TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PlatformStriking6278 Archive

View 0 posts and 101 comments by PlatformStriking6278 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I know this sub is targeted toward "left-wing male advocates," but that skepticism always arises when I see criticisms of behavior associated with the general left. Anyone who whines about "wokeness" or considers themselves "anti-woke" is cutting out quite a massive chunk of American leftist principles and has pretty obviously been influenced by right-wing propaganda. Men’s issues should be discussed in addition to women’s issues and all of the other marginalized communities that are more widely…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/26 08:15 AM
1

However much fascism has been overused and misapplied in the past, I also think it’s undeniable that the use of the term has increased dramatically since Trump’s reelection and rightfully so. Of course, right-wingers often choose to ignore that fact to act like the current accusations of fascism are just more of the same fear-mongering and alarmism, though it’s pretty much strong consensus among relevant academics at this point that the MAGA movement is fascist in nature.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/26 07:18 AM
1

Then why aren't they doing anything against radical feminism? I didn’t say that they hated or even disapproved of radical feminism. Radical feminism is indeed quite popular. There are debates between feminist schools, of course, if that’s what you consider doing something "against" them, but none of it is in the name of men. Discussion are women-centered as to be expected.
/r/EverydayMisandry11/02/26 07:14 PM
2

It's not a universal position among feminists, no.
/r/EverydayMisandry11/02/26 06:21 PM
8

There’s also a radical feminist perspective that porn is inherently rape because financial incentive exists.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/02/26 10:59 PM
10

I think it’s odd that you’re able to view white supremacy as a structural issue, but minimize the patriarchy to being about individual men. I said the opposite
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/26 08:18 PM
12

White supremacy isn’t analogous to the alleged patriarchy. It’s a personal philosophy of racial superiority. White privilege might be more analogous. The definition of patriarchy is ambiguous and inconsistent, but I think most people in this sub would agree that men are not the problem. And if that’s not what the term "patriarchy" implies, it’s misleading.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/26 05:40 PM
7

Children don’t have the right to education until they are born lmao.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/26 05:37 PM
6

I mean, don’t lesbians hang out straight men? These are all just stereotypes, but I feel like I can imagine a really butch lady going out with guy friends to the gym. 🤣 Thars just my two cents.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/11/25 12:45 AM
1

Not men. Society. There is no way that such a dichotomous view of reality or history is most accurate. And again, I emphasize that ethics are individual. It is not rational to translate large-scale sociological conclusions about gender dynamics to individual relationships. In science, the primary logical relationship between entities is cause and effect. Culture is shared collectively among a population, i.e., men and women alike, rather than imposed on passive members unless they are transporte…
/r/EverydayMisandry09/11/25 04:30 AM
2

Hatred of men remains unjustified. Whatever large-scale sociological factors contributed to the oppression of women are utterly IRRELEVANT to the individual ethics. The conflation of sociological conclusions with personal morals is nothing but an excuse for individual prejudice. The implication of saying that misogyny is defined as systemic is that no individual person can be considered a misogynist because no individual person comprises the system. If individuals can be misogynistic, then they …
/r/EverydayMisandry08/11/25 04:46 PM
1

That’s what they say but would still call out a random, powerless man on the Internet who thinks women shouldn’t be able to vote a misogynist
/r/EverydayMisandry08/11/25 04:33 PM
-10

Nah. Misogynists have quite a lot of power right now and are partially using the prevalence of misandry to justify more power grabs.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/09/25 07:29 AM
8

Not if you subscribe to the presupposition that women really never are at fault in relationships
/r/EverydayMisandry18/04/25 01:26 AM
14

When did being a Trump supporter become a male stereotype?
/r/EverydayMisandry18/12/24 09:13 AM
2

Yeah, the culture war, including the gender war, is completely stupid, primarily because each side is talking past each other by associating the other with the most extreme individuals on their side. However, in response to the meme, I would say that, as someone who tends to stay out of circles who say that women shouldn’t vote or should be beaten by their husbands, I have never received such widespread support for any of my issues. I would also say that the type of men who don’t think women sho…
/r/EverydayMisandry17/12/24 06:23 PM
12

After about the first five, they start to tackle issues that are undeniably exclusive to men and then it isn’t even defending their primary sentiment lmao.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/12/24 06:08 PM
1

How did OP advocate for MGTOW, and why do you not criticize analogous radical feminist movements? Also, in bragging about your love life at every single opportunity, you are lending credence to the “white knight” stereotype.
/r/EverydayMisandry16/11/24 02:58 AM
11

Yes, greater personal risk than getting on the battlefield because, at least on the battlefield, he gets to fight for his life. If he wasn’t fighting for his life, then you would probably praise him. Your suggestions also do not take into account his actual means of making any of those decisions. You’re now suggesting an unreasonable level of mass cooperation among the soldiers, which is close to physically impossible without some form of organization for such a major resistance. Some soldiers c…
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 07:18 AM
17

It doesn’t matter. Your argument is fallacious. There are obstacles to all of those choices, none of which guarantee that he would have been able to actually escape fighting. Russia is not known for being tolerant of independent thought and free choice, so each of your proposals would have come at great personal risk. You might as well suggest that he refuse to fight by lying down on the battlefield and allowing himself to get butchered by the opposition. Yes, he could have made any number of di…
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 06:57 AM
22

Against his will. That’s what conscription is. And he obviously was resisting more than most other people since he was apparently supposed to be fighting but dodged the draft somehow. That’s the entire point of the post.
/r/EverydayMisandry14/11/24 06:22 AM
1

Not moving the goalposts. No one is saying that telling people not to vote for Trump is misandristic, as you implied. Someone is saying that the concept of a “real man” is misandristic, which just so happens to be being utilized by the side that is telling people not to vote for Trump. Are you semantically impaired?
/r/EverydayMisandry05/11/24 11:52 PM
1

That’s the association fallacy. Just because they’re saying that the side saying “don’t vote for Trump” is misandristic doesn’t mean that that’s the reason why they’re misandristic. Telling people not to vote for Trump is not misandristic. The phrase “real men” is misandristic. It just happens to be the side telling people not to vote for Trump using the phrase in this instance.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/11/24 11:42 PM
1

You are implying that someone is saying that telling people not to vote for Trump is misandristic.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/11/24 11:33 PM
2

They’re aligning their masculinity with a single candidate and insulting others who do not conform. I am hostile toward Trump supporters as well, but their chosen rhetoric is still misandristic.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/11/24 09:54 PM
1

No one said that supporting either side is inherently misandristic.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/11/24 09:50 PM
4

“Pedophilia” is a psychological disorder that isn’t defined by any legal or ethical implications.
/r/EverydayMisandry01/11/24 05:12 PM
1

No…I’m suggesting that he proposes to his partner if that’s what he wants to do and sees it as a way of affirming his masculinity. A world in which women also propose to their partners wouldn’t prevent this from happening.
/r/EverydayMisandry27/10/24 09:18 PM
1

He can still affirm his masculinity in a world where a reversed marriage proposal is commonplace. He just has to propose to his partner, and if his partner knows him well enough, she will know that he wouldn’t want her to propose to him, so she will wait. If he was advocating based on his conception of what men are in society rather than just personal preference, then that is a different matter. And I would act antagonistically toward the sociological enforcement of any social construct or gende…
/r/EverydayMisandry27/10/24 08:07 PM
2

How he affirms his own masculinity is not the issue. It’s trying to impose those standards on others and enforcing them as the only way to display masculinity.
/r/EverydayMisandry27/10/24 03:35 PM
3

Whether it emasculates the man is a personal judgment.
/r/EverydayMisandry27/10/24 03:32 PM
5

I mean, I can’t speak for others, but I absolutely do have terrible social skills, which is why my hatred is directed inwards.
/r/EverydayMisandry20/10/24 09:29 AM
1

If I’m given the choice between something bad and something worse, then I’d rather not choose at all. Then you’re going to end up with someone worse, and quite frankly, the margin between “bad” and “worse” is massive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/24 10:00 PM
0

Do you have a source on Harris’s stance on the issue?
/r/EverydayMisandry15/10/24 02:25 PM
5

How so? Regardless, Trump would be terrible for everyone.
/r/EverydayMisandry15/10/24 01:52 PM
5

When the stakes are high, there’s nothing wrong with voting against a candidate. Also, I can’t think of a single case in which not voting would be the right thing to do. One of the candidates is going to become president. You might as well make your minor contribution toward shaping the government to your liking. It’s not like the government ceases to exist or affect you if you abstain.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/24 02:00 AM
18

Kamala does not deserve anyones vote just because she’s the potentially better candidate Um…yes she does. Why wouldn’t you vote for the better candidate?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/24 01:54 AM
3

It’s not derailment. In fact, the sentiment of your comment is what this subreddit actively opposes and why the creator made another subreddit called r/MisandryFreeFemAllies. It’s because quite a lot of discussion surrounding women’s issues devolves into misandry and condemnation of men in general. It’s quite hypocritical of you to do the exact same thing. It only feeds into the culture war between men and women and breeds resentment on both sides.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/10/24 02:39 AM
6

Most of those comments are almost certainly ironic since asking whether or not he said “no” is completely nonsensical (murder is wrong and illegal regardless of consent). They clearly all have the men vs women debate in my mind when reacting to the situation and feel obligated to choose a side. Maybe there’s a reason for this, e.g., perhaps that’s what the TikTok account usually talks about, but it doesn’t excuse the behavior regardless.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/10/24 02:30 AM
9

If some government planted explosives on Israeli men with enough explosive power to mostly maim vs kill and then they mocked Israel men who had their genitals destroyed…the western nations allied with Israel would be condemning it harshly. So…this does seem like a Palestine vs. Israel thing rather than a men vs. women thing.
/r/EverydayMisandry18/09/24 07:52 AM
7

Whether it’s a whataboutism seems like something that can be readily ascertained based on context, making immediately discounting “not all men” or “men too” sentiments based on the automatic assumption that it’s trying to distract from women’s issues unreasonable and possibly an instance of confirmation bias. Their argument is also premised on the fallacy of relative privation. They should ask themselves why the idea that women must always have it worse than men is such an important tenet of the…
/r/EverydayMisandry13/09/24 09:12 PM
7

That completely depends on the context. And besides, regardless of whether what they were doing in the water slide was fine or not, there is no reason to make the situation gendered or imply that the guys who were obviously at least trying to have fun were potential rapists. Yes, the comments were unreasonable and “crazy.” It’s an example of misandry.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 08:42 PM
1

Feminists use anecdotal evidence all the time to justify their position. Let’s try to take the high road and acknowledge the subjectivity of these questions and the near-impossibility of answering them in any objective manner based on data.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 05:06 PM
6

They aren’t facts. They can’t be. They’re fairly subjective and similar to the “who has it worse” debates.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 05:02 PM
8

Let’s try not to resort to the same type of “bent stick” reasoning that we hate so much in many radical feminists.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 04:54 PM
4

Members of FDS still present themselves as feminist.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 02:05 AM
8

You know that the name of this sub is “everyday misandry,” right? Not everyday misogyny or sociological misandry.
/r/EverydayMisandry04/09/24 02:00 AM
1

“Cis” refers to one’s gender identity, specifically whether it aligns with their biological sex. It does not mean the same thing as “heterosexual/straight,” which refers to sexual orientation and is the opposite of “homosexual/gay.” Yes, there are certain people who resent the “advantaged” norm, but “straight” is a separate part of it when they think that “cis straight white men” are the problem with society.
/r/EverydayMisandry31/08/24 12:02 PM
5

It’s not an offensive slur. It’s the opposite of “trans.”
/r/EverydayMisandry31/08/24 02:08 AM
4

I’m not sure I understand how “torture” is a euphemism or how it’s any better than molestation. I see your point about how female on male violence is always assumed to be non-sexual, though.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/08/24 07:54 PM
1

I don’t know what that means. I hate it when radical feminists think that their extremely subjective and stretched interpretations of events can serve as some sort of evidence of hidden misogynistic aspects of our culture. It’s not scientific. It’s confirmation bias. Let’s not do the same.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/08/24 11:44 AM
0

No…I don’t. I’m a member of this sub and would criticize any misandry I come across. I just wouldn’t consider myself to have come across any misandry by watching that video.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/08/24 11:34 AM
0

No, that is literally what the video shows, buddy.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/08/24 11:32 AM
0

That video does not show women attacking men. It shows both men and women harassing both men and women as a form of protest.
/r/EverydayMisandry10/08/24 11:22 AM
5

This doesn’t exactly seem like a gendered situation to me. Yeah, most of the loudest protesters looked like they were women in the minute-long video, but they’re not attacking men. They’re attacking tourists in general.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/08/24 10:24 PM
3

It’s strange how she turned a conditional phrase with the word “until” into an absolute. No, people shouldn’t always believe anyone on the basis of gender alone. If that were the case, it would just be…"innocent," or "innocent until proven a man." Instead, we would just like evidence of the crime committed regardless of the identity of the defendant.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/07/24 01:15 PM
3

Did you see the post?
/r/EverydayMisandry08/07/24 01:12 PM
2

The idea that men, as a group, are all rapists whose actions are curbed by society is blatant misandry and completely ridiculous. I think that’s what it all boils down to in the end once people actually think about their decision to choose bear over man.
/r/EverydayMisandry23/06/24 07:59 PM
2

I don’t have any self-respect, but that’s a separate issue.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/06/24 11:49 AM
4

Yeah, yeah I know. But it’s just the nature of that subreddit. People are saying this shit to get off, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with it. They aren’t actually defending those views from an intellectual perspective.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/06/24 02:47 PM
15

I think this one is fine lol. It’s not serious. I can even indulge that kink sometimes.
/r/EverydayMisandry12/06/24 02:44 PM
1

Interesting
/r/EverydayMisandry08/06/24 11:11 PM
5

Really? I consider it to be one of the few places on Reddit to gain insight into the more academic side of feminism. I argue with people there sometimes. There’s no shortage of downvotes, but they don’t seem to ban people often. Their rules say that the sub is for bridge-building. They only allow top-level comments to be from feminists, but that makes sense considering the name of the sub.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/06/24 09:47 PM
12

What were the responses like? It seems like the members of that sub would probably be sympathetic, though with quite a lot of unnecessary caveats of course.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/06/24 12:16 PM
3

I respect psychology (with the caveat that some fields of study within psychology are more philosophical), but because it does draw conclusions about human behavior through empirical evidence, feminists and sociologists don’t seem to like it very much. Data should not be open to interpretation, and conclusions shouldn’t be. If there was really a scientific basis to feminism, then it should be trying to overtake other sociological perspectives like Marxism or these other sociological perspectives…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/05/24 06:30 AM
-7

Hunting is not the same as defending. I think this is where we disagree. Women are involved in defending tribes. It’s not like not men could. Humans have very low sexual dimorphism, and our means of defending against predators were typically through resourcefulness and the use of tools.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 08:33 PM
-8

Your first point is incorrect. Women were generally more collaborative. It’s one of the major quandaries when considering the origin of the patriarchy (even if we aren’t in the sociological sense, we definitely are in the anthropological sense). And I’m not taking any stance on the findings of the paper. Sure, there might be flaws. That’s still the perspective that they were challenging.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 07:55 PM
0

Just because it’s called “altruistic suicide” sometimes does not suggest that it is the same phenomenon in human psychology that has confounded scientists for decades. Just because a certain phenomenon is called “altruism” does not mean that there aren’t quite a few scientists who dispute whether “true altruism” exists. Suicide cannot be evolved in humans because it is not a characteristic of the majority of a population. That is what evolution is. The change in the frequency of a certain trait.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 06:55 PM
-15

I’m mainly discussing hunter-gatherer societies because that is the subject of the post. Idk about “soldierhood.” My main point was just that there is an objective answer to each of these questions, so social activists should lay off.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 06:26 PM
-1

The difference in humans is that there is no predictable setting in which it occurs. It is not instinctual behavior that has been selected for, and it does not characterize our species. Suicide, by definition (I acknowledged semantic nuance in my last response), is not altruistic. Effects of kin selection cannot be considered suicide.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 06:08 PM
-2

Eh, technically, but not really if we consider it a psychological phenomenon. It depends on how you define “suicide.” Many animals engage in behaviors that could be potentially or even certainly harmful to them but not because they want to die. Of course, lemmings jump off cliffs but they really just instinctually migrate to areas with lower population density. Male praying mantis’s always get eaten after sex, but I wouldn’t consider their choice to have sex suicide. Matriphagy is a well-documen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 05:35 PM
-16

Hunting was about food sources. The way we fended off predators, the weak little naked apes that we are, was through group collaboration, and we didn’t exactly have the luxury of dividing up the genders when the entire troop or tribe was being attacked. Men are not the “protectors” from either lions/tigers/bears or other men. They have traditionally been acknowledged as the “hunters,” which is the perspective being challenged by the findings in question. Anything else is science-denial. I didn’t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 05:14 PM
12

I agree in the sense that I’ve come to realize that sociology is a bit of a pseudoscience in that it’s often postmodernist in nature and it generates perspectives like philosophy with no attempt toward unity or cohesion. However, that being said, I don’t see many people arguing that males and females are the same in the strictest sense of the word.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 05:07 PM
-9

No other animals are known to have committed suicide. That is a uniquely human phenomenon.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 05:04 PM
-20

Men as the protectors and/or providers has long been deemed an anthropological myth. The content of this post has more to do with the objectivity of science. Social activists should stay out of it. Very few landmark studies go unquestioned. It’s just how science works. Conclusions that significantly challenge our previous understanding are never immediately accepted because they need to make sure that such an increase in complexity is warranted by the evidence.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/24 05:02 PM
7

Well, it isn’t women’s fault, but it isn’t “men’s” either. It’s difficult to know the intended implications of such a statement. Of course, any conclusions drawn from it would likely be treating each of the genders as a monolith. The social trends that have disadvantaged men throughout history were not self-inflicted by the individuals who were subjected to those restrictive gender roles. Or they could simply be trying to deflect responsibility by acknowledging the lack of agency that their grou…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/24 11:19 PM
2

I’m not saying you are or that you should stop saying that. I know that I like it and that it makes me feel validated. 😊But it’s still a generalization that makes it difficult to ascertain whether or not you are being sincere to those who don’t know who you are or what you do on here.
/r/EverydayMisandry26/05/24 11:58 PM
1

The comments you replied to were misogynistic, though your post might come off as slightly pick-me, especially at the end, which might have prompted the responses. I appreciate everything you do in support of men on here, though. We need more people like you exploring the middle ground of this asinine gender war. It’s a shame too. r/malementalhealth is also a subreddit I’m a part of that I feel does a fairly good job of exploring men’s issues without resorting to misogyny, along with this sub an…
/r/EverydayMisandry26/05/24 11:39 PM
1

Yeah, that’s what I was saying. I usually consider transgender people to be our allies because their unique experiences generate empathy for men, alongside women. They don’t need to construct these oversimplified models of gendered experiences that they’ve never experienced themselves.
/r/EverydayMisandry21/05/24 09:51 PM
3

I think a lot of them are rightfully alienated by people like Andrew Tate. They’re usually left-leaning and sympathize strongly with feminists, as do I, because they perceive them as their “camp.” Many people aren’t willing to think independently or seek out a middle ground without an accurate label and without many others that agree with them. I don’t think many of these types of men or feminists that aren’t too far off the deep end endorse claims that male rape doesn’t matter or that men can’t…
/r/EverydayMisandry21/05/24 09:22 PM
2

Transgender people are usually allies because they’ve usually gotten to experience the social treatment of each of the genders. So idk what you mean.
/r/EverydayMisandry21/05/24 09:17 PM
3

That’s debatable, and different people would say different things when comparing rape with simple death. It completely depends on one’s subjective values. Rape is a form of torture. No, it is not indisputably better than dying.
/r/EverydayMisandry07/05/24 04:14 AM
10

If I handed you a bowl of skittles and said “don’t worry, only some of them are poisonous” would you just dig into them blindly? No…I wouldn’t eat any of them. And it honestly doesn’t matter the exact proportion of them that are poisonous. Even if I had reason to believe that only one in a thousand skittles are poisonous, I simply wouldn’t eat any skittles. There’s no reason to risk it. This is because eating skittles is completely trivial. The same cannot be said of interacting with fellow huma…
/r/EverydayMisandry06/05/24 02:55 AM
15

Yeah, there’s a major double standard with how women get pissed off at men pretending to know what it’s like to be a woman but then pretend like they know what it’s like to be a man. If they think all men are always fearless all the time, they’re delusional or influenced by the same archaic gender norms that they’re trying to deconstruct.
/r/EverydayMisandry06/05/24 02:44 AM
46

We appreciate your acknowledgement.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/05/24 04:54 AM
3

Right, because I literally said the exact opposite in my comment. 🙄
/r/EverydayMisandry30/04/24 10:32 PM
4

What are you talking about? Nothing you just said has anything to do with the comment you responded to. Thinking that your sexual services are always desirable can absolutely lead to predatory activity. For instance, as it said in the post, flashing your tits at someone because you think you will get away with shit is being a sexual predator. It is a sexually assaulting a person.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/04/24 10:28 PM
4

I’m not willing to say that “most women” are sexual predators, but I think you need to broaden your definition a bit.
/r/EverydayMisandry30/04/24 09:14 PM
11

That’s not how evolution works. Other than that, I’ve reached a similar conclusion. Misogynistic men are the ones interacting with women constantly, which is why there is a selection bias. They then ironically play into outdated gender norms to attack them when all it really does is amplify the insecurities of the silent minority.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/24 09:05 PM
4

It makes sense. In order to convincingly generalize a gender, your underlying assumption must be gender essentialism. There are no universals regarding gender or any other cultural construct. The man-hating type of feminism is more closely linked to conservatism than many people realize. It’s premised on outdated social norms and praises the reversal rather than a complete deconstruction.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/04/24 08:56 AM
1

Social change can help eliminate hierarchies in those various spheres that you just listed, though we’re really only talking about one specific hierarchy that does not need to exist. These cultural hierarchies are what have been historically preventing women from entering into the same jobs as men. Nothing so concrete as their biology or willingness. And stop with the generalizations. This is not a place to hate on women or promote gender essentialism.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/04/24 07:40 PM
8

If the patriarchy does exist, it can’t be said to only benefit or harm either men or women. That’s just not how culture works. It develops unconsciously. It is completely stupid to act as though the patriarchy suggests some conspiracy by men against women.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/04/24 06:50 PM
0

If the patriarchy does exist, it is not a necessary hierarchy. It is ok to raise the status of women in society.
/r/EverydayMisandry05/04/24 06:49 PM
9

Well, one of the main purposes of this sub (and what should be the purpose of most feminist subs) is to make our “experiences” as equal as possible and pushing back on people who want to reinforce these differences in some way. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if a rapist, murderer, etc. was a man. It doesn’t change how we should treat them. We should treat them with contempt because they are an immoral criminal. I can understand if a woman has an understandable prejudice against men as a result of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/24 02:56 PM
9

it specifically said "a man" might have given her reason to xyz. A person. There is almost never a justified reason to broaden the claim to their gender. It’s almost always an arbitrary characteristic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/24 02:27 PM
-3

They have a point. It was responding to something pretty misogynistic.
/r/EverydayMisandry18/03/24 04:00 AM
5

…for what?
/r/EverydayMisandry16/03/24 03:49 AM
20

Not to mention that there’s no way that type of thinking would fly in a context about a woman’s choice to have an abortion. Child support is definitely one of the areas where systemic misandry is most apparent.
/r/EverydayMisandry11/03/24 03:56 AM
10

Yeah, it depends on what she means, but this type of statement is made as a generalization in response to people calling her out on her possible misandry. The problem is that there is absolutely no reason to group all men in with the creeps.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/03/24 04:00 AM
1

Is there a longer version of the video? This one doesn’t show where the woman slapped the man.
/r/EverydayMisandry03/03/24 10:17 PM
5

Lmao. I’m a man and I’m pretty sure I have a resting bitch face. I don’t think it’s intimidating because I look super young, but people don’t tend to approach me.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/03/24 07:06 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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