TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Numerous_Solution756 Archive

View 1 post and 351 comments by Numerous_Solution756 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

"Either my husband can pay for me, or the state can tax men and give money to me." Geeh, thanks. (Men are net tax contributers, women are net tax takers.)
/r/MensRights19/08/25 04:07 PM
8

The guy you responded to is exaggerating, but it's true that in 2025 on the whole women are massively privileged and it's much easier to be a woman.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 03:56 PM
3

You're not "challenging", you're just being misandrist. Most white guys, especially ones on this sub, aren't asking to be the patriarch / hegemon with sole power, with all other voices silenced. They just want to not be discriminated against. You're basically strawmanning their position with your last line. You're also part of the reason why white men aren't left-wing for the most part.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/25 03:54 PM
1

There aren't a lot of good single women out there who also don't have unrealistic expectations. n = 1 anecdotes are worthless.
/r/MensRights27/07/25 06:27 PM
1

You're correct, but it's not the Kremlin doing this.
/r/MensRights27/07/25 06:26 PM
1

To stone age women, it's sort of hot if the guy is a bit of a psychopath / murderer who is also dedicated to you, because such a partner can optimally protect and provide.
/r/MensRights19/07/25 01:13 PM
1

Women don't mind taking money from men they perceive as losers.
/r/MensRights19/07/25 01:11 PM
2

Some educational reading: https://cheezburger.com/3017733/guy-conducts-twisted-experiment-on-tinder-as-fake-child-rapist-and-gets-horrifying-results https://www.distractify.com/trending/2018/09/12/Z25CUDI/fake-hot-tinder-dude-criminal https://www.boredpanda.com/social-experiment-guy-created-fake-tinder-profile-hot-model-pictures-germanlifter/
/r/MensRights03/07/25 04:56 PM
3

It's either a shit test, or she means it and actually will dump OP if he doesn't bend the knee. But in both cases the best play is to just walk away.
/r/MensRights03/07/25 04:55 PM
6

It's pretty clear men have it harder. There's a mountain of systemic discrimination against them. 80% of suicides are also men. The woman Norah Vincent dressed up as a man and lived as a man for quite a while. Later she committed suicide. Women want to play the rape card to argue they have it hard? More men than women get raped in the US if you count prison rape. Also, in the UK men can't even legally get raped by women because the definition of rape includes being penetrated with a penis. Most …
/r/MensRights03/07/25 04:51 PM
2

"Bye"
/r/MensRights03/07/25 04:45 PM
40

80% of people killing themselves are men. If it wasn't worse, just different, that percentage would be 50%ish. In the present, the systemic discrimination is nearly all aimed at men. Men get raped more in the US if you count prison rape. Men are the victims of violence more often. Men are the victims of domestic violence more often. So what's this female burden -- some individual men are sexist? Yeah well, some individual women are also sexist.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 06:02 PM
39

On one hand, yes, but on the other hand they didn't get emotionally abused for being a man during childhood as men experience. Because in their childhood there were still seen as girls. Plus our education system is much less destructive on girls than on boys. And if they announce "I'm trans" then they still get categorized as a good person.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 06:00 PM
21

Even if with all my heart I wanted to move to Iran and I don't feel I have a choice, I would still research what life in Iran is like before I moved. This transman could have, you know, talked to a man before transitioning. Even if the choice whether to transition was never a question, it's probably good to talk to an Iranian before you move even if you're set on moving.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 05:59 PM
2

I'm MGTOW, but despite the rampant misandry my life overall is still worth living. It probably helps that I live in a country where prostitution is legal and affordable.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 06:29 AM
4

They're not rational. Don't expect facts to change their mind.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/25 05:36 AM
5

Right. If powerful men rigged society to benefit all men, then you wouldn't see female-only scholarships at a time when already more women attended university. Or far more money for breast cancer research than for prostate cancer research (which is something that can kill rich men too).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/25 05:26 AM
6

Yep. Women are less likely to just rob someone at gunpoint, but they don't seem less likely then men to tell other men to go do violence on her behalf. So are they less violent, or are they simply less willing to take personal risk?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/25 05:16 AM
8

Medieval queens also waged more wars than medieval kings.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/06/25 05:15 AM
6

Thanks for your compassionate and fair and empathic reply. I agree that women have struggles and also need help, but women are still more likely to be abused (...) by a partner I'm not sure this is actually true. Yes there are sources saying that, but here are some sources saying that men are more likely to be victims of domestic violence: https://www.cdc.gov/nisvs/documentation/nisvsreportonipv_2022.pdf reports that 5.5% of men and 4.5% of women experiencing physical violence by an intimate par…
/r/MensRights13/06/25 05:11 AM
5

(Our biggest issue is class by the way). Not saying you're wrong or that you shouldn't post here, in fact you're very welcome to post here, but you might also enjoy r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:58 AM
22

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_rape_in_the_United_States says: In 2008 the Justice Department) released a report that indicated that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the United States that year. Because of the high prison population in the United States the country has become probably the first and only in the world where rape of men is more common than of women. And yeah, I've been sexually assaulted by a woman. I've never told someone IRL. What's…
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:57 AM
5

- Not all but a lot of women want the female benefits from both traditional and modern gender roles, while denying men male benefits from both traditional and modern gender roles. For example: Women want female benefits from traditional gender roles: Women gets the man's stuff in divorce court. Women get lighter sentences for the same crime in criminal court. Men needs to earn more and financially contribute more to the relationship. (Now yes women theoretically will say that men don't need to e…
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:44 AM
5

Thanks for caring and wanting to understand. What are some important men’s issue: legal, systemic, social, or emotional that you think more people (like me or anyone) should be aware of and speaking about? There's a whole lot, but some critical ones are: - people treat women better, which sounds sort of benign, until you realize that an alternative way of saying that is "people discriminate against men". And not just in small informal ways: judges discriminate against men in criminal and divorce…
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:44 AM
10

Republicans suck, but most of the anti-male discrimination comes from the Dems. The perpetual "the right / conservatives / Trump sucks" argument all fail to take into account that while yes the right / conservatives / Trump sucks, the Dems suck harder. I'm sure some mythical left-wingers exist who are actually fair to men, but those aren't the people you empower if you vote for the Dems.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:11 AM
2

True, but spend time offline in the real world and you'll also realize that most (not all, but most) women don't take accountability.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:08 AM
4

Wife unhappy => husband needs to fix this Husband unhappy => husband needs to fix this
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:07 AM
4

Women bond from sex, but if they sleep around a lot that seems to go away.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:05 AM
29

Yeah, the vast majority of modern women hate men. Them liking a few specific men doesn't disprove that. If some racist said "I hate blacks, but those few specific blacks are cool, and blacks can prove themselves to be good people" then he's still a black person hater. I know that sounds crazy, but it's just the plain reality of the situation.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 04:01 AM
1

I don't like Trump, and I'm not American, but the choice that the US had in the last election wasn't Trump vs some genuinely good leader. Kamala would have been absolutely horrible. But obviously she isn't getting the chance to do her damage, while Trump is, because Trump won. So you're seeing his dysfunction and you're not seeing hers. But that doesn't mean that Kamala would actually have been better. All I want is for politicians and lawmakers to do is look at factual data, and stop making pol…
/r/MensRights13/06/25 03:58 AM
0

I do agree that it's good to think for yourself, but if you're a man, that does come across to me as a bit of a hen voting for a fox. The anti-male discrimination is mostly coming from the left after all. Unless you're living in some country that very much isn't like the typical Western country. If you buy into the sales pitch that the left gives, then that does sound very good. I agree with that.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 03:56 AM
1

That advice doesn't work for young average men today. Early 20s girls grew up with tik tok and tinder and social media. Good luck trying to have a good relationship with one today. You pretty much need to be substantially above-average to convince of one of the few sane ones to choose you. And then we're back to the classic "well just be a top-20% guy and you can get a sane girl" argument.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 03:52 AM
1

Haven't seen the movie either, but that's very much a thing women claim to support without actually supporting it. Tell a woman you're MGTOW and happy and spending lots of time on things you want to do, and 9/10 you get a negative or hostile response.
/r/MensRights13/06/25 03:49 AM
1

I don't understand why people think n = 1 anecdotes prove anything. If I said: "well I'm a millionaire, and my self-report about myself is that I'm average, and you're just going to have to believe that because you can't check it. Therefore, most people can just choose to put in some work and become a millionaire." ... then you would likely think I'm completely out of touch and possibly delusional. But that's pretty much what you're doing. Also, most above-average dudes think of themselves as av…
/r/MensRights12/06/25 07:08 PM
0

Stopped reading at the "cute". No need to be condescending.
/r/MensRights12/06/25 04:14 AM
12

I mean, women change the definition of patriarchy when it suits them. If you said this to a feminists, she'd temporarily switch to a very light definition of patriarchy that clearly does exist. And then when the discussion was over, suddenly patriarchy would again mean "men in positions of power conspire to unfairly benefit men and oppress women."
/r/MensRights11/06/25 09:52 AM
1

Thanks!
/r/MensRights11/06/25 09:40 AM
6

I mean, yes, but my father stayed even after his children had moved out. And I know we don't exactly love the mental image of slightly older men having sex, but the reality is that older men still want to have sex, and so do some older women.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 08:32 AM
5

But obesity rates absolutely exploded, and I don't buy that men today are just inherently worse than men of a hundred years ago, for no reason. Either society is toxic, or men struggle so much that they're using food to cope, or whatever. "Eat healthier" is good advice from the individual perspective, but it's not really a societal solution. I mean if those are "societal solution", I can fix society by telling all men "eat healthy, work hard, make a million dollars and find an amazing girlfriend…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 08:31 AM
3

Yeah. Lots of men are uncle toms.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 08:28 AM
14

It's partly because of our sex drive, but men also just seem to love women (including non-sexually) and want to be good people to those around them. For example my father eventually ended up in a sex-less relationship, but he stayed. So men aren't always just purely sex-seeking. If he'd been just a sex-seeking animal, he'd have left.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 06:55 AM
1

Yes. I have repeatedly done so.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 06:37 AM
6

Your username is well chosen.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 06:29 AM
1

People aren't rational. Men aren't, and women aren't. I think that in many cases, women are chasing chad to an irrational degree -- if men can follow their dick, why can't women follow their vagina? So do men and women want the same thing? Well, average guys want average woman as their girlfriend but those women reject them, and women want chad and chad doesn't commit to her, and chad wants to fuck half of womankind.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 06:25 AM
6

I largely agree. Amazing relationships indeed are amazing. But that doesn't mean that average guys can just get a unicorn woman. I'm still leaning towards the argument that the unicorn women who do exist aren't going to settle for an average guy. Meaning the actual formula is "be above-average, and THEN be lucky / look for a long time." If you know how to coach an average guy to get such a girlfriend, feel free to write a book and become a billionaire. But when it’s real? It changes everything. …
/r/MensRights11/06/25 06:20 AM
1

Agree, men do that, and it's bad -- -- but I don't think men do it AS poorly as media suggests. Personally I've opened up to both men and women, and have found men to generally be more emotionally supportive and willing to listen. Sure, it's an anecdote, and sure men could absolutely improve further here, but still.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:50 AM
0

I mean, women mostly vote left-wing, and men mostly vote right-wing. And left-wing politics prioritizes the female caretaker things (we must take care of refugees / the climate / sexual minorities). While right-wing politics prioritizes the male ideas of safety, competition and economic growth. So one could argue that [left-wing thing that a right-winger doesn't like] is an issue that's caused by women. Admittedly that's a bit of a stretch maybe. But then again, just saying "well it's society" i…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:49 AM
2

Don't have the time, but I do appreciate the contribution. Maybe post this as a separate post, and not just a comment that'll get buried?
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:42 AM
1

I think it's more that women don't truly fall in love except with top-tier guys. Women can become absolutely crazy for top-tier guy, and can remain heart-broken over such a guy for life. That's the term "alpha widowed." It's just that most of us aren't top-tier guys and don't experience that, and women also don't really like to admit that openly. But of course, what's most common is that two partners are both more or less average, and yes in that situation the woman certainly gets less heart-bro…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:40 AM
1

The only women who make a man's life better is a small group of high-quality woman (I'm talking about personality here, not about prettiness). The average Western woman in 2025 just makes a guy's life worse. This isn't unreasonable pickiness on the guy's part, it's just reality. And that small group of high-quality woman wants high-quality male partners. Which isn't unreasonable in itself. But it does mean that average guys can't get women who'll make their life better. The only women they can h…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:37 AM
4

So I think there are a lot of reasons, just you need the right partner. Good women, being picky as all women are, are pairing up with high-quality men. So even if an average man can find a good woman, she probably won't date him. I think in women's minds, most women are good women. Well, from my perspective, only a small minority of women are actually worth being with. I'd rather be single for my entire life than be with the average Western woman. And I think that has more to do with the unreaso…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:29 AM
1

Yeah but if I went to a feminist sub and wrote "but men are victims tho, see this source / well-reasoned argument"... well that probably wouldn't be appreciated.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:26 AM
6

Yep. And the crazy thing is that a woman starts at like +100 points. Sure, my scale is arbitrary, but just sex / cuddling on the couch and watching tv together / being with someone and being a team rather than being alone, is like +100 points already. And these are things that the woman presumably enjoys too, and they're basic and don't require any virtue or quality or burden on the woman's part. So women start at like +100 points, just because they have a vagina and a warm body to cuddle with a…
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:18 AM
5

Yeah, it's honestly pretty wild, if you think about it, that "give us a home worth dying for and we would" sounds like a completely reasonable sentence to me. In other words, most guys are absolutely willing to either literally give their life, or dedicate their life and work hard for decades, to a half-reasonable woman. But the majority of women are like "but chad tho" and aren't interested in basically having our life in exchange for them being half decent to us.
/r/MensRights11/06/25 12:06 AM
4

Yeah, the double standards are staggering. For example, woman tells man to go sleep on the couch? He deserved it / you go girl. Man tells woman to go sleep on the couch? Abuse. Woman doesn't talk to man? He deserved it / you go girl / very responsible of you to take time to gather your thoughts first. Man doesn't talk to woman? Abuse. Or at least it's a major failing on his part and he needs to do better. Woman unhappy in relationship? He needs to fix that. Man unhappy in relationship? He needs …
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:57 PM
3

Well yeah, Christianity does say that. But it also says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be silent." and "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord." So an actually Christian society, where the majority of people genuinely live according to the bible, is something we could scarcely picture. I'm not saying I want that society. I'm just saying that a Christian society isn't just "Western 2025 society, and also men must pay for everything."
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:53 PM
3

Sometimes women say the clearly nonsensical "I just want a guy who has a job and who has basic life skills." But clearly that's not true, because when she meets such a guy she'll most likely not date him. What other women SAY is that they want a man who has a hundred qualities. And then a man who has a hundred qualities... realizes that women aren't that excited about him. The reality is more than if you're a drop-dead gorgeous guy, or a billionaire, almost nothing else matters. So being above a…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:49 PM
7

Agree. I honestly feel that a lot of women objectify their partners. Sure, not in the "you're purely a sexual object and nothing but a sexual object" sense that men do to women. But when I've been with women, I kind of feel that she sees me as a walking wallet / therapist / supporter / entertainment monkey / handyman / mind reader / stoic provider and protector / always-ready-to-go penis. And if ever I "malfunction" in any of these roles, the problem is on my end, and I need to fix it. Why? Beca…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:46 PM
5

It is. There's lots of men out there, myself included, who are not rich and not exceptionally hot but perfectly fine men. We're the type of workhorse guy who a century ago would have easily been able to find a wife, because while we're not chad, we're reliable and we have a job and we're stable and there's really nothing wrong with us. We do what we're supposed to do, we don't do anything horrible and we do put effort into being a good partner to our girlfriend / wife. We buy flowers, we give he…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:31 PM
14

Good post. Personally, I wouldn’t want to be with someone who doesn’t find me attractive. But if women haven’t figured out what they want beyond looks or money (...) I mean, talk to any woman and she'll be able to mention things that she'd like in a partner that aren't looks or money. The problem is more that those are non-essential extras, they're the cherries on the pie, while looks / money / status / dangerousness is like the non-negotiable must-have. I guess I'm nitpicking here a bit. I rece…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:19 PM
2

Agreed with your first paragraph. I think there are very few actually traditional women in the West left (and the few who exist are usually very Christian, and they'll insist that the man is Christian too, so this isn't an option for non-Christian men. People can't just decide to start believing in something they don't believe in.) Sure, there's quite a few women who'll be happy to be stay at home moms if the guy provides. But how many women are on board with the other parts of traditional relat…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 11:07 PM
5

Solid argument.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:55 PM
7

The product wasn't sold to you in a convincing way because marriage isn't a good product.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:54 PM
12

Yep. If you asked an alien or non-trained AI to evaluate the situation, it'd predict that a 6/10 woman would actively try to be an appealing partner to me, the 7/10 man. And if a 6/10 woman genuinely tried to be a good partner to me (not just in the first month of dating but overall), I'd happily have a relationship with her. Yeah I realize she's not the prettiest person, and that people are imperfect, and that women are women, but all that is completely fine. But in reality, the 6/10 woman prob…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:50 PM
36

I live in a country where prostitution is also legal and affordable. And I am a non-exceptional guy who's dated a lot but just couldn't find a good relationship. Indeed, I agree, and it's not even close from my point of view: Prostitute: + gorgeous women, of a calibre I couldn't bed normally + great sex (if you don't click with someone, just go to a different woman next time) + if you want kinks or non-standard stuff, you can probably find someone who's willing to do that, whereas that's harder …
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:31 PM
7

If a female friend told you that a relationship was a net negative to her, you'd probably advise her to dump him, right? So why aren't men also allowed to not want net negative partners?
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:13 PM
5

While few women have all of the flaws that OP and others have described... the vast majority of women seem to have some of them. It's easy to say "well just don't date women who aren't worth being with" (I mean, yeah, duh) but it's a rare woman that doesn't have something disqualifying, if a man has any amount of self-worth. "Just find a good partner" really is easier said than done. It's really easy to just say things, but not necessarily easy to accomplish those things. Maybe you have an amazi…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 10:05 PM
5

Obviously neither of us can really prove our position, but I think this sub is more diverse than you might realize. Men's rights activists can be anything from married to MGTOW to "trying to find a girlfriend." They can be anything from left to right or in between. Observe that OP clearly isn't getting one type of answer here. You have anything here from "MGTOW is the way" to "dating is fun actually" (yes really, there's someone saying that in this thread) to "yeah dating sucks but men should st…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:54 PM
2

Good point -- probably more women think like you than men realize. I agree. But I still think you're a small minority. If like half of all women thought like you did, there wouldn't be so much raging and blatant anti-male discrimination out there. My experience has very clearly been that most women just aren't open to "men are being seriously discriminated against, average men aren't privileged overall" type of arguments, even if they're well-argued and well-sourced. And if half of all women wer…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:48 PM
4

And your credentials are... what, exactly? It being obvious to you doesn't prove anything, because it's not obvious to me, and you're just a random internet person. And seeing as how I am upvoted and you're downvoted, apparently more people agree with me than with you. Now I'm not saying that the average woman writes exactly like OP does, but if OP is more rational than average, it's also completely possible that she uses slightly atypical language as well for a woman. If a guy writes in a sligh…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:42 PM
5

I really don't know. ChatGPT answered: 🕒 Typical Timeframes for Dead Bedrooms to Manifest Early onset (within 1–2 years): Sometimes happens right after the "honeymoon phase" (first 6–18 months) ends. Often due to mismatched libidos that were previously masked by novelty or infatuation. Can be linked to unresolved resentment, mental health issues, or a lack of sexual compatibility. Mid-term onset (3–5 years): More common in marriages or long-term cohabitating couples. Often related to life stress…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:34 PM
7

I mean, I don't have statistics handy. Maybe you're right. Or maybe you're over-extrapolating the anecdotes of the golden-hearted obese girl, or the black-hearted beautiful girl. Yeah those people exist, yeah these anecdotes are striking and emotionally salient, but that by itself doesn't prove that you're right in general. Though, maybe you are. Maybe most people just aren't attractive enough to be able to date the beautiful golden-hearted girl, so maybe there's a bunch of beautiful golden-hear…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:29 PM
18

It's more common than you'd think. It's just that the average man doesn't want to admit that because he feels it makes him sound dumb / weak. And the more feminist-y type of women (obviously I'm not accusing you of this) will typically push back against that, say it didn't happen, say that only a tiny percentage of women are like that, etc.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:15 PM
9

I agree with you, but there's a whole lot of guys out there who have the subjective experience that no woman has ever truly loved them (even though you're right that some women do truly love men, so it's wrong to say "no woman truly loves a men"). For example, I've had three romantic relationships in my life. I would say none of those women truly loved me -- sure they had a period of raging hormones and sexual attraction towards me, and sure when I was basically pure upside to them they stayed w…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 09:05 PM
20

I think unconditional love should be thought of as a spectrum, not as absolute. After all, almost no one, man or woman, actually loves unconditionally in an absolute way. Picture a person (man or woman) and then picture their partner becoming very unreasonable, very self-destructive, very hard to be around, etc. Most likely the person will eventually dump the misbehaving partner -- and in some cases, leaving would be the only sensible choice. So the unconditionality of love is a spectrum, not an…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 08:58 PM
3

Addressing OP's edit: Every relationship I have observed; my parents, friends, and some of my own experiences, I have seen that men seem to suffer more. While in the relationship, after breakups, in marriage, in divorce. Men always seem to suffer more in the long run. Women suffer more in the short term but recover better in the long term. Indeed. "Males Two Times as Likely to Die From ‘Broken Heart Syndrome, Study Finds": https://www.healthline.com/health-news/men-more-likely-to-die-of-broken-h…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 08:42 PM
22

A book could be written on that topic, but I'd say: The woman and man should either agree on modern gender roles, or traditional gender roles. But the woman doesn't get the benefits of both and the drawbacks of neither, as is typical today. So: - if the couple agrees on traditional gender roles, completely fine. But then the man should be respected and supported and listened to. And while the woman can obviously refuse sex sometimes, she doesn't just get to reduce sex to 1/year or never as some …
/r/MensRights10/06/25 08:13 PM
3

I sort of agree, but obviously, there are real problems. If you think there are no problems, go fix homelessness, or the fentanyl crisis. Or, you know, do a tiny part in helping out. I'd word it as: people are so love-starved that they try go get love by framing themselves as the hero who is unmasking or denouncing the villain.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 08:02 PM
12

Yeah, if you put it like that... it's honestly a bit crazy to realize that the majority of women are a net negative to be in a relationship with. But I honestly believe they are.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 07:04 PM
4

Sorry but this almost certainly not written by a woman It can be. Some women are like that. Sure most aren't, but that doesn't mean that a particular person can't fall on the far side of the bell curve. this person needs to seek some therapy Why? What she said was just simply correct. Note that she wrote "for the most part" and "most of the time" etc, so she's not saying that all women are a net negative (which of course wouldn't be true). Your n = 1 anecdote doesn't prove anything. Yes, amazing…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 07:00 PM
8

Addressing the person rather than the argument isn't valid. If "dating is fun" for you, as you said, you're not an average dude. And that's not a crime, but your advice really doesn't work for average dudes.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:48 PM
4

I love that channel too. It's great, but it's indeed hard to recommend due to its name. Agree that polygamy isn't efficient. I don't know if it'll automatically mean collapse, but it'll certainly get outcompeted by monogamous societies. Good points. Thanks for the high-quality discussion.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:44 PM
4

Why do we have to make everything about "things are hard / scary for women"?
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:42 PM
5

Here's something that's actually a really critical principle to understand in general: For any topic, there will always be scientists who find results point in either direction. If it's socially unacceptable to publish one set of results, then science will always "show" that the politically correct opinion is the current one. So in this case, there's some amount of "men are smarter", some amount of "women are smarter" and some amount of "equally smart" results. "Men are smarter" won't get publis…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:39 PM
1

Something like two thirds of men are either obese or overweight. If you were a normal-weight guy, with a decent job, a reasonable functional outlook, no huge mental health problems, no serious illnesses, no crazy beliefs and you're not ugly or short... then you're probably like a top-10% guy. Sure maybe you actually do have one or two of those drawbacks, but then you're like a top-20% guy. And sure, top-20% guys can certainly find a girlfriend. What I'm saying is that it's entirely possible that…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:34 PM
2

Women are still women. Just because they're traditional, doesn't mean they're not trying to date up. Women are hypergamous and picky, after all. You're probably right that what you say gives you better odds, but those odds are still pretty bad. Plus, I'm just not a Christian, and I genuinely don't believe in that way. It's not really feasible for me to fake being a Christian. And don't traditional women want a provider guy? In this current economy it's not easy to be able to support a family. Su…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:28 PM
12

It can be. Sure OP is very atypical, but women like OP do exist. If you don't believe me, look up "girl writes what" for example. There are a couple of pro-men, rational women out there.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:23 PM
15

I'm 99% certain you're not an average 20 - 25 year old guy today, who's put some time into dating. And I'm also 99% certain you don't understand what dating is like for average 20 - 25 year old guys. Or what it's like to try and date women who grew up with Tinder and tik tok and social media, and with "men are thrash" messaging. You might think I'm unfair, but it sort of feels like we have a bunch of either boomers (non-young men whose same-age women are much higher quality), or people who grew …
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:21 PM
9

https://historum.com/t/throughout-human-history-40-of-men-have-reproduced-compared-to-89-of-women.197048/ says that historically only 40% of men reproduced (and 89% of women -- which yes is possible if top men get multiple wives). I think the odds are worse today because we now have Tinder, so it's really convenient for average women to hook up with top guys. Plus we now have "men are thrash" messaging which wasn't there historically. But yeah. Ultimately we agree, we just have different percent…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:15 PM
5

I'm guessing that in your mind a small minority of women is like that, but in reality pretty much all women are like that. Sure, maybe not in literally all the ways I described, but at least in some of them. And the problem is that the few sane, high-quality women out there are desired by all men, so why wouldn't those women demand exceptional partners. Which I'm not. So I can't get one of the few women worth dating, and the women I can get aren't worth dating. So it's rational for me to go MGTO…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:09 PM
15

That's the eternal "improve yourself and you'll get a girl" advice. And it's not exactly wrong, in fact for some guys it's the exactly right advice, but a lot of guys just can't get there. Maybe they're short. Maybe they have an ugly face. Maybe they were traumatized or abused as children. Maybe they're depressed. Maybe they have a health condition. Maybe they were born with a low IQ (which is quite crippling). Maybe they have a micro-penis. Maybe they were told by their parents "you have to go …
/r/MensRights10/06/25 06:00 PM
3

The women in your age range are MUCH higher quality than the currently 20-something women. Why? The women in your age range didn't grow up with social media and tinder and tik tok and constant "men are awful, women are girl bosses" messaging. Unless you're an average 20-something guy yourself, today, it's almost impossible to truly grasp how much of a dating wasteland it's out there for those men.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:40 PM
18

Doesn't compute. Pretty much all women want the female advantages of modern and traditional gender roles, while giving men none of the male advantages of modern / traditional gender roles. For example: - women want female traditional gender benefits: the man must earn more, and usually pay, and men get screwed in divorce court, and women aren't drafted even in countries where men are (notice how approximately 0 women protest against that) - women deny male traditional gender benefits: men aren't…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:34 PM
2

The women in your age range are MUCH higher quality than the currently 20-something women. Why? The women in your age range didn't grow up with social media and tinder and tik tok and constant "men are awful, women are girl bosses" messaging..
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:33 PM
10

Most men and women outside of reddit give eachother love and support. I mean, half of all marriages end in divorce, and some percentage of the marriages that don't end in divorce can't be described as "both partners give each other love and support". So what you're describing probably only happens are minority of the time. At the end of the day, WHATEVER we get out of it seems to be enough for many Men. You're assuming that men are rational. They aren't. Men in love are stupid. Have you ever not…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:31 PM
14

That'd probably help, but I still think you run into the fundamental problem of: every man wants one of the few available women actually worth dating, so those women are going to demand an exceptional man (and fair enough, I'm not saying they're wrong to do so). Why wouldn't they. So even if you can perfectly vet women (which you're right about, it's important) -- you also need to be an exceptional man yourself. Or you'll spot a great woman, and she'll just reject you. So, that's great for the e…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:27 PM
11

I've tried dating one officially diagnosed autistic girl, and one probably-autistic-but-undiagnosed girl, In both cases, wouldn't recommend. Maybe spectrum girls have better odds, but it's not foolproof.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:23 PM
19

I suspect that in r/askmen people would give all kinds of nonsense "but women are wonderful" or "I love women" type of fluff answers.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:08 PM
28

If you're an average guy dating an average woman, I would expect the sex to be infrequent or to dry up after a period of time. Problem is women probably boinked chad in their younger years, so average men just aren't that sexy to them anymore. Now yes, if you'd a chad yourself that's no problem. If you have a unicorn woman that's no problem. But in general... I wouldn't expect an average guy to be sexually satisfied (after the initial dating period).
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:07 PM
56

But IF a man wants kids, he's better off with a supportive wife than solo. Great relationships are great. But most relationships aren't great.
/r/MensRights10/06/25 05:02 PM
64

You're right, Most women aren't a net positive to a man's life. And an average, non-top-tier man isn't likely to be able to get one of the minority of women who are a net positive to his life. After all, all men want one of those few women, so why wouldn't those women choose a top-tier guy, hence an average guy can't get one of those women. This is why I'm MGTOW even though I'm like a 7/10. I could absolutely find some average or below-average-ish woman, but she wouldn't improve my life. And I c…
/r/MensRights10/06/25 04:58 PM
3

They don't NEED to manipulate men. They could also just, you know, cooperate, be a good person, find a good husband and support him, etc. Does a small, physically weak man need to be a manipulator, even though he couldn't beat up another man physically?
/r/MensRights03/06/25 05:28 PM
3

4'4 guys can say they're 4'4. That'll fool 'em. No one will realize that the person flipped the numbers.
/r/MensRights03/06/25 05:20 PM
2

I agree that chads tend to be on Tinder disproportionally often, but note that 6 foot is just one of women's requirements. I'm over 6 foot, but also quite overweight, and I'm not getting a lot of play. If you calculate out the "6 foot, and not broke, and not overweight, and not mentally ill, and not depressed, and has decent social skills, and is decently experienced in bed, and doesn't have a tiny dick, and has some free time, and has a decent face, and is single" etc etc etc probabilities, the…
/r/MensRights03/06/25 05:18 PM
3

Women don't get rejected that often, but more than you think because when they approach, it tends to be an "average woman approaches a top-20% guy" situation and then the guy might say "no". See https://medium.com/hello-love/women-say-80-of-men-are-below-average-bab0b8af2606
/r/MensRights03/06/25 05:12 PM
2

Problem is that chads have no incentive to stop using those apps. Tinder is amazing if you're a chad. And so long as chad's on there, women are on there as well. If normal dudes stop using the apps, women might actually experience that as a plus -- less noise during their hunt for chad. Or more broadly: half of all women want to fuck the top 10% of men, and the top 10% of men want to fuck half of all women. Us average guys can complain, but neither chad nor women are going to change their behavi…
/r/MensRights03/06/25 05:09 PM
1

I'm sorry, that's awful. I don't want to assume that her reaction would have been more empathetic if I weren't a man I mean, that's probably true of 99% of women. Even men are typically more empathetic towards women than men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 10:01 PM
2

Is it that, or is it just that they want their workhorses to work and not bother them? I'm not convinced that feminists are so resistant about traditional gender norms being violated, because 1) they're violating traditional female gender norms, and 2) if a man wears a dress they'd cheer that on.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 09:58 PM
-2

Collapse.
/r/MensRights01/06/25 09:37 PM
1

The Dems also tell some people what they want to hear -- "minority group, you're victims, and men are at fault" etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 06:05 AM
1

Republicans are for good jobs, they just try to accomplish them in ways that the left doesn't recognize, or doesn't think are good. For example, from the Republican perspective, tariffs + deporting illegals is exactly how you create jobs for average Americans. Now you can disagree, but still, Republicans ARE for good jobs. They just try to accomplish it in another way than the left would.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 06:02 AM
1

What they got in return is large campaign contributions from business. You can certainly see how abandoning those positions in favor of "more immigration, therefore more workers for big business" would make big business want to give the Dems more money. Also, Dems presidents hugely increased their wealth while in office: https://www.newsweek.com/chart-shows-net-worth-us-presidents-before-after-office-1992975 So it's a bit of a deal with the devil that the Dems made.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 06:00 AM
2

You can say they have bad policy, certainly, but they have a policy. For example, "drill baby drill, + shut down electric car subsidies, + deport illegals, + impose tariffs, and that'll create conditions where men can build a good life for themselves because now the government is out of the way and there are jobs available" IS a policy. Sure you can argue it's a bad policy, but it's a policy. Regardless, I would hope that the last elected showed that just saying "Trump bad" isn't good enough.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 05:58 AM
2

I don't think it proceeds from a place of cluelessness. If it were, someone like us would have a conversation with them and they'd immediately switch to treating men better, or doing their own research and then treating men better. I don't think the problem is that they're ignorant. I think the problem is that they hate the average man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 05:55 AM
2

Right. This isn't an oopsie mistake. They simply hate men and this is intentional.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 05:52 AM
3

"Ask not what the Democratic party can do for you – ask what you can do for the Democratic Party. You dirty men."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 05:51 AM
1

Yeah, did that. Cried twice in front of a then-girlfriend. Got dumped both times. I'm single now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/25 03:17 PM
4

I think many women are being truthful when they say they don't want to be approached. Well yeah, women don't want to be approached by men they're not attracted to, which is most men. Most women (not all women) do want to be approached by chad. All the rules you think you know about dating and what women want go out of the window if the guy is hot enough. Women don't present an alternative means of dating to average men because they don't want to date average men. The system is working as intende…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/25 09:27 AM
1

Men are: - more often the victim of violence - more often the victim of domestic abuse - more often the victim of rape, in the US, if you count prison rape How do you explain that 80% of people killing themselves are men? Is it "men are inferior" (that would be sexism) or "men have it worse"? Also, "feel for women and maybe u can be liked"? Women disdain unattractive simps / feminists. The only way to get women to like you is to be an attractive, strong man.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 09:11 AM
5

If I’m talking to a feminist There's your problem. Don't talk to feminists. Even if you have logic and facts on your side, they're just going to resort to personal attacks.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:15 PM
9

They're uncle toms.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:14 PM
1

I'm sorry my dude.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:07 PM
1

There's two, both valid ways of looking at it. From one perspective, you are a literal victim. From another perspective, it's not productive to label yourself as such. Even though it's unfair, you still gotta move forward. (Or move to another country where you won't be found.) I'm sorry, it sucks.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:06 PM
1

Interesting point, but at the end of the day it's still just pussy-worship. They could just tell women signing up to welfare "you're not getting anything because you can work. Don't want to work? Okay, you can starve to death then." You know, like they'd do to men. People act like society bowing down to women is a law of physics, but it's really not. Look at our ancestors, for example.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:04 PM
1

Right. Women worth being with do exist. The problem is just that women seem to insist on dating up by 2-4 points on a ten point scale. So in other words, a woman in my league who would make my life better doesn't want me. A woman who wants me wouldn't make my life better. For example, because her finances are a smoking mess.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 09:01 PM
1

I think a meh woman with a very attractive man possibly doesn't test him because she's (subconsciously?) scared he won't put up with her bullshit and leaves. But hey, more reason to go MGTOW.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 07:53 PM
6

Yep. It's like how women insist on body positivity for women, but not for men. According to women: fat men should hit the gym, or at least shouldn't even talk to women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:55 PM
8

Women like stoic men who give the women what they want, and women don't like stoic men who don't give the women what they want.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:52 PM
17

What women want has always been consistent. It's just so awful that they don't want to say it out loud: Women want hot guys to assertively approach them, and even cat calling / touching on the arms without consent isn't really a problem. Women want non-hot guys to not even look in their direction.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:52 PM
1

I'm starting to think feminism has always been a supremacist movement pretending to be egalitarian. It's just that back when women didn't have the vote, feminism was accidentally on the right side of history. It's like how if you have a hypothetical society where white people are oppressed, white supremacists may accidentally make reasonable arguments and may accidentally be on the right side of history, for a while.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:48 PM
1

You can ask chatgpt to add paragraphs to your writing (and spellcheck / grammar check it if you want).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:47 PM
0

You're redefining the word. Which, sure, you can do, but it won't necessarily lead to people understanding you. While "woke" is poorly defined, it means something like: "people are either victims or oppressors based on which group they're born into."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/25 05:46 PM
4

Men have no rights in Europe. That's true. Overall they're still okay places to live, but don't expect to have rights as a man. Maybe guys have more rights in Eastern Europe, I don't know those countries.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 05:28 PM
15

Average guys probably aren't going to get one of the few wife-quality women. Because those women, shocker, are picky and are going to choose better-than-average guys.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 05:26 PM
1

Sounds like you are / were a top-10% guy or maybe even a top-5% guy. Women are so picky that "just" a top-20% guy doesn't get that kind of mass "fuck me without a condom" interest. Keep in mind that like 75%ish of US guys are overweight or obese. So even if you're just normal weight and otherwise average, you're a top-25% guy. So if you have a normal weight and some other pluses, you might very well be better than a top-20% guy. That's false. The math doesn't check out https://thehill.com/blogs/…
/r/MensRights27/05/25 05:21 PM
2

So if you heavily discriminate against a group... people in that group struggle. Hm. Maybe we should help people in that group. Unless you want to argue that women are inherently superior, but this isn't r/FemaleSupremacyWorld
/r/MensRights27/05/25 05:04 PM
2

What you said, plus, women spend more time looking at super hot guys on screens. Shirtless wolverine 20 years ago looked pretty normal, whereas shirtless wolverine today has a one in ten thousand physique.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 05:02 PM
5

Why would they date there own level when they have access to men in the top percentile? Because they can only have sex with top-tier men. They can't get commitment from top-tier men.
/r/MensRights27/05/25 04:56 PM
2

Yes, and sometimes women aren't even treated badly by attractive guys. Sometimes the women offer free, no-strings attached sex and the hot guys are like "sure." And then the hot guys refuse to commit to those women, which the women don't like, but is that really the hot guys treating women badly? Or were the women just delusional / vainly trying to fish for commitment from out-of-their-league guys? If I give a hot, out-of-my-league woman a present, and then she refuses to date me, no one would s…
/r/MensRights27/05/25 04:55 PM
1

Cool, but one of the two is going to be in power realistically speaking. Feel free to start a men's rights party and win the 2028 US presidential election.
/r/MensRights26/05/25 10:36 AM
2

Well yes that's a bias that people have. But women want it both ways. They want to be the vulnerable people who need special protection, AND the boss babes who aren't vulnerable at all and therefore are just as capable of being a CEO. Meanwhile, men don't get protection, but they also don't get the benefit of "you're powerful actors, so you should be the head of the household / the CEO." Really it's just female supremacism at this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 09:47 AM
1

Women want the traditional advantages ("he must provide") and the modern advantages (discriminatory pro-female hiring). Women deny men the traditional advantages (he's not the head of the household, he's not entitled to sex, he's not the only one with the vote) and the modern advantages (we're going to have blatant pro-female bias in divorce court and criminal court). It goes without saying that I would only consider a serious relationship with a woman who shares my values ​​on this aspect, whic…
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:25 AM
1

Do you care about your society going into the toilet? I do. If you don't, well it's going to affect you. For example, good luck trying to get money from the government at old age if feminism killed relationships and now there are way too few young people working. Also, we might literally start seeing large-scale violence, which is what often happens when young men feel they have no future. Yes that's going to affect you too. Obviously I'm not saying that women should be forced to marry people ag…
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:18 AM
1

I prefer the party that doesn't care about me, to the party that actively tries to implement discriminatory policies against me.
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:16 AM
5

I think that has less to do with the average guy really deeply hating people from that other country, and more men being forced to go fight in wars. Who causes wars? Hateful men, or weapon dealers / bankers who want to profit?
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:11 AM
4

Yeah but the problem is that those 30-something women who want stable provider type of men probably aren't sexually attracted to those men, especially if they spent their 20s banging chads. Want to end up in a dead bedroom marriage? Be a stable provider guy and marry a 30-something woman.
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:07 AM
2

Literally every other sub is already about women being oppressed. Go to one of those and let men have one sub for ourselves.
/r/MensRights26/05/25 09:05 AM
9

That's why I'm MGTOW. Most women are like that, unless you're a very attractive man, then she might not test you. And it's easy to say "just find a good woman" but it's also very easy to say "just become a billionaire with a six-pack." Really easy to just say things.
/r/MensRights26/05/25 08:52 AM
4

You're not completely wrong, but you're overstating how important it is to beat shit tests and understating how important it is to be hot. Try being an ugly short dude in 2025 who's a master at beating shit tests. Guaranteed you're going to have less success than you might think. Try being a hot chad who has no idea what a shit test even is. Easy hookups all day every day. Beating shit tests used to be more important than it's now. Now, in 2025, looks is where it's at. Some sources showing that …
/r/MensRights26/05/25 08:51 AM
2

If you just want a physique that women are attracted to, you can do that natty without it being unhealthy. It's only when you define "great physique" as something with a very low body fat that it becomes unhealthy. But you don't need to be that low body fat for women to have a body that women like. Sure you won't have a fitness-influencer physique but you don't need that to get laid / keep the wife happy.
/r/MensRights25/05/25 09:40 AM
1

True, but the kind of body that women are sort of expecting and attracted to is still like a top-10% male body. (Consider how like 70+ percent of guys are overweight or obese. So just gym-fit but not insane is a top-10% body.)
/r/MensRights25/05/25 09:38 AM
1

Right. Dad bod means "a top-1% physique, but someone who isn't either a roided up mass monster or someone at 6% body fat."
/r/MensRights25/05/25 09:35 AM
1

Everyone claims "I worked really hard, and only ate broccoli and rice and lean protein, and also I have insane genetics, and that's why I look like this." But statistically speaking, most of those guys with "this is maybe possible with really hard work and insane genetics" are just on the juice. It's like they refuse to understand how it works Women have no idea about the struggles of being a man. They just want an effortless winner, and think that if a guy spends an hour per week in the gym he'…
/r/MensRights25/05/25 09:35 AM
1

They're basically uncle toms. They think that if they sell out their brothers, they get some crumbs.
/r/MensRights25/05/25 07:12 AM
4

An issue of reddit is that mods can more or less do whatever they want. I'm sure if you asked reddit's CEO if hatred against men is okay, he'd say "no." But a reddit mod can be blatantly sexist against men and face no repercussions.
/r/MensRights25/05/25 07:09 AM
5

Yes, and why did their mothers choose to have children with bad / absent fathers? I thought that women had these amazing emotional intelligence and person-reading skills. If it's not their father, it's the old "average woman bangs a chad and is then bitter because she can't get commitment from high-quality men, and the average woman refuses to 'settle' for average men." Shoutout to https://medium.com/hello-love/women-say-80-of-men-are-below-average-bab0b8af2606
/r/MensRights24/05/25 03:27 PM
3

"Bold of you to assume that women’s happiness is tied to relationship status." It is. Yes twenty-something and thirty-something women who can get laid via tinder in 20min are perfectly happy while not being in a relationship. However single, childless women aged 50+ are typically not happy. (Sure, exceptions exist. Also, people lie about how happy they are.) "Men are less likely to seek mental health support." -- well yes, all of psychology is very feminine and anti-masculine. There's outright t…
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:53 AM
1

Sort of, but what you're not factoring in is that you have men who openly have multiple girlfriends.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:49 AM
1

I mean, at one point white men had all the levers of power in the US. And then they gave equal rights to black people and to women. White men could just have said "no, screw you" and retained their power. But they didn't.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:47 AM
2

Most feminists aren't logically / internally consistent, they just use whatever argument is convenient in the moment to win and that's it.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:45 AM
3

"I don't control my uterus enough to be able to get invested yet" Yes, because before the repeal of Roe v Wade, there were million-women marches every month to demand fairer treatment of men.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:43 AM
2

Okay, so men should be discriminated against, because a few men online are mean. Cool.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:42 AM
2

A whole lot of women don't care, and / or don't want to help. More than 7%. In fact it sounds closer to the truth that 7% actively hate men and want to hurt them, and then there's a group that just doesn't care, and then there's a group (far smaller than 93%) that cares and wants to help. And of the women who theoretically think "yeah men are treated poorly" -- if they never speak up, they're not really helping, are they. The group who women who actively speaks up to help men is like... 5-10%, a…
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:40 AM
3

Right. If I wrote "I'm a radical masculinist and egalitarian" women wouldn't believe I was actually an egalitarian.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:39 AM
1

Of course men understand what it's like to be men better than women do. In the same way that women understand what it's like to be a woman than men do. But women just speaking out against obvious anti-male discrimination is very valuable, because people actually listen to women. It's fine if she doesn't understand every single nuance of being a male.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:38 AM
2

I think a lot of women support men's rights very theoretically, but never speak out in favor of them or lift a finger for them. (Of course, some do.) Or they support "men's rights, certainly, but first we need to focus on the plight of this other group over there" (and sometimes that's accomplished by preferentially hiring that group over white men). In that same way I support the right of Zimbabwean farmers to have a good life. But of course that's so theoretical that one could question if I'm …
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:34 AM
5

Fair points, and I appreciate you posting and caring. It's clashing a bit in my head that: - on one hand I'm told that women are kind, fairness-minded, compassionate and emotionally intelligent people - on the other hand you're telling me that if women aren't explicitly told that men can be victims, women fail to realize that or don't care about that - and on the third hand when I try to inform a woman about men's plight, they're very rarely open to listening and are quite often actively hostile…
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:27 AM
1

Either there are vanishingly small numbers of "true" leftists, or they only theoretically care about men's rights and in practice spend about zero time lobbying for men's rights.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:21 AM
1

If it's just a "small retarded percentage" of the left that hates men, then those are the ones who are actually getting policy implemented / implementing policy. The majority of the left doesn't even speak up against the mistreatment of men (except maybe if you prod them specifically in conversations like this), while they are voting for misandrist politicians, so they're not exactly a part of the solution.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:20 AM
1

Yes, white men unironically are oppressed. Not as oppressed as some groups historically were, but still. Just being sarcastic and cruel isn't an argument.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:18 AM
2

Most people are primarily interested in their own interests and in feeling good, not in truth. That's why it's hard to make people understand that.
/r/MensRights24/05/25 05:15 AM
4

I know it's what you're supposed to say to be politically correct, but AFAB aka "assigned female at birth" is such a stupid term. She was probably "assigned female at birth" because she, you know, was female. At least before the transition. I have no problem with saying that a trans man is male, but it's stupid to pretend that that person wasn't female back when she was a just-born baby.
/r/MensRights17/05/25 12:53 PM
2

Partly yes, but the dominant culture still sees men as being evil / privileged / oppressors while it sees trans men as good / victims / deserves help and sympathy. Sure I get that trans men look like men ideally, but then again they don't always, and they can just say "I'm a trans man" and get the social benefits of that. But yes, obviously it has downsides too.
/r/MensRights17/05/25 12:51 PM
27

Fat and ugly dudes are treated worse than fat and ugly women. Yeah sure maybe fat and ugly women are treated worse than handsome men, but that's not a fair comparison. "Honestly you have to factor in that women in general have more negative feelings." -- well yeah that's because of feminism. Back when women were stay-at-home moms under traditional gender roles, they were happier than men are. Nowadays, thanks to feminism, women are unhappier than men are.
/r/MensRights15/05/25 11:07 AM
8

Indeed, good point. Big corporation's biggest expense is labor, and labor obeys supply and demand laws, hence big business has less expenses when the labor pool is bigger. It's darkly funny that the left pretends that they're the anti-big-business ones, while they led the charge to get women to work, and then expand immigration. Which is exactly what big business wanted.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:34 PM
12

Right. I'd absolutely date men if I was equally attracted to men and women. It's pretty insane that women had this amazing deal going where they had cushy stay-at-home positions, and then they decided they wanted to beat the patriarchy by becoming career women.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:26 PM
14

The whole "education means sitting still for eight hours and regurgitating what the teacher said" is more suited to girls than to boys. Not to mention that in this world of smartphones, memorizing facts isn't as useful as it once was. Replace that with a "we're going to build things with our hands" centric education system and instantly boys would do better. And you can teach a lot of stuff as it becomes relevant to doing practical things in the real world. For example, some math and budgeting n…
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:11 PM
21

Right. If I could easily find a partner who'd let me be a stay at home partner, I'd consider that to be a great deal and a huge privilege. Maybe maintaining the house was hard work when people had 9 children and all the laundry had to be done by hand in the local river. But in 2025 it's a joke.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:06 PM
23

Needing to be the decision maker and protector and provider, and being held accountable if I'm wrong (unlike women). Being seen as guilty until proven innocent just because I'm a man. Needing to be stoic (cry in front of your girlfriend and see how quick she loses attraction to you). Living in a society that discriminates against me while I'm told that I'm privileged.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:03 PM
2

Yeah. A guy who's committed to being single will often be very non-materialistic. He may drive a very old car saying "hey, it works fine." He might be happy living in a tiny apartment because it has everything he needs. It's women, and men who want to attract women, who are materialistic.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 08:01 PM
3

European queens waged more wars than European kings. If we want to talk about women doing violence by proxy.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 07:58 PM
2

Didn't read thoroughly enough, sorry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/25 06:55 PM
8

Nearly every man who gets married thinks the marriage will last. Otherwise he wouldn't get married. So low-quality women are simply too good at temporarily pretending to be quality women, for your strategy of "just marry a good woman" to work.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:55 PM
19

Problem is that non-quality women are often quite good at temporarily acting like a quality woman. No one gets married thinking "she's going to divorce me and ruin my life", right?
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:52 PM
3

Largely true, and interesting point. However some men are masculine in a spiritual or religious sense. A Christian martyr who was willing to be executed for his beliefs? I'd consider that guy pretty masculine. Jesus or the Buddha? They're low on "Fighting, Fornicating and Feeding" but I wouldn't label them as "unmasculine."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/25 01:47 PM
1

Most guys driving around in the car their mother bought them don't have the attitude of "I need a woman like a fish needs a bicycle." You sort of have a point, but also sort of not.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:39 PM
31

Right. Women play the "we're so weak" card when it suits them and the "we're at least as competent as men at literally everything" card when it suits them.
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:15 PM
10

Relatively more controversial examples Picture a toxic teenage girl. The toxic teenage girl is basically our dominant culture. So for example: - if someone says something you dislike, engage in personal attacks and reputation destruction. Beat them with gotchas and soundbites. That's what a toxic teenage girl does, and that's our dominant culture. - The toxic teenage girl doesn't think ahead and isn't logical, and rather acts on feelings. Same goes for our dominant culture. - The toxic teenage g…
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:11 PM
22

Relatively less controversial examples: - women wanting the perks of equality but not the responsibilities of equality (non-discrimination against men); and the perks of traditionalism (lighter sentences for women, alimony) but not the responsibilities of equality - women pushing anti-male discrimination, and the "good women" not speaking out against it at all - anti-male hatred - women being hypergamous and picky, while pretending they're not - women trying to use children or pregnancies to get…
/r/MensRights14/05/25 01:10 PM
2

What exactly is "their own version of this"? Most men and most women are pro-woman and anti-man. Hard to think of something that would actually work in reality (just saying "do X" is easy).
/r/MensRights14/05/25 04:42 AM
1

I'd put it as: men in fiction are either the heroes, or they're idiots, or they're villains, or they're unimportant background characters. But yes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/25 08:52 PM
26

Most people are sympathetic towards women but not men. If women cry, they get what they want. If men cry, people lose respect for them.
/r/MensRights13/05/25 08:49 PM
2

Kudo's.
/r/MensRights10/05/25 08:25 AM
7

Most people, men and women, are lemmings who just go along with the dominant culture. This is why women seem so callous towards men's issues. I don't believe that women are just inherently uncaring. I think they are simply going along with the dominant culture, and the dominant culture says "women / minorities are the victims, men are privileged and quite possibly oppressors." Dominant culture says that men's problems aren't an issue, so most men similarly just go along with that. Then there's a…
/r/MensRights10/05/25 05:33 AM
24

"We can't find workers" always means "we can't find workers willing to work for a low wage."
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:45 AM
22

Right. There's a whole host of people saying "young men are struggling" and offer as a 'solution' "young men need to behave in ways that are beneficial for society." The problem is that young men are the group that's being screwed over the most, so they have the least incentive to be self-sacrificing in order to maintain a society that hates them. So you have people benefitting from society, telling people who are getting screwed by society "go maintain society." Geeh, thanks. How about women an…
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:42 AM
33

Similarly, women were told that being a mother was bad and being a career women was good. Which has led us to now.
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:37 AM
10

Only a tiny part of people who go to college go into liberal arts. All else being equal, a woman would rather date a programmer or a lawyer or a doctor than a plumber or electrician -- even if they make the same amount of money. Women have a general association of college-educated white collar guys as being good partners, and blue collar guys as being not as desirable (though yes, exceptions exist). So on that basis, telling men "go into the trades" is telling them to go against incentives.
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:36 AM
3

In 2008 the Justice Department) released a report that indicated that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the United States that year. Because of the high prison population in the United States the country has become probably the first and only in the world where rape of men is more common than of women.\6])\7])\8])\9]) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_rape_in_the_United_States
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:31 AM
9

Sorry, dude. I empathize.
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:17 AM
23

Right. Even the "good women" have as their solution: "us women are great as we are, it's you men who need to do better." Woman is divorced => it's the man's fault, man is divorced => it's the man's fault. Woman unhappy in relationship => man needs to make changes, man unhappy in relationship => man needs to make changes Woman can't orgasm => man needs to make changes, man can't orgasm => man needs to make changes I don't think women understand this "equality" concept very well. Specifically, equ…
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:17 AM
24

Sorry, dude. I had a financially struggling girlfriend who I helped back on her feet and helped get on a path towards a good-earning job. The second her situation looked stable and her path looked solid, she told me "either agree to open up our relationship, or I am probably going to cheat on you." (Before then we had a normal closed monogamous relationship, and she had never even brought up an open relationship / polygamy.) Being a fool who was in love, I agreed to an open relationship. She imm…
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:09 AM
26

Right, why sign a contract if the other side can unilaterally break it, and if they do, they get your stuff and you get fucked.
/r/MensRights09/05/25 06:04 AM
7

Well, women often don't realize what life is like for men, at all, or what men actually need. So even psychology women who don't have a grudge against men will develop a female-centric approach that's, I presume, suitable for women (lots of talking and emphasis on feeling). But it's not necessarily suitable for men (which would be more practical, action-focused and coaching-like and more focused on building a good life). But yes, the fact that female psychologists often have an actual grudge aga…
/r/MensRights08/05/25 05:22 AM
3

Women: "Ugh! men don't interact with us anymore! How can we be offended and call them out for their misogyny if they don't interact with us!?" Don't worry, I've seen women cry "misogyny" because men didn't interact with them. Women don't need us to do anything to be offended by us. If we ignore them, that's offensive too. Not even making this up. Not all women, of course, but some.
/r/MensRights08/05/25 05:13 AM
16

Do you think it would be okay for a male boss to tell a female underling "you know, on some quiet days like these when I get bored, I look at you and some other women in this office and I try to imagine what kind of sexual stuff you're into and how rough/soft you like it''. Most people would answer "no." Oceans of ink have been spilled about the inability of people to freely consent if there's a power imbalance. If it's not okay for male => female, it's not okay for female => male. Though of cou…
/r/MensRights08/05/25 05:08 AM
10

The brutal truths are: - the average woman doesn't want the average man - most men aren't able to become a top tier man just by working hard - men who are attractive to women, often aren't primarily attractive to them because of virtue or because of how good their game and approach skills are or how confident they are (although that helps). Often they're primarily attractive for shallow reasons -- hotness, bad boy attitude, wealth, high status, power, etc. - even if you can somehow game or confi…
/r/MensRights07/05/25 07:25 PM
3

For both initial attraction and having sex, confidence matters but isn't as important as people argue it is. But I guess we just disagree. So fine, let's agree to disagree.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 07:14 PM
1

I mean, feminism obviously means pro-female advocacy. It's literally in the name, and it's also how feminists usually behave. People just try to gaslight you into believing that feminism is an actual equality movement. But if I invented a masculinism movement, people would immediately assume that to be a pro-male advocacy movement. Because that's what the word masculinism clearly means.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 06:25 PM
1

What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Otherwise, I assert a tiny Russell's tea pot is orbiting around Earth, and if you can't disprove that then it's there. The only situation in which she might have a point is: people might have more sympathy for a very well-liked famous man than for an average woman. But of course that's not a fair comparison.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 06:20 PM
3

Confidence surely helps, but I don't think confidence is as important as most people think it is: - modern dating is often done via online sites, and there looks matter more than confidence. So "confidence is key" maybe used to be true, but it's not true anymore (as much). - people have gotten pickier due to online dating, meaning that being confident doesn't allow you to get into someone's pants as easily - often confident people are actually people who are experienced / successful / handsome /…
/r/MensRights07/05/25 06:18 PM
7

I find that one of the very few ways in which you can get women to empathize with sort-of-average dudes is by having mothers realize what their sons are going through.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 06:10 PM
2

Agree, I think that grassroots "talk to the people you know" is the best option. There's simply not enough societal support for us to make "big moves." So continue building grassroots support, one conversation at a time. Women may have a bit more leeway -- a male person of our group probably won't be listened to (much), but a woman of our group may be able to start a successful podcast or youtube channel or something.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 04:46 PM
1

Good point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 04:43 PM
-1

People don't want to say "sex" to indicate male / female because it sounds a bit dirty and impolite. You can argue that's just people being stupid, but it's still how most people are. So to the average person on the street, "gender" is the word they use to indicate what academics call "sex." I don't think it's helpful that academics overwrote the definition of "gender." If they must make a sex / gender distinction, then keep the gender definition as normal people have it (so if you have a penis …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 04:41 PM
3

Yeah, men in modern movies are nearly always: - minor / background characters - villains - or truly exceptional men And that's pretty much it. Even though in reality, like 95% of men are neither movie villains nor truly exceptional.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 04:17 PM
-1

frankly many [women] don’t even think those men are human beings with thoughts and feelings. Yes, but I (perhaps naively) think of this as just humans following their basic biological template -- which is something that can be transcended with consciousness and attention. Just as men have learned not to just lie to women, impregnate them and then leave -- or swap out their wives for "younger models" -- so too do I think that women can learn to treat men as human beings. I mean, the alternative i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 04:07 PM
1

I don't think it's disturbing. Some women overthink a lot, so if they can stop the monkey mind and just be for a while, then I can certainly see that being nice. People who meditate try to achieve an empty mind. Also, maybe you don't personally want to be in that energy at all, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean that it's bad for other people to be in that energy. What I do think is: "if men are supposed to protect you, then what do men get in return? If the answer is 'nothing' then you're n…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 02:53 PM
1

Yeah, even the non-insane women seem to want to get the perks of traditional gender relations, but not the responsibilities; and also the perks of modern equality, but not the responsibilities. Often I think "if men need to do X, what do men get in return? Nothing? And you call that equality?" Outside of perhaps a very few women who are very explicitly men's rights activists, I've never heard a women advocate for either - traditional gender relations including all the stuff that isn't favorable …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 02:44 PM
6

You see, many people didn't receive enough love when they were children. So to compensate, they virtue signal, and try to get love that way. However, the demand for racism / sexism is larger than the supply. And besides, if you point to someone whom everyone already agrees is a horrible racist, then you're not getting special attention. Therefore Latin X was invented, so that people who didn't get enough love as a child could virtue signal with it.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 12:27 PM
6

I'm sorry. That's not okay.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 12:24 PM
29

Indeed. For some reason, when women think of men, they tend to think of either completely awful men, or of men who are significantly more successful than average. As you point to, the whole "men are privileged" and patriarchy type of arguments seem to come from women looking at billionaire men. But those are a vanishingly small percentage, and I don't benefit from some guy being a billionaire. Also, the average woman seems to think that the average guy can get laid or get into a relationship pre…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 12:22 PM
-3

A lot of people would disagree with you and say that sex is the inborn thing and gender is a social construct. Though I think that's just a stupid way of defining things -- if you let me make definitions that others are forced to use, I can win pretty much any argument that way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 12:15 PM
2

You can have two types of education. One is a model that's better for girls. It's the "sit still and repeat what the teacher told you" model. Another is a model that's better for boys. It's the "plenty of movement, making stuff, fixing stuff with your hands, competition" model. We chose the "good for girls" model. So yes now girls do better in education. But that's because of the model that we chose, not because girls are somehow inherently better.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 12:13 PM
24

I don't think that's it. I think what women want is: - hot dudes should cat call her (and touch her on e.g. the arms or shoulders without asking for consent, etc) - ugly dudes should not even look at her. If he dares to cat call her, she'll get upset. So theoretically it's an internally consistent (though unspoken) position: hot guys should catcall, ugly guys should be quiet.
/r/MensRights07/05/25 08:27 AM
1

Women are currently the ones with institutionalized power and privilege. Just because most people in power have penises, doesn't mean that they're rigging society in favor of men. That's just female projection (because some women would actually rig things in favor of themselves if they were in power).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:57 AM
3

A while ago I heard a mid-40s man, who has a wife and children and a very comfortable amount of money, argue that young men need to work hard to fix / maintain / improve society. I don't think he understood that he had wife and children and a good amount of money, i.e. he was very invested in maintaining society -- but young men often don't have all or even any of those things. So the people who are benefitting from the status quo, are expecting the people who are being crushed by the status quo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:54 AM
1

You don't know how old the person you're replying to is, or when they became awake to this. It's not necessarily "bad" that they're now just deeply realizing it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:51 AM
3

You're just defining the left as good and the right as bad, and proceeding from there. But that doesn't actually make sense: right-wingers aren't the ones pushing misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:48 AM
3

Yep. Unfortunately, the reality is that the Dems and feminists are just a female supremacy movement, not an actual equality movement.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:45 AM
3

The abused turning into abusers... a tale as old as time. But not justified, of course.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:43 AM
1

For most of history, sure. But there's no real reason why we couldn't have kept going with the "one working man can support a family including a woman who doesn't have to work" model that already physically existed. Labor too obeys supply and demand laws. It's no real mystery that when the pool of workers roughly doubled (women started working), the price of labor roughly halved, and then soon after men and women NEEDED to work to support a family. All that was gained was... more profit for big …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:39 AM
1

Indeed. And easy, no-fault divorce, with the woman probably getting alimony and the kids, also leads to more situations where women initiate divorce (women usually are the ones to initiate it) for just "I'm bored" type of reasons. And divorce is horrible for the children. It's easy to say "divorce is best for the kids" and yes sometimes it is, but sometimes it isn't.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:32 AM
1

Well written. Obviously big business is hugely influential in our society, and what do they want? Lower expenses. What's a company's largest expenses? Labor, usually. How do you lower labor costs? Increase the supply of workers, because due to supply-and-demand economics 101, that reduces the price of labor. How do you increase the supply of workers? Get women to work, and increase immigration. It's darkly funny that the mainstream left has been doing what big business wants them to do (get wome…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:29 AM
3

Obviously I disagree with it, but I see more and more young men saying that women shouldn't get to vote. So yes indeed, keep oppressing men and men might turn around and actually start oppressing women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:26 AM
3

Problem is, the mainstream Dems ALSO think of themselves as the "real progressives." So how can we claim to actually be the real ones? There's more of them than there are of us. Isn't progressivism just what most people say it is? And you can make an argument against that, but a feminist will also have an argument why you're not a real progressive and they are.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:23 AM
2

They're so different that I think it's clearer to just say there's logic and there's emotions, and not invent the term "emotional logic." Two rational people will agree that certain statements are logical, and certain aren't. If rational people disagree, usually they can have a logical argument and they might be able to sway each other. But two emotional people may have completely different and irreconcible differences of opinion, and there's usually no realistic way to reconcile it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:21 AM
2

Yeah. It's also making me see the Dems as just a "we care about women and certain minorities" advocacy group, rather than think of them as an actual equality movement. Which means that their self-congratulatory "we're the good guys" stance is just hypocrisy. Not to say that the republicans are amazing, but the Dems act like they're better than them, when really the Dems and GOP just look like advocacy groups for different people (women / minorities / poor people vs "native born Americans" and ri…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/25 07:15 AM
2

Just because orange man bad, doesn't mean that people are going to vote for the Dems. I expect that if you reran the election today, most young men would still vote Trump -- maybe with less enthusiasm, but just because orange man bad doesn't mean that young men suddenly want to vote for the party that openly blames them for everything and discriminates against them. Also, don't almost all president's approval ratings decline once they're actually in office? So to be rigorous, you'd have to compa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/25 04:24 PM
3

Here are sources claiming Hillary had a >= 90% chance to win: https://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2016/10/18/presidential-forecast-updates/newsletter.html https://www.reuters.com/article/world/clinton-has-90-percent-chance-of-winning-reutersipsos-states-of-the-nation-idUSKBN1322J0/ (based on https://www.ipsos.com/en/2016-us-pre-elections-clinton-has-90-chance-winning-november-7 ) https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/25 04:17 PM
1

"Complete toss-up" is a bad prediction when the reality was that Trump easily beat Kamala. Republicans usually lose the popular vote but maybe win via the electoral college; but Trump won not just via the electoral college but actually via the popular vote, which is quite rare for republicans to do. And saying "Hillary has a 70% chance to win", but then Hillary loses, again points to Trump overperforming compared to predictions. And I shared some sources here that gave Hillary a >90% chance to w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/25 04:16 PM
19

So long as the Dems are going to continue actively demonizing and discriminating against men, most men are going to vote Republican, no matter how imperfect and out of touch they might be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/25 12:22 PM
66

This also isn't helped by the fact liberal and even actual left-leaning groups don't do a whole lot for men. You're understating it. Liberal groups tend to be actively hostile to men, and actively promote (informal) discrimination against men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/25 12:20 PM
12

Source: "Young Men Research Project" Description: Gen Z’s political gender gap has exploded in the US and globally. YMRP researches the gender gap and supports campaigns to engage young men on progressive issues in 2025 and beyond. Donate at: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/youngmenresearchinitiative So this is a graph made by group that's explicitly affiliated with the Democratic party: - they have an act blue donate link in their description - their goal is to "engage young men on progressiv…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/25 12:16 PM
2

Yes, but objectively speaking, sometimes one side is right and one is not, regardless of whether some people are delusional. If you need proof that men are being systemically discriminated against, just read this subreddit for a bit. I'm all for ending the gender war, but I don't have a "end anti-male discrimination" button I can press. And it's not really ending the gender war so long as men are being discriminated against.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/25 08:01 PM
1

The good feminists are useful idiots at this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/25 11:41 AM
1

I wonder what "Toxic femininity" would apply to? maybe malicious gossip? Here are some examples of toxic feminism: - excessive / unbalanced caretaking of minorities: discrimination in favor of women / minorities during hiring processes, being fine with unrestricted illegal immigration - excessive / unbalanced caretaking of the vulnerable:, covid lockdowns - excessive focus on preventing people's feelings from being hurt: censorship, political correctness, deplatforming, banning people - maliciou…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/25 11:26 AM
1

I don't love that statement because toxic masculinity -- men being bad toxic femininity -- pressure on women to be bad Let's hold women equally accountable as men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/25 11:21 AM
1

When the phrase "toxic femininity" is used as often as often as "toxic masculinity", then I'll start accepting toxic masculinity as a valid phrase. Until then, it's just a one-sided clobbering against men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/25 11:19 AM
1

A lot of men do -- but men can't really say that out loud, because there's always people who are going to call them incels, or give them unwelcome unsolicited advice like "have you tried dating sites" and stuff. So men are quietly giving up, rather than loudly giving up, because they don't want to get harassed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 04:09 PM
2

I don’t think you guys can advocate for yourselves. 1) no one will listen to you, no matter what you say or how you say it you will come off as misogynists and incels. 2) quite frankly you can’t fix the problem just advocating for “your side” as this is a systemic problem and in order to fix it, it will require a whole of society effort. Yes, you're right. So thanks for advocating for boys / men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 04:04 PM
2

In most places, unmarried men have every right and freedom that unmarried women have. In theory yes, in practice no. For example, there's huge discrimination in hiring processes against men. Men get worse grades than girls in school. Why? Just the "women are wonderful" effect. Men receive harsher punishments for the same crime. There's women-only scholarships when already more women attend university. There's far fewer male-only shelters. Men aren't allowed to make male-only clubs (women are). T…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 04:00 PM
3

Every time when a men’s organisation is created with good intentions, it quickly gets overrun with “trad” incels who have no interest in solutions, but just want to oppose women having basic freedoms. Proof that happens "every time"? Source, links? You alleging that it happened "many times", without sources / links, isn't proof that it happens "every time." Your personal anecdotes are pretty worthless when it comes to proving that "every time X happens." I can just as easily "prove" that any mov…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:55 PM
40

Legally discrimination against men is illegal, so you're unlikely to find too many organizations that literally have "let's discriminate against men" or "we hate men" as their mission statement. I think in 99% of cases it'll be cloaked in superficially-nice language: promoting equality, helping women, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:45 PM
2

One option is to simply not argue with / against people who use the "pick me girl" insult. Such arguments are unlikely to be productive. Sometimes the only winning move is not to play. Being a woman calling out feminists, misandry and bringing facts about men's issues makes me a target for being name called 'pick-me girl'. Sorry for your troubles, yet also thanks, you're doing amazing work.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:43 PM
1

Yep. The article literally opens by saying: "For Democrats, reaching male voters became a political necessity after last fall’s election, when young men swung significantly toward President Donald Trump." Admittedly then it goes on to say "but people really care too, it's not just a political necessity." But still. It's undeniable that this is a topic because the Dems realized that if they say "fuck you" to half the country, they can't win elections.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:42 PM
1

I get this is subjective, but I don't think of Gavin Newsom as particularly masculine. Putting it in other words, does a teenage boy think Gavin Newsom is inspiring / cool? Probably not. But he may very well think that about John Brown, The Roosevelts, MLK, Malcolm X, JFK, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:36 PM
1

It's not just "fuck you" -- It's a good bet that if the Dems had gotten into power, more anti-male legislation had been greenlit (or at least more people who in practical terms are acting in ways that disadvantage men just for being men). There's a lot to dislike about Trump, but the mainstrean left is the source of the anti-male legislation, and Trump isn't. So it's understandable that some men are drawn to the left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:32 PM
1

According to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAZIEKvYeXY Trump said "manhood is under attack." But yeah, Trump isn't a great men's rights advocate. It's more that Trump isn't actively trying to enact anti-male discrimination, unlike the mainstream left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/25 03:30 PM
11

Yeah. Pretty much everyone tends to accept very weak forms of argument as valid if they support their existing worldview. But if you present something that runs counter to their worldview, suddenly they're hyper-critical, and only the highest standards of evidence can even be considered. For example: an anecdote that confirms their worldview is valid proof and is "lived experience", but an anecdote that refutes their worldview isn't worth anything.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/25 08:38 AM
2

Ah, must be my privilege.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/25 08:35 AM
1

I don't think that hating MAGA people is justified, unless you have the additional information that they're doing bad thing X. Trump won the popular vote. We're going to hate the majority of the country now? If I’m honest with myself I legitimately think my ideas are superior, so in a sense I feel above them. And it makes me feel less insecure. Are you able to see that both the mainstream left and the mainstream right have some good points but also some nonsense that they're pushing? Not necessa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/25 08:31 AM
0

Most writers go unheard. I think overall in our current culture, black men have a slightly higher chance of being published and taken seriously than white men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/25 08:28 AM
5

I think the whole "right-wingers are all racists and they all actively mistreat black / latino people" is a bit overblown. I think that's more a talking point than actual reality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 07:46 PM
6

Vance is probably going to win in 2028. Why? Because some leftists keeps doing this shit and being completely unrepentant about it -- and the vast majority of the rest of the left isn't calling them out (we're an exception, but we're also comparatively tiny). If the left declares half the population to be the enemy, then yes Vance will in fact be elected in 2028.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:49 PM
6

Imagine if we had a show where adult men were sitting down teenage girls and giving them lengthy lectures about not being misandrist, and the girls weren't allowed to leave.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:44 PM
7

What's harming me as a man isn't misogyny (although obviously women shouldn't be discriminated against, etc etc) What's harming me as a man is literal systemic anti-male discrimination... which is often pushed by the very people who claim that "misogyny harms men." Gender-swap your argument: misandry harms women, therefore we need to sit teenage girls down and have adult men lecture them about not being misandrist. And not just briefly but for an extended period of time, and no the girls aren't …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:41 PM
12

On top of the obvious arrogance and condescension: talking in an excessively complex way is a stupid person's idea of a smart person. People who are actually smart are able to convey relatively complex ideas in concise, understandable terms. It's the people who can only convey ideas in lengthy jargon-filled word salads who are the ones who are actually not as smart as they think they are.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:36 PM
11

Some leftists think that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid or evil. Hence all the "men are incels" and "toxic masculinity" type of rhetoric, and now also the "dum men not understand big wurds" thing. It's probably people wanting to see themselves as heroic and super intelligent saviors, and hence if people disagree with them those people must be stupid or evil.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:32 PM
14

Yeah the the right lies, but they actually pretend to listen. And also, they're not the ones pushing the anti-male discrimination. There's a lot lot to criticize about the right, but the anti-male discrimination comes from the left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:30 PM
18

False allegations are mostly a non-issue Says who? Sure the statistics say it rarely happens... but I'm sure something is only listed as a false allegation in the statistics if the woman says "yeah okay I made it up." I'm sure false accusations happen that aren't recorded as such in the official statistics. Which means we don't actually know how often it happens.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 07:13 AM
16

It's the issue where if you start out by assuming you're the beleaguered good side, and the other side are the evil people who are trying to oppress or physically assault you... then your arguments might seem logical on the surface, but look at them carefully and the hypocrisy becomes apparent. Ultimately the arguments boil down to "we deserve protection / consideration even at your expense. You don't deserve protection / consideration if it even mildly inconveniences us, because we're the good …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 07:10 AM
11

So we're policing thought crime now? People thinking or saying mean things about women isn't actually a problem that needs fighting, unless we want to police thought crime. Which law says "it's illegal to say mean things about women"? Also, if we want to police thought crime, there's much more misandry out there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 07:03 AM
25

Literal anti-male discrimination, as there is in the West, will only create more misogyny. Want to reduce misogyny, stop literally discriminating against men. Also, sure misogyny exists but it looks pretty obvious that misandry is much more common. It's not realistic to say "let's engage in collective punishment against men until zero individuals are misogynist in all of society."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 07:00 AM
51

Trickle down equality is a great phrase: 1) endlessly help women and minorities, often by literally discriminating against men 2) ??? 3) men now have amazing lives
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 06:59 AM
5

Honestly a minister for men probably isn't the best answer for this, because I'm sure a "minister for men" post would soon get corrupted into yet another "fight toxic men / teach men to behave" post. However saying "not the answer" without doing something that would help is just callous. Starmer, saying "not the answer" and then not doing anything else, also isn't the answer.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 06:58 AM
2

It';s 1984's doublethink.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 06:55 AM
42

The left clearly has failed men. Most of the anti-male discrimination comes from the left ("no true scotsman" is a fallacy), and those left-wingers who don't discriminate against men themselves also don't lift a finger to help them. People like the ones in this community are a small minority with relatively little power. "But the right sucks" -- sure, but that doesn't mean the left hasn't failed men. The other side being bad doesn't automatically make you good. Maybe both suck.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 06:53 AM
1

I don't see that. Society heavily discriminates against men, and 99% of women aren't lifting a finger to change that. If society discriminated against women like it's currently discriminating against men, I and huge numbers of men would actively demonstrate for women's rights. Also, just saying "generalizing" and "hateful towards women" aren't actually arguments on why I would be wrong. Some generalizations are correct. And I don't hate women, I'm just describing reality. If you think that's hat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/03/25 05:51 AM
3

Obviously most women aren't like OP, but I don't have trouble believing that some women are like OP. After all, we know that female men's rights activists exist.
/r/MensRights23/03/25 09:56 AM
12

Thanks for caring about men. No need to feel guilty, and I don't think any man here is insulted / offended by your post. To answer your question: - listen to men; most men don't have anyone who'll actually just listen to them - if someone says something misandrist, disagree with them - if you feel called to it, you can become a female men's right activist, and actively speak up / start a podcast or youtube channel / demonstrate. The downside is that you'll get a TON of shit flung your way. It wo…
/r/MensRights23/03/25 09:54 AM
2

The percentage of lesbians isn't anywhere near 20%, but a lot of women now say they're bisexual / pansexual even if they mostly just like men.
/r/MensRights23/03/25 09:48 AM
8

Technically an ethnostate is a state run by a specific ethnic group. You'd need to define an "ethnic state" but for women. Probably easier to say they're after an apartheid state.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 07:08 AM
19

Right. I've seen more than one "repeal the 19th" (aka "ban women from voting") posts on social media. While on one hand that's shocking and extreme... on the other hand if many women are - going to war against men - declare men as inherently evil (even feminist men are seen as second-class citizen behind women) ... then it's understandable for men to also go to war against women, and not care what women think about that because women see them as evil anyway. An extreme action creates an extreme …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 07:05 AM
23

A whole lot of times, whether a woman excuses or condemns a man is determined by whether he's hot or not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 06:57 AM
22

Ah yes, now that person 128957108956716092871208967681209 has said "men need to fix their problems" I'm sure things will change. Men have a problem => men need to fix this problem Women have a problem => society needs to fix this problem
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 06:53 AM
13

Men absolutely are wired to like and protect women, but I don't think men are inherently wired to be misandrist. I think that's cultural programming. If in ages pages men were on top / oppressed women... then how can men be inherently wired to be misandrist? Men prefer female company more than male company. I'm a man and I don't. (Obviously I care more about the individual than about their gender, but in general.) men need to be aware of their own internalized misandery and control it . Stop bei…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 06:51 AM
3

Yes. That's why I try to be a good person, but I don't worry too much about what other people think of me / my positions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 06:47 AM
2

This is the pendulum swinging back. The left went nuts with promoting irreversible surgery on minors, which is insane because we don't allow minors to vote or drink or make big decisions. So why would it be a good idea to let them get irreversible genital surgery? Also, the Biden admin replaced "mother" with "birthing person." Also, the whole trans women competing with women in sports issue, and having a massive advantage there. So the left went extreme on that issue, and now the right is pushin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 05:45 AM
0

We're never going to make an actual difference if we more or less declare all right-wingers to be bad. The only way in which we'll make an actual difference is if we're willing to come together with reasonable right-wingers to work together for men's rights. Maga, femcels, misandrists, conservatives - they are all conformists. Misandrists may very well be conformists, yes. Being MAGA / conservative is counterculture, because the dominant culture and news and media tells people to basically be an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 05:31 AM
7

Just because masculinity is somewhat hard to define, and can express itself in different ways, and there's some debate in gray areas / edge cases whether something is masculine, doesn't mean that masculinity doesn't exist. That are plenty of things that are hard to exactly pin down and define and draw a border around, yet they clearly exist. I think this kind of "ivory tower" reasoning is part of why average people don't connect with the left. Average people obviously think that masculinity exis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/25 05:25 AM
4

It seems that feminists love to have words that have hugely different definitions, because you can manipulate people by using whatever definition is convenient. For example, the public definition of diversity is "don't discriminate, and it's good to have varied perspectives." And that sounds great, I agree. But the private definition as used by feminists seems to be "screw men" (as evidenced by the fact that now that few teachers are male, no one is bringing up diversity arguments there; and mor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/25 02:45 PM
15

Right. They're both female supremacists, they just disagree on what a "female" is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/25 02:30 PM
-4

They're not fascists. Musk literally wants more brown-skinned programmer immigrants. It's not very fascist-y to want more brown people in the country. Shrinking the government, as Musk and Trump are currently doing, is also the opposite of what a fascist would do. There's plenty to criticize about Trump and Elon, but they're not fascists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/25 02:29 PM
1

The problem is that "the labour party" isn't a sentient entity. Instead, the sentient entities that make decisions, are human politicians. And it wouldn't be in their individual interest to say "let's drop identity politics, let's tone down the feminism, let's actually start helping men in a genuine way." Because if an individual politician said that, they'd get metaphorically lynched. So no one is going to say that, and they'll change merely their rhetoric but not their substance, and they'll l…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/25 11:31 AM
7

You have people who are sort of seeing the problem but they're kowtowing, and ultimately they're not helping that much. Or you have people who do state facts, but they're never getting platformed in conventional media. In both cases, little difference is made.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:35 PM
57

Diversity doesn't mean diversity. It means "screw men." It's the motte-and-bailey fallacy, where the publicly stated position is reasonable and hard to attack ("we need diversity"). But the actual policy that's pushed is "screw men", as evidenced by this, and by the fact that there's women-only scholarships while already more women attend university. And of course if you attack the actual position of "screw men", then you'll get gaslit by people saying that diversity doesn't mean "screw men". Th…
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:31 PM
15

Too few female teachers => "girls need female teachers as role models" (especially if we're talking about female physics teachers and similar) Too few male teachers => crickets.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:28 PM
1

People don't seem to understand that "an advantage for women" is more or less equivalent to "discrimination against men." Similarly, "being nice to minorities in court" is more or less equivalent to "discrimination against white people in court."
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:17 PM
1

Problem is that many men are white knights, or just pussies. If all UK men grew a spine overnight, the backlash would be immense. But they won't.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:15 PM
20

Yeah. It's easy for society to say "Tate isn't the answer", and I agree, but just saying "Tate isn't the answer" while not providing any answer yourself doesn't help. Some men would rather have a bad answer in Tate, than no answer at all. Which isn't a good thing, but it is understandable.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:14 PM
2

I don't diagnose people all the time. Just because you and perhaps some of your friends do that, doesn't mean that "we all" do that. The problem with diagnosing people like you're doing is that it's dehumanizing to them in a way that's not fair, and labeling people in general is sort of dehumanizing and dangerous. Furthermore, you most likely do diagnose people you don't like, while not diagnosing people you do like, so in effect you're creating a club that you're only hitting people with who yo…
/r/MensRights16/03/25 09:11 PM
4

Yeah. I live in a European country and have a Ukrainian colleague. His uncle died, who was practically like a father to him. That Ukranian colleague of mine can't go to the funeral (in Ukraine), because he'd be immediately sent to the front lines if he stepped foot in Ukraine. Of course if he was a woman he'd be fine.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 06:19 PM
20

Right. Most "I'm for actual equality" type of feminists are simply misandrist who are engaging in marketing, like North Korea calling itself Democratic. I'll change my mind when a significant portion of feminists starts taking tangible action for men's rights. And not just giving lip service to that idea.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 05:26 PM
20

I think that's a naive opinion. If anything I think women are currently a bit uncomfortable because in the back of their minds they know they're not treating men well, whereas if we start being supporting feminism they'll figure that men are doing fine and they'll stop feeling that itch in the back of their skull. If you assume feminists are reasonable, they'll act like you expect them to act. But they're simply not reasonable. I speak from experience -- it's not like I presupposed, or want to b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 05:24 PM
3

Right. If I invented "masculinism" no one would believe it was for actual equality and it'd be helpful for women too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 05:16 PM
5

I live in the EU. I haven't noticed anything positive from the alleged effort to seek male voters. I think they're just stepping up censorship, election shenenigans (or threatening with this if the wrong party wins), etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 05:15 PM
12

In what way would it help?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 05:06 PM
6

I'm sorry, my man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 03:40 PM
6

If toxic femininity were as acknowledged as toxic masculinity, then I would have no problem with the concept of toxic masculinity.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 01:31 PM
19

There are male hysterics as well Yes but 1) whataboutism, 2) society already acknowledges those.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 01:29 PM
6

You can't diagnose people unless you're a qualified psychologist and they're your patient. Otherwise everyone would psychologically diagnose everyone they didn't like with all kinds of bad things.
/r/MensRights16/03/25 01:29 PM
7

Well, the feminism label has become quite toxic. But I think a lot of people either quietly think of themselves as a feminist, or would agree with the feminist perspective if asked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 01:23 PM
17

I think patriarchy has multiple contradictory definitions and feminists use whatever is convenient in the moment. So it's a motte-and-bailey fallacy. The publicly presented definition is something easy to defend, something like "a society in which most powerful / rich people are men, and in which male norms play an important role." But the actual definition that feminists seem to be working with it something like "a society in which men have all the power and actively oppress women" -- but if yo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 01:21 PM
10

I don't think that two (or even three or four) people pushing the same message is sufficient proof of a brigading effort.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 01:18 PM
40

People who might self-identity as libfems, or people who are "feminists who aren't crazy", still likely aren't interested in actually lifting a finger to help men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 01:17 PM
27

First of all, men don't need to open themselves up to a female supremacy, let's-discriminate-against-men group. Just because feminism doesn't market itself as such, doesn't mean it is. If we go by marketing, red bull gives you wings, and North Korea is democratic. Second, those "moderate feminists" often aren't actually willing to lift a finger to help men. They only SAY they're after true equality. Again, North Korea isn't democratic, despite what it says. I think those people genuinely willing…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 01:15 PM
34

Most people in this sub are after true equality, not after men having unfair advantages over women. That's probably why you got downvoted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 11:15 AM
14

Sorry bro, I empathize.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 11:13 AM
34

While sometimes the man is a jerk / unreliable, too little attention is paid to the fact that fatherlessness often occurs because of divorce, which women usually initiate, usually just because she's not really feeling it (usually there's no cheating / abuse going on). Plus, divorce court heavily discriminates in favor of the mother, despite kids from single fathers having vastly better outcomes. Hence the kid not or only barely seeing his father. Fatherlessness is always presented as either "thi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 11:09 AM
1

Yeah. According to mainstream culture: - "If we ignore context, more black people commit crimes, therefore black people are inherently more violent" => this is racism and I'd probably get fired at my job if I said this publicly. - "If we ignore context, more men people commit crimes, therefore men are inherently more violent" => this is seen as such a self-evident truth that it doesn't even need proof.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/25 08:11 AM
31

Our society would rather ruin children's lives than hurt the feelings of adult women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/25 12:51 PM
5

Kudos on just saying things that are completely social unacceptable yet thought-provoking. I'm not sure I agree, but you're a more interesting conversation partner than most. I guess logically one of the following has to be true: a) society only works if there are either clear gender roles, or if it's just commonly accepted that women are inferior in some fundamental areas. In this case, us Westerners just have the bizarre delusion that "women are equals and gender roles are bad", and this delus…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/25 12:45 PM
5

Here's a truly awful argument for you to consider: If a society believes that men and women are equal, and that gender roles shouldn't be enforced, then I don't see how you escape the trap that Western nations are in, where white knight men and 99% of women fight for female interests, while only a few percent of men are men's rights activists. We're all painfully aware of the results, and also consider that Western birth rates below replacement so we'd be dying off without immigration (from coun…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/25 08:31 PM
16

Was it actually productive? I guess it's shifted the discussion from "men are evil oppressors" to "men are useless, what do we need men for, what's even the use of men in modern society." Sure, that's a change, but it doesn't bring us any closer to actual equality. I'm not seeing any prominent left-wing figures advocate for actual equality. Even the mainstream leftists who understand that it's bad if half the population drops out, generally have as a solution: "let's tell men to work harder" or …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/25 08:08 PM
2

On one hand, I empathize, but on the other hand, if I were to act like my ex-girlfriends were representative of all women, people would call me a misogynist and tell me to shut up. Or at best they'd say "if you chose bad partners, what does that say about you" which is a fair point to an extent -- and of course that same point can be made about the "I had a horrible boyfriend and now I hate men" crowd.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 11:49 AM
1

I know it's not constructive, but I keep hearing Theoden's voice in my head, "Why should we ride to the aid of those who did not come to ours?" Arguably that IS constructive -- if you have a friend who keeps asking for favors but never agrees to any request you make of him, then it's best to eventually stop doing favors for him.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 07:24 AM
1

Yes, great points. I fully agree. I'm also going to make the cynical addition that reforming society so that everyone can have a good life, is very hard. However, just getting a few companies to prefentially hire women / minorities is relatively easy and doable. It can be argued that if you want to optimize your own political / influencer career on the left, then pushing identity politics is a better choice than pushing for actual equality and prosperity for everyone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 07:22 AM
1

It's the old question of: is ideological purity more important, or is getting stuff done in the real world more important. The left often chooses ideological purity, but then remains small enough that they have little real-world influence, even if they're theoretically right. To make an impact in the real world, you usually need some kind of movement that appeals to people on the left AND right, like Occupy did... but it can be argued that this corrupts the movement, or detaches the movement fro…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 05:21 AM
1

We're all on this sub because we think it's not okay for some feminists to consider half the population to be bad people. Right? Then I don't think we should imply that anyone not on the left is either not honest or doesn't have basic common decency. Because then we're the ones saying half the population are bad people. I think the primary reason why right-wingers are right-wingers isn't that they're evil, it's just that they believe in the argument that: "the West is capitalist, and it's the ri…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 05:08 AM
1

A long, long time ago I actually used to read reddit's red pill sub. Yes, I know. And at least back then, practically all of the focus was on how the individual can build what they thought was a desirable life for themselves individually, and how to understand / bed / date women. There was zero focus on making systemic change and reforming the system. It was just "go lift bro, go dress better bro, here's an article on female hypergamy, here's how you can get a woman to sleep with you." And yes, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:56 AM
5

To be fair, if nowadays I hear that someone voted for the big left wing party in their country's last election, I assume they're okay with anti-male discrimination. And yes sometimes that assumption is wrong. But then again, if you hear that some American person is a conservative, don't you also make a number of assumptions about their positions that aren't always correct? For example, there are conservatives / right-wingers out there who despise Trump, who are pro-abortion, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:30 AM
7

Ask feminists in a country where there's a draft, if in a hypothetical referendum they would vote yes or no on "women get drafted too." Don't let them dodge the question with "well I don't want war and the draft at all" -- would they vote yes or no on the "women get drafted" proposal? In any case, I don't see women in a hurry to demand that either women get drafted or the draft gets abolished. They seem to be content with the situation where only men get drafted. Divorce court being unfairly sta…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:25 AM
4

What feminists are actually investing energy in in 2025 is either pushing for anti-male / pro-female discrimination (which is more or less the same thing); or spreading disinformation (like the wage gap) meant to attack men. What you say, "we just don't women to be discriminated against", was once true and is now just their marketing. But if we believe marketing, red bull gives you wings, and North Korea is Democratic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:20 AM
10

Just define men's rights activism as a movement that is after equality, and state that anyone believing in equality is definitionally a men's rights activist. And point her to a men's rights meeting or url, and ask her when she'll come join a meeting or a protest. It's exactly the same logic as they're using. (Or if someone wants to nitpick that feminism and men's rights activists aren't exactly the same, switch out "men's rights activsit" for "masculiniism".)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:17 AM
4

Words are incredibly important in how the average person perceives something. There's psychological research saying that if researchers show a video and ask "how fast did the car hit the wall" vs "how fast did the car crash into the wall", people give substantially different answers, for example. This is also why you have the right calling people "illegal immigrants" and the left calling them "undocumented people". How those people are labeled makes a huge difference in the debate. It's why the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:16 AM
2

Some feminists are female supremacists, and they also believe in collective punishment. There's a whole lot of "anything men can do, women can do better" and "men are so stupid / emotionally unintelligent / violent" and "if only women were in charge the world would be peaceful" statements being made by women. Haven't you heard them? If you switched out the word "woman" to "white people", and "man" to "black people" then that would 100% sound like white supremacism. "If only white people were in …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 04:04 AM
12

LOL, great quote. If a man read your average female smut and treated that as an instruction manual, they would actually be quite likely to become a redpiller, or something roughly in the vicinity of that. Most male love interests in female smut are usually some combination of selfish, violent, psychopathic, narcissistic, stalkerish, possessive, emotionally withdrawn, someone who doesn't treat her seriously / as an equal, etc. And they're usually hot / rich / high-status, which is also a thing th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:24 PM
3

Yeah. You can't win elections if you declare half the population (men) to be the enemy. It's logic that a child would understand. So the mainstream left will have to either change their positions (unlikely) or try to gaslight men into voting for the man-hating mainstream left (they'll try, but they'll fail).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:19 PM
1

There is, there's plenty of papers you can find by googling, using very straightforward search terms. For example: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9922938/ By the way, I really dislike the "there's no evidence it does though" argument, because taken literally the statement means "there doesn't exist evidence that porn is harmful." And if indeed the evidence doesn't exist, that would be a very strong argument. When in reality, what you're saying is "I haven't done any research, and no on…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:16 PM
7

Right. If women literally didn't have rights, or any say, or the right to vote, then criticizing patriarchy would be completely justified. But in the society we live in, criticizing "patriarchy" is completely insane. Just because most rich people are men, doesn't mean they're rigging society in men's favor. See e.g. breast cancer research receiving much more funding than prostate cancer research.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:07 PM
9

Yeah, great point. I think that's the core of it: you genuinely can have a great life as a man, if you're born with an above-average amount of advantages. (The people saying "I had nothing handed to me, I just worked really hard" typically were born with a high IQ, good health, they didn't suffer trauma as a child, they didn't have any kind of neurodivergence etc) But despite men being theoretically able to build a great life... most won't. There's systemic anti-male discrimination during e.g. h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:04 PM
3

Or they do this because they're female supremacists. It's not true that everyone is a moderate who's terrified of being ostracized by the scary female supremacists. Some people... are just female supremacists. If no one was a female supremacist, then no one would be afraid of the female supremacists because they wouldn't exist. Therefore some people are female supremacists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:55 AM
6

Agreed. I think most (not all, but most) of the left still wants to keep pushing "men are oppressors" type of identity politics. They're just trying to put a nice messaging bow on it, but the fundamental worldview is still the same. I don't think these people actually want to reform divorce court, for example. Call me when the mainstream left-wing is actually advocating for divorce court to be reformed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:52 AM
1

It's good that the left notices that boys and men are struggling, but I don't see how real change can happen inside the mainstream left-wing movement. After all, mainstream left-wing ideology says that men are oppressors, and women and people of color are victims. I don't see that changing in the near future, because some people benefitting from identity politics may not want to give up their victim status / their higher status in the left-wing hierarchy than white men. And those people who are …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:48 AM
1

I'm sure that happens, but "people complaining about something that some other people do" is so common and so relatively harmless that I don't worry too much about it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:42 AM
2

I've never seen that happen in my personal life. I'm sure it happens, but it's a low probability scenario I think. Honestly I think it's far more productive to point to blatant systemic anti-male discrimination (like harsher sentences for the same crime for men) than to point to this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:41 AM
3

It's unionized womanhood, which has literal man-haters in its ranks, and the union doesn't lift a finger to denounce or stop or talk to the man haters. If I make a man's organization, and that organization doesn't kick out literal woman-haters, my org would be denounced too by the outside world.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:39 AM
9

By their logic, black people are inherently more violent than white people. Because you genuinely can find research showing that black people commit more crimes. Of course that ignores the economic factors etc... but then again women also ignore the context when they point to men's crime statistics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:38 AM
8

It's a women's rights movement, that has some genuine man-haters in its ranks, and moderate feminists don't call out the man-hating feminists. Some feminists literally lobby to have male shelters be shut down (while obviously not lobbying against female shelters). Why? Because they hate men. If feminism was merely a women's rights movement, they wouldn't do that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 11:36 AM
2

Because they emotionally dislike men but not blacks, therefore it's different. Most people are driven by emotions, not logic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 07:45 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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