TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

NoMoreMisterMaybe Archive

View 1 posts and 626 comments by NoMoreMisterMaybe on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

Social IssuesNoMoreMisterMaybe/r/MensRights14/03/21 10:16 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Did you though? Cause the stories from the UK and the US sure seem a lot more intense.
/r/MensRights02/11/21 03:58 PM
28

Feminists in the Netherlands largely only worry about "lack of women in leadership positions" etc., while falseflagging about caring how men feel.
/r/MensRights02/11/21 03:20 PM
1

They can fuck off as well. I'm just saying putting stress on an already stressed teenager lacking confidence isn't unlikely to help. In reality the one most at fault here were the supervisors. They should've noticed the girl in the video was in "hunter mode" and would continue pursuing unless taken out of it. Like the boy doesn't have enough to worry about weighting the potential backlash of even punching her against letting her continue on. And teaching the other kids to have some sense of hono…
/r/AntiFeminists25/10/21 11:42 PM
2

This is cute and all, but you're talking about a cornered teenager here. "Careful retaliation" isn't exactly what he's going to be thinking, especially not after being chased. Frankly, the whole having to think about "careful retaliation" is only going to stress out an already stressed teenager even more, likely to the point of one harming the other more than what would be the result otherwise. Your advice makes more sense towards someone with clear confidence and judgment in their abilities.
/r/AntiFeminists25/10/21 11:26 PM
6

You just wrote 4 paragraphs to justify shitty behavior and you still misunderstood the GP. Let that sink in for a second. “how tall are you?” “6’1, how much do you weight?” I replied. She unmatched me a minute later. Read as: Her: "How tall are you?" Him: "6'1. How much do you weight?" You have been unmatched. It's almost as if Western women are entitled when it comes to dating, to the point they'll get upset if they catch a hint about weight being important to the guy despite them having no qua…
/r/MensRights25/10/21 11:02 PM
20

Men also need to be constantly reminded that money or material stuff does not solve or compensate for whatever they lack. Which is why plenty of women will literally date just for money to the point studies have suggested how much money a man can make to compensate. Take a break from Reddit and take a hike through Google Scholar.
/r/MensRights22/10/21 01:29 PM
4

Don't feed the roid trolls. He forgot to take his neutropics stack.
/r/MensRights21/10/21 06:39 PM
1

You see what I mean? You're splitting hairs. Stereotype or not be damned, you can take a look through Google Scholar and come to the painfully obvious conclusion what women prefer in their partner starkly contrasts unsuccessful men, unsuccessful in the broadest sense possible. Take a further look and it should also be obvious what starkly contrasts men's preferences. Then look at which gets demonized by social media and which gets applauded. The sudden uprising of "incel" as a slur towards men s…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 06:10 PM
1

I'll say it differently. While I think you and many others have a great ideal, that ideal only works under the assumptions the other party is willing to listen once you abide their standards and that playing the game will grant the outcome desired. It's those assumptions I and many others have come to doubt over the many years, as we see increasing hostility towards single men (either directly or indirectly through taxing and such), virgins (see the whole incel thing), men who swear off women (M…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 03:56 PM
2

With all due respect, this is incredibly naïve. Men and even Mensrights in the past have done more than their fair share to open the discussion on equal grounds, only to be subverted and thwarted even on cases which would not harm women at all. Vice versa there would not just be a massive outrage if men did the same, there would be an actual response as well. MRAs have been playing the same game society wants them to play for decades now, yet it's only gotten worse with the rise in hatred agains…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 12:12 PM
5

This took way too long to be posted. People really should know the effects of hormonal birth control first and foremost. Medication, stress and diet don't help either.
/r/AntiFeminists03/10/21 02:44 PM
5

My dude, you can't even spell "feminism" correctly. I don't think you're in any position to talk about it. If you'd done your research, you'd know how to spell it through sheer osmosis.
/r/AntiFeminists02/10/21 08:11 PM
0

Yeah, it truly is farcical that someone with different anatomy and hormone levels has unique problems. Come on now. Don't perpetuate the gender war further with this crap. You don't have to be closed off from the idea women have their own problems to fight feminism or further awareness of men's problems.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 02:50 PM
12

Here's an idea: don't toss yourself into a sub with the idea of making people stop butting heads, and then butt heads. Heck, even posting bait like because this sub acts like women's rights issues don't exist puts the validity of your motive in question. Surely you must realize with parent's comment and the recommendations you gave on your own, social policing men in one of the few areas they can vent isn't going to sit well. Young men, let alone guys on Reddit, aren't exactly welcomed for makin…
/r/MensRights05/07/21 05:32 PM
7

Try making a dating account larping as one of those ugly women, it'll blow your mind. What these women have trouble with is getting past sex stage. Often because they're still trying to date outside their league.
/r/MensRights05/07/21 04:50 PM
1

Not in the slightest. This is a really important thing for Devs to understand that you seem to be missing. Arguing a technical solution with a coworker of the same discipline generally doesn't require me to translate jargon or consider their inability as much as arguing a solution with a coworker of a different discipline, but who will be using the solution. Arguing with a customer who wants a solution which also attracts an audience is something different from writing a tool which just needs to…
/r/MensRights29/05/21 09:13 PM
0

One set of soft skills is knowing that you have customers, whether they are the company's "customers" or internal customers. This is really just trying to argue semantics. Arguing with an external customer is something else than an internal customer, and it depends entirely who the internal customer is. At that point just generalize all discussions with multiple stakeholders as customer support. An entry level developer can get away without having those soft skills, but anything more than that..…
/r/MensRights29/05/21 08:23 PM
17

Because tallness usually decides your maximum size, and bigger men were generally more affluent (you can't eat well if you don't have the food to begin with) and stronger, so from a bio-evolutionary point of view, it made more sense for women to be impregnated by big guys and for people to be nice to bigger guys (halo effect). Which has likely led to the side-effect that height is considered without looking at comparative width. We're stupid animals, a lot of things don't really make sense (edit…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen29/05/21 07:00 PM
0

Way late reply: you're doing the exact thing I was posting against. I'm saying most that are expected. Yes, you need to communicate. No, you don't need to have the entire list that companies demand because they are trying to make their programmers also do customer support and consultancy at the same time, as well as believing this magical wonder world where "as long as we talk a lot, everything will fix itself". If anything, the soft skills people really need to make great software are severely …
/r/MensRights29/05/21 06:26 PM
9

MRM sexist! Feminsts extremist! BLM extreme leftist! Clearly we don't live in the same world, since every time I open a newspaper, articles surrounding women use far more rosy and positive wording (even for crimes) than they do for men. We can't waste our time with that and so can't you. You're not spending any time on it at all. You're here on an MRA forum trying to make people believe "yeah dude feminism is totally cool its just a bunch of crazy kids ignore them". Let your damn actions speak f…
/r/MensRights20/05/21 10:45 AM
25

This isn't "a crazy bitch". These people are forerunners and spokeswomen for feminism. They are the ones who set out to define the movement, and who feminists have willingly aligned themselves with, without regard for what those words actually mean. The entire sidebar is filled with examples and your unwillingness to read through it and still comment, doesn't show a lot of respect towards people trying to show you otherwise. If these supposed "cunts" are really so bad, start demonizing them. The…
/r/MensRights20/05/21 08:55 AM
11

There really is only one thing I have to state: every five years or so, the number of new developers doubles (edit: not the number of new developers, but the 5 year window implies half of all developers is inexperienced). And a shockingly high number of them cannot implement something as simple as FizzBuzz. There's a reason the "10x" developer myth continues to perpetuate. This is even worse considering most software out there in large companies is trash. Including many big corporations (yes, th…
/r/MensRights20/05/21 08:08 AM
21

The biggest joke being, at least for CS (which is one of the most in-demand STEM majors), degrees are becoming increasingly useless thanks to all this pandering and general degree inflation. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 2-3 decades, we'll see a transition to "self-made programmers", which requires risks, which generally isn't associated with women. Software dev is already being flooded with pseudo-management jobs, pseudo-tech-mostly-bureaucracy jobs and more. Soft skills are being over…
/r/MensRights20/05/21 07:23 AM
9

This is the real issue and we see the inverse time and time again in women who have been raised to give a damn about men. When the world tells you from age 4 men are oppressive, evil beings and you are the strong woman who shouldn't take shit, is it really that weird so many women have trouble bonding or relating to men at all? They've been told for years not to.
/r/MensRights18/05/21 03:54 PM
6

There are better subs for this but whatever. When men show kindness, compassion, etc to each other, are these feelings really genuine? Or are they fake? Their with-woman-present state and without-woman-present state don't necessarily depict anything of one another. The reality is, men do have an out-group bias instead of an in-group bias. Also a reality is that many men aren't in satisfying relationships, creating this kind of competition. And also a reality, is that these scenarios don't even n…
/r/AntiFeminists18/05/21 02:53 PM
13

With all due respect, acting like a complete doormat by indirectly validating this behavior through defending it, isn't doing the male population any favors. Passive destruction of relationships through inaction, misguided intentions and the inability to take responsibility for one's actions is a huge reason for the current state of the dating, marriage and relationships scene. Think of it this way. You're indirectly teaching your daughter and her peers this behavior is okay. Is that really the …
/r/MensRights17/05/21 09:26 AM
3

From my own experience, the number of men and women who can't cook are about the same in younger generations. Older generations still had strong trad roles which made the men less likely to pick up cooking, hence the "I don't want to be your mom" stigma on younger men. I'd wager more women love to cook compared to men, but the apex is mostly men (being a chef is really brutal, highly competitive, etc.). But at the same time, more men who don't feel strongly about cooking end up doing their cooki…
/r/MensRights12/05/21 09:02 AM
8

Right. that will inhibit progress. Again, this is a very blunt statement which has yet to be proven. If you've looked at the history of men's rights at all, it has been shamed regardless whether it tried to be nice to women or not. MensLib can give you a good taste of what happens when you become so spineless, your public opinion is worth more than what you stand for. I just want to gain support for mens rights without pushing people away so that the movement can start opening people's eyes to t…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 03:52 PM
5

And then you get back to the point I mentioned before, which you have yet to answer and ties back to your opening statement. One of your main concerns seems strikingly like not wanting poor judgment from outsiders. Due to the nature of the subject, these people will always get poor judgment until society changes or conformists don't get clout for being conformists. Being critical is already condemned. You put them in their corners, they will still be unheard, but in some idealistic world, MRA wo…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 02:47 PM
9

Your definition of "rights" be damned. Having kids or support for your kids wasn't a right until too long ago either. People had no trouble letting your kids starve to death in times of famine. What is and isn't a right changes with the times. Nor does someone opening their mouth about what is happening to dating infer that the solution is a "right to date". It could be as simple as having a critical look at the education system, or a restructure of what can and can't be monetized on, like Tinde…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 02:33 PM
10

So you would rather they be silenced away to places and have them draw the hate instead? Look, I get your point. But real question: do you think it is in any way okay for people to be resented because they are curious whether or not something as integral to life as partnership, romance and love is being trivialized? Because that's also what is happening to men right now. If anything, their continued silencing and shaming of the people questioning what is going on, is exactly what is fanning the …
/r/MensRights10/05/21 01:42 PM
2

It is so easy for women to get a date (much harder to find an actual boyfriend), that you are prompted to be a bit skeptical at first - skepticism that might come across as entitlement even if that is not a true reflection of their character. This doesn't make any sense if you investigate just a bit further. Most of the traits selected for are traits common in both one-night stands and LTRs. Furthermore, due to the harsh requirements, a lot of mimicry takes place. Making it hard to distinguish p…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 01:25 PM
3

Feminism, executing under the idea that it must rectify imbalances by uplifting women, will naturally be blind to any case where men need to be uplifted. It also doesn't consider resource allocation except for trying to gain as much as it can to distribute to female rights, expecting a different force to straighten it out. At best it is "male-neutral", but in practice, it is often anti-male solely from pulling away resources from an egalitarian issue benefiting both sexes. Simple question: Do yo…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 09:12 AM
7

It's just women back then were way more feminine and not stressful to be around It is exactly this. Society has been telling women repeatedly to become more masculine without directly saying so. Meanwhile it has done the opposite for men, becoming more feminine. At the same time, standards for men have risen absurdly and they are setup for failure as kids: how in blazes do you expect men to be virile if you nuke their diets with corn syrup as kids? How can you expect them to lead and dominate (n…
/r/MensRights10/05/21 08:03 AM
8

Who cares how many sexual partners someone had, or what happened in the past Anyone who has ever looked at behaviors can tell you otherwise, the far majority of people do not change permanently, if at all. Both their past as well as their number of sexual partners are suggestive as to whether a person is compatible with you in the long term. It's one thing to hyper focus on virginity. It is another thing entirely to be as naïve to believe nothing matters except the present. Honeymoon periods do …
/r/MensRights10/05/21 07:23 AM
4

I don't think Red Pill has an answer to this as much as just trying to make the best out of it and enjoying the situation for what it is, feeling that things won't change anyway. They've been at it for I believe over a decade now, and the tone has visibly changed to be more pessimistic about the outlook. The remainder of the manosphere largely does the same, either ignoring society or checking out of society. Even tradcons (which are kinda manosphere?) generally leave society where possible beca…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 07:28 PM
3

This whole thing sounds like you're complaining about your dating life and. Has nothing to do wirh any issues or rights. This is a really bold assumption. A stupid one too, considering just a few lines later, I am already writing about the insignificance of context regarding women's acceptance. I would urge you to throw away society's brainwashing that everything a guy says in regards to women's labeling of men immediately has to do with sex. It comes off very shallow and dishonest, too. ​ But t…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 04:28 PM
14

You aren't really accepted in society as a man unless you're dating or married to a woman. Which is a huge barrier for men who are single, especially when it comes to socialization. "Bachelor" has had a huge stigma against it for many years and continues to do so. Men as old as their late 20s living a lone, rich life have frequently been called far worse, even (especially?) if they were known to sleep around / be successful with women. For all the complaining about how men "aren't entitled to se…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 04:08 PM
2

And talking about feminism may create a focus or distraction, but no problem is solved Agreed. Unfortunately, most our problems are resource-constrained. You can't magically solve every issue on Earth. So sides exist on what is more important. Lo' and behold, sides start fighting one another. That's the main thing about men's rights' somewhat anti-feministic stance. Feminism has made it abundantly clear they will funnel most of society's resources to female-first issues, sometimes over egalitari…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 03:01 PM
2

Pretty sure the author of Shield Hero wanted to highlight the struggles of being unfairly accused, and what tactics people will use against men to accuse them or to belittle women, as if they can't hold agency over their own actions (you know, that one scene early in season 1, episode 4). Also why Raphtalia is one of the better examples of a strong female character. Since Redo is kind of a short anime trying to fit most of its manga inside a typical 13 episode season while highlighting the ecchi…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 01:32 PM
2

Easily one of the best anime of the 2010s, though I'm biased towards (semi-)anti-heroes. If you liked Redo thematically but want something a bit easier and typical for isekai, more focused on the world and the story, explores more different themes and the protagonist makes a different decision than "revenge shall be mine", it is a must watch. The manga is already pretty far ahead of the anime, though two new seasons have been announced due to overwhelming reception. The most refreshing thing is …
/r/MensRights06/05/21 01:06 PM
3

Yup. That's also why I mentioned sitcoms. Despite sitcoms having to "tone down" and fall for these stupid things. Despite the "redemption arcs" where she becomes some amazing woman of the house + career woman. Besides the obvious "man of the house is an idiot, woman of the house is somehow a diamond in the rough who barely ever shows her full potential", most of them still have to write in a way that sex differences are at least slightly nuanced. Turns out even the majority of women aren't inter…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 12:43 PM
4

That's kinda what I'm saying. They are fairly egalitarian in their own sense, and they also aren't blind to the obvious differences in strengths of men and women, and how they play off of one another. Meanwhile most western media wants to trivialize the entire thing and either pedestalize women, or androgynize the sexes so strengths and weaknesses are less nuanced and people can have this nice image that "men and women are the same".
/r/MensRights06/05/21 12:30 PM
3

It is just a low-effort target, the whole of west is already primed to hit on "clear examples of misogyny" and anything that presents women in a position of submission or victimization at hands of a guy, let alone a successful protagonist, is deemed too much. Friendly reminder most people on the internet have the analytical skills of a child and can't even separate the obvious narrative devices from the obvious appeals to horny guys for views, and most of the critics lump the two together. Doesn…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 12:20 PM
6

male who is victim of rape & abuse by bunch of women Nitpick: this isn't completely right. The whole premise of the show is just a guy who got taken advantage of by a supremacist country, fed up with it all and decides revenge is the best course of action. While the abusers were predominantly women, the show highlights both male and female abusers. Obviously, the fact the focus is on just the women/misogyny shows the comparison made isn't right. Keyaru is an anti-hero who gives absolutely zero s…
/r/MensRights06/05/21 11:50 AM
2

Because in internet lingo, everything they don't disagree with is right wing*, misogynist, unintellectual, etc. Most online individuals feel conceited enough that because they learned a few hivemind things in their teens, they can now call others "idiots" for not believing the same, without giving any arguments as to why. Doesn't just happen with feminism, but with other things too. The internet of today appeals to the lowest common denominator, frequently those who are easily manipulated and la…
/r/AntiFeminists06/05/21 10:34 AM
6

I mean nothing special aside from "womanhater" whenever I don't vehemently agree with their random points or point out the hundred things wrong with feminism. And my favorite, "righter". As in, alt-rightwing person (this came presumably from a male feminist, not a female one). Though most of them would rather spin 5 paragraphs on how I'm not being honest or some shit when they don't want to answer the question.
/r/AntiFeminists06/05/21 10:16 AM
3

This isn't binary and there is missing context / implied context. If someone else backs off once you stand up for yourself, the other group doesn't necessarily "submit". The context implies one of the two must come out as a victor, as if the game is zero-sum. Most situations in life aren't zero-sum, especially not for modern people. This is a gross misrepresentation of many leader/follower-type relationships (mentor-mentee, dom-sub, parent-child, captain-first mate), only highlighting an abusive…
/r/MGTOW205/05/21 04:25 PM
6

I expect normal people to read the rules. This looks like it breaks at least 2, maybe 3.
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre05/05/21 09:25 AM
2

This isn't really anti-feminism as much as a dab on conservatives masquerading as faux-pas traditionalists trying to get cookie crumbs by pushing misandrist narratives.
/r/AntiFeminists28/04/21 03:42 PM
0

If you're not in the weakest 20% as a man, you will destroy 99% of all women out there in terms of strength 1-900-come-the-fuck-on. Surely this should insinuate enough the underlying context is physical strength, not combat prowess. Now extrapolate what an equal upper body strength between untrained men, and trained women, means for the majority of women who don't train when meeting what looks like an average male stranger alone. If anyone truly wanted to dissuade the premise of the original com…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 07:58 PM
1

And that is objectively wrong. Higher testosterone people will have more muscle mass than their equally trained, lower T, otherwise equal counterparts. You only need to watch 10 boys grow up, each under the same set circumstances, to realize this. Even many studies say otherwise. You need to do both to maximize your muscle mass. T increases both current muscle mass, and potential maximum muscle mass. Training closes the gap between current and potential maximum muscle mass (by increasing current…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 07:40 PM
0

Don't strawman only to retort with a poor argument, please. It doesn't make you look intelligent. You're also moving the goalpost.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 07:36 PM
1

Elaborate your second segment. Testosterone already increases muscle mass without having to train, though it prepares the body to be more responsive to stimuli for further increases, too. Obviously, you still need the food to perform the required synthesis in both scenarios.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 06:54 PM
3

Read my response to the parent. You don't need to be remotely fit to be stronger than the majority of women. Testosterone alone will make you stronger, despite what many roidheads say (you need exercise to maximize the benefits, not to get any benefits at all). You're still comparing a larger than 99% of women not doing any form strength training, to a larger than 99% population of men having far higher testosterone regardless of whether they train or not. Even the fat ones.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 04:22 PM
1

I would say it's not even 99%. The average men being stronger doesn't mean the majority of men are more powerful. Almost all men are stronger than the majority women. If you're not in the weakest 20% as a man, you will destroy 99% of all women out there in terms of strength. Many of the top percentile women require steroids to do so. The strong ladies out there part of the bleeding edge, generally get outdone in absolute mass by an average guy eating a proper diet and doing a 3 times per week po…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 04:01 PM
8

Just to entertain the question beyond the obvious: These people are profiting off feminism. They will take advantage of other feminists' naivete, male or female. Their priority is not helping women: that hasn't been feminism's goal for a long while, and it is extremely easy to prove. At that point, their validity doesn't matter, as long as the outrage porn they spew is good enough for their followers to listen to and pay 10 bucks a pop for.
/r/MensRights15/04/21 05:15 PM
33

Woman who knows shit all about the manosphere talks about the manosphere, claiming to know everything. More news at 11. You got the exact response you wanted. Putting endless 1-paragraph statements on your belief of what incels, PUAs, TRP, MGTOW, black pill, MRA (technically not manosphere but gets lumped in anyway) are will not invite them back to play on your terms. You showed them you will change the rules, cheat, flip the table and whatever if things don't suit you, yet you expect them to st…
/r/MensRights15/04/21 04:34 PM
19

All those products you named tend to have a cheaper, androgynous alternative though. Even the ones advocated "for men" on the cheaper end tend to be androgynous products repackaged. For a true masculine hygiene product, men still pay a premium. Anyone ever smelling a good sandalwood soap and the cheapest stuff on the market can tell the cheap stuff isn't masculine smelling at all. This sounds more like a "if it isn't an explicitly feminine smell, it is masculine" peer pressure women are falling …
/r/AntiFeminists15/04/21 03:00 PM
6

I don't see anyone taking this seriously. Think about it. There are some people (even in this group) who say that men are more violent because of the greater testosterone we have in our bodies compared to women. People will actually think of falling T levels as a good thing. Which shows they are horribly misinformed. Existing misconceptions already proven wrong shouldn't be part of the discussion, period. That's a recipe for a middling society. For bypassers: Testosterone doesn't blindly increas…
/r/MensRights15/04/21 08:02 AM
2

Suit yourself. I'd love for this magic to happen to female patients when female researchers become more prevalent. Considering this hasn't happened in the many decades male researchers dominated the field, I remain skeptical of such a link being present. Writers aren't making this link clear, making their intent for writing these articles suspicious. Wouldn't be the first time academia swayed for the vocal society they got their grants from.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 09:55 PM
2

Again it seems you either misunderstood my point or ignored it, either way you are still trying to claim that theses issues cannot exist in the same space. They can. Again, I'm not going into this point. I moved the goalpost, and I clearly stated doing so. Keep up. The underrepresentation of women in medicine is the main contributing factor behind their input being ignored when receiving treatment so I am not sure what your point is? You need to make the connection here between treatment for ong…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 09:26 PM
2

You don't have to recite your point. I'm fighting the article and the idea that "women are overlooked/ignored in medical research", not the idea that women are underrepresented. Anyone with half a braincell should be able to tell androgynous studies don't necessarily map well to either sex, our hormones and macro distributions differ too much. By extrapolation, so does mapping findings on one sex to the other blindly. Thing is, science is different from academia. Science is blind, raw, without h…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 08:08 PM
5

It's actually a fairly bad and biased article (despite the author pretending not to be biased), with a ready-made conclusion that is incredibly difficult to make and requires several sharp turns to do so given the limited information. Some people higher up already commented on one possible explanation: higher willingness of men to participate as guinea pigs for potential cures causing underrepresentation of women (vice versa, women being less willing). This doesn't mean women are being ignored b…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:32 PM
1

Can you not take my lines out of context and not make immense claims that they are saying something they aren't? Thanks.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 10:13 AM
13

Oh I actually saw my comment get completely taken out of context. Apparently calling a single privileged bookwriter out on their desire to blame everything on the patriarchy, disregarding what masculine men have done for her, is calling all women selfish. There's no point arguing with children who can't read.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 09:59 AM
1

You're strawmanning one single line out of a 6 paragraph post where it is obvious I do not wish to exclude them from the discussion. Until society is willing to listen to a group of reasonable people regardless of what their problem is, the most rational thing they can do is force society's hand. They don't do that by continuing to validate and pedestalizing women, or incurring the morality police to clamp down on them. At that point, doing nothing is far more destructive to society. The only ot…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:38 AM
6

Honestly, a lot of this is trying to thread around the real issue only to devolve into the same stuff it always does: trying to treat the symptoms rather than the cause. Incels are largely a result of boys being brought up with the mindset of the boomer population, together with some "be nice" sauce. Do your work, be a good boy, be good in school, get everything done and you'll live a nice life. If it wasn't obvious yet, this hasn't worked out for a significant number of millennials and gen Z. T…
/r/MensRights13/04/21 01:29 PM
25

Privileged woman talks about how the concept of being a "strong, traditional man" harms everyone, completely oblivious to what that concept has done for her ancestors and what allowed her to write this book in utter luxury. Meanwhile, blind to the obvious that power corrupts and the elite have a natural survivorship bias towards psychopathic tendencies. More news at 11.
/r/MensRights13/04/21 11:40 AM
7

Because they either dip out when they are losing, or they derail the conversation, or go into reductio ad absurdum territory. If they'd actually be willing to discuss instead of trying to socially police MRA, that'd be another story. Notice how some of their posts do get a lot of upvotes and no flack, despite their horrid reputation across multiple subs. There's no intellectual discussion to be had when all it devolves into is "I have the high ground, you don't" pingponging.
/r/MensRights13/04/21 09:36 AM
11

Going slightly into "the dark side" here: biologically, women don't have the same incentive to put effort into getting high on the hierarchy compared to men. Men have little qualms dating down their class, and additional abundance can be transformed into getting more partners. This effect is a lot less prevalent in women. What's worse, it is very unlikely for a man to climb the class ladder through romance, whereas women have a fairly higher chance. This gives men at the bottom of the ladder an …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/21 08:18 AM
11

And what's the point of bringing this up? In fact, what even is the point of saying this, when it is obvious by emphasizing patriarchy rather than "the rich", people are pushing the "male" part of patriarchy rather than the "apex" part, which then extrapolates and escalates the intra-class warfare OP warns of? If you bring it up, why not just throw the entire kitchen sink at it by adding matriarchy to the mix (inb4 "because we don't have one"). If you're not arguing against it, why throw out suc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 06:58 PM
10

Your reaction doesn't argue against what OP says. In fact, it does the exact thing OP is talking about: falling for the patriarchy discussion scapegoat while ignoring the bigger problem, runaway capitalism and increasing wealth inequality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 06:16 PM
1

what is basically just "babies." Last time I checked, it still required spermatozoa to create a baby. Inb4 "but you need less men to impregnate a higher population of women" That doesn't mean women are superior. It means less men are required to acquire optimal procreation numbers in a single generation. Not particularly useful except for repopulation or your goal is to have your son marry your daughter.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 02:43 PM
16

Ding ding, we have a winner. Intraclass warfare meant to occupy and hold back the middle class and lower class, ignoring the people at the top (or at least minimizing the damage, a few rich guys getting MeToo'd is a small price to play). Add onto that in history, it has always overwhelmingly been young middle class people causing massive changes in society. Most frequently young men, who have more to gain from interclass warfare than women do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 02:29 PM
18

Because it doesn't matter what the narrator writes, as long as the crowd swallows it whole. You can be the absolutely shittiest writer and still get praised for it. That's what gender politics has boiled down to. Most people aren't amazing analysts without an ulterior motive. So you get things that on further analysis, straight-up contradict, and those people will never come to the conclusion themselves, and the means for distributing the information aren't in hands of that counterculture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 08:04 AM
16

At this point, you're being dense intentionally. People have told you multiple times what the problem is with that movement. Hint: it is not women being encouraged to open up about sexual assault. Here's another hint: it is a bunch of privileged women trying to get brownie points and trying to rewrite their history of providing sexual services for gain as "bad male superior abused his power to get sex with me". I hope I do not need to tell you what kind of damage falseflagging and shifting the f…
/r/MensRights08/04/21 04:02 PM
3

Yeah, I agree. The "we'll call it out and wait on the sideline" mentality is appalling. Men becoming "less masculine" is in itself reactionary to how the world reacted to that masculinity (more work, more risk, less reward). The hands of women in general aren't clean. That said, these are supposedly trad women saying it. If they do take the "trad woman" stereotype seriously, playing the passive / reactionary role is kind of in their nature. They can play the role of the prize for men becoming ma…
/r/AntiFeminists08/04/21 02:45 PM
8

Honestly, the obvious subcontext aside ("as women, we want manly men without being worthy of manly men or raising manly men"), I don't necessarily disagree with this. Then again, the whole world has gotten a lot more emotional and kneejerky towards their first emotional impulse. Both dudes and chicks could learn to grow a spine and some resilience.
/r/AntiFeminists08/04/21 12:03 PM
6

What I'm saying is this: Patriarchy theory implies men have unfairly / unnaturally conspired to oppress women. Despite that, in history, we have seen women been given multiple chances to invert the situation or "balance" it out, and they haven't. Supporters of the patriarchy theory only tend to look at the last 1000-1500 or so years, primarily in the context of Europe and America, which happen to coincide with mostly the "winter" or society. "Winter" itself implies tough times, high risk for low…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 10:05 AM
6

Really, all one has to do is ask themselves why men became leaders in the first place, and how the last 50 years differs from back then. Feminism likes to home in on the idea that this was some coordinated effort, while reality is, the whims of nature and differences between man and woman largely caused what we see now: a small concentration of men at the top, a large concentration of women and men at the middle, and a small concentration of men at the bottom. There were biological reasons for t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 09:32 AM
10

Surveys are academically known to be an absolute hassle to work with and use as proof. There are tons of factors one has to worry about. Even a simple change in wording or time of response can lead to entirely different results (e.g. responding right after lunch instead of before lunch may leading to more positive outcomes). Surveys are generally only useful for comparison between vastly different things (e.g. A/B testing user experience of two interfaces) and even then they are extremely volati…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 05:20 PM
12

Young men and boys are being pushed to right wing radicalization. They're joining Q-anon groups and alt right groups. And I've come to understand where some of this push is coming from. Both sides of radicalization are bad, and mass media (including Reddit) stimulates radicalization of any kind, whether it be stimulation or backlash. People here are already aware what radical rightists do. Radical leftists, on the other hand, tend to be doormats to any kind of higher narrative and encourage self…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/21 04:12 PM
48

Feminism is trying to not only absolve women of their side of the social contract, it also attempts to claim it is actually men responsible for that side. One has to be a socially shrewd person to frame themselves having to give up that social shrewdness as the opponent having to. Men in general never had to learn that level of social aptitude except for climbing the ladders towards the apex, men had alternatives to compensate which we largely gave up (e.g. physical strength and its contribution…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/21 02:11 PM
4

I'm not skirting around the point. You're bringing it awfully ominous saying "one day you'll learn", as if that's supposed to dissuade OP. /u/d_nijmegen isn't some random nitwit unaware of risks involved. Just state the facts and leave it at that.
/r/MensRights01/04/21 05:40 PM
4

Come on, this place is men's rights, not MGTOW. It's fine to be aware of the risks, and spit facts, but this is bordering fearmongering. OP is clearly aware of the risks and has made the decision to take them should an opportunity be given.
/r/MensRights01/04/21 05:32 PM
1

Pay isn’t determined by how many people prefer to do the job Pay definitely is determined in part by how many people prefer to do the job. Game development is notorious for being underpaid, despite being more difficult than the average dataplumbing web dev job. Passion industries clearly contradict this claim. Both willingness and capability (which in part is determined by difficulty) are part of the supply side of the equation.
/r/MensRights01/04/21 03:50 PM
6

That said, I don't know the business. This alone should really signify you need to stop talking. Businesses are both psychopathic and stupid. They do smart things for reasons we don't know. They do stupid things for reasons we don't know. Either way, we don't know and likely we don't even know if it is smart or stupid until 10 years later, at which point most people already forgot, except for a few specific branches where dealing with legacy is a known headache (construction and IT come to mind)…
/r/MensRights01/04/21 03:39 PM
3

Honestly, I'm a little flabbergasted you're this resistant to the idea kids do things because they are looking for acceptance from their peers in the form of transtrending, rather than being genuinely gender dysmorphic. There's no discussion to be had if you immediately swing back to what I said before: claiming every case of transgender is clear-and-cut gender dysphoria. All you're doing here is ridicule the notion that there is an ulterior motive or an overzealous society which can do no wrong…
/r/MensRights31/03/21 07:44 AM
4

Thanks for specifying, that's exactly my point. The hyper-inclusivity crowd is just that, a selective-inclusivity one. Without qualms who gets hurt.
/r/MensRights31/03/21 07:31 AM
3

By heavily emphasizing on that, you're missing the larger point of a distraught woman who might be phrasing things poorly, going on the attack rather than acknowledging any criticism she might have. That's the real problem here. People make mistakes, but the current "selective inclusivity" crowd expects the opposition to be perfect in their handling of that crowd, whilst the crowd itself gets a free pass to bowl over anything they desire, with no regard to what harm they themselves might cause. …
/r/MensRights30/03/21 09:20 PM
3

You are confusing two massively different things. The mother isn't stating she is against trans. She is posing the perspective that society is indoctrinating people to become trans, without looking at actual issues trans people face. If anything, that alone would arguably make society transphobic by using transgenderism for its own good rather than the good of its participants. “The truth is that this whole thing came from the exterior, not from within him” / “adults grooming kids into being tra…
/r/MensRights30/03/21 07:19 PM
8

Yeah, you're missing a lot. What you're reading is a piece of a distraught mother who feels her son going trans is a mistake. To the pro-inclusivity people that might seem like transphobia, but in reality, she is still a parent who doesn't want her son to make a mistake and doesn't see why he is doing the things he is given his behavior in the past and the features he portrays. In fact, the writer has raised multiple questions both in this part and previous part, questioning whether our definiti…
/r/MensRights30/03/21 05:41 PM
7

Quotes from the first part: A couple of years later, I now understand what got my son to this place. Puberty made him uncomfortable with his body. But it wasn’t just that: it was that he was such a smart, nerdy kid. And boys who are nerdy — even if they’re masculine — are told every day that they might actually be girls. Everything has changed. If you’re not G.I. Joe, you’re in trouble. These boys don’t understand that there are all types of men. They think if they’re not the stereotypical male,…
/r/MensRights30/03/21 05:23 PM
1

Which is nonsense, a 50:50 ratio is optimal to avoid incest. 20% men and 80% women would lead to lots of half siblings reproducing. Incest isn't the big one. Even in the past, a similar ratio of reproduction hasn't caused too many problems. Rather, the problem with the 20:80 ratio is that it is completely blind to the history of labor. The idea stems from the modern ideology that a woman can do exactly the same things a man can. That's cute, but we have absolutely no proof replacing 30% of the m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/21 09:37 AM
11

You also see this in law and morals/ethics, where the physical misdeeds are almost always judged more harshly, let alone being judged more often due to a physical misdeed being easier to prove than manipulation. There's at least something to say for women being more evolved to be socially stronger on average than a man. Men can compensate social shortcomings with their bulk. Add onto that physical violence being much easier to punish than social manipulation, while both are the darker sides of e…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/21 08:32 PM
1

So diet choices imposed by external forces can cure or prevent obesity. It's almost as if that's in favor of what I wrote. Now check how many previously fat people relapse later in life.
/r/MensRights29/03/21 03:08 PM
1

Satiety is part of the point. Satiety decreases hunger. Decreased hunger lowers the willpower required to not eat, thus increasing success rates. If fighting obesity is the goal, going for increased success rates is a no-brainer. CICO isn't incorrect. It's just a horribly naïve model which stimulates poor advice, lowered success rates and a methodology which most followers don't even strictly follow it anyway. Or would you say eating potatoes exclusively is a good way to live?
/r/MensRights27/03/21 08:46 PM
1

If you are going to quote selectively, at least quote the conclusion instead of the abstract. In summary, any successful approach to controlling weight needs to take a wider and longer-term approach than studying the intake of calories. There is evidence of physiological mechanisms that monitor intake, although Western society often ensures that they are overwhelmed and obesity develops. However, although these control mechanisms are powerful, understanding how they function may be helpful. Rath…
/r/MensRights27/03/21 07:45 PM
0

Its all CICO Yet when this idea gets challenged, we have studies (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691617690878 ) say something entirely different: After dieting, in a randomized trial for 6 months, either a high-protein or control diet was consumed. Satiety was higher and less weight was regained when high-protein meals had been consumed (Lejeune, Kovacs, & Westerterp-Plantenga, 2005). Similarly, a Cochrane review concluded that the overweight and obese lost more weight when on a lo…
/r/MensRights27/03/21 07:23 PM
4

Honestly, I just don't understand people are so insistent on not using proven science to increase success rates. Especially when one of them references a school of thought which has no qualms using steroids, something known to have dire side-effects, as a shortcut to lose fat and gain muscle mass. That's all. Then again, this is Reddit. Most people reason with emotions in the first place. Not with logic.
/r/MensRights27/03/21 07:02 PM
0

If you actually read my initial post and extrapolated the information, you'd realize most of it can be executed on by people right now, and it will decrease the tendency they binge eat more than continuously shouting "don't binge eat". Frankly, the government today is doing more harm than it helps. Redirecting their programs based on science would increase the success rate further. It is not a base necessity to increase success rates at all.
/r/MensRights27/03/21 06:55 PM
3

Right, the age old internet rhetoric. "You dismantle my argument about obesity being easy to fight, so you must be obese". Let me ask you: if we could stop paying tremendous amounts of health care costs keeping obese people alive by tackling the issues as they form in their childhood and early adulthood, by using a method different than "eat less", would you still shout "eat less" and pay more taxes when the masses inevitably vote it is more "humane" to keep everyone alive and have everyone pay …
/r/MensRights27/03/21 06:33 PM
2

That's a good argument. Maybe you should explain why while you're at it.
/r/MensRights27/03/21 06:08 PM
4

Read the bottom next time so you don't need to make a snarky response. "Red pill" bro-science only works when actual double-blind studies aren't already refuting the point, as it did with CICO.
/r/MensRights27/03/21 06:05 PM
13

Actually, no. A lot of people can't easily stop being fat, and this excuse is actively being used by companies to profit from. Willpower is extremely limited in the majority of people. Now take today's population: loads of people raised as kids to associate sugar-laden foods with comfort, with most of them living in a situation extremely detrimental to their mental health. Most of their willpower is already drained by not being in a good place mentally, and continuously showing comfort foods wil…
/r/MensRights27/03/21 04:59 PM
24

​ But wasn't that the point of the meeToo movement? At best, it was about not taking sexual advantage of women knowingly. It has been twisted, turned and bent out of shape since a few days after its inception. Sleeping without explicit verbal consent or sleeping with intoxicated women on its own is not the same as premeditating taking sexual advantage of women. The latter, in more twisted terms, can be seen as giving women plausible deniability to void any responsibility they may have (see "we w…
/r/MensRights25/03/21 02:03 PM
16

This may have been OkCupid, which was also the publisher of the other often cited graph (women rating men vs men rating women) and did quite a few studies on their users before it was bought out by Match dot com. Match (which Tinder is part of) generally avoids making any of these studies public, and even tried to retroactively remove studies published by OkCupid prior to being part of the Match family.
/r/MensRights24/03/21 04:29 PM
5

That's the premise, but it has been shown one can get better at IQ tests and 'cheat' quite a few points by training. IQ tests are kind-of biased, and many are designed really shoddily. Also, some problems presented are context-dependent, where the more intelligent person would ask clarification of the context or give an immensely broad answer to encapsulate all the possible options, instead of making an educated guess on a multiple-choice answer based on their limited perception of the context. …
/r/MGTOW224/03/21 02:57 PM
3

Look at Nietzsche, who describes societies as seasons (the rise in spring, abundance in summer and autumn, death in winter, revival in the next spring), the Mouse Utopia experiment, and the fall of the Roman Empire for examples. Long story short: when people start fighting one another over trivialities, especially intra-class warfare among the workers, aspects of society slowly crumble down. A weak-nerved, tensed up, angry mob of worker-class people with no hope of achieving what they want, will…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/21 08:41 PM
5

Fair disclaimer: a woman is far more likely to claim she earned more than she actually did. Imagine leaving dox-able information of yourself while claiming you sold your body for less than what a gas station attendant earns. Most of these chicks are still narcistic enough to want their bodies worshipped like temples without putting any effort in. The overwhelming majority of these chicks do not earn enough to live off of (thank god).
/r/MGTOW223/03/21 07:17 PM
15

This is cute and all, but many guys do vet and still end up having the short end of the stick 10-20 years later because she decided she wants something else. No amount of vetting is going to protect them from a court which irrationally favors the wife over the husband, or a society which sends women mixed messages so they "don't miss out on life". If women want to be treated like equal adults, stop treating them like children and start having them bear responsibility and risk for divorce. A grow…
/r/MensRights22/03/21 11:12 AM
2

Thing is, it depends entirely on which side of the story you see. In both cases, preselection applies: As an ousider, all you see is a guy who, unlike many others, got picked by a chick to get serious with. As someone closer to the guy, the girl that divorced him saw some flaw that he got dumped for, and they likely know and can judge strongly on that flaw. In a vacuum, there's an argument to make both in favor of divorced men, and against divorced men. What I'm mostly concerned about is what yo…
/r/MensRights22/03/21 10:56 AM
10

Don't forget social stigma. Divorced men are often seen as "wow something is wrong with him". Divorced women are portrayed as being "empowered", just like anything else a woman decides to do on a whim and has tons of government and social support on.
/r/MensRights21/03/21 11:05 AM
11

I'll just sideline this food for thought: Boys generally still grow up relying on physicality and executive actions, whether their field of interest is traditionally masculine or not. Girls grow up training their social skills more than most boys would. It isn't that far-fetched to imagine girls learn both the "light" side of social skills as well as the "dark" side of social skills. Therefore, after growing up, being more equipped to cause harm through social actions than men are. Just like boy…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/21 01:59 PM
39

Added note: 50/50 according to subjectively defined standards of violence. These statistics always leave out that important note. Change the standards of what constitutes as violence, and suddenly, it might just be men who will be victims more. Our methods of measuring violence aren't flawless.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/21 11:02 AM
67

Frankly, I hear very few people claim violence against women is rare. They are just saying it isn't as outrageously more prevalent than violence against men, which many people seem to claim.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/21 10:02 AM
4

Can you really, rationally claim that people as a whole would invest the same amount of resources in 2 years if they likely they would be gone after, than if it is likely they will still be there? It isn't that people completely stop doing it. The question is whether they have lost their incentive to some degree. If said loss of incentive changes their behavior, compared to before. As when the incentive drops, less concern is given to the long term benefits of working somewhere, and more concern…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/21 11:00 PM
16

It just isn't a model that would be profitable. This has been a problem since internet fora became a thing. Professionals who aren't biased are too expensive, and biased moderators are a dime a dozen so you don't have to pay them. At the very least, there should be a proper veto system. Several communities have actively called out their mods for abusing power, and admins will stand by and watch. First mover advantage is a huge problem with subreddits, both in claiming the name and establishing t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/21 10:37 PM
10

The problem is mostly the service-oriented world we live in today. In their old days, many western countries emphasized close family bonds and groups of friends. Such scenarios help see more than just the surface, which both encourages people to be more than a pretty face, and helps those without the most pretty face shine more, aka counteracting the halo effect. This in turn helps men see the value in one another beyond a surface-level competition for sexual partners, as does it help look at wo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/21 08:29 PM
7

Traditionalism sees crime against them as being worse than the deaths and mutilation of countless men. You're making a mistake here. While it is true traditionalism tends to favor men on the frontline, old advice wasn't to treat women with velvet gloves. Old advice actually recognizes the harm this does on the long term (poorly paraphrased example: "don't be surprised your wife is only capable of menial tasks when you derive her of any mental challenge"). Old advice was a lot more "tough love" t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/21 08:05 PM
5

Exactly. We have ample proof that despite their lesser physical stature, women can be hunters just fine. We also have ample anecdotes of guys lacking confidence and/or living a coddled lifestyle completely freezing up while mugged. This is one case where upbringing largely decides the outcome, not physical stature. Vice-versa, one can also infer that the coddled lifestyle made them feel entitled to having somebody else take risks and not having to exert effort to mitigate it themselves.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/21 09:59 AM
39

The entire line of thinking in the article is wrong. Yes, unarmed and inexperienced, a guy is likely to be less afraid of coming against someone they can't fight against. No, most perpetrators aren't unarmed and/or inexperienced. It's not that difficult to brandish a knife, whether you're a man or a woman. Someone gutsy enough to attack likely has some kind of confidence backing them up. Outnumbering is also a common tactic (given, men have a little advantage here generally being better runners …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/21 11:05 PM
1

Was it academics? At the very least, that was what I heard. If it is, that puts the academics in question to shame. If it wasn't, well, that puts the people pushing the term to shame. Unfortunately, hijacking terminology to twist the meaning is a very common theme. Even proposing changes to the wording to mean "warped", "toxified" or anything, I highly doubt they wouldn't twist it one way or another within half a year tops. But at the very least, it wouldn't be as ambiguous as a term like "toxic…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/21 07:00 PM
3

"Toxic" by nature is a term that allows clobbering. Toxic implies both a state capable of toxifying others as well as a state which itself is toxified. It allows its proponents to hide under the umbrella term whatever they don't like about men, sometimes to the point of using both implications of the term "toxic" against those they apply it to. If there are social expectations put upon men by others, whoever that may be, there are better terms to use (e.g. harmful traditional gender roles). The …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/21 02:59 PM
11

They can't. People here are proudly saying "I will still defend them", but reality is, most people don't understand the underlying social and hormonal dynamics truly going on here. For one, men will likely find themselves not wanting to go to areas where they could defend women in the first place. Even if the ratio of men willing and capable to defend stays the same, the number of capable men in a position to do so would decrease. E.g.: men staying indoors to play games because the incentive to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/21 10:59 AM
2

Also known as (a version of) plausible deniability.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/21 08:54 AM
7

Perhaps the theory you're referring to is the hypodermic needle model? Problem is, and behavioral scientists largely know this: most people are trend followers. By far, the majority of people are consensus-seeking to such a degree that being in agreement is more important than being right. More sheep than shepherds, etc. Positive reinforcement is extremely powerful, and by agreeing with the status quo, many of these people will likely experience some form of positive reinforcement from society. …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/21 03:57 PM
20

That still makes toxic a terrible word to use. Toxic largely implies it comes from inside, affects others and then those others internalize it to further toxify others. The word you're looking for, is warped. Warped happens to something, and has a very clear consequence on a larger structure.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/21 03:21 PM
1

Anyone capable of using a weapon only has to get a proper opening to win against anyone else, which is a lot easier against an average, loner individual during the night. The physicality argument is BS for anyone who ever brandished a knife and stuck it in a steak. Whether you're 100lbs or 200lbs, you'll fall over and bleed either way. If you want to argue differences, then hormonal responses, childhood upbringing, societal expectations and irrationality are more likely arguments.
/r/MensRights13/03/21 05:49 PM
1

Because toxic masculinity is a scapegoat and an umbrella term. A scapegoat which often devolves into playing off responsibility onto men. An umbrella term to shove anything under that anyone may specifically dislike about men. Ask yourself how often you see "toxic femininity". Or maybe even more stupid examples: "toxic blackism", "toxic judaism", "toxic christianity", "toxic leftism", etc. I'd wager while reading this, most people would already internally kneejerk towards "wtf those terms are in…
/r/MensRights13/03/21 05:41 PM
24

Guess it is equality only in word then. There's your answer, folks.
/r/MensRights13/03/21 03:49 PM
0

Read better next time. "What's wrong with this" gosh I dunno, maybe the 4x suicide rate gives an indication.
/r/MensRights13/03/21 03:36 PM
1

This assumes perfect filtering or the inexistence of a perfect filter means no filtering can be done at all. A difference in values is likely to tax the relationship eventually. Being promiscuous is likely to result in different visual and behavioral cues eventually compared to being reserved. The perfect filter may not exist, but the far majority of people aren't smooth criminals able to tell the perfect lie either. For something as serious as marriage, I'm fairly certain most people will take …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/03/21 12:43 PM
2

You didn't refute my arguments. You went off on one word which apparently is a synonym for another, despite the fact I clearly did not imply this semantic meaning, immediately got into one source, pushed your US-centric point of view and went "look! look! US is bad, other countries good!", completely disregarding several countries in your dataset which adopt a different way of working, and continuing the story black-and-white, as if the world really is that simple. Again, the problem is multifac…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 10:48 AM
3

Largely what people want is someone matching their values. It's not that farfetched to believe someone who isn't very promiscuous also doesn't want a partner who isn't very promiscuous. Habits rarely change, so on that premise alone, it is weird to expect a promiscuous woman to become a housewife, as would the male equivalent be (from stud to salary man?) Where this premise falls apart is when comparing what men and women get from commitment, and how each view their promiscuous / not so promiscu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/03/21 10:35 AM
2

No. Assimilate means assimilate. Adapt means adapting to the environment. Be that carving out a piece of yourself the group is willing to give you on whatever merit (clear segregation or assimilation). Failure to adapt generally leads to friction, and failure to adapt is usually being solved by telling the other party to adapt to them instead, often through blindly accepting what they bring. I can adapt to a group of women without having to join them going to the bathroom. Frankly, this entire t…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 10:20 AM
1

No need for the kneejerk reaction. The rhetoric isn't even "anti-immigration". The rhetoric is "give and take a little". I would judge Americans expecting any European country to change to their liking just the same. Kneejerking towards "oh so you mean assimilate" doesn't make the point about assimilation or not. The point is about friction and forcing others to adapt to your liking, or pushing more resources to be pointed to one where they are already restricted. Whether you prevent that by ful…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 10:03 AM
3

Now imagine the story from the EU-perspective, where blind immigration and "yeah they can just come in without having to adapt" has been a rhetoric for almost decades now. Is it a form of discrimination? Yes. But you can't fault people for raising their eyebrow when preferential treatment by the government and several other institutes has been given systematically. The same way you can't fault guys for raising their eyebrows whenever a woman gets hired after the government decided companies must…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 08:38 AM
1

Because indoctrination. Reality is adjusted wage gap is only like 5% difference, and the "adjusted wage gap" still only looks at job title, years of experience, etc. Anyone with any experience in the work force can tell, two almost similar jobs can have very different compensation structures, and the 5% difference can be explained as easily as "men are more willing to fight over better compensation". Of course, you never hear this perspective, because it is more convenient to push the "big bad m…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 07:56 AM
4

Instead of answering your question, I'm going to ask you to stop thinking in this frame entirely. The problem with this entire way of thinking, is that "privileged" is extremely subjective. Women are known to have several benefits men don't have, yet a few benefits men may have are given higher weight as to serve as a scapegoat to the entire thing. If someone put a higher weight on women not being as likely to reach the top than lower-class men having to work shit jobs just to be seen worthy of …
/r/MensRights10/03/21 07:52 AM
8

Finally someone got the guts to say it. It's quite alarming so many in this sub believe empty platitudes and being a doormat for symbolism is going to work as an underdog, while we have numerous studies showing the "women are wonderful" effect and how reinforcing bad behavior never works. In the same breath, they dare condemn other masculine groups, who actually execute on a potential solution. Evolutionary prisoner's dilemma should be mandatory reading for the doormat crowd.
/r/MensRights09/03/21 09:19 AM
19

Tribalism is one viewpoint. Another perspective, by celebrating women's day without doing the reverse, you're potentially positively reinforcing this kind of behavior.
/r/MensRights08/03/21 11:55 AM
2

Here's another way to undo the argument: Only 1 guy in about 20 has 7 inches or over. That alone should show these women are size queens and have likely done some shit to wreck their sexual organs, or they are faking and trying to show off.
/r/MensRights07/03/21 02:53 PM
1

FWIW, I do not agree with the current state of the world preying on the mentally weaker via consumerism either. I simply view this, as well as the inability to move out of poverty, as entirely different topics unrelated to financial literacy. The only ones I'm interested in regarding the topic of "are these people financially literate" are the ones who are capable of making those choices. The remainder are a different, much more important topic entirely. To that regard, we're really just discuss…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 10:03 PM
2

Read back to what the original writer wrote about theatrics. That's the point. They weren't saying jack about groups vs individuals vs whatever. They were only saying, loud mouths are loud mouths because scare tactics tend to work and avoid confrontation. Now invert that perspective and think about why someone would resort to theatrics to avoid a confrontation. One of the obvious ones is that guy doesn't want to commit to a fight in the first place, and they are using theatrics to make up for th…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 09:51 PM
1

Then our definitions of financial literacy differ greatly. My definition doesn't require an evaluation of those who are incapable of being evaluated fairly given their situation. Maybe what you are describing is a broken system if examples for success aren't working, and the government can't honor simple promises to paying out for peoples' retirements. Frankly, it is an inadequacy to fall for mindless consumerism and psychological tricks, not understanding that contexts differ, and not utilizing…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 09:47 PM
2

And your points are valid. Again, the sum of one's individual power + the power of their peers matter. I already mentioned, we are a social species. That said, if you are unwilling to commit, it doesn't matter against someone who is. Sure, having more perceived power should make you more confident, but people aren't quite the rational beings we pretend to be. Maybe there's a risk involved the other one evaluated differently. Hormones take time to release, favoring the one premeditating an attack…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 09:39 PM
1

Income inequality being at an all time high says nothing about financial literacy. You need to isolate the group of people who can do what normally shows financial literacy and compare them to the generation before. A stronger argument advocating for equal-or-increasing financial literacy are headlines of younger generations saving more than previous ones, often out of fear that the government will not support their retirement. At the same time, like I already put in a different post, one cannot…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 09:12 PM
3

It's the difference between being willing to pull the trigger or not. That's all. Your post is mixing up two completely orthogonal points: the confidence to take a calculated risk and commit to an act, and the sum of one's physical and social power. Obviously, being a social species, the power to persuade enough people to overwhelm a larger foe is more important than being stronger than an individual. Without ever seeing the actual event happen though, the only thing bypassers can do is guess wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 09:01 PM
1

That's my point. Financially literate is a fairly ambiguous term. Is financial literacy just living within one's means, even paycheck to paycheck on an upper middle class income? Or is it also being able to save money given an income substantially above average lower middle class costs, setting up new opportunities and safety nets? Even Investopedia's definition of the term is fairly ambiguous and US-centered. If it is the latter, I'm not getting the idea people are becoming more financially lit…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 07:35 PM
1

"If I pay it off it will be good for my credit score". Thank god these aren't things I hear across the ocean.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 07:02 PM
2

There is one question I have regarding this. Disregarding the very obvious, immense difference between what an average man contributes and what an average woman consumes in her lifetime: is this a zero-sum equation? In other words, unless women and men equate the exact same, will one side always be the consumer compared to the other? If it is, pointing out that men are net contributors and women are net consumers may not be as useful as pointing the immense difference between what women consume …
/r/MensRights06/03/21 06:54 PM
1

who are financially literate and are smart with money. Which is becoming increasingly more rare these days, or our ideas of "financially literate" differ greatly.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/21 06:27 PM
3

The Red Pill will disappear once the behavior stops being rewarded or a better alternative forms. While I do not agree with the essence of TRP, it is one of the few places that doesn't only avoid condemning male sexuality, it encourages them to develop it and attempt to become better partners. They don't bother gatekeeping frustrated men by having them moralize themselves out of the market. They are willing to acknowledge biology is brutal and that the current state of the world deems that bruta…
/r/MensRights06/03/21 05:50 PM
6

People assume it because suffragette movement == feminism according to the average western curriculum. Most people have to do research on their own before they realize the two things are different (myself included). That same curriculum also forgets to mention the right to vote was mostly a way to bait men into accepting military service. Framing it from a different angle, it becomes "women got the right to vote without having to be conscripted, unlike men". Suddenly, it isn't so equal anymore.
/r/MensRights06/03/21 05:31 PM
2

Thanks. Though I wouldn't mind making a post on this, I have two problems with making it a main topic point on Men's Rights: * I'm having difficulty seeing how to frame this in a way it would appeal to the majority of MRA. The topic lends itself more to development of modern society and its influences on sexual relationships than the more typical points of MRA. * The topic of self-improvement and anything resembling traditional masculinity is a fairly divided one on this sub. Even framing it in …
/r/MensRights04/03/21 03:49 PM
2

Not just preferences either. People today are routinely overloaded with information, and need a quick way to sort through all the options. At that point, obviously, you're going to pick superficial indicators to remove most of them. This benefits the people who are good at presenting value using those indicators, but that doesn't mean these people are valuable. They just have an amazing conversion rate of actual value -> perceived value. For a different context, this is an ongoing theme/meme in …
/r/MensRights04/03/21 03:19 PM
2

You claimed that women always "chose" the tallest and strongest guys during pre-historic era. But in reality, they chose the ones who could bring food on the table without risking themselves too much This is something more people need to understand. This doesn't apply to just partner selection, as this happens in everything. Education, politics, academics (NB: not science), work, career, you name it. Proxy indicators are always worse than actual indicators. Yes, tallness is associated with raw s…
/r/MensRights04/03/21 03:05 PM
1

There's a big difference between tall and strong, though. I'm sure there is a big correlation between maximum potential strength and height, as well as the advantage of height in many actions, but a lot of tall people are also just lanky, not overall bigger size. As for the problems with breeding bigger size unconsciously: look at big dogs and their size-related complications. It isn't definitive proof, but it is hard to dismiss the idea solely on the basis that "bigger = stronger = more protect…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/21 10:03 PM
2

Imagine the number of tricks Hollywood has to make a guy look attractive despite being fairly Average Joe. Now imagine how many tricks an industry with as much money, if not more, has to make an Average Joe's dick look big. Cutthroat competition and loads of money generates a lot of smoke and mirrors trickery.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/21 09:52 PM
3

Problem is most of these feminists will watch passively or give away their power regardless of the backlash. They willingly align with a political movement which is known to overemphasize female-only issues to the point of women losing out because egalitarian issues may have benefited them more. This is different when saying "but what about men", as men aren't a political movement. They are a sex.
/r/MensRights03/03/21 01:13 PM
1

Obviously, I can't speak for Denmark. I can only speak for a different European country and for what I see coming from the US. That said, I would ask of you to the following: have you ever spent longer than a week tallying common media sources and their intentions, both what flies over internationally and what stays in your own country? Here, I see an incredibly common theme that anything pushing women to step up either relates with their careers, consumerism or sex. Only two of these topics tou…
/r/MensRights03/03/21 08:29 AM
4

In that perspective, employers would only fold under the premise that birth rate would tank so low, bare minimum headcount to continue running a profit wouldn't be met. We're talking oligarchs here: with the advent of automation and kicking out all the superfluous jobs currently existing to keep people occupied, they won't go below that minimum anytime soon. Except for the smaller businesses which can't pay the wage you want anyway, because they can't compete with the oligarchs producing at vast…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 04:54 PM
1

That's the original situation sketched all the way up the thread. If ya got beef with a strawman, take it with that person. If you wish to adjust the frame in a more constructive manner instead, I'm all ears.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/21 04:39 PM
10

You can support a child on a median wage + benefits anyone would get, but you will have to be frugal. This is the dissonance which is happening right now. You can't expect to raise kids on one income under globalization (makes differences in power dynamics more extreme) and pushing women into the work force en masse (mostly supply, not demand) as middle class kids. You can't push individualism under rapid population growth and then turn around and go "wait, we can't raise kids luxuriously on one…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 04:36 PM
21

Not sure why you're pulling feminism into this, the argument is against pushing "equality" / strong women while pulling the "men, step up!" card. This is one of the focus points of BB, pointing out multimedia emphasis on men to "step up" where no such advice is given to women. Personally, I don't come across advice for women to attract high quality men who want to procreate and stick around unless I go to more traditional sources or, dare I say it, FDS (even if it does so extremely poorly). Inst…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 04:29 PM
2

Neither is decorating your floor with strawmen, but ya got that covered nicely.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/21 04:12 PM
74

It's money. The government doesn't want to be held accountable for single moms taking benefits from taxpayers. Denmark already has some of the highest taxes (if not the highest), taxing people further to supply single moms isn't going to fly, so by framing it as a good deal for guys, they can hook the guy up to take the fall should the family not work out. Of course, the obvious solution (get women and men to actually form a loving family instead of pushing individualism and consumerism) goes ag…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 03:58 PM
23

"Hey, I made a fool of myself spouting 'incel' without realizing what it actually means on an MRA topic, sorry about that guys!" goes quite a long way. For someone insisting so hard on gatekeeping content, it is a little amazing you resort to using derogatory, misandry-related terminology.
/r/MensRights02/03/21 02:38 PM
30

Look at the material next time. Both the video and Better Bachelor are not anti-women, they are holding the government and pro-female movements accountable for pushing men to do the legwork while shouting "equality". If anything, the video goes over the government stimulating single moms through treating men as disposable bags of semen and money, which goes directly against men's rights' stance regarding fatherhood. The title being clickbait is obviously for marketing and outrage purposes, and y…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 02:31 PM
42

Incel: involuntary celibate, often used derogatory towards men for their incapability to get sex. Title and movie: Denmark begs men to have sex with women. This sub also isn't meant for "incel" spouting shitters.
/r/MensRights02/03/21 02:25 PM
44

You might wanna check your dictionary, this is the exact opposite of incel.
/r/MensRights02/03/21 02:13 PM
341

TL;DW: Danish government is worried about birth rates. They are pushing men to sleep with women and help conceive, only looking at them as sources of semen and money, rather than people. Joker calls them out on this: if they want equality, they can't have men do both the leg work and carry the risks while absolving women from their natural risks (bad partner selection, pregnancy, providing for the kids). Really, it's nothing new for this sub. There is no equality of outcome if one of the sexes h…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 01:08 PM
21

To put this in a different perspective: there are real correlations that rich people are abusive or even malevolent to those underneath them, simply from privilege. I'm fairly certain people instinctively know that those in a "higher class" may be abusive to them. Under the idea of "patriarchy" feminism supports, that would imply men are more likely to abuse than women due to their privileges. ..now we have a report women are the more abusive ones. I think anyone with an ounce of intelligence ca…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 12:52 PM
1

To hobos maybe. You've never met men with taste? Minimalism is a taste. Modern minimalism is a thing, too. Hanging a bunch of paintings and vomiting pillows everywhere isn't taste either. It's a low effort attempt to make things cozy, and now you're saddled with something that's a hassle to clean. Don't even get me started on the 30+ older women with no understanding of color theory when they circlejerk(shlick?) going "it looks nice" when everything clashes and gives no peace of mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/21 09:31 AM
5

This post is really grasping at straws. Anime is one of the few media where male-on-female violence isn't taboo, and most points come across as overly emphasizing SoL and isekai genres (ironic, since one of the most popular isekai has a meme template vouching for true equality). Also no mention of how many shounen anime have tons of chicks fall for the male protagonist and go into soft-harem mode. Dare I say it: you should watch more anime. Many popular ones reverse and solidify most power dynam…
/r/MensRights02/03/21 09:11 AM
6

And they could also be guys who aren't stereotypes, while in a time of their life where boys are extremely vulnerable towards stereotyping and peer pressure, and as a result feel like they "should transition because the world is telling them they might be women". Again, which the concerned parent points out. Let's stop kneejerking to LGBT terms when the problem may be in an entirely different dimension, please.
/r/MensRights28/02/21 10:39 AM
8

Nothing in this post indicates transphobia. It indicates a concerned parent worried there is a basis for their son's desire to change genders other than feeling aligned with the other gender (I cite: He doesn’t really want to be a woman. He just can’t see himself as a man in this world.) Any other claim is based on data that is outside of the context of the post. This kind of kneejerking is part of the issue. It stimulates behavior leading to regretful transitions.
/r/MensRights28/02/21 10:23 AM
0

Quit generalizing statements to all men. Read some literature by men for men. Repeated emotionless sex is a very common topic usually reserved for dealing with their frustrations, not by being a means to an end. It often results in the guy feeling unfulfilled too, to the point of deterioration if tapped into repeatedly without being offset by something else. To that regard, fuck buddies aren't the same, as there is often still a form of philia and eros.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/21 06:32 PM
3

the author believes, based on the data cited, that it is good that a candidate pool that self selected for a greater fit with job requirements, performed better, and is encouraged by job providers that are assessing more on skill than previously. We really only need to look at the increasing requirements in the STEM job market to see how well this worked out and what an utter impossibility this is starting to become. If this is the take the author would have, by all means, they shouldn't be doin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/21 05:14 PM
2

Ah yes, because a daughter potentially making bad choices in partner is the exact same as sexual misconduct. As for why fathers are protective: because they know sleeping around, either monogamously with the wrong guys or extensively with multiple guys, has consequences most women aren't aware of. It ain't rocket science.
/r/MensRights27/02/21 04:51 PM
15

Devil's advocate regarding your last question: cost/benefit analysis has to be performed. If the cost to apply is low enough relative to the potential benefits, applying to more jobs is always beneficial regardless of your success rate. Additionally, most people advice to have multiple job offers do you don't get stuck into sunken cost fallacy, FOMO and other desperation moves, resulting in the individual taking a bad job offer. As for personal opinion: things are currently happening in the labo…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 02:19 PM
2

They explicitly said "weak, often desperate" men. Don't frame it as all men. The sub advices pretty questionable things, involving manipulation tactics where they are perfectly capable of chipping in, but test the guy to see if he can provide for the woman. Their FAQ shows one such tactic. This pulls power to the woman with lesser costs, while the guy now runs into a higher degree of sunken cost fallacy. It's not an unreasonable assumption to imply such manipulation tactics take advantage of men…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/21 01:00 PM
1

Obviously, conservatism and LGBT do not mingle. However, it is a mistake to claim partial traditionalism is the same as conservatism, as is the claim that anti-feminism is predominantly conservatism. There is such a thing as a right-wing progressivist, for example. Politics is far more complicated than a one-dimensional space where one can only go into two directions. The premise is that the current narrative of extreme leftist progressivism is dragging everyone in the wrong direction. Even in t…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 11:33 AM
2

In Europe, which is somewhat less extreme leftist than the US is, it came to my attention that education predominantly pushes girls and girl power, furthers myths which have never been proven or rely on poorly interpreted statistics (wage gap, as opposed to adjusted wage gap) and overall tends to demonize men in leadership positions as being "privileged due to the old boys club". Now imagine this line of thinking being told for at least 200 days a year, the majority of each of those 200 days. Re…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 11:13 AM
158

it does show that women do a very thorough job at vetting roles One cannot make this claim without further analysis. She provides a potential explanation, not a fact which is already verified. Equally likely is the explanation that men take bigger risks, ignoring the degree at which a role must be a "perfect fit" before applying. This differs from vetting, as vetting implies no foresight was done before applying (more shotgun approach than sniper approach). The analysis also stops prematurely. W…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 10:59 AM
2

Can you explicate a bit more on this issue? One argument often given by others onto MRA is "why do you not mingle with [racism issue/LGBT issue/non-male issue], claiming that mingling with them will put MRA in better light, as feminism usually does mingle with other issues. Problem being that these two scenarios aren't comparable at all, and supporting issues of other political parties doesn't magically stop the kneejerk reactions against typical MRA issues, nor the inherent problems that some t…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 10:42 AM
1

He already said it back then and it's still the same today. Limited resources. Let LGBT fight for itself. If the issue isn't focused on men as a sex or men as a gender, or men as equally human to women, men's rights shouldn't waste the limited resources we have on this. Some may argue the "get favor with them first, then have them scratch your back." The manosphere in general holds the opinion that the elite see masculine men as the most threatening force capable of disruption, and prefers men b…
/r/MensRights27/02/21 09:54 AM
0

This is fallacious. Men are actively told not to rape by the law, media and more. Trophy wives and lack of financial responsibility are applauded in tons of media. Gold digging is not illegal, at most immoral (unethical is highly debatable) and both governments and most companies have a huge incentive to stimulate gold digging (more money circulation), which can't be said for stimulating rape (= dysfunctional society very swiftly). They may be opposites of another in terms of the "darker" side o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/21 09:32 AM
-3

There is no need for such a knee jerk reaction against soft sciences. Most of its practitioners sucking at performing science, doesn't make a soft science "not scientific". Friendly reminder that even in hard sciences, many malpractices exist: extreme fine tuning of test and training sets or even unspecified variables in AI failure of replication in physics even with a higher standard for confidence lobbying in medicinal and nutritional sciences, often swinging back-and-forth (NB: sugar vs salt,…
/r/MensRights26/02/21 07:13 PM
10

Only use it for non-political information and sources. When it comes to classification of anything political, it is useless. You only have to look at the page on MGTOW to see how obvious the duality is. Measuring with two cups, as always.
/r/MensRights25/02/21 06:34 PM
1

I did acknowledge your point on the resentment by not outright denying it. Though to be frank, I don't think it is an interesting discussion. It isn't much different from harboring resentment for someone who sets a premise for A, then does a bait and switch and expects someone else to clean up the mess so they can have B. Shit humans are shit humans regardless. At least with headlines like the OP, men know what to expect and not get addicted to her income being a significant contribution at any …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/21 06:25 PM
1

I'll repeat again: obviously, the act in question requires more tact. I very clearly stated this. However, the entire premise and grayness of it all lies in the increasing need to tiptoe around things which used to have some form of subtlety, and the increasing risk of men forming misconduct leading to a potential lawsuit. I'm glad there is some semblance of pushback from feminists (despite it still being up: more innocent questions got the delete+ban combo in a much shorter timeframe), but post…
/r/MensRights25/02/21 05:52 PM
2

Obviously, it is more difficult to go down in lifestyle than to go up. This much has become clear in our consumerist society. I purposely avoided this aspect in favor of looking at the dating aspect and the "taking a few years off to be a mom" aspect. As for aspects where the couple has already been well-established: For most temporary things, this can easily be achieved by being a healthy financial couple, setting savings aside for these moments and using these savings to continue your lifestyl…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/21 04:17 PM
3

There was at least one going off on the differences between kissing and more intimate acts (believe it was fingering) while the girl is asleep. While I agree that it is of higher severity and requires more thought and working towards than pulling a Nike, here's the essence of the problem: If men are punished for overstepping a boundary in relationships, regardless of their intent, with that boundary being capable of changing at any given moment, you might as well start drafting contracts on what…
/r/MensRights25/02/21 03:23 PM
3

Not all comments are disagreeing with the premise. Quite a few of them change their stance depending on the action performed, regardless of the essence (implicit consent). Additionally, the whole false accusation development is indicative it only takes a few crazy rotten apples before most of the harvest goes bad. The comments in the post indicate there is some hope left for feminist women, but I'd rather stay cautious around they who support what has resulted into similar things.
/r/MensRights25/02/21 02:36 PM
6

Meanwhile we have other woman wondering why romance is dead. Your feminist sisters are killing it, ladies.
/r/MensRights25/02/21 01:59 PM
1

Long story short: Men look at women as women first, human second, when it comes to romance and relationships. If required, men will seek the human part from other people. Men not in relationships are likely to have friends from which they can have that second part already, lessening the need to find it in their sexual partners. Most guys will still want a life partner who they can also appreciate as human, but with the above conditions, it isn't unthinkable a subset of men don't need it from wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/21 11:37 AM
3

That's also the point I'm making FYI, we're not in disagreement here. At least for most men, money isn't a huge problem until housing needs to be bigger and more permanent, and kids come into the picture. For a woman to at least play neutral (finance just her own things), that's enough. In "ye olde times" where he could do factory work and still buy a big home pre-30, he likely also made enough to fund another person with a relatively inexpensive lifestyle. The point I'm going against is the ide…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/21 09:54 AM
9

The wage thing has already been true far before the push to get women into the labor force, under the premise that what the woman brings to the table provides value. Yet, most men who find themselves in a position of financial comfort do not have as high expectations of their wives' financial contribution (not to be confused with financial responsibility). A woman's capacity to earn has never been high on the requirements ladder, except for situations her finances were required. Those situations…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/21 08:53 AM
30

women often send subtle signs which can be misconstructed That's a fancy way of saying "she wants so much plausible deniability, her way of communication is worse than a baby's". There's a huge difference between "I want him to notice without anyone else seeing it or me mentioning it" and "I want him to notice but if it goes awry I can still play it off". The latter just resembles the poor communication skills men are often accused of when it comes to reading girls.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/02/21 05:59 PM
2

Look man, I care a lot about my partner's satisfaction, but if there's one thing I barely talk about friends with, it is how to satisfy a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/21 01:03 PM
6

I agree with this when a connection is established, but the establishment of said connection usually doesn't happen from cultivating introverted and/or solitary hobbies. At the same time, men who are more outgoing and stereotypically masculine are likelier to hit a woman up for the connection to be established in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/21 09:05 PM
1

I'm not asking for feedback or "solutions" resolving my traits. Focus on the basis of my argument, which you now gloss over very easily: corporate culture is moving towards this exaggerated positivity, which isn't all positive as it seems, and as corporate culture accounts for the majority of the job market, many people will crash against this wall. Coping mechanisms only go so far for people, and there is no clear benefit to this exaggerated positivity. Anything which isn't clearly beneficial s…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/21 08:55 AM
2

Extrapolate your second sentence. That's the key here, which I also mentioned in my post. The problem isn't "they feel happy, blergh". The problem is when they feel the need to push others to be happy, which is frequently what happens, be it consciously or subconsciously. This stuff gets to HR and influences annual reviews faster than one thinks. As a critical perfectionist myself, I have gotten in trouble more than once due to my unwillingness to fake positivity in an environment desiring such …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/21 09:53 PM
1

It is quite irrational to extrapolate it in a discussion and subsequently generalize it as if men are privileged. I'm fairly certain you would be equally brash in calling me out for generalizing my bad experiences with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/21 09:48 PM
3

not feeling Feeling is cute and all, but men are still more often the victim of violence than women. Let's not base privilege on irrational thoughts, unless you wish to claim men caring less about this is a biological privilege, at which point any further discussion is moot shit-flinging anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/21 09:41 PM
2

Exaggerated positivity can be just as bad as being cynical. Trying to downplay that shows the essence of the problem and how people fail to realize how damaging their practices can be. It is a serious issue in today's culture. It would be okay if this was just a matter of incompatibility and/or accepting differences, but corporate culture is heavily trending towards happy-happy-joy-joy cultures where if one isn't super positive first thing in the morning, they are one step closer to getting HR o…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/21 09:30 PM
10

This isn't just dating practice either. It is everything. Society has successfully derived most men of the capability to practice traits which they may find beneficial in securing a mate until their late 20s. If not for securing a mate, developing traits can help them create the positive feedback loops and spiral towards improvement, which will make them more attractive for the dating market as well (higher value). We have in every way, shape and form, artificially extended traditional juniority…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/21 11:42 AM
2

Wait , do you reject the notion that social-economic factors contribute to violence? I'm telling you not to move the goalpost instead of getting sidetracked on something, whether that be true or false. I am very well aware social factors, economic or not, influence behavior. My emphasis on humans as a social species should've given that away. Reality is, science on what biologically influences violence in humans is extremely scarce. Facts and findings are changing yearly, and both primates and m…
/r/MensRights22/02/21 08:40 AM
1

Who said anything about violence? I said extremism. Your argument about size differences doesn't account for the fact women can be just as violent as men despite their much smaller sizes, which we can see today. Go and have an actual look. Like primates, men initially shit test one another to establish a dominance hierarchy. Once said dominance hierarchy is established, any notion of violence drops immensely as would-be challengers are mostly weeded out. Testosterone has paradoxically been assoc…
/r/MensRights22/02/21 08:18 AM
3

You are misunderstanding. Society viewing men and women differently does not imply the only inherent differences between men and women are physicality. Society's view on men and women is not representation of what the differences between men and women actually are.
/r/MensRights21/02/21 03:33 PM
3

These are two different arguments. How society views masculine and feminine behaviors does not imply society's view on men and women is the only thing contributing to differences beyond physicality.
/r/MensRights21/02/21 03:09 PM
4

Obviously, no. What you point out is a lack in acting humane, which supersedes being male or female. Yet whether a behavior can be excused or not does not mean society can plug their ears, go "lalalala" while encouraging said behavior to be performed despite it being punished or deemed unethical. The first step to avoiding temptation is to attempt removing the temptation, not saying "you are bad if you are tempted by this". Not every scenario requires the person in question to make the decision …
/r/MensRights21/02/21 02:51 PM
3

You said "a bit hyperbole" where it was really extremely hyperbolic, and prior to that, you still emphasize incredibly heavily on the long-abandoned nature vs nurture thing. If you're going to put this forward this strongly, you're not getting away with a simple "a bit hyperbole". The idea put forward by the OP's friend essentially says that there is a function for which every human, regardless male or female, will produce the same output regardless of input. Considering how differently the two …
/r/MensRights21/02/21 02:19 PM
12

This way underplays the importance of hormones and the spiraling, self-reinforcing effects they cause. This line of thinking doesn't take into account how nature and nurture play off of each other and the importance of the initial state, which is primarily nature, in relation to the current state of society.
/r/MensRights21/02/21 01:18 PM
3

Your whole explanation fails to explain why testosterone is the hormone of extremism, which both makes people kinder to those submissive / friendly to them, and more aggressive to those with a hint of willingness to fight for dominance. This is a cute theory and all, but I don't exactly see gym rats go out and be violent. Quite the opposite, they tend to be some of the nicer people around.
/r/MensRights21/02/21 12:17 PM
3

It is actually very fair to blame adults for their lack of critical thinking and the ease with which they slip into normalcy bias. If you can't think critically, you shouldn't be making strong statements. Let the critical thinkers discuss and let the dummies sit back and watch.
/r/MensRights20/02/21 06:24 PM
11

It is similar to you guys. The US in general is just the most extreme version of anything present in the western world. At least where I live (NL), women have always been very brash and loudmouthed. Men are very passive and meek to begin with. Despite that, women still want "more equality" when our laws are fairly egalitarian to begin with. Gender quotas are being introduced, and the wage gap myth is still very much alive. A woman's struggles are highlighted, while a man's struggles are buried. …
/r/MensRights20/02/21 06:12 PM
29

Look at the downvoted comments in the linked post. That should answer your question. Or as someone in the comments said: "Look at all these apologists".
/r/MensRights20/02/21 06:02 PM
4

This is horrible advice too. This is the exact same advice they got as boys, kept them sexless in their 20s and drives a significant subset of these men into TRP, as their advice at least doesn't boil down to "wait for luck to kick in". The last 40 years should be indication advice needs to be much better than this. Even if it requires them to learn seduction the hard way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/02/21 02:36 PM
4

What I say is orthogonal to what you are saying. I'm specifically mentioning the things I am to indicate what would usually drive a woman to sexually desire a man. The absence or structural deterioration of those roles put men far behind, even in a scenario which should be advantageous to them compared to the biological status quo of our primate relatives (a civilized society which still pushes monogamy and "the happy family" image to a fairly high degree). There is relativity in the sense that …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/02/21 01:01 PM
3

This is way too simplified. 1 is obviously wrong, unless we're going to define "need" as "needed for optimal health" or something. A strong desire is more like it. 2, 3 and 4 leave out the obvious fact that sex is about more than just sex drive within humans. Dominance hierarchies, bonding, securing resources, satisfaction, a lot of things go into it. It all goes back to the five traditional roles a man used to encompass to varying degrees: Provider: good luck being a great provider as a young m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/02/21 10:52 AM
1

Realistically the brunt of the difficulty will be quantifying, weighting and conversion of words and sentences. Given the emphasis is on stimulating gender wars rather than technical complexity or a novel implementation, I'm already skeptical on this going any further than a simple scraper tallying word counts. In the best case, it is still a fuzzy logic-fested hole which relies too much on the incredibly volatile and present day interpretations of social studies. Nor do I believe a CS student s…
/r/MensRights20/02/21 10:03 AM
1

Not like this. Any professor in CS should be ashamed of putting something of such low technical complexity up, and the entire premise will be dependent on how they choose their weighting and conversion to quantify sexism. The latter part is entirely social studies, and constitutes the brunt of the difficulty of this thesis. This would be fine if the student in question was already a PhD or professor with proven success, but this is a trial to establish whether the person in question is worthy of…
/r/MensRights20/02/21 09:57 AM
81

This is not a thesis topic suited for a computer scientist. This is a psychology or social studies thesis topic.
/r/MensRights19/02/21 01:31 PM
4

I don't see the majority of people kicking them out, specifying it or resenting them either. You're the one feeling the need to make a meta post to address how a minority behaves this way. If there are sex-related issues specific to trans men for inherently being female in sex, this obviously isn't the right sub. The issues on this sub are predominantly "male in gender and/or male in sex".
/r/MensRights18/02/21 10:20 PM
6

Do we really need meta posts about every little thing every damn time? People already treat trans people differently as people here emphasize sex, not gender, more than other subs. Just because it doesn't fit your narrative, doesn't make it transphobic either. The statement "trans men are women" is both true and false: false for gender, true for sex. Their chromosomes aren't XY, they weren't born with a penis, they aren't able to procreate with women naturally, etc. How pointing out a biological…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 10:08 PM
12

Trust should be earned, not given. Given most of the arguments feminists give on basis of a lack of trust in men, they cannot complain about the reverse happening and biting them in the ass. We live in an age where people have safeties and be given clarity on things they wouldn't have normally. To make an exception on paternity just because of female pride or "my body my choice" is a joke. "My money my choice" doesn't exist either when it comes to paternity (fraud or otherwise).
/r/MensRights18/02/21 10:00 PM
2

Come back when you can read the very obvious point I made as the basis of my argument, which is aptly named "the basis of my argument". There is no point discussing this further if you fail basic reading comprehension.
/r/MensRights18/02/21 09:55 PM
2

how many colleges do you know of that have a gender quota for stem programs? I've been steadily following news of my country where universities are strongly considering gender quotas. They do the same for large companies and executive committees. why do you think women get student loans easier? pretty much anyone can get a student loan if they haven’t screwed tgeir credit. Why are you specifically talking about women? This is a non-gendered issue. The whole premise is feminism emphasizes the for…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 09:41 PM
4

Yet all what you say falls flat when looking at the way feminism executes, which is at best only beneficial for a subset of women, and at worst hurts both men and women at the benefit of a small subset of women and a very small subset of men, who may as well be called leeches. I have not been harmed by feminism directly either. Yet I hold a strong opinion feminism is the wrong ideology for both men and women's best interests respectively, let alone at the same time. men are not thought of as hom…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 09:10 PM
2

Right. Guess I have to be very blunt and very clear, since you continue to talk past me and assume a lot about me. Male bonding is good and I encourage it. That doesn't mean I encourage the idea of using it as the sole mitigation strategy under the assumption women won't change otherwise. There are too many holes in this argument, one of which you have yet to address and which I will repeat once more: This is not an "A or B" situation. This is an "A and B if we put in an ounce of effort" situati…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 08:50 PM
0

You're using two completely orthogonal things to make a point. No, women do not have to be a man's "everything". Yes, women, as humans, should be humane towards other humans, including men. The way you are advocating now, is by essentially preferring a high-effort solution to convert the 50th to 60th percentile men (based on willingness to compete in hypergamous environments), over a low-effort solution to convert the 0th to 15th percentile of women (based on willingness to exhibit empathy towar…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 05:30 PM
5

This is a MGTOW pipedream which has only ever worked in times of poverty and scarcity. Frankly, I do not see a reason to exclude methods which could cover the female half of the population with any kind of success rate on the idea that enough of the male half will magically overcome the lizard brains you allude to. This isn't a scenario where resources are so severely limited we cannot do both.
/r/MensRights18/02/21 04:05 PM
7

I don't think this is the way to go either. We should be better to each other as humans. Only when coming across sex-specific (or maybe gender-specific) issues which require more empathy to cross, should we have to rely on peers of the same sex. That's the main problem here. There is no basis for a gendered issue here, but women's lack of empathy towards men to the point of hate and resentment is pushed (by false facts, propaganda, agendas, etc.), making it into one. If we are to be equals as hu…
/r/MensRights18/02/21 03:15 PM
28

There are a lot of good-willed women in feminism too. The majority people of any movement are more likely to have good intentions than bad intentions. Despite that, they are often not the drivers, and it doesn't keep them from the age old "live long enough to see yourself become the villain". Look at a movement based on how it executes, not based on the intentions of the majority.
/r/MensRights18/02/21 08:42 AM
3

You've got cause and effect backwards. Next.
/r/MensRights17/02/21 06:03 PM
30

"Bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks" "Dude wtf?" "Chill sis it is just a phrase" If they disagree but attempt to justify "kill all men", time to burn bridges.
/r/MensRights17/02/21 05:57 PM
42

The whole premise of her post is flawed, and it is revealed in this part: I often see men on reddit talking how no one checks up on them, no one talks to them about their feelings. I have to ask them, do you reach out to those same people? Or do you only talk to them when you need something? Life is reciprocal, you can’t expect to receive when you don’t give. Most men stop doing this from a state they used to do it. The West overly emphasizes emotions and the importance of emotions, even in boys…
/r/MensRights17/02/21 01:51 PM
2

I can hear Iago in the distance, dying from a heart attack at this big surprise (/s). Related but slightly off-topic: I'm curious if other guys also notice their business interactions with women tend to be more emotionally charged and emotional are given more weight. I do hope the "feminized work place" doesn't alienate logic in favor of emotions formed by the slightest trigger.
/r/MensRights17/02/21 11:47 AM
8

You might want to find the actual word before putting up a topic which comes across as bait: Upset, wary, vindictive, hate, resentment? At women? At feminism? At pro-girl power movements? As for the reason whatever it is: This place is one of the few, if any, male-centric spots which isn't borderline radicalized or radicalized, and doesn't enforce a specific way of living onto readers. It serves as a stopping point for many people early in their journey, of which a lot will still feel some sembl…
/r/MensRights16/02/21 04:54 PM
0

You're falling into a slippery slope. You're essentially saying that Because culture was a way some point in our past, we should allow people to continue them. False. If I wanted to appeal to nature (which is the actual argument, not slippery slope), I would have said "how do you think culture and gender roles were formed?". I'll repeat it once again: I am saying there is a group which is naturally inclined to act on traditional gender roles because they enjoy it. Without actively harming others…
/r/MensRights15/02/21 08:56 AM
-1

Your entire story would be 100% correct, were it not for one very fundamental flaw: the idea that we are all enlightened humans who can think rationally. Most of us make tons of important decisions with the completely irrationality of the aforementioned chimp. Stop emphasizing height for a moment and realize my argument is entirely about achievements one acquires by putting in effort. Now compare that to a person who isn't willing to put in the effort. Bob and Dan are both wealthy, affluent peop…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 05:31 PM
0

You still haven't defined how to solve the fundamental problem: most of our species still being slaves to dominance hierarchies, sexual selection highly similar to tournament selection, passive competition and sexual preferences from women causing several layers of prisoner's dilemma and active competition. You can't solve these overnight, and the likelihood you will solve these problems within the next three generations is slim to none. That's the point I'm trying to bring across. You're not ju…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 05:07 PM
2

Many men here aren't "happy to enforce gender roles". Rather, they are (rightfully) afraid that a progressive movement will demonize traditional masculine values, for various reasons. With all due respect, a lot of men in the "screw gender roles" crowd are woefully unaware what is required to truly absolve gender roles. Take competition. Traits that help win competitions and be competitive, generally help a person stand out in life and (or in turn) help them find a partner and start a family. Yo…
/r/MensRights14/02/21 04:36 PM
16

My experience has been the dudes mocking my height usually lack confidence and feel the need to shit test to build up their ego. They also shut up pretty quick after pointing out I could nail them no problem. Thank for standing up. Unfortunately, I doubt this behavior will disappear. Random guys wanting to compete out of spite isn't a problem being solved anytime soon, and people in general are unlikely to stand up for one another regardless the scenario.
/r/MensRights14/02/21 02:43 PM
3

Agreed. Additionally, this part of "things aren't binary" in the OP feels like too much of a scapegoat to make the entire premise binary. The conclusion itself is fine (analyzing multi-faceted problems for their entire worth is too taxing to do on a consistent basis, so keep it simple), but it skips over massive holes and contradictions on could find comparing to history. One of the holes being the women -> society -> women thing. Feels incredibly circular and doesn't explain why it is happening…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre14/02/21 12:41 PM
6

As far as I gather, this has been the preferred method of the left ever since it has been usurped by extreme leftism, combined with deflecting so their extremism remains under the radar while the extreme rightists take the majority of society's scorn. Even regular leftists are getting fed up with this behavior.
/r/MensRights12/02/21 07:14 PM
1

false. Reread. your misstatement of my points A little ironic, since you just misread my point entirely and don't realize your original post still has the mental gymnastics for men, but rushes for women. Actually calls me a feminist Aylmao. Sit down and stop providing fuel to the feminist trolls, then we'll talk. I couldn't care less about feminism, and I couldn't care less about men actively hurting the MRA movement with their blabbering.
/r/MensRights11/02/21 08:33 PM
1

My position, at the moment, is that some very small number of men are capable of sexual violence, call it 6 %. Of that 6% some small number have sufficient lack of impulse control that they will actually rape, something like 1 in 5000 men. And that one in 5000 men does not just rape every woman he meets, he rapes opportunistically, if he lives in a large city where he encounters hundreds of women a day, he may rape 1 in 100,000 such women. You go through all these mental gymnastics to clarify a …
/r/MensRights11/02/21 08:13 PM
1

Whatever the underlying case is doesn't matter, you were comparing apples to oranges. Comparing the group that has executed A, to the group which may potentially execute B. The comparison you should be making, is the group that has executed A, and the group that has executed B. Additionally, you're changing the subject to "people are encouraged to execute B, but discouraged to execute A, despite both being malicious". Obviously, that shouldn't be the case. Both should be discouraged. But this ar…
/r/MensRights11/02/21 05:57 PM
2

Your post has one mistake. First, you beautifully illustrate only a subset will take the opportunity to rape. Then you come around and forget this entire flow for women, when in the end, it is still a subset of women who will attempt the false accusation. For the sake of the argument, I'm going to compare the two as if the number of rapists would be equal to the number of false accusers. Reality is, a subset of people suck. Evolution has deemed these traits, or the formation of these traits, ben…
/r/MensRights11/02/21 05:32 PM
1

Aye. I took the most obvious and advertised example for simplicity's sake. The actual rabbit hole goes far deeper. Despite that, the essence is still the same: you can't fix a multi-faceted problem through a black-and-white approach held together by duct tape. There are a lot of things that can be done, but pinning the blame on one gender and continuously reinforcing the idea they are in essence "inferior scum" is the quickest way to make this problem get out of hand. And this time, we don't nee…
/r/MensRights11/02/21 05:02 PM
3

The problem behind this entire thing is trying to make things black-and-white. And when that doesn't work, they use a band-aid fix to make black-and-white "work" again. Should women be able to walk through the parks during night without being assaulted? Yes, of course. That doesn't mean they will walk through the parks during the night with the same safety they would during the day. Does that mean she's at fault if a guy attacks her in the night? No. It does mean she could have prevented it by n…
/r/MensRights11/02/21 04:32 PM
2

The things you name are facts, not mentality. Being ok with wanting sex is mentality.
/r/MensRights11/02/21 12:26 PM
5

Let me specify. It's not that I don't think this issue could be MRA. Rather, the tone and emphasis in the OP is so heavily on race rather than sex, that the post comes across as if its more about racial stereotyping than anything. The example you gave just now would be much better suited. Or you could emphasize something like "women get more sexual attention, as a man the fact I'm exotic is the only thing getting me that sexual attention", which seems more along the tone you were trying to set. …
/r/MensRights11/02/21 11:30 AM
3

I'm missing why this is MRA. Sounds more like race stuff.
/r/MensRights11/02/21 10:03 AM
1

That's insinuating those remaining people aren't able to gather, continue producing electricity and more. More than half the populace is working on jack shit which doesn't require priority in such an event, and enough of them are capable enough to be put to work on high priority things. Bureaucracy and social services easily take the majority of what is being worked on today: all of that can be dismissed or reduced to 10% and we'd still be fine, especially considering the lower load due to a mas…
/r/MensRights09/02/21 10:13 PM
1

On your first point: it's mostly steroids. All that "time spent" won't make a person magically outshine a Mister Olympia from the 20s. Guys in their 40s and 50s are coming out better trained than a mid-20s guy from the early 1900s who has trained his entire life. That's the biggest problem with body image: the vast majority of bodies made to be visually pleasing, are made through some semblance of steroid use, but sold as if they aren't. Running 5 miles a day 5 days a week and rigorous body exer…
/r/MensRights09/02/21 07:01 PM
1

Halving the population with an equal spread in geolocation, education, race and sex wouldn't revert the global society to such a state: the population was half today's only a while ago. Last time I checked, the Victorians weren't massively living in caves.
/r/MensRights09/02/21 06:48 PM
8

Either way the two aren't the same. They serve different purposes. Perhaps TwoX isn't the same as MGTOW, but TwoX does fulfill a similar purpose to MGTOW: an inner circle of people sharing a common, apolitical trait based on sex and/or philosophy. The same can't be said for MensRights, which is by nature political, and does not inherently exclude any one of the sexes. Let's just end the discussion at the fact it isn't sexist. The OP of the original post doesn't seem like the type to make a 4000 …
/r/MensRights08/02/21 04:07 PM
8

That's not the definition of sexist. u/iloveyoubutyou is right on that front, two subs from both sexes are being compared. She's also right on the front that the more extremist side of this sub does at least border on misogyny, though that should be a given based on the audience and the position of this sub, and is actually one of the stronger points of this sub: don't filter and ban the angry guys out, let them have their moment and wait for them to calm down and realize there's more beyond the…
/r/MensRights08/02/21 03:42 PM
8

If you can't bring forward a point, you are denied the ability to discuss things. The same goes for using pathos as a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss any and all arguments. There's a difference between opening the point for debate, which is "people are being taught X" does, and stating "all people are X", given a context where the latter is very obviously false, but the former is at least interesting to investigate why this would be said. Are all men rapists? Well, I don't exactly see women being …
/r/MensRights08/02/21 03:00 PM
4

If I knew, I would tell you. Reddit is polarizing for a reason. For now, just chill, don't be too confrontational and accept there will be kneejerk reactions by guys here if you continue to post things that are at odds (with them, that is). People all have their own problems. They just don't all want to listen to other's problems.
/r/MensRights08/02/21 02:14 PM
12

It isn't an excuse. It's a nuance. There's a difference between "being taught" and "being taught therefore they all are". Cool your jets. Bringing in the pathos army in any discussion will only lead to endless discussions. For someone so hellbent on logic, simmer down and realize that for one, you grasped another comment by someone else just to confront the OP in your already confrontational post, and for two, you are continuously falling back on pathos to make your point. If you desire a confro…
/r/MensRights08/02/21 02:09 PM
8

Try to grasp the audience a little. The majority of social media and Reddit is pro-female, pro-girl power, etc. The majority also has no problem shaming men for anything, from trying to be masculine to showing their emotions. The few men-only and men-dominant subs flying around are essentially filled with people who don't want pro-girl power narrative to drive the conversation. That isn't to say most guys here hate women, but this is one of the first and few stops you will find guys who are feel…
/r/MensRights08/02/21 01:54 PM
11

That's not an attack on young women. That's an attack on what young women are being taught. You don't blame people for the way they are brought up, you blame the teachers who knowingly did so.
/r/MensRights08/02/21 01:47 PM
1

Aye. Lied to from the cradle to the grave.
/r/MensRights08/02/21 01:39 PM
7

Being purposely confrontational doesn't help. Nor does trying to shift the discussion primarily towards women and their problems, depending on context. Besides, there are a dozen other places to emphasize problems women have.
/r/MensRights08/02/21 01:37 PM
1

Education today is largely based on the Prussian school system. Making people think is not the primary goal of the Prussian school system. Conformity is. Making people think is also the one way they will quickly start questioning things, which directly contrasts conformity. We see this double-edged sword today, where we continue to ask for more and more bright minds who can solve problems which require out-of-the-box, critical thinking. Critical thinking and conformity contrast each other very o…
/r/MensRights08/02/21 01:21 PM
24

Unfortunately, dual mating strategies in a "world of equality" comes at the cost of a subset of men. Let's take responsibility for our choices, including mothers.
/r/MensRights07/02/21 09:40 PM
5

A few weeks back, there was a post regarding a study showing how female students do better with male supervisors guiding them than female supervisors, whereas there was no difference for male students. A lot of pro-girl power scientists were quick to point out "misogyny", despite this being science and benefiting women as a whole should the study be true for the world and executed upon. Reality is, attempting to navigate complex social scenarios is difficult even for adults, let alone teens. If …
/r/MensRights07/02/21 09:37 PM
9

Just gonna toss this on: Despite the spread being about 50/50, a guy without issues is more likely help women than to help men (women are wonderful effect). It isn't weird to assume this goes for politics, too. Female movements are encouraged in politics, to the point only extreme cases require activism. Male movements are chastised, and even minor things require activism. Like you said, for both men and women, we aren't the same person just based on genitals. Even here, you will find discussion…
/r/MensRights07/02/21 07:00 PM
18

Related study (still paywalled because why would we make knowledge free?): https://academic.oup.com/ej/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ej/ueaa140/6055681 In subsample analyses, we find larger child-gender differences in divorce risks for parents whose attitudes towards gender-roles are likely to differ from those of their daughters and partners. We also find survey evidence of relationship strains in families with teenage daughters. I remember someone on Hackernews stating the highest diffe…
/r/MensRights07/02/21 02:55 PM
1

This entire stance on the "us vs them is bad because resentment" stems largely from the belief that any kind of competition is bad and will further the divide. Read the origins of yin and yang. Competing forces can co-exist because they keep each other from reaching a point of self-consumption and self-destruction, thereby creating balance. This is assuming feminism in its current state is balanced compared to men's rights. It is not. Feminism is more akin to MGTOW or Red Pill, which is a much m…
/r/MensRights07/02/21 02:30 PM
1

Unfortunately, I can't find the study anymore and I'm failing to recall the exact terminology. I vividly remember the study was about people being told to compete against others another in a virtual competition, where men, as expected, were more aggressive than women, until anonymity came into play and group size increased, at which point women were equal if not higher in aggression. The current theory is that a far lower number of women than men are brazen enough to act in an environment where …
/r/MensRights07/02/21 02:08 PM
3

You realize the vast majority of devs does not know ASM? Yet you somehow believe this is the right litmus test to pull to claim most software devs do an honest day's work? The absolute vast majority of programmers does simple web-based CRUD, reprogramming the same forms over and over. Compare the webprogramming subreddits to the other subreddits. Now extrapolate that to the remainder of Reddit's population and draw your conclusion. Surely, for someone who desires to pull ASM into a discussion, y…
/r/MensRights27/01/21 10:38 PM
5

Gonna be real with you, all those posters complaining software dev is toxic and sexist: oh, software dev has shit alright, but not because of some need to be sexist to women. Software development is being dumbed down enough as is. Software dev in general is filled with special snowflakes who forgot what a honest day's work is. I say that as a software dev. The amount of tolerance and bullshit we accept in software dev is inane, and has lead to the ridiculous amount of bureaucracy and buzzword sh…
/r/MensRights27/01/21 02:44 PM
5

Quit resorting to pathos. Like you ever read this, so more for the bypassers: people are unconsciously or subtly hinting that investing the few resources you have on a less prevalent problem indicates clear bias. Your argument only rings true in the context of limitless resources.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 01:05 PM
24

That's not the goal of MRA. The goal of MRA is to make men (and in a lofty sense, all people), feel comfortable where they are. That doesn't imply pushing men into fields that have a male minority, nor does fixing that minority imply they will be listened to. Same goes for women. This take on the entire thing is incredibly superficial despite the reality being much simpler: people at the top often lack the empathy and social skills required to relate and listen to wildly diverse subordinates, re…
/r/MensRights25/01/21 01:19 PM
7

Unfortunately, the suggestion may be far from the truth. This implies two things: They need enough people of their sex represented in management for them to be listened to Being listened to will resolve their feelings The former is far more intricate and hits on the problems with how mass media likes to define diversity, what actual diversity is and the "diversity sweet spot". A white woman and a black man with the exact same ideals and birth place working together, are not actually that diverse…
/r/MensRights25/01/21 12:57 PM
7

Take your upvote and leave.
/r/MensRights25/01/21 08:21 AM
5

I do not oppose your point. Rather, if over the span of the last 50 years, people like us have been putting others out of a job, yet unemployment still hasn't risen sky high, that begs the question where all these people that lost their job went to, especially given the working population was still increasing at that time. Increase of service-oriented jobs, STEM and others can only account for so much (not to mention many people end up a net negative over the span of years without anyone knowing…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre24/01/21 10:50 PM
11

I work in the field and can confidently say, if there is anything that will speed up the adoption of robotics, automation and AI, it won't be their improvements that are the driver. Human processes are unnecessarily complicated to the point almost all AI in the next 20 years will trip up and require a human supervisor. Meanwhile, the quality of the average software dev is poor, even FAANG, slowing down innovation to a crawl. What will drive the adoption, is admittance that our systems are bloate…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre24/01/21 09:22 PM
12

You invited the discussion from mensrights, so might as well throw in a few cents. Disclaimer, I'm not leftist (I'm still not sure whether I'd technically be right-winged or centrist by US standards, and I hate the extremely simplified linear/binary construct of modern politics anyway). You're basically spot on. Right or left doesn't matter to the individual: until they can satisfy their own desires, they will not help others. The degree at which they help others is dependent on the way they are…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/21 04:15 PM
15

I wouldn't be too worried about automation just yet. Robotics still has a long way to go and realistically, if we really wanted to cut the work force in half, we could do it overnight without introducing a single robot. Most white collar jobs do not have a reason for existing beyond keeping people busy and micromanaging them to death. We're also hitting environmental limits where introducing more robots has too much impact on the environment, unless we mitigate it by killing people off.
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre24/01/21 02:14 PM
63

While it is true king high is "better" in several cases (and this order exists for historical reasons and simplification), many of the most important combinations include the queen and the king together. Additionally, the queen has the benefit of fitting more sequences without wraparound (king only fits 9-10-J-Q-K and 10-J-Q-K-A, queen fits both those and 8-9-10-J-Q*). It also depends entirely on the game that is played, where many card games do not value cards past 10 to be of higher value than…
/r/MensRights24/01/21 01:02 PM
2

It implies that the pater part is more important than there being an elite, or that the pater part causes the elite to be corrupt. Given current evidence I'd be hard pressed to believe a matriarchy wouldn't also have an elite that can oppress the majority of people (both males and females fight for hierarchies of their sex in most social mammalian and avian species).
/r/MensRights24/01/21 11:31 AM
3

Honestly, it's just over-analyzing calling a spade a spade for most people. Fat people are more likely to stay fat, and even after getting thin, are at danger of bouncing back. Lazy people are more likely to stay lazy, and even after getting active, are at danger of bouncing back. Promiscuous people are more likely to sleep around, and even after being more chaste, are at danger of wanting that old life of sleeping around back. Instinctively, people realize they shouldn't treat promiscuity diffe…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre24/01/21 11:01 AM
1

Targeted? You misread quite easily. I'm not the one feeling targeted, I'm the one targeting you with clear intent. Regardless, you have proven my point tenfold. The discussion's already over.
/r/MensRights23/01/21 12:07 PM
4

A few critiques/additions: Can a man accurately assess someone's n-count? Related: people who do something often gain confidence in that activity. A person who is naturally confident, will likely be confident in most activities of similar risk (bar fears). A person who is particularly confident in one thing, way off their standard, is likely to be familiar with it. If you have a man/woman who is abnormally confident when it comes to flirting, sex or the likes, that should tip you off. There's a …
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre23/01/21 12:04 PM
2

I have no worth behind your opinion. I only have beef with the way you represent it and subtly, maybe even unknowingly, drag others down and affirm yourself on the proverbial high horse. Your actions betray your words.
/r/MensRights23/01/21 11:09 AM
9

That wouldn't explain why similar statistics (infanticide being one) isn't highlighted anywhere as much. Or differently, why highlighting differences in race and crime is considered bad under the name of racism, despite highlighting differences sex and rape being considered good. Marketing matters. Feminism has marketed rape as being worse than infanticide. Read a few books on psychology, marketing is more important than logic and objective truth when it comes to spreading facts.
/r/MensRights23/01/21 11:05 AM
2

You're judgmental yet propose yourself to be strong. Meanwhile, most revered symbols of masculinity support wisdom, which itself supports not to judge. Surely you must see the irony in your words.
/r/MensRights23/01/21 10:55 AM
1

I'm not downplaying them, though. Furthermore, I have stated female desire manifests differently. Rather, I'm highlighting that because the two are different rather than one is more extreme than the other, a simple change of context could cause women to be on the receiving end of what the OP is describing. I'm certain most guys here realize this, but more importantly, discussions with people charging in emotionally (like the women in the original comment) can't be fought directly. The only way y…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/21 10:49 AM
3

Yet you point out something when the OP already said they don't care as long as it is fixed. Your actions betray your words.
/r/MensRights22/01/21 10:09 PM
2

That's cute and all, but use your own words and your own brain to analyze what's going on in the world currently as well. I'm not disputing the sex drive of the median man is stronger than that of the median woman. I'm merely saying that the differences aren't so drastic the exact opposite scenario is impossible (women unable to satisfy their sexual desires resorting to other means). Japan's most notorious for this, being one of the few countries not shying away from turning a service into absol…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/21 06:19 PM
7

I'm going on a whim and turn "gender differences" into "sex differences". Stating there are no sex differences is flat-out denial of one's own senses. Sexual dimorphism in men and women is obvious: Your mom has tits, you father (hopefully) doesn't. Men are generally top heavy, women are generally bottom heavy. Enough to warrant differences in fighting style and exercising due to the change in center of mass. That's before we dive into the internals and their effects. Take testosterone: a hormone…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/21 05:50 PM
12

At least make an effort to make your argument coherent. OP is fairly showing double standards where we handle disproportions (in social media) in race differently than disproportions in sex. Either discriminate in both cases, or don't discriminate at all.
/r/MensRights22/01/21 11:36 AM
7

It's not completely false. Research into hormones and testosterone isn't that old, female desire manifests differently and we have a slew of on-going, real life cases that warrant research beyond "this is an exception to the rule" (Japan). The jury is still out on what is really going on. That said, most women on the net do seem to lash out just at the mention of protecting men from this. Ironic, since in the same breath, they would throw a tantrum is we stopped supporting non-widow single moms.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/01/21 09:42 PM
5

And now you are a single mom who has to continually hold up this false very thin veneer of "happy happy joy joy!" in order to get through your day. Unfortunately, being a single mom, or a woman, is no longer requirement for this to my own chagrin. OP never said that Gonna go on a whim and say they meant the OP of the PPD post chief, which the OP of this post points out as fallacious. Or to put it simpler: PPD OP: women are smart, we play a game of "share or take", and all men are sharing. Dumbas…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre21/01/21 04:48 PM
6

Great, more communication graduates trying to tell us what and what not to do while disregarding the entirety of (philosophical) history. Guess they forgot to teach her all she has to do is communicate herself as a "consultant" and she'll have no trouble paying the bills.
/r/MensRights20/01/21 11:13 AM
1

Given I know very little about the actual research beyond "we measure hours reported by users unweighted", I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they measure everything. So not just shopping, but also typical guy things (outdoor maintenance). As you point out, many of these categories are very grey-zoned, where there is a clear part of "time that must be invested", and a whole lot of "time that I don't really need to invest buuuuut.." I know within male circles, there is the idea that wo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/21 09:37 AM
2

It is an artifact of the predominant way people live their lives: hour by hour. I can't fault people, even academics, for falling into this trap, but that still means it is a trap. There's a reason they say "work smarter, not harder". Time is limited. Optimizing it is less limited.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 05:25 PM
7

If your intent is to highlight the now, you shouldn't write your point using the past tense: "they were told to fuck back to the kitchen". Your point makes close to no sense in the context of the current day, where saying that in a public context is more likely to paint a target on one's back than anything. Furthermore, the same apex fallacy is still present today, if not even more. The point about descendants is the only thing that no longer holds ground.
/r/MensRights18/01/21 03:28 PM
8

He's saying it's a matter of perspective. No one's going to give a definitive, objective answer, and studies fail to adjust or highlight this. Some women claim shopping for holiday gifts is a necessity and not leisure time. Some men will say otherwise, that it is leisure time despite it feeling like a necessity. On top of that, unlike a job, there is no set time for shopping. If he finishes in 15 minutes and she decides to take 4 hours, she may write up 4 hours of "unpaid work" despite it arguab…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 03:18 PM
3

So the old days are done. I can assure you, living in a country where women have been "emancipated" for far longer and are the queens of working part time compared to their western sisters, the old days are far from done. History would also like a word with you on this. Biology will not be subdued so easily in a time of affluence and abundance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 03:00 PM
14

The majority of white men did not oppress. The majority of white men did grunt work for the majority of history and had no time, patience or energy left after. To project onto all white men that which a select group of extremist and/or powerful men did is the basis of apex fallacy. To push the responsibility of something they did not do onto their descendants is insidious.
/r/MensRights18/01/21 01:55 PM
5

You're projecting yourself onto others.
/r/MensRights18/01/21 09:03 AM
7

It is a little telling whenever "toxic masculinity" comes up, you only resort to calling out others for "not understanding it", yet ignore any and all criticism given to your understanding perception of the word. I may 'tough it out' instead of going to a doctor because I don't want to look weak. And in some cases, you teach yourself discipline. Whether it "hurts" you in this scenario is way more context-sensitive than your small example. I may go to the doctor and my brother calls me a pansy. T…
/r/MensRights17/01/21 07:05 PM
1

Because most media has been successful in making men believe they can essentially "escape the friend zone" the past 20-30 years, or worse, believe being a friend is a necessity towards dating. Waiting that long worked in the past, when both women and men were told to start dating and marrying far younger than we do now and a woman's chastity was also encouraged far more than it is now (read: women were actively called out for being "easy"). For various reasons, it no longer does.
/r/MensRights16/01/21 09:29 PM
5

You are leaving out the crucial detail, perhaps on purpose: days vs weeks vs months. Checking compatibility on the level most humans do to establish dating status doesn't take months, frequently not even a month. Refer back to my post for the reason.
/r/MensRights16/01/21 06:20 PM
0

This is projection of human intelligence onto other animals and a common fallacy made by human arrogance. That same arrogance used to claim plants aren't sentient, despite it being arguable at best even from that perspective. Are there animals who are evil for their personal gain and dicks to others for no apparent reason? Nah. Wild sulphur-crested cockatoos and several other parrot species do that all the time, either out of boredom or to experiment with social boundaries and learn interactions…
/r/MensRights16/01/21 06:13 PM
5

You're falling for the obvious trap (or worse, baiting people into it). Somehow men need to spend their valuable time chasing a single woman in a time where women are ridiculously flaky, and still do it in a way that doesn't come across as "nice guy" or he'll be labeled as a creep. The real joke being, "nice guy" is tossed around so casually, it has become as useless as any other man-shaming term. That dichotomy is setting men up for failure. That's before the consideration evidence after eviden…
/r/MensRights16/01/21 05:52 PM
6

If Tinder really was so great at making LTRs, the app would be self-defeatist and unprofitable in the long run. That alone should make anyone think twice about the true purpose of Tinder. Reddit seems to forget most of the world isn't remotely like the average redditor.
/r/MensRights16/01/21 05:18 PM
1

Im not a woman As a feminist and also someone thats not a man You gonna have to explain that one to me fam
/r/MensRights13/01/21 08:28 PM
5

The, for convenience let's call it "raw", wage gap, is statistically correct. It is just the way those statistics are built up make it complete useless as a metric to discuss the things feminism usually attempts to discuss with it. Just like saying "H2O is one of the most deadly substances" is useless and shouldn't keep someone from drinking water. You can make a very fair assessment using that raw wage gap and say "the work men do is generally more lucrative than that of women". That is true. W…
/r/MensRights13/01/21 02:08 PM
25

This isn't really MRA as much as it is a clearly asinine woman cherrypicking S. Korea (I assume South anyway), the country with some of the most vapid and high beauty standards, to make the point why building + maintaining muscle and maintaining a low fat percentage is easier than maintaining a low fat percentage. Hint: it isn't.
/r/MensRights13/01/21 12:15 PM
10

Yup. The wage gap is real, metrics and math don't lie. But it is about as useful as me saying "H2O is the most harmful substance on Earth". Not necessarily incorrect, just nigh on useless information in most contexts. Nor does the existence of it alone justify working towards "closing it".
/r/MensRights13/01/21 11:45 AM
3

Its just an indication as to the overwhelming power Twitch has with which to do this, not an actual call to legal action. More likely is the momentum will slowly change as Twitch continues to mess up more and more. Both with this stuff and other issues like DMCA.
/r/MensRights13/01/21 09:18 AM
7

This was ironically the first and only time a girl put herself in a position for resentment by asking me out, and she still didn't even do it herself in person. She had a messenger do it for her. Whoever truly believes women take risks the way men do and it is remotely comparable are about as insane as the people shouting "men have periods too".
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen13/01/21 08:50 AM
2

This will backfire. It already has been prior to trying to attract women at this large a degree. It happened when "we need more devs" demanded anyone without a job and two working hands "learned to code". People with low intrinsic motivation to stay in CS and/or software dev move to management after they finally get enough knowledge and experience to make a big impact, only to then cause more overhead. This is how software quality ends up shit and most devs end up working dead-end programming jo…
/r/MensRights13/01/21 12:11 AM
195

Money speaks louder. Loads of Twitch's income comes from glorified cam girls raking in money from lonely, horny teens. This has been true since subs, gift subs and especially bits became the predominant way to get money as a streamer (for those curious, there was a brief period where donations were more frequent, which is nowhere near as lucrative for Twitch as taking whatever cut they take from bits). The only way this will ever backfire, is when the costs become too high for Twitch to defend t…
/r/MensRights12/01/21 05:21 PM
21

Assuming break-ups aren't the same as rejections, only once in kindergarten here. Though I'm a bad sample (I predominantly prefer wallflowers and keep myself out of social situations). The fat thing came back in the comments too. Women complaining it was "men setting the standards" for being called out fat. Jfc, how fat must you be or what kind of guys do you pick to consistently be called fat by them in { { currentAge } }? Most guys already settle for chubby girls with an ok personality, not ev…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen12/01/21 10:18 AM
150

Projection 101 in the field. It ain't fat guys still getting showered with attention. Also wager most guys have never been in a position to reject women when women barely ever put themselves in a position to be rejected in the first place.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen12/01/21 09:30 AM
10

Guess I have to be a bit more extreme here. Yes, you can make your own ISP (if you have a random giant stack of cash floating around). Yes, the internet is "decentralized" in a sense, though not remotely in the way it should be. Now imagine the state the world is in when publicly known ISPs start throttling networks and filtering results for MRA content. Thing is, if it comes to that extreme a sub as meek as this one gets the ban hammer not once, not twice, but repeatedly by every big social med…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 09:51 PM
15

You can do that, exactly like I said. Building another Reddit and self-hosting it is easy, especially with all the information and frameworks available. Problem is, at the most extreme point, this problem will be handled at the server's or client's ISP. At that point, no amount of personal or remote hosting is going to keep you online. You'd require decentralized internet to go any further, or return to the methods that are decentralized despite being physical (written works, oral tradition). Th…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 09:19 PM
3

The entire thing is full of samples, including a specific header for the sub alone. Point being, just like feminism at its early steps, it is achieving plenty. Is it big enough to move large things on its own? No. Will it all be reported and put in a positive light? No. Will people credit it for making something positive happen? No. Will it influence people and set things in motion to think twice? Yes. Just like early feminism set people into motion slowly rather than a full-on confrontational a…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 08:10 PM
5

RTFSB: Read the f*'ng side bar.
/r/MensRights11/01/21 06:30 PM
6

Just a lurker. My experiences losing and regaining several times: Using a temporary solution (e.g. a crash diet) to speed up the process is okay, as long as you can teach yourself to transition to something that can be maintained at the end. Fasting has several added benefits too and starting off with a fast can help shrink your appetite severely (NB: not guaranteed). Emotion-induced overeating is a bitch. Losing that last 10% of your ideal body weight is stupidly difficult if you are constantly…
/r/MGTOW211/01/21 05:08 PM
41

What do you propose? Could go the route of TRP, make our own forums, even self-host to some degree (or don't host in the west). That works until providers decide "f this". Still suffers the same problem: big tech will successfully remove MRA from the big picture, severely reducing momentum. It is less likely to be scorched than being on Reddit, though. Realistically, the only way to spread knowledge that big tech doesn't want public or harm their sales, is by spreading it anonymously and decentr…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 04:42 PM
1

And that is great. The real problem is even a lot of "average looking" girls are getting increasingly demanding. For the average guy, no amount of looks is going to compensate for a shitty and demanding personality. Having a trophy wife just isn't an option for them, especially countries where having a family home has become neigh-on impossible without at least 1.5x median solo income. Age also plays a large factor. There's a cruel twist of fate where as women age and the uterus alarm starts rin…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 03:54 PM
1

I'm not. Admittedly, I didn't read the part you mentioned PUA. The problem is I don't see "increase the quality of men so they have more leverage over women" to be the be-all-end-all, and many coaches (old PUAs, Red Pill, MGTOW, bachelors, manospheres, whatever) agree. These guys still decide to go bachelor/single after being burned really badly on what they thought was a quality woman worthy of marriage or long-term investment. Yet, that is what your post boils down to. Don't get me wrong, men …
/r/MensRights11/01/21 03:36 PM
2

Repeating your statements as if I haven't read them doesn't work. I already addressed them: Frankly, once you start working on yourself and put in effort, getting dates isn't that difficult in your 20s-30s. Changing the quality of men solely through PUA does not erase two very fundamental problems which you conveniently neglect: Female labor participation increasing made it much more difficult for men to compete on aspects that matter before you even get in bed with her. This includes more than …
/r/MensRights11/01/21 02:59 PM
2

Post-COVID is not going to solve this. The real problem is, most people simply cannot handle being given too many options. Men don't get these options, as men are still largely the initiators and women are still the receivers. Changing this dynamic socially is difficult to do ethical, so don't count on it changing anytime soon. Frankly, once you start working on yourself and put in effort, getting dates isn't that difficult in your 20s-30s. The real question is: why even care? The amount of effo…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 02:06 PM
15

Male rights groups just haven't made an impact so they get ignored. Underreporting != they made no impact. Your post is incredibly dismissive towards media being extremely selective when reporting on men, and there have been multiple examples of that: "Rape" when it is male-on-female sexual assault, "sex" when it is female-on-male assault (even in countries where rape does not discriminate in gender) Downplaying on topics in general ("women" on good topics, "people" on good topics for men, etc.)…
/r/MensRights11/01/21 01:42 PM
2

why wouldn't you do it? There has to be merit to the point made The opportunity costs associated with a difficult to define end The potential downsides, as your assumption "make everyone happier," is just that, an assumption which forms the shaky foundation of your entire post Considering the OP didn't even throw out the premise of their statement, your post's shaky foundation ain't gonna fix itself. Don't try catching a falling knife.
/r/MensRights11/01/21 01:20 PM
3

Here's a hot take: most public intellectuals these days are public because they treat people like crap, infantilize them and make exceedingly complex topics black-and-white for merit points with the general public. It's just a more "sophisticated" version of modern-day politicians flinging poop at each other like monkeys and going "look he has poop on his face are you really going to vote on him?" Common sense doesn't sell well. Hard to market. The entire article reinforces this with how simple …
/r/MensRights08/01/21 02:35 PM
10

If women desire power, and they have to compete with men, but their rules prevent them from overtly chasing power Except, this isn't happening (or you might want to edit this to articulate). Women are perfectly capable of chasing power the same way men do. The only field women generally struggle competing with men is physical fitness. As a society, we have successfully worked on outlawing physical violence and intimidation, as well as diminishing the need for raw strength in jobs. Additionally, …
/r/MensRights07/01/21 09:47 PM
2

Look at slums and hoodlums to find your answer, or ancient Rome. Children will likely miss either a male or female role model, or one of two parents in question won't be at the top of their game (unsatisfied urges), or anything. While people tend to berate the nuclear family for its overemphasis on gender roles, it did produce a lot of productive adults and happy kids, whereas kids coming from divorced families not only tend to be off worse, but are more likely to perpetuate the cycle of divorce…
/r/MensRights07/01/21 07:15 PM
3

Look at what MeToo did to women. First it drew emphasis to sexual misconduct, then it was pushed to its extreme and women started complaining about a lack of mentors (male mentors noping out). Look at the "paradox" of feminists being loud and boisterous, yet desiring a man that dominates them. "Paradox", because it isn't a paradox, most women do desire a man that can handle and lead them. Yet, not every guy is willing to settle for a brat in need of constant fighting and unwilling to improve the…
/r/MensRights07/01/21 05:38 PM
6

If you have monogamous and/or traditional values, good fucking luck. It is a complete dumpster fire. This may come across as judgmental, so fair disclaimer: you can live life however the hell you want. I don't care as long as it doesn't affect mine. If you have a fragile ego, don't read any further. Society is becoming increasingly service-oriented and individual. Result: by your 20s, unless you are a serious extrovert or wish to date coworkers (baaad idea generally), meeting people online is th…
/r/MensRights07/01/21 04:50 PM
4

As long as there isn't a proper way to veto out mods, it will always be a case of first movers. Whoever claims the name first will automatically have the advantage. Hence you get derivatives like "trueN" and whatever, but by then it is already too late. I'm certain most guys on AskMen would votekick the mod in question given the chance (there have been tons of complaints about her), along with limiting the number of female posts. It is also a little silly just how often a female post can be near…
/r/MensRights07/01/21 12:16 PM
9

The mod made a post and stickied it just for MGTOW going in quarantine. I remember most of the sub being confused and going "why is this relevant?". AskMen has been hijacked for years now.
/r/MensRights07/01/21 12:09 PM
2

The concern trolls are up in force again. If you believe feminism is the answer, go to menslib. Not here.
/r/MensRights06/01/21 07:11 PM
8

intimidating, bossy, loud, sweary be respected Ma'am, this is real life, not anime. There is nothing to be respected about this behavior, man or woman.
/r/MensRights06/01/21 06:43 PM
-1

Devil's advocate: Riding the coattails would be fine if they didn't emphasize the woke agenda. Hollywood in particular plays extremely safe and people absolutely eat up old things. First-mover advantage is huge in media, so riding the coattails may be warranted to even out that advantage. Unfortunately, that also means people are very attached to male characters and go "wtf" when a female character supersedes a male character for almost no reason whatsoever. Combine this with continuous "I'm a g…
/r/MensRights06/01/21 11:58 AM
4

There are roughly two types of studies / metrics thrown. The first one is raw wage gap, where feminists get their insane "a woman only earns 78 cents for the same work a man does" rhetoric. The "adjusted wage gap" is the one that is often used to show a bias in favor of men, claiming that "after adjusting for variables" women earn 90-95% of what men do. Even if the second metric is more fair, there are two huge problems with this metric. The first one: it generally doesn't adjust for age group. …
/r/MensRights04/01/21 07:21 PM
14

A sub full of women claiming they are A) not like the other girls (N=1) and B) claiming other girls are like them too, enabling heavy debate between largely three different parties. Despite that, still generally being bombarded by men who are tired of the status quo and several posts only being highlighted due to Reddit's award system. At least some of them seem legitimately open for debate (read: bare minimum). I never questioned a woman being willing to argue, though. Listening and being react…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre04/01/21 11:07 AM
9

Feminism in execution differs from feminism as it is often described. One cannot claim a political movement strives for equality of both sexes when only pushing for equality from one side. Additionally, feminism only does so for perceived inequality. Human perception is subjective by nature, making inequality impossible to quantify. Feminism is a bureaucratic movement first and foremost. If it fails to do things for men where they at a disadvantage, and it fails to find facets of society, it wil…
/r/MensRights04/01/21 10:38 AM
19

Yeah, agreed. It is really just entitlement and "woe is me". I prefer not having to do leg day but I don't want to be called Knuckles from the Sonic Boom cartoon either.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen03/01/21 08:54 PM
49

It's likely she's decorating the story to make it seem worse too. Wouldn't put it past her to leave out some important details.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen03/01/21 08:44 PM
12

I give up. I have given you the chance to a reasonable discussion, but you would rather ridicule the opponent and assert the high ground. Do question what your goal is and how your actions achieve just that. I assure you, most people here do not hate women, despite their comments coming off harsh. Yet, ridiculing their concerns to this point will eventually cause that hatred that pushes these men towards extremist circles.
/r/MensRights03/01/21 07:34 PM
12

It’s the conclusion of anyone with sense. Don't disqualify the discussion with childish endeavors. Have a little respect for your own conversational skills and the opponent's. You said hating on males for showing emotion was significant on the sub. If you have to go digging for “gems” like this, they’re not significant. I went digging for a specific very clear example. I could point out half the sub and you'd disqualify me for it being "subjective" or anything else, given your current merits. I …
/r/MensRights03/01/21 07:18 PM
14

Except, it’s not actually a problem. That is your opinion, not mine. It’s cherry-picked. Did I not state exactly that? Must I again mention I do not wish to compile information for someone so adamant on being on the high ground? So you admit, in a comment where you’re trying to defend the post dismissing the sub as hating men for showing emotion, that it’s, at best, subjective. Does the existence of grey remove the existence of black? You didn’t link any additional context, you linked a post of …
/r/MensRights03/01/21 06:58 PM
14

I stated before: It is not the majority, but it is significant enough not to be an exception. Considering this entire thing is largely grey/subjective, it isn't hard for some people to see why some posts border on hating on men for even outing any kind of double standard or emotion. I do not have the desire to go through their entire list, state exactly when and where, compile the info only to convince one person a humor/bashing sub bashes more than "male fragility" for the sake of outrage porn.…
/r/MensRights03/01/21 06:34 PM
18

I messed up, meant the second one. Edited, thanks for pointing it out. Here is an example cherry-picked from the whole Amber Heard thing. The poster in question has a legitimate concern, but the comments instead move into bashing instead of opening a legitimate debate. It goes far beyond "pointing out hatred".
/r/MensRights03/01/21 06:19 PM
7

The current rise is highly linked with young men's inability or struggles to becoming a desirable partner, and divorce is a huge factor in suicides. Loads of pro-girl-power pushes have actively pushed towards female independence without tempering their requirements, pushing cooperation equally or helping men who are the prime receivers of divorces (as women are more often the instigators). Feminism has actively pushed for the government superseding man's traditional, biological roles that made h…
/r/MensRights03/01/21 06:09 PM
8

I can't understand how an intelligent person can rationalize that. Don't worry, it is quite easy: contrasting goals. Menslib believes complete equality to be the most optimal goal, and for feminism to be a tool towards that. Stop believing the latter, and you're better off at LWMA. Stop believing the former (and by extension likely the latter), and you are essentially anti-MensLib. I don't believe complete equality to be possible, let alone to bring us to the best possible outcome. Despite that,…
/r/MensRights03/01/21 05:59 PM
42

Check the second sub and sort by "top, last month". Loads of them pick on context-sensitive comments or grasp at comment history. They definitely are picking on men showing some form of emotion. It is not the majority, but it is significant enough not to be an exception.
/r/MensRights03/01/21 05:48 PM
1

There definitely is a stigma that Flemish women are "much more feminine and sexy" here, so the feeling is mutual. Incidentally, the (presumably) more dominant nature of Dutch women hasn't lead to a whole lot of equality on all matters, still working much less hours than most women and their male counterparts, and the aforementioned victimhood highlights. An important lesson that one can't expect the women to just up and solve equality for us, and a largely passive force of men will get waltzed o…
/r/MensRights02/01/21 12:56 PM
3

Things often do not work out like this in the Netherlands. The police rarely interrupts, regardless of gender. The Dutch are an extremely passive society, and public instances often depend on social circles to interfere before they dive in. She will likely have the benefit of the doubt once it is brought to court, but that is still unlikely to happen. What I can tell you is that Dutch women tend to be fairly controlling and wear the pants in the relationship, to the point of abrasiveness, wherea…
/r/MensRights02/01/21 12:31 AM
9

It is mostly Americans coping and normalizing it really. Apparently the non-English section of the world (read: the majority of the world) are unhygienic savages. As far as I know, we don't have issues with stinky, unhygienic men in Europe any more than America does.
/r/MensRights01/01/21 12:25 PM
1

Must I really cite their sidebar? We oppose right-wing exploitation of men's issues as a wedge to recruit men to inegalitarian traditional values In other words, they have a strong, leftist view of what sort of solutions must be used once the discussion of "traditional vs liberal" solution starts forming. There is a lot of common ground, until that point of the discussion is reached. This is before I mention this statement is incredibly strong without explaining a lot. Again, be the change you w…
/r/MensRights01/01/21 12:44 AM
-8

Im shitting on feminism for being an anti egalitarian movement, my goal isn't really mens issues. Don't do this shit. You're generating outrage porn for the sake of clicks. Leftwingmaleadvocates is much better for that, so I try not to post these kind of posts on there. Unfortunately, as is the name, LWMA is leftist. Which means whoever isn't left, has little to do there. If you resort to messing up the board for clicks or whatever ulterior motive you have, only to post the good posts there, you…
/r/MensRights01/01/21 12:19 AM
5

Keep the incel shit to PPD. Also get a value indicator other than sex.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 11:41 PM
25

Essentially being told your manhood or womanhood is negative to the point of it being poisonous to others, is not something people appreciate. Gosh, who would've thought? People hate being blamed for their biology. It is almost as if this should be common freaking sense.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 09:47 PM
8

Some people spout something weird like "respect is given not earned". Not sure what they mean. Weird people. Sometimes I ask them where their red nose is.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen31/12/20 08:57 PM
5

The concern trolls sure are up in force today. disadvantages exist for women (victim shaming, abortion/birth control rights, wage gap still, sexual assault/harassment) The adjusted wage gap in most countries is a few cents. It is also a result from pressure from women to seek providers, which is often neglected. Victim shaming is a mess and allows people to turn a multi-faceted responsibility into a "it is all their fault!", which is stupid and promotes childish behavior. Hopefully this wakes yo…
/r/MensRights31/12/20 08:14 PM
17

Instant bans for people who claim the wage gap is a myth, probably with a very wide interpretation of "myth" (ergo, if you believe it is not as much of a problem or doesn't exist, ban). That's an instant nope from me.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 06:15 PM
2

Set aside your need to judge for a single moment and you'd realize most posters here are not woman haters. They simply do not see a reason why they should commit to relationships. Despite society claiming women are strong and independent, both society and women put pressure on men to execute. When men execute in a way they don't like, men catch a lot of flack. There is both a hypocrisy and a dichotomy here. If women are strong and independent, they can execute this themselves and adapt. If they …
/r/MGTOW231/12/20 05:55 PM
2

This is a discussion sub, not an outlet for outrage porn.
/r/MGTOW231/12/20 05:30 PM
1

It is largely 4 combined with discouragement of masculinity. Men are actively trained to be feminine, do things in feminine ways (talk instead of do is a big one), never use their fists over their mouth, etc. It wasn't until I started focusing, I noticed just how unintentionally feminine we act. In myself, talking way too much (and way too fast, too). In male friends trying to shit stir for a prolonged time and gossip a lot. At the workplace, where people emphasize feelings over actions and solv…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre31/12/20 03:49 PM
8

Feminism does not stand for equality. A movement which actively pushes from one side only, can only ever be equal assuming every aspect is in favor of the other side or equal. And it is nigh on impossible to get things equal even under those circumstances. They can say it over and over. The execution behind feminism betrays its words. It is not a movement of equality, and it can only ever cause equality as long as an opposing movement functions as counterweight.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 03:22 PM
82

That's extremely wishful thinking that relies on the assumption society will fund men being the primary tax burden. Given our wealth of history indicating otherwise, I doubt it.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 02:40 PM
3

There are a few bad women I would love to see that claim be given substance, as for young men, it sure doesn't seem that way. Even marriage has become a coin toss, and that is assuming those that stay together are happy. Why? Just remember the very person who raised you is a women, your first unconditional love was a women! Children do not love their moms unconditionally. They are dependent. Ironic you're resorting to bashing men, and illustrating the exact point the original poster is making: m…
/r/MGTOW231/12/20 02:18 PM
4

Your view is by default not objective, just an FYI.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 01:19 PM
8

Which indirectly leads to the false suspicion of male supremacy when in reality, it is and always will be a supremacy by elite, not by men. It is the duchess complaining about the dukes while ignoring the peasants underneath them, as someone succinctly put.
/r/MensRights31/12/20 01:10 PM
3

I stand corrected at least partially. That said, his statement still does not imply that a man verbally assaulting a woman should receive different treatment than a woman verbally assaulting a man. Rather, he is showing that men and women fight differently, with women preferring emotional and verbal attacks over physical, when they are just as harmful, if not more. His point of view illustrates that "equality" in one perspective does not mean equality in a different perspective. Something that s…
/r/MensRights30/12/20 03:30 PM
5

Except you usually fall into the trap of believing your own, subjective opinion of anti-women is objective truth and continue to argue with emotions. When in reality, you're arguing against someone that only appears anti-women due to a narrow perspective. That is also a fine line. Take what you said. "Why should women go to jail over verbal abuse when men don't?" You had such a knee jerk reaction, you immediately imply the OP's statement was to pull women down below men. From a different angle, …
/r/MensRights30/12/20 02:22 PM
10

Read what is there, not what you think is there. Misdirection is a child's tactic, and you look like an uncivilized caveman to boot. If I was advocating for women to be completely subservient to men, I would say so straight to your face.
/r/MensRights30/12/20 02:15 PM
1

You're being selective. Sexual violence towards women can be found in tons of games. AAA games do favor towards being more PC-compliant, that doesn't mean the overarching theme is true. Many Japanese games not heavily westernized portray violence to both parties, and often predominantly to women due to the bias in male player base. Many games do this either off-screen or implied (Alice: Madness Returns, Persona series). I'm fairly certain even GTA V has plenty of sexual violence, both to men and…
/r/MensRights30/12/20 01:51 PM
16

That's not a win. That's settling for a situation where loads of career-driven, entrepreneurial guys have to decide whether the risk of marriage is worth pursuing both family and their dreams, or whether to drop one of the two. Realistically, the only way men can win is by standing up against women and society reinforcing this system. Words will not change things for the current generations, and there are too few women who will stand up for men. Even if it is just forcing a situation where these…
/r/MensRights30/12/20 12:45 PM
1

You won't find an easy answer on this. Physical violence is usually tied to numerous other things: humor, competition, a goal at the end of the road, etc. Sexual violence is usually harder to portray this way (at best humor), and stems more from inability if anything. Also, the inclusion of sex in pretty much anything raises severe questions and can get one in trouble and a lot of headaches. Keep in mind it is mostly public, westernized games that allow physically violent games, but if you look …
/r/MensRights30/12/20 12:24 PM
3

Easy target: obesity, for one. You'll need stronger bait next time.
/r/MensRights30/12/20 12:53 AM
5

If this line of thinking worked, our problems would've been solved centuries ago. Environmental influence is incredibly powerful, if not flat-out decisive.
/r/MensRights29/12/20 11:47 PM
4

For what it is worth: while the internet likes to magnify things, a magnification of a trend still shows that trend increasing. When even professionals advising women are saying things have gotten to a point they give up because women can no longer be satisfied (read: they have so many clients that are insatiable, they want to quit the job), that should raise a yellow alarm on the whole deal. For many men, the experience is a trend that has gotten so out of hand, trying to find "a good and hones…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre29/12/20 11:00 PM
102

Thank f'k I'm not the only one thinking that. Reminds me of one of those creepy doll horror movies.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen29/12/20 05:54 PM
1

Believe me when I say that I would rather have cutthroat competitiveness cut down multiple pegs. If I were to put it differently, the idea is not a bad one to strive for. Just like the idea you could leave your car with the doors unlocked anywhere you want and not have it stolen. But under the premise of thieves existing, it is more sensible to tell you to lock your doors and severely reduce the risk, as we don't have the manpower and/or methods to counteract potential thieves. It is close-to-un…
/r/MensRights29/12/20 01:58 AM
1

It boils down to both when I really think about it. I could attribute the former as the cause of the latter. Cooperation is useful in many situations, especially when delivering products. Any environment which truly emphasizes cooperation at all levels and in every way would also pay for loyalty. Yet, being loyal and cooperative to the point of not being willing to fight anymore, makes one an easy target for malicious business practices by people that are willing to commit those. HR is filled wi…
/r/MensRights29/12/20 12:46 AM
2

Rewrite your last sentence in a way it is eligible for discussion and I'll consider answering. Whatever you're saying, it is incredibly difficult to read.
/r/MensRights29/12/20 12:17 AM
6

Some would say it is quite intentional.
/r/MensRights28/12/20 02:07 PM
12

You're arguing from emotions. I urge you to stop and think logically for a moment. Most of what you have mentioned is on the rise since feminism and liberalism have spearheaded politics. You're misusing the video as a way to justify hating on traditionalism, when in reality, the author is showing it is because of biology that these things happen, and traditionalism is a way to move with it instead of against it. You think sexually frustrated men will magically disappear or drop in numbers when w…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 01:55 PM
11

I talk to myself too much. Also, a thesis. Most of the credit goes "WhereAreAllTheGoodMen". They emphasize the problem of women shunning agency and being passive to the last moment more, which usually ends up hurting both men and women at the benefit of a small, select group of men and women at the top (which is also why I don't believe feminism ultimately benefits women).
/r/MensRights28/12/20 01:26 PM
22

There is a difference between "traditionalist garbage" and presenting points from a biological view to explain why total liberalism doesn't work. Frankly, I am traditional and couldn't care less if some boy wanted to grow up with the mindset of "I should open up to women" and "I don't need to be tough and strong". It is your life, go ahead. What I have a problem with, is people who are intellectually dishonest regarding the likelihood of these boys getting what they want. A not insignificant por…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 01:07 PM
28

This is one perspective. It is equally damaging to claim being extremely liberal isn't damaging to men. To say the lecture is traditionalist garbage, shows an extremely narrow understanding of all the different subjects the lecture was presenting, from different angles. Bias is one thing. Tossing it out in its entirety, is about the same thing you frequently post against when others do it against women. Detecting a hint of hypocrisy here, to be frank. One of the main subjects he presents is the …
/r/MensRights28/12/20 12:44 PM
0

No offense: you post an obscene amount of posts in the MRA subreddit. Waking up, maybe 5 out of 10 articles outside the pins are yours alone. Even if you didn't put in feminism, the entire thing dilates viewer's focus to the point of exhaustion and analysis paralysis. Additionally, you write. A lot. Two page responses aren't unusual. Yes, clickbait happens. Using hate or a clear target helps get views. This is nothing new. The Romans already knew this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/20 12:14 PM
52

Their point is extreme, but the exact opposite, "they are different groups so they can do whatever", is equally damaging. In this case, the girl scouts are not innocent bystanders. They could have stood up for the boy scouts instead. To now turn around and sue them is extremely low and shows they are only willing to go for the low-hanging fruit, no matter if it damages the tree. This has become a consistent theme when something becomes detrimental for women, that was originally pushed by PC, pro…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 11:26 AM
52

Feels like they are still fighting the symptoms, not the cause. I doubt the boy scouts would've caved in if there was less pressure from society to have male circles be "all inclusive". To then turn around and blame it on the boy scout clubs is vile and weak.
/r/MensRights28/12/20 09:59 AM
50

does this sound totally messed up Let me say it in a way that changes the angle, just to ridicule the entire notion: a male-female teen couple had the boy (yes, boy) go to jail and be registered, after participating in typical spicy teenage things. Teens do stupid things and your friend, a boy at that time, was not malicious in nature. A justice system exists to straighten people out. Not to punish teens who willingly do things under both teens' consent, and especially not to permanently blacken…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 09:53 AM
1

I can't give you something academic that I know of. Academic sources tend to keep to the "it is social effects that caused it". However, this highlights that "toxic" is the wrong term. "Warped" or something akin would be better, showing the problem is not masculinity itself, but what is done to it by socialization. "Toxic" is a term usually describing something that affects others, not itself. Being vague, it makes it hard to use once it leaves an academic setting (which may be an ulterior motiv…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 01:03 AM
11

I can attest to being born with this mindset. Yet even then there are three things: You have to actually care about the score, whatever you wish it to be (equal, ahead or behind) You have to somehow equate events that are subjective in terms of equivalence, good luck with that (making sure she does X 5 times and he does X 5 times is a horrible idea) You have to have a perfect memory of everything that happens (or record them, which is an instant red flag anyway) Frankly, it is exhausting to keep…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen28/12/20 12:27 AM
5

Women are more aggressive than men once groups, anonymity and lack of judgment come into play. Men are more aggressive than women in individualist scenarios where one will be judged more easily. This is important, as under the narrative of "men are the perpetrators more often", a shift in culture could simply move the load from men to women. What's holding violent women back is their lack of willingness to commit under the spotlight, which does not hold men back nearly as much. Additionally, cau…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 11:56 PM
0

FWIW, safety nets should be there for emergencies. Medical ones especially: people already don't want to end up in emergencies, and getting financially punished for them on top just serves to paralyze people and make them worried over things beyond their control. That's also incredibly counterproductive to making them do their best work, people without continuous worries tend to perform better long term. What I disagree with is the degree to which Europe tends to create safety nets. Having fully…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen27/12/20 11:30 PM
1

Real question: do we really need to get the pitchforks out over this? This seems such an extremely minor thing compared to all the other issues going around. If it becomes such a problem that a disproportionate number of female seniors consenting to vaccination are getting vaccinated before consenting male seniors, sure, that'd be an outrageous case. This seems like making a mountain out of a molehill, which dilates focus over something relatively small.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 11:03 PM
16

It has gotten to a point any girl who's got her shit together, has an alright personality, looks decent and is feminine will be a catch. That's a ridiculously low barrier to entry: half of that is just being a modern millennial adult.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen27/12/20 10:06 PM
4

Negative is highly temporal, culture-dependent and subjective. You will have to elaborate.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 09:52 PM
5

It is used as a scapegoat, especially in ways that imply it comes internally from a man himself, or from brotherhoods / male circles. It is an extremely dishonest name for what it was meant for. It is purposely vague so anyone can safely put whatever they dislike about men or masculinity under the umbrella term, and then proceed to get media attention. Don't for a moment think the term is intellectual honest: it is not. The original academics did a poor job coining the term, and it has been redu…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 09:45 PM
1

That's awfully black and white. I'm saying what people are doing currently, is hurting both men and women, while it is questionable if it is lowering the number of rape victims at all. Currently, PC policies are getting men more frustrated. Surely, I shouldn't have to explain what happens when young men get frustrated and have nothing better to do. It is becoming more and more evident that today's society isn't equipped to handle false rape accusations, and any method that is "shoot first, ask q…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 08:49 PM
2

It is extremely disingenuous to shuffle the order around, just to come the conclusion I'm telling rape victims what they should and shouldn't do. Read my comments again, and read the article again. The issue is multi-faceted. By emphasizing your own example and using emotional arguments as a basis, there are roughly two outcomes: you're either indirectly encouraging more potential for further rape victims, which would be the exact opposite of what you and I both desire, or you're requesting men …
/r/MensRights27/12/20 08:22 PM
2

Cite where I said exactly that. Go ahead.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 08:03 PM
2

Whatever you're trying: it's not gonna work. Feeling bad is a bad reason for justifying something as big as a rape accusation. By all means, we should encourage people to talk about it. Yet, it has become evident that in our society, just being slandered as a rapist is enough to do serious damage to people's psyche, career and reputation. Advocating for people to take emotional arguments so serious that we can accuse if not jail people over it, is simply shifting the burden. From the women unfor…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 07:57 PM
3

It all really just boils down to what others have said and u/Hallitsijan elaborated. With all the taxes, not only is it harder to save, but people also take the route of "meh if something happens Mr Gobermint will take care of me" much quicker. It is a mentality problem primarily. In essence, this is the dark side of a very pro-leftist / socialist approach. Especially one which largely taxes the middle class (= skilled workers) while giving the upper class loads of tax breaks (corporations payin…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen27/12/20 05:10 PM
4

Yeah. It is simply disingenuous to say this article puts the blame on women. Roughly, the flow of the latter part of the article goes: Society encourages hook-up and getting drunk -> women feel pressured -> women cave in -> some men ("Brads" as the author puts it) utilize this -> some women feel like used objects -> some women (may or may not be used) try to exact revenge by false accusations and the likes -> now everybody who didn't take part of this also suffers Then, the author tells people t…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 03:57 PM
8

It is saying multiple things. Paragraph 6: it is explicitly telling women to report things instead of going on a bout of revenge-porn fantasies later in life, as illustrated in the movie according to paragraph 3. Paragraph 7: feminists tend to target specific groups to the point of over-representation in movies compared to the stats. This shows a clear hidden agenda: it is not about the rape. It is about the money. Paragraph 8: the author is tiptoeing around the subject, and ends up framing it a…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 03:48 PM
11

Step 1: Live paycheck to paycheck Step 2: Develop a mindset where you won't settle for lower qualities Step 2b: Get a girlfriend / friend group / wife to do the same Step 3: Further develop that mindset to the point of not being able to say no Step 4: Lose all your power Step 5: Have some shit happen to you Now you're bankrupt. Start over, now much older, with only your experience to help you (probably nowhere near as much since you couldn't take risks living paycheck to paycheck, good job ya pl…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen27/12/20 03:18 PM
9

Read the actual article next time without misdirecting. It isn't trying to downplay rape. Rape is serious. So is falsely accusing people and being able to ruin someone's reputation and affecting their career permanently just by putting out an accusation. As men are still primarily the initiators and women still experience better outcomes in emotional arguments, even legal ones, this disproportionately affects men.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 02:58 PM
11

Only under the assumption that what they say is the one and correct way, could you make a 100% correct statement that this is in fighting which inhibits progress in mens rights. That assumption has yet to be proven. Frankly, looking at their top posts, most of them seem more concerned about sexual freedom and self-image than anything else. The latter is alright I guess. The former shows the sub to be more about "I am a leftist man" than "as a man who happens to be leftist, these things concern m…
/r/MensRights27/12/20 02:41 PM
2

Making the job sound much better than it is, usually by hiding the fact it is mostly grunt work.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/12/20 10:51 AM
8

It is a lot easier than people think. When animated, people look a lot different than when they are still. People that look good suddenly look a lot worse or more average outside a picture, and vice versa some people look way better in real than in a picture. Additionally, still images and looks serve as poor proxies for several traits. Lookism is an incredibly defeatist attitude which simplifies a much more complex subject. The much bigger worry is letting society and government narrow man's wo…
/r/MGTOW224/12/20 07:58 PM
4

If work was so great, why does almost every company outside passion industries and extremely well-paying jobs decorate themselves in ways, only to figure out that ain't true? Thunking
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen24/12/20 06:40 PM
20

FYI many of these claims are also made by women who try the "let's be a guy in OLD" experiment. That generally didn't keep them from not continuing their own shit, but hey, seems women at least agree the pressures of men in a relationship or dating are not something they like. mentions that men compete with the government Real talk: this is one of the few reasons I'm right-leaning (European context). Paying tax for someone perfectly capable of working or accommodating to live with a guy, no than…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre24/12/20 11:28 AM
5

It includes all consumer goods. See this site for reference (there are many others): https://girlpowermarketing.com/statistics-purchasing-power-women/. As you showed, reality is more complex. Yet when talking about things like the wage gap, suddenly, that complexity is thrown out of the door for a very simple "men are oppressing women reeeee!" Additionally, when viewed under the light of "women still want a man who earns equal or more (often more)", that should make a few guys suspicious of the …
/r/MensRights24/12/20 11:12 AM
1

You're missing the part where I never actually said I can see them. If anything, I gave you an out by helping you prove your point. Way to play yourself, I guess.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 11:57 PM
1

Acting passive aggressive doesn't make your argument any stronger. I've entertained you enough, the mods can decide what they wish to do with this. Especially considering a meta sub already exists for meta discussions. I'll leave with this: the worst way to get people on the side of your argument, is by fighting them. To that end, I fail to see the purpose of your post, unless you're openly trolling.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 10:52 PM
1

Present the link and I can look at it myself. I can't exactly guarantee you alternatives as ceddit, removeddit or whatever else exists would work.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 10:43 PM
2

https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/kbnpnz/thank_you_and_question/ Does this seem like a "white cis men only" post to you? I can find similar examples for color, religion and anything else. The proof of the burden remains on you to show the mods discriminate, let alone discriminate unjustly, based on these traits. unreddit You can still post the link. More alternatives to unreddit exist. anyway, as you are no doubt aware - i mean, I looked at your history Don't beat around the bush.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 10:39 PM
1

This is pseudo-intellectual concern-trolling. Now, no two men are exactly alike, even our intersectionalist mods agree. And you have proof of such a bold statement, correct? Deleted posts with a bad reason, for example?
/r/MensRights23/12/20 09:56 PM
19

Leave your salty attitude for the potatoes, thanks. OP made a clickbait title. Actual article talks specifically about the ease at which women with kids will get a support package, as they are "primarily responsible" for kids. This immediately disregards single dads, which have to put much more effort to get the benefit. Just state that next time instead of further provoking a flame war.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 09:43 PM
1

I wonder just how much extremely supporting evidence there is for that supposed "4 year limit" rule that is not affected by societal pressure on his age > her age, or how much it truly is about "attraction" rather than "these people are married, so this is the age gap" which stands orthogonal to attraction. Not that I would disagree that a guy might rather want to think of kids in his 20s than his 30s. Luckily, the point extrapolates to men in their late 20s, who can still settle with a girl in …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:18 PM
15

Sometimes, following ones instincts is what makes people happiest. Undermining instinctual behavior is not necessarily the road to happiness, and modern society sure is testament of that given the paradoxes popping up every day.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 08:47 PM
2

There is actual merit to it, and if you put a little thought behind it besides what TRP says, it isn't hard to figure out. In fact, I'd argue that effect is even stronger today than it used to be before. Most of the world is artificially holding people in "extended juniority". You spend a longer time studying, you take longer having to prove your skills (do your dues), people require more assets to pass critical breakpoints. These breakpoints are generally more defining for women than they are f…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 08:30 PM
32

Most women are barely earning the equivalent of an extra night shift behind the bar off of OF every month. It isn't anywhere as lucrative as most of them claim, but like someone stated, "no woman wants to appear like they are selling their body for a few bucks". Sex is incredibly cheap these days. The real problem is, many men have standards so damn low, they'll give their time, attention and value to a woman that has done nothing to deserve it. And then many of these chicks somehow equate "Lots…
/r/MensRights23/12/20 03:44 PM
62

You're looking at this way too superficially and being extremely disingenuous on top by only saying the downvotes are about "equality in jobs". Feminism pushed for "equalizing the pay gap". As a result, young women doing the same work now earn more than young men. Google already saw this. Furthermore, we're seeing more and more suggestive evidence that women only date equal or higher, and finance is one of the bigger aspects where they really want a guy earning at least equal or more. Not only i…
/r/MensRights23/12/20 03:15 PM
2

If you don't understand, discussing this is useless. I already articulated my point three times now. It is extremely easy to claim "women are less lonely than men, therefore they handle solitude better than men, therefore you are wrong" when conveniently disregarding the current state of society.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 02:30 PM
3

https://www.jstor.org/stable/585665?seq=1 Does not prove men handle solitude poorly. Also, this has been stated by others before: cause and effect matters. Randomly citing an effect does not mean the cause is marriage. It may just be men who are happier and less stressed end up married. https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol40/24/40-24.pdf Again, this does not say what you think it says, nor does it deny what I'm trying to say. You can be more depressed, less satisfied, all that jazz a…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 01:33 PM
3

Most studies will not give you the answer you need for either case. You have to look at specific age groups, the definitions of loneliness and the context. When I speak of solitude, I specifically mean desire of men to have a partner while in their 30s, to the point of lowering their standards. As far as I know, no such study has been done, for it would be much too in-depth and require a long-term study of both men and women from theirs 20s, as they transition into their 30s (and every age-group…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:45 PM
2

Like I said, it doesn't contradict what you said. OP claims all women in that age range need to do is "be open-minded", using an N=1 example. Statistics say otherwise. Articles interviewing not just single moms, but single ladies as a whole in their 30s state otherwise. Male-centric circles stating why they won't date these women state otherwise. You can take the demand side from women out ("any guy, I will take any guy!"). You still have a shortage of men willing to saddle up with a woman who h…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:24 PM
2

Played correctly, man's worth increases in the 30-40 age, woman's worth decreases, as the things that define masculinity exponentially increase late 20s / early 30s. Any guy that age willing to stay with an average single mom either doesn't value paternity, has incredibly low standards, doesn't value themselves a lot, drew the short straw from biology's lottery or messed up hard in their 20s (like, really, incredibly hard). Additionally, despite buying the narrative, men still seem to handle sol…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:07 PM
355

It means men will up their standards for women. She loses the information you might spill in private (less ammo against you), her listening to you is no longer that big of a deal, and I wager loads of other things are indirectly affected by it, e.g.: if men at work are all happy and dandy, there is little reason for an emotional tampon role in the company.
/r/MensRights23/12/20 11:49 AM
7

None of what you said affirms what the OP said. If anything, if you would have explained those differences, it would contradict the OP by very simple supply/demand rules.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 11:41 AM
1

Maybe this is the right place to ask: have other people noticed the autoplay / Up Next feature tends to never suggest the vids from the channel one is currently watching, always a different channel? It's not nearly as severe as straight-up removing or hiding content, but it seemed very specific.
/r/MGTOW222/12/20 11:32 PM
10

Done playing those games Now looking for commitment Here is my cleavage
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen22/12/20 05:41 PM
5

I'm suspecting it is rhetorical, but for any bypassers: we listen to words too much. Feminism and feminists do frequently say it is about "equality". It is just the way it ideally, presumably executes, "by uplifting women", that equality can only be achieved under circumstances that are not true (men are only ever equal or ahead of women in any given situation), and the odds of success are abysmally low (overshoot for any dimension and you can no longer correct it). Now we take the whiskey goggl…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre22/12/20 04:20 PM
3

The Napoleon thing is way more complex in Europe. Europeans are much less explicit about height than Americans are, bar some lanky European men being passive aggressive towards a short dude who could kick their ass blind. Unless you're aiming for the lowest common denominator getting most their info from satire and Reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 03:10 PM
12

Last time I checked, someone who got served mush while their friends got served steak, they were pretty frustrated about it. Real answer: if he really is rich now and got his stuff in order, he's got a better deal waiting than that 30yo trying to secure retirement funds. Have some standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 01:16 PM
17

Man's biggest power is realizing most women today are just kids throwing tantrums. Yet, I've been outed as a misandrist by other guys for saying that, because they really, really want to believe women will somehow magically come to their senses and fix everything the same way guys listened to women. I'm low-key hoping they'll read this and realize the fundamental flaw in their thinking.
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre22/12/20 12:44 PM
7

From the guys I encountered, its usually the very machismo, southern European countries that pedestalize women the most and seem totally okay with being a complete doormat. Guess that shows one can be a meathead and still be a complete doormat.
/r/MGTOW222/12/20 11:50 AM
6

The root of red pill thinking is just guys who are tired of getting a bag of shit trying to do what Disney movies, media, society and regular education tells them to do. This extrapolates not only to sex and love, as it also goes for professional success (you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs), family, entrepreneurship, financial success and more. Emphasize love and sex so much, and you can't see the forest for the trees.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 10:21 AM
2

And Reddit likes to claim the US is the only dumb country.. Anyway, thanks. Here's to hoping they keep the landlords by their balls on that and hopefully introduce that same thing here, too.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen22/12/20 10:03 AM
3

I can give you one form: overpopulation to the point of forced cohabitation. Where I live (non-US), rent is insanely expensive, while housing is locked behind an insanely high income barrier, say 1.5x modal income. Additionally, 1.5x modal income is incredibly hard to achieve, even for skilled workers. This changes over time (very strong "do your dues" culture), but pre-30 your choice is pretty much limited to "live at home, piss away 50% of your (already meager) income to rent a shoddy place, o…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen21/12/20 03:36 PM
3

There was some study stating a negative correlation between perceived attractiveness of the partner and willingness to use anti-conception. This went both ways (men and women), but given women have much higher standards than men.. yeah, anyone can figure out the remainder.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen21/12/20 02:59 PM
8

Read what's there, not what you think is there. Misdirection is a trashy tactic. Additionally, my statement only rings true in the current snapshot. The world, however, is not a snapshot. People adapt. Holding women to standards before listening to them is the opposite of tearing them down.
/r/MensRights21/12/20 02:11 PM
3

That's what you get when you censor one side while encouraging the other to be vile without repercussions. At least on 4chan, both sides can be vile to one another, which in some ways cancels out the desire to be vile or outs the other side as being too stupid to hold their ground without resorting to ad hominem. It is far from perfect, though. Also, lack of a karma system. Even other places with an upvote system affecting visibility have similar problems. An upvote system just doesn't work with…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen21/12/20 11:40 AM
4

I don't think it was. If it was, I'd expect more information on either 4chan or Reddit regarding this (the fact the creator of 4chan ended up working for Google is something that gets mentioned at least weekly in discussions on or regarding 4chan). Reddit was founded 2 years after 4chan, if I look at the data correctly. I also believe the boards on 4chan generally associated with incels/MGTOW/red pill/black pill/[insert whatever you like to call it here] were made way after the inception of Redd…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen21/12/20 10:05 AM
10

That if we would all come to our senses and stop believing a woman's every word, most of them would have no power anymore. I'm not disagreeing women hold way too much social power in the West. That said, people do need to wake up and see what the prerequisites are to that social power, how this plays into numbers and specifically, the explosion of numbers that globalism caused. It wasn't that long ago the average man was at least able to hold a woman properly accountable to her shit without 50 o…
/r/MensRights21/12/20 09:45 AM
2

People here focus way too much on the similarly named sub that has muddled the name. Yes, people who are frugal are generally resented by big corps, until turned into a money-making activity or a way for them to continue their activities. This is nothing new. Most of the guys at the top couldn't care less, whatever gets them another dime gets done. But people prefer listening to the fairy tale where some good-hearted big corps listened to improve the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/20 07:44 PM
6

It really is amazing. Her age tells her "you need more". Her looks say "you can't get more". Only logic can solve such an equation: satisfy your future needs by saving up today. Well, we all know how that works out, expecting cold logic from the average woman. In a way, nature sure played the most cruel joke on them.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen20/12/20 11:57 AM
3

Yeah, it's already bad. Both these departments lend themselves incredibly well to automation. The real amazing thing though: In software development and IT, there is a huge push to make people "work more autonomous". Anyone with half a brain cell can immediately tell: autonomy and management in its current state are incompatible. So either the majority of these managers need to GTFO, or they need to change to be "under" the developers (aka secretary work), or the whole autonomy push is a scam. S…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen20/12/20 10:45 AM
1

Not everyone on Reddit lives in the US, but people seem to forget that. Do not extrapolate your own cops' deficiencies to the remainder of the world (same goes for your other points). Even bothering to answer the other points, it is not that hard to learn some very basic programming and get an okay salary. The fact we have people from Africa and India coming to just Europe with nothing but an "affinity" in technology is testament of that. I'm sure plenty of accomplished professionals in other fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/20 05:35 PM
1

A number of these equations do not work. If the police are dissatisfied, they may still continue doing it because they wish to help people and do not see a way out of the current system just yet. Or they are trying to play the ladder game, so they can "make big changes" once they are at the top. Same goes for government officials. Unfortunately, people normalize circumstances, so by the time they reach the top, many have lost the incentive (if they even get there). If capitalism was the prime re…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/20 05:08 PM
29

Women also have a tendency to take cushy jobs that are easy to automate or artificial in nature. HR and management do not need to exist at the numbers they currently do. Once people start working more autonomously, most of them are unnecessary overhead alive only due to self-preservation.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen19/12/20 01:33 PM
7

You do the maths based on your own situation, as he did on his. Furthermore, you're claiming "limitless" without further specifying if it is truly limitless without cost, or if you're hiding details and actually have opportunity costs associated to keeping her around. Unfortunately, we also do not have the information regarding what happened to the guy afterwards, which limits my statements to the pre-LTR state (as should be obvious to anyone not trying to read words that aren't there). This als…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen18/12/20 10:59 PM
26

I'm really interested what his incentive was to go there. From a quick glance, it doesn't seem like he was just playing around. Just all the opportunity costs and combined with the monetary costs, that's one hell of a price for "playing around" (like seriously, you're saving money going to quality professionals at that rate). If looking for a LTR, that's already a huge "this better be worth it" moment. I hope this shakes a few guys awake. OLD is hardly worth it for anyone. Edit: the number of po…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen18/12/20 06:14 PM
10

Pretty much. It's the people not committing fully that make my eyes roll. Either full on commit and link everything, or hide your persona properly (including not making this type of content at all: the wrong person will figure it out if you set them off somehow). But we've come to known that for women, committing without knowing the results is a near impossibility.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen17/12/20 07:07 PM
32

Reading a lot of comments on the crosspost and other communities, and they frequently say "your life shouldn't be put out in the open!" Welcome to the internet guys. Don't put something on the net you don't want others to see. A thousand times so if you include audio or visual material of yourself. Maybe a lecture on the current state of AI would help them.. nah, who am I kidding. The duality of sex work sure is fascinating. It's okay to be a sexworker, but it is not okay to put it out there. So…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen17/12/20 04:41 PM
17

Putting bitches in their place and putting value in paternity is toxic misogyny, of course. How could you ever think otherwise? Now back to working more and marry a single mom, pronto.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen17/12/20 04:30 PM
25

The neck never lies. Always check the neck. Well, until people figure this one out, but seems most chicks haven't realized it yet.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen17/12/20 11:53 AM
1

It does influence the timeframe which is central to influencing the woman chosen according to his assertion. This has an implied assertion that aging of the woman he chooses has significance. It does not. This is sneaking in an implication. You'd get a bunch of academics on yourself for making such an assertion. I'll articulate. Their final result is not that far off a lot of truths, given fertility rates (in fact, if we really talk fertility here and want "near full guarantee", I'd go with 12-1…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/20 09:22 AM
1

That's not what he's saying at all. If you're going to read between the lines, at least read it correctly. He's telling you very clearly, fighting like a woman only works if you're a woman. Entire ages of governments not listening to men telling them what's wrong surely is evident of that. Men are still largely expected to actually do the doing, and show their problems through their acts. You can't fight like a woman until you redistribute that power and have people listen to men without those m…
/r/MensRights16/12/20 10:36 PM
1

Really? Step 1 shouldn't even be part of the process: it doesn't influence the woman chosen. At best it is step -1 or step 0. Other assumptions are: Three kids. Obviously, you don't pick a woman in her 30s if you insinuate family man = three children. Resting a year between children. This is not a given. Rate of conceiving should not just blindly be a year. Probability does not work like that. Pregnancy does not take an entire year. This wouldn't matter for a single pregnancy, but multiplied by …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 10:19 PM
1

Opening a book on biology, then opening a book on logic 101 and specifically reading the header "Making Assumptions" would help. The assumption is already wrong at the first step. Take a second to figure it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 10:04 PM
9

Women are successful and win the gender wars? Because they support each other and don't kick each other when they are down. You really haven't been around enough women. Watch a few experiments where women had to cooperate without men: it turns quite messy. Even the CEO of an all-female company cited she'd never do it again. Honestly, the concern-trolling here is getting out of hand. Yes, men have problems (otherwise we wouldn't be here). Yes, they can vent. Why did things change for women? Becau…
/r/MensRights16/12/20 09:50 PM
5

Maybe you should gain a little experience with actually having kids before making these claims. Just maybe. I'm all for going against the "get kids in your 30s" hypetrain, but this.. is just grossly misinformed.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 09:22 PM
1

No books, but maybe ArtOfManliness can serve as a source of information. It's a little on the traditional side, not for everyone.
/r/MensRights16/12/20 08:24 PM
7

Pretty sure Rollo said one particular line that reveals it all. Paraphrased: "In biology, paternity is a big deal to males. In men, paternity is still a big deal. Instead of trying to hide paternity, society tries to tell men that paternity isn't a big deal." Blue pill = telling you pretty little lies that likely won't even help you. In other words, it's ok to marry a chick who's clearly had a past banging and cheating on guys and has a few kids. Red pill = telling you the brutal truth behind se…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 04:06 PM
1

They are still that. Media and Reddit are showing you that which puts them under bad light. Check the things Rollo says these days. People part of the essence of the former two movements are getting so fed up they've slowly been rebranding it. The guys you're talking about are either rebranded, "f everything" PUAs or people who call themselves "incels" when they never put an ounce of effort into improving themselves and dating women (this is not to say dating isn't a complete disaster, but you h…
/r/MensRights16/12/20 03:54 PM
4

how can i learn the truth? Do research. Learn how to read papers, not articles with papers in them. Learn how to look at both sides critically. Learn how to not read between the letters (this is a hard one for many, people are taught to "read between the lines" for something that isn't there). Look at other animal species and their behaviors. Actually listen to individual people, to their problems and their desires, go beyond politics. Red Pill FYI Red Pill is not a hate movement against women a…
/r/MensRights16/12/20 10:08 AM
3

Those numbers make me glad I'm not living in the US. That said, as a guy who still has family ambitions, while I'm okay with the kids being costly.. I just get a bitter taste hearing all these stories. Even just the ones where it ended up with just her already costing 100k in the span of 10 years and the guy doesn't even get his sexual desires met even remotely.
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre15/12/20 08:49 PM
1

There was a post on the Tinder sub that got removed, but not before Joker got his hands on it and did a piece on Better Bachelor. It was something like $7.2k to bed like 14-16 women, but (if I interpreted it correctly) more importantly, to just find a prospect for LTR. And that's just the measured cost, god knows how big the opportunity costs are. Even on other sites that are completely unrelated to dating, you see this stuff. Relationships are becoming service-oriented and just finding a suitab…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre15/12/20 05:41 PM
-1

You're making one giant mistake here. I already pointed it out in another post. No one is going to listen to guys complaining about this and proceed to act in their stead except for mothers trying to give their sons a better place, and maybe a few men at the top. Society has already thrust the responsibility to be tough onto us. We can either wallow in misery or fight back in some form, but wallowing and complaining about it won't do anything for the current generation of young men. In fact, it'…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 10:54 PM
1

I'm pointing this out because you're projecting your own defeatism onto others. You need an immense wake-up call that reality and even female nature, while not as complex, is a little more complex than "just looks" even in today's society. Take what I said and extrapolate it. Look at other features male organisms generally have, sought out by female organisms, and project them onto the human race. Then subtract any you can't actually show. Even with that, you still have more left than just looks…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 10:13 PM
-1

It’s because women find 80% of men to be below average in physical attractiveness This line. This is the one that insinuates men have no agency in this opinion. I'll let you in on a little secret: it doesn't matter if you're 6 feet tall, have a six-pack, a 7 figure job and a 10 inch wang. If we lived in more of a primal society and you don't have the guts to kick my ass, but I do have the guts to kick your ass, it doesn't matter how good you look if I still look at least healthy and capable. You…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 07:42 PM
8

The article linked doesn't state men aren't financially destroyed. It states their income is higher than that of women post-divorce. This is some real mental gymnastics to connect two statements that are not at all at odds with each other. Really, what you should be looking at is why these guys suddenly increase their income so rapidly. I'd wager a large part of it has to do with wanting to prove their ex wrong, or having more time on their hands, or being able to take risks they formerly weren'…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 07:25 PM
-3

This entire post is just a little bit of very obvious truth mixed in with a lot of "black pill" BS. Men's sexuality is demonized because we allow it to. We don't need to listen to this. We don't need to compete on apps that overemphasize male looks and peacocking. Yes, halo effect is a thing. Yes, that guy at the top has plenty of reasons to have fun with multiple women and be promiscuous, as long as we all foot the bill for single moms via taxes and he doesn't get his assets absolutely annihila…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 06:50 PM
1

I'm not saying the study wasn't well done or that it should be disregarded. It says exactly what it says: it makes a very weak suggestion that men being persuers may be tied to societal norms, based on the results of one experiment. I'm arguing that, if the results are true, how do we incorporate these isolated results into a composite world, without violating human rights. For what it's worth, the study isn't exactly new. It basically uses the concept of people getting tied to their investments…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 05:58 PM
1

You're confusing the intent of my first paragraph and my second paragraph. I didn't state what you claim I stated. But I'll entertain you anyway. There's one problem with the experiment. It pushes the rule "men will remain seated, women will move". Also note the rather weak statements, e.g.: "Men may be less picky not because they are men, but because societal norms require them to do most of the approaching in dating scenarios." How do these societal norms form? How do we make women become more…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 05:28 PM
4

I'm 39f Dunno man, pretty sure with just that and the context of the post, you got all the important information you need.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen13/12/20 04:42 PM
9

Obvious answer: female sexuality and male sexuality, as well as their preferences, aren't the same. No matter how much people want to "level the playing field". People get uppity on biological differences. That just isn't how courtship works. Besides, your point, while related, is not the one OP was talking about. OP was specifically talking about sexual attraction and preferences, not about N-count or promiscuity. Behind your parents' messages lies a very subtle thing you either did not pick up…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 02:41 PM
11

I'm probably gonna get a lot of hatred for this, but eh: It's a combination of drama out of boredom, and a collective shit test. That's all it really is. People like to psycho-analyze things until it's so diluted that nothing is left. This is just a combination of rampant female sexuality and encouraging male disposability, nothing more. Going into depth likely ventures off to "Red Pill" territory (not really but anything brutal and male seems to have a connotation with it).
/r/MensRights13/12/20 12:03 PM
1

Toxic masculinity is a really bad term in this regard. Toxic usually implies two things. It implies both that it is poisoned, and that it is poisonous, as most things poisoned are poisonous themselves. But people primarily think of it as poisonous, not poisoned (you can see this in translations as well. Toxic usually translates to poisonous in different languages). This distinction is important, because something that is poisoned had something happen to it to become so. Something that is poisono…
/r/MensRights13/12/20 11:13 AM
3

All that you've said has a very recent and fitting name: apex fallacy. People don't look back. They look at what is ahead, in front of them. And I'm fairly certain there is scientific evidence floating around saying women do it more than men.
/r/MensRights13/12/20 11:03 AM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypodermic_needle_model Say something often enough and people start believing it, no matter how wrong. We've got plenty of examples in history, both in academics and in culture.
/r/MensRights12/12/20 10:24 PM
7

There's one thing in your "opinion on RPW" women post that stood out to me and is somewhat related. This is what MRAs don't understand (see note below for an extended opinion), passing a law won't fix anything. On MRA circles, I roughly notice two kinds of people: those who accept differences between men and women, and those who vehemently try to "truly equalize" both sides. You notice them vouching for "equal" dating (she becomes the aggressor more often, he can be more passive), in work (they …
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre12/12/20 10:16 PM
12

No idea how what you say opposes what the OP says in any way. The theory of feminism is divided between "we fight for equality" and "we fight for women's rights. Maybe even "we fight for equality through women's rights". In practice, even for goodhearted feminism, it is extremely unlikely it will lead to equality. Try pushing a stick on a table barely to the point of tipping, only pushing it from one side and not touching it from the other side at all. That's already nigh on impossible to do. In…
/r/MensRights12/12/20 09:48 PM
1

Keep believing that and pray you'll never find yourself in a position these people who've been pushed over the threshold have been. It's quite amazing how people with similar opinions to yours have made a 180 shift once they found themselves at the other side of the world.
/r/MensRights12/12/20 04:30 PM
8

Pretty sure it's more disingenuous to claim it's a "what about me" mentality than pointing out the disproportionate amount of money going to female aid globally compared to men, despite it being proven multiple times that men are more prevalent all the way at the bottom of the society than women.
/r/MensRights12/12/20 02:01 PM
17

My own pet theory is that "the top" has simply changed focus to satisfy their own needs. Men aware of the bullshit just aren't as lucrative a market. They shift their needs, save lots of cash, grow wealth (= power) and gain the ability to oppose loads of societal BS. Who's more likely to leave his job? The married guy who lives paycheck to paycheck, or the guy who can take 5 years off and still get by? In fact, who of these two is more likely to make a start-up that could compete? Additionally, …
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen12/12/20 12:32 PM
29

I really like what Better Bachelor said on this one. Joker specifically mentioned that 20s are important for both men and women, but for specific reasons. For women, it's about shacking up and getting babies, or they'll end up like OP-related. For men, it's about financial stability and being professional. You can't revert a woman's fertility loss once she's 30, nor can you catch up 10 years worth of career building and savings. But at the very least, the barrier to building finances is so low (…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen12/12/20 11:37 AM
2

Respond to the actual comment, don't chicken out by deflecting emotionally. Given the advances in anti-conception and still failing, the push for abortion even for consensual sex, the laws to support children out of wedlock and child support for single moms, child daycare to not just encourage women into the workforce, but also completely forget to even be mothers beyond basic biological needs, and much more, he isn't that far off the mark. Maybe we still hold them responsible, but nowhere near …
/r/MensRights12/12/20 11:20 AM
1

Man am I late to this. I dunno what world you live in, but I don't think killing someone outright is worse than driving someone to suicide and getting away with it because "it can't be measured". The focus on physical crimes is solely because it's low-hanging fruit, easy to identify, easy to prove. And maybe partially because "women are wonderful".
/r/MensRights12/12/20 11:13 AM
4

A huge part of the reason they "commit more crimes" is that we are much laxer on social and emotional manipulation than on physical action. Of course you're gonna see men committing way more crimes when crimes are specifically defined around male ways of aggression, not female ones.
/r/MensRights11/12/20 04:56 PM
20

Another by-effect of women and diversity hires into the white-collar workforce: it's becoming increasingly feminine. The amount of discussions that devolve into "I'm not feeling haaaaaappyyyy" are insane. Managers feel a need to pander to it, and it slowly changes the culture. Bitch, just let me do my job and judge me on my actions and results.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen11/12/20 12:31 PM
31

How dare you point out women have some responsibility in their decisions. You dirty misogynist.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen11/12/20 12:27 PM
4

The entire world tends to use buzzwords. "Fancy words" tend to mesmerize people who don't know shit. Pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo. It's trying to cover up having nothing to say. It becomes a problem once it's used as a cop-out, not as an actual shortcut to define something with real meaning. Ask anyone who looks at technology in somewhat of a sober way. It's rife with buzzwords.
/r/MensRights10/12/20 08:11 PM
3

I just had to look at it.. and no sources on that claim in the article. Of course, statements taken very broad to make older women seem amazing. Had a quick search and some look into it as "sexual confidence" and "experience".. wow, older women have more experience, who would've thought. What a great piece of information. TL;DR: never believe shit articles, just laugh
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre10/12/20 04:40 PM
58

My first thought as well. It feels way too introspective and reflective for what the average legit shitbag there seems to write. The last paragraph's first line too, incredibly descriptive.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen10/12/20 04:27 PM
6

First they claimed women were affected harder. Now they claim it'll be more difficult for successful women to find a suitable partner than before. Uh, if it affects women harder, then the relative pool of man per woman will increase, not decrease. This entire article is a fucking mess, but that's about what I expect from the field of psychology unfortunately (for the good ones).
/r/MensRights10/12/20 04:06 PM
2

Shut that open door while you're at it would ya? It's drafty.
/r/MensRights09/12/20 08:37 PM
25

Again, it really depends. The general rule of thumb is, if you want an easy, average life, where things are largely decided for you, Europe is better. If you want to excel and take control over your life, the US is better. I do base my statement on pre-2019 times, but the last thing we need are people here taking blanket statements as gospel (yes, my statement as well) without actually knowing the details and turning into another America-hate sub (we got IWantOut for that).
/r/MensRights09/12/20 06:35 PM
97

This is very rose-colored. I urge you to actually look at a few problems Dutch people face, they aren't very obvious unless you're a local. We do a little better on male issues, but make no mistake, our women can be just as abrasive as the average Western, if not more, and have been known to fight for control.
/r/MensRights09/12/20 06:05 PM
2

I've elaborated specifics that go in-depth on these points here it sounds like adapting to fit the needs of the woman as apposed to building a relationship (what ever type it may be) with a woman. That's one way of looking at it, and it's not the only way. if we don't we're too closed off and riged. And that leaves us in a predicament. Don't take what women say at face value regarding this, it's generally not the whole story. And the reason I use the "," is because the social standard is now bee…
/r/MensRights09/12/20 05:01 PM
2

Is this where the women go when they don't get a letter from Hogwarts?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/12/20 09:39 AM
100

You jest but sometimes I wonder if we're already there. There's been a lot of concern-trolls here last few weeks.
/r/MensRights09/12/20 09:30 AM
4

"Man good woman bad" doesn't sell nearly as well as "woman good man bad". That's really all it is.
/r/MensRights09/12/20 09:20 AM
1

I don't think your entire story correctly paints the whole picture and romanticizes father-daughter bonds, especially considering the history of single moms. I agree from the daughter's perspective, her bond with an accepting father, sometimes to the point of neediness, is being praised more by society. That said, I also see little respect for the inverse: a harsh father who treats his daughter with tough love and is rather strict. Kind of the romcom stereotype, who does it out of concern his da…
/r/MensRights09/12/20 09:00 AM
1

With how sensitive the whole trans issue, I wouldn't count an N=1 case regarding trans as anything special to the whole "girls good guys bad upvote left" phenomenon. It might just be as simple as "we don't want to be politically incorrect". And both transitioning M to F and F to M is still supporting the "strong independent woman" narrative in some form. The cis man is the only odd one out of the four.
/r/MensRights08/12/20 11:44 PM
2

This is going to sound ridiculously far-fetched: is there any way you could see yourself still give talks, conferences, private lessons or the likes should you go into industrial R&D? The time seems about ripe for a counter-movement against the "inflation of papers", and I wouldn't be surprised to see fast tracks or incentives for gifted, interested people to get private lessons in the next few decades. My knowledge is somewhat biased coming from a field where the alternatives are much richer, b…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 10:40 PM
3

As someone who could've gone for a PhD and purposely chose not to (master's only): You don't. Academia has both the traits of a passion industry, and the requirements of following social politics to the T. You can't avoid all the churn, burn-out, low pays, etc. from an academic career. Now that politics has pushed the "old boys club / too many men" narrative, academia will be filled with gender politics and you will have to deal with them at every corner. Academia is notorious for being slow. Sl…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 10:26 PM
1

Given the report is based on the following, very broad categories open to interpretation real GDP per capita social support healthy life expectancy freedom to make life choices generosity perceptions of corruption and other reports paradoxically stating women have gotten less happy, maybe it's wiser to refrain from making sweeping statements that somehow should infer Sweden being 7th in happiness is at odds with a correlation between feminism and domestic violence. Self-reports make horrible sci…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 10:07 PM
34

There is one glaring problem with your entire post I can't overlook. Most of what you said puts the blame on men, and your solution is to improve almost solely for women. Improve yourself for yourself and no one else. Women shouldn't be the goal of your self-mprovement. Even Red Pill, the part of the manosphere that aggressively focuses on getting laid, repeats this over and over. It's not about women. It's not even about your fellow man. Self-improvement is for yourself, maybe your kids, and no…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 08:01 PM
14

I'll try and articulate what he's saying, since it's a little rough and more nuanced. Basically, society is pushing the narrative that most of our communication should be verbal (or text-based, I guess). This includes various contexts (work, relationships, family) and various problems (need to convince someone? Use your words. Need to vent? Use your words. Express your love? Use your words). The problem is, words are weak, meaningless and extremely addictive to use. Think of times when someone w…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 07:37 PM
9

I agree, I'd go as far and TL;DR it to the following: Primarily express yourself physically to women Limit verbal expression to women to positive things, minimizing even those Limit your verbal expression even around your close male friends. A bit less, but still limit it Once you are comfortable expressing yourself physically (not aggressively) towards your partner, things get easier (and even here we have limitations, like not crying too much) and generally, it's more productive and/or fun for…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 05:33 PM
3

I don't disagree, it makes sense from a biological, traditional perspective. I don't think anyone here who's ever read a history book on traditionally masculine perspectives, looks at how monkeys and apes behave in groups, etc. would disagree. There's a reason CS is predominantly guys. The problem is that boys are raised like this isn't the case, and then they are met with these quotes. At the very least, there should be a clear indication of what is actually expected of men, instead of these co…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 04:10 PM
10

The quote is very obviously hyperbole. If we're really gonna talk about guys that expect their wives to be their mothers, those are generally traumatized by their moms (dependency issues) or have a hard-on for femdom. Anyone who has spent a week or two on social media can tell "venting your problems as a guy to a girl" gets conflated to "I'm not your mom LoL eksdeeeee", whereas the reverse is pretty much demanded.
/r/MensRights08/12/20 02:09 PM
5

There isn't proof to your theory AFAIK, but there definitely is proof that most of the unfortunate kids are boys and come from single-mother homes, and that fathers are more important to boys than mothers. And there is suggestive evidence in the form of MGTOW and Red Pill, which are not only counter movements, but in the latter case also stimulates behaviors destructive towards society for the benefit of the man himself (e.g. ghosting women, pump & dump, enabling cheating, not settling down. Not…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 01:58 PM
73

I've had this song and dance with women so many times. Men are told they can be open, but then when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is, men generally get shot down and told they are whiny. As a fairly trad guy, I'm okay with not venting verbally, but men do need some kind of release valve. Meanwhile, I've encountered the reverse plenty where holding the woman to the same exact standards (stop complaining so much) gets you painted as the bad guy by her friends, which then sours …
/r/MensRights08/12/20 01:43 PM
233

I have. And let me also state I personally don't mind. But I do expect a partner to help me take care of my needs as well. As a baseline. Not some "I give you sex because you listen to my problems" transaction. Otherwise, what the hell is the point in it for me?
/r/MensRights08/12/20 01:35 PM
34

Lightly off-topic, but let's try a response in good conscientious: Motherly traits overlap with feminine traits. Kindness, softness, care-taking, etc. are all parts generally desired by men for both a relationship and the sake of potential children. Even if it is not for him, checking if she can do it for you and will for a short time, the guy can vet if she's a suitable mother (alternatives do exist). Obvious double-standards: many of these chicks still expect provider traits (money), status tr…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 01:06 PM
5

There's no point if you're not seeing the contradiction between what you say now and what you stated in your first post. Again, yes, there are idiots on this sub downvoting and upvoting things for nothing because it's Reddit. It appeals to the most common denominator, just like the entire voting system itself. We have the "Red Pill-anger" type of people here. They should stop generalizing, and they eventually might. Unfortunately, this is one of the few circles where they can vent that hasn't be…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 10:50 AM
11

Dude, even you are falling for the generalization meme. Not all MRA's are downvoting you en masse. So congrats for playing yourself about MRA's playing themselves thanks to feminism.. I guess? People here downvote all the time over the silliest things, it's still Reddit using downvote as an "I disagree" button. Some people here are downright illiterate and still voting. Nothing new.
/r/MensRights08/12/20 09:39 AM
3

Whoever pulls that argument is comparing apples with oranges. Men are meant to remain fertile pretty much 24/7, whereas the female contraceptive is meant to trick the female body into not ovulating, a stage already part of their natural cycle but now superseding the ovulation stage of the cycle. Whatever we mess with, we're tackling the lifeblood of men, testosterone (which has already been in free fall from generation to generation). Even if we use a replacement hormone, we don't really know wh…
/r/MensRights08/12/20 12:22 AM
1

But dare insinuate it's a slippery slope and not black-and-white, and now you get the crazies trying to turn the kids non-binary on your front door screeching. Next thing you know, we're gonna remove speed bump signs because they are oppressive to speeding drivers. Viva la idiocracy.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen07/12/20 09:31 PM
14

Loads of people already want this (yes, even some gals), but there are some major problems: It's not nearly as profitable Feminists and pro-female movements have a serious incentive not to want this (it puts anti-conception more in the hands of men, including prevention of paternity fraud and baby-trapping), which means you'll lose social power You really, really, do not want anything highly hormonal if the pill was anything to go by, unless you were willing to continue taking it for the rest of…
/r/MensRights07/12/20 09:09 PM
5

Because comparatively, men receive pretty much zero support from the media for not wanting children compared to women, who at least get some support (read: media pushing women to be career-driven). It's not black-and-white "well women are getting shit on too". It's an ironic depiction of the reality of men being actively shit upon for even choosing to opt out, while women are fighting each other because god forbid they have differing opinions from one another.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 11:32 AM
1

FWIW, this is why many guys look for virgins. Or as others have stated it, really just low N-count women relative to their age. It's not the virginity itself as much as the things implied by it. A woman who has had many partners (let's say once a year) has completely different values than one who's had just a few, and those values don't just change overnight because she said so. But it's easier to just say "because she's a virgin / doesn't have many other partners" than write a wall of text expl…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/20 11:20 AM
9

The video doesn't show it all. Women are shaming each other for not having children, but also for having children. They are also telling each other having children is amazing, and telling each other not having kids is clever and brave. These are subsets of the female population with different opinions and one common theme: they shame the other group into complying, and reinforce the people they agree with socially.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 10:11 AM
1

So it's rude to tell you to live with it, because it would take more than just a night of sleep for things to revert? I don't exactly have a sparkling wand and a set of fairy wings to make your wishes come true. You can go and fight. And fighting is good. But fighting won't solve things for you personally. It will solve things for the generation that comes after you. The status quo didn't come into existence overnight, it gradually shifted to that. You can rant all you want, nothing's going to c…
/r/MensRights07/12/20 12:02 AM
16

You just couldn't drop it and needed to be called out, so here: In your post history, you had to ask whether a woman squirting was pee or not less than a month ago. I highly doubt you're in any position to judge people here on their sexual prowess, and you might want to take a good, hard look at the proverbial mirror.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 11:23 PM
5

Japan is interesting since it's showing a broader theme: people are commoditizing everything into a service. "We had sex as a service, but now we do not only have girlfriend as a service, also boyfriend as a service!" If anything, we might reach a point where we too get "boyfriend as a service" just to satisfy any needs for romance a woman might want. And you see this theme not only in romance, but also in child-rearing, cooking, repairs, all kinds of tasks that used to be "fix it yourself". Als…
/r/MensRights06/12/20 11:09 PM
3

Might also be projection in the sense that these are the typical "go girls" type that actually get off on being treated like dirt in the bedroom. There's a reason it is a TV trope.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 10:51 PM
11

I wish there was a masculine culture in politics. Literally everything is filled with consensus-seeking democracy or design-by-committee. Anyone who dares pull that card has never worked an office job. They got what they said they wanted, now they will clean the plate and better smile at the end of it.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 10:47 PM
3

You can thank a few decades of "sexually liberating" women, the government replacing most of men's values through taxes, pushing people to spend their 20s like their late teens and encouraging people to "sow their wild oats" before finally getting children and settling down somewhere early 30s. That works for men, who are still virile and at their peak late 20s / early 30s. Not for women, who take a massive nosedive in fertility and still don't have a long term partner, but proceed to use their …
/r/MensRights06/12/20 09:50 PM
6

It's real simple. Men and women fight differently. Men are intrinsic, solitary, fight themselves. Women are extrinsic, social, fight using others (read: other men). So yes, women are afraid alone, obviously. It's like an RPG where you play a water mage while men are earth mages, but there's no water nearby. Of course you'll be afraid when you feel like there could be a fight, you're at a severe disadvantage. Then you'll get the argument "but she clearly has a reason if she is afraid!". Dude, peo…
/r/MensRights06/12/20 01:47 PM
28

r/whereareallthegoodmen would love your post. Just double standards as usual. She wants equality but only when it suits her. Her money is hers, your money is also hers. Please give me chivalry, also don't expect me to cook dinner you misogynist. Hope you enjoy clown world.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 12:49 PM
3

If anything I hear mostly women complaining about loneliness now. Too bad many of these posters still can't put 1 and 1 together and realize many men were already experiencing it.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 12:40 PM
5

Hun, if you only took 10 minutes at most and only scraped the surface, why would we put effort into a proper response?
/r/MensRights05/12/20 10:08 PM
10

Either lacking brain cells or shit testing you for some reason. In both cases a complete idiot. "Hun, I'm complimenting your shirt, not your tits. There was nothing to compliment there."
/r/MensRights05/12/20 10:06 PM
12

r/whereareallthegoodmen would like a word with you, they can show you who
/r/MensRights05/12/20 09:54 PM
3

There are just way too many things working as an incentive for people to adhere to feminism, or even just women, in particular. The money, the social power, status (which makes men fight each other to appeal to women). Of course they'll control the conversation when it's more lucrative to most people short-term than listening to MRAs. I like frequenting the more extremist parts of the manosphere. Even there, despite having no patience to listen to feminists (or just women, in some cases), one wi…
/r/MensRights05/12/20 09:35 PM
8

Dude, MRA is a freaking hugbox compared to many other pro-masculine fora out there. People here accept shit all the time, there are guys making borderline concern-trolling posts and women trying to socially police things (we have egalitarianism for that, or if you wish for another echo chamber, menslib). Whoever is saying MRA is evil clearly has never looked inside or is cherrypicking the minority of posts from angry posters without realizing, hey, it's the internet, people are hyperbolic by def…
/r/MensRights05/12/20 08:43 PM
4

My opinion: It's already happening. See MGTOW, men who completely opt out because it ain't worth it. Actively aggregating resources and subsequently taking advantage of no longer having to provide for women. See Red Pill: men who just take advantage of the situation. "Well we both can't get the romantic end we wanted, might as well enjoy whatever is there". And those are just two of the famous movements, there are plenty of others. In the span of a few decades, it seems people have forgotten why…
/r/MensRights05/12/20 07:07 PM
-1

Their power is fine. It's that people in general should think twice when a woman says something. Everything in the world is more willing to listen to women, either biological or due to a social or economic incentive. It's the same stuff when listening to women for dating advice: you don't.
/r/MensRights05/12/20 04:38 PM
3

"Watch as they do, not as they say" has never been more prevalent.
/r/MensRights05/12/20 04:22 PM
16

The discussion was ok until you had to bring "incels" here. Practice what you preach, keep that shit out or go join FDS. As for the actual point, I dunno why some guys here like to come out of the wood works and pretend he's some fallen angel. That same blind faith you guys believe is the source of his mistakes is similarly blinding several posters here. Having a little doubt is warranted: the guy doesn't look that young and he's brazen enough to farm points on social media. As is the belief men…
/r/MensRights04/12/20 07:40 PM
9

It's simple really. Most of these women have benefited from the good deeds their male ancestors performed, and they are not entitled to payment just because of the idea that their female ancestors as a whole got messed up. You can't claim respect and/or responsibility without agency, that's what children do (and for good reason, they are learning). Effectively, anyone who treats others that way is treating them as children, and those who want to be treated this way are children. There's a reason…
/r/MensRights04/12/20 11:33 AM
3

How about we can just acknowledge the problem is both those who take advantage of loneliness and those who let themselves fall for it and get addicted? I dunno about you, but the entire post OP linked comes across as "it is their fault, not ours!". There's not a piece of potentially accepting that yes, the women doing it can be at fault, it's just the usual shoving away responsibility and agency to the other side. Responsibility isn't black and white, but for a sub and a movement that always lik…
/r/MensRights03/12/20 09:05 PM
3

You might wanna reread what he said and lay off the caps. Or as they put it differently: Woooooosh.
/r/MensRights03/12/20 05:07 PM
2

I've read the article and could tell immediately that was what it was about. My post was a jab at the cited Twitter message misandrists like to pull to support their bigotry. A little faith, please.
/r/MensRights03/12/20 04:55 PM
3

Thanks for your detailed responses. It was very intriguing to read. My original point of interest was the benefits of being rigid compared to being flexible, the contexts in which they are applied by women, and a tendency for women to emulate men incompletely in this regard (and vice versa, pushing boys to emulate women). Everyone becomes more rigid as they age, similarly to learning algorithms (which in turn emulate nature). Yet, (modern?) women seem to emphasize heavily on making their demands…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre03/12/20 04:33 PM
3

I too like to be held accountable for something some other guy did on the basis of both being guys. In fact, let's extend it. Let's hold all humans accountable, because we all share being members of homo sapiens. Terrible idea? Exactly. Selectively picking traits that seem convenient for your narrative is just that, selectively picking for your own convenience. Not for truth.
/r/MensRights03/12/20 01:37 PM
1

I would articulate it to make it even simpler. A bureaucrat, just like almost other human being, is about self-preservation first and foremost (children and heroism aside). The death of a bureaucracy is at direct odds with that. Therefore, bureaucrats fight to keep their bureaucracy existing, despite it being harmful. (NB I agree with your explanation).
/r/MensRights03/12/20 01:29 PM
10

Even if life experience meant anything savory for them (it doesn't), I find most women with more life experience just get extremely rigid. Rigidity, especially mixed with occasional flexibility, is great if you lead a relationship and are the shot caller. Not so much if you're the one who's demanding things to be done. If anything, someone being rigid while being demanding and not getting their own stuff done, largely reminds me of a kid throwing a tantrum. I can accept that from kids, because, …
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre03/12/20 09:34 AM
10

It's something feminists on Reddit love to perpetuate too. Feminist: "MRA are all toxic hate groups they don't understand feminism at all they are just incels!!1!1!" At best you'll find a misguided feminist who believes feminism practices what it preaches (equality, and surprise, it doesn't), and is actually egalitarian. At worst you'll find one thrashing about at the mere notion of someone opposing feminism.
/r/MensRights02/12/20 09:23 PM
1

You assume that sticking to traditional roles and "doing business as usual" would fix things You're the one assuming things here, I never specified what that truth is. What we can't deny is that there is a huge disparity between what the media is saying (equality good, trad bad) and the studies that come out (with a significant number of studies stating gender roles within a relationship are beneficial). Nowhere do these studies get addressed in regular education, whereas feminism and "equality"…
/r/MensRights02/12/20 02:21 PM
2

"Not our business, let's ignore it" - the largest and the least impactful. You'll have to articulate your point here. Look at Japan and look at what MGTOW is doing to feminism, and how much they are scorned. Largely to do with the reasons why third wave feminism even exists. Many people are just flat-out bored. When the world is at peace, nothing happens. People, especially women, live around drama. They actively seek it out to avoid getting bored, and largely do so extrinsically, instead of ent…
/r/MensRights02/12/20 01:03 PM
2

It is pretty much impossible to predict in the context that I presented: children who have not gone through puberty yet. Hormones released during puberty change things drastically. In that regard it is complex, as there simply isn't a way to determine which child will develop full-blown dysphoria, and which child just has a phase that will go. And kids go through many phases for the silliest reasons. Adults can do whatever the hell they want. It's the push onto children from the very pro-LGBT co…
/r/MensRights02/12/20 10:49 AM
1

This is a meme. I even had professors mention our abysmal numbers on women in CS compared to math, saying most that actually went to math would've been happier in CS, despite the best efforts to attract them. It's almost entirely women voting themselves out these days, whether it is selection STEM at all, or a subfield. Nor does your argument follow the paradox of the inverse correlation between "emancipation of women" and women going to STEM. The truth is a lot simpler than people like to admit…
/r/MensRights02/12/20 01:02 AM
11

And why do you feel compelled to give this reminder on one of the tamest subs on Reddit?
/r/MensRights02/12/20 12:42 AM
4

It's one of those tough questions no one truly knows the answer to, plus it's not black-and-white. Loads of kids who would arguably be alright once matured are pushed to the other side, but at the same time, you'll get people who'll never be happy because they transitioned too late and their bone structure etc. has been fully developed into a gender they don't align with. There's also the part where people push someone to the other gender because they don't fit a stereotype (e.g. tomboys, girls …
/r/MensRights01/12/20 11:09 PM
2

Blindly accepting any form of concern opens up to concern trolling. The point he makes is valid, especially given the context of this rather tame sub. Even most pro-masculinity subs on Reddit are extremely tame in this regard. They wouldn't pay an ounce of attention to the example of the OP because in a vacuum, N=1, it has nothing to do with MRA. Instead, he's vouching that this case should've been picked up by MRAs because the sexist factor was more significant than the racist factor, which whi…
/r/MensRights01/12/20 01:17 PM
1

Why again are you ranting this to me? I don't remember stating "sometimes she deserved it", rather that these things are much more complicated than "he did it / she did it" and people like to deny that.
/r/MensRights30/11/20 09:15 AM
9

I didn't feel looking at percentages was very helpful here, so I looked up some sources I could find quickly. It does seem in terms of suicide rises, women in Japan are affected disproportionally: https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h00864/. Obviously, this does not take away the glaring fact that men are still offing themselves at higher rates. And the answer is simple: when it comes to handling suicide tackle the issues regardless of sex. It should also be noted that Japan is extreme: you bar…
/r/MensRights29/11/20 11:31 PM
6

I don't feel like this is leniency to women from men, as much as management and "leadership" (they wish) becoming increasingly more intolerant to anything and anyone that might rock the boat even a little along with company political agendas. Personally, I have no problem being blunt to either sex. But I speak from a point of luxury where if I lose my job, I'll be ok without a job for several years and am likely to find another pretty easily. I don't imagine most men are in that position, so at …
/r/MensRights28/11/20 09:57 PM
6

Perhaps a little controversial but hear me out. You guys will do way, way more damage to feminism and this kind of behavior as a whole by no longer saying anything. No downvotes, no upvotes, no replies, no baiting, not even any genuine participation to a seemingly neutral question in a sub that could be majority feminist / pro-female. Nothing. Negative attention is still attention. Look at how their sidebar reads, and then look at their reactions. There is no good faith here, no genuine need for…
/r/MensRights28/11/20 02:21 PM
7

This is basically why I stopped taking most arguments regarding domestic violence against women seriously. More often than not, there was something she could've done to prevent it or not encourage it, and she didn't do it. You almost never hear the full story: where did she get him, what happened in his life, what happened in hers, what did she do prior to that, what did he do. It's almost never as simple as a cartoon-level victim, but it's how the media likes to portray it. Things just aren't a…
/r/MensRights28/11/20 02:06 PM
3

Jokes aside, I can agree necessary shopping and the likes is a form of labor. Luxury shopping, e.g. taking your time, shopping far more than the bare minimum, being inefficient because the time constraints are so loose, is just padding the numbers with needless consumerism. And I can definitely agree getting dragged along to go shopping is labor.
/r/MensRights26/11/20 05:31 PM
9

Shopping for family decoration They call this work? Most of the time it's something the women want, and want to switch out continuously. I just order what I want, spend a day improving it and it's done for at least a few months. Is shopping considered labor now? No wonder women work more. The same tends to go for other things. I remember it's usually women pushing inefficient methods like cleaning in small batches and cleaning often. Yes, obviously it takes more time if you introduce the overhea…
/r/MensRights26/11/20 04:52 PM
4

There are some ways you can influence math grades. Leniency on open questions and how many points are given based on step-wise calculation come to mind (some teachers can get very petty on this, like expecting x^2 = 3+5, a separate step for 3+5 = 8 and x = sqrt(3+5) ). Also if your classes have homework grading in some subjective form (attendance, behavior in class, etc.) they will grade you on disruptive behavior. I didn't have this in my math classes, but they can definitely happen. Never unde…
/r/MensRights26/11/20 01:55 PM
21

There's a reason the saying "crying wolf" exists. The problem with believing rape claims is two-fold. The first problem is the obvious one you named, "innocent until proven guilty" is outlandish. You're potentially sacrificing people to catch more perpetrators. For them, it may sound like a great deal, until some mother watches her son, some wife watches her man or some daughter watches her father go to jail. Ask your girlfriend if she's ok with you landing in jail over a false accusation (and i…
/r/MensRights26/11/20 12:06 PM
14

I'll articulate: "your country" meaning "one's own country", not America in particular. Almost every country sells itself better than it actually is, otherwise brain drain would f'up most western countries. "This isn't unique to America at all" meaning no country fully practices what it preaches, not even respecting people's rights ("yes we value privacy", proceeds to invent Five Eyes / Six Eyes to spy on their own countrymen through a loophole, yeah ok thanks). It's true Americans have an extre…
/r/MensRights26/11/20 11:40 AM
23

This isn't unique to America at all. Time to learn your country tells many pretty lies to make itself seem amazing.
/r/MensRights26/11/20 08:58 AM
3

High school girls are devils. Only took us a few decades to figure that out. Revelation, truly. Anyway. Our statements aren't really contradicting, despite mine possibly being hyperbole (I CBA making a scraper to filter and tally, but it was intended as hyperbole). Most of the top ones are about "gosh girls suck". Doesn't take too long before you see people shovel this onto "toxic masculinity" though. At least at the time of writing that, one of the most awarded comments had a comment chain with…
/r/MensRights25/11/20 10:31 PM
15

It's our duty to protect and defend even if society doesn't treat us fairly Hard pass, undying, one-sided loyalty to people is for two things: dogs, and suckers.
/r/MensRights25/11/20 06:17 PM
16

Half of the comment section is an utter shitstorm basically justifying why it's ok to bash on men but not on women, and presenting arguments from an angle that supports this bashing specifically. For people who praise themselves for being "radically different", they sure seem to follow their ancestors' ways of only looking at things from one angle. Whoever still thinks non-political, non-masculine subreddits are a place to argue against feminism: whatever you're smoking, stop smoking it and go s…
/r/MensRights25/11/20 01:46 PM
2

Pretty sure that's where it comes from yeah. I originally misspelled it anyway and meant satire, not satyr, though the two are related and it still works given the context (especially considering she might as well be a satyr).
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/11/20 10:21 AM
1

Satyr plays. Satirical shows, etc.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/11/20 08:31 AM
11

I only ever hear this lingo coming from the internet, from satyrs or from hoodrats. Maybe her knowing this lingo so well is indicative of the problem? You know, her?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen24/11/20 07:16 PM
3

Pretty sure women use more tax money per capita than men do (on top of contributing less) anyway, and by a pretty significant margin. Pretty sure it ends up a zero-sum equation so it doesn't matter they do, but it does matter when the margin is already big and we pay tax money for professional women bleeding every month while there are people starving in the same country.
/r/MensRights24/11/20 06:20 PM
6

So she's 42, like most birds here she doesn't say at all what she has to offer, her fertility has pretty much dried up, and she has a list of demands like she's the one pulling the strings. Dear madam, you're not too old to play games, you're doing it right now. For you are not a clown. You are the entire circus.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen24/11/20 01:15 PM
5

Honestly, the only non-elites I've seen solely benefit from this are two specific groups. The women who are truly and utterly incapable, essentially been handed everything in life on a silver platter. And the guys who go "gosh I wish a female [insert job title / profession] would join", frequently with an unsavory and sexualized undertone. Most people, man or woman, have largely been disadvantaged in some form, be it professionally (e.g. not getting a job) or emotionally (e.g. getting ridiculed …
/r/MensRights23/11/20 09:15 PM
60

I'll never understand how sounding like a hoodrat is supposed to attract quality men. Or how these chicks are under the impression it would, at least.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen23/11/20 04:43 PM
42

Your last part is pretty much what most people on RedPill and likeminded circles advocate. They stop caring, go to the other side of "the extreme" and it ends up working, and like most organisms would, they learn from the results of their actions, not from the words of some dogma. It reminded me of that whole "being silent instead of opening up is toxic masculinity11!1!1" propaganda. No, most men don't care if their brothers are emotional. We care they don't get absolutely slaughtered on the dat…
/r/MensRights22/11/20 09:59 PM
5

These kind of panels irk me, both from the perspective as gamer and as pro-masculinity. I don't know when exactly this happened, but especially the gamer culture seems to push this narrative of "emotional men good, trad men bad". As a gamer, I get it: most people back in the 90s and 00s who got into gaming weren't exactly "chads" (as one of the sections is named). More likely, they were outcasts, bullied for it, bad at gym / didn't like it, you know the stereotypes. It's escapism and extremely c…
/r/MensRights22/11/20 08:23 PM
10

The cited comments read more like angry video game enthusiasts or extremely political fanatics, than a bunch of scientists distraught at a problem within academia. Those people should seriously be ashamed calling themselves scientists, when they intend to harm the integrity of science by putting their feelings and political agenda upfront. If you wish to critique a paper, do so by specifically saying why the method is flawed or pointing out misinformation. Anything else, like tackling the result…
/r/MensRights22/11/20 05:54 PM
5

There is none. Neither MRA nor feminism is a completely united front regarding definition from the inside, and they definitely aren't from a third party's perspective. You can find some specific cases like Self-Made Man, a book about a woman who pretended to be a man and came to conclusion that being a man isn't any easier than being a woman (in fact, from what I remember her main problem was acceptance from women as a disguised man, not acceptance from men). Though those examples are more "this…
/r/MensRights22/11/20 05:24 PM
10

That’s like saying that if you believe in morality then you must be a Christian, or if you care about the working class then you must be a socialist. If this is the line you're citing, I'll let the sub decide how big the leap in logic you're making here is. Otherwise, you might actually want to cite the line you think implies the writer saying "socialism bad".
/r/MensRights22/11/20 05:04 PM
10

For dating I agree. For finance and profession, with two bachelors, those are definitely not twilight years for a woman and she messed up something fierce. Or more likely, was living on hand-outs way above her standards and the hand-outs stopped coming in. Like, damn, no savings at 35 with an obvious coddled-middle-class background in what I presume is the US. That's on her, not on the world.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen19/11/20 07:54 PM
3

God forbid men have a space where others read the side bar. That's not even apart of your guys stereotypes for whiteknighting, that's literally just a preference for them because they're literate and prefer discussions in subreddits meants for them. Eksdeeeeee
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen19/11/20 08:54 AM
4

Dude this is mensrights not FDS. Keep the incel stuff elsewhere.
/r/MensRights19/11/20 08:31 AM
2

I remember a short time where specifically kids cartoons weren't too afraid to still present a vulnerable female character despite them largely being Mary Sue-ish. The most obvious case being the super athletic tomboyish archetype who still looks above average and despite not being super intelligent, gets alright grades and is studious. It was already pushing it then, but at least they were presented with clear flaws, required other characters for support, had character growth and most of all, t…
/r/MensRights18/11/20 02:48 PM
13

That's not a whole lot different from feminism and they sure got a lot of support though.
/r/MensRights18/11/20 02:20 PM
8

They are extremely coddled, to the point the basics of action -> reaction and positive reinforcement are completely foreign. Anyone with an open mind and half a working brain can watch a few animal documentaries and understand what happens when you piss off something much bigger, faster and stronger than you. With a full brain, that person can likely figure out what would happen if those animals were pissed off and organized.
/r/MensRights17/11/20 06:45 PM
18

Everything is temporal. If this is the mentality they wish to instill into society, eventually, it will backfire. It already is in many ways (RedPill, MGTOW, herbivore men in Japan, falling marriage rates, etc.) There's a reason the saying goes "Fear the man with nothing to lose". When you take a man's incentives away and try to suppress them, nasty things happen. Young men are the last demographic you want to upset, they create the most and they will also destroy the most when pushed to the lim…
/r/MensRights17/11/20 06:22 PM
6

At least you don't have to get her pastries, she's already cookiecutter as they come
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen17/11/20 01:57 PM
10

There's nothing wrong with classical upbringing in a vacuum, but like always, different people benefit from different things. A very traditionally-minded man isn't going to enjoy today as much as the nuclear times, and a very "modernized" (for lack of better term) woman isn't going to being a housewife all day. It's difficult as raising kids means making choices that may or may not have been good, despite the parents' best intentions. Especially since the information is so conflicting (some sour…
/r/MensRights17/11/20 09:29 AM
1

But what does she have to offer? Literally nothing in her bio gives one a reason to LTR her, she's only making demands and putting up trophy pics.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen16/11/20 05:08 PM
2

Meanwhile I'm still looking at the post trying to figure out what she has to offer that isn't bare minimum. These chicks putting their wish list on the net wondering why the guy showing up has a red hat, a big belly, likes cookies and milk, and keeps calling them a ho three times in a row, instead of a chiseled six pack and a loaded bank account.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen16/11/20 02:25 PM
19

There's a trending post on UnpopularOpinion right now regarding paternity fraud. Many comments (including upvoted ones) are claiming that it is extremely painful for a woman to be asked a paternity test on the child, in order to establish the guy is the father. Despite the fact paternity fraud is arguably much more harmful than a lot of things that boys are routinely chastised and "re-educated" for. (Note: a lot of them are actually in favor of paternity tests and see the double standard and the…
/r/MensRights16/11/20 02:14 PM
3

Here's a mental exercise. Assume the majority is silent and not feminist. Now explain why most of Reddit has feminist undertones, why feminist agenda has way more of a spotlight in the media, etc., and why MRA agenda is always under scrutiny and so poorly received. Anyone would conclude something doesn't add up here. Either the silent majority is subtly feminist, or they are irrelevant due to their passivity, or the feminist agenda is more profitable to push, or whatever. But as long as the majo…
/r/MensRights15/11/20 01:22 PM
17

That's a lot of words for someone claiming to be happy in their current position.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen15/11/20 12:31 PM
2

A combination of: High progressive tax + welfare (= less incentive to work) Less worry about material wealth in general. Especially post 30s, as our biggest expense, by far, is housing. Everything is massively dwarfed by comparison bar maybe cars (and expensive cars are a luxury). Full-time is often associated with 36h, not 40h Family men still tend to work longer. There is still a notion of "if you don't work 40h, you're lazy" among old people. Note how despite men working the least hours in Ne…
/r/MensRights14/11/20 02:49 PM
3

For those looking at the original post: do yourself a favor and scroll all the way down and view the comments with negative points. Notice how many people misinterpreted the post and read it as "he is 18, kissed her, she is 13". Several of them, by the looks of their flairs, being decently well-respected and/or active members of the sub. You cannot make up how quickly people will jump to conclusions without properly reading. I'm also very willing to say, were the genders reversed, the false conc…
/r/MensRights14/11/20 12:21 PM
3

Just do yourself a favor, go tally the local news for a month and check: How many issues are raised that do not discriminate between sex. How many issues are raised that focus on women, and put men as the problem. Then do the same for those that put women as the problem. Then do the same for those that do not put either sex as the problem. Do the same as above, but now for issues raised that focus on men. In reality, you will see massive disparities. I have no doubt more issues are raised that f…
/r/MensRights14/11/20 11:43 AM
4

If a man is fucked, he's fucked. If a woman is fucked, she has god-knows-what to fall back on. If a man wants to excel and have everything, he realistically has better odds than a woman (well, at least until the simps and feminists have successfully pushed their sex-positive agenda). Just on the premise of men being biologically stronger, more driven and not needing to sacrifice as much for a child as a woman (need, not want). If you just care about an average life (which realistically, most peo…
/r/MensRights13/11/20 07:52 PM
7

I know one mod in particular is actually a woman who has even gone as far and stickied a thread that had nothing to do with AskMen, applauding the quarantining of MGTOW. That's also part of why AskMen is very tolerant towards women reacting, whereas AskWomen is a lot less tolerant. And I'll say, there is nothing inherently wrong with either men or women answering questions asked to the other sex, but holy moly, does AskMen get cluttered with female posts that provide no conversational value what…
/r/MensRights13/11/20 07:24 PM
11

I hope to god she just poorly worded it and she just doesn't want one of those old, bad relationships where the two settled on bad terms and only got together out of obligation and wanting a family. In reality, she's probably looking for some divine comedian who can entertain her 24/7, because she's incapable of entertaining herself. Imagine not being able to entertain oneself in 2020, what a miserable mentality one must have.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen11/11/20 10:48 AM
-1

In a different world, where men perceived to be highly oppressed and no female movement yet, I would argue the inverse would've happened as well. Then it would've been MRM occupying the role feminism does now, and feminism being the counter force. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows, MRM also has plenty of extremists, bad apples and more, just like feminism does (which currently happen to have a way more negative light on them while the feminist equivalents have gone largely under the radar). Th…
/r/MensRights11/11/20 10:31 AM
1

Let me put this under a different light. Inherently, humans generally only seek what's best for themselves or their relatives and close friends. Feminism as a whole does just that. It presents itself as "fighting for equality", but in reality, it does what it's users believe is best for them. Feminists perceive some kind of inequality in their disadvantage? The opportunity cost gets weighted, and if beneficial, they push hard for perceived equality (sometimes leading to supremacy) for women in t…
/r/MensRights10/11/20 04:52 PM
3

Specifically FDS (Female Dating Strategy). Be prepared to get your mind blown. Once you see it, you can never go back.
/r/MensRights10/11/20 02:40 PM
5

Ask him the same question regarding the female subs, specifically the feminism and female dating ones.
/r/MensRights10/11/20 02:23 PM
12

There's nothing you can do about the wording. The original comment didn't even explicitly say the wording is bad. What it did insinuate was that, given social and biological factors, the law will be a problem (correct me if I'm wrong). That means you don't change the wording of the law. You change society. Starting with harsher punishments for false accusations, and teaching people that guilt after the fact is not a reason to accuse someone, that's your own mistake.
/r/MensRights05/11/20 07:00 PM
54

The problem isn't in the wording though. The problem is in how the law behaves once factoring in the social and biological behaviors of men and women. Women being the benefactors of the halo effect and being the gatekeepers will have way more value out of emotional arguments, than men. Men, being seen as aggressors and initiators by both nature and society (therefore much less likely to freeze up, and taking the risk of the sexual interaction), will get way less value out of emotional arguments.…
/r/MensRights05/11/20 06:43 PM
118

This is extremely dangerous if people do not take into account the halo effect. Interpreted from some angle, essentially, emotional arguments are taken at higher value than before. However, emotional arguments are in essence flaky at best, and completely worthless at worst. Now take the world news into account and see how often "his word vs hers" has resulted in her getting the benefit of the doubt. Doesn't matter if she can now be the accuser or the accused, if in both cases she is more likely …
/r/MensRights05/11/20 06:20 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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