subreddit for the opposition to exploit.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 10:34 PM
8

I like this as a message but it's not punchy enough as a slogan.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 11:40 AM
10

I think what he actually wants is joy and happiness and you just fell for the reverse psychology. Really smooth, obsidian, really smooth.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 01:34 PM
2

Love this kind of enthusiasm. Spread the word my friend.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 01:31 PM
2

Yeah veering off into general anti-women remarks makes us no better than the opposition. I like to think that this movement as conscientiously steering clear of all the things we fault feminists for. But, as a straight man, i say feel free to gay pile away.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 12:40 AM
1

G-O's point is by far the best response so far (haven't read those below yet). I am really rather surprised this point wasn't made sooner. The problem is rooted in male disposability, but that's too abstract and fundamental a concept to have any effect in a casual conversation with your male friends. As such, simply explain it using G-O's language and perhaps with this message, combined with any self esteem issues they may have during this time in their lives, something will click.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 11:05 AM
-1

Indeed. Why oh why are these posts not being deleted?! The whole laissez faire thing, I know . . . Sounds cool in theory but it will seriously fuck this movement.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 02:39 AM
1

I agree. Those who don't are posting the most but you are getting upvotes.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 02:29 AM
1

Actually this is one of the most important things MRAs can do; we all need to think of ourselves as thoughtful, provocative (yet not trolling and vitriolic) missionaries.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 11:51 AM
1

Welcome!
/r/MensRights05/09/12 12:57 AM
2

I certainly agree. Five or ten years ago, one otherwise thoughtful and intelligent would have been rendered utterly stupefied by really bad feminist arguments. Have you ever had the experience: you encounter an argument that's so BAD you can't defend against it? This is what happens when one, unaccustomed to combating it, is confronted with the feminist approach to the world. So one slowly backs up, avoids eye contact, and says "ok ok, whatever" and walks off. These fora are great at helping us …
/r/MensRights05/09/12 12:52 AM
0

Um, . . . Hmm . . . Well . . . .
/r/MensRights04/09/12 11:22 PM
6

Men’s (and women’s) willingness to engage in small-scale skirmishes like this collectively can make a big difference so long as a critical mass of folks are willing to push back with every day frequency. For too long we have left feminist viewpoints to fester in an analytical vacuum free from challenge, usually just rolling our eyes and saying "ok, whatever, do your venting and let's move on." It's nice to see that we are becoming more inclined to fight back now. So I applaud you. Well argued. A…
/r/MensRights04/09/12 04:36 PM
35

Bingo.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 10:07 AM
1

Ah, I see. Nevermind.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 08:55 PM
9

Exactly.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 11:03 AM
2

Oh, by "political discussion" you mean "discussion by politicians." I read the phrase to mean public discussions meant to bring into greater relief, and propose solutions to, particular social problems. That politicians don't bring MR issues up, well, seems to prove the sentiment driving PostPatriarchalMan's post: feminists' efforts in shutting down, in certain public contexts, discourse that cuts against their theories and narratives, makes clear to politicians that certain issues are off limit…
/r/MensRights01/09/12 08:26 PM
3

the "men's problems" are problems that the actual men cause for themselves Please tell me why this matters at all. I know you think it's obvious, but to me it's not, and the difference between our thinking reflects a crucial difference in the way feminists and MRAs approach history and the concept of relative power between the sexes.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 04:49 PM
3

Are you serious? Ok, here's just one example off the top of my head of where feminists have actively "shot down" discussion of a men's rights issue: Consider the reaction of feminists when researchers (many of them women) try to shed light, and bring greater empathetic attention to, the fact that men suffer from domestic abuse about as much as women. Here's just one scholarly source explaining this: http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf
/r/MensRights31/08/12 04:38 PM
2

Exactly. I get the impression that lurkers are disproportionately moderates or those on the fence, people who can be pushed away with enough vitriol. Pushing them away is not strategically smart.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 09:39 PM
1

I see.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:15 PM
2

This is something I've always, since a boy, been very sensitive about. And I've noticed that female reporters do it a lot LESS than male ones do. This is consistent, of course, with the idea that men are a large part, if not most, of the problem.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:34 PM
15

It's in menrights precisely because folks like you think it shouldn't be, and respond with "ughhh." I for one think this is fucking awesome.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 02:36 PM
2

When the media writes these types of headlines I don't think they are trying to be sexist. I think what the are trying to show is the depravity of the act. How, exactly, is an unarmed man, in any even slightly meaningful sense, less defenseless against the state seeking to execute him than an unarmed woman? The answer, of course, is that he is not. It is for this reason that, for example, in the U.S. protests outside of execution chambers are especially intense when it's a woman about to die. It…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 12:56 PM
1

This credibility issue is so often so under-appreciated here. Many here seem to see these fora not as the public face of a movement but rather a place for venting with frendlies. It is often these people who will accuse others of defending feminism or even white-knighting simply for worrying about such weak-wristed things like credibility and rhetorical moderation.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 11:31 AM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 10:39 AM
1

And about 3 hours ago; Brian Williams discussing the beheadings today in Afghanistan: "18 victims were beheaded, including two women."
/r/MensRights28/08/12 01:38 AM
8

Yeah, I read a testy exchange between law professors about these firms here: http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2012/08/a-family-law-frat.html I can't believe she actually cited the Huffington Post as a source.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 01:29 AM
1

Echo what GWW writes, but I would add the conclusion: thus, our focus on the women and children victims is manifestly an illustration of male disposability. I fail to understand how one cannot see this. Were women so rarely the victims of violence, I perhaps could see your point, MaunaLoona, but the violent victimization of women is not so rare as to make the mentioning of female victims interesting in a "Ripley's believe or not" sense. Thus, it's mentioned because it makes the tragedy seem wors…
/r/MensRights27/08/12 07:17 PM
2

Now THIS is interesting.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 07:07 PM
10

The comment I just left on his channel: "Sir, I normally hate to do this; I really do. Name calling is so not constructive, I understand that, but I hope you will let me vent a bit. So here goes: that little smirk on your face, the progressive-intellectual black-framed glasses and obligatory male-feminist facial hair, make your comments seem even more superficially informed and politically cliquish than they substantively already are. Whew! Ok, thanks for that. Anyway, it seems you have fallen v…
/r/MensRights27/08/12 12:33 AM
2

Glad to see that the very first comment posted there pointed out this terrible language.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 11:24 PM
17

Yes, I hear this quite often and it disgusts me. It's amazing to hear feminists claim that the "women and children first" norm is a "myth" because it "only happened on the Titanic," not realizing that the norm includes every instance where the value rears its head, not just on sinking ships . . . for example in journalistic language meant to convey that a tragedy was particularly tragic because women and children were lost. I actually complained to NPR recently when a journalist kept using this …
/r/MensRights26/08/12 11:18 PM
3

Parallel conversation going on over here (link below). I'd love to see the mrm fora run by the ladies visited more frequently: http://www.reddit.com/r/LadyMRAs/comments/yun4l/gender_relations_in_history_how_do_you_feel_about/
/r/MensRights26/08/12 05:58 PM
1

I for one will donate. Assuming corpseflower's response was not facetious I share his sentiment.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:02 PM
5

Thought I would post this comment from a woman named Maire: "This piece may have been written in order to provoke, but I'm going to comment anyway. I wish everyone could stop pitting the sexes against each other and making comments about women's superiority over men or vice a versa. If a piece were written extolling the virtues of men and dismissing the necessity or sufficiency of women there would be blood. Man-bashing is reprehensible. The merest suggestion that men are not necessary when it c…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 02:09 AM
5

Justify myself to feminists? What in the flying-French-fuck are you talking about? I am merely pointing out that the primary reason why this forum even exists is to combat a feminist mindset that, ironically enough, is qualitatively the same as yours: it works to convince all of society that an entire demographic group is "the problem," rather than only those who are manifestly culpable. The kind of thought process that yields these prejudices ("deep-felt" or not) is crude and hyper-emotional, t…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 02:02 AM
2

Please tell me you see the irony in your response.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:40 AM
4

Well I don't think that's nec . . . wait, do I sense a tad of facetiousness?
/r/MensRights26/08/12 12:29 AM
5

Wow. I'm not sure what has led you to think that women as a group are the enemy; oh wait perhaps it's the same hyper-emotional mind that leads a young woman to focus only on rapists and wife beaters in judging all of men. Please grow up. And feminists, please quote me instead of him (though of course you will not).
/r/MensRights26/08/12 12:26 AM
5

I know, right?! Is he really so dumb as to not see the glaring problem this line presents to his thesis?
/r/MensRights25/08/12 09:59 PM
2

Collect evidence of this; perhaps even record meetings.conversations, save screenshots, etc., so that you can prove what's being said. Then consider filing suit for a "hostile work environment" on the basis of sex, which the law prohibits (this is US law; don't know where you are). I think the law allows for the recovery of attorney fees, which means you don't have to pay a lawyer by the hour. And, the mor evidence you collect, the more likely an attorney will take the case without your providin…
/r/MensRights25/08/12 06:47 PM
8

Yes, it is great to see it. So the "pattern" is good.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 01:14 PM
5

Yes he is an ass. We have a few of these guys who pull this "big fucking deal, you are a woman and you support us; stop the presses! Here's your fucking brownie button!" routine but most guys here, including myself, love seeing these posts. Stick around; I look forward to seeing your future posts.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:44 PM
2

I had a somewhat similar problem as you. Since as far as I can remember, my mother would always say things like "men are dogs, such pigs," and when her friends were around, they would of course join in the circle-jerk, completely oblivious to the presence of a small boy hearing these things and wondering why they hated me so much. When I was with my father (they separated when I was young) I NEVER heard him say things like “women, such cunts, those bitches” etc. In high school I had the feminist…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 06:01 PM
2

Oh, because it sounds like she was a big part of the problem and I think justice requires that she appreciate the effects her conduct had on you. But I realize that's none of my business; after all, I too bite my tongue to keep the peace with my parents.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 05:38 PM
2

Wow. I find myself fantasizing about showing your mother this response.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 04:50 PM
2

A vast majority of post-modernists I am aware of--in fact all--are leftists.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:45 PM
3

Totally disagree. I love seeing these announcements by women for reasons others, especially Hamakua, have already stated. This is not a forum for an academic journal but rather for a movement. Information matters but equally if not more important is political momentum.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 11:04 AM
3

Jesus man why must you be such an asshole? Guys like you just love snatching enmity from the jaws of moral support.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 11:08 PM
5

One thing to remember when here is that some folks are very abrasive but not necessarily hostile; oftentimes visitors have a hard time telling the difference. It might be the difference in female/male modes of communication, I don’t know. Many here have a style of unapologetically racing for the core of things, other people's feelings be damned. I have noticed that often feminists communicate with an extreme superficial gentleness when they’re telling someone who they otherwise respect that they…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 08:48 PM
2

Wait what?
/r/MensRights20/08/12 10:34 PM
1

I for one think this is great.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 10:22 PM
1

Yes I know.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 03:35 PM
3

Troll? No not that obvious at all. Yes they are two sides of the same coin; unfortunately the MRM is still so incipient that not ALL MRAs accept the same currency; like the minority who wax nostalgic for the days when "men were real men" and all that crap.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 01:48 PM
2

Exactly.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 01:44 PM
3

Sltkr is right. I say this as a man and an MRA. We need less rhetorical masturbation and bumper-sticker thinking if we are to be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 01:41 PM
6

Note to all the feminists who comb these fora looking for misogyny to discuss in your safe spaces: notice how none of the responses to Lupo so far say anything sexist, anti-woman or anti-equality. When MRAs say they are anti-feminist pay attention; we are complex and nuanced just like you are. In fact the more thoughtful among us make you appear old-fashioned, conservative and obsolete.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 01:30 PM
2

Yeah, I cringed when I read it; not because I thought she was condoning violence but because I knew it could so easily be interpreted that way by an eye needing to do so.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 07:21 PM
1

Exactly. While GWW's post was not ideally worded, taken literally--which I think the post should be taken--this should be clear.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 07:16 PM
0

Really? Eating steaks? Smoking cigars? Hunting? Ok, I’m fairly new to these fora, but if by “men’s rights” we’re talking about sitting around celebrating archetypal masculinity and beating drums, please count me out. I have no desire to be celebrated for my disposability, thank you very much. And I have no desire to perpetuate a cliché notion of masculinity that has the effect of continuing to make the definition of manhood so constricting. Note how almost every single thing that guys have liste…
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:05 PM
0

Oh please.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 07:50 PM
1

True but it's liberals who are most likely to fix it as well.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 11:35 AM
4

You just planted a terrible visual of my parents in my head. Thanks for adding injury to insult. ; )
/r/MensRights15/08/12 12:34 AM
2

Tigalicious, waffebunny's post below is essential if you wish to understand what the real divide is; it's all about the premises. Read his post then watch the male disposability video by girlwriteswhat, as well as her other videos.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 01:12 AM
2

Funny, I was thrilled when I encountered an ad that preceded one of GWW's videos; the reason should be obvious.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:47 PM
2

Seriously, though - how could you NOT be aware of that already? Because she wasn't; now she is. Why isn't that good enough? Jesus, this movement is to push things in a certain DIRECTION, not to just mock those who have not already been magically teleported to where we want them to end up before we try to influence them to go there in the first place.
/r/MensRights29/07/12 07:24 PM
3

When people from both sides of this argument begin excising their own personal bullshit from the discourse, we'll come to find that we don't exactly disagree on all that much. As an MRA, I must say well-said. Throughout history, successful movements are generally sophisticated ones; pragmatic in strategy and optimistic, rather than indulgently pugnacious, defiantly puritanical, and separatist in posture. As such, I always cringe when men so quickly take a mocking and/or hostile tone with women w…
/r/MensRights29/07/12 06:57 PM
1

For the most part, agreed. It's also the case that because this movement is still developing, no one person has the authority assert definitively what the MRM is "about," is "primarily concerned with" or what the "point" of it is, unless the description is provided on a high level of generality (e.g., "equality").
/r/MensRights29/07/12 06:38 PM
0

"Conversations on reddit help me formulate and hone ideas, and test them. Most of my videos and blog posts are inspired by conversations--either here, with people around me, or over skype." Yeah, that makes sense. Along the same lines, I figured after writing my post that, given how well your posts are usually written, you can essentially consider them to be collectively a book in progress. What my post represents, of course, is an excitement about what you will provide this movement in the near…
/r/MensRights28/07/12 12:16 AM
-1

GWW, This is a compliment, though it may not seem like one: you spend way too much time on Reddit. Your posts are way too long, well thought-out and edited. They're so good they bother me; why? Because every time I see one of your more deep posts—and so many of them are deep—I think to myself "and this could be going into a kick-ass BOOK instead!" (as I know you have received unsolicited offers to publish) or toward another video that might get tens of thousands of hits on youtube (or hundreds o…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:06 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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