TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Melthengylf Archive

View 12 posts and 1,528 comments by Melthengylf on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,528 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

What I think is happening is that it is same economic level but distinct educational level. And also what happens with lower class meb is that women either become single mothers, go to college or, if they stay working class conservative they marry the wealthiest of their community, because there is a shortage of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:04 AM
–

Do you have any data on this? I don't think churches are that popular among young men. Search about "Independent Network Charismatics". This is growing fast. Also called "nondenominational" churches. It is mostly strong amongst Millenials, not Zoomers. They are the churches that have music, stand-up and shows and all that. Is it good for men specifically or is it good for the system? Young men are loyal to their (Boomer) fathers and have not broken that bond. Thus they want to not rock the boat.…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/25 05:31 PM
–

The church has been feminized and liberalized. Neo-Charismatic and evangelical churches are not, and it is where young men are staying at. I did not say that Conservatism is good for young men. It is just good enough for young men to not want to shake the system too much, or to defy their parents frameworks too much. With regards to what is best for men, I personally think young men lack both a clear view on what they need and what their plan is.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/25 05:05 PM
–

Russia has a much higher homicide rate of women than the Middle East. In fact, it has one of the highest in the World: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_women#/media/File%3AMURDER-SCALE-4-2019.jpg they didn't 'reject' western women's framework In the Middle East, no. In the West, where they can work and cut out their families? Of course they can. It is more complex than that. you also haven't elaborated on your point regarding the 'far right' advocating for white people's right ov…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/25 02:27 AM
–

I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 08:33 PM
–

Conservatives, such as Evangelical Christians, also voted for Trump. Trump himself is from the Far Right (return to the past instead of preventing a future).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 06:46 PM
–

I consider him reactionary. More precisely, while the centre-right tries to conserve, the far-right tries to return to an (imagined) past.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 06:25 PM
–

In the US, noncitizens commit less crimes than citizens. It is different with the case of Muslim immigrants in Europe, of course, which have specific troubles integrating. The case for European men and women is somewhat different. Crucially, neither European men or women comprehend Islam. The war with Russia is another factor: European women distrust Russian-aligned far right men as much as they distrust Islamists. Russia is not much better to women than Muslim countries. We can see the paradox …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 06:10 PM
–

Yes, I am a leftist.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 05:58 PM
2

Cultural freedom is useless when you're starving or attacked by rival groups. They say they want X because Y is already present but in the lack of Y they will fold. If men start threatening with killing them unless they submit, they will want the freedom to escape those relations more, no less. You are missing the crucial point: women's interests rely on creating a multiculural alliance of women. It depends on women prioritizing their gender over their allegiance to the men of their tribe. But i…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:59 PM
1

Yes. Older men clearly have more chance of dating conservative young women. That's why conservatives have a larger age gap in relations.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:28 PM
2

I am using "left" here in a very broad term including both liberals and leftists. That is, anything that isn't cultural conservatism.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:26 PM
1

LMAO, women self interest is a strong society that keep them safe, yet, they do and endorse every act against it EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. You are wrong about their self-interest. Their self-interest is cultural freedom and social safety net. And they are willing to let go of some of the "protection" in exchange of cultural freedom and social safety net. I mean, you could talk to almost any young women and they will tell you this.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:24 PM
1

It is true that historically young men have changed ideas faster, but this changed recently. You can see how young women have abandoned their parents religion faster than young women. And, by definition, the Left wants change and the Right/conservatives want no change.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:20 PM
1

The discussion here is not whether the poorest sectors are the most affected by crime. The discussion is whether the police is the most effective way to solve crime. I am not saying it works, I am saying there are more effective pathways.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:55 PM
2

The care work has always been done by women. Taking care of children, elderly, disabled, etc. That wasn't done by men. I mean, men did provide for the household. I am referring to the direct work. And if you remove the government, you remove protection for women. Wonder, do I wonder, what will then happen. To which age will we return? Yes. The risk is becoming something like a Latin American country, specifically, Mexico. I'm LatAm and my girlfriend is Mexican, so I know about it. The bet is tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:53 PM
2

Yes. Many are working in a zero-sum mindset. And instead of trying to be better they are trying for others to be worse. So that is possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:49 PM
1

Ok, I see your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:47 PM
2

I totally agree that society is more gynocentric than before. Which is why women support change more and men less (lefr vs right).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:31 PM
1

Interesting point. As a Jew, I am scared of the rising antisemitism on the Left. So I imagine you refer to that Left Authoritarian mentality, which undoubtly is patriarchal. Like pro-Venezuela, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:29 PM
1

It is traditional. Conservative religious people are more traditional than liberal ones. Nonwestern societies are more traditional than western ones. It is in the word, "patriarchy". It means "rule by the fathers". Not by men but by the fathers. There are many interesting texts that analyze this. One of them is "peasants in the east of the Elba" from Weber. One example of this is warfare. Warfare is old men deciding on wars where young men go to die. US militarism is one of the largest manifesta…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:27 PM
0

Mhm, and you think if we remove police forces altogether, women will suffer less? I strongly think women believe this. At a personal level, I think a weaker police force would make revolutions easier. And women want to change the system. So they intend to mount on that process. It is a risky bet than a different system will be less patriarchal. It mostly comes from the idea that a decrease in economic inequality will also decrease patriarchal dynamics. The Left is against parenthood. Against hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:21 PM
1

And the community will be made of women, because men will wash their hands from the responsability. Which is how humans have historically functioned.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:17 PM
1

I think young men don't realize the right is misogynistic because their mothers are extremely religious. But, in general, this is the "toxic masculinity" feminism talks about: loyalty of young men towards their fathers. That's the patriarchal pact. In other words, "if I obey my father, I will have a woman and my children obeying me".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:16 PM
1

Sure. But the Right has institutionalized misoginy. Misoginy in the Left is more covert or not institutionalized.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:13 PM
2

Far Right politicians support a rigid system where men will have privileges over women, whites over nonwhites, etc. Thus, white men voting for them is in their rational self-interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:12 PM
2

The Left is systematically in favour of public services. Less so on police, which makes sense given the large ammount of police men who beat their wives.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:10 PM
6

Why? What misoginy? The manosphere does not make up majority of the right. Besides all the women who Trump himself sexually assaulted, conservative morals are restrictive to women in a way it doesn't make sense in the modern World. Women can't be sahm, besides the economic crisis, because divorce would be life-threatening to them in that case, which would make them too vulnerable. Not only that, but women rely on the State. Historically, they have taken care of the children, the elderly and the …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 11:26 AM
0

I did not say that all people are rational. I said that younger people are more rational and secular because they can no longer afford self-delusions in the context of an economic crisis. As you've said, it is rational (in their own self-interest) for men to stay away from the Left.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 11:20 AM
1

I started dating my girlfriend (who was my first) way after I ended college. 4 years by now.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/25 09:33 AM
1

Unless it was an irrational trauma response.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 09:49 PM
2

Men need to survive on their own because they don't have enough social support. So the money they earn will protect them in the elderly years or will protect them from homelessness. Men are much more focused on survival, and thus forgo enjoyment of the job in exchange of a higher earnings.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 09:45 PM
1

It is much more complicated than that. Essentially, emotional disconnection and sexual disconnection are tightly linked. But it is also true that sexuality is about being seen as an object, as a living being (instead of a disembodied mind). Feminism hasn't made the connection between male sexuality and men's reluctance to go to the doctor or reluctance to use work safety protocols. The relationship is that men don't see themselves as living beings but relate to their bodies in an utilitarian way…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 09:43 PM
1

>Surveys indicate that a majority of male researchers prioritize scientific progress, while female researchers often emphasize societal progress. You can't get societal progress if you are wrong, there is where this women get mistaken.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 07:36 PM
0

Have some dignity and break with the woman with whom you do not trust to cry because of the death of your friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/23 09:56 PM
1

I do not fully understand. Do you mean that feminist answers concentrates in solutions instead of connection?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/21 05:25 PM
1

Yes, we need to change our attittudes to support each other more (includinh men that are part of media).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/21 05:08 PM
1

Well, we need to try. I do try to do that, as my part. But I think just falling into despair is not an answer?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/21 04:31 PM
5

It's not only that. It puts pressure on men to be providors. I mean, """""boring""""" guys are usually depressed. But I'm referring more to men who are unable to launch because of the job market and are on dead end jobs, for example.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/20 11:15 PM
2

Sorry, I had a strong reaction towards the subject. The video is actually very good. It reminds me a lot to Heiddegger.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/20 11:56 PM
17

I have a strong dislike about those that propagate aboiut the "Peter Pan syndrom". In my view is akin the "Man Up" like. I do am in favour of growth and self-actualization, but many times this discourse makes more harm than good.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/20 10:22 PM
2

It's more than that. Bourdieu explores how what each person likes ends up being a sign of status. He shows even that intellectuals in that french time used to have cats, so cats were a sign of prestige. If you liked cats more than dogs, then you would end up with a social network of rich and powerful people. He mostly talked about the elite liking of museums, operas and fine arts, if I remember. I'm extremely exaggerating, I strongly recommend you to read something of Bourdieu, though. He is ver…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/20 04:25 PM
2

Foucault and Bourdieu are two of the greatest sociologists of all time. Both french. Foucault was highly influencial. He is the one who theorized about Power. He was a follower of Nietzche and partly of Marx. He was homosexual and one of the main people who advanced the theoretical legitimacy of gay rights in his History of Sexuality. His main book is Discipline and Punish. There he basically creates a genealogy of prisions. It is an excelent book. Because american feminism has a fetischism of p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/20 10:21 AM
3

Yes. And it is not new.... People read Foucault, but they never read Bourdieu. The american liberals flaunt their cultural capital in a completely unacknowledged way. And frankly if they read Foucault they wouldn't be as punitivistic either....
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/20 11:05 AM
2

and that the people without power are really the ones who do have power. Ohhh... come on, now whites are powerless? US and Europe do not have power over Africa and Latin America? Now poor people have power over rich people? I'm not denying that power exists. What I dislike is the metanarrative: that ALL social issues can be explained through power.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/20 02:01 AM
1

Sure
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 11:17 PM
2

Yes, it is :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 11:17 PM
5

It's not about that. It is that psychologists shouldn't have animosity towards conservatives. If your patient is christian, it is not your role to explain to them that believing in God is like believing in Santa.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 08:51 PM
19

You know what I hate about "postmodern critical theorists"? That they created a metanarrative (every social issue is caused by a power relationship), they have threw out the skepticism of metanarrative that is the core of postmodernism. This was the EXACT behaviour postmoderns were trying to avoid. Critical theorists have abandoned critical thinking.....
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 08:49 PM
1

Thank you gor acting!!!! I can imagine how painful must be for male victims to be referred to that page. They will blame themselves fot the abuse!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 02:53 PM
5

Well, that is false. I mean, lift is ok, it does make you more physically attractive. But if you go to parties you'll get boring girls that you are not attracted to you and you will not attract them. It is about living a life that makes you happy. Then you'll get women that are interesting and who share your interests. Read "Models", it is an excelent book. My point is not that. Say a man lives a boring life and that makes him unattractive to women. So what? I care about him. It's not the greate…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 12:16 PM
5

where X basically boils down to being more of a partygoing extroverted jock type No, it is mostly about frame which, if genuine, comes from self-compassion. I'm just disgusted by the cruelty of telling someone that because they have no ability to self-soothe and be self-compassionate, then they do not deserve my compassion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/20 01:09 AM
6

I do not care whether the women rejected him because a trait of him or not. Even if women did reject him because they didn't like a trait of the guy, that doesn't mean that trait of the guy is unloveable. Women are not celestial judges who decide who goes to Heaven and who to Hell. If women dislike some aspects of him, I do not care about those traits.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 11:05 PM
7

I don't disagree!!! But that is a whole another thing. When we use "vrigin" as a negative, we are implicitely saying "I know you are worthless, because other women deemed you worthless". So I'm just saying, they are not worthless to me, even if some women did npt like you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 07:50 PM
6

I couldn't care less about what is up to the minds of women. I mean that why is the value of the men depending on the oppinion of women......
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 06:30 PM
3

Capitalism engulf whatever revolutionary tendencyu surges anywhere
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 04:16 PM
14

It implies that women have the moral authority to determine who is worth it and who is not, I hate it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 04:15 PM
2

I want no privileges if it has as a consecquence me dying :S
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/20 04:13 PM
2

Fear leads to hatred. We would be extremely stupid if we wanted to be feared.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/20 11:11 PM
3

The emotion of fear is crucial. If you feel a constant feeling of fear and dread, you probalya re in an abusive relationship.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/20 09:57 PM
1

Yes, onlyfans and influencer patreon is accounted in US GDP, as part of services. Prostitution and drug dealing is usually accounted, but it is difficult to calculate, as well as other informal jobs, like gigs. What is not accounted for is non-payed work. For example, childcare is not part of GDP if it is done by the mother, but it is part of GDP if it is done by a nanny. This kinds of slightly inflates GDP when women start to work in labour relationships.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/20 09:51 PM
2

> It took some self reflection but I eventually realized that the reaction was because I was jealous of women's ability to have these types of profiles and make significant followings from them. Men technically can do also sex work, in gay circles. ​ I think the main issue is not so much that, but they empathize with men that have no boundaries and that put expectation of affection in the context of onlyfans. So it feels like women are taking advantage of them. Technically, it is not different f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/20 09:44 PM
2

It's a component, it is important for men to not feel that they have the duty of marriage. The community, I'm not very fond of.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/11/20 12:37 PM
2

>shouldn't we figure out what "liberation from patriarchal expectations" means on our own? Right now we don't have the power inside gender discourse to say "this is how we want to be", and be accepted. Since women will just talk about us as if we were their object of study, at least I want for them to not err extremely bad.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/11/20 03:18 PM
7

You should express it to your friends, not necessarily towards her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/20 10:40 PM
8

> This could be called the “trickle-down equality” approach to men’s issues, because it means that we can focus on women and their issues and equality will “trickle down” to men and their issues. I use the argument to turn it around. I can defend MRAs towards feminists arguing that it is good for them. And that male issues will trickle down towards women too. > Slut-shaming happens to women because men’s sexuality is seen as dirty and demeaning to them. Men’s rights activists are very much again…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/11/20 04:28 PM
1

True, buit tyhe problem is NOT their accumulated capital, but our indebteness towards them. Men still act as if they are in debt towards women and have to balance things out. This is the crucial problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/20 07:53 PM
1

I know them yes, thank you anyways :).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/20 02:25 AM
1

But I wasn't talking about the matrilineal societies, I was talking about the patriarchal ones, which they do exist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/20 02:23 AM
2

Yes. Thank you for valuing what I wrote!!!! Yes. My issue is the tone. I find the tone extremely off-putting. I made a few concrete examples (such as WWI) where I believe the tone shows off. I do not disagree with the substance of the text: there is a dire crisis in some white men (specifically rural noncollege in US) that intersects with male disposability and Green New Deal is a good idea to adress that. I also agree that there is a wide movement towards authoritarianism worldwide that is link…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 11:22 PM
5

First of all, see what the text says "World War I and the flu epidemic solved^ the problem of the surplus with a ruthless cull of more than 100 thousand men". Is the author crazy? WWI and the spanish flu created the Lost Generation, which was the most disposable generation of men ever, being the breeds of fascism, brown shirts, etc. The constant problem of the text is that it seems to believe that surplus of men is a numerical problem. Here you have an example: because WWI killed so men, it also…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 10:15 PM
6

Yes, I know... this sub has people that do not... express is a calmly manner many times. But I see that what's going on here is that I am using "white dude" (a group that includes me!) as a shorthand for truckercamo guys. Look, you have a political crisis in your country. Whiteness and westerness exist in many countries (white supremacy and racism does exist in my ocuntry, Argentina). But my culture doesn't use truckercamos, and that is crucial. Why? Because there is a huge political polarizatio…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 09:30 PM
2

I'll try to explain some of the problems. The first problem is in relation to whiteness. Whiteness is not specifically related to, for example, warmongering. I could put Erdogan's Turkey and Xi's China as examples (Xi just said that soldiers should prepare to war). The problem is not a problem of race or ethnicity. It is not even done throughout white american men in general. There are specifical cultural problems, related to noncollege rural and suburban white men, specially those from evangeli…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 08:43 PM
3

They may well be trying to gain white women, and they are choosing their priorities.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 03:50 AM
1

I never said it didn't. I was just referring to the issue that people believed that families were like a little kingdom where the man had (and should have for the harmony of society) the authority. This happened un ancient rome, ancient greece, european middle ages, indian golden age and most of chinese history for sure. In other places I'm not 100% sure, I know ancient Crete had women with more power. Now, men had power to mantain social order because women had to bear babies, for sure. Society…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 01:09 PM
-2

I'm not saying they didn't exist. I'm saying that in roman times, in christian medieval europe, in ancient china, in ancient india, etc, men were supposed to be the little kings in their households. This is what, say, christian priests preached it was the normal order. The idea was that by women obeying their husbands, the order that God intended everything would be good, while if women disobeyed bad things would happen.The Lilith vs Eva problem, for example. In christian mythology (it is not in…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 11:24 AM
-2

They did have propierty, and the system was patrilineal, even amongst peasants. Dominated in two senses: firstly, they perceived themselves to dominate the households (they had the right and the duty), whether they were right or not. Secondly, fathers had legal control of the wife and children. In roman families this is extremely clear (in fact, familia meant initially cattle, because the family was grouped together with the propierty of the patriarch, called pater familias). In fact, proletarii…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 09:32 AM
-5

The answer is about less than 1% of the population. For 99% of the population, their lives would be focused on feeding themselves, surviving winter, religion, hoping their children survive, avoiding plague etc. Most societies were patrilineal and men dominated inside the families. No, this is not only on the top 1%.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 06:00 AM
3

Hey, great!!! Good luck!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 06:33 AM
2

I hope you are able to meet women with a more healthy mindset that see relationships as life companionship and not as a way to have iPhones, jewels and expensive cars.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 06:12 AM
1

Their are lots of things to make up for that and the people are not all bad (lots of them would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it), but I will readily admit their is a lot of assholery and such. Growing up next to trailer park style poverty I had Yeahh, people in small towns are very warm and friendly, even if they are more bigot. People in big cities are just bitter. There are some pros and some cons between cities and small towns. Yeah I can see that but also think it is a bit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 05:19 AM
1

Out of curiosity what size cities are you living in? I have only once lived in a city above 150k people and I have noticed a massive trend of women leaving smaller cities for large cities. Most of the towns I have lived in were either smaller blue collar oriented or smaller college oriented cities. I live in Buenos Aires, a city of 13 million people. Maybe that is part of the issue? Maybe there is kind of a rural small-town culture that is different from a more cosmopolitan city (I hope I'm not …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 03:30 AM
1

One of the reasons, I believe, that nerds hace trouble with girls is that stem is like 80% men (I'm in stem, so I know that), so the guys kinf of circle the few women there are there. I can understand needing security and not having to worry about paying the rent, but only wanting to date rich guys is not that. 100% agree!! But anyway. I have no idea why the men and women we seem to know are pretty different. Let's see.... I'm friend with at least 13 women, neither of whom is dating someone beca…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 02:55 AM
1

Totally!!!! I have no idea why the surroundings you have are so awful. It indeed is an awful culture. The people I know are nor like that, they are normal, frankly. Normal people with normal average relationships. The healthier with healthier relationships, and the ones who are not mentally healthy with more unhealthy and unstable relationships. Say I was in a culture like that: I would agree that is imprtant to change it. Gold diggers are just not happy, you need a life companion, you cannot bu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 01:49 AM
1

Yeah we completely agree on that point that is uncommon in male male friendships. The point we disagree on from what I can tell is whether that should be in a male male friendship and personally I think different kinds of relationships will naturally have differences like the parent/sister example I used. I personally have a few male friendships with high emotional intimacy, and find it highly rewarding. Emotionally intimate male friendships have the extra advantage that they understand the expe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/20 12:43 AM
1

My problem is so many women all going for the same trait and that trait usually coming with issues. To me it is like going for good looking athletic women and then complaining she spends a lot of time at the gym or doing her makeup or that she is a bit of a narcist yeah no duh those things go with the territory. Mmm.... what is confidence? Confidence is self-acceptance: being able to be confortable in your body and your self. People who are not emotionally stable believe that confidence is the c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:24 PM
1

Yeah I am well aware my don't stick your dick in the crazy was undiagnosed but obvious BPD and thanks to my long term relationship with her I have managed to keep my relationships with other crazy girls short (sub 2 months usually because I break it off once I figure out they are nuts or they get bored of me refusing to fall into their manipulations and instead find some other sucker.) It's ok. I'm happy you were able to exit that toxic relationship. Personally I don't think it is just girls wit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 08:39 PM
1

Thank you a lot for answering!!!! I know the theory behind AF/BB. But it is not about erasing women agency. Many immature and isecure women confuse bravado with confidence. Being addicted to "exiting" things is many times a sign of BPD, they do so because they are empty inside and they need to fill themselves with experiences. These women are often abusive and tend to lie and cheat. I do not disagree that some awalty women exist. I believe they are the toxic ones. Did this ex girlfriend of yours…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 07:11 PM
1

I did it :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:55 AM
1

I wrote this, what do you think? https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/j6tt62/is_it_time_and_is_it_possible_to_have_a_better/g83uhz2
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:50 AM
0

I wrote this, what do you think? ​ https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/j6tt62/is_it_time_and_is_it_possible_to_have_a_better/g83uhz2
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:49 AM
1

Do you know how to link a comment? I want to delete my duplicated comments and just link it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:24 AM
1

I know, but Aaod and pm_pics certainly do expose this view, don't they? It was not my intention to blame the mod team about it, but seing so many users exposing that idea was a turn off. Sorry for the duplicates, indeed it might have been a bad idea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 11:20 AM
1

I don't believe sex life can be regulated at all. Or more precisely, you can forbid people to have sex, you can't entice them to have it more. Specifically, you cannot find "something to encourage young women and young high status men to commit early". As long as this sub pretends that society can pressure to marry the first person a woman sees -if the hyperbole seems fit- no real solutions will be find. Men who adhere to redpill-like ideas (and sorry, but this stems from a redpill-like myth) co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/20 03:43 PM
-1

I believe that the concept of regulation of sex comes from a complete misunderstanding of how sexual interactions and women motivations work. But you are right, I will copy it to aaod and pm_pics
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/20 03:33 PM
0

Yes, yes, you didn't, but people who answer your post did. And my point is that their strategy stemmed from a shared view on women motivations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/20 02:59 PM
-1

I don't believe sex life can be regulated at all. Or more precisely, you can forbid people to have sex, you can't entice them to have it more. Specifically, you cannot find "something to encourage young women and young high status men to commit early". As long as this sub pretends that society can pressure to marry the first person a woman sees -if the hyperbole seems fit- no real solutions will be find. Men who adhere to redpill-like ideas (and sorry, but this stems from a redpill-like myth) co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/20 01:31 PM
1

I'm just saying what it is: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/magazine/amp/story/2018/10/27/sexual-fantasies-republicans-democrats-politics-221919
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 09:44 PM
1

I personally am a man, more on the dom side (sexually, quite submissive in my common life). I have no idea what a "bitch" means in this context.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 09:26 PM
1

Why are you disgusted at women because they are submissive if you are yourself submissive? Anyway, it doesn't matter, if you do not like women and can pair with men, congratulations!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 09:09 PM
7

This is not how it works!!!! I'll try to explain it: sexual fantasies trigger what is more opposite of the core values of the person. Because of this, conservatives tend to get off on cheating, gangbangs or cuckoldry, while liberals tend to get off on BDSM (specially submissive roles). Why? Because conservatives tend to view in high value the sanctity of monogamal marriage, while liberals tend to be as sacred symmetric consensual relationships, and they hate to be subjected to hierarchies. Sexua…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 08:50 PM
1

It is easy to answer. I don't care about who is """guilty"""!!!! I care about change!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 08:36 PM
3

Yes. I think more than half of the problem would be solved if payed maternal leave and payed paternal leave was given. I do believe that the core of the wage gap is the conscquence of the child tax.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 04:46 PM
1

Sincerely? I've heard quite a lot of times that he tends to invent stories that are not true, incompatible stories that do not match up. I doubt he has a girlfriend and doubt that she did this. I believe he did those cuts to himself. Sorry if I an mean, but I distrust this specific guy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 03:30 AM
1

Yes, that guy!! BlueOrange22, see the picture, it is him!!! What is his deal with his constant lying....? I did like his content, but this is not the first time he makes a throwaway account and tells something it is not true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 02:07 AM
1

Wait.... I know that guy. I recognize his photo. He has had dozens of different accounts and repeatedly gets suspended..... I'm not sure he is being honest. He also has a youtube channel, that he usually posts here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/10/20 01:55 AM
1

Gender is the behavioural component of a sex..... in a specific culture, having a specific role in the organization and stability of society. It is a social function, to reproduce the society. And those behaviours vary from culture to culture depending on what those societies need to be stable. Is it clearer?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 07:35 PM
2

Sincerely speaking, the theory of gender roles it's not from Butler. It is from Simone De Beauvoir. So you can discard Butler, if you want, she didn't even invent the theory (she invented another theory that is way wilder). My point is, gender roles exist. I'll put another example: age. "Baby", "child", "adult" and "elderly" are another social role. For example, in some societies men have to perform specific tasks to become adult. Circumsition was one of those typical tasks. For example, in the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 07:26 PM
2

Because there are social roles, called men and women (or I guess njeri and grua, the women who become men are called burrnesha), that are distinct from their biological sexes. A woman who becomes a "sworn virgin" has to take male roles herein thereafter.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 07:16 PM
2

The social roles between men and women are distinct, but they vary between cultures. There are also some cultures where sexes transition into the other (not out of self-expression). For example, I know that sometimes albanian women become men to avoid longtime family vendettas.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 07:10 PM
2

What do you mean? Many cultures have gender roles, they, for example, bring different food to the table. In general, women do bring more vegetables and small game, and men do bring more big game. But it varies wildly.... specially because each culture eats different things. So in all those cultures there are gender roles, but what those roles are vary with the culture. There are plenty of examples like this. For example, some societies are matrilocal and others are patrilocal. Thus, in some soci…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 07:03 PM
2

Ok, so you are saying that there are a few sexual behavioural differences between men and women. I do agree with that. I won't defend the posture that there are zero differences, because that is not what I have seen in the studies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:42 AM
3

Ohh, yes. I have done it. But they are few and far between. There are some funny ones, like, poetry is universal. But they are not a lot. Besides, you have the issue of the bell curve. In those aspects that men and women are different, there is a high overlap.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:37 AM
1

Sure... but when you talk about "universal behaviours" you are thinking about studies that you have read?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:34 AM
1

I agree!! Have you seen the studies over whether those behaviours are universal or vary amongst cultures?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:28 AM
2

Do you have any reason to say that biology accounts for the norm, and not culture? My counter proposal is that culture accounts for the norm, and biology for the exception. I'm not saying just because. I'm saying it because I have seen the scientific studies, and universal constants amongst humans are rare and far between. Have you seen the scientific studies or are you talking from an ideological place?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:21 AM
6

Some happen quickly? How much you know about biology and what the actual rate of mutation is? And do you know how genes interact with the environment to produce behaviour? You are just saying "all differences are biological, except all the exceptions, which are cultural". It doesn't make sense. And what is the point, by the way? I have seen many people saying that since male disposability is biological, then there is no activism to do. Then why are you here? You cannot change anything.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:06 AM
9

It's not random mutations (mutations happen very slowly, you should know that). And if you say "arbitrary cultural norms" account for the exceptions, you are completely erasing what you say. I'm not saying that there are not average universal differences between the sexes, there are and they are studied. But I suspect you believe there are much more than there actually are.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 11:00 AM
5

It is more complex than that, maany behavioural differences between the genders are cultural dependent. Just as an example, computer science was seen as feminine in the 50s, and now is completely masculine (it changed when it started to earn more).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 10:45 AM
1

I think it is mainly culture, menslibers have usually a social network that is feminist and more left-wining, while MRAs usually have a social network that is more antifeminist and right-leaning.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 03:57 PM
3

I didn't play with toy guns.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/09/20 02:51 AM
3

I want to underline two of my best friends. The first one is the one who taught me what affection and empathy was, frankly. She was almost my only genuine friend for more than 5 years. The other is my best friend who she always supports and is witt me, she is a lonely, simple girl with mental health issues, but is extremely sweet and lovely. I should at least add my sister, with whom we are very very close and she always helps me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/09/20 12:10 PM
2

Do not go into fights to protect your girlfriend honour.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 10:55 PM
1

They, you mean, the police? Have you tried moving out of State or at least out of the city? Try find a city were the police may be more interested in your well-being. I know it will be hard, the police are extremely assholes. Do not let it get into your mind. I hope you will become free.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 08:07 PM
1

I don't understand. What tweet you responded to? Don't you have proof of the emotional abuse your ex did to you?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 04:43 PM
2

But cannot you have a restriction order against her so she doesn't do that? Don't you have proof in your emails and whatsapps? Cannot you go to the police with that proof?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 10:00 AM
2

By your abusive ex????
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 03:00 AM
1

Yes, what a terrible situation :S. Are you able to work now, at least?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 05:52 PM
1

Nasty cut. Thankful you are alive with us.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 05:20 PM
2

I try to find many friends and groups to talk about it. I also meditate and things like that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 05:19 PM
7

Aiii, I can't believe how horrible must be to be disabled because of your abusive ex, and then get economucally dependent on her because of it. :S
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 05:18 PM
1

Well, we can have different oppinions on those XD.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/09/20 04:19 PM
1

We live in a male-dominated society, also called "patriarchy," which is constructed to empower and benefit men; I believe that men do dominate and it does empower men, but it does not benefit men. I think I said agree, but with this caveat. For example, the difference in earnings between men and women is almost entirely the result of sexism, the systematic discrimination against women; Disagree In the lion's share of other areas of society, from health care to film roles, disproportionate attent…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/09/20 02:58 PM
1

- Average biological differences in predisposition between men and women are absent, irrelevant or must and can be overcome; This was one of the ones where I disagree with feminism. I agree on others.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/09/20 07:02 PM
1

No, that I got it off.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/09/20 01:46 AM
1

I mean, my best friend had a father that pursue her when she tried to get work (at 25) so she couldn't get work. Then, another friend has received a tirade of 20 mails because she didn't answer her phone (she is 27) and telling her she is egoist "just like her father" and that the fact that she didn't answer her phone showed that she was "hiding things" (we think her mother thinks she is a criminal). Then my other close friend had a mother who beat him up when he was a child and broke his tooth,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/20 06:35 PM
2

I read the accusations of sexual harassment, and the women seemed to be very put off by Trump. I think most women see Trump as insecure, not confident.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/20 01:53 PM
2

I can only say what I see in my friends. I have friends with awful parents.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/20 01:14 PM
1

I don't think Trump is very attractive to women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/20 01:00 PM
1

CEOs and serial killers are completely different beasts. The women who go after men who will actively hurt them totally are traumatized. They are like "ohhh, he saying he hates me and wants to hurt me is so hot, it reminds me my only place is to serve men and if I'm docile enough I'll proove him that I'm such a good girl that I will earn his love". And yes, the majority of women AND men have grown in abusive households. Parenting is extremely violent and leaves scars. And the women who pursue th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/09/20 12:28 PM
0

The sarticle doesn't proove that narrative, it only prooves the correlation. And yes, the point is that men and women who are raised by narcissist manipulators only know the type of "love" given through trauma bonding. I imagine you've never been with a BPD girl to understand how exciting and unhealthy the relationship is, I have been.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/20 11:49 PM
1

It well might, but the articlke doesn't proove it at all. Like, at all, it prooves correlation, no causation. Also, the issue of women ""liking"" Dark Triad erases the issue of Trauma Bonding completely, which is a crucial reason why women "like" dark triad traits. Trauma Bonding is a form of manipulation were you make someone feel atracted to you through inflicting pain, such as the person gets confused and believes that when the few times you are NOT inflicting them pain, you are giving them p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/20 11:42 PM
2

Mainpulative people have more sex because they manipulate people into having sex XD, this is funny. Like, of course, you can bully insecure women into having sex with you, it is not ethical, though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/20 11:28 PM
3

I consider myself an open heterodox.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/20 11:35 AM
4

I'm 7/15. What am I? XD
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/20 02:09 AM
1

Cohabitation is the same thing as marriage in California? You can still date and live separately.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/20 09:30 PM
3

Not everyone has to marry. Just talk about the issue with her. If she loves you, she will probably understand.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/20 08:27 AM
6

Hi!!! I thank you for posting. What would I personally like? Recognition that us men do have issues. Recognition that it is not always our fault the issues that we have. That it is a societal issue that is reinforced by both other men and women. Put men in a less agentic place, more in a vulnerable place. Maybe even talk about "internalized misandry" instead of "toxic masculinity". Cases of male homelessness and the crisis of boys in elementary schools are an example. Recognition that some insti…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/20 05:04 PM
2

I loved the conversation and learned a lot!!!!!!11
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/20 11:47 PM
5

I love the idea of this symbol!!!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/20 11:45 PM
-2

Passive men are usually dishonest. They do not search what they want. And that means they do not actually accept themselves as they are, with their wants and needs, they do not take responsability for their needs. And that is a problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/20 12:27 AM
1

Sorry. True. I meant what is called technically "hypermasculinity" (aka, macho attittude).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 09:21 PM
0

Yes. And part of that is to stop being resentful of "friends" who they are attracted but secretly resent because those women are atracted to men who they dislike. Noone controls who they are atracted to, however, maybe they are pathologically insecure people-pleasers (NiceGuys), or other thing. In any case, therapy is a good place to discover what is the crazyness that someone have inside.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 07:36 PM
1

No, what I believe is that everyone is crazy and each persons crazyness fits with other person's crazyness. If she likes men that are crazy in a different way than you are, then your crazyness probably doesn't fit with hers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 06:46 PM
2

I believe that manipulative and hurt people atract manipulative and hurt people. Maybe some hide better their distorted view. But I do believe that is a red flag.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 06:34 PM
3

Better alone than with a woman who likes agressive and manipulative men, the women who are like that are themselves manipulative.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 04:01 PM
-5

No, what is attractive to women is honesty and assertiveness. Confidence is about acceptance of who you are. Instead, traditional masculinity is about faking confidence. Faking confidence is a self-contradiction, because if you are faking you are not accepting who you are. It is just that some women are not able to distinguish between agressiveness and self-compassion, and they choose violent men because they believe they are full of love to give. Sad... this are not healthy women and you better…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 03:57 PM
4

Just wanted to say that I believe the analysis is high quality from a data point of view.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/20 08:36 PM
3

It depends on how it is expressed. If it is mindful, that is you are expressing "I have this emotion", that is correlated, if you are lashing out, that is not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/07/20 03:46 AM
3

Mastery about emotions (thar is, emotional literacy) is a positive, and correlated with emotional expression, it is different to emotional repression. And validation about feelings and vulnerability (the opposite being shame) has been completely accepted as a source for violence. Repression as a coping tool to manage emotions (instead of processing them) is limited, this doesn't mean that men need to talk about feelings (talking and receiving empathy is a strategy) but they do need to accept the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/07/20 03:18 AM
2

Mostly because most media is made in hollywood, so it reflects mainly US, and specifically LA culture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/07/20 09:00 PM
1

Yeahh, fiction is very ethnocentric, true that. Representation, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/07/20 06:47 PM
3

Hair length and clothing is stupid, besides one of the most variable traits of gender roles by culture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/07/20 06:35 PM
5

I have not found in your comment a justification of why, for example, men should have the stoic-emotionless as an ideal. This creates both suicide and violence in men. You are saying that ideals are good. I don't disagree completely.... but what if we are striving for the wrong ideals? What if we strived for being genuine, honest, respectful of ourselves and others, etc? I haven't found your arguments in favour of the gender roles that exist at the moment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/07/20 04:24 PM
8

It always seemed to me to be the equivalent to call men "incels" or "whiteknights".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/20 09:19 PM
1

Yes!!!! Guild socialism and democratic syndicalism are quite cool. Also, democratic confederalism. I believe society would be more democratic if more decissions were made at a local level (although it is not a guarantee, as we can see in nimbysm).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/20 11:08 PM
4

I believe that capitalism ultimately sees peopel as disposable and in an utilitarian way, and in men that is more accentuated. So that. We need an economic system based on community.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/20 03:04 PM
1

No. What I say is that men have a greater time forming connections because they receive less affection. So they are extremely disconnected inside. Some of the external manifestations outside of that disconnection is the inability to banter, to make great conversations and the awkwardness. My point is that we can reverse that trend of men unable to connect. How? By connecting with them, giving them empathy and compassion. This will allow them to be less awkward. My point is that is an historical …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 01:25 AM
1

He can't banter, he's awkward, he cant make good conversation. Exactly!!! This is what I mean when I say men have difficulty with connecting. Men overall are more awkward and are less able to make good conversation than women. Because of this, male friendships are more shallow. This makes men desperate to have a woman in their lives, because they feel women give more value to their lives than other men. But women are less desperate, because they have great relationships with other women. This cr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 01:19 AM
1

And then again, the nerdy men could become friends with each other. It is true that men have weaker relationships with each other, they are more disconnected. But the cause for that is not that they are intrinsecally worthless. It is that because they receive less love, they can give less love. So men are raised in communities with a structural depletion of love. And thus, male communities are intrinsecally fragmented. Men are not seen worthy by other men, neither they see worth in other men. Bu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 01:08 AM
1

I think the problem is that when you say "men are worthless to society" you are thinking "men are worthless to women", I'm not sure whether you believe men are part of society or whether they receive and can give worth to other men. I think that you think if a man is worthy to another man, that doesn't count. But then I would ask.... why? I think men cannot give value to other men because they have no value themselves. But this is a trap, if men had value, they could give value to other men, whi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 12:56 AM
1

A man who can't get women or has no friends, he is like that way because he has nothing of value to give to their lives, that's how a relationship is formed on any level. Paradoxically, there are too many men who don't have friends because they don't have nothing of value to give, when there something obvious of value that they can give: being friends with each other. Those men are so in need of friendship and of giving something of value simultaneously. But that seems like a self-solving proble…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 12:46 AM
1

are YOU going to make friends with all the jobless men，the homeless men ? Yes, in fact, I have a friend that is homeless. the weird kid at school who couldn't make any friend, why was he alone? I was one of them. and jsut telling people some hippie bullshit about "he has value just for being human" isnt gojng to make people start hanging out with him Yes, there is a lack of love and compassion in this society. But we do need to fight back against it. Too many men specifically have completely fal…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/07/20 04:08 PM
2

The entire purpose of most men's lives is still to be accepted by a woman and that hasn't changed. Yes, it is..... but it shouldn't be. And it doesn't have to be. programmed to be infatuated with men and can give birth and indistinguishable from real women I don't think robots are indistinguishable from men. Women do not like men because they see men as robots either. Men won't ever be valued for their bodies like women are so their value will have to come from their work, whatever work that may…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/07/20 03:31 PM
2

Women weren't "kept out" of a workforce throughout history because people just hadn't been enlightened yet. I agree!!!! The material conditions changed. So as I have said elsewhere, men are disposable because it's too easy for men to end up in a position where they have zero value. That's what get's them disposed. This biological reality is what needs to be contended with, and no amount of social pressure and "oh we just need to teach people see things differently!" is going to change anything. …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/07/20 02:20 PM
1

Hi!! So, let's see. I do not deny the role of biology in creating us a bias with regards to male disposability. However it is not like we need to make men less disposable than women, we need to make men less disposable than they are right now. And that we can do. Because, the issue is, we do not only care about other people as reproductors. Feminism has fought tooth and nail for women to be seen as more than mothers. And now.... they are seen as more than mothers, that is, despite the strong bio…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/07/20 01:27 PM
1

Exactly!!!! A maaaajor cause of fatherlessness is incarcerated black men who cannot be there for their children because they are in prision.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/20 10:28 PM
2

Yes. But men should come easier to comprehend the situation of other men, because of shared experience. Then, we can get women as allies, but men first.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/06/20 10:22 PM
3

Heyy. Great :). Yes, it is one of my main points.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/06/20 10:13 PM
1

Sure. It doesn't have to be a universal experience
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 11:48 AM
1

Yes. It is not universal, but it is not only my experience. Then again, is just a possible explanation on what the other user suggested that some men prefer that the empathy comes from women and not from other men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 11:32 AM
2

Sorry!!! I meant there are morr men than women. We are in need for allies, as you can see, and you do are welcome.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 09:59 AM
1

I think most men have received most love from women, maybe it stems from mothers, and they came to expect them from it. And then there is sexuality. But we need to start breaking this if we want to change society in a way that is better for men, and start to give and receive more affection from men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 01:39 AM
3

"thinking women should have it harder" Yes, this then. I think fairness and equalizing, factually equalizing, would go a long way to men living better lives I'm in favour of making men's lives better. Against making women lives worst. Ah but if we can get women to advocate for men, in your model (which I think has some issues), then "those" men who advocate for those women will also advocate for those women advocating for men, right? :) Yes!!! My point is that it is a more difficult and convolut…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 12:45 AM
1

I don't disagree with the broad idea, but I am more interested in the practical mechanics of how this "low empathy" trend is sustained politically, or whatever-ically. I see. I agree with you. My point however was that to fight it we need to get men to see themselves more. This is more crucial than to get women to get men, mainly because it is still men the ones who have institutional power. This was my main argument. In any case, having more women comprehending men is a net positive too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:55 PM
2

Yes. In a short term it is indeed finite. Which again, it repeats my point: you have the causality backwards. There is low ammount of welfare for men because there is low empathy for men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:45 PM
1

Total ammount of increase in social welfare. Instead of... I don't know, wars or police, whatever. There is not a finite ammount.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:41 PM
1

My point is that the more love there is the easiest is to give. My argument is about the cycle of violence: if you are violent and abusive to someone, that person will become more violent and abusive. This implies that if you give love towards someone there is a multiplier effect. What I'm saying is not happening is that if you give it to someone then there is a competition and someone is loosing out.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:37 PM
1

But you do need to consider the possibility that is indeed true. You can't just assume that the fact that women are more empathetic towards women implies that they are less empathetic towards men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:34 PM
1

I agree that you are probably not lying, but your premise seems factually false through-and-through: I just don't see any data supporting the idea that the growth in compassion and empathy outstrips the growth in material abundance. Ahh. No, I did not say it oustrips. What I meant is that you can trigger an empathetic response pretty easy if you know how to do it without using material resources. Now, people do not do that, they act in irrational ways because they are broken, it is a cycle of vi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:32 PM
1

Yes, it is possible. It is just one study.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:24 PM
2

This is not an argument. It seems to be completely opposite to me. I want to focus on this because I think it is a much greater point of disagreement and the rest of the disagreements stem mostly from this. So, in my view, the fact that nonmaterial things are easier to multiply is obvious to me. Take ideas, for example. Ideas multiply pretty fastly in communication. Someone gives an idea to other person and this gives it to a third one, and it multiplies fastly, like memes on the internet. Inste…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:18 PM
2

I gave you a citation. Sorry I copy pasted later. The "cakes" for the growth in material and the non-material goods (of the kind that world religions talk about) seem very different, and distinct to the point where the comparison shouldn't apply. Yes, non-material things are easier to enlarge. Does it, or does it not grow? You have the causality backwards. It does not grow because there is low empathy towards men. If there was more empathy towards men it would grow accordingly. There is no compe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 11:08 PM
-1

Citation needed. This is also odd, because you are being specifically non-blank slate, when it is beneficial to feminism. Nono. Women are more compassionare in general BECAUSE they receive more empathy. I never said it was biological. They just receive more love so they have more love to give. Btw, citation: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.malepsychology.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/john_barry.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiCoeuDgaPqAhWkB9QKHTwhAY0QFjACegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 10:58 PM
0

Milgram experiment is extremely tricky. This is because people fail it when they are too eager to please. Because women are more eager to please authority, they are much more dangerous in those situations. In fact, it has been studied that agreeableness is one of the most correlated traits with hypnosis and other similar issues. The issue here is that the order in empathy is this one: Women to women Women to men Men to women Men to men You can see the order very clearly in this research: https:/…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 10:07 PM
2

College is waaaay better at an economic level. I can search for studied if you want. Like it is extreeeeemely better at an economic level, even despite the level of debt. > Pretty much every college kid I know is an insufferable cunt. no, you see college kids through distorted media, colege people are normal people. I ahve heard that in the Ivy League they are slightly more insufferable. > Lastly, how likely do you really think it is that I would get accused of sexual harassment? Sexual harassme…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 06:19 PM
-1

The problem is.... traditional system has 5000 years advantage, feminism has 50, 10 years at tops. The problem is not excessive empathy towards women, but a lack of empathy towards men (by men!!!x Men should be more interested in getting a better situation). For some reason this sub sees this issue as a zero sum game, which I hate. Here is the instance where I prefer Menslib subreddit to LWMA. It's like some men here prefer to get women to suffer as much as men suffer instead of working in favou…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 06:08 PM
-8

No, it does not. Why? Because women have more compassion towards men than men hacve compassion towards men. Women just have more compassion in general, it is just that most of the extra compassion they have they redirect it to women. But it is not only that: we are talking here amonsgt men, women are not reading here. You canot get more compassion from women towards men here, becasue you are not talking to women. What you can do is getting more compassion from men towards men (which doesn't decr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/20 06:04 PM
2

I'm genuinly in favour of abolisging the police.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/20 03:11 AM
5

Bluepillers are disconnected from the difficulties of dating. But redpiller tactics are extremely manipulative. And this will lead for them to meet only manipulative women. It is a receip for disaster.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 11:00 AM
1

Sure. But in the Era of New Imperialism (1875-1914) capitalism required empires to survive. Anecdotally, Hitler economic theory and the cause for starting WW2 was based in Lenin economic theory. He saw Soviet Union industrializing and feared competing industrial powers because germans ate ukranian food and german tanks used Caucasus oil. Soviet Union industrialization based on the hunger of ukranians (holodomor) made Hitler scared that Soviet Union would no longer need industrial goods and thus …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/20 08:43 PM
1

In a way, that politics was the price to be an imperial power in the last 100 years, which contributed to a much higher wage that everywhere else in the world. Black oppression inside the US is linked to europe imperialism in Africa, of course. So, be greatful that you have a higher wage than outside the US, and that this gives you the power to change relationships into a safer and more just reality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/20 08:05 PM
3

Ohh, I see. But this is brilliant because they have managed tu fuse the woke liberal issue of racism with the socialist aspect of the causes of that racism. I've never seen a movement in the US as deep as this one, in my oppinion. I have been waiting for something like this for a long time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/20 07:41 PM
1

No, sorry. This one: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/conferences/2013-w50-research-symposium/Documents/glick.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjW-4S-1JbqAhWnDrkGHWYQC2k4ChAWMAV6BAgFEAE&usg=AOvVaw2yuNAaZ0N62WGTDN08D44M
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/20 12:18 AM
1

Benevolent sexism is correlated with hostile sexism. Like here: At the individual level, hostile and benevolent sexism correlate modestly (about .4); more striking is the almost perfect correlation (close to .9) that occurs when comparing sample averages across nations (Glick et al., 2000, 2004)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 11:25 PM
1

And they are wrong to do it. Chivalrous men are the most dangerous ones, as it has been heavily studied.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 11:01 PM
1

I'm not sure about that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 09:04 PM
1

I still dislike mensrights subreddit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 09:00 PM
1

I stand by my definition of the difference between this sub, mensrights and menslib. At least what I want it to be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 08:49 PM
2

Misogyny= hatred for women; I said that you can have boundaries without hatred or even anger.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 08:26 PM
2

I think I was with a 34 years old when I was 23. Whatever.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 02:10 AM
11

From the first day since two years ago, I said that the reason why american feminism is horrible is because it is punitivistic (carceral), it's a mentality that doesn't decrease violence by men (or women) and doesn't heal. I'm extremely optimistic that BLM will help carceral feminists to transform into a non-carceral force that actually helps transforming society. I do believe that they will try to sanitize the issue to try to focus on racism from a liberal point of view that doesn't critisize p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 08:21 PM
1

Not at all. Honest expression can be acompanied with love. You are mistaking assertiveness and agression. Then again, this society equates agression and assertiveness, but they are not the same thing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 12:01 PM
1

A middle point between Menslib and Mensrights. It tries to be less misogynistic than mensrights and more open to disagreements with feminism than Menslib.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 02:34 AM
9

Slowly and steady. This fight against the police moved the overton window significatly in favour of having empathy towards black men. People actually felt sad about a man dying, that was impressive!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/06/20 02:54 AM
2

I agree. This fight against the police and in favour of social services will be so good for men!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/06/20 08:59 PM
1

but at the same time if you make incarceration too cushy it fails to be a deterrant against crime Punishment does not actually work a lot to deter crime. The cause for this is very complex, but most criminals either rationalize their actions, or even don't care much about what happens to them. If the only way to get to a place were you are not dangerous is harming someone and going to prision, society has done terribly wrong, there are supposed to be preventive programs. Do you think there needs…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/20 04:41 AM
3

The large majority of incarcerated people are in for low level offences. There they become more violent and eventualy go to jail for more violent causes. Now, about the more violent offenders, say they are going to be there 10 years inside, then they go out and they are as dangerous as they were into. What you need to do is to actually use the time usefully. There are lots of knowledge about how to change violent criminals into less violent people. It is actually studied that the absolute worst …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/20 03:39 AM
4

Thanks!!! It was so much pain!!!! If this sub now is against black men and believes that we do not incarcerate people enough and that people should get in jail for consuming opioids, thn in which way we are leftists at all?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/20 01:16 AM
8

Incarceration is useful for keeping dangers to society away from society. For a few years. Then you throw them out in the street much more violent than before. It also serves a punitive effect to discourage crime, since people fear prison. All studies that have been made show that punishment and fear makes crime more prevalent, not less. The way to decrease crimes is a completely different path. Do you think the kangaroo courts at colleges work to reduce rapes, by the way? I mean, if you are so …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 11:15 PM
12

War on drugs. The huge main cause of black male incarceration is war on drugs. This was done ON PURPOSE by Nixon administration, where Nixon criminalized marihuana to put hippies into jail and heroin to put black people into jail. The war on drugs was a way to continue jim Crow laws, and this was done on purpose, knowing what they were doing. Then again, remind me who the incarceration system is useful for, in any case? Did having the highest number of people in jail helped you at all with crime…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 11:06 PM
5

The cause of the loss of black nuclear family is, in huge part the actions of the police that this is tryoing to solve!!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 10:34 PM
1

I 100% agree with you!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 10:32 PM
10

Like..... women are human beings? Some women will be abusive, sure. Some won't. I recommend you to start by having women friends. But only those who actually care for you, discard the ones that abuse you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 12:56 AM
3

(more recently) to encourage them to be trans. MtF is more common than the reverse, because trans men are pretty invisibilized. The gap has decrease the last decade because of information (more trans men).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/06/20 12:38 PM
1

Great!!! I also love the fantasy genre.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/20 09:48 PM
1

I hope you are able to learn some self-compassion :S
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/20 07:47 PM
6

Youy need to talk to a professional BECAUSE it causes so much shame. Shame is a huge red flag that signals what you need to talk asap. ​ Also, try to search for a male psychologist. You will find yourself more confortable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/20 07:46 PM
7

I have taken as a strong value that I don't want to be around people who do not accept me in my weakest moments. It is a very recent decision that I made, like 2 months ago. Then again, I had the privilege of having some men and women in my life that accepted me as I am, some do not have that privilege. But is a boundary I decided to put in favour of my mental welbeing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/06/20 04:44 PM
1

I like your derlfinitions: The term "white privilege" is worded poorly and used in a way that makes people see the it as “white people and are handed better circumstances” when in reality it’s "minorities have bad circumstances disproportionately” And the term "male privilege" is similar. But it's more or less used to say "men don't have issues" when it should be "women have issues men don't need to deal with"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/20 12:45 PM
2

Yes. It's still men the ones who fight at wars. Men are usually physically absent from households, busy fighting wars very far away, conquering more land from other nations to ease the demographic pressures. They would not be able to fight other tribes of the same nation/culture, because they live at their in-laws, so they share the house with the people who would be their enemies (like their wive's sister's husbands). Ultimately, these are matrifocal societies but are still tribal (kin corporat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/20 02:11 PM
3

In my oppinion, from political anthropology, patriarchy is a mode of production (like capitalism is), which I have seen called (patrilineal) kin corporate mode of production. It stems from tribalism. The name is because families act as corporations -tribes or clans, depending on the size- with interests and alliances (like in Game of Thrones). Roughly speaking, it is good to have in-laws that you can trade through gifts. Arranged marriage is one of the most important institutions in these societ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/20 12:51 PM
3

Aaaaalll the differences? Veeery roughly speaking, there was a hierarchy inside the house. The father was in charge of public relationships with other households, this includes politics and many economic activities (specially the ones that involved travel). Women were in charge of the household, which included the children, but also slaves and domestic servants. The idea was roughly that women micromanaged the household while men gave the big directives. Men were in charge to make sure the commo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/20 03:30 AM
4

Women were barred from scientist professions until around the post-war. They started at the start of the century but were extremely shunned. Situations like the one of Rosalind Franklin (of open sexist rob of women's credit) do exist, but they weren't that common. Until the early XX century, all scientists were self-taught geniuses, mostly flithy rich that did not have to do anything for a living. Scientists from poor backgrounds do exist, but I would say that they were rarer than women, who als…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/05/20 08:31 AM
4

I liked the idea of emotional and social isolation. After all, isolation is one of the structural acts to instill abuse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/20 01:43 PM
2

I agree with askingtofeminists, a (good) therapist is there to help you sort out, not just give you attention.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/05/20 10:58 PM
2

That's the reason I never payed for a prostitute (or an onlyfans, for case).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/05/20 10:57 PM
3

The reason women work different jobs in wealthier nations is because men make enough money to allow women to work easier jobs while still maintaining a decent lifestyle. Richer countries have completely different jobs than poor ones. This is a consecquence of education. People without education, with primary education only, graduates from high school and graduates from college have veeeeery different educations. People no longer have awareness that high school is as important as college. But whi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/20 05:57 PM
1

So accepting that you have needs --> grieving. --> being more content with what you are grieving about. Or is it that accepting that you have needs --> taking action that satisfies those needs --> no need for grieving? Or both? Both!! I think that awareness of whether things are your responsability (and thus you need action) or it is not under your control (and thus needs acceptance and grieving) is already on itself healing. But isn't the point of this that you are vulnerable either way whether…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 10:01 PM
1

Yes, sounds like it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 08:16 PM
2

My understanding is that american sex negative feminism is a consecquence of american sex negative culture in general, am i right?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 07:02 PM
4

As many women in thois thread say, american culture is extreeemely sex-negative. Because of this, american feminists have a lot of fear of sex naturalized because of the raising and the culture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 06:58 PM
7

The enormous difference, is that sex negfativity was seen as conservative 20 years ago, but now it is seen as a progressive view. I think conservative women who grew up to beocme feminists have a learned icky relationship with sex so they say male sexual feelings are patriarchal or something. I think it is because of the huge number of new colege students whe gre up conservative.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 06:50 PM
0

Wowww, pure chaos
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 06:28 PM
1

That sounds reasonable. But its missing the key component. what exactly happens to make someone content once they accept their drives? Well, if you do realize your needs, then you do make yourself content. But if you can't then you have a great deal of need of grief, which is what happens when things are outside your control, like if someone close to you died. Or, you lost your job in the pandemic. There are many ways of griefing. Some of the most commons are crying and searching for empathy. Cr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 11:57 AM
1

You feel more loving because you are less defensive, and thus accept others instead of fear them and try to control them. It is about acceptance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 11:43 AM
1

No problem. Thanks for answering!!!! I think that it would be the other way around, that accepting that you have drives would make you less content, because now you need to think about the ways in which those drives are not being met. That is the opposite of contentment. As long as you are human the drives that are there are there. They make you unhappy in the inside and if you don't pay attention to it they cause you more pain. The needs you have that are not met cause you pain whether you are …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 11:25 PM
-1

Sure. But my point was clear: Brock did remember. So a drunk but conscious person shouldn't have sex with a blacked out one. I don't think a blacked out should have sex with a passed out either. I have no moral quarry with to blacked out people having sex with each other, probably neither have any idea of what they are doing, they are zombie fucking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 11:13 PM
1

Sure!!! I'm not denying there aren't grey areas. There are always exceptions of exceptionally lucid blacked out drunkness. But, like, on average.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 10:44 PM
1

Yes, that is completely true. But what I've heard is that, say, medium term memory is also impaired. A classic example would be that someone shouldn't have sex with someone who doesn't know where does they live, or other personal details. But so I've heard, that telling your name and checking if they remember 5-10 minutes later is a good way to know whether someone is black out drunk. There are grey areas, of course. But the point is indeed that is not ok to have sex with brainless zombies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 10:43 PM
3

That may well be. There is always many rumours. However, it is not what I was arguing against. Someone said "it was all ok because she did not remember", which is extremely absurd to say.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 08:17 PM
-1

Nono. If they are blacked out drunk they usually do not have longterm memory WHILE they are drunk. Like, say you tell them your name. Then you wait 5 minutes, they will have forget it. It is a very limited ammount of consciousness.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 08:00 PM
-4

I mean, from a legal point of view, sex between a conscious person and a blacked out person, is a cause for putting someone into prision. Then we can discuss details about whether it is moral, whether it causes harm to the victim, etc. We can also discuss whether sex with an unconscious person is moral and whether it causes harm to the victim, etc. I think there is some sort of confusion on why rape is illegal, which causes people to justify this type of situations. I mean, everyone knows that r…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 06:49 PM
-1

Nope, you can be black out drunk as in the next day you don't remember...but still act with full conscience and consent while awake. I think this is called blacked out, which is a state of mind on the verge of unconsciousness, where, for example, there is no longterm memory. In general, sex between a conscious person and a blacked out person is not considered consensual. It is very creepy that the gusy defense was "she didn't remember it, but it was consensual".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 06:39 PM
-1

> What was withheld from the public was that there was no evidence of mens rea. There was no evidence that Turner was aware that she was incapacitated. He was very drunk. He was focused on her nethers with his hands. He was not looking at her face. She may have consented before losing consciousness. Running away is not evidence of guilt. It is evidence of panic. And there were other legitimate reasons for him to panic, like being intimidated by two large foreigners running at him while committin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 05:37 PM
-2

He is doing great with this pressuntion of inocence!!!! He has been presumpted inocent after obviously abusing the girl!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 05:33 PM
2

There are a lot of people who stay together for intimacy. Yes, yes!! I did not meant that it wasn't about intimacy. It was more about that if you want to build intimacy, then it is improtant to listen to the needs of each other and think how to help aliviate the pain of each other. If women are barking orders and try to whip men into compliance then two things happen: one, men will have less desire to be around her and listen to her, because she is agressive; two, those women aren't having their…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/05/20 04:04 PM
3

Here, 18 year olds have routinely sex with 15 years old. In fact, one of my best friends, was in a relationship like 10 years (they separated last years), and they started at roughly that difference of age. I try to not talk too much about it, because relationships with age differences seems to be an extremely sensitive topic in the US. But what is exactly the limit were age differences become harmful varies quite a bit from culture to culture and it is difficult to pinpoint exactly the limit. T…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/05/20 12:58 AM
1

I'm kinda curious about what you mean by this. Have you been having trouble expressing yourself before? Yes!! I was horrible expressing myself, I became much much better the last years.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 07:35 PM
1

Ohhh. I'm so happy that I was able to express myself!!!! Yessss, exactly as you have said (or women can work more outside, one of two). I hope you are able to manage to get the idea across to others too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 05:53 PM
2

I mean we can certainly try. I like the idea. I'm just skeptical of how far we can bend things before they eventually break. I mean.... things have already broke. We have been talking about the issue of men being in "surplus" and all this, the issue of men no longer being able to have a nreadwinner role, etc. If men really did care about cooking and cleaning but used women to perform those roles, then I would say that it's unfair. Cooking is important because buying food outside is extremely exp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 04:13 PM
2

I may have come across as saying that men are more responsible or that men are more at fall at this situation. This is not what I believe. Sincerely speaking, I do believe that women are more responsible that men in this situation. What I'm saying is slightly different. What I'm saying is that instead of saying "women wanting to do less unpaid labour is absurd, and unpaid labour is a myth", we should say "we want to take more of the slack in unpaid labour, and we do see it as a problem, but on t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:51 PM
2

What you're talking about is valid and I honestly don't know where / how to tie this in here. But it's not just women who think that this is unfair. Many men think that the expectation for them do everything that their wives tell them to, when they're told to do it, and how they're told to do it, is incredibly unfair as well. Sincerely speaking, I do believe that women are more responsible that men in this situation. What I'm saying is slightly different. What I'm saying is that instead of sayin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:50 PM
2

By and large men do participate, and I'm sure many men would be glad to be able to keep the same salary, but come home 1 hour earlier to do laundry and cooking instead of work. The issue here is that men would indeed earn less. That is the cause for that labour to be unpaid. It would be balanced out by women working outside more. The problem is that women tend to want men who make more money than them. That's the plan A, but the plan B is to be with someone that cares about them and that pulls t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:40 PM
1

And that is wonderful!!! I'm looking forward.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:33 PM
2

Not in Canada. Out of the 112 hours you're awake during the day, women work a stunning 30-45 minutes more per week than men. That's basically a rounding error. 76 minutes, read the article that is posted. It is not so long, because of the quadratic relation between time and wages. The hours of labour also don't take into account the difficulty of labour. One person works as a secretary, the other person works laying bricks or roofing all day. The hours of work might be the same, but the intensit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 03:12 AM
2

Sure, because of the pressure for men to be succesful and hard-working, and because capitalism doesn't like men who take time off. It's just something that we need to fight, the same way mothers have maternal leave (in any place except the US).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 03:04 AM
1

Nono, it is quadratic in the number of hours worked per week. That is, hourly wages grow linearly with the ammount of hours worked per week.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 03:04 AM
2

It's a plan A and plan B: either you are the man in the house and provide for me and have high earnings OR you love me care for me and pull your own weight inside the house. This text comes to mind: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/she-divorced-me-i-left-dishes-by-the-sink_b_9055288
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 03:02 AM
2

Most work is done in cooking, childrearing, going to buy groceries, cleaning, doing laundry. Men don't care if women cook and clean. Men do, the whole point of the complaint about unpaid labour is women nagging that their husbands do not want to cook and clean. Right now there is a whole thread in Menslib about this. I'm not saying that gender roles are enforced solely by men, it is both. Men not wanting to cook and clean, women not working to work outside.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:23 AM
3

After controlling for education, hours worked, career choices, and seniority the wage gap shrinks to women making 90-99 cents for every dollar men make. But that is the point, the point is the hours worked and the seniority. the whole point of this post was that women work more in unpaid labour while men work more in paid labour. The consecquence of that is the wage gap. without women having to work harder or make the hard choices. Women work as hard as men, but in unpaid labour instead of paid …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:19 AM
3

To be fair the actual solution here is probably to give more paternity leave for the father, and make it so that men actually do take paternity leave. Yes, I thoink Canada and some nmordic countries do that. Essentially they give like 12 months for both parents, but each one of them has to take at least 3 months. Or something like that, I don't remember the details.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:15 AM
1

No, the wage gap is a consecquence of women working less hours than me, because earnings grow quadratically with time, not linearly. https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041?gi=c0fa9e3e2e19
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:12 AM
2

They want balanced work-family life.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/05/20 01:11 AM
8

About dating, I strongly recommend Mark Manson's "Models". However, my strong recommendation is to not start dating: start making friends, firstly, acquaintances, then close friendships, then go to more. Dress me slowly, I'm in a hurry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:34 PM
3

Exactly!! It would lead to more shared custody, in many of the positive consecquences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:18 PM
4

There are some issues that can be done by the government, though. Specifically, maternal leave and paternal leave, both of which balance out the division of labour (maternal leave alows the mothers to go to take care of baies and go back to work afterwards, paternal leave allows men to feel more attached and related to their children). Because of this, maternal and paternal leave is one of the best policies to decrease the wage gap, if that is what is willed to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:04 PM
2

Ohh, yes! I completely agree. Here is the issue were in a very clear way, women cannot regulate about "unpaid labour". It exists, but it is negotiated inside the couple. Now, feminism usally talks about what women want as a collective, not expecting the government to step in and regulate it, but it is more about men understanding what women are requesting.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:03 PM
-4

Sure, but it is not only their choice, it is a couple's choice the issue on how the labour is split. So complaining that they do not find men who want to do more housework is a valid thing to do. The other option is to stay single, which is what many women are choosing to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 09:59 PM
1

The cause women have power over children is precisely one of the most crucial issues in the context of unpaid labour (like half of the unpaid labour is taking care of the children). What women are complaining about is that their husbands are not "lifting their weight" in the context of the relationship, which has, as a consecquence, women being unable to further their careers at their jobs. Women are not happy with these roles. I've seen polls that showed that while men and women preferred the e…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 09:15 PM
2

UBI would also solve quite a bit of the problem of the wage gap, evbenm if it wouldn't erase it completely. This is indeed the role of alimony, but it only account for around 40% of the difference, and for a few years. > At best you collect unemployment from the government. It's not the responsibility of an ex-employer to maintain your current standard of living just because you gave up opportunities to pursue your career in a different direction. > As such I don't think your ex husband should b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 08:14 PM
13

As I always said, the issue is not the time when married. The problem is divorce. The man usually has advanced their career a lot, while the woman has depended on the career advancements of her husband. this creates a huge imbalance, which makes women economically DEPENDENT on men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 06:09 PM
1

Like, one of the most empathetics places were I know right now is usually composed of 75% women and 25% men -but those men have given a lot of to me-. It is not empathy towards men, just empathy in general, both giving and receiving. I believe many men believe that they don't need empathy, and I believe they arr wrong. There are quite a lot of studies that show that men are much more confortable telling their issues to their mothers than towards their fathers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/05/20 01:08 PM
1

Yes, I did, it was a long journey. Thank you :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 06:31 PM
1

I did!!! Not only 3 years and a half of therapy payed off (I will be given the end of therapy in a month from now), but also I have found groups and people (both men and women) that are genuinly empathetic and genuinly accepting in a way that I couldn't have dreamed before.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 06:20 PM
5

In my experience, it is both. I have been shut down about my pains many times by men, few male friends have given me empathy (you know, more friends in "common tasks" and that). And I will be sincere: I have been shut down muuuch more by men than by women. I was able to tell my pains and my feelings to my mother and to my sister, not to my father. And the same with male friends, when I was a teenager and up to 2-3 years ago, when I started to meet very sensitive men who were much more touchy-fee…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 05:43 PM
3

You don't think that men being pressured to burden all their issues alone and having their issues and feelings constantly dismissed is a problem?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 05:29 PM
2

This is why I will never marry a woman with whom I cannot trust her to be vulnerable, spceially around things like our dog dying.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 05:23 PM
3

I will say this. Differently to these "feminists" like Susan Faludi and Alyssa Milano, I actually do care about women, and I have seen the story about Tara Reade and I will say I completely support her. This self-destruction institutional feminism is doing is disgusting to me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 04:43 PM
1

Sure!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 04:09 PM
0

Sure, but WHO has a great deal of financial power. And this was written in a really technocratic way. I think solving issues of men in a practical way will also help to acknowledge that these issues exist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 03:59 PM
2

Yes!!!!! I agree. But we need to start by something. I think we shouldn't be so pessimistic, maybe this will help advance male issues despite bias against men. Also, I mostly agree with the threads of askMRAS you sent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 03:38 PM
6

It makes me extremely happy!!!! It is so neutral, and they seem to actually care about men!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 03:17 PM
3

I liked your post. I do agree that those superheroes movies and alike will help instill bravery values in women and that will make that if we are in danger we will get rescued.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 12:14 PM
0

Not at all. Nice Guys TM refers to the type of guys that appear in niceguys subreddit. That is what means for people outside this subreddit. The common view is that they are just entitled guys that believe that because they put "friendship points" they earn the women. This is the layman view. It is crucial the indignation and agression for them. I framed it in the context of Heartless Bitch and NMMNG because I wanted to give a more empathetic view. The common layman view right now is that they a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 11:59 AM
2

posts where the only "wrongdoing" is a guy lamenting how unfair dating can be. And I'm 100% against those posts. If you are in favour of the types of post were a woman shows how she was sexually harassed, but you are against posts showing a guy complaining that dating is hard (and even those that say that he has a hard time because he is "nice") and you see this as bullying, then we are at the same place and we agree on the assessement. I've made a motto to not pay in full for the first date. So…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 02:31 AM
1

I see that I came across as saying that women who use men as ATMs, who cheat their boyfriends, who abuse and isolate men from loved ones, who pressure dates to spend money as a proof of love, are less harmful than guys who sexually harass. I did not meant to say that, and I do not believe that. My point was more like comparing venting about someone who harmed you personally vs to vent about the type of people that are similar to the ones that harmed you. Like, I do not consider saying "this is h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 12:56 AM
1

Also, I was about to say that the sub just shits on random single mothers, but I was wrong, I checked the subreddit a little more, and those are quite entitled and mentally ill women. The difference I signalled still stand, though, we should be grateful that we are not dating those mentally unstable women, it is different if we were dating one of those and we had been demeaned or used in that way and we were showing what they did to us. I actually had a mentally unstable woman attacking me like …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 11:32 PM
0

it's a place for men who are sick of being used, objectified, unwanted, Demeaned, dehumanized and treated like a human ATM. I completely agree!! Say they were showing facebook messages were they were showing how their ex girlfriuends were using them as ATMs. I would totally support that! Or, like dates that told them "I don't like you because you are poor" by whatsapp, or "you are too short to be dating". Or demeaned in any other way. Say, it happened to you, or your friend and you are supportin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 10:52 PM
0

I know, and I do agree with the problem of radicalizing the romanceless. However, that subreddit (much differently to inceltears) is a place of expression, mainly, of women themselves who were sexually harassed. Now, do I agree that there is a component of bullying in that subreddit? Yes, there is (this is objective, it can be checked with mathematical tools of population intersections). However, I believe that women expressing "I was sexually harassed, I want to rant" is completely valid. You c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 10:15 PM
-2

I mean, many of those guys are literally sending rape threats to the girls that post there. This is nothing at all like WAGM, where mostly there is to despise single mothers that are minding their own business.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 09:54 PM
-2

Yes. NiceGuy syndrom is a real and extremely serious issue. Not all kind guys have that situation. The pattern of lack of boundaries, emotional instability and bursts of anger and misoginy (in the face of rejection) in the context of a systemic self-pity, moral righteousness and self-declaring as "nice" is pervasive. This situation is a real problem. Then we can talk about the causes. But believing that the people called out in niceguys subreddit are just "naturally nice" and not mentally unstab…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 07:44 PM
1

You tell me if the guys at niceguys subreddit seem to behave in the way you describe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 04:42 PM
1

I'm not sure, but hellenistic jews did turned into "spiritual circumsition" or something. Anyway, I'm not religious which does help.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 01:22 PM
2

Yes, it was just difficult to accept because it is something that so stronly ties me to my roots, to my great-grandparents, you know? But I think it is just time to evolve.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 09:27 AM
1

Yes, I support this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:32 PM
1

royal you, didn't think about you personally. I meant a person who is white collar.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:32 PM
1

Oh yeah. unfortunately most of my friends don't want to talk about these things regardless. (or womens issues for that matter) Start from the particu8lar to the general. The personal is political. Start with what cauises you pain at a personal level, as well as what causes your friends pain at a personal level.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:17 PM
1

Mmm... yes. I completely agree!!!! Bit the reason is that they (twox users) were dismissing circumsition, not just talking about fgm.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:15 PM
1

hell. part of the reason paul elam and AVFM is so well known is because they used outrage to get on the radar. and they've said as much in their articles. Not in a positive way. "do it for the lurkers" Well, yes, this is true. But you still could do this in any other place and would get more positive attention from lurkers than in a place were the only attention you'll get is from people who want to go "see? Women do not have it as bad."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:14 PM
1

You surely will have a lot of stigma. But there will be some people out there. Maybe one or two, but it is important to start slow, instead of giving up.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 11:11 PM
1

Yet this is something that is done to men constantly when their issues are brought up. And... we should do the same? Did it work? We can't. Hell on subs like menslib. a place that's supposed to be for men to express that. you can't even bring up the topic. No, I mean, literally we can. Talk to your friends, male and female. Talk about those issues, open up. We have a big need to be seen, and there are many people who are willing to see us. I mean, I do it all the time, and this has helped me be …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 10:25 PM
1

I understand that your issue is for their to be searched solutions without getting input from everyone involved. I agree completely with this that you signal. However, the request the women at twox are doing is the step temporally before the solution stage, the empathizing stage. At that stage, saying "but men have issues too" muddle the waters and do not help to solve men issues better either.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 09:29 PM
0

I do understand that when men jump with their problems in the moment when women are expressing theirs the cause for that is frustration of not being listened. However, it still is true that it is a terrible moment to express your needs, and the consecquences are to shut women up from their expression, while men do not get more heard about it. It is an understandable, but irrational and ineffective tactic. And women getting frustrated by being shut up when they express their needs and requesting …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 09:26 PM
1

Who are you friends with? I cannot think any people that I know, even the most misandrist ones, that would argue in favour of somethinh so horrible.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 07:26 PM
5

Your post has helped me learn a lot and was very interesting!!!!! As a jew, I had the last two years coming into terms that circumsition of men was bad.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 07:20 PM
-1

But we do agree that when a woman is trying to solve a woman's issue is not the time to talk about a male issue, right? This is what this users are complaining, not that men talk about male issues, but that they talk about them in the moment when a woman is talking about a particular pain.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 07:17 PM
1

The term was intended to not indict masculinity as a whole. This is very clear, because the entrance of Toxi8c Masc inside feminism got in the context of third wave feminism, which is anti-essentialist. However, many men do receive the term as an indictement of masculinity for many reasosn. For a start, a constant anger of many women who were hurt by men, against masculinity. But what is crucial is the patriarchal shame that al men have were all narratives about men are assumed first to mean tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/20 09:06 PM
1

I see what you say. Like those are the toxic men and we are the deep ones? I meant that it wasn't derogatory on masculinity as a whole.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/20 07:02 PM
1

Thank you :). I share your desire. Also, I hope that link serves for you to discuss against homophobes who may say that children need a man/woman to be risen healthily.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 02:08 PM
2

Why was I downvoted? Is this sub against gay adoption? Here is a meta analisis: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1053%26context%3Dhdfs_pubs&ved=2ahUKEwj-_vj1lrPpAhULHbkGHf5YCZkQFjABegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw04NPdLL4WEYcVoAf4u36-n
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 10:49 AM
2

But in order to achieve this we have to get around the societal standard that men are supposed to take (financial) care of women, even to their own detriment. Exaaactly. Traditional division of labour creates a mutual dependence that is not healthy imho.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 02:56 PM
2

Exactly. Or even because he didn't invest emotionally in his children because he was busy working so his children would be fed. In fact, I think you are more right that I am. Women stayinh at home more allows them to invest more emotionally in children, while men not. I think this is a more important part of the asymmetry than friendships.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 02:54 PM
2

Yes, this is exactly why roommates have become a thing, to articulate modern marriage pattern with increase cost in housing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 02:52 PM
1

Alimony is smaller than the differences of wages (around 40%). Also, usually the man has advanced more in their career than the woman has. Women "sacrifice" their career for their children. Now, you could also argue that men are "enslaved" by their career. My point is not that, but that although indeed there is no "unpaid labour" while couples are married, once they split, the woman is finantially worse off than the man if they divorce. Then again, the man is emotionally worse off because it has…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 02:03 PM
1

Do you mean the studies where there is shown that homosexual adoptive parents create a healthy upbringing?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:41 AM
3

I use it because I like academics and I always like to use terms in its correct sense and not in the sense culture distorts it. I also use it because it refers to a concrete situation and there is no other name for it yet. The name was created by mythopoietic culture at first, and it wasn't intended to be derogatory. What happened was that the systemic shame of masculinity distorted what they started to hear. So I try to use it only when I share common ground with a person, while with an antifem…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:39 AM
3

You know there are marriage tax breaks, right? Single people are literally taxed. Not only that, but living alone is highly uneconomical (because rent costs are higher).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:33 AM
-1

That's because in one case it doesn't help capitalism flow, it is non-wage labour, so it can't be turned into profits.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:30 AM
-1

The issue with "unpaid work" is divorce, in the case of divorce, men get the big portion of the benefits of what was """couples work""".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:29 AM
1

It is widely studied that the unpaid domestic work is exactly equal to the extra ammount of men in the workplace, so if you think one is a smokescreen, then the other would be too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 11:27 AM
1

I just meant that feminism is seen as a good moral force.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/20 06:23 PM
1

This is an idea whose time has come. It will just take some years of work to get there. The normie majority will eventually come around to the same conclusions with some red pilling. We're winning the culture war, bit by bit. I think we are not winning. Many of the early supporters of mras were in fact tradcons. Right now, menslib subreddit is growing at a far faster pace than mensrights subreddit. We may need some self-criticism to be more nuanced.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/20 04:03 PM
1

It happens in some mammals and some other species. For example, amongst our closest cousins, it happens in the chimps but not in the bonobos.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/20 04:01 PM
2

Feminism doesn't have a stigma in the larger population. We talked that it was hegemonic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/20 04:00 PM
11

Just further the construction of male movement and do not care about what feminist thing. You should care about women well-being, and you should listen what feminist say about female experience. But you just shouldn't care too much about what feminists tells you male experience actually is. Be empathetic to them, but do not take responsability for their feelings of fear, their fear for the organization you have about your well-being is not your problem. Just don't use "men's rights" name, becaus…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/20 12:46 AM
1

Sorry, I think I did not understand you. The issue here is that it should be good for women to work as much as men, don't you agree on this point?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 08:32 PM
1

Great :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 08:30 PM
1

What are the facts? And no, I'm a HISTORICAL materialist, you are materialist, but not an historical one. In a sense, this was Marx criticism against Feuerbach.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 08:30 PM
1

Why look for another (more human specific) explanation if social mammals already do it? Because many social animals do it and other social animals don't. So to understand hiumans at a more specific way, you need to analize history to know how this played out in specific ways.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 08:28 PM
2

Hey, great :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 02:58 PM
2

Women having a labour force as big as men. Which implies that there is no longer a situation were men are materially sustaining women, but that women work as much as men. Look, this is a good stituation for us.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 02:30 PM
3

The reason why female-dominated industries is growing has nothing to do with Obama and is a consecquence of the ageing of the population, since nurses are mainly women. However, you can check the statistics and see that the vaaast difference between male and female labour population is a consecquence of women being childrearing. And it has nothing to do with male and female dominated industries. This is a god process. It means that there are less men supporting women. > We do. Along with women p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 01:59 PM
1

Sure!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 01:56 PM
1

Most of the users of LWMA
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 01:55 PM
1

Also, your view is not socialist. It implies that men will always be disposable because there will always be an upper class of men despising lower class men. This implies that hierarchies are biological, which is not a socialist posture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 11:41 AM
2

Recent data show women’s labor force participation has been growing faster than men’s in recent years The cause of this is almost exclusively the lack of marriages, which implies women are working instead of being with children at home. But which is it? I though you guys supported women working as much as men?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 11:39 AM
1

I did not say blank slate, and I am not a blank-slatist. However, fully biologizing things is just a way to fall in the despair of an unchangable future. It brings us no imagination of what reality can be, only the study of history can give us perspective.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 11:27 AM
1

HeyyyStrongly recommending https://aquiestoy.live/ or 7cups.com There are wonderful and empathetic people there who listen. In my situation, I would say that when I opened up, most of the people I talked to were very supportive, many were not supportive. I would say that after opening up also I tended to change myself and relate to the friends who were suppoortive more. I hope the sites I gave you are useful to you :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/20 05:24 PM
3

The concept of patriarchy was not invented by feminism but was as old, at least, as the roman empire. But I agree that many women reinforce gender roles, I don't disagree with it. Thank you for your answer!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/20 12:28 PM
5

Both have merit, but both are extremely biologicist. And that severly limits our imagination n how to change it. I'm not extremely anti-biologicist all the times, but it is always good to add some causation from social structures, whether material or cultural.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/20 01:42 AM
6

I support the changes you propose
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/20 01:40 AM
3

So, what you want me to pay attention is the fact that gender expectations are reproduced not only by men but also by women? Because I agree with that. I also agree that men work longer hours even before marrying. Although the difference is smaller, it certainly is a consecquence of gender expectations, and it certainly is related to pressure in dating. I think that many feminists do realize that women reproduce "patriarchal" expectations in men. Others think that only men reproduce patriarchy b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/05/20 09:37 AM
2

So, just to be clear, you are saying that women should earn their money instead of staying at home doing household tasks, and that feminism implying that they do not work outside because they are stuck at home with domestic chores and children is not taking responsability for the fact that men also do not stay at home with their children and household chores because they are stuck outside at work, and that showing one and not the other erases the fact that agency in this situation is shared? If …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/05/20 05:59 PM
1

Which means what? That hypergamy persists, but is smaller? Exactly!!! Hypergamy decreases when gender expectations decrease. It is lower in western societies than in China and India (I mention those countries because they are some where hypergamy is strongest, in a socioeconomic sense). The thrust of that article is about the wage gap, not about hours work, or workplace flexibility, benefits, or anything like that. However if you scroll through, there is one graph showing quite plainly that sing…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 02:53 PM
0

Well then why is hypergamy so prevalent in western "free love" societies? Wage gap is way smaller in western societies. Gender expectations have decrease, although they persist. Women work fewer hours and easier jobs even before they get married or have children. It's often said that woman focus on dating and "catching men" in exactly the same way men focus on their careers and finding better jobs. This is not true. https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 01:23 PM
1

So, the thing is more or less like this: hypergamy (as it has been studied by antropology, like in India and China, not in redpiller ideology), is a direct consecquence of patriarchy. In particular, parents create arranged marriages were women are pressured to marry up to enshrine the situation of the families. Men, as head of the households, cannot do this, they cannot marry up or down, they are the point of reference, women come up to them, not them towards women. Wage gap (earnings gap, more …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/20 09:51 PM
1

It is a valuable tool for us, to explain male issues to others. I have found it very useful.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/20 11:22 AM
1

Childcares costs have gone through the roof.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/20 07:27 PM
6

"The price of hierarchy is suicide, the other side of hierarchy is moon landing". I'm all for anarchist astronauts.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/20 07:24 PM
1

Argentina!! In Latin America.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/04/20 01:08 PM
3

Yes!!!! Physical touch is extremely important, but specially men are touch starved. I have the luck of living in a country were nonsexual hugs and nonsexual cheek kissing is extremely common.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/20 11:13 PM
3

I also like it :). The engine is a brilliant idea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/20 11:07 PM
1

Great!!!!! I'm starting to understanding you. Now, in my oppinion, although indeed humanity have a natural bias towards fairness and wellbeing, we can see that humanity has not always been fair. Now, I think we would agree that the reasons why it was not always fair were material structures that limited wellbeing. What does it make you think that those structures that were there to impede wellbeing are no longer there, and instead, what is limiting male progress is feminism (which is much more r…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 03:51 PM
1

Ok... why do you think that the advancements of women are a natural consecquence of material conditioms, but the misandry is artificial manufactured by feminist ideology? I do not follow you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 03:06 PM
1

Heyyy!!!! I see I'm starting to understand you. So, this is what I don't fully understand. What I believe you believe is that feminism is only an ideology that reflects (and only slightly furthers or hinders) the advancement of equality between women and men, which, I believe, you consider it to be a product of material conditions (for example, the pill, but there are other examples). So my question would be this: why are you angry at feminists if they are only a consecquence of the material cha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 02:29 PM
1

Completely agree. I was just discussing the idea that oppression towards women never existed and that only wackos believed men are women were not equal in the past.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 12:10 PM
1

It simply must be recalled that the suffragettes in England campaigned (and with terrorism) for only female suffrage with some factions not even wanting mass suffrage but only propertied suffrage for women to match men. The contemporary suffragists campaigned for mass suffrage for all. Most "first wave feminists" also didn't want suffrage for non white women. I do not disagree in many things that you said, like that feminists were very racist back then. May I ask you about the english feminist g…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 12:09 PM
1

I'm not caricaturing. I'm putting a lot of effort into understanding what schalazeal believes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 12:04 PM
1

Yes, yes. I agree with you. I was trying to understand SchalaZeal, which I believe told me that abolitionism was not needed for the end of slavery, and that this happened in an automatic way. Abolitionism was, in my oppinion, a crucial part in the development of the american civil war.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 12:03 PM
1

Yes, I wanted to understand SchalaZeal, who believes that feminism never did absolutely anything. Then there is another view that feminism did useful things, but it is no longer useful.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 12:00 PM
1

Ok. So in your view politics just fastens the issues a few years back and forward but the underlying issues go at a rate set by material conditions?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 11:58 AM
1

So, in my understanding, you believe that ideology doesn't exist and politics automatically reflect material conditions. I, of course, agree partly with that. For example, it is well known that the persistance of slavery in the US was largely a consecquence of the cotton of the south being needed for the industries in the north, and that the cotton of the south being no longer needed for the industry of the north was highly related to the possibilty of the american civil war. Is your oppinion th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 03:33 AM
1

Yes!!!! I completely agree. Now, you mentioned the end of slavery. May I ask you which do you think was the role of abolitionist ideology with respect to the end of slavery?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 03:13 AM
1

You know slavery was universally accepted as 'something that happens' 2000 years ago? And not just to black people. The Old Testament has ways to deal with slaves. Don't think it needed feminism. Great!! I'm starting to understand you. Is this what you are saying? That in the same way we evolved into having egalitarian values in the context of slavery, we did in relationship to women?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/20 02:31 AM
1

But you do agree that Aristotle did believe that, right?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/04/20 11:18 PM
1

I'm just saying that women gained some rights that men already had. I don't really believe so many people can say that women had no issues to be solved. I mean, see what Aristotle said about women: "as regards the sexes, the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject." Do we think that men are by nature rules and women subordinates? Well, we don't (I mean, many in this sub do believe that, but most don't) because of feminism. I mean, you do agree th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/04/20 06:40 PM
1

But women did get suffrage later than men, isn't that true? Also, domestic terrorism? I was not aware of any guerrilla-like movement amongst women at the early 20th century. Also, do you think that the right to drive and leave the country without a chaperone, which aren't a given in Saudi Arabia are legitimate issues?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/04/20 03:26 PM
0

You do realize that women weren't even allowed to vote, right? I mean, just as an example.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/04/20 02:07 PM
1

I see, I see. I'm very thankful for having thought and answered my concerns. So, let's see. Let me reframe your concerns about "enforced monogamy" towards "premarital sex shaming". You can also forbid divorce. You would also need early marriage. When I say early marriage, I mean marriage at the age of around 20 years old, like it was in the biggest part of human history. This is my reasoning here: right now marriage is monogamous, since polyamorous marriages are not allowed in most parts of the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 05:49 PM
1

I think socially enforced monogamy does not do what you believe it does. You do not realize something crucial needed for enforced monogamy to work: women dependinh economically on men. Women will not marry men that they despise if they do not need it economically. You are the one that told me that women are not attracted to the bottom 80%. So, if they are not attracted to them, and they do not need them economically, then WHY would they marry them? Please answer me. In your world, would women wh…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 04:55 PM
1

So you think that women are attracted to a relative trait, not an absolute one. In this view, (most) men are inherently undesirable. In this view, this is inevitable, since it is biologically determined. Now, this is the framework that pushes men to step on each other and compete. This is what drives misandry amongst men. Not only that, but in this framework, misandry amongst men is inevitable, since competition is inevitable. In this view, affection is intrinsically impossible. Now, I disagree …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 02:38 PM
1

sufficient quality This is very generic. Let me ask you, why do you see women having sex as a finite cake, where men have to compete for a finite ammount of sex. Cannot the size of the cake grow overall, through men having an overall greater "quality"? Because here is a point were I believe we disagree: I believe the ammount of sex women want to have depend on the overall "quality" of men, and thus, I don't see the competition you see amongst men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 11:38 AM
1

showcasing to the girl why she should have sex with him And why would they? The point in traditional society is that marriage was a sort of prostitution: sex for money. But women no longer need men's money. So why would women have sex with men? I clearly have my own oppinion, but want to hear yours.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 10:08 AM
3

I think that crispr and biological reproduction in general are basically irrelevant in the context of male disposability. There might be a tendency for men to be disposable (and maybe a tendency for men to be dominant?). But all in all, no human is disposable, at a human level. As I consider it, the cause for male disposability are social structures (the mode of production, as I've talked before), which organize biology, in a way. "We do not receive empathy because biologically we are unempathiz…
/r/MensRights20/04/20 01:41 AM
2

And men will always be the one who need to lead the way in romance Why?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/20 01:29 AM
4

Men are simps because they are emotionally needy. They are emotionally needy because men do not support each other, and instead step on each other to get the girl. The point is not to be less simpy or less needy, the point is give emotional support to the needy other men. Men "chase" women because they are in despair and are very needy. Women also need men, and do enjoy male company, but they no longer depend on men the same way than before (because now they earn a huge part of their own money).…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 07:55 PM
3

Thank you!!! Good luck!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 07:31 PM
1

That they must be willing to provide. That men are not ATMs. If we compare the past with today, we realize that although men continue providing to women, it is done much much less. The reason women are okay w/ being single is because they can easily have sex on demand, so many of them sleep around as long as they can. No, they have as much sex as they want, but they want it less than men!!!!! Look, if the traditional marriage was sex (and emotional support!!!!!!), for money, What changed? It cha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 07:08 PM
2

Women have the expectations corresponding to what they can get. In what sense would it be "too high"? They just prefer to be alone than to be with a man that is below their expectations. This is within their prerrogatives: women have a less worse time with being single than men, because they have each other. Instead, being partnered with the wrong person would be draining. Divorced men have a harder time than divorced women at an emotional level. And again, I don't agree with you in the idea of …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 06:04 PM
5

You misunderstood me. I said touch, not sexual intimacy. Because here is the issue: women get emotional and physical intimacy from other women. This gives them power over men, because they need men less than men need women. If we got more emotionally intimate with other men, as well as if we hug and touched more our friends, we would be in more equal footing and less desperate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 04:48 PM
3

Enforced monogamy was part of the exchange of sex for money and stability. I say we do not return to it. We shouldn't pursue women. The problem here is that the lack of male-on-male intimacy has let us weaker and more desperate than women. We need to make us stronger through male-on-male empathy, emotional intimacy and physical touch, so we aren't desperate for women and we don't pursue them, and the dating becomes balanced.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/20 03:48 PM
3

Eventually it will happen. I don't think there is any place for a view of male advocacy that is less adherent of feminism than menslib. I'm going to continue here until then, I guess. DO NOT BRIGADE.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/04/20 10:31 PM
1

I don't agree. We can use statistics correctly. But yes, somerimes people hide under the rug.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/04/20 11:02 AM
1

Yessss. I hate when feminista use that distorted statistic!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/20 03:29 PM
4

Today I learned that love is the cause of nazism. Probably TRP is not the best source.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/20 09:37 AM
0

Do you mean people justifying child marriage on this age? Your argument on peirod at 16 is very interesting. I find it difficult to understand that anyone outside 4chan would justify child marriage in this age.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/20 11:05 PM
2

Wowww, thanks. Terrible times. I find it very difficult for people to not believe it that the past was really awful for women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/20 06:24 PM
1

I have heard that Aisha was actually 16 and that followers exaggerated her youth to be clear that Aisha was virgin (something about comparison to her sister age or sth). Is that true? Anyway, it does not pain well on islam either if followers of Muhammad thought that a 12 year old child spoke better of his virtue than a 16 year old.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 11:16 PM
1

The dychotomy is saying that we have two options: either we make the definintion of rape less stringent or we throw more people in jail.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 10:24 PM
1

I mean, this text literally says: believewomen--->30% US population in prision. Or, like: either we should be more stringent on the definition of rape, or we put many men in prision. Both of these are false dychotomies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 10:13 PM
3

Another question is about gender and education in historical times; was it really necessary to restrict access to education for women? Or is it more nuanced? Mmm... it depends what education was. Like, greek philosophy, or brahmin studies, or confucian scholar bureaucracies were mainly done by (middle to upper class) men. Roughly speaking, litteracy was related to accounting and scribes and other aspects of State bureaucracy, and bureaucrats were usually men. So that would be the main economic a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 04:14 PM
3

Yes, this is true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 03:56 PM
3

That's an excelent question. Shortage of women was quite common in some colonial societies, for example. Just yesterday I was reading about shortage in Wyoming because of the gold rush (the same could be said in early California or Alaska). Other similar examples would be societies founded by pirates (some islands of the caribbean) or inmates (Australia). I'm not sure what "roles" would be those. The main role of women was childrearing (in some societies, the women worked in the fields as much a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 01:38 PM
3

I always say that women are oppressed, men are disposable. While women had basically no freedom, they were quite protected, while men died quite a lot in, for example, wars. Wars were quite gruesome back then. So, if they had the luck of having a good husband that did not abuse them, I think they had a better life than their husbands.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/20 07:30 AM
5

Patriarchal societies were quite oppressive towards women. Roughly, in most of them, they belonged to their husbands. This means that they were protected, but they were at the mercy of their fathers until marriage, husbands after marrying and sons after widowing. This does not mean that they were unhappier than their husbands. It means that they were suppose to obey their husbands, in a similar way that children are supposed to obey their parents. Now, children were also basically propierty of t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/04/20 10:34 PM
20

First of all we need a lifestyle change: specifically the greatest problems are smoking and obesity. Decreasing these lifestyle problems will greatly increase the life expectancy. We also need to go to th doctor more frecquently.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/20 01:42 PM
1

Congratulations!!!! You may be saved. I hope this is your life turnaround!!!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/20 10:26 AM
3

A little bit. I hope we will be able to talk a little more. I know some empathetic sites where they will treat you well, no matter that you are a guy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/20 07:34 PM
6

This really is awful. Not only about the male thing. But also about the "entitlement" thing. I'm not surprised that unemployment benefits and other """""entitlements""""" are constantly cut. Fucking Ayn Rand logic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/20 10:56 AM
12

I went there to talk with him. This guy needs empathy and support now. I'm advocating for men right now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/20 10:54 AM
2

yes, that too
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 11:08 PM
2

Sure, sure. I did not meant that, sorry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 08:07 PM
4

That 1.4% is only about being penetrated (in the ass)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 08:03 PM
3

I do believe it is true, and I'm quite angry by the silencing of Time's Up. And where are all the people that talked about Kacanaugh and are defending Biden now? It makes me furious.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 09:35 AM
1

Jusr wanted to say that I'm extremely happy abiut you :). You came such a long way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 09:33 AM
2

Heyy, PrincessofPatriarchy is a woman. Double standards and blabla, but you clearly believe she's a man, hahah.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 09:27 AM
1

Well. It is something, haha.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:53 PM
1

I did not mean that. I'm probably wrong. I just meant that I did not know.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:53 PM
1

Thank you for helping me with my deliver. Do you understand better my overall argument now?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:44 PM
1

Also, maybe this is in part because of how they will be laughed at, and their pain mocked and ridiculed by "patriarchy hurts men too" or "menz tears" types of brave feminists if they are vulnerable in public. Yes, yes. I agree with this. Anger isn't going to get us a lot of sympathy from feminist-dominated spaces, that's for sure, but those aren't the only ones that matter. Anger doesn't bring sympathy in anyone. Neither towards men or towards women. Female anger makes them create boundaries and…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:44 PM
3

Yes!!!! Yes, in great sense it is what I'm saying!!!! Anger makes you seem strong when you are not!!!! That is one of the biggg issues on why it is not working.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:41 PM
1

May I ask for the studies? I don't want to fight with you. I have indeed found studies that showed that people of age 15 or less with people of more than 2 years of age difference caused them harm. For people of 16+ I found the evidence, specially in the case of men having casual sex with older women, more inconclusive. But I'm indeed interested in solid studies that shows that older male teenagers indeed are harmed -when there are no authority relationships, that is-.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:38 PM
1

I think there is a lot of leftover cultural puritanism attached to the expressions of teenage sexuality, and both sides of the gender wars try to play this card in their favor as hard as they can, since it resonates with a lot of people, but the issue is probably bi-partisan; that's probably what the voraciousness of the responses you received was most closely linked to. Maybe, I was probably in the wrong. I just do not fully understand it yet. I'm really not sure what you are saying here. Is me…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:35 PM
1

But they are literally not the same insults. Women WANT to be insulted in ways that highlight their agency, which is why they are trying to become more angry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:29 PM
1

So coming to think of it, for one example, how do b.s. concepts like "everyday sexism" or "microaggressions" different from the hostility and demonization of men and male sexuality that we see everywhere in most respected and influential media? The insults toward men and women are just not the same. Towards men is usually seing us as either evil or weak, or maybe "doglike". Towards women it is usually about them being sexual objects, or being unable to work in technical situations, etc. Those di…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 09:22 PM
2

Sorry I was hard on the issue of male anger. Look, we talked before on how I believe that the problem of men and women are just not the same (negative and positive freedom). I do believe anger is just not useful to develop positive freedom, you are going to turn the people you want connection with away. If what you want is negative freedom, then seeming a heartless bitch and an harpy will get you what you want: to be left alone. But this is not what I believe us men need.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 11:56 AM
2

I think there is an unhealthy demonization of teenage sexuality, but the way women's liaisons with underage boys are treated differently than men's is a double-standard that needs to stop. I do not care about double standards. Sincerely I'm still not entirely sure that a 16 year old guy having sex with a 20 year girl is worse for the man psyche than the guy not having sex until 25. But it seems that there are people who feel very strongly that the man is hurting when dating an older woman, so I …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 10:33 AM
4

Don't sell yourself short. From getting to know you a little, I'm sure you had your reasons, even if they weren't presented perfectly, and as we now know, there is more to this story. I was defending female pedophiles XD. Or, according to myself, I was defending the right of male teens to have sex. The censorship in that subreddit was acting like a pressure cooker, and I was transiting a bad time, and it blew up in that weird way. If by misogyny you mean anger directed towards women, and recogni…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/20 12:44 AM
1

Mayube it's time for US to stop thinking in punitivistic way
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/20 11:13 PM
5

I'm not sure which one. I believe it was Cicero himself. It was a detailed and quite ¿honest? explanation of what Menslib mods believed. It wasn't from a point of argument, it was more like "I've heard that you were disappointed about this, and wanted to set this clear". Remember that I have been quite an active user there and I split (or precisely, was rightfully banned, I was making an embarassment of myself) in relatively good terms. And I continuously find frustrating the way they manage the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/20 11:12 PM
6

And besides, a mod there EXPLICITELY told me that they indeed were in favour of the concept. My guess is that they are trying to wade off people from the MRA community and distrust people who use that terminology. Like, if someone uses "toxic masculinity" they are probably feminists. Sth like that. But extremely sad still, glad I'm no longer there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/20 08:19 PM
9

So sad, so extremely sad. I had not realized they had purged the concept of Male Disposability from their goodthink.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/20 09:21 AM
3

I don't think they want their fathers and brothers to die, they just take no responsability for the consecquences of their discourse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/03/20 06:47 PM
5

I think people realized that they don't reaaaaally want men to die. They will return to forget it in a few months.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/03/20 10:25 AM
1

Thanks!!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/20 12:06 AM
0

I mean.... surely they could say that if so they wanted? The fact that they don't is part pf toxic masculinity precisely.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 07:44 PM
1

When I was young, many smokers did have this macho artittude of "you have to die of somethinh anyway"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 06:47 PM
3

I read the statics about mortality, in essence, your life expectancy decreases with each extra kg after being overqeight.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 06:12 PM
1

I personally think it is one of the instances were "Toxic Masculinity" theory works best. That's why I was curious about how this sub viewed that issue.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 04:40 PM
2

Men smoking more and being more obese is part of the statistics too. As well as the deaths by suicide and opioid abuse. Btw: what does this sub believe about why do men smoke so much?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 04:23 PM
4

They do date them. They are women, they put a picture in Tinder and get dozens.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 01:01 PM
1

We have to be strong, we have to be confident, we have to be providers and prioritize everyone else over ourselves. And with this pressure comes a ruthless expectation of accountability. If we fail, we have no one to blame but ourselves. We are not allowed to be victims. I like this part.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 12:56 PM
6

If men criticize you for saying something you know is true, perhaps it’s worth getting centered in your own truth and questioning the notion that you have been taught to believe: that other men can decide if you are a “real man” or not. There’s nothing more liberating than living authentically, standing up for what you believe in, and not giving a fuck what anyone else thinks of you. Fine, I'll use my critical thinking to decide that entitlement to power is not in fact the cause of male pain in …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 12:50 PM
1

I'm just saying that the two factors are relevant in the dychotomy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 04:48 PM
2

I tend to encourage those types of behaviours. But remember to be very empathic. I disagree with mewacketergi and believe you indeed can have a conversation with her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 04:47 PM
3

Better not. I think she was very hurt and she felt that her issues didn't matter to us. Someone laughing at the issue of "women are propierty in Nigeria" would probably not be good for her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:37 PM
1

Yeahh, what I've heard is that men hours and women hours are roughly the same. But it does seem that when women are breadwinners, men do take some slack but not all, isn't it? I'm just saying it is a complex issue that is not reducible to "men are lazy" or "women coerce men", etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:29 PM
3

I was very very clear against the dichotomy. This thread is presented as a dichotomy, don't discuss with me, discuss with OP!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:23 PM
7

HighDuchess is a nigerian user. She came here to learn about male issues. She became disheartened by the dismissal of women issues and the attacks on feminism. She started to say something akin "If you don't care about all the issues women face in my country, I don't care about your issues either". You can check the issues she mentioned, which are quite horrible, including child marriage and other things like that. I tried to say something like "I do care about nigerian women, and I don't believ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:22 PM
5

I think one of the positive comments might have been mine. I'm here to defend it, if you want to talk about it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 11:37 AM
0

Yes. A study posted in FDS: https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/eg0rbz/women_do_more_housework_regardless_of_who_the/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 10:28 AM
6

So.... why so much effort trying to proove that women do not suffer horribly in those places? We just need to proove that men do suffer. Just see the post of HighDuchess. No, really why are we trying to futher the idea that women life is not horrible?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 03:21 AM
2

Well, yes: this is called the deconstruction of the gender roles. I am actually in favour of this. This implies showing more women at films and in childrne books working outside home and more men working in chores. This is not to force them to occupy those roles, but to make them feel alowed to occupy these roles if so they want.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:47 AM
1

I don't thinkl they are mutually exclusive. I believe both are true. The second is not the only truth: when men work less in relation to women, they take less extra hours of chores.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:26 AM
5

We need government intervention to ensure that hypergamy comes to end and men and women spend equally on each other. Men and women should face an equal likelihood of marrying up /down What does this mean? XD Forced marriage? Would you accept to have some random woman to get thrown at you and say, here you have to marry this girl.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/20 12:26 AM
6

I do care about how women are treated (specially in places like Nigeria, I come from a country were women are treated better than Nigeria, but worse than US or Europe). Indeed I dislike when women oppression is disregarded as an illussion. Many people forget how it was just a few decades ago. Here you are to remember us the real situation of women there, and the dire situation. Africa is still a place were men -besides women, of course- do have it worse than in the western world. Think about chi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/03/20 01:10 PM
1

Sure!!! Np
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 10:53 PM
1

Cooool, I didn't know you were a physicist! I'm in theoretical biophysics. What area are you in? I also prefer science to philosophy if they conflict.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 06:16 PM
1

Well, I'm a phycisist. But I like science and philosophy both, I do not find them antagonizing
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 04:51 PM
1

Yeahh. I haven't really understood Derrida. I do know -and believe I understand- Deleuze, Foucault, Lacan, Bourdieu, Sartre, Camus, Simondon, Levi-Strauss and Poulantzas. I do like french intelectuals quite a bit, but Derrida I have never understood. I always loved french structuralism and post-structuralism (I don't like postmoderns so much), I love how they think about social structures.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 12:43 PM
4

I liked very much how he described Derrida. The problems of translation are quite accurate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/20 12:11 PM
11

Truee!!! When will menslibbers care about us going to the dopctor to protect ourselves and take care of ourselves?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 09:38 PM
4

People shame themselves because of a society telling all men that theyu are ugly. But you are right, we shoulkdn't start,
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 06:43 PM
4

It might be a social science. But the issue that they punish whoever says a different thing from the orthodoxy is what makes it alike a religion, I believe
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 11:08 PM
8

My cousin LITERALLY believe women civilize their husbands. She thinks that men saying "whatever you like honey" shows that they are immature, childish and uncivilized.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 11:14 AM
6

My cousin thinks that it shows the guy is immature and childish and treats the girl like her mommy and that it shows how men are entitled to women labour... I'm not joking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 11:13 AM
1

So, if boys' performance is due to behavioral assessments, isn't the cause due to socialization? That is one possibility. However, part of it I believe it IS that boys need to move more and schools categorize moving children as ADDs. I do not remember the precise age that this starts to happen, but I believe it was around 9 or 10 years old. That is not to mean that there is not an early socialization phase, of course, sepcially in kindergarden. But we DO need to question which is the standard by…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 08:57 PM
2

What we know is that boys around 10 yo and girls of the same age have equal grades in exams, but boys have worse behavioural assessments. Now, why that happens I don't know, and we know that this is the cause of the imbalance, boys get discouraged because they repeatedly are told they are not good students and all. There are various theories about it: that it is because almost all teachers are females, that it is because there is not enough physical sports at school, etc. My favourite theory is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 06:59 PM
2

The reason is the education crisis for young boys, which implies that women accede to college more easily than men. And in any case, this is what they said, not me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 05:53 PM
3

If you can't compete in the marketplace than you need to get more skills or to be less lazy. If compitition forces you out of a job, then you obviously suck at your job. The same thing would happen if more men moved to your city. The fact more people have the oppertunity doesn't take anything from you unless you're an underperformer, and then it still isn't a womans fault you lost your job. It's your own incompetence. Atleast that's how I see it. I mean, the cause of the lack of jobs for men is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 10:52 AM
2

https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/ffjlh8/i_love_hearing_guys_complain_about_the_future_is/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 10:27 AM
4

It depends the age, you are seing a bias on old age. Millenials do not live better than boomers (in US). And even then, I don't care. The issue is that those women believed that men lived worse and they were celebrating it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 02:07 AM
3

What stats? I said that I don't like how people at twox subreddit are celebrating that (so they believe) life for men is worse than before.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:21 AM
3

I don't like how women in twox are celebrating that men's life is worse than it was 30 years ago.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/03/20 11:34 PM
1

Later wr can talk in chat about that. It is indeed possible. Like right now in this precise moment I'm practising expression at my NVC workshop, how to express in a way that it reaches people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/20 10:25 PM
1

That's not necessary. It's not that difficult to have catchy phrases.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/20 09:39 PM
2

We will figure one out, I'm quite sure :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/20 06:48 PM
2

They cut their toungue after cutting their foreskin
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/20 08:43 AM
2

That is exactly the point of reframing. It's not about talking about different things. It is about talking about the same things in a different way. I'll show you what I did and why did it sound different. Celebrate is to become aware of when your needs are met. Instead, rewarding implies a struggle, that you are trying to pressure into doing something. The actions are the same, but the first assumes harmony, the second doesn't. The need of strength has become explicit in the second part. This i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/20 01:45 AM
1

I can explain why they are different. But the important thing is this: do they feel different?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 01:12 PM
1

I did not say that my theory is scientific. I'm trying to express you what changed inside me that made me, after being a virgin of 28 years, be dating a girl and having another deeply attracted to me. And having more instances of flirting than before. I deeply believe that therapy more than reading advice or scientific studies online is useful. Because the barriers of each person are different.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 01:10 PM
1

I believe operant conditioning on oneself or someone else doesn't create much problems as long as it is done from a place of consented help instead of imposition. It is different "I'm going to reward myself whenever I do blabla because that is the good part of myself (compared to the bad part)" than "I will celebrate with a candy whenever I do blabla because I am happy that I do blabla and I need strength to keep my commitment to keep doing it". Do you see those positions as different?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/03/20 11:10 PM
1

You just need to make shirking work, and getting away with it, harder and less pleasant than the actual work. I'm trying to say that is like trying to hold water in your hands. It's not like it will never work, but just to try to control harder is like putting corks in a bottle that is leaking through lots of places. The mere fact that something has inadvertent effects doesn't make it bad. Everything has inadvertent effects because of the Butterfly Effect. I agree!!!!!! But if instead of fightin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/03/20 12:12 PM
1

Good point
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/20 10:46 PM
1

if by "need" you mean "something that you need to be happy." Yes "free action" you mean "intentional action, as opposed to an inadvertent action. Yes That is a perfectly sensible definition of authenticity. Thank you!!! Focusing on the other person and ignoring your own vulnerabilities and needs, as the man, sounds like the opposite of your version of authenticity. They are not opposite. The main issue of being authentic is the why you do it. If you listen to the woman because you are interested…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/20 10:46 PM
1

Those women can get therapy and get better men. Women (or men) do not need slaves to have intimacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/20 10:17 PM
1

Yes!!! I meant harmful action. Let's put the example of children and homework, so it gets better understood. If you focus on rewards on teaching, then the children will focus on doing good in the test instead of on learning. This is a consecquence of Goodhart's Law (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law), and it is very known for the case of standarized tests. It is a crucial part of what makes many children dislike school too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/20 10:06 PM
2

What if told I you that my brother was kidnapped, raped, and murdered? You went through a lot. I'm sorry that you didn't find any empathy at all back then when you needed it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 11:34 PM
1

That is a completely fine definition, but it is not what I mean when I say authentic. It is not that I disagree that diversity is at odds with authenticity, which is what I believe that you believe I believe. It is that authenticity means something larger than diversity or autonomy to me (or the capability to be different and take different decissions than others). So what I mean when I say authentic? What definition I'm using? First of all, I would say indeed authenticity is one of my greatest …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 10:33 PM
1

I did not mean violence in that way. Say someone who is addicted to gambling. They may put their families wealth and children's money for college into the gambling. That is.... violence in a certain sense, but in a very different meaning that the style of violence of someone killing or physically hurting someone. I think that would be an excelent example of what I'm trying to convey.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 10:11 PM
1

I think the best I can do is taking a few specific examples of nonphysical addiction, which will help me talk about what is the issue with addictions, and thus rewards. So, in addiction to videogames, the main issue is their need for self-realization, and also play. So you are channeling the need for self-realization into there. That is the reward. The reward is towards a behaviour. And because of this, if the person engages in that behaviour it will become disconnected from its other needs. It …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 12:10 PM
1

I don't believe my answer quite gets it to my problem with punishment-and-reward. I will sleep it through, and will try to be more precise on what I0m saying. The other two answers, yes, that is what I mean. When I say the Ego is illusory, I mean that the separation between what of your feelings are valida dn which aren't are illusiory. And on the other hand, realizing that you have a need and having the capability of fulfilling it are two very different things.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 03:02 AM
1

Solution is simple. Forget about the "punishment" part and just focus on the "reward" part. Its what casinos and free to play games do. No one fears slot machines or farmville, lots of people have ethical objections to them. But that isn't exactly the same as fear. Tricky. I remember an anecdote. One of the people of the psychologycal theory I follow had a son. She told him, when he was playing freesbee "You are a wonderful thrower of freesbee!!!" because he was throwing it far away. Then he thr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 02:37 AM
1

Temporally speaking, firstly I had to stop lostening to what people said about me (I had instances of people telling me that I should kill myself and mean it, mind you), it was after that that people started telling me I was more confident. Then again, indeed you need to receive empathy to not loose your mind, I'm not denying that. the way others think of us matches up with how we want to be seen Yes, you need empathy and feel comprehended, sounds reasonable to me. In particular, we all tend to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 02:17 AM
1

pavlovian conditioning Conditioning through prizes and punishment is roughly the opposite of what I'm saying. The problem is not that you cannot condition someone to do something out of obedience, fear or the desire for a reward. It is that mostly you can only convince someone to be violent through this means. Rewards and punishments disconects us from life. So if your objective is, for some reason, to create a lot of violence and pain in the world, say to create terrorists, pavlovian conditioni…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 01:03 AM
1

Do you try to reconcile all the various parts of yourself by crafting a narrative or philosophy where they are all congruent Yes, this. It is what it is called "integration". You cannot craft a narrative/philosophy from a rational perspective alone, you need to integrate feelings and it is an transformative experience, mostly. Usually you canot do that alone, empathy from others help a lot (for example). The single most effective tactic in order to do that is to listen nonjudgmentally each of th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 07:03 PM
2

It is illegal, it is called "quid pro quo".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 12:07 PM
1

Yes... well, everything we do fulfills a need. Say obedience: maybe it is making sure he doesn't get hurt by someone who may cause them pain. Or maybe he wants meaning and obedience is the way to get that meaning (like, religion, for example). And about drugging because you hate yourself, as someone who went through an addiction I know the feeling. But that is the issue: to become yourself you need to accept yourself. If you are struggling inside you'll have parts of you fighting each other. May…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 11:09 AM
1

True to that, yes yes. You need to start to stop judging yourself. That guy had an incredibly toxic mindset and was earnest in that mindset. Those thoughts about his feelings being inherently harmful to the women are wrong. But again, he needs to validate his pain. He doesn't. He thinks his pain is a form of entitlement and whatnot. Never judge your feelings is, like, being yourself 101.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 11:03 AM
5

Always the same.... true advices without an ounce of empathy. No conscience of "maybe you are insecure because you are surrounded by people who tell you that sexual attraction is oppressive and men need to apologize for existing". Feminism might be perfect but you aren't, worm. Get over yourself. Hahahh
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 01:17 AM
2

You need to be more in contact with your feelings. Not because it is a more "feminist" thing to you, but because you will have no fucking idea of what you want unless you make contact with you. Personally, now that I'm more myself, people describe me as more confident. I think I give less a fuck of what people think of me. What forgetaboutthelonely says is quite similar to my experience too. the "myself" of the past was like a large essay with several [redacted] or blacked out bits. because i be…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 01:13 AM
1

It's not about being yourself: it is about becoming yourself. Say, if you are constantly obeying duties and mandates and have no idea of what do you want, you aren't being yourself, not really.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/02/20 01:10 AM
4

CS earns a lot of money and men are pressured to earn a lot of money. Back then when it was low-earning it was majority female.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/20 12:42 PM
5

Second-wave feminism was gender essentialist, and thus, they brought political lesbianism, they believed men to be biologically evil, etc. Third-wave is the one of the gender spectrum and transgenderism and thus, it muddled the waters more in misandry
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/20 11:34 AM
3

I was pointing to the fact that feminists have no problem in using hyperagency against men, despite that being against leftist ideology.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/20 12:57 PM
9

2nd wavers were the Mckinnon and Dworkin likes, kind of difficult to not consider some of them misandric.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/20 02:25 AM
7

it isn’t quite the same because your statement about black people assumes that the locus of control is out of the hands of the black people. “Men need to learn...” as in it is men who need to do something about it Aaaaaallmost self-aware wolves
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/20 02:15 AM
2

Fair enough. Yes, they should stand by the abused guy instead of dedicating space to the abuser, they are harming the guy right now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/02/20 07:18 PM
2

I don't respond for other users. I'm quite interested in being against capitalism and consider that sometimes feminism is an ally to male issues, and sometimes it goes against male issues. I consider this sub has the potential to be a sub for advocacy of male issues when the limits set by feminism/menslib movement are not enough to encompass all the changes needed, but it is true that reactionary cultural politics might be tempting to many.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/02/20 05:35 PM
1

Intended outcome is a distorted way of saying. Someone who chooses to kill themselves in order to make someone else suffer is obviously suffering themselves. The good thing is that heinous action is punishable by death (?).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/20 07:01 PM
1

I won't beat up a dead body, she has ceased to exist. It's only natural, people who abuse are on extreme pain themselves and it is very frequent for people who kill their partners to also kill themselves. The important is to take care of the boyfriend who will probaly be more in shambles now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/20 04:47 PM
2

This was a very funny comment XD
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/02/20 05:12 PM
3

Equality amongst humans.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/02/20 05:11 PM
1

You might be interested in my theory of KCMP, where I propose an intermediate state between hunter-gatherers and civilization and explain how it relates to patriarchy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/02/20 06:43 PM
3

I think the problem comes from believing that sexual harassment comes from sexualizing women. I don't agree with that, sexual harassment implies an imposition of the sexualization over them, implies a lack of consent. And the imposition doesn't come from sexuality, but from shame. And while shame might as well be "biological", I'm quite happy saying that shame comes from society and that we can raise men who are ashamed to be alive, and that by raising them we can also avoid sexual harassment (b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/02/20 06:40 PM
0

Things are not in or out of proportion. We do not have God to be an universal ruler. You need stopping to judge the fact that certain things cause you pain, and start naming them. If you start searching for peoole to blame and start to harm the people guilty of your pain out of self-righteous anger, they will always consider that your anger is out of proportion, no matter your grievances. People always consider that their own anger is just and that the anger of others is injust, there is nothing…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/20 01:06 PM
15

Black people also commit more crimes. It is just different the way to address the problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/20 07:01 PM
22

But this was so explicit. Like, he explicitely said "men of color" and people listen to that and said "that is racist".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/20 06:09 PM
2

Yeahh, thank you for the observation :). I don't think she had any awareness her behaviour had on my well-being. On the other hand, I don't believe I was able to express my needs and clearly express that I was getting hurt when she did that. It seems that I keep being a people pleaser XD. Thanks :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 07:30 PM
7

She was badmouthing not only her ex dates but also her ex girl friends. She doesn't have any friends by now, I was her last. She's probably badmouthing me. She was by my side when I was extremely depressed and was one of my most important supports back then. I do regret a lot having exploded and saying something that I knew it would be extremely hurtful. It's just that if I had noticed throughout december that the relationship was getting toxic, I would have protected myself instead of reacting …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 05:55 PM
3

No, I'm just extremely sensitive to shame and can react quite violently when I feel shame and guilt. So I become more misogynistic if I hang too much around menslib subreddit that if I hang around in an openly misogynistic subreddit such as, I don't know, purplepilldebate. As my own set of values, I try to follow the ones of Nonviolent Communication, which try to stem judgements that come from guilt, shame and anger, and focus more on feelings and needs, specially love and freedom.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 02:59 PM
16

Just wanted to rant: I had been friends with a woman for 3 years. She had been extremely supportive many times during the years. However, she also gave anti-male rants despite saying that I was ok because I wasn't hegemonic (which made me feel like I was her black friend). She also hated weakness, this is related to the fact that she hated weakness of herself and tried to appear tough on her own. Sadly, I wasn't aware of any of this, and throughout december I was getting extremely angry at her w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 02:20 PM
3

It is not an intelectual website. It is short snippets with rants full of anger. I repeat, it has only 5k subscribers. I don't recommend you to read too much in that sub. Just be glad that it is small. Pinkpillfeminism, which is a mix between radical feminism and female incels has 10k users, truefemcels -where female incels are- is 20k people, and femaledatingstrategy -which tries to immitate more redpillers- has 50k users, and gendercritical where radical feminists (terfs) are is 54k large. Tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 12:21 PM
3

Those women believe that they are more beautiful, more intelligent, more moral, more empathetic, more mature, etc, than men. Don't pay attention, I do believe it is just about hate. The good thing is that there are just 5k subscribers in that sub (to compare, redpillers had more than 100k) Femaledatingstrategy is more interesting to me: they seem to genuinly be trying to enforce boundaries and not be in relationships that harm them, but they seem to distrust men so much that I don't believe they…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 10:53 AM
1

I see, yes, yes. I remember he did a great analysis in his youth about the dismembering of the patriarchal family because of capitalism. He talked about how young men went to wage labour to be independent from their fathers in "Condition of Farm Labour in Eastern Germany". Thank you for your work!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 10:47 AM
5

Thefairersex is about how women are better than men, similar to pinkpillfeminism. It is also related to femaledatingstrategy, where they recommend each other methods to find the 1% of the men that they do not hate. We are talking of the level of hatred of the pinpointed thread right now: Only when manhood is dead - and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it - only then will we know what it is to be free
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/20 11:52 PM
2

Max Weber was dead by 1947. That phrase confuses me. I didn't know Weber talked about patriarchy. He did talked about "traditional authority" (near his death by 1922), and I do believe he considered that authority to be patriarchal. Weber took that ideas about traditional authority from Tönnies (1887, Community and Society, recommended book). Family and society aren't that separate, and many people (for example, Confucius) considered the king/emperor authority to be an extension to the father au…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/20 10:41 PM
3

I see. I mean, the term "patriarchy" surely was explored as "social patriarchy" since that moment. But only the word. The concept of male dominance over women was routinely used before. And it already was intertwined with familial patriarchy. So, in my understanding, cutting the process since the 70s is too late to construct a genealogy of the idea and theory of patriarchy. Although I love your work, I do recommend you to construct a longer genealogy. Not doing that, you make it appear as if the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/20 04:39 PM
3

I liked your analysis a lot. However, can I ask you to include in your analysis the work of people such as Engels "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" and works of XIX century early feminists who already believed in male dominance over women? I'm mostly interested in knowing the evolution of the thought before the 40s (and mainly before the IWW and 20s, time of the first sexual revolution). I'm interested in their arguments and the tie to the roman and biblical reasonings a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/20 04:17 PM
1

Yes, I was really understanding that from what you said. But I'm also in favour of taking us a break. If that is genuinly not what you believe then I seem to not be understanding anything that you said. Let's later talk about this on pms, because it seems there is still lots to unpack here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 09:26 PM
1

Ok, pay attention to what I'm going to tell you because we have so many open threads that I feel like when I talk about some one I have to jump over to another. We were talking about wage gap. Until now, it seemed that we agreed that it was a consecquence of the difference between married men working more outside of the house and the married women working more inside the house. You say that a big portion of that is because of personal decissions, fine, I give you that. Now you say that men earn …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 07:23 PM
0

Citation needed? http://www.attorneys.com/divorce/how-is-alimony-calculated So this graph claims to show that there are more high-earning men than women. So what is your conclusion here, as it relates to Nobels? May you remind me why do you want so much for rich people to not be taxed?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 06:27 PM
1

Alimony is a very small percentage of the difference (around a third). And frankly, this is the reason of the disparity: https://infogram.com/Number-of-taxpayers-by-gender-and-income-bracket
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 05:31 PM
1

Those who get Nobels are at the extreme end of the bell curve distribution, so even if there is a 99% overlap between the normal distributions for intelligence for male and female sexes, the tails are going to be something like 80/20, which is what we are seeing now. Do you have a mathematical demonstration? Science is done through experiments: you are just assuminh a reason without taking account the much more reasonable explanations. Like the fact that most nobels were sent to people at times …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 05:25 PM
1

While single women have an equal income to single men, divorced women have a smaller income to men. Much smaller, the programs geared towards women are few at a macro level.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 05:21 PM
1

I think that is the major story, that women are poorer than men and thus receive more benefits, we were talking about the wage gap all along. There is another important reason I didn't consider: women retire earlier and live longer. I think that if you take into account those two things, the disparity basically goes away. Do you have any study that quantifies the different components in the tax transfer?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 11:57 PM
1

Are you going to ignore the age of the nobels? I know about physics because I'm a physicist. One of the people I want eventually to win a Nobel is Helen Quinn, not because she is a woman, because I really love the theory of axions, and I believe it is one of the most beautiful theories of fundamental physics. She is like 80 and won't receive a Nobel in less than 10 years, because exploring axions is costly and time consuming. At the time that she studied physics, only like 3% of physicists were …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 11:54 PM
1

It is funded by men because women are poorer. It is part of the same story: men and women marry. They divorce, women end up poor, men end up rich, and men pay women welfare benefits through taxes. Or they have children while being unmarried, the man disappears, the woman ends up poorer trying to sustain a family, the man ends up less poor than his ex girlfriend, and so the man pay taxes because he is less poor.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 11:41 PM
2

Interesting point, yes. I think you may be interested to contact an amab enby that I know.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 11:38 PM
1

A TERF is literally a transphobic feminist, that's the definition. Being transphobic was the default in feminist history, which is precisely the reason many 3rd wave feminists consider terfs to be old-fashioned 2nd-wave feminists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 04:33 PM
3

The womanosphere would be...? I think it would be Networked Feminism, more or less. I agree that MRAs are not the same as redpillers and incels. Despite that, it is true that from an historical perspective, manosphere was a name the system of blogs about the issues of men gave themselves. It is also true that redpill philosophy was, from a historical perspective, a consecquence of the conversations between Pickup Artists and Men's Rights activists in the context of the early internet of the blog…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 04:31 PM
1

Again, so interests (then again, on average).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 04:21 PM
2

The gap in nobels is transparently a consequence that 50 years ago, 99.99% of people in stem were men, while now it is more like 70%
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 04:20 PM
3

I personally believe that men and women do not have so different capacities, but they do personal interests. I don't agree that saying that men have less interpersonal skills is PC: feminists would say that this is because of how they are raised.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 09:15 AM
1

needs to be penalized for with taxes who said about taxes?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 09:12 AM
1

I find it rare for this maliciousness to be put forward this way, you would expect a whistleblower if there was a conspiracy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 09:11 AM
2

It's not my fault they decided to equate power and privilege with money. I said recognition, not power and privilege, that is another thing. And I agree, the idea that "if you earn more your work is worth more" is a cultural myth that has absolutely nothing to do with gender. But, as I said, the core issue is still the problem of finantial autonomy from their partners. Because of that, the earnings gap is still a problem. Now..... what's the solution that is a whole other problem. And whether or…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/20 12:09 AM
2

Yeahh. Look, you need to listen to the needs behind the words. Let me show you: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/bhitsi/how_would_you_explain_the_gender_pay_gap/ "One major factor is that women's work is considered less valuable than men's work. Yes in the same jobs, the wage gap all but disappears, but it's no coincidence that jobs associated with female workers are more poorly compensated and less prestigious." There you have the need to be recognized as worthy as a human. https:…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 10:26 PM
2

Yes, I agree with that. What I insist is that the core of the plead is about autonomy. That is because that is the function of money: grant freedom and autonomy. It is that together with the myth that people receive as much money as they are worth, and thus, people who are payed less are worth less. So the plead for having a higher wage is also a plead for being recognized as valuable. But that's tricky because the idea that people earn what they deserve as people -and thus, being poor is humili…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 09:14 PM
2

Yes, yes, I agree with that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 09:02 PM
1

I don't know, the stories surely seem extremely weak, I just find hard to believe that four people told similar things and they had absolutely nothing to do with reality. On the other hand, I was not there, at some point it is a he-said-she-said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 07:41 PM
1

No, I'm saying that they are factually equally demanded, not that they SHOULD be. The reason for the difference between wages in men and women is, again because of the difference between part-time vs full time jobs and it is not a consecquence of analytical skills being valued more at the market than interpersonal ones.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 07:24 PM
1

I'm in favour of due process!! That has absolutely no relationship about whether the guy assaulted or not the girl. I said that I believe that the guy did indeed rape her and that the girl was not falsely accused. I did not say that the girl presented enough evidence to accuse the guy without reasonable doubt. But it's not like you thought about reasonable doubt when you accused her of lying (?).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 05:58 PM
1

I said that studies show that "people jobs" are not less demanded than "things jobs". It is only true that low-skill jobs are indeed less demanded than high-skill jobs.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 05:54 PM
0

She didn't even see that encounter as an assault until her woke friend talked her into it! That is extremely frequent. Which is the reason why the guy probably didn't realize he was assaulting her either.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 09:50 AM
1

You believe Ford wasn't telling the truth either? I mean, at some point it is the subjective bias of he said-she said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 09:48 AM
1

They arr not, read this "T A S K S A N D S K I L L S IN E U R O P E A N L A B O U R M A R K E T S"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 09:46 AM
0

He had texts to proove that she continued to like him, maybe? Did they talk about the encounter? Look, I generally do not trust men when like 5 different women have a similar story of being sexually abused by the same guy. It is possible that one women lied, not everyone of those. Now, that doesn't mean that he was a bad guy, evidently, many women fancied him, and this girl forgave him after the encounter and he was so great that he decided to let go of the situation at first. On the other hand …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 10:41 PM
7

Yes, what causes me extreme pain about this narrative about "friendzoning" is two-fold: on one hand, it takes "sex" as being some kind of evil manipulative thing on itself, and on the other hand, it dismisses the caring and loveful feelings of the guy. Now, in a sense, guys that complain about being friendzoning are kind of manipulating, but of course, this is a consecquence of not being able to express in a healthy way their feelings. And this narrative -which is extremely judgemental- kind of …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 08:12 PM
1

Well, there is no exact reason why things would be payed more than peoples issues (in fact, it is not, interpersonal nonroutine cognitive tasks are as highly payed as analytical nonroutine cognitive tasks). work-life balance trade-off Yes, this is what I meant: married husbands work more outside home, while married women work more in their lives, cooking, raising their children, etc. Now, I'm not saying that this is not willful, that is another whole discussion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 03:26 PM
1

I kind of extremely doubt it was a "false" rape accusation. Like... not every rape accusation is false, you know? And the girl did express that she was indeed assaulted in the interview that you sent me. She just says that the harassment she got by the media was even worse than the rape that happened. It does not mean that making the guy's life hell was the best outcome, but I don't feel meaningful to deny what happened.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 03:23 PM
1

I read the article. That Sulkowicz sounds very nice. :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 12:27 PM
2

Yeah, I frankly agree. The statistical illiteracy is huge.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 12:17 PM
0

I got convinced that the pay gap is inextricable from the fact that married men, on average, work more outside and married women more at home. https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 12:15 PM
2

You can expect as much as you want. What I'm saying is that obviously these men didn't have the emotional resources to deal with sexually frustration without harassing women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 10:58 PM
2

Ohh, I see. My thesis still applies. It is not sexuality but desperation what drives men to act in those ways.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 07:28 PM
9

It is not male libido. This is a crucial idea I take as an objective to dismantle. While I can relate to that situation, I have at least always known that certain kinds of behavior are not acceptable, no matter how horny you are. It is not about rationally being against. It is about having the emotional resources to navigate pain, in this case, the pain of sexual frustration. One of the most important resources is unconditional acceptance of feelings, which gets blocked by shame (which is the re…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 05:13 PM
1

Ohh, great then!!! I'm not sure what else could be done. Maybe enforcing part time and full time workers to have the same hourly wage would be a good idea. I do not sincerely know enough to understand what more can be done.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/01/20 08:33 PM
1

the woman has to option to choose to live a comfortable, subsidized life in exchange for losing future earning potential It is not a subsidized life, she still works in "unpaied labour". It is just a division of labour. I'm not sure the system is sustainable, the arrangements between women and men are not longer fulfilling the needs of anyone, and marriage rates are collapsing. But I don't know, maybe that is for the better. Men do not seem to like the arrangement of being providers either, if y…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/01/20 03:07 PM
19

I'm not a fan of cancel culture, but I'm sincerely angry that people called for the cancelation of Johnny Depp because he was a victim of domestic abuse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/01/20 04:12 AM
1

However, a women deciding to leave a marriage is made no more vulnerable than a man deciding to leave a marriage. In-fact men are definitely made more vulnerable insomuch as men generally do not get alimony and women generally do. That is not how it goes. It goes like this: women who earn as much as men marry. Women start to stay more at home and men start to stay more at work. Men start to earn more and women start to earn less. But this makes sense because they are together. Once they get sepa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/01/20 04:10 AM
1

Yes, less. But quite a lot. Because wanting to be with someone who wants "a lot of money" seems extremely shallow to me, and because I don't think people in my surroundings think like that. I certainly wouldn't date someone who wanted to marry someone who earned "lots of money".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/01/20 04:05 AM
1

I wasn't surprised about women caring about men havung a steady income or earning as much as them, but I did was about "earninh lots of money", too many men care about that in women too. I'll say that you were right, I was quite surprised by it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 06:31 PM
3

Sure, but it is a decission that makes them vulnerable. And some things (I put as examples payed maternal and paternal leave) would help into creating relationships where both are as free as possible. This idea of "well, marrying implies subordination, so I won't marry" is basically what japanese women are doing. I'm just saying that if there are tools to use to avoid that, it is better.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 06:27 PM
3

I agree, which is the reason why I say it is not about being or not payed. It is about the finantial autonomy. Women started to work in the 60s and 70s and 80s not because working is fun, but because earning money let them divorce men in case they didn't like the marriage. Women care much much more about finantial autonomy than about all this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 02:54 PM
1

But a consecquence of that is almost all workplace fatalities being men. Do we really want that system?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 02:51 PM
2

Sure!! Show me!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 02:50 PM
1

Allowance is much smaller than the difference between wages of the man and woman; child support is for the child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 02:50 PM
1

Forcing people to listen is always aggressive. Opening up is not. Just that because there are few people open to receive what men have to say, this is quite a problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 02:49 PM
2

Ultimately, this means men have to be willing to stay single (possibly forever) if they can't find an egalitarian partner. Yes, like, having boundaries. That is not bad. Men have a harder time doing it because of the lack of male friendships. On the negative side, I'm reminded of studies from dating sites that show that most women find the majority of men 'below average'. This is not how I think. Firstly, women sexuality is mostly reactive, more than spontaneous, so tinder statistics are a littl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 01:15 PM
1

Yes, I read it. Thanks Penguin!!! You can see here how the difference between payed and unpayed labour is the direct cause of the earnings gap. Which contribute to my thesis that the issue there is the finantial autonomy of the women in case of divorce. https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041 In any case, dismantling our role as breadwinners would let us more time with children and also less workp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 01:09 PM
3

Maybe you are right, I hope we, as men, can start saying no to arrengements that aren't good for us.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 11:48 PM
1

The breadwinner does not the 100% of the payed labour. Pulling numbers out of my memory it was something like: Men 43 hours of payed labour; 4 hours of unpayed labour. Women: 37 hours of payed labour; 10 hours of unpayed labour. That small difference on payed labour is important, because companies pay much much bigger hourly wages if it is a 43 hour-week than if it is a 37 hour-week. The consecquence was somethinh akin the man earning like double of the woman. Again, it is more of a matter of th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 11:47 PM
2

They refuse to date someone who earns less, not the same. But not exactly, I believe many women would be ok for a man who earns and works less if they take care of children and chores. Anyway, the roles are indeed changing. But sure, I completely agree that with women despising weak men who depend on women they end up being vulnerable to men on whom they depend on.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 10:36 PM
10

I don't care so much as whether it would be taken seriously. I care about two things: men receiving empathy and emotional support from male friends and giving it to them, and men stop being pressured to be pillars of strength for women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 10:03 PM
4

The alternative is obvious: equal separation of unpaid chores and paid work. It is a cultural change, but politics such as paied maternal and paternal leave would help. This would also help men connect with their children more, which the lack of paternal leave makes it more difficult. And surely it is not technically an unpaied labour, but the autonomy is, I would say, even more important than whether their labour is paid or not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 10:00 PM
1

Not sure why a feminist would ignore this part, all money spent by a stay at home mom was earned by her working partner. The labour is not unpaid it's just not directly paid. The fact that it is unpaid makes them extremelly vulnerable in a finantial sense in a case of divorce: men advance in their career more because their longer hours (companies prefer longer hours than shorter hours, and pay much more per hour to men, who work longer than to women). The vulnerability in case of divorce, which …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 09:33 PM
2

Originally it was done with thar term (toxic) and it was compared with a "deep masculinity". Men's mythopoietic Movement. And I agree that women do pay a huge play on it, specially on dating. The issue is, I agree with women in that male violence and male suppression of feelings are related. But it would be nice for them to take responsability when they encourage those behaviours.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 09:30 PM
17

The key facet of toxic masculinity is that men 'cant express themselves' due to societal pressures and gender roles...well hang on, wouldn't that be a form of ingrained emotional labor? And emotional labor with a gender specific manifestation that uniquely affects men? If the feminist theory of toxic masculinity is correct, than men face a unique and particular form of emotional labor. But are feminists saying we should be compensated for it? I specially agree with this. I have seen male friends…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 09:27 PM
1

I'm 28. You're literally stating that if a woman chooses to marry someone who earns more than her Nono, when she marries someone who earns the same and has children, she stays more at home and her husband goes more to work and as a consecquence, she earns less than her husband. Even, married men work longer hours than unmarried men. Uh, yeah. Do you honestly fucking think that some people deserve more rights than others? What kind of crypto-fascist bullshit is that? I have frankly not found anyo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 11:18 AM
8

A married couple need more homeownership and stability because of children.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/20 10:16 PM
0

I'm a man, by the way. The pay gap only ocur between married women and married men, with single women and single men earning exactly the same. That's why thr issue about nuclear families is important. So, just to understand, I want to understand you. Are you against married people having extra rights, such as maternal and paternal leave, and having rights to take their day off when their children are sick and other similarities? Do you think people do not take enough responsability for the conse…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/20 05:12 PM
-1

I did nor say ANY of that. OF COURSE pay gap cannot be solved at the level of business: it is a cultural change. And where's the proof of the fact that women do more around the house, apart from an outdated gendered stereotype? I have seen the studies. Look, if you add the hours worked inside and outside the home it is almost the same (like men work like 3 hours more outside and women work like 3 hours more inside). You are forgetting children, which take a lot of time. Mowing and changing the o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/20 12:39 PM
-1

The pay gap is important for women because of FREEDOM in case of a divorce. The issue here is that women who are married have an income that is around half of their husbands. So they are slaved to their husbands, because in case of a divorce they would loose a huge portion of their income. This has been said explicitely since Simone de Beauvoir. The pay gap is a direct consecquence of women working more at home in unpaid labour and less outside at paid labour. Pay gap will be solved when women a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/20 03:17 AM
0

It is not at all a zero-sum game. You say that about pay because you are waaaaaaay off on why the pay gap is important to women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/20 01:20 AM
3

I just don't believe that dismantling some of the roles (the ones who harm women) is possible without also sismantling the roles that benefit women. Because it is a system, a structure, like a house of cards. i do not deny that they intend to dismantle only some of the roles, I don't believe they can be able to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/01/20 06:23 PM
4

Thank you!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/01/20 10:15 AM
-2

That would imply the analogy was truthful, which is not the case. It is not an analogy, it is the same concept. Sounds like another way of framing a shift from traditional survival-oriented to modern self-expression-oriented societies, on the level of values to me. No, it is not. But it will take a while to talk about it, so let's leave it for another day.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/01/20 03:11 AM
0

This argument just does not compute: feminists did not use the term "patriarchy" to describe ancient Roman society. "Patriarchy" was a name used from the greeks to the 20th century in a continuous way. without prosperity and justice, what you called "capitalist values", there is no protective shell of modern civilization from within which you can ponder these warm, noble thoughts about equality and love. It's not what I said. I said I was against justice and equality and in favour of prosperity …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 11:51 PM
2

Ohh, I did!! I'll talk to you in PMs
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 10:39 PM
2

I believe that feminism is not a bait-and-switch. It is a framework to advance women rights through destroying gender roles. Now, destroying gender roles does help men, of course it does. It is not possible to dismantle the gender roles of women without dismantling simultaneously the gender roles of men. Feminism did not invent the word patriarchy, by the way, it was invented by the romans, who bargued how it was good that women were subordinated to the Pater Familias, where familia meant slaves…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 10:15 PM
1

But I'm against the view of power being the sole explanation of (societal/structural) suffering. If it is a religion, I'm not orthodox XD. The issue is that I believe that the point where the tunnel vision needs to be broken is that one: the one understanding structural suffering only through the lense of oppression.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 12:23 PM
2

What would it mean to "excuse them"? I'm quite tired of everyone, including them, to cut their empathy as soon as they get scared. And start blaming others. What I'm supposed to do? I can't take responsability for their actions. Just today I was talking to a feminist, I talked for a few hours, she was a core extremely orthodox one. I wasn't able for her to see male pain beyond oppression.... at least I was able to get her to understand at an intelectual level that there might maybe exist societa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 01:45 AM
2

I see it in everyone I know, what can I say. But it is quite terrible and I'm really tired of that happening over and over.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 01:39 AM
2

Yes, I know it is painful for people's fear to block their empathy. Sadly, that is quite common in the human condition.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/20 12:15 AM
2

I'm just saying that having a sign of an ideology that is very explicitely antifeminist inside a woman's march is an extremely bad idea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/20 10:27 PM
1

Because MRAs is wiiiidely considered to be misogynistic among feminists, so they would get in the defensive by seing the sign.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/20 10:19 PM
3

XD too bad. It was probably a bad idea to go to a women's rights march with a MRA sign though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/20 09:20 PM
2

Yes!!! I copy-pasted from that thread!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/20 09:14 PM
5

Yeah, it helps getting beyond this state of mind that it seems many women had at the march: "i dont give a fuck, i hit him if i want to" "men who complain about domestic violence are pussies" "if a woman gets physical with her man, he probably deserved it." We are really far behind :S
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/20 08:50 PM
2

Thank you :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/20 07:46 PM
2

Thank you!!! believe all women doesn't mean to believe them like in a judiciary sense. But like, to listen to them, not to dismiss them out of hand. I agree with you. I agree with the concepts, disagree with the tone. Sometimes I joke that wr should call Male Privilege, "benevolent sexism against men". I believe that 99.9% of women have suffer at the very least street harassment. This might sound trivial to do, but creates a lot of psychological damage to women, because it starts when they are 1…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/20 11:29 PM
5

I think they are quite different things. These are about shaming men and I consider them nonstarters: Fragile male ego Fragile masculinity Killallmen Male tears Menaretrash Rapist in the waiting Schröedinger Rapist Yesallmen These are related to real issues that can be distorted and can be reframed into more positive ways. I dislike them because they usually assume an aggressive intention on the part of men. Male entitlement Male gaze Male privilege Mansplaining Manterrupting Patriarchy Rape Cul…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/20 11:06 PM
3

I quite agree with the description. My country is between 0 and 2. 2 is the most woke in male issues people in my country get. Which is quite horrible, frankly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/20 10:58 PM
1

Only on big companies. You can't have quotas when there are 5 people working on the company. Besides, men and women usually have extremely different jobs. Again, it would imply a quota for garbage recolectors or it wouldn't work.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/01/20 02:18 PM
1

They will do so without pushiness. Like someone who offers a gift to someone that can take it or reject it. At first, women will be scared. Because something that is offered as a gift might well not be if the women are accostumed for rejections to be taken with violence. But eventually they will learn that all is safe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/01/20 07:03 PM
3

As many other people said, I want less male characters that are imbeciles. And also less male characters that are the superheroes that sacrifice over everyone else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/01/20 11:38 AM
2

Women want to be treated as if they were human.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/01/20 09:32 AM
2

Yess!! Exactly. Roughly speaking, shame is a terrible anger directed inwards. This destroys the capacity for empathy. On the other hand, shame destroys the capacity of expressing feelings and needs in a honest manner (in this case, sexual feelings and needs for intimacy). Instead, the feelings are expressed through manipulation and other controlling behaviours. The reason for that is that shame is a lack of self-love, and someone who cannot love themselves, cannot love others. Shame is the sourc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 06:56 PM
2

No, it isn't. It is the fact that because men are full of sexual shame, they express their sexuality in that way. The cause and solution are exactly the opposite that you believe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 04:15 PM
2

No, it is not. What causes great pain is the belief that male sexuality is what causes men and women pain. This creates shame, and shame is what creates the pain.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 02:54 PM
2

Yes, yes, women-who-have-sex-are-sluts-men-who-have-sex-are-studs, I agree. >compliments based on looks or charm are passé Women are desperate to be considered as subjects. Any compliment referring to what that woman DOES will be received positively. All that I have talked to women, my conclusion is that women are hypersensitive to boundaries and being regarded as subjects who DO.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 12:30 PM
3

No, it is not. The reason is this: what makes sexual harassment painful is the realization by the woman that many men would do it even knowing that it causes them pain. It is pushiness, not sexuality, what causes them pain. Since they are being harassed since they are 12 years old, they do get to know that many men are dismissive of consent and sexual boundaries in general, and get defensive. It is just that usually people are less pushy with playing chess than with sexuality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 10:47 AM
1

They want quotas IN POLITICS. That is easily achievable. You cannot have quotas at every work.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 09:48 PM
2

Not exactly. Usually they see them as morally perfect, but frail and weak. They see them as the epitome of love and empathy but needed to be protected and carefully have their freedom to be taken away so they are protected from the awful world outside. They get to be paternally guided since they are too inocent for their own good, those are not orders: they are just advices from a wiser and older man who knows better what is good for her. That is the traditionally position: and it merges benevol…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 08:00 PM
3

Men who see women as goddesses and demons both don't see them as humans. Ergo, a man who sees a woman as a goddess can easily start seing her as a demon.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 07:14 PM
2

It's just that shaming is a terrible way to create empathy. I'm not saying anything groundbreaking, this is known for a long time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 06:16 PM
2

Yeah, punishment is an absurd social reality that hinders empathy and creates more pain in the world. Why does it hinder empathy? Because it creates mentalities like the OP's.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 05:01 PM
2

> don't do things that are not accepted, but always wonder why Intimacy. Intimacy acts change from culture to cuiltre. For example, hugs are way less intimate in my country than in the US. And thus, hugs are harassment in the US but are not in my country.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 04:18 PM
6

> Is The Prim Reaper underreacting, or is my strawwoman from the latter example overreacting? Neither. Each person suffers pain in different ways. To someone something might be hurtful that is not to another person. >You may say that everybody is different, but because it's hard to tell in advance how someone will react, we kind of need some standards of what is acceptable. Feelings are not acceptable or non-acceptable. > then people always assume bad intentions Intentions do not matter, consecq…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 04:17 PM
1

Also, childrearing is very time consuming. And cooking takes at the very least 1 hour per day if there are two meals. I mean, not if you always eat pizza.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:56 PM
1

You can't have a mandated quota in every job. That is absurd. I'll see it when they mandate a 50-50 quota for truck drivers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:53 PM
1

Until men have their lives valued and not disposable we are going to continue having wars.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 11:07 AM
3

The statistics show that benevolent sexism is highly correlated with the hostile one. And I'm greatly suspicious on how menslibbers act in real life.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 09:36 AM
12

The funny thing is that the men who do benevolebt sexism are also the ones who do the hostile sexism. So when women claim foul when men do not act in a sexist way towards them, they are actually harming themselves. I frankly believe that this is related to women expecting men to treat them as women treat other women. However, men treat men worse than women treat other women, so when men treat women as men, they are seen as hostile by women, but it is tuesday by men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 04:38 PM
1

I was talking the other day with an amab enby about how the issues of disposability are even worse amongst trans, and I agree.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 03:34 PM
4

Just wanted to tell you that I consider those reasonable comments.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 03:32 PM
6

Yeahh, I saw that post and told to myself OMG. This is what is wrong with menslib. I obviously have no problem with op being greysexual. But "Maybe my abnormal view of sexuality should be the normal view", like, really? Just to be clear, I believe the greysexual dude to act in a completely normal way "I'm not abnormal, you are.", but as always, the sub norms are enforced so it is clear that he is right and we are all abnormal except the select holy monks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 03:24 PM
4

Wage gap is a direct consecquence of men being more at work than women, because wage grows quadratically with time, not linearly. So this is a stupid idea. It is also a stupid idea for women: it would increase the wage gap.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/01/20 02:34 PM
2

I believe that pickmeishas are exactly the women that will try to hurt you if you don't give you enough attention. These are the girls that seem wonderful and out of nowhere they divorce you and take all your things as revenge. I would be scared.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/20 06:48 PM
1

Because of traditional gender roles that assume mothers to be better parents. The discrimination has went down over time, and it happens the most with older judges.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/12/19 12:14 PM
1

The case for what?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/12/19 11:53 PM
1

I would advice against using overall discrimination to take these sensitive issues. The answer is men, though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/12/19 07:52 PM
2

Sure!! Go for it!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/12/19 03:11 AM
2

He can return here if he doesn't like it, we'll take him with open arms.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 09:59 PM
2

XD. I don't disagree, but it might be the good place for him. If he doesn't like it, he can return. Let him experience in his own what's the problem of the sub.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 08:28 PM
1

I do agree with you, but you are frankly terrible at communication XD.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 06:24 PM
2

You need to understand intelectually first what feelings are. Feelings are, according to Damasio, the signals that your body send you to your brain. What are they for? To show us what we want. Feelings is a perception that implies intention. If you are disconnected from feelings, then you will not get what you want, basically because you don't know what you want. You may have some fuzzy idea of what you want, resting in what was left of your feelings, but you want be able to find that in detail.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 12:25 PM
1

Ahh, I see. I don't disagree with you. I do wish that male issues were more framed in how we wish society were instead in how we dislike how society is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 12:12 PM
3

a lot of casual conversation focuses on topics which I don't know much about and/or am bored by, so often I just don't have much to say No, see, the idea is to be confident in that you don't like that type of conversation and just don't search a girl there. Being connected with your feelings means to embrace what you like and what you don't like, instead of doing things because you are supposed to. While, of course, being autistic is a big part of it, shame is a crucial cause of disconnection fr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 12:10 PM
1

Sure!!! If you find this sub too misogynistic you might find Menslib subreddit more palatable. It is a pro-feminist men's issues subreddit. Although I disagree with some tenets, it does have a huge positive role in the discussion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/19 12:00 PM
4

It is hard to create a balance, isn't it? I also find quite a lot of misoginy around. Sadly, men's issues are still a big issue for me, and I'm not convinced of feminism framework to solve it. I'm sure you are well versed on male issues, and while patriarchy (toxic masculinity) is a big issue causing them, it is just not enough to explain or change it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/19 11:38 PM
7

Look, I lnow exactly what is the issue, because 0 girls flirted with me like a year ago, and like I have women flirtinh with me like twice a month (I mean, they are initiating, out of nowhere!!!!). Roughly speaking you need two things: (1) connection with feelings. That terpers call "game". So this is about responding fastly and acutely to what happens to you and the other person. The objective is to be connected within yourself and with the other. Mindfulness might help you. (2) self-love, whic…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/19 11:31 PM
1

Search it on the internet!! It is a real thing. I won't say which one I'll have communication with, but it is one of the tops.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/19 05:56 PM
2

Wish me luck. I'll send it on monday to an expert biosemiotician.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/19 12:36 PM
2

I was very busy. We are reading with my PhD advisor a few papers that will be important for my thesis. And also I have just finished a 150 page text that I believe will unify physics and social sciences and I will send it this monday to one of my professional idols. Also, christmas and that. I read the sub once in a while but I had no time answering posts and all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/12/19 11:57 PM
6

I like your perspective very much
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/12/19 02:50 PM
5

Look. You are wrong, you are extremely wrong. These guys behave like that because a simple thing: they have never received love, they believe they are not worthy of love and they had tried to destroy their feelings since noone will care about them anyway. This predatory and sexual behaviour you see is what is left when you tried to destroy all emotional connection needs that you have because you aren't going to get them anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/19 02:50 PM
2

Bingo!!!! These guys are not in touch with their feelings. They do not receive love or sexual attraction. Because they have resigned to noone caring about them they tried to exorcise their need for emotional connection. But sexuality still flows through.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/19 02:45 PM
1

I think you may think that I want for division of labour to go back. No, I'm not advocating returning to that. I'm just arguing that division of labour shouldn't be arranged through marriage.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/19 10:43 PM
1

Just to be clear, I am not an anarchoprimitivism. I do not support the return to a system that only suported 5 million humans in the planet.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/19 10:37 PM
1

What I have a hard time with is making sense of why you would argue against it. You are against arranged marriages, right? I mean, when I want men not to be forced into all issues like male workplace casualties that is all part of that system. The growth of both gay/lesbian and trans visibility also undermines the kcmp. To sustain it, you need to fight against that. It is what conservative christians, as well as conservative muslims are trying to do. They are against gay marriage because it unde…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/19 10:23 PM
1

Against. It is not like I'm arguing to going back to primitive communism, which is neither possible neither desirable. Anyway, Capitalism (and as I've learned a few weeks ago also Feudalism!!!) has been working against Kin Corporate MP for a long time, since it is like a "competitor system" in a way. My idea is to continue working against the KCMP (which is what conservatives mean when they say that "the left is against the family") while limiting the individualism and fragmentation that capital…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/19 06:27 PM
1

Yes. In chimpanzees, women and men do not specialize in different labours (division of labour is a technical term invented by Adam Smith, by the way, as he argued that it was the cause of capitalist success). In tribal human societies, men may specialize in hunting large animals, while women gathering plants. Sometimes only men fish, sometimes only women fish. Usually women cook (because it requires for them to stay at home with the toddlers). The separation is roughly that the men do actions th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/19 03:27 PM
1

There is no division of labour beyond gender division of labour, which does exist in early human societies and it is one of the main difference with other primates. Gender division of labour is much higher than childrearing. Usually men hunt large prays and women collect and hunt small preys. But the specifics of division varies quite a lot from cultures (but all have division of labour in some aspect). However, what is needed to create the Kin Corporate system you need some ammount of division …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/19 06:13 PM
1

In fact, she tried to push me against searching validation from her. She said things like "You don't need to explain to me your feelings". It was weird.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 11:08 AM
1

Yes, it's more complex than that. In my country, 5 years ago, the justifications for sexual abuse was rock high. The same of domestic violence, or so called "men who kill women out of love". But I don't believe that the cause for that is empathy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 04:19 PM
3

I won't defend her. I don't agree with her that is a problem of empathy. I think the problem is something else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 03:16 PM
3

The concept is that people are more sympathetic to men than to women in the specific case that men perpetrate violence against women, not always. The typical case would be Brock "he shouldn't have his life ruined for 15 minutes of raping a girl" Turner.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 01:19 PM
1

I recommend this text to learn more about the transition from patriarchal to modern marriage patterns. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1081602X.2013.871570
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 03:58 PM
1

I recommend this for learn more about the transition from patriarchal to modern marriage patterns: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1081602X.2013.871570
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 03:57 PM
1

I recommend this text to know more about the change from the patriarchal to the modern marriage patterns: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1081602X.2013.871570
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 03:56 PM
1

They are extremely empathetic between them, I've seen it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 03:55 PM
2

No, I meant.... I don't believe men are empathetic to one another even if they are exactly alike. I don't believe many men are able to give empathy to themselves, even.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 11:36 AM
1

If you tell someone "the best thing you can do is kill yourself", that is not exactly empathy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/19 09:37 AM
1

In fact, it is already being dismantled. While through the statist (technically called redistributionary) Mode of Production there is something akin the KCMP in coexistence. But the individualism capitalism requires goes straight against the family as a basic unit of the society. This is kind of the reason why feminism surged in capitalist countries (but the change was earlier, with the neolocality that was possible in the early XIX century when men -and women- started to work in factories inste…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 10:20 PM
2

It seems wild that women would show higher loyalty to their clan of origin than their own children, although I can at least see a difference between mothers and fathers in this regard. More or less. They have divided allegiances. Supposed that your brother and your husband starts to make war. Who will you support? It's not a confortable decission. Gender equality in what sense though, if we have already established that men are disposable regardless? In the sense of political power. Political po…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 08:22 PM
2

It's not the point (no, we shouldn't enforce equality of outcome, by the way). The point is that you are focusing on differences on abilities, because you are still focusing on shame. Focus on what would make individuals happy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 08:17 PM
2

There are extremely strict and bizarre rules. Things like: if you are from this tribe you have to only marry women from that other tribe. Or things like you are forced to marry your cross cousin, that is, the daughter of the brother of your mother. This all makes sense in KCMP as studied by Levi Strauss.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:24 PM
2

I agree!!!! I just meant that because men receive so little empathy, they are pretty terrible at giving each other some. I want to give men empathy precisely because society gives so little empathy to men!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:22 PM
4

Look. The main psychological difference on average between men and women is this: openess to thoughts vs openess to feelings. This is transcultural. But it is wrong to conclude from this things like "men shouldn't be encouraged to be in touch with their feelings", since that is very important for men to not suffer. And just let not start with the discrimination one can conclude where "women are not rational". You are asking yourself the questions that are not the important ones. You are trying t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:20 PM
2

Yes. But in pre-statist societies, arranged marriages were commonplace, not only amongst the rich.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:17 PM
2

Do you mean to say that women in patrilocal and patrilineal societies don't have a vested interest in influencing their children's marriage prospects? Exactly, they don't. Why? Because it is their husband children, not the children of their own clans. They are potential traitors, seeping as unreliable allies in a foreign clan. That's the reason why patrilocality and matrilocality are major issues in gender relations. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the core of the argument. I'…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:16 PM
1

I could give you some positive traits that are on average more frequent in men than women, even transculturally (yes, there are; no, men and women are not equal biologically). But I believe that's not the core of the problem. The core of the problem is that many people will judge men as violent without asking themselves what pain is causing them to commit violence. Encouraging male pride is only a fig leaf for the deep seated shame, it is not what will heal us.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:08 PM
2

Exactly. Many times when men try to give each other empathy they end up giving sympathy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:04 PM
1

There are lots of traits that are on average more present on men than women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 07:03 PM
1

Sure
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 06:37 PM
7

The reason for that disparity is mainly that teachers punish boys for "misbehaving", which ends discouraging them. It is not clear to me why they punish young (I mean, like 8 year old boys) more. I've heard arguments about teachers being women, about schools discouraging physical movement and competitiveness and encouraging cooperativeness and obedience. But I don't really know.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 06:37 PM
1

The disparity at school and high school level.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 05:37 PM
3

I'll answer it: arranged marriages (or broader, controlled reproduction) would lead to a larger influence of men instead of women They do not. That is a consecquence of the kin structure being patrilocal and patrilineal. In matrilocal society there is basically equality, or even some female bias. But the male disposability happens in both. I certainly don't know of any society, pre-state or otherwise, where women took the control of violence upon themselves, even though ever since the invention …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 05:27 PM
4

Thank you very much!!!!!! Do you think this way of thinking is useful to the advancement of male issues?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 03:26 PM
4

Yesss! Thank you so much for valuing it. So, I'll summarize how does patriarchy, male disposability and marxist modes of production interact in pre-gender-studies anthropology. This is seriously studied and you can search up what I'm going to say. (I jump the first paragraphs because they were too polemic and weren't the core point I wanted to express) This implies that extremely early human societies (Original Affluent Societies) are all egalitarian. Not just egalitarian, but fiercely egalitari…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 02:55 PM
8

Thank you so much!! I'm very happy to be appreciated. The good thing is that I believe that the theory is not so far from feminist theory at a theorical level. The bad news is that it is still too far away from an emotional point of view: seing men as evil, omnipotent and invulnerable is exactly the point of that mode of production and is needed for men to fall into shame and actually commit violent acts. Feminism knows this, as they talk about the importance of "letting men become vulnerable an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 02:02 PM
18

I have a detailed view, that is based on (patrilineal) kin corporate Mode of Production, which is a well known mode of production of tribal societies, that is, pre-statist societies. I believe that "patriarchy" means that, and I do believe that it includes oppression of women, but oppression of women is not the cause nor the objective of the (P)KCMP. As any mode of production, the cause are the material conditions, and the organization of work. This does create the gender roles as many other thi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 12:52 PM
1

Thank you!!! I don't disagree with SirSourPuss. While undoubtedly feminism is not the best framework to understand male issues (toxic masculinity is a useful concept, but limited), feminism isn't the cause of men problems either. I say this not because I believe you, Blobbartus, think that, but because I believe for many, specially MRAs in the menrights sub, it is the easy target. But that is just a reaction, since feminism is a reaction to a previous pain caused to women, and male issues preexi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 11:57 AM
2

I'm sorry!!! Yes, it is longer than I remembered. But it was such a good text. It changed the way I comprehended the World back then when I read it in 2012. Specifically, the concept of Values was one of the ones who I remember more fondly. But also the neokantian division between hard and social sciences (nomothetic vs ideographic). The value judgements vs value relationships. The imputation of the causes. All those are concepts that I cherish. Thank you!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 11:09 AM
2

That's because oppression is irrational on the part of the oppressor. But then it still doesn't make sense why a situation that is more beneficial for both men and women (men get more sex, women get more resources) hasn't been the dominant form of society in the first place? Unless men have more interest in power than they have in sex (something I find hard to believe). You are asking the good questions here. There is a reason why I support Nonviolent Communication and try to avoid excerting pow…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 11:05 AM
2

This one!! http://fs2.american.edu/dfagel/www/Class%20Readings/Weber/weber_on_methodology_of_social_sciences.pdf Yes!! Please, read it. It is a wonderful text. It is my favourite sociological text (it is a text of the Methodology of Sociology). And it is a classic that would be regarded highly by basically every sociologist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 12:59 AM
1

Secular Humanism and Classical Liberalism are two very different things. Secular Humanism is an ideology, of course, but it is the dominant ideology in both hard sciences, and social sciences. It is definitely dominant amongst feminists and others. I myself consider myself a secular humanist. On the contrary, I'm not a classical liberal. Liberalism is extremely hegemonic in american culture, but not in Latin America. Just to be clear: not, not being a liberal doesn't mean you are in favour of co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 12:56 AM
2

Sure!!!!! But as someone from a very patriarchal society, mothers advicing such things to their daughters was quite a commonplace situation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/19 12:47 AM
9

In fact, I don't disagree with the findings: in traditional societies female sexuality is a resource to be carefully given away. Frankly, check femaledatingstrategy to see in a very explicit way how traditionally-minded women advice each other to not give away their precious sexuality resources until men are hook up. Traditional mothers have always adviced their daughters to be hard because all men are only interested in sex and will throw you away like trash when you have it with him, so concea…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 09:21 PM
1

In fact, I would largely agree that he is classical liberal. That is not a problem, I prefer classical liberals to religious evangelicals. The problem is that he is irresponsible of the consecquence of his liberal ideological bias in his framework. Just because classical liberalism is indeed the hegemonic ideology doesn't make it true. And specially, it doesn't make it apolitical. He is doing political activism in favour of classical liberalism. Many of the criticisms I would have to the text ar…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 05:37 PM
1

So to you, there is no contradiction between political activism and intellectual rigor at all, and the cognitive distortions that motivated thinking brings into scholarship are a-okay I believe the only way for social sciences to have intellectual rigor is for the scientists to try to be honest about the ideologies. The social scientists who I don't trust at all are those who present themselves as apolitical. Can I ask you to read The Objectivity of Social Sciences by Weber? And Weber was a cent…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 05:08 PM
2

I think it would be worthwile what is the definition of Religion that you manage and in what PRECISE sense you understand that social justice framework is a religion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 04:25 PM
2

I think there is a confusion between postmodern thinkers (like Butler) and Foucault, who is a poststructuralist one and quite traditional indeed. I don't believe the text you agve me understands Durkheim: religions are indeed moral communities. That means that religious practises reproduces an idealized version of the community. The sacred is a major concept in Durkheim: it separates the Ideal World (the sacred) from the material world (the profane). It is like if Religions expressed in the symb…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 04:20 PM
2

It's just.... I have been in sociology a great deal of time. I have an extreme hard timr believing this guy would consider the works of Foucault, or Goffman, or Wright Mills as science at all. I believe he would consider the methodology W Mills presented in The Sociological Imagination as an anathema to science.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/12/19 02:00 AM
3

> nobody actually cares What nobody? > It goes almost completely unread, not only by everyone outside the field, but also by almost everyone inside the field too (more than 80% of its papers do not receive a single citation). … As most science, and specifically social science. I don't believe it is deniable that feminist theory does have a huge impact in real life. I find that most of the criticisms in the article are criticisms to academia in general, specially social sciences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/12/19 09:40 PM
1

It frankly is creating to myself pretty much a great xenophobia against americans XD. But you are right that it is probably just reddit. The puntivistic and liberal undertone there is in every expression even on the left in reddit does make me despise american culture a little. It's like, I have just reread Foucault's concept that Power is productive, not just repressive and that one of the main products is the Subject, and I was asking myself if an american would even understand what that means…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/12/19 05:12 PM
5

The supposed equality of our time is pretty illusory considering wealth inequality has been rising for decades, due to our increasingly unrestrained capitalist economic system in which workplaces are undemocratic. We're also seeing a rising number of unemployed men as automation is beginning to reduce the need for workers. Living in a society with high wealth inequality is known to exacerbate various social and psychological problems, because social status differentials are larger. It stands to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 07:09 PM
3

Hypergamy is a consecquence of millenia of women depending on men finantially. Thus, there is some disgust from women in case that they don't provide value in some way and there is the perception that men are overall disgusting. This was compensated through money before and that isn't a possibility anymore. Women have not yet accepted that men could be vulnerable or not powerful or anything. This can change and is changing. Many women marry down economically right now, in the past that was like …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 07:08 PM
1

To partly replace, maybe. But even then it is not like fathers are the sole breadwinners, since women work. But it is not that I disagree: child support, welfare and women working did indeed lessened the dependancy women had to men, and that did allow many women to divorce. Before the 80s, many women would have wanted to divorce but they didn't because they feared getting homeless. Like my grand mother (this is what she said).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 05:59 PM
1

No, I mean, like, on average. Besides that in my country like half of the men don't pay child support at all or do it irregularly. And they don't visit tte children.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 05:56 PM
1

May you give me some numbers on this? I find it implausible. Specially because the ammount of work (besides money) that takes raise children alone. I'm not saying that it doesn't soften the economic fall of divorced single mothers, but I don't believe it to be equal.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 12:46 AM
8

Someone needs to do the math here. When I picture a single mother, I don't imagine a super rich woman that lives through benefits. Welfare and child support are not enough to cover the money spend on the children AND the work that takes to raise them. Women get most of the welfare because they earn less. "They get pregnant in order to get welfare", a common said phrase amongst right-wingers in my country.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 07:02 PM
5

Mensrights subreddit was too far right and misogynistic to me, Menslib subreddit limited the discussions that could be done there. So I believe the distance between the two was so big that there was space somewhat in the middle.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 04:49 PM
5

At a personal level, I have. When done in person, I would say 80% of both women and men were sympathetic. This is restricted to people in person and from my own culture; I've found reddit to be mostly unsympathetic, but I don't know if it is because of the american culture or because it is the internet. I was able to frame the issues of men in a way that is mostly palatable to both men and women. It did take great effort. My ideas might be seen as extremely feminist for this subreddit standard, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 04:35 PM
1

If men are not entitled to sex, then what's the point of stop watching porn "in case you have sex"? The whole premise is wrong, men are more lonely now than they never were. Porn is a coping for this loneliness. If the porn wasn't there..... the loneliness would still be there, just worse. Look, I was addicted to porn once, I still masturbate like 4 times a day. But sex is a luxury that is not available to everyone. Then what's the point to pressuring men to stop watching porn when they aren't g…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/19 09:00 PM
5

Sure, I'm just saying what it happens. It is just that feminist respond that "men should be allowed to cry more" is extremely condescending because, as other commenters say, noone will listen. I'm not saying that feminists should volunteer on doing so, I'm just saying that at least they should stop constructing a condescending narrative.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/12/19 01:13 PM
10

No, what they say is something different: what they say is that if men were able to express their vulnerabilities and someone listened to, then men would be happier and men would be less misogynistic and less angry and violent. I do largely agree on this proposition. Feminists don't necessarily volunteer to be the ones who will be open to men's vulnerabilities. Some do, some don't.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/12/19 01:40 AM
1

This is an extremely bad time for me to talk about this. Since the last three days I have been trying to help finantially a close friend who is having to pay a lot of money for an urgent operation, and they can't because they are poor since grew in a single mother household, with the father not only having hit the mother, not only not paying the 18 years of their lives, but coming back at 23 to "reconnect" with their children when the only thing that they wanted was to fuck the mum. So right now…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 02:29 PM
1

And you are right. You have not the duty of enable spoiled children who don't want to die of hunger. You can support that movement in favour of child poverty all that you want. I feel extremely angry right now, this issue makes me feel extremely angry. You shouldn't be talking to me at this moment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 02:22 PM
1

You want women to have forced abortions. The one who would have to take care of the child is society, aka the State. But in any case, having the father is a less worse option than not having anyone taking care at all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 02:08 PM
1

I don't have the duty to support fathers who prefer their children to be in poverty than to send them money. And that child wouldn't have been destitute if LPS was a thing, because that woman wouldn't have made the same decisions. This is a stupid neoliberal take "we should take away welfare so they stop having children". You set up a system that is as fair as possible, so that everyone thrives in it. I don't give a shit about fairness, I care about children not being in poverty.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 01:40 PM
1

Your answer gives me horrible neoliberal vibes of "we should abolish welfare so people need to work to survive, they are unemployed because they want."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 09:38 AM
1

Basically, I am not "sending children to be malnourished" by refusing to allow parents to steal any food they want from stores. Yes you are, but don't let me start with capitalism. I shouldn't continue talking about this. I know people who grew in poverty because being children of single parents whose fathers didn't send any money and it makes me very emotional.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 09:36 AM
1

Haver you not noticed that children from single parents are in extreme poverty? Come onn, everyone here likes to say how much boys from single mothers suffer!!! What do you want, to force women to abort? I can never support sending childen to be malnourished like you want. I'm really getting angry here. Don't you know people whose fathers have disappeared? Then you should know what you are asking for.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 09:42 PM
1

For example, why is it in the best interest of the child to stay with the parent that earn the least? The best interest of the child is to be with the one that will take them care of. And I refuse sending the children into poverty and destitution just because the father didn't want to pay. I frankly won't continue talking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 05:35 PM
1

I see. Yes, there are much more deceased donors. I wonder why both of that discrepancies
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 10:13 AM
1

What do you mean she didn't?? Didn't you say that she earned as much as the man? Then she earned around as much as the man did, outside of lawyer's fees, I mean. No, english is not my mother language.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 01:42 AM
1

So it was not HIS things, it was their things, and the woman kept half. The issue of the lawyers fees is another thing and I would understand and agree with that problem. That is what you are saying? That women keep half the things and then the man pays up the lawyers fees?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 11:15 PM
1

But I don't understand, did the women kept more than half of the goods? I mean, assuming there weren't children.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 10:08 PM
1

Did they outearn greatly their wives? Did the wives took more than half of the things? How was exactly?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 09:53 PM
1

Mmm... I did not understand. Is that 2/3 only for alive donors? In any case I don't understamd the relation with matrifocality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 06:30 PM
1

I have never asked myself that. Apparently, women account for two thirds of organ donations. May I know where this question came from?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 01:43 PM
1

I believe that is very bad for the kid. I'm sure there are psychological studies about it. There is a reason why people who work with adoption try to get the children with their biological parents first and only when they can't do that they give in to adoption. In any case it is difficult to argue that being poorer is good for the kid. And I'm just saying this: I won't listen to you if you don't try to argue on good faith putting the interests of the child on foremost. Maybe you believe that fin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 11:58 PM
1

I did not say that they wanted or not to work outside. What I said is that they do work the difference of hours, just they work in domestic unpaid labour. A very large part of my argument -- a part that you have already conceded to -- is that women who are less inclined to want to take care of and support themselves, are more likely to want to get married. It's an easy way out in life that many women take advantage of. Sure, I'm not arguing that women go unwillingly to work less hours once they …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 11:54 PM
1

Look, the issue is simple: don't talk to me about equality, argue to me that amy change would be better for the child and I will agree.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 08:47 PM
1

Again, safe haven laws are made only to avoid babies to be dropped in dumpsters. I don't know if forbidding mothers to put babies into foster care would work. Maybe? Whatever ends up being better for the child. I'm not sure if it is better for a child to be forced into foster houses or with a mother that hates him. If it is better to be with their mother, then surely force them to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 08:32 PM
1

No, the quote that said "Yes, I agree. If we had a REALLY...." It's not a mirror image. You do not understand that an embryo is not genuinely human, it is just a bunch of cells. In case of finantial abortion there is still a child that is set into poverty.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 06:37 PM
1

Abortion is not the case, that is just a bunch of cells that are not really human except for a few extremely religious people. While adoption is not a problem, per se for the child, being in a foster home is, and I would greatly discourage women to send their children to foster cares. I believe only in extreme situations that happen, like if the woman is a drug addict or something like that. I agree with the thread that safe heavens are intended as deseprate measures for extreme cases were if it…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 05:09 PM
1

I believe that comparing the two is absurd: in abortion there never gets to exist a child, if the father "finantial aborts" the child then the child still exists. Now, technically the finantial part of the father can be replaced by the State. And technically the affective relationship by the father cannot be forced. I do think, though, that when mras talk about finantial abortion they have zero reflection on the effect it has on the child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 11:14 AM
0

Having friends whose fathers abandoned them at early age and having that traumatized them, I'm not particularly sympathetic to this reivindication.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 10:10 AM
2

Matrifocal society is a society that culturally centers around women. For example, female goddesses such as fertiliy goddesses may become more important than male godesses. Of course, this is quite common in agricultural societies, since many of them related the fertile earth to be related to women. Matrilocality refers to a residence system and is related to an economic system. In a matrilocal society, husbands go to live with their wives in their mother-in-law houses. That is, men share their …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 01:05 AM
3

Yes, it is well known that minoan civilization was matrifocal, or more probaly a transition between matrifocality and patrifocality. This is because it stemmed from neolithic Europe, which was matrifocal and probaly even matrilocal. As I have argued somewhere else, I don't believe matrifocal and matrilocal societies are matriarchal, in my oppinion. I believe that is the majority oppinion, but there could be bias in the anthropologists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/11/19 05:08 PM
1

They may be poorer on average but they end up with more money than what they would have, had they stayed single. No, that is false, married women get to earn less than single women. They renounce to career advancements in order to get married and take domestic work. As a finantial gamble, it is a bad gamble. Another pet theory I have is that women who are less inclined to want to work (or earn a lot of money), are more likely to want to get married. Yes, those two theories have equivalent consec…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/11/19 04:03 PM
1

Thanksss
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/11/19 01:59 AM
3

We are talking (historically, we need to understand that globalization has mostly homogenized the globe) mainly of societies of native american societies in North America (mainly from the eastern US, like Iroquois), Southeast Asia -specially mainland southeast asia- and scheduled tribes (that is, pre-hindu peoples, like Khasi people) from India. Prehistoric neolithic cultures indicate a probable matrilocality, including neolithic Europe, the Levant, neolithic China and Southeast Asia. On the who…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 07:13 PM
5

I don't believe matriarchies ever existed. Matrilocal societies were as close as you got. ​ In any case, matrilocal societies were objectively not more peaceful than patrilocal societies, since both stem from kin-corporate mode of production. The difference was that matrilocal societies had more international wars, with patrilocal societies more intranational wars. In both societies the ones who fought were men. What does "more progressive" mean, by the way? Matrilocal societies were mainly soci…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:28 PM
2

What I meant is that in the highest peak difference, at 35 years old, single women outearn single men by 15%, I do not know how much would be on average, but let's say 5-10%. Now, median hourly wage for married men is 40% bigger than hourly wage for married women. So this effect is way bigger than the effect of selection. I insist that even taking into account child support and welfare, single mothers are usually abjectly poor. That's the reason why they receive welfare. It is indeed true that b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 04:09 PM
1

Alimony is only a fraction of the difference between the wages of the man and the woman. Alimony by now is rare except in old or religious couples because the differences in wage are smaller. https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041 Single women indeed earn more than men, but only slightly so and the gap gets closed at 40. That doesn't square with your theory. 40 year old single men should earn muc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 11:04 AM
1

That's because there is a finite number of medium articles that you can see per month.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 01:27 AM
3

Paywall
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 01:15 AM
4

Wowww, the situation of Big mouth episode is really awful. I haven't thought about the Gravity Falls one, but I agree.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 09:13 PM
1

The tldr is that women select for men who a) make more money than them and b) are on a career track to very quickly make more money than them in the near future. That is an extremely good point and you are on the verge of convincing me of it. But let me ask you a question: if it is not that men's wages grow once they are married but that women select men who will earn more, what happens to age? I mean, you woulf expect older single men to have a lower wage than older single women -since they are…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 04:11 PM
1

If they winde up richer when they marry, why doesn't it make sense that they would winde up poorer after a divorce? Nono. They don't get richer when they marry. They marry someone of around the same wage, but they stay longer at home while their husband goes to work. The husband gets promoted and the wife goes to the supermarket to spend what he earns, because they have a shared budget. When they get divorce that arrangement breaks down. Plenty of men find that their skills become obsolete, but …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 08:44 PM
1

I don't agree. Women when they get divorce end up poorer than they were before. The issue for women is not about being poorer, but about being in a coercive situation where they end poorer if they get divorce because of the delayed career advancement. The problem for men is to get trapped into dangerous and unenjoyable work. Alimony is a smaller ammount as a proportion of the difference of wages. And the reason women gain less is not that they don't work, but that they spend more labour hours in…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 04:27 PM
2

It is a consecquence mainly of married women working less than married men. Wages are quadratic, not linear, in the time spent. However, this is also related to the time spent working in domestic tasks. On average, adding domestic and payed labour, hours worked are similar. If we want that to change, we need to change gender roles so that men are more with the kids at home and women work longer hours.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 12:27 PM
1

What is it good about women that isn't true about other genders? I don't seem to get you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 02:25 AM
1

It means that if we were to magically disappear, then no one else would be inconvenienced. Don't you have friends or a family? It is not normal to feel this way. It is the way people feel before getting suicide. Corporations are not "happy" corporations are just legal fictions created for the sake of their owners. It was a joke
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/19 10:29 AM
1

We are humans. What does it mean to be redundant? In any case, corporations are happy for us to exist, since they do need labour.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/19 12:56 AM
1

Paywall
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/19 12:55 AM
1

Good thing is that things are fastly changing. I guess it is just colonial shame XD.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/19 12:50 AM
2

We have a governor that is a child abuser XD. Sorry, had to vent. We really are a backwards country. I hope he will renounce, but I'm not sure he'll do even that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/11/19 05:09 PM
1

Although it is proven that male and female interests differ, it is a huuge mistake to understand from this that we should deepen those differences: on the contrary, we should strive to teach balanced skills that make a complete human, both in the case of men and women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/11/19 02:09 AM
2

Yes, I always had nerdy interests but thankfully I was able to make many female friends.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/11/19 01:56 AM
3

Mmm, true. If it is out of nowhere.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 04:56 PM
2

:S. Yes, I know. But compared to two years ago, when these issues weren't talked at all, it is something.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 04:55 PM
2

It is important to note, though, that one of the major reasons for two people working outside the home is because home appliances, which reduce the ammount of work needed at home but require money. How many of your washes your clothes by hand?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 02:45 PM
2

I don't agree. Sure, I want eventually universal childcare to not be needed. But since we ARE in a capitalist system, it is better one that has universal childcare, than one that it doesn't have.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 02:14 PM
5

If you have only male friends, then sure.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 12:49 PM
12

I believe that the issue that we don't receive friendliness like ever IS part of the issue: someone being nice to us is seen as exceptional. If they are nice to us, that might mean that they like us a lot. The reality is noone like us XD.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 11:06 AM
2

Heyy!!! My comment in the post of my friend, the one that was laughed at got a like by a woman and also by a man that I know was a victim of domestic abuse. I'm very happy about it!!! It will take time, but it is a seed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/19 12:02 PM
2

Well, maybe it is not the best path possible, but since I'm already at the middle of the storm, better try to reform it from within (besides the fact that I agree with many of their tenets). In any case, I always talk my oppinion and set boundaries within my social circles, remembering that no social change is easy. I speak my mind, I don't longer just shut up in shame and fear like I did before. Just today I was defending the fact that men have issues in a facebook post of a close male friend a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/19 02:22 AM
1

It is not. Not at all. Sex worker industry is extremely shady, at present. Also, there is something that seems off to me with this idea, that I can't quite precise what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/19 09:34 PM
2

This is what I would write to her. I'm sorry that I don't believe that she will read it -I'm sure that she's very busy- and I'm sorry it might not be on the same lines that you would like, but I wrote it in a way that I believe it would be the most likely for her to read it and open up: Hello Lindy West!!! I read your article "If I Admit That 'Hating Men' Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?". There are some issues that you talked about that concerned me. I know …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/11/19 06:48 PM
2

It's partly because male sexuality generates feelings of intense disgust by women when they are not attracted to you. So you internalize the idea that you are disgustful that makes people ill with your mere presence. Having sex and being sexually desires makes you realize that perhaps your body is not the disgustful thing that you had thought. Besides, when you are touched starved, feeling like your body is so disgusting that everyone would vomit for merely touching yourself is not a nice sensat…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/19 04:50 PM
1

These sex workers need to at the very least have the right to refuse those clients.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/19 10:27 AM
2

That's an interesting factor.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/11/19 09:36 AM
1

Sex workers are not natural resources for the State to distribute, they are human beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/19 06:33 PM
1

I'm just saying that jail doesn't stop rapists from rape and that the definition of rape has change over time, you couldn't rape your wife, 20 years ago, for example.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/11/19 11:01 AM
1

In particular, the sexual mores changed from (1) Sexual interaction is an instance where it is assumed that it happens and the responsability of each person is to stop the interaction, where the two people go search what they want and are responsible for whta they want. To (2) a sexual interaction is assumed to not happen and only happens when there is trust between the participants and an open communication of fears and desires. The connection and communication needs to preexist in order to sex…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/11/19 02:26 AM
1

That depends on how you define rape. What's the relevance of definitions? Definitions of rape are only relevant in a system that is based on punishment. It defines which situations deserve to be punished, nothing more. Since I'm against the logic of punishment, the definition is not relevant to me. place the burden of not getting falsely accused by them on their male victims That is about what are the social mores that we need to expect. That is only relevant in a punitivistic culture. In a matt…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/11/19 02:02 AM
4

In most discussions of affirmative consent I’ve had with feminists, this kind of nuance is completely rejected. Women have no responsibility to say “no;” the onus is on men to get a “yes.” If a woman is unable to express her feelings when having sex with someone who is not part of the affirmative-consent culture then it is SHE who will end up raped. She will pay a high price. Affirmative action is part of the sexual mores of middle class college educated white people and it will not feel natural…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 11:35 PM
5

We often joke about collecting male tears but…doesn’t that kind of add to a culture of toxic masculinity where men are forced to be repressed and stoic? About time
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 09:35 PM
2

This is something I always ask myself when people talk about when people say there are basically no false allegations. From this statistics you would have to consider either that many women make false accusations, which would be misogynistic, or that black people are more rapists, which would be racist. The reality, of course, is that sexual dynamics is an extremely complex dynamic where both involved have a great deal of responsability. Maybe these black men acted in shady ways and women got mo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 09:09 PM
2

If you sincerely want to, we can collaborate on that and if you don't want to, I wouldn't hold it against you, but it would mean a lot to me and bring some peace on a psychological level, if you were to respond to her with something calm and factual about this bunch of vile lies. Yes, I would do that. Then again, I can critizise it from my point of view, which many times is not the same as yours. Please, remind me in a few days because I may forget.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 08:00 PM
2

Ohhh, what a horrible article. Your hatred of men, and by extension of me would vilify and dehumanize us less than your movement spreading this obnoxiously self-righteous blank-slatist narrative of statistical equality that tells you that the world is against you It is very interesting your point here. We do not agree with many points, but if you want me to, I can write later a text of how I would address her to express my grievances in a way that she could hear it. Since I'm in that environment…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 05:15 PM
2

I understand. So basically this is the crux of the issue? Feminism claiming to have the solution for gender pains and reproducing the toxic gender roles? That hypocrisy does also make me extremely angry myself. But it is wrong to perceive feminists as superhuman goddesses that ought to be always right. I don't think we should expect for them to be the ones who have all the answers and all the solutions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 04:20 PM
1

I strongly recommend mindfulness and gestaltic therapy to you. As someone that is an autist, being in contact with your feelings is extremely hard, but important. Mindfulness and gestaltic therapy will help you into recognizing your own body. Being into contact with your own feelings will help you understanding the feelings of other peoplem and developing empathy and social habilities too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 02:54 PM
1

Are you better able to express your sexual desires or are you still trapped in the sexuality is inherently creepy mentality? Are you having more male friends?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 02:52 PM
2

No, I don't mean it is too sensitive to me. I mean, it is extremely difficult to have a serious discussion for this because it touches too much the tribal nerves. whose ticket is reducing this sort of influence in society Maybe what you meant with this is that feminism proclaims itself to be aganist gender roles so it makes you more angry when they act in an hypocritical way than when someone with power in society acts in an openly sexist way?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 02:50 PM
1

I will disagree on this. I believe it is good to agree to disagree for now on this issue, because I believe it to be a sensitive issue, but it is important for me that you understand my position, even if you disagree, that while institutional feminism is indeed one of the many resposnibles that block the synthesis to be done, it is not in any way the only one. I'll later give a detailed analysis of the video you sent me before.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 01:38 PM
1

I see that actions that dehumanize the interlocutor is fairly common throughout any person that takes political decissions. There are many high-ranking people who seem to try to act in favour of men and dismiss women, I mean, like Trump.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 12:12 PM
1

I am not an autist, although I had lots of asperger-like symptoms. Most of which I was able to surpass through therapy. Connecting with my feelings has been a blessing. NMMNG details how NiceGuy syndrom many times is a consecquence of trying to "be different to your father", and I agree. I'm very sorry that you went through the same, Serpent. Are you feeling better now?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 12:09 PM
1

Yes and no. Accepting the world as it is doesn't mean to suck it up. It just makes your head clearer to understand where you are going. There is a phrase from leftwing populism here that said "if there is a need, there is a right", from Evita. It was extremely painful to me to understand that she was wrong. This simplified situation only works when the needs are material: it doesn't really matter if someone gives a wedding cake to homosexuals out of free will or if they are forced to. That gay c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 10:21 AM
3

I am very happy that the girl I'm dating approached me. It made me feel much more desired than if I had proposed and she had accepted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 02:40 AM
1

Yes. Not in an empathetic way, but nevertheless I believe that her answer does address in a correct and adecquate way the question Cassie Jaye asked. I'll try to later break it paragraph by paragraph. I believe that if I can convey why her answer was indeed a good answer to Jaye's question, then my overall posture will be clearer. I'm more critical of her answer to her second question, where I believe she is overall making lots of mistakes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 01:37 AM
1

I also agree with you on this. But I believe it would be disingenouous to believe that it is only feminists who don't want any synthesis to happen.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/19 01:34 AM
1

I watched the video you recommended. I would say: 1) this feminist does represent what I believe hegemonic feminism believes. 2) I agree almost 100% to her answer to the first question. I have lots of disagreements in her answer to the second question.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 05:12 PM
1

I think it is kind of the question of marxism, right? Why is there hunger in the world when there is enough food to feed for everyone. It is not that I disagree, it is that there is a whole social structure that is there. And while feminism is indeed a factor in the social structure that harms men, I would not say is the only one, and I believe feminist misandry feeds from deepest social structures. I would express feminist theory in the following way: There is a pressure to perform gender roles…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 04:57 PM
1

I see your point, I'll think about it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 04:42 PM
1

US has expensive problems that rehabilitate soldiers who come back home from the tours of duty abroad, but who rehabilitates the "ideological fighters" who have been on the front lines of the War of Ideas for decades, and whose thinking has become warped and deformed as a consequence? This is a very interesting point. It sure existed before, but before it existed in a non-egalitarian society that didn't have all those resources available to use for addressing this problem. Today, it exists in a …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 04:41 PM
1

"of course you are in pain, and you should be, it's just that you are losing your unjust privileges!" But they are wrong. I'm very sad that they think that way. And that you relate with such kind of people. I disagree. "Your pain is no one's fault" is not an improvement at all. But do you believe feminism is tha cause? Because male pain preexisted feminism
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 01:58 PM
2

I found that kind of masculinity to be quite commonplace.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 01:55 PM
1

Hegemonic masculinity, if you prefer. The male classmates that bullied me really were half of the class, not isolated incidents. In any case, I had defined myself in opposition to their behaviour, and that is what turned me into the NiceGuy I became.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 01:37 PM
1

Wowwww. You really got to my feelings. May I ask what got you of what I wrote?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 01:27 PM
10

Humans are responsible for their success and failure. We can debate nuances, but there is that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/19 08:17 AM
3

I do my best to abstract from these things when engaged from a good-faith perspective. I'm extremely thankful for that. You don't know how much that means to me. And can't say I noticed you exhibiting these traits, so your therapy must have went pretty damn well. :) Thank you!!! Therapy was extremely hard work. But I believed it worked out pretty well. what motivated your convictions when they were at the more extreme end of the feminist vs anti-feminist spectrum? Mainly it was that my father wa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 08:58 PM
2

I hope you are able to read what I believe in from a rational point of view, beyond my illness (of niceguy traits, neediness of female validation) that may filter inside my views once in a while.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 07:08 PM
1

Thank you!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 06:57 PM
4

No XD. It was a complex history. But I'll summarize: I am in a context where every man and woman I personally know is a feminist. I had those views before that. Not very different from this guy that went to an all-female high school, but my situation comes from being amongst the field of leftist political activism. But I was EXACTLY like the character of this story. I was a creepy performative male feminist before feminism was popular in my country. When the feminist revolution happened, I went …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 05:57 PM
3

I went to a specifically feminist therapist XD. Like a therapist from the feminist organization of therapists, hahah. That was because the issue that exploded and brought me there required me to. Yes, I know it is complex. But I was awoken of this change of views there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 05:16 PM
2

Sure!!! Take your time!!!!!!! Think about it at your own rythm!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/11/19 02:08 PM
1

The impressiveness of NVC is that you can use it with someone that is NOT thinking in this way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 10:37 PM
1

I'm very happy that you are interested!!!! There are books and also websites. What Marshall Rosenberg did was to analize the way compassionate people like Marthin L King, Gandhi, Mandela or Mother Theresa, and his own grandmother communicated and he kind of got humanistic psychology to concrete solutions. He even was able to stop a tribal war were hundreds had died in Africa through this method. According to those tribal members "we wouldn't have been killing each other if we knew this way of co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 10:31 PM
1

Yes, it is precisely about that. Being more precise about the theory, reason makes you disconnected from reality because it is about merging between observation and feelings. The situation we are talking about is what happens when you filter rational judgements into your feelings and needs. But judgements can also filter into objective observations. In this way, we say "he is creepy" -which is a subjective judgement- instead of "he sent 3 mails after he got no answer" -which is an objective and …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 10:14 PM
2

I don't think that the pain means that one doesn't deserve to be happy, or that happiness is impossible. Compare it to physical pain. Royal you Sure, you can still be overall happy despite having an illness characterized by chronic pain, but sometimes you're going to be in excruciating agony / miserable. Yes, you will be miserable, but not necessarily depressed. I'm saying if a class of romanceless people forms in society then institutions need to take it seriously. I would want sensitivity camp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 09:46 PM
3

Yes, in a buddhist sense. are needs (we can always debate how much of a 'need' they are compared to oxygen, food and water, of course) that, when going unmet for a long time, can really fuck you up No, what fucks you up is your vision that the pain means that you don't deserve to be happy or happiness is impossible. That means: there is still an ammount of freedom in it. Obviously romance, sex and love cannot and should not be "redistributed" in the same way that shelter, food, money and water A…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 08:08 PM
0

Entitlement comes from the idea that you "deserve" something. Deserving is some metaphysical shit that doesn't have any real meaning. The idea of deserving something comes from the idea of not deserving something. The idea that you will inevitably get something comes from the idea that it is impossible for you to get something. And the core of this is despair. Entitlement at a true level is the (buddhist concept) of entitlement.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 07:10 PM
2

Not in person, but I have made a few anti-vaxxers question their beliefs. I have heard that flatearthism is usually not a core conspiracy theory, with the ones in it usually already believe in a few others conspiracy theories.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 07:08 PM
-1

I believe the guy does not necessarily feel entitled to the girl's attention, but he is so desperate That's because entitlement and despair are actually the same.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 06:36 PM
1

The first time I read it, I believed the author actually endorsed the distorted views the character reached through the end. Then again, the character is an unreliable narrator, but in any case, both the NiceGuy way he started and the weird blackpillish view at the end were hugely distorted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 06:34 PM
2

As a physicist, it was so nice for you to compare me with him!!! Yes, I quite agree with what he says.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 06:32 PM
3

I wrote a post a few days ago in incelexit that was pretty much acclaimed, you can check my history. But I'll sum it up: I substituted morals by communication. I realized that there are no good and bad people only actions that cause pain. This was important, because I believed I was one of the "good guys" and my extreme entitlement was in fact making me do really creepy shit. I realized that people don't get love because they are good (like Nice Guys -or this character- believe), neither they ge…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 04:52 PM
2

Yeahh, I had this mentality for too long. Uff, I'm so glad I entered therapy. I was getting crazy, crazy. So much pain!!! So much pain that didn't have a name. I still remember it. To learn that I was so fucking wrong my entire life, I'm so glad that maddening pain has gone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 04:27 PM
2

The way I see it, now it is an empty talking point from twitter.com and everydayfeminism.com, completely devoid from its supposed original meaning I don't see it the same, I don't live the same life as you, and do not hear the term in the same context that you hear it. But specifically, the original academic concept behind the term is very worthy. I would not use it with some random antifeminist guy (since it has the possibility to shut the other person down), I just trust you to understand what…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/19 12:55 AM
1

If I remember correctly, most linguists agree that at some point, the "real meaning" of the term isn't what it used to mean initially, but how people used it. I think we are way past that. People don't exist. Terms are a battleground, like Voloshinov said. But rejecting an academic term is rejecting the insights a social science has, and I will not abide for those rules. So many things that feminists falsely claim credit for is just progress in society due to technological and economical advance…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/11/19 09:58 AM
1

don't think that toxic masculinity is a meaningful concept. Just because it is misused or used in an hypocritical way it doesn't mean that it don't refer to a specific process. And I mostly agree, I just don't think those changes are in any way related to the political macro-level systems. Ok, but you do agree that individualism in this sense has grown since modernity in the XVI century and in order to target male issues we need to supercede it, right? It is ok if you don't agree that it is need…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/11/19 09:43 PM
2

That's fair. But I don't think it's meaningful to frame that in terms of left-right divide. Fair enough
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 09:20 PM
1

I did not mean that we need a communist revolution in order to solve male issues. We obvioulsy can't wait until a revolution to solve male issues (!!!!). What I said is that in order to solve male issues we need to think in terms of the Good Living, if you want. It is the thinking that we have to change. We need to change the culture, we need to change the values. We can't solve the issue that men are vulnerable if we pretend that all individuals should be invulnerable. Toxic masculinity IS inte…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 09:19 PM
2

Sure, it is not really feasible a societal change into an ancom society in a short-term pace. My point is that I like classical liberalism and all. But it doesn't solve basically any of the male issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 04:10 PM
2

What I'm saying is that in order for male issues to be solved, it is necessary more change than it is being considered right now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 04:07 PM
1

The president Evo Morales who was outed from the coup enshrined those principles in their constitution. They call it "el buen vivir" (the good living). It is also related to a relationship with the environment/ecology. Translate this: https://www.economiasolidaria.org/noticias/vivir-bien-propuesta-de-modelo-de-gobierno-en-bolivia I'm highly emotional right now for the ousting of Evo Morales. The "buen vivir" is deeply entrenched in the communal perspective of latin americans (all of them, from M…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 01:26 PM
1

In the precise sense that left/right is about how much of society we need to change. Right is conservatism, while the left is reformist or revolutionary. My point is that the regressive left can't take care of male issues because it doesn't want to change society enough so that our issues become addressable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 01:16 PM
1

Polarization and the resulting break-down of dialogue is very dangerous, so I don't see this joke as remotely funny. Sorry, I shouldn't have done it. Okay, so it looks like you dislike the individualism-collectivism dichotomy for politics. I'm an ancom. I believe the interests of the community and that of the individual as compatible and intertwined. When I refer to "individualism" I mainly refer to this idea that because humans are basically evil, the best that can happen to humans is to not re…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 01:14 PM
1

The youtuber I agree with almost 100% is Peter Coffin. He is one of the few americans who see the world in a similar way that I do. I recommend his analysis of the Joker. I saw it and was, yeahhh, that's 100% what happened in that movie. He's one of the few ones who see the world in this beyond-liberal-progressive way. There are others, like Mexie and Noncompete. In the video about the Joker, he goes into great detail criticism not only the right but also the left liberals, for exactly the same …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 12:38 PM
1

Look, latin america is by no means a good political place. There has been a militar coup d'etat in Bolivia last week. There is racism, populism authoritarians, neoliberalism, and lots and lots of corruption. But at least, we can see beyond individualism, even in the form of individualism-lite of american progressives.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 12:04 PM
1

Then who are these people who loudly claim everybody is a Nazi and is at the far-right? They aren't that few. Well, that is partly because US IS full of nazis (just joking, just joking). but I honestly don't understand how you can say that they are the champions of individualism. They are not individualistic in the same way than classical liberals and neoliberals. Classical liberals seek to preserve the individual. This preservation of the neoliberal social structure does preserve certain preexi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 11:44 AM
2

Because you are trapped into a false dychotomy. Both classical liberals and US progressives enshrines the individual, and want to destroy any kind of community that there is. All their praxis is about destroying relationships. It is just that US progressives do it in a more radical way than classical liberals do. As far as it regards me, they are quite similar. In my view, there are far right religious loonies, that want to preserve the traditional family and religious communities, then you have…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 10:54 AM
1

US progressivism stems from classical liberalism: it is trapped in the logic of trying to destroy as much relationships as possible. It sees humans as dangerous and evil.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 10:13 AM
4

Toxic masculinity is the pressure to be in a certain sense (like, stoic, disconnected from feelings, etc). ​ It is not true that the lack of masculinity makes toxic madculinity less prevalent. On the contrary, single mothers pressure their sons to be archetypes of men, instead of real humans. When boys have a father, then they get to know what a real human, a an is, instead of this ethereal idea that society has in their heads about what a man is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/11/19 09:40 PM
2

Ok, no problem. Yes!!!! The ideology (religion?) of Power that grew mainly since the late 80s is harming us men specifically since it blocks empathy to us. It won't be able to survive in a few decades. I sincerely believe that such an ideology is harmful also for the environment and we won't be able to tackle seriously the problem of climate change if we are trapped inside liberal ideology. And you are right that the way it developed itself was harmful. We are, still, in the present, so we can f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/11/19 09:24 PM
3

I agree with everything you said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/11/19 07:33 PM
1

Yes. I agree. But my point is that both are intertwined. Not every "religion" would be compatible with capitalism. One that tries to frame every social problem in terms of a sector of society that doesn't let another sector of society to be free is. My point is that you need to ask yourself why this "religion" exists as such.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/11/19 06:53 PM
1

The global idea is this: main female points were about negative freedom. In particular, be free to go to work, stopping sexual assault and harassment, no-cause divorce, abortion, are some of the issues. Male issues are not about that: Empathy gap, suicides/opioid deaths (many of which are linked to loneliness), homelessness, unemployment, male disposability in general, etc. The only thing male feminists can do is to stop masculine gender roles. In particular, pressure to provide and pressure to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/11/19 10:26 PM
1

Sorry, it is ok :). The issue here is that positive freedom is the nucleus of masculine pain. THAT is the reason, I argue, that feminism was successful but male advocacy wasn't.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/11/19 07:31 PM
2

I agree with you that male problems aren't caused by male oppression over women. Let me say that unlike almost all users in this sub I do believe men largely oppress women in an extremely precise sense: men being targeted by society with the role of actions that cause female (and many times male) restriction of freedom. That is, it is men's jobs to be the police and judges of society. But this role not only is not good for us, it is not all that it is in this society. Let's start with in-group f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/11/19 12:14 PM
2

Yes!!!! When I'm talking about liberalism vs postliberalism I'm talking about negative freedoms vs positive freedoms. I'm arguing that any social movement that increases negative freedom is somewhat easy in capitalism. Positive freedom is much harder, on the other hand.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/11/19 09:24 PM
2

Retirement for most men isn't a thing if you have an awful pension system. I can't talk anything because pensions in my country are extremely low. But i believe Europe has a well-fed welfare system.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/19 02:12 PM
5

There will be a retirement age adjust in around 6 months, because of the economic crisis we are having. I hope women's age gets equal to men's. The last time age was adjusted was around 1990, so I understand that it wasn't done back then, but it is time by now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/19 01:51 PM
1

Utilitarianism is wrong. The pain of the slaves doesn't cancel out the pain that someone else has. If you force a situation were there are two possibilities: person A and B will be killed or person C and D will be killed, what happens is war. And they will die A, B, C and D. Asking for person A and B to kindly sacrifize for the better good ends up extremely badly, usually.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/11/19 12:50 AM
1

It is so strange to me that you are trying to argue something akin "Surely they were victims of some rockstars that had raped them when they were 13. But they should have shut up and stop whining, I mean, those rockstars would have raped a few more girls, sure. But see, their grandchildren might not suffer the same, maybe, if they are lucky."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/19 08:33 PM
2

There was a discussion at the start of the XX century between Kautsky and Lenin. kautsky said that because the collapse of capitalism was inevitable, then we should sit still, because capitalism would collapse on its own. Lenin said that it was a wrong perspective, because capitalism would fall because human beings would throw that appart. Just because it was inevitable (to these marxists) that capitalism would raise people that would destroy it, it doesn't mean that the people who would destroy…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/19 05:29 PM
1

You were suspended :S
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 08:57 PM
1

Men shouldn't be sentenced by the book either.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 08:55 PM
1

Saying that it is just individualism doesn't make sense. Say, in US Civil Rights Movement was indeed just a movement towards more individualism. It is studied as such by Talcott Parsons' "Full Citizenship of the Negro American". But it still didn't happen until the civil rights movement happened. Would slavery have been abolished without the Civil War? Of course it would have been abolished, capitalism needs free labour, it was a system that was being abolished in the whole wolrld and it soon wo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 11:20 AM
1

If women had not organized around feminism, these changes would not have happened. Of course this is related to the growth of individualism. But to deny these changes were brought by the feminists is absurd to me. Street harassment being seen a bad thing, not calling domestic murders as murders of "love", recognizing having sex with someone that is passed out as a form of rape, not longer being ok for teachers to creep into teenager students, not longer having rockstars having sex with 13 year o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 10:08 AM
1

I have an intuition that the social changes feminists love to take credit for would have happned with or without them, minus the over-reaching of a "let's make everything into a revolutionary cause", sex war antagonism (except today it's called "gender war") and other forms of added ideological toxicity. There is more than one cause for something complex like that happening, but if you talk to a feminist, it's always them, and nothing else. There is absolutely no way that any of the changes that…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 02:23 AM
1

I was not understanding what were you trying to argue for and what were you trying for me to understand. In particular, I sometimes have the impression that you are saying "It would have been better if feminism had not happened." I, seing the social changes in my country in the last 4 years because of the feminist 4th wave revolution, have to completely disagree with that. I could give plenty of examples of the last years. Sitting still was not an option for them. It still could have been done b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 09:08 PM
3

Women attempt it more because they attempt it many times. You only need once to suceed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 09:02 PM
1

That is not a novel idea that you brough to my attention. Sure, sure. But it is good that we have that together. That was my impression, yes. No. Not at all. Social changes rarely work in the best way possible. That is the main reason why society always needs some reform. If we got it right from the start we would need social change just once. While feminism did have some changes for the better, it also reproduced toxic institutions, and reformulated old ailings into new ailings. They totally co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 04:40 PM
1

Yes. It could have been done in better ways. It is not my intention to excuse the bad behaviours in the logic of "means justify ends". I had a hard time understanding where you were coming from. I understand the point you are making there about the transformation from traditional to egalitarian values being driven by the real needs of real human beings Great!! but I am completely puzzled as to why you think this ideology-backed ugliness is the only way it could have happened. No, it could happen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 02:12 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/dqwjrp/thoughts_on_this_post_that_got_pretty_popular_on/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 11:46 AM
1

what kind of drawbacks you would need to see in that movement to conclude that maybe a better solution to those needs should / would come from elsewhere? If your question is about whether the solution should come from a reform inside institutions or from outside I would say both? Not sure I understood you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 01:18 AM
2

I do agree basically with the 12 step path, the tenets of Cathy Young. I myself am deep inside the philosophical school of ethics called nonviolent communication, and her steps I do agree with, like "recognize that behaving badly is not a monopoly of the male sex". But it is still not the crucial issue that impulses feminist actions. It is crucial to understand that if you are oppressed then your objective is DISENGAGEMENT first. Because stopping being oppressed is about your own freedom and aut…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 12:13 AM
1

It is ok, but I basically don't agree with you. Feminism exists because it is fulfilling a need although in an imperfect way. My country is decades before the US. So here it is more transparent. A status quo would have been disastrous for women and so they rejected it. The dead hand of ancestors does pressure present actions, of course. They always did. But on the contrary of freezing the conflict over, there is a change that is ongoing. The direction of the change is set up by unfulfilled needs…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/11/19 11:26 PM
1

Let me be clear: feminists take actions to harm women as much as they hurt men in order to sustain a dogma. Which is what you are saying. I'm not denying it. If they acknowledged that men suffered and were vulnerable, then the dogma giving sense to female suffering would not be useful anymore. This dogma implies four things: 1) Gender is a social construct that gets defined solely by power. 2) Patriarchy gets defined by a system where men have power over women. Men gets defined as the gender tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/11/19 05:56 PM
1

I think the most likely majority factor is the personal choice about life-work balance, and of being the nurturer vs career ambition. This is where the feminists get twisted into stone-faced grimaces, deny that most women likely are better care-givers than most men, and go full-blank slate on you. Yes, yes, I agree. But a lack of benefits for fathers does not help either. How many examples of this, undoubtedly, "a vocal minority of bad feminists whose actions are non-representative of the larger…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/11/19 05:36 PM
1

This is... Is this a quote from a sci-fi novel? I know we are in a leftist space, and that ideology constrains our understanding of reality, but this nonsense is taking things too far. I know it is an exageration.... but it is not THAT an exageration. Loneliness and capitalism are extremely interlinked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/11/19 12:51 PM
1

I'll refer to the example you post it first. So, these feminists were hypocritically defending men not having benefits for being fathers. But why do you think there are not more SAHD? Feminists can't complain about there not being enough fathers involved with their children, if they reproduce incentives for men to not being involved with children. If they want to "help women", then they are doing that wrongly. Which is my point that all issues are interconnected. Your example is a perfect exampl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/11/19 12:50 PM
1

Thank you a lot for your questions!!! First of all, we live in a capitalist economic system. Capitalism is compatible with lots of social and cultural progress, but only the ones that are solved through getting more freedom and individualism. Because progressives feel the pain and want to change the system, but they have hard limits on the direction where the system can change, they reduce all social structures that cause pain to those of oppresion: that is, they convert all fights into liberati…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 08:59 PM
1

Hahah, great ;)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 08:13 PM
1

Heyy, great :). We may not agree with everything, but I will try to keep an open mind while being around here and I may change a few ideas.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:40 PM
1

Yes. I strongly disagree with their blank slatism. While they handwave and if you read the academic texts it isn't technically wrong what they say, in practise they act as if humans were a Blank Slate, which is one of my hardest disagreements with them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:39 PM
1

No, structural and complex causes ESPECIALLY if they are not allies with feminism. I'm here because I have reached the conclusion around a year ago that male pain that this society structurally causes is enormous and because I strongly dislike the way Menslib gets modded and I believe that it highly restrains the talking about men issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:35 PM
1

So to quote Orwell, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others?" Neutrality can't be "on someone's side". There is no neutrality. This makes me primarily interested in the practical outcomes of your ideas, which you seem rather uninterested in (very perplexing to me), instead preferring to talk about intentions. Ohh, nono. I still disagree with the way many feminists are behaving and thinking. And yes, that have consecquences in the world. After studying it, I reached th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:32 PM
1

More like, if one of you does something bad -- oh my, let's marvel at these structural and complex causes, -- but if one of us does something bad, then all the fault lies with this individual. No. Structural and complex causes for men too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:22 PM
1

So the feminist hypocrisy and lack of consistency in carrying out their supposed noble ideals... is... wait for it... the fault of an invisible, nebulous evil force called "the Patriarchy"? Call it however you like. If an individual does something, it is the fault of someone. If plenty of people do, then it is a social problem with structural and complex causes. See? This is why I dislike american culture so much, you can't think beyond individuals.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 07:03 PM
1

was probably going to happen It could have happened, but it happened in the real world through feminism. This reads like propaganda of an authoritarian government. If feminist organizations reproduce traditional structures (which they do), the fault is still at the traditional structures, not the feminist people themselves who are brainwashed by thousands of years to reproduce gender roles.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 06:49 PM
1

It is not a religion. It is a system of political organizations. What I said is the opposite: the Church is not genuinly a religion, it is a political organization. It is a political party. Look, my country is not liberal, it is progressive, populist, leftist, etc. Progressives are opposed to religion being taught into schools NOT because the school needs to be a neutral place, but because what gets taught in schools is a political fight and they want their values to be taught. For example, exis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 06:47 PM
1

And I have to wonder, are they okay with teaching of religions in schools, or do they support the separation of church and state? The church is a political party disguised as a religion. Who is the one against being taught integral sexual education in the schools? In my country, it is mainly the catholic church. There is no hiding that these issues are a political fight between the catholic church and the feminists. And, so you know, the catholic church is winning for now (for example, abortion …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/11/19 04:38 PM
4

They get defensive because you use the excuse of men commiting the most violence to punish men collectively, despite studies showing that punishment, and particular collective punishment drives people towards violence. So I ask you that: what are you doing to stop the violence, why do you realize acts that cause violence to the world? No, that is not a rhetorical question. You were trolling, you were acting in a violent way, you know that. But if you search inside and connect with yourself you m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/10/19 08:36 PM
1

Some phrases that I love from the text: in the area of gender justice, women have been making great strides forward, talking to each other about the obstacles they face, calling out and defining their issues as women, and pushing back against sexist norms – while men’s issues are still most often shrouded in silence. Feminism is overall a very progressive phenomenon – one that takes women’s issues, yanks them out of the dark, and calls them out so that they can be known about and dealt with. The…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/10/19 04:40 PM
1

Yes, I'm well connected within feminist academia. Secondly, their theories in general look more like weapons crafted to fight the War of Ideas. Yes, most people in feminist academia are activists. They are not neutral and have an agenda. But that is not what I said. What I said is that most (almost all) believe that there is a power structure. But they consider that power structure to be unconscious and to not depend on "deliberation" or "willness".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/10/19 03:19 AM
1

Nono, I'm talking seriously. No feminist academic I have seen that suggested that oppression is deliberate. That is not part of, say, Butler's influencial theory, or second-wave feminism, it is not part of the marxist theories that influenced radical feminism, it is not part of the Duluth Model, etc. It is part of american commonplace culture, because of the extreme level of liberalism, but I don't beñieve that idea would be taken seriously in academical circles.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 08:24 PM
1

Sorry to answer late. I have personally read the legislative code where I live though, and it does say this, including the part about marriage where the father gets presumed custody in that instance (although divorce changes this). So, my understanding is that if they marry, the husband is presumed to be the father. If they are not married, the law doesn't pressume someone to be the father, thus he doesn't get custody. But how can he be made to ask child support if noone knows who is the father?…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 08:10 PM
1

If they do so while telling themselves stories that they are going to go about the business of emancipation disproportionately Yes, I agree with you. The most despicable lie they tell to dehumanize is that in traditional societies they wanted to deliberately oppress people. Patriarchy in feminist hegemonic theory is not about DELIBERATE oppression. I believe no serious feminist would believe that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 08:05 PM
2

I'm going to be a contrarian here, and say something I believe in. Does hatred even register in this scenario? I don't think it should, in a moral sense. Hatred is merely an emotion, as natural and normal for human beings to feel as love. It's the actions that count. True, but the story we tell ourselves influence in if we dehumanize them or not. And thus if we can build this world together with other people or not. According to UN the common saying “To my friends, everything; to my enemies, the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 06:15 PM
1

Yeah I basically agree with this. How do you see this relating to male disposability and prosperity? Male disposability is extremely linbked to a mode of production: the kin corporate mode of production. Basically, between the communal and the statist mode of production, this other system existed. The basic idea was the there were corporations ("families" or "clans") that had interests and alliances. These alliances were a system of war alliances, and a system for a flow of gods and ideas. And t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 01:57 PM
1

No, Engels is 150 years old. He was highly attune to that time anthropology, Morgan's one, which was very good... for that time. Marxist in the sense of dialectic materialism. Ok well now you are talking about societies that have private property. I thought we were talking about Hunter gatherer societies before conceptions of private property. Nono. See, Engels had it wrong. He mixed up hunter gatherer cultures with matrilocal horticulture cultures with private propierty. The "matriarchal" socie…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 03:29 AM
8

Just wanted to tell you that I agree with most of your deleted posts. Damn that menslib moderation is draconian.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 03:19 AM
1

If this was the extent to which they were used they might never have reached global cultural ascendance Sure. Not the marriage we are used to. Pair bonding is going to occur naturally (part of why I think the idea of community raised kids is unlikely), but this doesn't mean that the conventions of marriage like monogamy or paternal lineage hold the same value. No, true marriage existed, not just pair bonding. The idea of the fatherless children that existed in the past that Engels talk about is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 12:03 AM
1

Both private property and semisedentarism were only useful things due to the power of agriculture over hunting and gathering. They were nessacery adaptions to take advantage of this new technology. Private propierty and semisedentarism in collector hunter-gatherer societies. But none of this was around at this time. Marriage exists in almost every society.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 11:20 PM
1

Sure. There are other reasons to not be egalitarian. But agriculture does seem to move us in that direction. Yes (intensive agriculture)!!! If fact I believe I did not written, but the whole movement started with private propierty and semisedentarism. These semisedentarian societies of hunter gatherers with provate propierty are called Collectors. You don't know that if you don't know who the father is. They did know who the father is. I mean, as much as in the present day. In any case, if child…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 09:27 PM
1

Most of the egalitarian societies you are looking at aren't developed in terms of agriculture, which is why they don't value land ownership. Many of the societies that I mention that are inegalitarian are nomad. That includes hunter-gatherer and pastoral societies. But so was the role of the father. Fathers were deeply involved with their children. Well... technically speaking the children were grown comunally, but men were part of it. Once land ownership and paternal lineage gave men Once you h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 09:13 PM
24

We should start calling male privilege "benevolent misandry" so we can change these damn gender roles for once. I saw the idea once and loved it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 08:55 PM
1

Heyyy. After so many people disliking my vision I'm very happy someone liked it. I believe it is the correct way to interpret the so called patriarchy through a marxist lense.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 01:48 PM
2

They banned incels because they were scared for a mass shooting because of Joker movies. Gendercritical subreddit is not liked at all by admins and will have the axe eventually.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 01:46 PM
2

I just think this should be the legal default and that every parent is entitled to it without going through a costly legal battle with a questionable amount of success. Physical joint custody without child support? Yes, then we agree. What part of "legal default" and "can be modified for various reasons" do you not get? Ok, I thought you had to change it only on court or something. Yes, I agree with you then. Seriously... https://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2015/04/5-reasons-every-woman-…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 09:29 PM
1

If the father has to work full time, so does the mother. Fair is fair. She shouldn't get 50% of the child care responsibilities and 0% of the financial responsibilities, while the father is working double duty with 50% of one, and 100% of the other. We agree with it. Did I disagree with it somewhere? Look we already discussed this a couple of posts back, and you seemingly ceded the point at that time. I did get the impression that you didn't 100% understand what we were talking about, but honest…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 08:23 PM
1

The text that you showed me says this: in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage…the court shall ensure that each party has access to legal representation to preserve each party’s rights by ordering, if necessary based on the income and needs assessments, one party … to pay to the other party, or to the other party’s attorney This does not mean that the man needs to pay the woman. If the woman can pay it herself, then there is no need. Besides, what does it mean for one to pay each other? They…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 07:30 PM
10

There was a specific case that a user showed. It had all the hallmarks of abuse. And the mods said "it was just a personal experience, nothing to do with male general experiences". First of all, what gives the mods the legitimacy to say what is and what isn't common male experience? But secondly, that specific case had all the hallmarks to be full of splitting moments (splitting is a techical term, and is a hallmark of abusers) of a female abuser with borderline syndrom/mental illness. The user …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 06:33 PM
1

This is common in the legal system in general (outside of criminal court), and not even just for family court. I am not from the US. Can you talk me more about this? Sounds extremely bizarre to me. But I think it's pretty clear, and factually true, that there is a bias. The specific bias against joint custody might not be a 6 fold bias, but the bias is still there. Ok, yes. We agree that there is a bias. I still think it would be stupid to not litigate for joint custody of the children, when you…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 06:09 PM
1

The man payes for his wives lawyer? I'll need some stats on that. That's why they tried to bury it. They found out that, oops, men really are being discriminated against here, so we have to try and hide this. Maybe I didn't understand the stats. But it seemed to me that comparing men and women who asked for SOLE custody with how many of them got JOINT custody was comparing oranges to apples. I mean, why didn't they measure how many of the ones who litigated for joint custody got it? Like there's…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 03:51 PM
2

Yes. But women are adapting. The ammount of women who date down is bigger than it was before. It is a painful continuous progress. But I believe we are going there. But we need to accelerate the issue.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 03:44 PM
3

I don't think you'll like it either, but here you are :) So, I'll summarize how does patriarchy, male disposability and marxist modes of production interact in pre-gender-studies anthropology. This is seriously studied and you can search up what I'm going to say. Edit: I edited out the two most polemic and little sustained paragraphs, who were a little sociobiological. This implies that extremely early human societies (Original Affluent Societies) are all egalitarian. Not just egalitarian, but f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 03:39 PM
3

Women still want a provider, as became clear lately, they have a hard time finding men who earns enough Yes, they want that. But they want it less than in a past. Say now 70% want him to be the main providor, but the other 30% doesn't. That is progress, slow progress, but progress. And it would not have been able to happen if it weeen't for the big changes in gender roles.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:51 AM
1

I see where you're seeing "6 times as much" from these numbers, but I think this was first argued here, which looks specifically at men who do go to court: In the stats yoshi_win had, takimg into account only the ones that LITIGSTED, in 65% there were shared custody, and only 18% sole custody of the mother. Now, about physical custody, the mother still gets sole physical custody 52% pf the time (the man, 9%, and shared/split 33%). I'm not saying that men are at a disadvantage, they are, but it i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:44 AM
1

the fact that men are discriminated against in the cases that do go to court influences their choices out of court. That is true, but this idea that women get custody 6 times as much as men is misleading. Because there are many cases of shared custidy. 30% women get sole custody, 5% men get sole custody. And 65% is shared custody. That's the stats I had. In the stats yoshi_win had, in 65% there were shared custody, and only 18% sole custody of the mother. Now, about physical custody, the mother …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:27 AM
4

Kin corporate patrilinieal mode of production. KCPMP. People here hate my theories, but I strongly believe it is precise and adecquate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:17 AM
10

Tits, I appreciate you. I just want to tell you what specific case I'm talking about so you know I'm not talking out my ass. There was, a week ago, some guy that posted about trying to enact affirmative consent with his girlfriend. His girlfriend had unstable boundaries, and made him walk on eggshells, because she had borderline disorder. You told him that his was a personal problem and should talk about it in malesupportnetwork. The user involved was u/vegans*****choker, I put asterisks for ano…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:09 AM
2

I know that what I'm going to say is going tl disgust many. But only 4% go to litigation, and only 1.5% complete litigation. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpost.com/entry/dispelling-the-myth-of-ge_b_1617115/amp Besides, of that 4% where litigation occurs, only 30% ends up with the mother as a sole custody. I'm not saying that there is no bias, but thankfully, this is not the 80s anymore.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:02 AM
21

I do not know trollxchromosomes. My vision about Menslib is that I like the people, but that moderators systematically curtail all the decissions deciding what SHOULD cause men pain and what SHOULDN'T. A week ago, they told a guy who was emotionally abused by his BPD girlfriend that his was a personal problem and should write it on malesupportnetwork. And it was NOT a personal problem, he was being victim of an abuser. Menslib mods do things like that all the time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 01:00 AM
2

It is not a small fact. Fighting traditional roles is preciselt what we are trying to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 09:55 PM
3

It is not small. Our role is basically that: fight against traditional gender roles. I wouldn't say we are fighting against small things. People here get confused because although feminists many times fight against traditional gender roles, many times they enforce them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 07:39 PM
6

Providor and protector role, for a start. Letting go the providor role means that, for example, we will stop needing to earn a lot of money in order to be worth as people and to date, etc. Yes, expressing your feelings helps you a lot, I have been throught that and it really helped me. But it is not the only one. Others: society is recognizing more the role of the father. In many places of the world there is now payed paternal leave. Although single motherhood has indeed grown, many more men are…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 07:37 PM
7

Yeahhh, I agree with you. I need to frecquently talk to my friends to remember that feminists are not the man-hating monsters that some believe to be. Which is not to deny that institutional feminists took many actions that did hurt men. But I agree with you. If we genuinly believe that gender roles harm us, then we do have to thank feminism at least a little, because it was them to started the fight against gender roles. We need to take a stance: are we in favour or against traditional male rol…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 06:10 PM
1

Not only does the capitalist system have an interest in entrapping men to their provider/primary breadwinner role so men can continue to be the replaceable cogs and workhorses , and do the backbreaking and stressful jobs that most women are not able to do, just to prove their worth and generate profit for capitalists. Capitalism has a huge interest in having both men and women working. But even if some pressure on men has been lifted, it seems like we haven’t reached the point where men no longe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 02:28 PM
3

Women support each other, period. This is not about bigotry. Supporting each other is not a crypto-hating someone else and it doesn't have to be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 01:24 PM
2

Surely!!! It can be a difference of scale. But that difference is not so small. "I shouldn't have had to go through the lengthy and emotionally draining process of figuring out that I'm trans in order to get mainstream feminists to treat me like a human being." I do like this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 03:49 AM
3

I don't think it either. Just trying to blend to subtly reinforce the idea that there are different kinds of feminists. I mean, I do believe that liberal feminists do sometimes uphold traditional norms and that that traditional society is misandrist. But I do not believe mainstream feminists are more misandrists than mainstream society.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/19 03:48 AM
6

I agree with you. Although I would say that, in my oppinion, terfs are even more misandrists that the average feminist. I mean, look at gendercritical sub. I believe feminist misandry is more of a normalized socially accepted misandry, while gendercritical is an open over the top one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/10/19 11:40 PM
1

Sure, thaty is a form of political power. I mean, I know the US political institutions basically works through lobbies. BTW: curious about american history, when did feminist lobby groups formally were established? In tne 90s?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 09:51 PM
1

> There are no billionaires in the legislature It is political institutional power. I mean, I would not bring Weber's distinction between power and influence, but it would be relevant for this case: influence is mainly about legitimacy and ideology. Influence is like religion (BTW: until now, all the popes have been male, although I'm sure there are some female led religions).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 09:44 PM
1

I know what I am saying is the reason for the support for each other is because of the bias I disagree. In fact, I believe that women emotionally support men more than men support each other. It is not a finite size cake. when they labor for other women it is not considered that. That's because women emotional support is symmetric. They give and receive emotional support. Women give more emotional support to women than they give to men. Men give emotional support to women as much as they give to…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 09:14 PM
1

An in-group bias would be to show emotional support for women and not for men. But what we are asking is for men to show more emotional support for each other, not to show women less emotional support. And I agree with TC1827 that focusing amongst us should be a case of "affirmative action". Even feminists are asking us to focus in emotional support for other men instead of women (say, when they complain about "emotional labour").
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 08:39 PM
3

that women should support eachother against the wrongs patriarchy (even if they don't call it that way) does to them But women should support each other. It is a good thing to have emotional support.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 08:38 PM
1

I'm not saying that men need to become women. What I'm saying is that if we were more attuned to the feelings of men, men would hace it easier to become in contact with their own feelings, and would express them in ways that are better comprehended. I do believe that there is a pressure for men to be "rational" and disconnected from their bodies. Being integrated with your body and your feelings sounds a good idea for men. It isn't that men are defective women. But repeated lack of empathy and d…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 05:37 PM
1

It is complex. I agree that the idea of "men are defective women" is toxic. But I also agree that men need comprehension and empathy much more than they believe. And not only solutions. Yes, feelings are important, and not only reason. It is paradoxical, but as long as this society shuns men who say "I'm in pain", men will become """defective""". It's not about forcing men to stop having fun with friends, in activities and all, it is not about shaming men for the ways they express themselves. It…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 05:32 PM
3

Yes. I agree with you. I'm not so much a fan of "men have it worse" because of it, because I believe what causes men and women pain in this society is just different. However, since last year, searching how women related to each other (in twoxchromosomes) compared to how men related to each other (both in the manosphere and in menslib), made me realize that I would like us to relate in the understanding, empathetic and nonjudgemental way women relate to each other. There is a lot to learn, and I…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 01:37 PM
1

Good luck!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 01:33 PM
3

But it is false that men do not need empathy or emotional support! Just because they cannot trust to show their vulnerabilities because men and women will want to use those vulnerability against them, it doesn't mean that men do not need empathy. This is not to dismiss practical, solution focus relationships. But, for example, neither mgtows, neither incels are in their communities seeking solutions, they are seeking empathy and understanding.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 01:32 PM
1

Heyyy, great!!! I have not great hope, though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 01:29 PM
3

However we do have the empathy gap. Do we believe men are "wrong" because they are not empathetic to one other?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 11:39 AM
2

I see. I quite agree with what you said except with your most important assumption XD. that there are reasons why things have fallen as they have, and those reasons have a lot to do with biology and survival. I don't like sociobiology. I mean, I'm not a tabula rasa fanatic like most of the leftists, but I'm suspicious when I see sociobiological explanations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/19 01:45 AM
2

100% agree with you. Thankfully, my two friends although did have toxic relationships in the past are in much more healthy ones in the present. And I agree with you about the power mothers have on children.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 02:52 PM
1

No, true. That part I don't agree with. Let's say I agree with 90-95% of it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 02:48 PM
1

I do not deny biology. In any case, I do believe we need to construct men to stop seeking female validation. User banmale calls it to stop us from the "mother need".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 02:47 PM
1

Sure. I'm an anarchist (ancom). I'm glad that you liked the video :). I do support welfare state, I do support public health, education and retirement support for elder people. All those things do require a tax system.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 02:45 PM
3

I'm a leftist because I specifically don't believe that. I strongly strongly recommend you to watch "there is always a bigger fish" from Innuendo Studios. He explains it in a very clear way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 01:32 PM
0

I 100% agree with everything that text said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 01:24 PM
0

Because I don't believe it is a fight for who is on top. See "there is always a bigger fish" from Innuendo Studios.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 01:18 PM
7

I see. I believe that what is extremely important is for men to recognize when they are in abusive relationships to be able to get out. Your situation was different, since it was your mother. I do have two close friends with abusive mothers. One of them literally punched him a tooth off when he was a child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 01:15 PM
1

Well, this I agreed before reading you: The point of my post isn't to directly compare men and women as it is to address this argument that you see from feminists. They like to say A) that men can't be discriminated against, and you can't be sexist against men, because men are dominant in society and B) that whatever male problems exist in society are caused by men, not by women, and not by feminists (I think there are areas where any of the above are true: women, and feminists in particular, ar…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 12:14 PM
6

Well, some issues are nonsense, for example, women holding most of the wealth is mainly about widowed octogenarians and they controlling expenses is mainly about who goes to buy to the supermarket (which women are trying to avoid, because it is mainly work), and them being major receipients of welfare is because they are poorer. Some other issues are issues that I already knew, like homelessness gap and the issues about domestic and sexual assault, the empathy gap, etc. I do have my theories abo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 04:12 AM
2

I understand what you are saying. But that indeed well may be your projection on what you imagine the user thinks. Yes, I know about the issue of female-dominated professions paying less (including mental therapists). I'm just saying I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that it is the specific case. And say that the user indeed had a dislike for other women and that was a consecquence of an abusive mother. Wouldn't be a problem then to not be able to talk about it? I'm just saying that it is an ext…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/19 01:07 AM
2

I see. I meant if it was a (cis) woman talking about a male therapist. It is not that I deny that you could be right, but something about answering in that way does seem a bit off to me, don't know why.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 09:19 PM
8

Although I do share your worry of this subreddit becoming a place for just rage porn and misogyny, I also do believe that it is important to share empathy with the person that is expressing having been victim of abuse. I mean, say a woman (sorry, I know Lady Coraline is a trans woman, I just believe it is relevant in this context) said the same about her father, you wouldn't react in the same, right? I mean, I do agree that LC problem might be that she doesn't understand female issues, but it co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 09:04 PM
1

You need to stop talking so much with radfems, because it will hurt your mental health.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 05:02 PM
1

Do you think if women were in the same roles as the men in those societies, they would produce equal levels of atrocities or not? Also, men are not essentially evil. Everyone is capable of harmful actions. If men many times have made some kind of atrocities (as well as many many good things), that is a consecquence of the system.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 04:56 PM
2

This helps me understand better how you guys see gender relationships. Thank you, I'll ponder about it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 03:53 PM
9

I agree!!! I mean, saying random things to a woman in a street, like shouting it to her, is indeed streer harassment. But Nice Guys are fabricated because of believing that showing sexual interest is bad everywhere at any time. And it also makes me angry that they portray the fact that more women are in college than men, as bad for the women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 12:15 PM
3

We need to diffund how a female abuser operates. Not only to act once the situatiin happens, but also to protect men from being abused when they are in the early stages. Recently, a male victim of a female abuser was dismissed on Menslib arguing that "that is a personal problem that should be posted on malenetworksupport, not a male's issue" (it is one of the reasons I dislike that sub). I am reading very interestly BPDLovedones subreddit, since it has a good recopilation of male victims of fema…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/19 09:32 AM
1

Yes. That is true. But they still thought in terms of class. They just were tryinh to harmonize the needs of the workers in relation to the capitalists. They were socialdemorats, not communists. But socialdemocracy is still different to neoliberalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 10:24 PM
1

Because it implies that you are no longer fighting against capitalism, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 10:08 PM
1

They rejected class, that is what made them neoliberal. In fact, that was lauded, it was called the New Democrat Movement. The time of Bill Clinton. It was a response to the growth of Reagan republicans.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 09:49 PM
1

I agree with "try more often". There is a thick line between trying more often and trying after the other person said "no". Then again, if you really lack the social abilities, trying a lot and failing might become really frustrating.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 08:12 PM
1

I agree with you!!!! PUA isn't on principle bad. The community is quite awful. As you know, I myself like M Manson pretty much. At the level of helthy communities, mixed groups, sounds a great idea. Didn't know that existed in Netherlands.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 08:10 PM
1

True. It can be more attuned.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 08:08 PM
1

The left and feminists say otherwise. Whatever they say. The democrats stop being about the working class and pandering to the working class is why they went republican. Sure, they remembered race and gender but they forgot class. Democratic party became fully neoliberal.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 08:07 PM
2

Great statistics!!! Thank you for sharing!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:54 PM
2

Thank you for the summary!! Always good to learn.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:50 PM
0

No, WTF?? Sexually harassing women is not ok. The fact that we didn't know that 20 years ago is not an excuse. I do not support the demonization of Domingo. I'm just saying that denying (female) feelings of pain isn't a solution at all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:46 PM
1

Exactly!!! The State should pay for it. You shouldn't grab a random man in the Street and force him to pay for the child. The child welfare is societal's problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:45 PM
2

It is a liberal interpretation of marxist writings. And I don't mean "liberal" in a sense of intersectional, you can treat intersectionality in a structural way. Liberal in a way of thinking all from the point of individuals.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:40 PM
1

Let me say: whites are not all equal. US has two different races of whites: there arr whites from the Coasts and rednecks/hillibillies. Lumping them together is racist. Redneck/hillibilly ethnicity IS suffering a lot, and that is one of the reasons they are becoming republican.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:39 PM
1

I would think it is to solve the problems. But how can you solve it when there's no awareness and limited amount of research done on the problem? As how do you fix something when you don't even understand what the problem entails. 100% agree with you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:33 PM
1

If you don't address it as a men's rights/issue is it really addressing a men's rights/issue? Yes, it is, since it makes men's lives better
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:30 PM
3

Also men's rights (though we never hear that term) in the form of worker's rights and recognizing "diseases of despair" like opiate/alcohol addition and suicide, and their root causes. Yessss. Deaths of despair are both men's rights and caused by capitalism. Right-winger MRAs can't genuinly tackle opioid crisis.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:29 PM
1

I agree!!! That BLM movement, well, they arr black men the ones dying!!! They would quite blame the fact that the black MEN are the ones dying on toxic masculinity. This is a HUGE victim blaming, as if dying was their fault.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:25 PM
3

No. It's your insecurities speaking. We men are responsible for many positive things. And besides, many women are heterosexual, they do indeed like men. Besides, almost all humans give to their surroundings much more good than pain. Besides, most inventions were made by men, you can thank them for inventing things.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 06:20 PM
1

Sure!!! Not about bodies or about sex. But it could be about confidence, or about stoicism, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 11:14 PM
1

Yeahh, sounds reasonable. It's like, that guy is already telling you he's not attractive. So why bother.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 11:06 PM
1

Look, I'm an incel as well as you (although I'm currently dating 2-3 women, so I'm very near to stop being a virgin). I was not at all someone without a life (lots of hobbies, political activism, a fulfilling laboral career). But the romantic market is indeed unbalanced, I believe. Why? One or the reasons, for example, is that many men do not get emotional needs or physical touch needs from male and female friends, while women do. Another of the reasons, is that virgin males are seen as failures…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 11:04 PM
2

I liked how you expressed it. I also dislike the norm that men cannot be needy. I mean, isn't it fucked up that society deems less attractive the men who are most in need of affection?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 02:35 AM
3

Nono, look you ARE worthy of love. You need to see yourself as worthy of love or you are going to become crazy. Believe me, not having sex sucks, but believing you are not worth love makes you go nuts.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 02:34 AM
1

You couldn't have said any of it better.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 02:30 AM
2

Exactly!!!! Something like that but with insecurity or something?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 02:28 AM
1

We need to make a living beyond women. As long as us men are so needy and dependent on them, that is not possible.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 02:27 AM
2

And shame is stupid. It worsens the problem that you are trying to solve. It blocks empathy towards the person who is shamed while at the same time making sure the person shamed will be unable to feel any empathy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/19 10:29 AM
1

Marginally. In a war, around half of the casualties are military and half civilian.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/19 10:17 AM
2

I mean, yes. Society does dismiss us when we are in pain. Now, how we fight for be seen as vulnerable is another thing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/19 10:16 AM
8

Male victims of sexual abuse and domestic violence marginalised; the horrific gender imbalance in homelessness and drug addiction ignored; the Male suicide epidemic at best brushed aside and at worst blamed on men; the devastating inequalities in parental access to children in straight divorce etc. And who cares about things like paternity leave or working hours at the bottom or the middle I am sick of listening to right wingers demeaning other men for thinking some women has valid problems too,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/19 03:37 AM
2

Yes, this happens. But a court both needs to know about abusive behaviours and not let abusers use children to control their partners, and do not pressume that (the man) is abusive in a divorce conflict. I mean, some things do not exist, for example "parental alienation syndrom" (it is very easy to check if a child was genuinly abused in a Gessell camera). That said, there needs to be a balance between checking that abusers do not have access to their children and partners AND the issue that it …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/19 10:59 PM
1

This. It is not that there are not hateful feminists. It is just that taking individual random feminists to show how awful they are, even if it is a way of conveying how many are able to post it in reputable news articles kind of bloats the page. It turns into something like a rage porn, which is not what I want this site to be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/19 10:56 PM
2

Well, there are two issues that I believe are basic: to listen without judging and to hear the pain before jumping to throw their own responsability. That does not mean to not be clear to set up men to connect with their own agency, afterwards. It's just that men almost never receive validation for their feelings first. Feelings validation needs to be temporally and logically before accountability. There is this text "Radicalizing the Romanceless" that basically says that, and is liked by many i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/19 01:33 PM
2

Great that you asked!!! I also want to thank you for engaging in good faith so long. My point is this one: not everyone is capable of having chemistry (aka, connection) with another person. Shame disconnects and guarantees that you won't connect with everyone. And the belief that-you-are-not-nice-enough-to-receive-love guarantees the shame that will guarantee that you'll not have chemistry with anyone. The ideology of Good and Evil creates the Shame that makes it impossible to create Compassion …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/19 12:44 AM
1

One last thing. It is important that the logic of love meritocracy is over. It is not true that love is a prize for the good people and loneliness is a punishment for the bad people. Reality does not work that way. The idea of meritocracy of love creates the ideology of NiceGuys, who believe love is a prize for deferrence and obedience towards women (and get angry when they do not get that prize). Love is not meritorcratic, shouldn't be meritocratic either. The ideology of loneliness as a punish…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/19 01:30 PM
2

Also, I wanted to thank you a lot for being involved in helping men out from abusive relationships, among other things. I mean, there are very few people involven on it, as far as I know it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 10:56 PM
1

To understand why I care about all this, I want you to pay attention to the way the risk factors of radicalization are related to maleness. First there is failure and not being part of society from an economic standpoint. Failure and economic success are totally requirements for men to be seen as completely humans worthy of love. Failed men are not men and are not human: Being Unemployed Having a Sporadic Work History Having Less Education Having a Lower Social Economic Status Failing to Achieve…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 10:22 PM
1

Heyy, great!!! Just to be clear, I am not saying that someone needs to be traumatized in a specific sense. There is an issue of suffering though. Beyond James Gilligang (which I believe it is the best author and would totally start here), you can also take a look at Jess Hill (which portrays a similar idea), I should also add the investigations about restorative justice (which, you know, is the most successful way of justice), you can also add the classification of John Gottman, and about border…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 09:54 PM
1

I do not want to cite right now the list of papers that support my view, James Gilligan is just a good point of departure. I also do not ask you to take interest in that subject, if you want to read him, sure, if you don't that's ok too. In any case, there is a reason why monsterizing people and believing them to be kind of from another species, doesn't help me taking into account male issues. There was an interesting text around here comparing the narratives between men-on-men violence vs black…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 09:10 PM
1

I recommend you to take a look at James Gilligan work.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 08:54 PM
1

Radicalization, sadism and lack of empathy are never just because. I recommend you to start from James Gilligan, if you want criminology and research. He relates pain and trauma to violence in a very clear way. Evil is subjectively applied to certain actions and behaviors, what's considered evil may vary from cultures but arguing that it is a concept does not exist is false. Evil presupposes punishment. That system of ethics, caled by Nietzche "slave ethics" is extremely dangerous to create a ha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 08:48 PM
1

Finally you are talking sense. But that is pretty much the widely understood definition of "unconditional love". Hey, greattt!! But it is not mine, I try to folow the ethics -even if most times I fail- of NVC (nonviolent communication). I contest that the solution is actually that we should not desire toxic women or toxic men by default, and evil people are not entitled to love in any way. Evildom does not exist. What exists is harmed people who are a danger to themselves and to others. So let m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 08:30 PM
1

you're basically saying that women should accept abusive men in their lives even if it kills them No. I am not saying this. Essentially what you are saying to me is that instead of leaving my boyfriend who abused me and broke my self-esteem in order to find a healthy and fulfilling relationship with a man who loves me and treats me with respect, I should have just stayed with my abuser and suffered because apparently abusers are entitled to that as long as they are male. I am not saying this. Pa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 07:56 PM
1

Thank you for asking!!! The classical answer would be that women are desired on their own, even if they are abusive, or depressive, etc. Because of sex. There is an inherent need for femaleness amongst men that women do not have. Whether that is biology or societal trauma that men have, it does not matter. Women are desired at the very least as an object. There is an empathy gap (scientifically proven) that is higher towards women and towards men. This implies that women spontaneously receive em…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 07:18 PM
1

Heyyy, sounds a great idea!!! Keep us informed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/19 03:22 PM
1

The idea is the same. For Marx, "work" is the relationship between humankind and nature, specifically the way humankind transforms Nature. As humankind transforms nature it does so in an organized way, not individually. I kind of skipped the technical aspect. Productive forces: these include human labour power and means of production (e.g. tools, productive machinery, commercial and industrial buildings, other infrastructure, technical knowledge, materials, plants, animals and exploitable land).…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/19 09:45 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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