TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Sailbad_the_Sinner30 Archive

View 1 post and 625 comments by Sailbad_the_Sinner30 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)
3

Not according to the German prostitutes themselves, oddly enough. Over regulation actually creates trafficking.
/r/MensRights04/06/22 10:31 AM
13

It should DEFINITELY be completely decriminalized, at the very least.
/r/MensRights04/06/22 04:16 AM
1

What exactly do you fear about kids seeing nakedness, exactly?
/r/MensRights04/06/22 02:54 AM
-1

Hmmm. Funny how that sort of thing has been going on at Carnaval in Brazil for over a century and it still hasn’t caused a single school shooting. Or any other negative thing I can think of. Also? I have been attending Pride parades since the 1980s and have never seen people publicly fucking. Can’t say the same thing about major sports events, though.
/r/MensRights03/06/22 02:52 PM
1

I’m pretty sure I don’t recall “toxic masculinity” being used in “Stiffed”, although it’s been awhile since I have read it. Faludi’s main proposition is that masculinity has been rendered essentially decorative, being that there’s nothing really that men can now do that women can’t. Before your knee starts to jerking, she also says the same thing about femininity. She believes that the women’s movements of the 1960s and ‘70s were, at bottom, a rejection of decorative femininity and a restructuri…
/r/MensRights02/06/22 03:49 PM
1

Yeah, that Faludi. “Stiffed” is an excellent book. “Backlash” is good, too, but doesn’t focus on men, so it’s hard for me to see how it’s “man hating”. “Stiffed” is probably the most insightful analysis of contemporary masculinity I have ever read. Of course, if you’re one of these guys who thinks “feminism = satanism” and are too delicate to critically read any viewpoint that doesn’t agree with yours, your head will probably explode just because of Faludi’s girl germs.
/r/MensRights02/06/22 03:13 PM
2

Yeah, that’s really neither here nor there, however. Toxic masculinity is indeed a thing, whether or not you qualify it as a mental illness. It is an obsession with being a man to the point where you endanger yourself and others. And our culture does indeed teach most men at least some of these behaviors (he types, knowing full well that he’s put off his prostate exam for yet another week because he’s “too busy”).
/r/MensRights02/06/22 05:18 AM
2

If you want to go that route, I do know psychologists who would consider toxic masculinity to be a disorder, sure. It’s a disorder that involves dangerous and harmful forms of masculine role-playing. I’m not sure why you think classifying it as a mental illness makes it any more of a SPECIFIC sort of mental illness. After all, no one says pedophilia is any less pedophilia simply because it’s a mental illness.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 08:58 PM
-1

What isn’t real? Toxic masculinity? It sure is real. Every time some dumb kid kills himself or others trying to show he’s a man, toxic masculinity rears its head. Men not engaging in necessary self-care and dying? Toxic masculinity. Men killing women because their “honor as a man” has been sullied? Toxic masculinity. Fag-bashing? Toxic masculinity. It’s real, alright. The fact that 19 year olds abuse the term on the internet to score points doesn’t make it any less real. (Also? The fact that you…
/r/MensRights01/06/22 05:03 PM
1

Show you? Read Susan Faludi’s “Stiffed” and tell me she hates men. Let’s start there.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 05:00 PM
-6

“Behaviors that are masculine” are defined using Max Weber’s concept of social action: they are actions which signify, to the person doing them, man-like behavior. This is not circular, because you can, indeed, empirically (and relatively easily) ascertain in any given society a set of behaviors that signify masculinity. (I jocosely call this the “Let’s see you faggots do THIS!” phenomena) The definition of “masculinity”, in this case, is not anchored in theory but in life as lived. It is not ci…
/r/MensRights01/06/22 04:57 PM
-9

While what you say can and does happen, that does not mean toxic masculinity doesn’t exist. Fascism is a similar problem. People use it to describe all sorts of behaviors that are fascism- adjacent or which are maybe necessary components of fascism but which aren’t fascism itself. And people also use the term as a synonym for “bad”. That doesn’t mean fascism doesn’t exist or isn’t a real thing. Here’s what most gender scholars I know would agree upon as a definition of “toxic masculinity”: behav…
/r/MensRights01/06/22 02:28 PM
-2

Strawman definition is spot on, here. You’re trying to push that I am arguing in favor of man hating. Other rhetorical tricks abound, too. The good ol’ “have you stopped beating you mother yet?” tactic. What you are doing is establishing a priori the idea that all feminism is man-hating instead of logically arguing that it is and then claiming that I support man hating. It’s simple Rhetorical Tricks for Freshman 101. The obvious rejoinder — as I set out in my initial statement — is that their ar…
/r/MensRights01/06/22 02:12 PM
-13

I don’t know anyone except a handful of radfems that would say all masculinity is toxic. However, I WOULD say — following Susan Faludi in “Stiffed” — that which masculinity which is not toxic is pretty much decorative. In other words, there’s nothing non-toxic masculinity can do these days other than be pretty. Am I wrong? Try to think of something that’s purely “masculine” that is neither toxic and which actually serves a non-decorative, functional purpose. Serious question.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 01:58 PM
-1

I sometimes agree, sometimes don’t. I agree in the sense that most feminists do indeed seem to think, as Beauvoir put it, “That woman is not born, but made” and yet don’t apply the same insight to men. So yeah, correct. I don’t agree because it’s really not women’s task to do this: it’s men’s. And just reading through the posts here over the couple of months I’ve been here (and the decade or so I have been involved in dialogues with MRAs), my take is that most men, including most MRAs, aren’t in…
/r/MensRights01/06/22 01:51 PM
-2

Such a nice strawman. Better hope no one sets fire to it.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 01:45 PM
-9

Still a feminist. I don’t see all forms of feminism as antagonic to all forms of men’s rights.
/r/MensRights31/05/22 11:53 PM
-3

Dr. Baltazar has conducted no substantial peer-reviewed studies of gender dynamics that I am aware of. He certainly hasn’t found the human universals he claims to have found. He also lies about being a member if a First Nation, among other things. The guy is a very sad example of what happens when one’s ego gets ahead of one’s intellect. He almost blew his own partnership up by refusing to get professional help for his mental health issues, and — typically — he went nutso overboard on “magical c…
/r/MensRights31/05/22 02:38 AM
0

You need to read about the Great Lowell Strike.
/r/MensRights31/05/22 12:42 AM
0

Why queues?
/r/MensRights30/05/22 08:46 AM
1

If we get a stand up urinal room, we’re still ahead of the game.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 08:45 AM
-3

Ooh, yeah. Feminists. So scary.
/r/MensRights29/05/22 09:01 PM
9

Yep. The Copenhagen Model. I am DEFINITELY a fan. True non-discriminatory potty parity, PLUS all the space needed for male caregivers to change children’s diapers and whatnot. I feel this is something we can definitely ally with feminists on.
/r/MensRights29/05/22 03:54 PM
18

Simple solution: make the toilets unisex.
/r/MensRights29/05/22 02:46 PM
1

Yeah, specifically about Covid. It was convenience sampling, riding around the streets of Rio de Janeiro on my bike, but what the hell. I found some interesting trends. Men who felt they were protecting others — cops, first responders, men with kids — almost inevitably wore masks. The worst offenders were men alone in bars.
/r/MensRights26/05/22 01:38 PM
1

Have you seen the second sentence I wrote?
/r/MensRights22/05/22 06:27 PM
-4

Such wise words from a self-named shit-poster.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 06:27 PM
-6

People also have strange ways of dealing with grief.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 06:26 PM
-14

I am not quite understanding why this woman is being painted as callous…. Oh. Yeah. That is nuts.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 04:43 PM
-44

Guy who has suffered from depression and anxiety and has sought help for it: if you think your problems are caused by your partner, nine out of ten times they are not. Also? Most guys who are with partners who barely care about them think that they are hot shit. At least that is my anecdotal experience.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 04:43 PM
-1

First of all, I doubt you read the study. You read the NBC view of the study. Secondly, correlation is not causation. Men who have hormone replacement therapy are almost guaranteed to be men who have self-selected for a higher degree of body awareness and self care.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 12:50 PM
-6

More likely, in my view, is that men simply don’t take care of themselves as well as women take care of themselves.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 02:40 AM
0

The one’s I interviewed believed, essentially, that it was unmanly to worry about Covid. In fact, men with physical labor jobs wore masks more, probably because they were forced to.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 01:26 AM
1

Actually, it’s quite related. What is being judged by the courts are the best interests of the child. My ex- COULD have hit me up for child support for my stepson, whom I had raised for seven years, but she didn’t. What the courts tend to look at here is who the social father of the child is, if a family is formed, and not their DNA.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 12:59 AM
1

I think there are way better health care issues to look at where men are prejudiced against. Circumcision is one, of course, but the worst is the general attitude among everyone that men should work under any conditions whatsoever. I did research work here in Rio during the beginning of the pandemic and maskless men outnumbered maskless women by a factor of about eight to one.
/r/MensRights22/05/22 12:57 AM
2

Well, there’s your problem, then. The blood clots seem to be much more rare in women, but there have been some deaths. The heart problems in men seem to be mild, even though more common, and have so far resulted in no deaths, or even permanent damage, as far as I can see from those studies. I’d reckon J&J is more motivated about lawsuits than anything else, so I can see why something that kills — even if it kills very rarely — would freak them out more than something that causes mild, temporary …
/r/MensRights22/05/22 12:02 AM
-4

I get the feeling that you are ignoring an important piece of data here, but maybe I am wrong? What are the chances of causing the side effect in boys versus the chances of causing the side effect in women?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 09:37 PM
-6

That wasn’t the original question, was it?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 08:55 PM
-4

No.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 08:48 PM
0

My name was on the birth certificate by Wisconsin state law as I was still married to the mother. I did not sign the birth certificate. Savvy? Let me guess: you have not dealt with custody issues in your own life, have you? If you have, you’d note that there are a lot of States where the law proclaims that a legally married spouse is automatically presumed to be the father of his wife’s child. That is exactly what happened to me. And yet I pay no child support. How is that possible if half of wh…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 06:08 PM
-2

Lied about what? Now you really have me confused.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 05:56 PM
1

Apparently smart enough to not pay child support for a kid that’s not mine, even though I am listed as the father on the birth certificate. So if I can clear that bar, as stupid as I am, and you feel you can’t… Well, gee, Elonboi. If I show you a glass slipper and you, Cinderella, say it’s a perfect fit for your lil’ tootsie, don’t blame me.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 05:41 PM
0

My name was on the birth certificate from the get-go. What I was not was the child’s father. Not even socially. Get it? The courts try to minimize damage to CHILDREN, not parents. So if you have been raising the kid as yours and the kid sees you as their father and, suddenly, you discover you are not the biological dad, tough titties for you, my friend. The court says — and rightly so — the child’s interests are paramount. It may not be fair, but it is just. You are probably not going to get rop…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 05:40 PM
1

We were talking about child support for no biological children. Suddenly, you’re talking about rape. What the hell…?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 04:18 PM
1

Uh, that was a bit of a non sequitur. Speak normal folk.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 02:18 PM
1

Male rape…? So you’re essentially saying “Fuck the kid,” then?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 02:00 PM
1

Forgive me for saying this, but based on the categorical and uniformed statements that have been made here (“It’s like that in all of North America!) and my own personal experience, I think things are LITTLE bit more complicated than that. The operative concept usually seems to be the child’s interest: not the parents. In my case, even though three years had passed and my name was on the birth certificate, I could prove that we had no contact for five years and that the child, genetically, was n…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 01:52 PM
1

No. I was out of the relationship, physically, still married. She got pregnant and my name was on the birth certificate, although I didn’t sign it.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 01:36 PM
1

I certainly didn’t sign the birth certificate! The kid was three years old. Three years for petitioning. Separation of the couple had already occurred before conception.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 01:32 PM
1

Like I said, my wife had a kid in Wisconsin by another guy. I am not paying child support. How did that work? Also, you understand Mexican law, do you?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 01:28 PM
-10

Everywhere else? You sure of that? Because I got out of child support here in Brazil because a kid wasn’t mine and he was born to my then-wife in the U.S. state of Wisconsin, where I also didn’t have to pay child support. So how did that happen, then?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:53 PM
2

Mexico, Canada, and every state in the U.S.? You sure about that?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:42 PM
0

Where?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:41 PM
-7

Where?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:38 PM
0

Where?
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:38 PM
-11

You should be forced to take remedial English for starters. But if you can prove it is not your kid, I am pretty sure you don’t have to pay child support.
/r/MensRights21/05/22 04:10 AM
1

Oh, yes. But as Galen and many other Greco Roman physicians describe it, the feminine is simply the masculine, inverted. Men and women are not OPPOSITE sexes: women are cast as failed men. The theory was that, during their gestative phase, they didn’t have enough “heat” for their genital organs to become extiorized. Women were understood, for example, as needing to orgasm to become pregnant because they “released seed”, just like men. This is not at all the 20th century view of women as being en…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:54 AM
1

Yes, I know you quoted the article. That first paragraph is describing what the gender dysmorphic SEEK. Savvy? They are explaining the more general issue. When they turn to METHODOLOGY, the talk about youth who’ve had BREAST REDUCTION SURGERY. Some of this may indeed be masectomies, some not. The study does not define this, as far as I can see. Furthermore, the study does not say — again, as far as I can see — what the direct ages of the respondents were. It gives a mean and a general age range.…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:47 AM
1

So where do you see “gender” — meaning a socially constructed understanding of what is “manly” and “womanly” — in Latin or Greek? In fact, you do realize that Greco-Roman physicians thought there was only one essential sex and that female was just failed masculinity? Here is an excellent book on the topic: https://seminarioatap.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/thomas_laqueur_making_sex_body_and_gender_from_bookos-org.pdf Here’s Lacquer describing the physician Galen’s view of sex: “Galen argued, ‘you…
/r/MensRights21/05/22 12:04 AM
1

Really. “Gender” is a term that has been around for millennia? You realize that not even ENGLISH has been around for millennia? How about you stop bullshitting and show me the earliest example of “gender” as a term? It’s meaning has changed in English in the last fifty years, not because there’s some post-modern conspiracy to defraud your precious masculinity, but because there’s a need to define the difference between biology and social constructions. Did you think the whole apparatus of the bi…
/r/MensRights20/05/22 11:57 PM
1

Look at what you wrote just above. You claim that sex and gender have been used to describe biological processes for millenia. Are you arguing dishonestly here or do you really not realize you were just now arguing that these terms have been immutable for thousands of years?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 10:58 PM
1

Now was that so very hard? Maybe READ, rather than scan. That first sentence describes what youth WANT. The study deals with youth who have had breast reduction surgery. This is not necessarily the same thing as masectomy. Can you find anything in the article saying that all — or even any — of the youth studied underwent masectomies?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 10:43 PM
0

You are pretty uninformed if you think “sex” and “gender” are immutable, eternal words whose meaning has never changed. I can guarantee you, flat out, that the way we think of men and women has not been “unchanged since the beginning of civilization”. But the real question is why is this an issue to you? Why do a very small handful of kids getting gender reassigned because they want, their parents agree and doctors say its advisable harm you — or anyone else — in any way, shape, or form?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 10:42 PM
1

This is not what the study cited says. You seem to be citing a very politicized take on a scientific paper. Why don’t you read the paper? Or is it too difficult for you? Please point out to me where it says “mastectomy” in the paper or even where it quantifies how many 13 year olds were involved in the study. Also? Are you against breast reduction surgery for girls in general or only for transboys?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 09:50 PM
1

That is not what the article says. All we know is that a thirteen year old was involved in some sort of breast reduction surgery with the permission of both parents and on the advice of a doctor. Such things happen to 13 year old girls probably a lot more often than they do to trans boys, and yet we’ve never seen an outburst about that. Why? Is your manhood that fragile that you have to question the opinion of medical professionals on this point?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 09:19 PM
0

Gender and sex are two different things and this can be proven empirically. Also? Sex isn’t the simple binary you think it is. Your inability to understand modern genetics or medicine is not an excuse for treating other people like shit. What are these “masculinity” or “feminism” (your terms) you feel hormonal therapy adds?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 09:04 PM
1

If you note the conversation above, someone was able to find a couple of cases in California. Unfortunately for their argument (and yours), the article they cite just shows how rare and difficult it is to get breast reduction surgery as a minor, even with parental permission and medical indications. What you are essentially saying is this: “I have no proof at all that this is a significant issue where I live but I am going to be outraged simply at the possibility.” Dude, seriously? Save your out…
/r/MensRights20/05/22 03:17 PM
1

Hormonal therapy — even for trans kids — IS for medical conditions. And you have to show that for it to be done. But, again, you are avoiding my question, so let me restate it. If transitional hormonal therapy for trans kids is commonplace where you live, surely you can show me some cases? Correct?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 02:44 PM
1

Hormonal therapies are mostly used among adolescent girls with serious menstrual issues. Do you think that should be banned, too? Sounds like your wife’s experience just highlights how difficult it is for minors to even take the first step towards transitioning, which jibes with what I hear all the time from trans youth themselves. This man’s wife seeking full parental authority over a child is not something that is happening because of trans rights. I very much doubt the court will give it to h…
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:17 PM
1

Correct. You think it should be illegal? Because there are a raftload of health complications that require hormonal therapy. My question was, remember, how many minors are being given hormonal therapy to change their gender where you live? I wasn’t asking if its legal. I know hormonal therapy for minors is legal and the vast majority who receive treatment are girls with serious menstrual issues.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:10 PM
0

Have you read that study? First of all, the article doesn’t mention “masectomies”, but “chest reconstruction surgery”. The second category includes breast reductions and these happen to youth ALL THE TIME with no one complaining about it… as long as the youth identify as women. The article doesn’t say what procedures were used nor what the average age of the participants were (only the mean age). Which means the number of 13 year olds in that study could be as low as one. All participants had pa…
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:05 PM
0

Have you read that study? All participants had parental permission. 100% reported they were happy with the decision. The mean age for surgery was 19. The study does say that there are no laws regarding this, but also points out ethical guidelines and insurance guidelines that stand in the way of this procedure. It very much looks, given the math, that they may have had ONE person who underwent breast reduction surgery when they were 13. Now, I have a question for you: how many under 18 girls do …
/r/MensRights20/05/22 12:59 PM
2

Name some cases I can check up on, then. If it is a fact, it should be easy to find them.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 02:55 AM
-3

Hmmm. I thought you said I am using the same tactics as Kermit, here. Does that mean you think Canadian Baltazar uses shaming tactics?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 02:18 AM
-4

You’re saying that Peterson himself didn’t choose to engage in a reckless therapy that gave him brain damage? Or are you saying it didn’t cause him brain damage? Are you saying Peterson wasn’t addicted to prescription drugs or that he doesn’t sound like Kermit the Frog? Or are you saying you just find Jordo to be one hell of a beautiful man?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 02:12 AM
1

Again, it is the same technology. So how many minors are being given hormonal therapy to change their gender where you live? I live in Brazil which isn’t particularly notorious for being overly concerned with medical ethics and the answer here, as far as I know, is “none”. P.S. If you’re going to call me a liar, perhaps you could at least say what I am lying about?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 02:10 AM
3

No one is arguing that it isn’t. Or that it should be legal. This is silly.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:37 AM
1

There is no such thing as “hormonal transgender therapy”. There is just hormonal therapy. And on the rare cases it is given to underaged people, it usually has nothing to do with gender roles. As for “demagogue”… friend, I read, write, and speak three languages. When your Portuguese is as good as my English, then you’ll be in a position to pick orthographic nits.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:35 AM
-2

By definition, switching gender via gender reassignment surgery is only something that’s allowed after a loooong assessment process wherein it is adjudged that person would be more mentally harmed NOT to do it. Why is this shit even an issue on a men’s rights board?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:32 AM
2

Can you show me cases where gender assignment of minors occurs in the U.S.?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:31 AM
2

Removal of foreskins — while it should be illegal — isn’t gender reassignment surgery.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:29 AM
-9

Jordan Peterson is not particularly pretty. He’s also a self-inflicted brain-damaged drug addict with a voice like Kermit the Frog who makes very dodgy claims about human nature. Fuck Jordan Peterson. No woman as hot as Yumi Nu is giving him the time of day, let alone anything else.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 01:27 AM
1

Uhm, it IS against the law for anybody but adults. If this is what people are getting pissed off at, “people” are having their chains yanked by unscrupulous demagogs.
/r/MensRights19/05/22 10:24 PM
2

Frankly, there are very few women out there who want to “trap” some dude who makes — what? 80k a year? — and become a slave to a kid for 18 years and probably the rest of her life for the princely sum of, maaaaaaybe, 32k a year. I live in Brazil, where gender-based economic disparity is far greater than in the U.S. and family and child support laws are more draconian (you don’t pay child support, you go to jail here, sport: do not pass Go, certainly do not collect 200 dollars), and even HERE the…
/r/MensRights19/05/22 03:38 PM
1

I think those people should see psychologists and psychiatrists. The second to help balance out any chemical problems they are having and the first to help retrain their brains.
/r/MensRights19/05/22 01:37 PM
1

You think you are dying because of masturbation? Is that is what is going on here?
/r/MensRights19/05/22 01:34 PM
1

Actually? Great example. A fever is something that exists and is proven with positive, empirical evidence. Doctors do not “prove you don’t have a fever”: they presume you don’t because there is no evidence to the contrary.
/r/MensRights19/05/22 01:33 PM
1

Actually, you got it bassackwards there, sport: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs absolutely cannot do what they do WITHOUT the millions of average folks like you and me. Einstien at least recognized this. You seem to have a comic book hero “great man” view of human evolution which just doesn’t stack up to reality. Stephen Hawkins would have quickly died without a nurse around to constantly change his diaper. Also, these “great men” you are talking about? Not particularly well known for their self-contr…
/r/MensRights19/05/22 01:31 PM
3

Wow! How do I deal with this? I have sex with reasonable people, use contraception, and assume that it is an imperfect world and mistakes happen. I have never met a woman who wants to “trap” me, so I feel pretty good. (Fifty five year old on his second marriage, btw.)
/r/MensRights19/05/22 01:18 PM
1

Nope. They are basically the flip side of each other.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 01:49 AM
4

Most circumcisions are not harmful. And, to be honest, a lot of FEMALE circumcisions aren’t either (for those who don’t get this, not all female circumcisory practices involve clitodectomies). But in both cases, you are mucking about with an incredibly sensitive part of the human body for no functional purpose whatsoever and, what’s worse, doing it to an infant who cannot possibly give consent. Also, the foreskin is often attached to one of the most sexually sensitive parts of the penis: the bel…
/r/MensRights17/05/22 03:43 PM
1

The real reason is most circumcised men don’t see themselves as having any problems because of circumcision and society justifies it as “merely a harmless religious practice”.
/r/MensRights16/05/22 11:44 AM
5

They made some excellent films, for one thing.
/r/MensRights16/05/22 07:55 AM
-8

They are not federal laws.
/r/MensRights14/05/22 10:45 PM
1

Hey, I have an idea. The Taliban just ordered all women to wear burqas in order to not provoke men. By your logic, those guys must be really “evolved”, socially speaking. I am very sure you can get enough money together to go live in Afghanistan, they are obviously engaged in much more “progress” than Western Europe or the Americas. Why not move there, where no one will be provoking you any more?
/r/MensRights13/05/22 03:15 AM
1

Give me an example, please, of the scientific method proving something DOESN’T exist.
/r/MensRights13/05/22 01:21 AM
1

“Drug selling mind”? :D Get help, man. Seriously.
/r/MensRights13/05/22 01:20 AM
1

Again, that’s not how science works, son. Science is incapable of proving a negative. It is YOU who have to prove this is a significant problem and that it specifically strikes men.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 04:01 PM
1

“Progress”? So not only are you an obsessive, you think some cultures are superior to others? Based on what metric, exactly? Most of these cultures are indeed as monogamic (or not) as we are. Also? Most of them are almost certainly living lives that are much happier than yours, so I have to wonder what you think has “progressed” here. Seriously, man. Get help. You’re obsessive. The fact that you’ve told me “you’re done” some four times here and yet keep on shit posting is evidence of this.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 03:59 PM
1

You being provoked into obsessive behavior by the mere sight of women’s bodies is not a “men’s issue”: it’s a “you” issue. Get help.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 03:07 PM
1

…he says, for the third time, after posting eight replies to me. Get help, man. Seriously. Women are not “provoking” you by showing their bodies.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 02:53 PM
1

This is a non sequitur. To begin with, where did I say psychological issues can be ignored?
/r/MensRights12/05/22 02:52 PM
1

Seriously, man: if you think women are “provoking” you simply by showing their bodies, get help. Also? You’re talking to a Brazilian anthropologist here. I have been to many native villages where people wear no clothes whatsoever. Oddly enough, no males seem to feel “provoked” by the sight of women’s bodies there. If this sort of thing is disturbing you to the point of obsession — and it seems it is, if you think this causes incessant masturbation — you really need to seek out professional menta…
/r/MensRights12/05/22 02:51 PM
1

If you have a hypothesis, you have to prove it with evidence. It is not up to others to prove things DON’T exist: you must show that they do. So given that lots of money could be made off of this problem you claim is widespread, and given that the current quasi-consensus among mental health professionals is that “addiction to masturbation” doesn’t exist, per se, I think the shoe’s on your foot here to show that it is indeed a widespread problem. Speaking as someone who trains health professional…
/r/MensRights12/05/22 02:48 PM
0

And, as I said, the article doesn’t say a damned thing about what masculine identity IS, or even COULD BE, but blames feminism for there supposedly not being one. Again, this is what we in the biz call “bullshit”.
/r/MensRights11/05/22 03:38 AM
0

And I pointed out that this article does not, in fact, answer that question with anything other than “whatever feminism isn’t”. I find it rather hard to be motivated to fight for an identity that cannot even be concisely described. Again, if you want to see a much BETTER enunciation of this same hypothesis, which might actually help you to think about what men should and should not be, I suggest Faludi’s “Stiffed”. If all you want to do is feel outrage that you are a man, then this article here …
/r/MensRights10/05/22 08:48 PM
0

You want a list of this article’ problems? Here we go… “The point here is that not much of this pre-feminist scholarship was the result of any specific interest in men, let alone bias in favor of them.” Wrong. There was no specific interest in men, but there was indeed a huge bias that men were the only people who really counted, who were doing anything interesting. The author is either incredibly naive here or writing in bad faith when they describe all the factors that gave a HUGE bias in anth…
/r/MensRights10/05/22 03:09 PM
1

Have you ever read Faludi’s “Stiffed”? It does a much, much better job.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 03:03 PM
1

OK. But what IS that collective identity? What would it contain, specifically? How is it imagined? Again, this is what they are measuring, right? They are specifically saying there is a lack of it. So don’t they have to define what they are looking for and what they claim is absent? I mean, I write scientific articles all the time. This seems to me a basic thing that should’ve been brought up in peer review.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 02:00 PM
1

It also doesn’t mean that they are. You sound an awful lot like a guy casting around for some sort of rationalization for your own psychological problems.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 05:19 AM
1

OK, here’s one warning for you: quit presuming other people are somehow “provoking” you into doing what you want to,do.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 05:18 AM
1

Again, it sounds to me like you are generalizing your own particulars.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 05:17 AM
1

No, none of that is shown by any peer reviewed scientific evidence. At all. Sorry, old son, but that’s folklore and superstition speaking there.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 05:16 AM
1

What makes you think there’s even a problem specific to masturbation? I can buy a DNA influence on OCD.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 04:10 AM
1

They aren’t specific to masturbation. People might need warnings about obsessive behaviors.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 04:08 AM
1

Yes. And so…? Funny how people on this sub think that I am a woman.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 04:08 AM
1

What harm — specifically — do you think masturbation causes? These mental problems I’m talking about are not specific to it: they are general to a whole range of obsessive behaviors. Focusing on masturbation misses the forest for the trees and thus does nothing to aid mental health.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 04:07 AM
1

I certainly am not living like that. Are you sure you’re not universalizing your particulars?
/r/MensRights10/05/22 01:11 AM
1

Nope. I think the problem is psychological.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 01:10 AM
-1

No, it isn’t. All the first paragraph says is that it is threatened. I want to know what it IS.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 01:09 AM
1

Covid and cancer have killed a lot of people. Masturbation hasn’t. You are aware of this basic difference here, right?
/r/MensRights09/05/22 04:29 PM
1

Frankly, I don’t think there’s any evidence that masturbation is the problem here.
/r/MensRights09/05/22 03:01 PM
-1

Tell me: what is “masculine identity”, exactly?
/r/MensRights09/05/22 02:26 AM
1

I take it you’re not a research scientist. First of all, nothing is simply “one study”. Anything important needs reproduction, otherwise it’s shit. So when you’re talking about subtle effects that may not even be there… It’s hard to get funding. It’s kind of like trying to get money to study the possible negative effects of excessive sweating. Secondly, how the hell would you even DESIGN an appropriate research project? Try figuring it out in your head. It’s not easy. Third, there’s so much fuck…
/r/MensRights09/05/22 02:01 AM
1

Am I a man? I dunno. Seems like a very high bar to clear, especially for some of the folks on Reddit. Let’s just say I have no objection to being called a man, but it’s not an identity I am particularly invested in. That good enough for you? What I am saying is that the effects are subtle and are most probably not negative — at least according to everything we’ve seen so far. Given that, you’re not going to get much funding to go off on what, scientifically speaking, is probably a wild goose cha…
/r/MensRights08/05/22 03:39 PM
-1

I love these first two sentences of yours: claim something is good for women, declare that’s what they want, then end with the rhetorical question “right?” No, I’d say “wrong”. Most women I know want better men, not no men. And “better” is a really low bar here: no sexual harassment, increased domestic involvement. Those two things alone would reduce most women’s complaints about men to a minimum. Of course, there are also a lot of women who don’t like men, much like u/cheescakedense3395 doesn’t…
/r/MensRights08/05/22 02:04 PM
1

Did you read that article? What it says is that maybe some things can be discovered by further research, but what we know already tends towards the exact opposite of what “no fap” advocates claim. In fact, the article begins by situating people with those beliefs in a long history of global superstitions regarding ejaculations. One thing seems pretty clear: if anything, orgasm seems to be linked to increased male testosterone production, with higher levels of testosterone linked to higher levels…
/r/MensRights08/05/22 01:58 PM
1

The best overall history of this would be Michel Foucault’s History of Sexuality. There are almost certainly entire books on the history of masturbation, alone. I’d also suggest any history of Dr. Kellogg. In fact, someone even made a comedy film out of his story which is worth seeing.
/r/MensRights08/05/22 01:41 PM
-1

Lots of studies on how masturbatory guilt can contribute to psychopathic behavior, yes. I know of no study showing that constant masturbation causes any physical effects besides, perhaps, chafing. Given the biomechanics of orgasms, constant orgasms could possibly make one addicted to dopamine releases. There have so far been no studies proving that. And, certainly, any compulsive behavior is troubling for mental health reasons. Here’s the deal, though: people have thought that masturbation “weak…
/r/MensRights08/05/22 03:27 AM
1

What are you talking about?
/r/MensRights07/05/22 11:45 PM
0

LOL. I’d be interested in seeing the result. Maybe a pay-to-publish venue would touch it? I have an anthropology Ph.d and know how to do some computer programing in C++, so I am pretty sure I can make an award-winning computer game. A lot of the ones being published are really shit and I bet I could do better. I’d be curious, btw, to see an example of an article “bitching about incels right in the abstract”.
/r/MensRights07/05/22 11:39 PM
9

Well, feminism IS a hodgepodge. You got that part right.
/r/MensRights07/05/22 11:36 PM
0

Not according to any viable peer reviewed research I have ever seen. All the work I have seen on sex addiction also indicates that it is not a thing as opposed to, say, addiction to golf, video games, or any other pleasure-inducing activity. I know the couple who began this whole “sex addiction” thing back in the 2010s and they have done no substantial research in the area, nor do they have any training in it. They are, in short, grifters.
/r/MensRights07/05/22 11:24 PM
-13

Avoiding half of the human race? Yeah, I’ll go with that’s a bad thing.
/r/MensRights07/05/22 07:53 PM
6

The short answer is because the biomechanics of addiction are pretty much the same for most things. Sex addiction is thus not a specific thing, really, as separate from — say — addiction to gambling or to long-distance running. What you are addicted to are the chemicals your own body produces. Also, both men and women are born with muscles and beauty.
/r/MensRights07/05/22 05:32 PM
7

Oh, god, so true! I did stripping, too. Hens’ nights are the worst. And this is legitimate men’s rights shit here. In New Orleans at the time, there was a very firm no touch law… for the girls. For the boys? We’d come out of there black and blue.
/r/MensRights06/05/22 01:57 AM
3

Plenty are, actually.
/r/MensRights06/05/22 01:55 AM
1

Not even close. And I research sex work for a living. Go down to any vice division and see how many suspected johns are in the can versus suspected pros, just for starters.
/r/MensRights06/05/22 01:55 AM
1

Yes you did, in fact. You said your definition was “feminist canon”. The simple fact of the matter is this, Sonny Jim: you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about.
/r/MensRights05/05/22 09:36 PM
1

It is apparently all you have, given that you apparently can’t cite any famous feminist theorist as to what patriarchy is.
/r/MensRights05/05/22 09:09 PM
1

Because on this case you can help get political goals achieved. I mean, presuming one cares about those goals and not just about feeling aggrieved and victimized.
/r/MensRights05/05/22 01:07 PM
1

Nice dodge. Where did your definition of patriarchy come from?
/r/MensRights05/05/22 02:55 AM
2

See? Now here’s an alliance opportunity with feminists: “We’ll support you on abortion rights in exchange for your support on paper abortion”.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 05:48 PM
1

Exactly what I am saying. That is precisely what tautologies like the one you have constructed here are for. Wanna prove me wrong? Give me the feminist theoretical source from which you took that definition of “patriarchy theory”. Turns out, I have spent most of the last year doing a deep dive into this and I haven’t found that definition anywhere. But if your understanding of feminism comes from arguing with teenagers on the internet, I am not surprised that is what you think it is.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 05:14 PM
38

It should not be happening.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 02:29 AM
-5

Probably because no American boys are being drafted. Back in the 1960s and early ‘70s, when they were, the women’s movement was against it.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 01:30 AM
1

I like how you define Patriarchy Theory yourself so that it tautologically supports you arguments. Nice rhetorical trick but…. mediocre.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 01:06 AM
1

“Patriarchy” does not mean “all men”. You understand it means “rule of the fathers”, right?
/r/MensRights03/05/22 03:42 PM
1

Why?
/r/MensRights03/05/22 12:05 AM
2

Opened up the discussion about gender roles and equality, for one thing.
/r/MensRights03/05/22 12:00 AM
-3

I agree. I think many feminists are, in fact, sincere MRAs’ best allies.
/r/MensRights02/05/22 03:59 PM
1

It has been the only definition you have given so far. And I have shown you now, repeatedly, why it can’t be compared to kids fighting with sticks. That kind of behavior is instinctive in kittens, but not in us.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:05 PM
1

I told you why human beings don’t let their kids just wail away at each other with sticks. You remember that, right? The main reason being that this is NOT instinctive play in the first place. We did not evolve to be predators: unlike kittens, we LEARNED how to do it.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:01 PM
1

I did. Kittens play fighting is a piss-poor metaphor for human socialization, for the five or so reasons I gave.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:58 PM
1

Plenty of horseplay at the Y, unless your definition of “horseplay” is “I get to beat up other kids”. Which it really sounds like it is.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:56 PM
1

Again, define “horseplay”. If it’s sports and wrestling, there are plenty of opportunities for that.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:53 PM
1

Oh, sure. Because literally the past 4000 years of human history shows us that unpaid, household bound, economically dependent women caregivers are highly respected by men.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:52 PM
1

Again, we’ve already established there are lots of alternatives. My mom was a single parent mom in the 1970s. She didn’t have cash. I went to the Y. I played in parks. I biked. If these opportunities are lacking where you live, that is not feminism’s fault: its late stage capitalism.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 03:02 PM
1

Not even closely comparable. They show no signs of conceiving of the moon when it is not there. That’s what abstract cognition is about. And what “instincts” are these that you think are “completely suppressed”, exactly?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 02:56 PM
2

They can, yes. But so far, you haven’t given any good example of how that is the case. Again, for the umpteenth time, what do you feel you lacked? You could have wrestled in middle school. Hell, here in Brazil, we just had a girl win the silver in skateboarding. She started doing it when she was seven. In a fairy costume. And she’s broken bones numerous times. So what was stopping you?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:32 AM
1

Not really. Neanderthals had bigger brains than we do. It’s the WAY we think, rather than any raw computing power, that sets us apart. Of course, there has to be a minimum brain size to do what we do, but big brain does not necessarily mean abstract cognition. Not even among humans. As for mice…. Wake me when they start creating tribes.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:28 AM
2

You don’t get it, do you? Those “guidelines”…? That’s exactly what we are talking about when we say “controlled environment”. We do this with human kids because — unlike every other creature on the planet (that we know of, at least) — they learn far too quickly. They can problem solve lightening quick loooong before they can conceive of what their actions mean or do. That doesn’t happen with cats, say. Not anywhere to the same degree. Some humans, in fact, never really catch on to abstract cogni…
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:26 AM
4

The key is to let kids learn without getting themselves killed. Let me take a wild guess here: you’ve never raised a child, right? Because it seems to me that you have no idea how dangerous human children can be. It’s not that they don’t learn from experience. Very much the contrary, in fact: they learn way too quickly before they can abstractly conceive of the results of their actions.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:20 AM
2

I am saying that it’s a lot more than that. Cats definitely think. Humans are a superorganic species. Cultural and social programming is what drives most of the particulars of their behavior, not instinct. And that programming goes a lot deeper, a lot longer back, than most people can grasp. We are not blank slates, but I’d be very interested in hearing of any major behaviors of ours that you think are instinctively produced without heavy cultural moderation. Cats, notoriously, do none of this. …
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:16 AM
1

And that is quite toxic to women.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:10 AM
1

In other words, you wish to be an animal and not a human being. Tough luck.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:10 AM
4

No, not really. And there are a couple reasons why. First of all, felines have evolved to be hunter-carnivores for millions upon millions of years. They have some pretty heavy instinctual restraints to hurting each other, especially as kittens. Humans have only learned to be predators very recently, in evolutionary terms. We have no such instincts. Secondly, humans are massively more socially and culturally programmed as opposed to pretty much any other animal out there. AFAIK, no other animal e…
/r/MensRights24/04/22 07:04 AM
1

So your argument seems to boil down, then, to a wish that humans were non-cognitive animals? You realize it only takes six to twelve weeks to raise a kitten, right?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:57 AM
3

Not even close. As a matter of fact, you haven’t even defined “horseplay” yet, except to equate it with the lawless behavior of cats (not kittens, note). So if anyone’s doing equating between cat’s and humans here, it’s you in your OP. I am just trying to figure out what it is you are envisioning there.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:49 AM
1

Why would eleven year old boys be sexual?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:48 AM
1

Feminism was definitely not a big motivating force in the U.S. in the 1950s, no. Nor even the ‘60s. Look, kid: I live in a very unfeminist culture where kids are given much more leeway, in many ways, than in the U.S. But you’d better believe parents here put a quick stop to kids whacking at each other with sticks or beating on each other, just like in the States. The very concept of parenting is based on controlling your kid’s urges. If you’re upset with feminism over that, you’re truly ranting …
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:46 AM
3

In controlled settings is the key to what he is saying there. Kids are not put onto the tatame and just allowed to hack away at each other. And never have been.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:42 AM
1

You think maybe a lot of what you believe here is perhaps you similarly projecting from a bad knowledge base? Is that a possibility?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:41 AM
1

I do, too. How am I denigrating homosexuals, exactly?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:38 AM
2

Is that what happened to you? Because I assure you, that’s not feminism. That’s something that happened back in the fifties.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:38 AM
1

Got a source on that?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:37 AM
2

You get that gamer said “controlled settings”, correct? That has ALWAYS been the case, as I have pointed out many times. Feminism isn’t putting a kabosh on your “horseplay”.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:36 AM
1

So, excuse me, your complaint again is what, exactly?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:34 AM
1

Name one.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:34 AM
1

How so?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:33 AM
1

Karate tournaments are going along as much as they ever have. If you think eight year olds were being allowed to fight without months — even years — of training fifty years ago, guess again.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:31 AM
1

You have never heard women calling out other women on toxic female behavior, I take it?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:29 AM
1

Sure. I don’t think it’s a martial art, but OK. You’re saying feminism stopped you from sweatily grappling with other boys in middle school?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:25 AM
1

You’re the one who made a post complaining vaguely about it. It seems to me you should have some idea.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:24 AM
0

What point is that? That women don’t find certain types of femininity toxic? Most feminisms certainly do.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:23 AM
2

Not in the way martial arts does. A couple hours of gym class every week is way below the level of even a mildly decent martial arts class. But, even so, sports also allows you to horseplay. I think the basic problem here is that you have a very specific definition of “horseplay” which is wrapped up in the idea of possibly being able to hurt someone else. Because society (not feminism, note) doesn’t make it easy for you to do that as a kid, you feel you’ve missed out on something “primal” and ar…
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:22 AM
1

Martial Arts is not an extension of horseplay. I was doing it almost fifty years ago when I was a kid and they had the same restrictions they have now. Feminism is not what is stopping you from joining Fight Club: responsible martial arts practitioners are.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:15 AM
1

Not really. Just how old are you? You sound like, maybe, 19. What physical activity do you think you’re going to get in martial arts that’s so fun, exactly?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:13 AM
-5

Yes they do. And with good reason.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:12 AM
1

Exactly.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:12 AM
0

Really? And this happened to you? And you define “horseplay” as martial arts? :)
/r/MensRights24/04/22 06:11 AM
3

Discipline. Physical fitness. Mastery of one’s body. “Fun” usually isn’t the reason, although work outs can give you an endorphin high. People who go into martial arts thinking it’s some sort of fight club usually don’t last long, in spite of what “Cobra Kai” may have taught you.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:57 AM
1

Funny that you can’t seem to answer my question: what exactly do you think has been denied to you?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:55 AM
-6

Oh, most feminisms were pretty damned clear about how toxic it is to women.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:54 AM
1

What grift? That word doesn’t mean what you seem to think it does.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:53 AM
3

Martial arts aren’t children’s playtime.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:52 AM
-8

Uh huh. What legal system prevented you from playing with other children, exactly?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 05:51 AM
0

Yes.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:57 AM
-4

“Soy boys”? So how about you tell me you’re insecure about your masculinity to the point where you think tofu is a threat to it?
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:56 AM
-3

Firesign Theater had your number fifty years ago, my man: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8VD4JXUozM “When do I get to start beatin’ up bozos? I bought the pajamas!” The fact that you think martial arts is “horseplay” says an awful lot about where you are with this. For your info, I don’t know any reputable martial arts school — at least in the past century — that just let you start flailing away at other people, untrained. You’d hurt yourself and, worse, maybe hurt someone else. Martial arts a…
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:55 AM
-10

What in the actual hell are you talking about? Are you saying you feel the need to torture and dismember mice, or something? Because I’m not at all clear what it is feminists supposedly deprived you of here.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:53 AM
-7

Not at all! Because it has real negative effects on many women’s health and happiness. Men’s, too.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 04:47 AM
0

Traditional femininity is generally considered toxic to women. That was one of the key understandings of most feminisms.
/r/MensRights24/04/22 03:53 AM
1

My parents, apparently. Hey, it could have been “Jordan”, “Chad”, or “Owen”. At least it’s distinctive. I have only met two others in my life. Ready to put your money where your mouth is?
/r/MensRights22/04/22 07:48 PM
1

“Actually, black women are complaining that feminism does nothing for them” sounds pretty categoric, don’t you think? Yeah, did you see what I wrote about job discrimination? You think university humanities programs are any different? And yet, here I am, gainfully employed. My case for gay organizations is that they open up space for non-traditional masculinities, at the very least. You disagree?
/r/MensRights22/04/22 07:47 PM
1

You haven’t read much black feminist thought beyond internet posts, have you? I can guarantee that black women’s thoughts about feminism are a hell of a lot more complicated than that. As for job discrimination, please. As a white, cis, het, male social anthro doing gender studies, I routinely encounter those employment hurdles you’re theoretically talking about. It would be hard to find a more non-friendly hiring environment than the one I am in. And I still get job offers and I get hired and I…
/r/MensRights22/04/22 05:19 PM
1

Sorry, sonny Jim. I have identified myself here repeatedly: Dr. Thaddeus Gregory Blanchette. You brave enough to do the same?
/r/MensRights22/04/22 02:23 PM
1

Sorry, I don’t buy it. First of all, the Ukrainian war is showing us how a conscript army gets pwned by a well trained volunteer army. The conscripts who went into the Ukrainian military seven weeks ago are barely making it to the battlefield now. Hell, even Russia is relying on mercenaries more than conscripts. And 23% of Ukraine’s army is made up of female volunteers. AND Ukraine is hardly a beacon for feminism. If the U.S. or Western Europe ever has to go back to serious conscription, women w…
/r/MensRights22/04/22 01:42 AM
1

Again, if what you say is true, women aren’t going to avoid it, either.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 01:37 AM
1

Let me clear it up for you: 99% of these “boys” whining about their oppression? They have not now, nor ever will be, conscripted.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 01:27 AM
1

I hardly introduced it to this sub. It comes up every time someone here wants to point to a great feminist conspiracy to oppress men. Usually by guys whose closet proximity to military service has been playing Call of Duty.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 01:15 AM
1

I don’t think you are anything but an anonymous voice on the internet who can claim whatever the fuck you want about yourself. How convenient for you, neh?
/r/MensRights22/04/22 12:47 AM
1

Isn’t something like 23% of Ukraine’s armed forces women? And that’s without conscription. There are plenty of different types of feminists. You are depriving yourself of allies in order to feel aggrieved.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 12:45 AM
1

“Our movement”? I hate to tell you this, cousin, but I am part of said movement. Last time I looked, your name wasn’t stamped on it. But I’d like to point out that, for someone who casts themselves as some sort of queer fundamentalist in this post, it is very odd that there is nothing at all, anywhere in your Reddit posting history, showing that you even have a passing interest in queer politics. Given that I am quite easily searchable and that you’re a 22 day old account that pretty much only s…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 05:15 PM
2

OK, that’s a better question. But it has to be met with another: why do you presume that there’s a divide being doing things for men and doing things for gay men? No feminist would ever make that silly ass divide: “Oh, you’re doing things to help black women and not ALL women? You are not a feminist.” There are really a lot of false assumptions about the human condition that need to be unpacked there, but let’s just go with one: working for the rights of a subset of men AS MEN should be understo…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 02:43 PM
1

I am not saying “you” personally. I should have said “one”. It’s a generic “you”. Regarding the draft, look… When you’re big oppression is something that isn’t happening, only might happen, and which has a great chance of either never happening or of being applied to both sexes if it does if only you’d ally with feminists, then you are really reaching in order to feel oppressed by feminism. Eliminating conscription entirely or making it applicable to both sexes is trivially easy compared to, say…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 01:20 PM
1

It was fixed here in Brazil, by feminists, in one fell swoop. I imagine things are a bit different in the U.S. where these laws are state by state. Also, anglo legacy law systems have some very strange ideas about sex. Look at all the African countries where male-on-male rape cannot legally occur.
/r/MensRights21/04/22 01:09 PM
1

Look at what you wrote: you said gay organizations are not doing anything for gay men. Don’t move the goal posts, now!
/r/MensRights21/04/22 05:19 AM
1

Gays are not doing anything about gay male issues? Oh, c’mon! Either you mispoke or are being tremendously ignorant. The trans lobby is not more powerful than feminism today. Take a gander at the wave of legislation being passed targeting trans people. If this is your view of the world, no wonder you feel oppressed. You are wrong.
/r/MensRights21/04/22 04:56 AM
1

That “rape by penis” law wasn’t made by feminists, friend. It’s a left over from the time when MEN believed that men could never be raped. Here in Brazil, we actually have a rape law built by feminists. It does not define the penis as a necessary tool of aggression.
/r/MensRights21/04/22 04:53 AM
1

All I can say is that I haven’t met an MRA yet who can actually define what an intersectional approach is. I HAVE met some feminists who can. When you say you reject intersectionality, what you really are saying is that you are a fanatic who believes that a uniaxial analysis will account for everything we see in the social world. “Nirvana fallacy”? You realize that most of the countries the people posting here are from do not actually have a draft? That’s not “Nirvana”, friend: that’s the common…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 04:51 AM
1

Now, this is total bullshit. First of all, arranged and relatively consanguineal marriages were common pretty much everywhere until relatively recently. There is no evolutionary reason why thousands of years of this in, say, Peru, the Balkans, or Estonia would be wiped out by a century or so of relative modernity while the same thing didn’t happen in Korea or Japan. In fact, his stereotyping of “western” and “non western” here is so crude and uninformed it borders on racist. Japan is an undevelo…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 04:40 AM
1

Whoosh. OK, where to begin? Ellis’ evidence comes from two sources: an overview of published research (which is what the guy you quoted complains about in Hyde’s work as open to dubious interpretations) and a low N comparative study of self-reported behavior among Malaysian and American inmates. Needless to say, both of these are extremely weak reeds upon which to hang seeping generalizations about humanity. Even so, he himself is unable to explain the data in purely evolutionary and biodetermin…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 04:39 AM
1

The evidence supporting that criticism, at least in that quote, is that the researcher didn’t look at the 2017 and 2018 studies… for a book written in 2005. Again, do I have to spell out the problem with this sort of logic? Apparently, I might have to. Uhm, I hate to break it to you, but intragroup differences are not that great among humans. Are you perhaps talking about sex differences? I’m actually going to READ that study, by Ellis and tell you what I think about it. It’s kind of odd, howeve…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 03:01 AM
1

I think MRAs are good at RHETORICALLY supporting gay men. I don’t see them doing shit on gay men’s issues, though. Which is ironic, seeing how so many guys here apparently think it’s feminism’s job to stop conscription. Male disposability is, indeed, one of the few interesting ideas out there in the MRA sphere. But guess what? Black feminists were talking about that 40 some years ago. It’s not exactly a new or even revolutionary idea. I agree with your critique. I’d much rather spend my time tal…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 12:56 AM
1

No, I am pointing out some epistemological and empirical problems with studies that are low N, that recruit from basically white, middle class English-speaking populations (with perhaps an occasional foray into China or Japan or France), and which seek to prove human universals. Knowing what I know about human play and toys as a social anthropologist with a side line into archeology, I am wondering how anyone could positively identify the gender of toys on a cross-cultural basis when we are lear…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 12:41 AM
2

Why? Because I am talking about how FEMINISMS see the world. I mean, that should be obvious. As for feminism being a library of ideas, it’s even hard to say that, as it is constantly evolving. That’s why I see it more as a field rather than as a distinct philosophy or position. As to whether it’s “filled with poisonous ideas”, that accusation can be leveled at any field. I haven’t seen men’s movements, in any form, create anything like the width or breadth of ideas that’s observable in feminism.…
/r/MensRights21/04/22 12:34 AM
1

Why should feminism fight it? I think most feminisms (note the plural) would say “Not my monkey, not my circus”. I haven’t seen any real evidence of the Duluth Model harming men. It’s a model used to try and rehabilitate domestic offenders AFTER they have been charged, not a model for making laws regarding domestic violence. And I do agree: many of its assumptions appear to be flawed. I would like to see some evidence that only men can be charged with rape. Here in Brazil, it is definitely not t…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 11:57 PM
1

I am not aware that feminism HAD an original definition. And we can see in this very sub how well appeals to any definition of feminism that’s not a caricature work.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 11:25 PM
1

I can think of a couple. I can’t think of any conducted by a woman in frustration over her not having any sexual partners. So, again, I feel pretty safe in saying that, whatever the term “incel’s” origins, these days it’s pretty much a male movement that is notoriously misogynistic.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 10:17 PM
1

“Toy preference”, huh? So was that study cross cultural? Are any of these studies? What were their Ns and what was the methodology involved in choosing subjects? The article you are quoting from seems to be a bit disingenuous because it apparently criticizes Hyde’s 2005 work for not taking into consideration work done in 2017 and 2018. I’d love to have that Ellis study, btw, if you have a link to it. I am guessing that his “international” comparisons are hardly rigorous.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 09:31 PM
1

Re: the first article, it doesn’t appear to say that there’s some sort of determinative hormonal or genetic component to male psychology, does it? The 2019 publication gives me an error message. The third article seems to support what I am saying: testosterone affects development, yes, but it is not an exclusively male hormone, nor does it seem to be what determines aggression in men. What we now know is that hormonal development is a constant tug of war determining sex and gender, not a simple …
/r/MensRights20/04/22 09:01 PM
1

Sorry, man. There is no “unique” gender-based parenting style. There are culturally-induced, patterns, yes. Regarding that paper, which seems to be a master’s or doctoral thesis, again, they are self-selecting for their values of “father” in a reductionist and even tautological way. There is absolutely no proof presented in that paper, that I can see, that fathers occupy some distinct space as opposed to co-mothers, uncles, etc. Regarding your views on “modern psychology” and masculinity, you’re…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 08:27 PM
1

Again, as I always do in these cases, please point me to what you consider the best available piece of research regarding father figures. For the record, though, I agree. I just don’t think these figures necessarily need to be fathers or even men. I think a boy with a bunch of women looking after him is probably going to be functionally indistinct from a kid raised by a mom and dad. Research into lesbian families seems to support this. So if by “father figure” we mean another adult you can ident…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 07:00 PM
1

I wouldn’t consider it a derailment at all. I might disagree with it, but then again, I’m not big into censoring people in order to win internet discussions.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 06:17 PM
1

You can look up to my original post: my opinion has not changed one iota. Deal with it or cry about it, it’s still the same. For better or worse, feminism is too broad and diverse to make any singular statement about it. My best attempt is that feminism sees women as heroic. And that’s about it. There are exclusionist feminisms and inclusionist feminisms; liberal, radical, and even fascist feminisms; feminisms that welcome men and feminisms that hate them; and egalitarian and female supremacist …
/r/MensRights20/04/22 06:14 PM
-1

Read what I have posted, twice, above. Feminism is not some homogenous position which can be tidily resumed in 144 characters or less. No matter what you believe, you can find somewhere in feminism that is for it or against it. So SOME feminisms are definitely for men and some aren’t. There is no singular “feminism”. In any case, men can learn from feminism. Got it this time?
/r/MensRights20/04/22 06:04 PM
1

Nope, I don’t think. This guy became a meme that is repeated in plenty of incel circles to this day. And Rogers didn’t kill out of “love”: he just went on a rando shooting spree. This was not a crime of passion: it was a hate crime.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 06:02 PM
0

No, I didn’t say that feminism is for women only, either. Are you actively trying to build strawmen here, or what? Let me state this again, because you don’t seem to have read it the first time: the only position I have found that all feminisms seem to agree upon is that women are heroic (and let’s be real clear here: for Jospeh Campbell values of heroic).
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:57 PM
1

Relationships are always fraught. What I didn’t do is project my frustration on womankind.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:54 PM
1

Nope. I’ll give you a hint: Eliot Rogers.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:53 PM
1

Perhaps. I have been through a divorce. It was nasty. I got over it.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:52 PM
1

For the simple reason to remind people that stalking isn’t a particularly female behavior, which is what the title of this post implies.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:51 PM
1

You didn’t get the reference, did you? Google “incel perfect gentleman”.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:50 PM
-1

Where did I say feminism is for men, too? That’s a complicated issue and I am not even sure I have strong feelings about it, either way. Certainly, feminism contains insights that can help men.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:49 PM
2

Nope. None at all.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:48 PM
-2

Like I said, that’s not the goal of all of feminism. Even the part that does believe in equality would probably say dealing with old patriarchal structures that fuck over men is not primarily women’s responsability.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:47 PM
0

Uh huh. Many long, violent manifestos posted there, right? Wake me when we get the first Perfect Lady and a whole on line movement dedicated to worshipping her.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:33 PM
2

I am also responding to comments. There’s a guy above saying that families and independence don’t go together. I mean Brazil. We have been doing composite names forever and it’s hardly created a better situation for women or a worse one for men.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:32 PM
0

Uh huh. How many female incels are out there, writing angry manifestos and dreaming of killing all the Chads and Stacys?
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:30 PM
0

Yeah, the OP does seem to think that.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:29 PM
-12

It’s really not feminists job to stop them, is it?
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:28 PM
0

Keep your shirt on, man. Here’s an inspiring male story for me: C.J. Cherryh’s “Foreigner” series. Cherryh in general is good at writing men. Her “Devil to the Belt” series is good, too. Here’s another: Ursula K. LeGuin’s Wizard of Earthsea. Oh, you don’t like reading, you say? The T.V. series version of Station Eleven (especially the character of Jeevan). (In fact, to step out of “stories” the whole “Jackass” series, really. It’s a brilliant deconstruction of young male stupidity.) There are pl…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:25 PM
2

First of all, kudos for you posting a study instead of a media report of a study! That is rare as fuck! Secondly, the first thing that springs out at me is that their definition of “extended” is not the anthropological definition: they are exclusively looking at grandparents, which is problematic for several reasons, as the study itself brings up. Third, gosh, it’s almost as if these results come from a society that is structurally organized in order to privilege nuclear families! One, for examp…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 05:17 PM
1

Having a shitload of uncles is also a good substitute. Like I said, unstable nuclear families are the problem. I would like a link to that study, if you please.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:44 PM
-15

In that definition, those TYPES of feminism, are supremacist, yes. There are quite definitely supremacist movements within feminism. Feminism itself, isn’t. Also? A lot of those things you are on about are not caused by feminism. The notorious divorce and custody issue is caused by the very old and traditional sexist view that women are naturally better caregivers.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:44 PM
3

The “exception” is having a large extended family. The problem is small nuclear families which are, by nature, unstable.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:42 PM
0

That would get me banned on many feminist subs, though, wouldn’t it?
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:41 PM
-3

Nope. Unless disagreeing with them is understood as harassment.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:40 PM
8

Nope. It’s always had an extremist element, but those are the minority. I mostly see guys who’ve been fucked over in personal relations and now seek to feel they are heavily systematically oppressed.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:36 PM
-18

Feminism is a huge field with many internal divergences and conflicts. I think the best definition of it is “a philosophical stance dedicated to the radical idea that women are, in fact, human beings”. That would be the most basic definition. There’s great difficulty in saying anything else. Not all feminists, for example, are dedicated to equality between the sexes. Not all feminists are anti-sexist. About the only thing I can find, in feminism, in all its branches, and after a loooooong engage…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 04:30 PM
1

I think they are both terms created by overwrought boys who think The Matrix is some deep philosophical statement regarding the human condition.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:37 PM
0

Whereas men are more likely to engage in actual physical stalking.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:36 PM
1

Cool! Good job, feminists! I had no idea that they were that powerful, what with abortion laws being rolled back everywhere….
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:35 PM
0

Practice digital inclusion, people!
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:34 PM
0

If Star Wars and Disney are your “gold standard” for entertainment, I have news for you: you are either 13 or haven’t moved beyond that. And I say this as someone who was a HUUUUUGE Star Wars fan…. 46 years ago when I was nine. Disney and Star Wars are not for your grown male ass. You’re SUPPOSED to not be grooving on them when you’re in your thirties.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:34 PM
-1

And this is a problem, why, exactly? Here in Brazil, we’ve been doing composite names for kids since, like, forever. Last I checked, we aren’t particularly noted for women being dominant in our society. Also, what’s wrong with being independent in a family? That’s how mine have always worked and they work fine. A family does not have to be a little fascist corporate lock-step unit led by a mini Duce. There’s plenty of room in families for independence AND cooperation. This is really weak tea as …
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:31 PM
-9

Boy, you make life as a lone wolf sound so attractive.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:27 PM
-28

Welp, I’m on plenty of feminist subs and the only threat to ban me, so far, has come from here.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:26 PM
1

Child of a single mom here: it’s not necessarily fathers that are needed but other adult caregivers. I had a large extended family and in no way missed the daily presence of a father in my life. In fact, I’d wager I’m doing better off than most boys raised in a nuclear family.
/r/MensRights20/04/22 02:25 PM
1

You have created an abstract “feminist man” who you are lecturing to. That’s not a conversation - let alone empathy - and the “feminist man” you have created is a stereotype: the exact sort of thing you blame feminists for doing. “Even naming the situation you are in makes you inadequate sexually”? Please. :) If this is sincerely your take on what “feminist men” feel, you don’t know many feminist men. This sounds an awful lot like projection, sport. And that is exactly the kind of falsehood that…
/r/MensRights20/04/22 01:49 PM
1

I like the fact that you describe feminism as seeing men as “uniform and faceless” while then going on to make a series of generalizations that are not only not supported by empirical data but which treat “feminist men” as, well, uniform and faceless.
/r/MensRights19/04/22 01:02 PM
1

That was entertaining! “As a rule, Black men resent being taught about relationships with women by other men who’ve never had intimate relationships with women.” Er, buddy…
/r/MensRights19/04/22 12:48 PM
-2

In my experience, very few feminist women hate men. This is why I find MRAs so troubling. It seems many of them have taken a cartoonish view of the worst sort of radfem nonsense, inverted the poles, and played it out. The feminist women who created real change in society didn’t waste their time hating men.
/r/MensRights19/04/22 12:45 PM
-2

As someone who saw tons of father avoid child support almost continuously back in the 1970s, I have very little sympathy.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 07:14 PM
1

If I had one wish from a genie, this would be it.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 06:45 PM
1

How would we know?
/r/MensRights18/04/22 02:15 PM
0

That is probably the saddest thing I have read in a while. He’s a MGHOW who’s absolutely obsessed with “feminists”, even when writing out a simple recipe. Protip: imitate lesbian separatists. Most of them don’t give a fuck about what men do. They certainly wouldn’t be harassing men on the internet while cooking. Also? If you’re such a “naturally high earner” and into life solely for yourself, live a little, man. Bragging about eating out twice in one year? You make the MGTOW lifestyle sound so f…
/r/MensRights18/04/22 11:28 AM
1

Wow. Who can argue with an opinion column from the New York Post? Now that’s first rate thinking, right there.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 11:11 AM
0

Yes, one can only speculate. But given many MRAs’ oversized reactions to other perceived infringements on their autonomy, it’s a smart bet. There may be more pro-choice MRAs, indeed (some are so “pro-choice” they want to have the ability to demand a woman abort), but that’s not the point, is it? The point is, you asked me about a concrete example of strong oppression against women and I answered with abortion laws. You then said that some people are sincere pro-lifers (granted) and now that many…
/r/MensRights18/04/22 11:09 AM
0

Oh, my, yes. Ouchie.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 10:58 AM
-1

Unless, of course, one is arguing that MRAs sure seem to use it a hell of a lot more than feminists. :)
/r/MensRights18/04/22 02:04 AM
-1

As opposed to — what — 26 on the feminist sub?
/r/MensRights18/04/22 01:21 AM
-2

Uh huh. No need to dig up old posts, I wager, because said old posts show alphabet theory masculinity has been used pretty consistently here, right? :) I am glad that the people posting here are finally apparently moving away from this embarassment.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 11:38 PM
1

Kisses to you, too, Fallensamurai77.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 11:36 PM
-9

I don’t know enough about Washington State law to comment on this, but the last time I looked into divorce claims on this sub, they turned out to be pretty uninformed. So I am dubious.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 10:01 PM
-4

So it would be fair to say — or at least not totally unfair — that the greek alphabet theory of masculinity seems to be much more popular on this sub, right?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 09:10 PM
-3

Hmmm. 23 to 246 is what you’re saying?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 08:51 PM
9

“The wife testified that she was disabled at the time of the trial. She worked part-time as a substitute teacher and also received SSI benefits.” “The husband testified that his income came from the parties’ business. He also testified as to the value of the commercial property, but there was no evidence of the value of the residence or other assets in the record. The trial court found there was no mortgage or debt.” Actually, sounds like the husband got a really good deal there. So good a highe…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 08:50 PM
-1

Oh, well that’s nice. Sorry to trigger you!
/r/MensRights17/04/22 08:35 PM
0

I have dealt with this CDC report elsewhere. If we take male rape victims as men forced to penetrate someone else together with men penetrated against their will (2015 report I am going on) it’s about 8-9% of men who have suffered some form of rape under Brazil’s much more egalitarian law (rape requires being penetrated in the U.S. and that is how the CDC defines it; in Brazil, any coercive sexual contact is defined as rape). Meanwhile, it’s 21% of women and, what’s worse, the CDC did not even c…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 07:49 PM
1

Pretty much exclusively. But I think the recent post about 80% of divorces being female initiated has some serious “why don’t women do what we want?” energy.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 07:28 PM
-1

Search this sub for “alpha” and see how often the term comes up.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 07:27 PM
1

I don’t know how to do in-reddit links. Suggestion?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 07:21 PM
1

Correct. But it’s political usage has been a manosphere thing. The idea that unless women cater to me, they are exploiting me is the one thing I most often encounter here.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 07:12 PM
-4

I teach gender studies, am male, and am signed up for two different countries’ drafts, thanks. As for all those other things, women have fought to be ALLOWED to do them, generally against entrenched male opposition. So why you think the disproportionate number of men in those trades is caused by women’s… I dunno? Laziness? Stupidity? … is beyond me. We both know that the moment 51% of plumbers are women, folks like you will immediately change your tune and say “women are dominating the field”. T…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 06:58 PM
-1

That’s hardly the reason. Those same people generally don’t give a damn for the lives of those fetuses once they arrive on this planet. And those same people are often also on record as opposing any kind of family structure other than what they consider to be traditional — as well as sex education, improving women’s access to birth control, and a whole lot of other, similar, issues. Yes, there are a relative handful of sincere prolifers. They aren’t the ones making the laws, however. MRAs would …
/r/MensRights17/04/22 06:54 PM
1

You’re correct. However, the manosphere massively popularized incel and politicized it. Can you tell me how “pretty much every [on this subreddit]” becomes “every man on reddit” for you? I stand by my original statement and your warping of it isn’t “taking the mickey”: it’s just intentional hyperbolic bullshit. Which is fine. I don’t mind. But let’s be clear about what it is. As for greek letter masculinity, do a search for “alphas” on this sub and see how many times it comes up.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 05:26 PM
1

Whoooooooosh. :)
/r/MensRights17/04/22 05:21 PM
-1

OK, strong example of female oppression: abortion rights in Brazil, where we are perilously close to making it illegal to abort rapists’ babies. I think your argument about Finland confuses feminists with feminist positions. Feminists do not want conscription, period. How many Finns want to see an end to conscription? The majority? If it’s a controversial position to take, I can see why a government made of feminists will,dodge it, much like feminist policy makers in the U.S. rarely celebrate ab…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 05:07 PM
23

This is GREAT news!
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:57 PM
1

Sure. I am not making a reductionist argument at all. Note I said “many men”. But those are indeed the type of men who have been making the laws for the past 5000 years. Patriarchs. Which, note, are not now and never were most men. But here’s the thing, cousin: under patriarchy, poor women got fucked over for being poor, for being women, and for being poor women. So there is an axis of oppression there that is quite definitely sex based against women. Is it the axis? No. Is it the most important…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:50 PM
1

Shouldn’t that be “buy Felicia”?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:38 PM
1

I am curious to see an example of feminists fighting against laws that acknowledge male rape victims. Can you show me one? I am with you on domestic abuse. But also, seeing that domestic abuse, as a concept, pretty much came out of feminism, the fact that it is even acknowledged as such for men, anywhere, is also directly attributable to feminism. Feminism has done a piss-poor job realizing that men are also subject to it, but that’s not really their responsibility. I DO give MRAs plenty of cred…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:36 PM
1

Objection?! I find it beautifully creative! If it isn’t some sort of exotic bread, it should be!
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:21 PM
-1

What country is that? Israel? Israel has also taken the most steps of any country to make military careers open to women. Finland? IIRC, Finland also has a pretty gender neutral military. I agree that conscription, if it occurs, should be for both sexes. Most feminists I know are 100% anti-conscription. You complain a lot about NOW in the U.S. I do not like NOW myself, but mostly because I see them as a very exclusive women’s organization advocating mostly for Karens and not as an inclusive femi…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:18 PM
1

Y’know, it’s funny you say that, because I have written about the etymological origins of the word “whore” and it’s a pretty rad term, actually. The folks in the world’s English speaking sex worker movements have totally reclaimed it. A good portion of women have also reclaimed “slut”. And yes, I do use “slut” when it’s clear I am not using it as an insult. Most women take it in the spirit it is given in. And my use of “incel” is in that same sense. The guys who came up with the term are proud o…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 04:02 PM
0

Aren’t we all? :)
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:59 PM
1

And you aren’t? :D
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:58 PM
1

So has “politically correct” and “woke”. They have all become snarl words turned against their makers. It’s tragic, I know. But I am using the term here in its original sense, as crafted by the man-o-sphere. Not quite sure I get your thing about “meeting every man on reddit”. Seems like a non-sequitur to me. What I feel safe in saying is that pretty much every guy I have dialogued with here believes in the existence of “alpha” and other greek letter males. Are you saying you don’t? Also not sure…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:54 PM
1

“Baight”? Isn’t that some kind of French bread?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:47 PM
1

Yeah, I agree it has become a go-to insult and a snarl word. But it’s like “politically correct” or “woke” in that sense. Both were originally leftists’ terms and the first was, in fact, an in-joke. The far right turned them into snarl words and now anyone who says anything in favor of treating other human beings who are not “us” as if they have rights (unless they are fetuses, of course) is immediately labeled as politically correct and woke. In the words of the immortal Kurt Vonnegut, “So it g…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:42 PM
1

I am sorry, but that is where I feel you have made a horrible mistake that is very common in a lot of circles (biology, even). Men do not look at women as something to reproduce with and raise children. Unlike what feminists believe, men do not even see them as objects to fuck. Many men, perhaps even most (and certainly those who hold to traditional masculinities) see women and their children as an adjunct to their masculinity: as something that increases their status among men. When I say “subj…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:32 PM
-2

Did you read what I wrote? MRA-adjacent men and the guys who built the whole greek letter masculinity thing (that so many men here seem to be into) CREATED the term “incel”, not women and not guys like me. It’s your baby, cousin. It has only become an “insult” because other people have begun using it to describe the type of behavior many men here celebrate and/or complain about. It’s more like “boomer” than “slut”. Boomers were happy using the term as a self-identifier until the generations foll…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 03:21 PM
-14

And the hate for the term “incel”. Look, I understand it is an insult towards a certain kind of guy. But it was an MRA-adjacent section of the manosphere that came up with it in the first place! The same guys who preach Greek alphabet letter masculinity (which pretty much every man I met here takes as an item of faith)! What people are really offended about is the stereotype of the whingy incel loser living in mama’s basement, right? And I can relate. But if the only thing MRAs have to offer is …
/r/MensRights17/04/22 08:36 AM
-15

Yeah, I kind of feel this too. It feels like the only take-away MRAs get from feminism (other than it’s eeeeeevul) is “we need to act like victims”. They then reverse the poles of this cartoonish view of feminism to make men “the oppressed” and spend their time whinging about it. In the last few weeks I have been here, literally a half dozen men have told me that conscription is male oppression. Note that NONE of these guys actually live in a country where conscription takes place and, were wome…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 08:14 AM
1

There’s literally nothing there to ignore, champ. I can’t find anything in the 2015 CDC sexual violence report that indicates that 80% of male rape victims are victimized by women. Tell the truth, now: you’re confusing the non-contact domestic violence stats with rape stats, aren’t you? And even then, you seem to be presuming the sex of the aggressors. I can’t find any info in that report on the sex of the rapists, but I am open to you showing me where I am wrong. Please do.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:11 AM
1

I just read the 2015 report. I couldn’t find any info on the sex of the aggressors in it. Maybe I missed it. Would you like to point it out?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:07 AM
1

This is relevant to the U.S., given the data presented.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:07 AM
1

OK, read it. Nowhere in that report did I find anything saying that 80% of male rape victims were victimized by women. Would you like to point out to me where in the 2016 report that statistic is? Regarding your beef about penetration, it seems you aren’t reporting the facts as they are stated in that report. Yes, rape is understood as penetration (for both men and women). However, the report has a separate category for men (and only for men): forced to penetrate. If one sums male rape victims a…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:05 AM
1

Thank you. But, again, wouldn’t one link be enough? I’ll look at the 2015 results only, with your kind permission.,
/r/MensRights17/04/22 12:39 AM
1

Isn’t this an open sub to discuss men’s rights? I didn’t see anything in the sub rules saying “Your opinions must pass muster with fallensamurai77.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 12:37 AM
1

Alex Jones and men like him are anything but subtle. I also think demagoguery has been around for a long time. Long enough that its etymological roots are Greek. Also, not so sure about men making laws to keep other men in check. Men made laws, it seems to me, to gain competitive advantage over other men. In resolving the successive contradictions this caused, women were created as subjects (in the Foucaultdian sense) and, as subjects, demanded space for their own interests. None of this happene…
/r/MensRights17/04/22 12:33 AM
1

I should also point out that it is stupid rhetorical tricks like the Gish Gallop that make most folks stay far the fuck away from MRAs. If you’ve got good data on sexual violence by women against men, you should be positively AVID to share it in user friendly form, instead of wrapping it in a bunch of red herrings and non-sequiturs. And this is what pisses off masculinity researchers like me who think MRAs occasionally have a point. We have to put up with these sort of sophomoric debating tricks…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:26 PM
0

One high quality source, please. Just one, supporting what you say. This should logically be easier than posting a laundry list, so if you can’t do it, it’s pretty much a tacit admission that you are bullshitting: doing a Gish Gallop. An honest interlocutor who wanted to prove a point would have no problem at all pointing to one good source that backs up their point. And again, I don’t want to waste time paging through your screed against Mary Koss to find the one possible article that says 80% …
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:20 PM
-1

Mate, have you heard of the debating technique called “the Gish Gallop”? Here’s how it works. Someone makes a a claim. They are asked to back it up. They post a long screed with a multitude of links supposedly proving their point. If their interlocutor doesn’t look through every single link, carefully, they will be accused of “not taking the argument seriously”. If the interlocutor does this, the Gish Galloper fires back with a shitload of other links. The trick is based on the fact that it is a…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:13 PM
1

No. Let me clarify. I am not looking for an in-Reddit link to a long screed with multiple links I have to parse through. That is a waste of your time and mine. What I am asking is this: one SINGLE link to a decent peer reviewed source that shows that 80% of the people who rape men are women. This would be VERY interesting to me and should be pretty easy to provide, if the data is as clear as you claim it to be.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:06 PM
0

Pretty sure Alex learned how to do this when he was a kid, as a lot of boys do.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 09:02 PM
1

One single source that you find to be high quality. Post it, and I promise I will read it.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 08:54 PM
0

Can you provide a link to ONE of those government sources, please? The one you find most compelling, preferably. I am manifestly uninterested in Mary Koss conspiracy theories. I’d just like to see a peer reviewed stat that says 80% of the people who rape men are women. Pretty please.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 08:53 PM
0

Can you provide a link here, please?
/r/MensRights16/04/22 08:52 PM
0

So your hypothesis is that women are raping men in hugely significant numbers and this is undereported because Mary P. Koss? Er, buddy…. Kinda conspiratorial, isn’t it? But if your hypothesis were true, we could test for it in other countries, couldn’t we? Here in Brazil, for example, which is hardly a feminist paradise. Here, the rape laws were changed in 2008 (iirc) to contemplate both sexes and forces sexual activities other than penetration. Rape rates immediately shot up and male victim rat…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 08:49 PM
0

Can we have a source for that statistic? That seems exceedingly unlikely to me, yet it gets reported here all the time.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:55 PM
-1

Yeah, I think Mary is problematic and I think male victims of rape are under-reported. However, is there any good data showing that women are raping men in large quantities?
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:55 PM
1

First of all, I am very conversant with that literature. Which studies are you pointing to? Secondly, did I say men are over represented in aggressive or anti-social behavior. I did say they are over-represented as rapists. Not the same thing at all.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:53 PM
1

Not really. Society as a whole tends to segregate out boys from girls — less so than it used to be, but still quite a lot. And “teaching boys to be men” is still something that’s very much understood to be men’s job. Both feminists and MRAs seem to be in agreement on that point.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:46 PM
-4

That’s a nice theory, but in theory PLENTY of men learn how to emotionally manipulate as well. Hell, just look at Alex Jones.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:44 PM
-7

Well, I can think of a couple of toxic traits that, while not 100% exclusive to masculinity, seem to definitely be constitutive parts of certain types of masculinity and which only rarely show up in women. Rape, for one.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:43 PM
-18

Consider the OP, cousin. The point they are making is that these are traits of toxic femininity. So yes, you win. I was completely unaware that people like Marjorie Tailor Green exist. But now that you have enlightened me with your superior knowledge, we still have to deal with the OP’s point, neh? We can discard this trait as being necessary or specific to femininity. It seems to be an artifact of POWER, not gender.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:42 PM
-7

How do you figure? I mean, how do we even quantify something as vague as “emotional manipulation”? I will say there’s some evidence that women are more communicative than men, but I’d have to say that all evidence points to both sexes being equally manipulative.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:54 PM
-22

So we’re agreed, then: this type of behavior is not particularly feminine. Both men and women engage in it. That’s all I wanted to point out and, miraculously, the folks responding to my point seem to agree.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:52 PM
-7

So not particularly a male or female thing.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:45 PM
-4

So not particularly a male or female thing.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:43 PM
-44

So, like, Donald Trump (or pretty much any powerful male you care to name?)
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:16 PM
-9

Hmm. How are any of these behaviors particularly feminine? In the case of toxic masculinity, there are certain behaviors that are not only valenced and taught as “truly masculine”, they are massively more engaged in by men than by women. Rape comes to mind (and if the guy who once claimed that 80 percent of male rape victims were raped by men is here, I am still,waiting on a source for that.) Just a heads up about rape. The best high N studies we have suggest that male rapists are also much more…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:15 PM
2

Yep. Same sort of mentality. “If our view of the world is not the only one allowed or if, heaven forbid, someone doesn’t like us, we are oppressed and the sky is falling.”
/r/MensRights16/04/22 02:44 PM
1

Sigh. I also brought up Russia. That doesn’t mean I think you are Russian. Wit is really wasted on you, you know that? Also, I originally said fifty years, yes. Then, in the next comment, I said “Actually, it’s longer than that.” About 150 years ago — ‘round about there — is when the first rumblings regarding “western” degeneration started occurring, although they were usually more honest back then and just said “white”. Things really started cooking off about twenty years later, in the 1890s. T…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 06:11 AM
1

“Not American”? Bit of a non-sequitur there, isn’t it? What does that have to do with anything? As for 50 to 150, did you miss the bit where I said “Actually, it’s far longer than that [50 years]?” You should read better.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 05:35 AM
1

You know what your problem is? You can’t see beyond the space-time dynamics of post-Euclidean geometry in order to perceive that power is in fact generated by hormone-reduced gonadal overcompensation super mechanics. Tinyurl(dot)/overcompensationfornevergettingaGED
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:37 AM
0

What I understand here is that you don’t seem to understand the meaning of the following words: Critical race theory; Moralize; Commodification; Interpersonal; Class And also probably not: Feminism; Capitalist; Power; Privilege. I have my serious doubts about “human”, too.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:30 AM
0

Well, you are a bit of an uncontrolled machinegun, firing shots off at random in every direction. So yeah, kind of like a Maxim.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:25 AM
1

So how does intersectionality “force people to be ‘anti-racist’”? And what does that have to do with moralization, commodification,or emotional labor? You know what you sound like? A bot that’s been given a vocabulary taken from feminist sociology journals and programmed to put together sentences. I would seriously not be surprised if that’s what you actually are.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:21 AM
-4

Oh, around 1968.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:09 AM
1

I agree. You do seem to be wasting a lot of time repeating other people’s word configurations. Thank you! That is a very apt description of what you seem to be doing. You’ve noted certain words pop up in conversations about sex and gender, so you figure if you just string them all together in some youtube video and hype that on MRA sites, who knows, maybe you’ll be able to become internet famous? Like I said, I have too much good stuff to listen to to bother with trashpanda pickings and conspira…
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:08 AM
1

You don’t really even understand what “commodified” means, do you? Son, spinning donuts on the lawn might be fun, but it’s not hard work.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:03 AM
3

I am saying that people have been claiming that for close to 150 years now and the whine never changes. Also? How about you define “Western Civilization” here, just for starters. We talking Russia, too, or only California?
/r/MensRights16/04/22 04:02 AM
1

“The moralization of the commodification of emotional labor”…? What does that have to do with intersectionality? Tell the truth now: you really don’t have the slightest understanding of what you are talking about. You are just stringing terms together.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:59 AM
3

Yep. But more importantly, I’m a reader. (Actually, people have been complaining about the imminent death of ‘Western Civilization’ for faaaaaar longer than that. Google “Madison Grant”.)
/r/MensRights16/04/22 03:56 AM
2

Don’t we all.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 01:29 AM
1

I think things were a wee bit more complicated than simply “choosing”, as if she walked into a car lot.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:41 AM
1

I’m sure it must be.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:40 AM
1

Friend, I am not going to pump your youtube channel until and unless you demonstrate that you are at least cognizant of the meanings of the terms you are using. There’s just too large a backlog of “The Prehistory Guys” for me to get through. If you want me watching your videos, at least show me there’s something there other than you rattling off jargon that you don’t understand.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:40 AM
1

Explain how intersectionality is the logic of post colonial empire, please. The abstract.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:38 AM
1

Well, you do you, then.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:37 AM
-8

Not this shit again. They have been whinging about this for literally close to fifty years now.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:32 AM
1

Right. “Critical Race theory” is literally on every conspiracy theorist’s lips, and here you are, fishing for likes claiming you have some great insight into the mind of one of its major theorists. You sound like a grifter, sir.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:14 AM
0

Feminism can indeed uphold privilege, yes. That is exactly what many intersectional theorists have said, beginning with people like Kimberlé Crenshaw. But that is far from the only thing feminism does. It can also challenge privilege.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:07 AM
1

Cousin, you’ve been dodging my question for a couple of days now. What I am asking is quite simple: please define what intersectionality is to you. What do you mean when you say “it’s the logic of colonialism”?
/r/MensRights16/04/22 12:06 AM
0

If it’s not women’s fault, then let’s focus on who mostly socializes boys and men into being men: men.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:06 PM
0

Have you been following this discussion? We aren’t talking about what you believe: we are talking about what those illuminate who are supposedly trying to turn men into tools via feminism believe, Please keep up.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 06:31 PM
2

MEN oppose it. And MRAs, in my experience, typically have such constrained notions of masculinity that they aren’t willing to act like 90% of men, who may disagree with them, have legitimate points of view.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 06:30 PM
1

Dude, they DO have more power than you. By law.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 05:14 PM
2

That’s… debatable. You certainly seem to have some anger management issues, any way you cut it, which may be understandable.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 04:45 PM
1

Got proof of us being far closer to chimpanzees than bonobos? I’d love to see that. In terms of our sexual behavior we are much closer to bonobos. Thanks for that link! That is very interesting. However, what the studies show is that capuchins possibly used food in exchange for sex and that they would also steal food. It doesn’t show they purposely stole food to pay for sex. In fact, it does demonstrate that they really have no concept of money as a store of value: they immediately use it. So th…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:00 PM
1

That money wasn’t stolen. The bonobos had tasks to do for it and immediately used it to trade for sex. Unless you are referring to another experiment? If you are, I would love a link, because I have used this experiment in articles arguing against the notion that prostitution is created by patriarchy. So what stealing is this? IIRC, the bonobos had to crank a handle or something to get banana chips, which they then gave up for sex. Again, this isn’t mate searching behavior. What it shows is that…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 02:54 PM
1

Boy, that was a non-sequitur. What money was stolen? What did I miss here? Repeating my main point: the very PURPOSE of prostitution is to NOT have a mate. So how does this fit in to your alphabet soup theory of masculinity?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 02:46 PM
1

Than’s not a shoe, cousin. It’s a smelly old plastic bag with weird brown stuff smeared on it. Sure, you can put your foot in it. But why? You watch hypergamy in every animal species? No, you don’t. Not even close. Bonobos, for example. Also? You may not have noticed this, but we do a hell of a lot things other animals don’t do and our sexuality is INCREDIBLY weird. Our closest cousins in this respect are the bonobos who, like us, use sex for a shitload of reasons other than reproduction. Human …
/r/MensRights15/04/22 02:18 PM
0

I would say the main problem here is men. Dude, my mom couldn’t even have a credit card or a mortgage in her name when I was growing up. There is no empirical evidence that men are living in a more prejudiced legal or governmental environment now than women were living in back then.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:57 PM
1

Exactly. So if your goal is to make men into better tools, why would you cultivate those traits?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:56 PM
1

Whoah. Stereotypes are reductive? That’s a new one. No, seriously, I agree. But in my life, I have found men stereotyping as much if not far more than women, so I am confused as to why this is something that’s particularly women’s fault.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:55 PM
1

Here we go. Greek letter theory. You realize that this whole “Alpha-beta” things is based on widely discredited research into wolves? Research that the guy himself who did it says, “Whoops! I made a mistake!” Hypergamy is indeed a long term cultural artifact that will probably take some time to get over, but it sounds an awful lot like you are inventing an overly complicated theory — and violating Occam’s razor, to boot — to explain to yourself why you have trouble getting a date. Let’s just put…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:50 PM
-1

Now THAT is bullshit. Sorry, man. Please don’t go into Greek alphabet masculinity theory with me. There are so many unattractive men, in every sense of the word, that are with women it’s unbelievable. There is no magic formula that makes men attractive. I have seen literally every male personality type, body, and class with women. Their is no conceivable way you could reinvent yourself that wouldn’t be attractive to some woman, somewhere. Unless, of course, you were totally hate women. And even …
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:33 PM
0

Right. Which, according to your logic, you’ll treat in the exact same way, right?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:29 PM
2

Oh, well, that makes it much better, then. Don’t try that with cops.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 01:27 PM
1

Like not calling a female administrator who has power over you a “cunt”.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 04:32 AM
1

But we aren’t talking about divorces here: we’re talking about situations with clear power differentials — enormous, in some cases — and abuse of them. And so far, you haven’t shown how any of these guys got drummed out on a rumor.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 04:27 AM
1

I think Granddad put his foot down. And the rumor was she had been coerced.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 04:25 AM
1

Nope. She got fired because the university is a privately owned corporation. Got it?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 04:13 AM
1

You do realize that not all universities operate like the American system, as corporations based on wealthy alumni? The one I am talking about — where I no longer work, btw — is owned by a family as a private company. The chancellor — the founder’s grandson — got caught screwing a professor in a parked car in the parking lot. She was fired. Nothing happened to him. Corporate education, baby, yeah! And that’s very much like what has been happening in many of the corporations hit by #metoo. I am d…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:44 AM
-5

Well, that’s a problem women faced in the 1960s and, in response, they reinvented themselves.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:41 AM
1

Because I — me — and many of my colleagues have an ethical issue with this. We do not think professors should be sexually involved with undergraduate students. Ethically, we think this is terrible.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:33 AM
1

I can think of quite a few other options, myself.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:17 AM
-9

That’s not what I hear, working as a professor forwarded to biological sciences and nursing departments. In fact, “toxic masculinity” is quite heavily recognized as resulting in lack of self care by most medical professionals I know under the age of fifty. Also, if you’re trying to shape men into tools, wouldn’t you want those tools to last? Seems to me like you’re conflating a whole boatload of different things here as “exploitation”.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:16 AM
1

Again, what would we allege he had done, precisely? A consenting adult woman got pregnant by an adult man. Any criticism anyone could make of that would be, ipso facto, an unsupported allegation. It’s not against the law to get an adult woman pregnant.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:09 AM
-6

Oh, I agree. That or true and reversible sex change. Artificial wombs will come first.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 03:01 AM
0

So?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 02:13 AM
1

Where to begin? First of all, let’s make it clear: I did not say “they ate all at it”. Enough of them are, though, that so far trying to get sexual ethics rules passed has been a no-starter. Secondly…. Do you think University Boards or Corporate Boards or their equivalents pass rules like these because they say, “Hey, maybe we better because it’s ethical?” No. In the American case I was talking about above, they did it in DIRECT REACTION TO #metoo. That’s how these rules get put in place. So you…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 02:07 AM
-4

And what do you see that exploitation as?
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:53 PM
-15

Nice!
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:53 PM
-9

Whereas we should want men to become worse men…? I am confused.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:37 PM
-27

Absolutely. If men get pregnant, they should have the right to abort, too. 100% behind this.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:27 PM
1

Did you read what I wrote above, or did you not understand it? We don’t have one because the university is full of male professors and administrators who are boffing students.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:25 PM
1

I do not quite understand your comment. Try a again, please.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:24 PM
1

What do you imagine I am advocating for? As for my dad, nah… he’s fine. Like many men, he just had a problem keeping his dick in his pants when he was young.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 10:04 PM
1

You can’t imagine my relief.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 10:02 PM
1

Oh, Ok. So this sort of shit is OK because we don’t have a code of conduct? We don’t have a code of conduct because of guys like him. You see the problem, now? When the boss is a sexual harasser, is he going to make an anti-sexual harassment policy?
/r/MensRights14/04/22 09:39 PM
1

“Intact” families are not necessarily “stable” families. Particularly intact nuclear families.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 09:37 PM
1

My mom initiated it because my dad was having an affair.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 09:36 PM
1

Kisses.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 09:34 PM
-1

We have a saying here in Brazil: you are better off alone than in bad company. Women often use it to talk about their marriage choices.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 02:29 PM
1

There’s a real simple solution to this problem: marry someone who is making about as much money as you do. I did. Twice. No alimony.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:23 PM
-2

I see at least as many women in their forties who are very happy they didn’t saddle themselves with all the shit their married colleagues did. Sure, some go “where are all the good men?” But guess what? It ain’t usually the one who were having fun back in college.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:22 PM
-2

Y’know, I have seen a lot of divorces. Three among my parents, alone. And in no case, did the woman throw away the man “just because”.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:20 PM
1

Per year. Which means your chance of getting married by the time you’re 68 is still, statistically speaking, 100%. With the average man now getting married at 37 in the UK, this drop is not as radical as it might appear at first glance. Also? Wasn’t cohabiting illegal in the UK until the 1970s?
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:18 PM
0

Marriage rate has no causal linkage to stable families, prosperity, and certainly not to happiness.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:15 PM
1

That sounds dire until you realize it’s per year. Marriage rates, overall, have fallen by 3/4ths in the UK since 1970. If Brazil is anything to go by, I’d wager it’s not because “society’s falling apart”, but because marriage is largely a huge and unnecessary expense. You live with someone here, the law considers you married for all intents and purposes, especially if you have a kid. So why go spend some x-thousand bucks to get a guy to wave his hand over you? You’re rights and responsibilities …
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:11 PM
9

Stable FAMILIES are the bedrock of society. That is not the same thing, necessarily, as stable marriages. In fact, they are often antagonic.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 01:05 PM
1

Of course the right believe in individuals. Which is why, just in my life time alone they have supported segregation based on race, sex, sexual preference, national origins, and now gender identity.
/r/AntiFeminists14/04/22 01:04 PM
1

If you can’t write a simple sentence, it ain’t an ad hominem. At most, it’s a bit of hyperbole. Semi-literate, then. See? I can admit when I am being hyperbolic, unlike the OP.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 12:33 PM
0

Sigh. More conspiracy theories. Illiterate ones, this time.
/r/MensRights14/04/22 12:27 PM
1

Evidence of what, though? She consented. He broke no laws. Yeah, he’ll probably have to pay child support, but that’s not my question. The question is, if the department can use other measures to remove a 40 year old guy who has a repeated history of preying on 18 year old girls, should it? And no, my institution, like many, many place in the world, does not have a code of ethics that covers this. And one of the reasons it doesn’t is that there are MANY (male) professor and (female) student rela…
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:52 AM
1

Is it really that hard to report the news as it is?
/r/MensRights14/04/22 11:44 AM
1

Sure. But having dealt with sexual harassment cases in real life, it’s not so cut and dried. Let me give you an example. At the school I worked, there was a professor who constantly hit on the incoming freshmen. Every semester, he’d have another girlfriend and it always ended poorly. All these girls were 18 or 19. The school had no policy about these sorts of relationships. They were all consensual. He wasn’t breaking any laws. He got an 18 year old pregnant during her first sexual experience. S…
/r/MensRights14/04/22 03:59 AM
1

Sure. But having dealt with sexual harassment cases in real life, it’s not so cut and dried. Let me give you an example. At the school I worked, there was a professor who constantly hit on the incoming freshmen. Every semester, he’d have another girlfriend and it always ended poorly. All these girls were 18 or 19. The school had no policy about these sorts of relationships. They were all consensual. He wasn’t breaking any laws. He got an 18 year old pregnant during her first sexual experience. S…
/r/MensRights14/04/22 03:58 AM
1

The question presumes the answer. “Do you think unsupported accusations should be enough to run someone out of their job?” The question presumes that that is indeed what is happening here, which hasn’t been shown, has it?
/r/MensRights14/04/22 12:05 AM
1

Are you aware of what a loaded question is? Let’s say I ask you “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”
/r/MensRights13/04/22 11:04 PM
1

Do you really think men don’t sexually harass women?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 10:57 PM
0

Yeah, no. “Excruciating detail” is the exact opposite of an elevator pitch. Give me the abstract, please. What it APPEARS to me, so far, is that you are someone who has learned some jargon without understanding what it means and you are just repeating it to pump your youtube channel. Again, I’m not anonymous here. Why are you, if you are what you say?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 10:56 PM
1

I haven’t the slightest. Why don’t we start with you telling me what your understanding of intersectionality is?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 10:55 PM
1

What the hell does “prescribed intersectionality” even mean? Crenshaw never put those two words together, as far as I am aware. Give me the elevator pitch.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 09:51 PM
1

Peterson’s just another in a loooooong line of intellectual grifters trying to sell alienated young men on some supposedly “natural” form of masculine spirituality. There were probably guys like him teaching 17 year olds to disembowel dogs as part of their kóryos rituals in the north of what is today Ukraine, 10,000 years ago.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 09:49 PM
-1

Got some of those to show us from this group here?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 09:14 PM
1

I was born in 1967. My mother, aunt, and most of their divorcee friends got royally ripped on child support and alimony. You can thank the fact that our father’s generation tried very hard to dodge their responsibilities for the current batch of laws. They didn’t come out of nowhere.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 08:11 PM
1

Hi, cousin. Sure! Post your photos! I had Angela as a prof, too, way back in 1985. Hell, post your name. I have posted mine. I notice that you have studiously avoided answering my question in your rush to show your feminist creds: where does Crenshaw say what you claim she says? I’m friends with Susan Dewey and Elizabeth Bernstein and a big follower of everything Kristen Bummiller writes. So if your point is that carceral feminism is a thing and that many of the so-called women’s safety laws do …
/r/MensRights13/04/22 08:07 PM
1

“Random girl”? Or a woman with a name, address, and a verifiable history? “Anonymous” doesn’t mean “not a celebrity”, dude. You know that, right? Here’s how that story has been reported here in Brazil, by a press not known for being overly sympathetic to women. A modelo Najila Trindade, que acusou o atacante Neymar Júnior de estupro após um encontro em um hotel de Paris, foi indiciada nesta terça-feira pela Polícia Civil de São Paulo por denúncia caluniosa, fraude processual e extorsão. Depois d…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 07:06 PM
1

So we’re back to the same point. You’re saying the American revolutionaries were full of shit in the declaration of independence then? And, by extension, most MRAs are full of shit? Because all these folks are or were politically motivated.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 07:02 PM
1

Can you point to me where Crenshaw says power = privilege? Because I have read a lot of her work and never encountered that. But even so, you would disagree with that? Also, you DO know Crenshaw’s a prison abolitionist, right? And that her work is not at all routinely used in courts of law? If it were, there’d be a hell of a lot of less men in prison. Forgive me for presuming, but it sounds an awful lot like someone just told you Crenshaw is bad (probably because of Critical Race Theory, amirite…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 07:01 PM
1

You originally said “if it has a movement it’s not VALID”. Now you say “if it’s a movement, it has an AGENDAl. Was that the scrape of a goalpost I here moving? :) Of course #Metoo has an agenda. Why does that mean they are wrong?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 06:14 PM
2

Really? So in your view, then, the Civil Rights Movement or — hell — even the American Revolution were fraudulent? What does that say about the Men’s Rights Movement? Cousin, I think you just turned every which way possible and your ass done gone into the blades.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 05:36 PM
1

How old are you, exactly? This is important.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 05:34 PM
35

Nope.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 04:57 PM
1

If it were Brazil, I’d definitely say “yes”. But judges are not given radical amounts of leeway in deciding alimony in Massachussets, which is why things like that calculator exist. If Auntie was making 400k and uncle making 100k, I could see a judge dropping the alimony, maybe, by five percent or so. But if it were to be radically too different, Uncle would have a great case on his hands for readdress, just by appealing to case law. Now, if you want to go full Qanon and claim there’s a secret c…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 04:51 PM
2

I don’t think that term means what you think it does, but you do you, son.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 03:26 PM
1

If they are bullshitting, that is what they are doing. That is not a lie, per se. As I said, bullshit, to be effective, very frequently interweaves elements of truth. My general position on anonymous internet discourse is not that it is lies, but that it is bullshit until proven otherwise. Knowing the person making the claim and being able to check out their history automatically raises my go-to belief to “probably their truth”. If other sources can corroborate what they say and there’re no equa…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 03:25 PM
1

What the hell is wrong with Kimberlé Crenshaw, exactly?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 03:04 PM
1

Dude, here’s how science works. If your hypothesis is that these guys were unfairly run out of their jobs, you should show that. It is not my job to prove a negative. So show us a couple. I can think of one, right off the bat: comedian Louis CK. He didn’t lose his job, but his career took a huge hit. However, I also think that if you were to choose any ten guys here, you’ll find that nine of them were up to some pretty shady shit.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 03:03 PM
1

Neymar? What particularly in that case was “ruined” and what was the anonymous declaration? And di that have anything to do with female journalists’ access to locker rooms (which, remember, is the OP’s justification here)?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:59 PM
1

Well, in this case, it wasn’t half of retirement funds, but 40%. Still a lot, but… As for generational wealth, this is EXACTLY what is being protected here. If Auntie and Uncle have kids, both have access to the same amount of wealth.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:59 PM
-2

Precisely.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:52 PM
1

But the conversation we are having is in relation to what the OP said. You know as well as I do: no sports figures have been deprived of homes, careers, children or what not because of women journalists in the locker room. In fact, if the NFL’s scandal re: domestic violence is anything to go by, these guys can have actual CHARGES on them in court and not sit out a moment on the bench.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:52 PM
1

Now, given the context of this text, I fully agree that there is discrimination against men in some fields. Nursing for example. I teach nursing students and I see this every day. However, when a guy says “I can’t get a job as a nurse because I am a man”, that’s when my innate skepticism kicks in and says “Being a man certainly doesn’t help, but I am around a hell of a lot of male nurses and they have never said that. Quite the contrary, actually.” So I have to wonder: is there something else ab…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:40 PM
1

Things are a lot more complicated than simple truth or lies. There’s truth, and even that is not absolute. A person tells THEIR truth, which may be misremembered or misperceived, or partial. In any case it is always situated and not complete. A liar has a direct relationship to the truth. They think they know it, but don’t want others to know it, so they intentionally obfuscate. Bullshit has no necessary connection to the truth at all. A bullshitter promiscuously mixes truth, lies, memes, tropes…
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:30 PM
1

Anthropologist. I teach archeology occasionally and keep up with my reading on it, particularly in this area regarding the stone age / bronze age transition. You can search my name: Thaddeus Gregory Blanchette. My contacts to the Australian system are through colleagues I occasionally meet at conferences.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:24 PM
6

Good news!
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:21 PM
1

Agreed. But did I say I consider them to be a liar?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 02:03 AM
-1

Wow. So this big risk is about as ephemeral, then, as the risk of cis women being assaulted by transwomen in the bathroom, correct? Oh, c’mon. Sportsmen don’t get put on the bench over anonymous rumors. Shit, they sometimes don’t even get put on the bench when there are actual legal cases open against them.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 01:58 AM
1

Yeah, you know, I once had a girl tell me she really, truly saw her grandmother’s ghost, too. What I am asking is, is there any independent confirmation of this story… at all? Anywhere? I mean, it shouldn’t be hard to find while we’re waiting for my colleague’s answer.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 01:57 AM
-5

Dude, if you haven’t figured it out by now, I am neither a woman, a feminist, not an MRA. I DO happen to be a guy who is very much against violence against men. Why you think it’s women’s primary responsibility to speak up in this case when not even MRAs care about it is beyond me, but I will say this: feminism has a looooooooong history of supporting pacificism and draft dodgers. MRAs? Not so much.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:56 AM
0

Not understanding your question here.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:53 AM
-14

All those people,lost their jobs based on unfounded rumors, huh?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:49 AM
1

So you heard a rumor from TWO people. Any independent confirmation of this at all? A newspaper story, perhaps? A registered complaint? Hell, even one confirmation in writing,anywhere, by a person with an actual name…?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:46 AM
1

And remember what I said? I agree with you, but not for the reasons you state. Let’s make it simple: I agree that transwomen are no threat to women in women’s spaces. But I also think women are no threat to men in locker rooms. Think differently? Give me an example.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:42 AM
0

Because the original point is that some poor sportsguy’s career, marriage, and life can be totally destroyed by an anonymous complaint. You set that standard my man, not me. Weren’t we going to talk about the Rolling Stone case? I know a lot about that. Was that an anonymous accusation? How did that eventually turn out, exactly?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:29 AM
0

Really? How much would he have had to pay, fair market value, for a 24 hour nanny for his kid, just for starters?
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:26 AM
1

I generally assume that anonymous stories told on the internet are not entirely true, especially when they push an agenda. If you don’t, I would like to sell you some Dogecoin.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:25 AM
1

Lol. How do you figure that? Alimony in marriage cases isn’t decided with a view to making everyone — or even anyone — happy. And that’s as it should be. It is a forced compromise because two partners cannot manage their own break up.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:24 AM
1

Sure, but those names are not really anonymous: they are known to the courts. What I mean is quite clear: someone who’s sports career got destroyed based on a rumor with no evidence to back it up. And I mean a paid career here.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:22 AM
1

Got any independent proof, anywhere, that such a thing actually happened? Because “I remember once hearing a tutor complain about it” is very much urban legend territory. I sent a message to my colleague there to ask about this. I except they will laugh.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:21 AM
3

Someone whom we don’t know, whose name is not known to authorities, sends in a report to a newspaper that X sports star raped her and said sports star loses his career.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:15 AM
-3

Yeah. That ain’t torture. Also? Not much sympathy for a guy who’s shingle has been how men need to toughen up and who then ends up fucking himself over like that. If he hadn’t made his rather mediocre career pushing bullshit about “natural men” I’d certainly have more sympathy. As is, he looks a bit like the Parson caught diddling the choir boy.
/r/MensRights13/04/22 12:14 AM
-22

Yeah. Let’s all weep for poor ol’ Harvey Weinstein.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 11:52 PM
-19

Hmmm. Wonder if our wheelchair bound white male member thinks he was excluded here. You might report it honestly and say “able bodied white men”.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:50 PM
2

Why doesn’t she? She made that life they enjoyed together, too. And, again, I very much doubt the OP would think it’s cool to see his father’s sister take a huge hit in her lifestyle after her contributing for twenty years to its construction.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:46 PM
1

So name the school, then. I have colleagues in archeology in Australia who I am sure can tell me if this is a thing.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:46 PM
0

OK, let’s look at the Rolling Stone incident. Was that an anonymous denunciation?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:45 PM
2

Marriages exist by mutual consent. Men don’t get to hold a financial Sword of Damocles over their partner’s head. Btw, this Massachussets alimony law? Applies to women, too. If Auntie were making 400,000 a year and Uncle 100,000, Auntie would be paying alimony. So how is this sex based discrimination, exactly?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:19 PM
2

Let’s start with Number 2. How many sports careers can you name that have been ruined by anonymous complaints?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:17 PM
2

Well, looking at the Massachussets alimony calculator, for him to be paying this amount of alimony, for life, she needs to be making a decent salary already: 55 dollars an hour. Also, they need to be married for more than twenty years. If she weren’t working at all, he’d be paying 2700 dollars alimony. But obviously his wife feels it is better to work and collect some 190,000 dollars a year, total, with more than half of this coming from her own salary. Uncle, meanwhile, is left with about 320,0…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 10:12 PM
0

I think you are right, but for completely wrong reasons, except for #4.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:55 PM
-2

“Chemical torture”? Please. He put himself in that treatment program, didn’t he?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:48 PM
2

Nope. Only one of them circumvented the law. That was my dad and men of his generation are the reasons these alimony laws exist in the first place. If men had been willing to step up to support their ex families without the courts getting involved, we wouldn’t be where we are today.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:46 PM
2

I agree alimony needs to be rethought. But having seen four out of five of my immediate female relatives get royally screwed, my sympathy for guys who make 400,000 bucks a year and have to shell out a quarter of that to the women who’ve held down their domestic fort for decades is extremely tiny. Particularly when these stories come from anonymous internet posters. Here’s info for Massachussets, the state this case occurred in. Right off the bat, you can see that it’s not “forever alimony” unles…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:33 PM
1

Yeah, but I don’t put much faith in anonymous people’s declaration of radical victimhood on the internet. And yes, that includes folks who are talking about rape.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:30 PM
2

Really? So you think a 54 year old woman with a masters in, say, English lit, who’s been a parent and home maker, unpaid, for 22 years should just suck it up and go waitress when her husband thinks he deserves a fresh 22 year old? Because that could be one scenario here. I saw that happen to my step sister and yes, she did go work. It was still not anything like fair.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:29 PM
1

Which school, precisely? Because this, my friend, sounds like an urban legend. Then again, I have seen crazier things.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:26 PM
1

Hmmmm….. Good question. I like “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” myself. Also? “Into the Wild” shows you what NOT to do if going your own way. The biography of Harvey Milk is pretty inspiring. Susan Faludi’s “Stiffed” is an excellent analysis of masculinity’s crisis and some potential ways out. I mean, part of the problem is there is this idea that there’s something called “being a man”. You are. What do you specifically feel you’re lacking?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:19 PM
-7

Particularly if you need life hacks on how to become chemically dependent on anti-anxiety meds.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 09:01 PM
2

You CAN. Maybe. Not that you are. Again, the key here to me is how long were they married? Did they have any kids? If it was a long time, my question is why isn’t the nephew saying “Well, at least auntie’s being taken care of. Good.” If she was a trophy second wife and a kept woman and nothing else, why isn’t the nephew shaking his head and saying “What the fuck was uncle thinking?”
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:53 PM
2

Totally agree on this. Do you know how many well off American and European men I see wife shopping in clip joints on Copacabana? And then they’ll tell you “every woman is a whore”. Well, dude, you’re specifically looking for a wife who has much less power than you, in every sense of the word. What do you think is going to happen if she divorces your self-made ass? What has saved me, twice, are these two things. But the most important is, marry a woman with a decent career. You want a trophy wife…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:46 PM
3

At 15 you thought the appropriate response was “Fuck you, cunt?” I mean, I sympathize with you about the bullying and the bullshit, but 15 is waaaaaay old enough to know that that is a very bad call.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:43 PM
-8

Not much of a word out of MRAs, either. Why is this a women’s issue? Isn’t it for men to step up on this?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:41 PM
-3

The dude’s a legal loan shark. He probably made his cash out of ripping off working people with subprime loans. My sympathy isn’t too great wrt how he earned his fortune by the sweat of his noble labors. He has more than enough cash to retire on and now the OP’s aunt does too. Good show all around.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:40 PM
2

Then my mom was an exception, too. My dad still owes her for my health care, half of my college, and a boatload of child support. My aunt is paying support to her ex. I DO have another sister who married and divorced and got quite a good deal out of it. But then there’s the other with the three deadbeat baby daddies. So of the five divorced women in my immediate family, only one is doing anything close to like what you think the norm is.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:36 PM
-1

Shrugs. Hasn’t been in my life in a very female dominated field: anthropology of gender studies. And no, I am not a very good feminist.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:32 PM
0

My sister isn’t paying alimony. She got almost zip after twenty years of unpaid domestic work and childcare labor, while her husband is a multi-millionaire. But my aunt ended up paying out half of her teacher’s retirement to her playboy ex-husband who pissed all his wealth away in shitty investments (he’d be a cryptobro now if he had a pot to piss in) and never worked a day in his life.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:31 PM
3

Having a master’s degree doesn’t make you financially independent, does it? How long has she been married to the guy and supported by him? Do they have kids? Those are the main questions which, oddly enough, no one seems to have the answer to.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 08:29 PM
-15

How long have you lived with me and been financially dependent on me?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:40 PM
-26

Alimony is a hellishly complex subject. Marriage is a contract that legally binds two people together, typically financially, and unraveling that knot as to who did what in the course of a relationship — especially a long one — is hellishly complicated and not improved by both sides hating each other. For every “horror story” like this, I can put up one that’s the opposite. I had a step sister, for example, who got totally screwed in her alimony deal after decades of life together and a son besi…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:10 PM
-4

It is absolutely alimony. What I fail to see is how this — and this alone — prevents him from retiring. Also, how long were the uncle and aunt together? Do they have any kids? What makes me a bit suspicious here is if it were my aunt, I’d be saying “Good. Well, everyone is taken care of then.” Unless, of course, this were a recent — maybe second or third? — marriage to a trophy wife. In which case, I’d be saying “What the hell was uncle thinking?” As for me, I have already had a divorce. I didn’…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:05 PM
1

The abolitionist versus sex worker schism is particularly big and touches directly upon what we are talking about here, because the pro sex work side of feminism is fighting to make sure clients and sex workers’ partners — male or female — are not criminalized. Funny. Anti-client laws are a sure ‘nough example of a rare case where men legitimately ARE being discriminated against by the legal system. And in twenty years of working with sex workers, I have yet to see MRAs lift a finger on this iss…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:52 PM
1

I’m not sure I classify NOW as a particularly sane feminist group, but point taken. I do know California’s system is very fucked up and many feminists I talk to comment on that. But, again, it’s sexist concepts that underlie this: the idea that women are “naturally” better care givers. Also? In my personal experience, absentee fathers are legion and don’t even take the opportunities they have to be with their kids. I do think default joint custody is the way to go, however. It is what we have he…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:28 PM
-47

Sounds like a lot, but not if her life partner makes 400,000 a year.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:11 PM
-18

Dude, and you say your uncle can’t retire? On 370,000k a year? Sorry, but it doesn’t sound like the problem is the alimony there. How long were they married and do they have any kids?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:10 PM
-3

Where was this?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:08 PM
2

Which clip?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 06:26 AM
40

So let me get this straight… Your uncle is paying some 7000 dollars a month in alimony, right? How much does he have left over?
/r/MensRights12/04/22 06:25 AM
9

Well, certainly don’t tell them “Fuck you, cunt”.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 06:08 AM
1

You have a degree in mathematics and still can’t understand how a slight skew in favor of certain mDNA lines, over a thousand year period, can’t generate the results shown in that study? Either you don’t get the math or you don’t understand how genetics works. One or the other. And yeah, it is pretty embarrassing that a social scientist has to point this out to you.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 05:11 AM
1

Pretty much worked it out on my cuff. It’s not perfect, but it is good enough to demonstrate the phenomenon being shown in that study. To wit, how most men can have children and you can still get a very heavy skew in favor of survivng female mDNA lines.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 05:08 AM
1

I am not dismissing your arguments because you are angry, am I? How is that an ad hominem? You really need to google that concept. Y’know, this conversation would be easier if it stuck to one thread. Please see my recent comment where I explain what this model shows, why it’s a MODEL, and why over a fifty generation period, you can get the results we see with a lot less radical presumptions than I make in the model. The model, like all models, is to illustrate something only. In this case, how h…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 05:07 AM
-8

According to some poster here who sent me a dubious article on women in the university, yes. I am being facetious, of course.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 04:12 AM
0

Those “certain feminisms” are hardly the radical feminisms you’re complaining about, are they? Patriarchy is poorly used, but when I use it, I mean the real historical deal.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 04:11 AM
5

Well, anything’s possible, I guess. I mean, I never had a genetic assay done on myself…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:33 AM
-14

Well, I guess my success as an anthropologist is an outlier, then.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:27 AM
1

No. In anthropology, we don’t make metaphors between societies: we compare them. So if you’re going to mention another ethnographic field, you need to be very clear why you think it is a relevant comparison to the group you are studying.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:21 AM
1

Reddit apparently removed my photo demonstrating my point, so here’s a link: https://ibb.co/hBKkpx9
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:12 AM
1

Twenty percent of the world reportedly thinks the earth is flat. That doesn’t make the idea of the globe a bad idea. See argument #1. Theoretical terms are not required to be instantly understandable by idiots. You don’t dumb down biology because pentecostals think Darwin is Satan. We are both agreed that a large majority of men really do not and will probably never care about their liberation until forced to do so by circumstances. Thus, why are feminists beholden to change their terminology to…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 01:01 AM
1

You don’t know of any? You don’t strike me as very informed about feminism, then. Search for black versus white feminisms, or abolitionist versus sex worker rights feminisms. I can give you a looooong laundry list, if you like. It seems to me that you simply don’t know much about feminism if you think the TERF tiff is the only thing dividing them. I mean, you never have heard of SWERFs? O.M.G. You mean to tell me people are talking shit on twitter? Pigs are flying. What people say, anonymously, …
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:50 AM
1

What was an ad hominem, exactly? Sorry, but I missed that. See my photo post to show you why male mDNA lines can quickly die out, even though the majority of men reproduce. The example has been exaggerated and simplified to show it, but the result we see of 17 - 1 female to male mDNA representativity is easily achievable over a thousand years with much less radical presumptions. Basically, elite males over reproduce in patriarchies and that’s why there’s a relative dearth of male mDNA line. This…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:46 AM
1

OK, my comment’s live and it shows, quite simply, how all male mDNA from all but one male line can be eliminated in only FOUR generations through the simple expedient of allowing the dominant male sexual access to all women and making the other males fight for the right to “earn” a wife. This is INCREDIBLY ABSTRACTED for clarity in presentation. I presume no incest taboos, for example. I also presume no out group marriages. But for our purposes, this suffices. This shows why you should not be at…
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:41 AM
1

OK, we can’t add pictures here, so let me start a new thread.
/r/MensRights12/04/22 12:32 AM
1

Yep. You’re not really thinking this through in Darwinian terms, though, are you? Let me give you a highly simplified example to show you just one of the ways that can work out. You have a population of fifty men and fifty women. All the women are forced or encouraged to have one child by the main man before than can marry another. The men are forced or encouraged to prove themselves as warriors before they are allowed to marry. Culturally, there is no stigma against bastardy in this culture. Wh…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 11:50 PM
1

Yeah, a narrative is a story that is told. Why do you think we disagree on that point? A masculinity that preaches that it is your duty to let your body be destroyed and that your prize for being a “real man” is a conditional right to destroy the bodies of others can only honestly be described as “toxic” in the strictest sense of the word.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 11:20 PM
1

I am just mentioning the groups I know locally. PLENTY of schisms over how evil men are. Oh, lord. You can’t even begin to imagine. There is no feminist dogma on trans women and that’s why there is a huge fight between competing conceptions of feminism. Feminists openly calling for the killing of men are so rare on the ground that I have met maybe a half dozen in my life. And I am absolutely SURROUNDED by feminists.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 11:11 PM
1

Whoosh. You’re really angry, aren’t you? Settle down, man. Here’s the deal. Rich men had more women. More women thus reproduced than men. Rich men’s daughters were married off to other rich men — who also had more women. This should not at all be a hard thing to grasp. Rich men’s daughters had little more sexual autonomy than poor men’s daughters. Their husbands were hardly monogamic but THEY were forced to be. Tons of evidence for this, by the way, beginning with the pages of the bible.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 11:06 PM
1

So how do you define “narrative”, then? What would be a nice start is if men advocates could just say, “Look, men are hugely victimized by violence and the perps seem to be majoritarily other men. We need to ask why this is”. Instead, what we get are men whinging about how women victimize them. All they have done is taken feminism and reversed the poles. But that doesn’t work because male issues are different. Men justify violence to other men by demasculizing them. That needs to be talked about…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 11:02 PM
1

Nope. My good evidence is show in peer reviewed scientific jornals. In fact, in the very article you cited, where the authors come to this very conclusion I am outlining: about 8000 years ago, women increasingly became the property of a small group of powerful men. I don’t know why you are so upset about this. After all, isn’t this PRECISELY the theory of that section of the manosphere that talks about these things? We have a pretty good idea of how men were like back then, too. Nothing indicate…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:53 PM
0

You should read what I wrote above. I don’t think you saw the edits.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:49 PM
-1

One example. That’s all I ask. Shouldn’t be too hard if it’s as omnipresent as you claim. Let’s make it clear: one mainstream media article claiming women are the primary victims of violence. Because when I google for “men are the primary victims of violence”, here’s what I find: CBS: https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2018/51/fewer-women-than-men-fall-victim-to-violence Promundo: https://promundoglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Masculine-Norms-and-Violence-Making-the-Connection-20180424.pdf Bra…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:39 PM
1

Nope. I am claiming that we have really good, solid, persistent evidence that beginning just about that time women started heavily out-reproducing men, hypergamy started up, patriarchy started up, wife exchange systems began to transform into slavery and powerful men began to arise. The evidence from this period overwhelmingly shows women had little to no choice in the matter of whom they had sex with. Rape was rather beside the point because women were basically seen as two-legged livestock in …
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:30 PM
0

I’m not quite sure that’s the narrative of mainstream media. Can you find me an example,of the mainstream media saying that women are the primary victims of violence in society? I’d love to have that for my files!
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:16 PM
1

Ot following you here. How does that show my “anti-male prejudice”, exactly? Ask any biologist: reproductive success does not necessarily equal individual happiness. That’s an empirical fact. A woman who gets raped into pregnancy may have a hell of a lot of descendants. What about this is news or prejudice for you? And I realize that “feminism” is a snarl,word for you, but you might at least try to make some sense when you use it.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:14 PM
-1

Oh, agreed. It’s still not news. Not among folks who study this stuff, at any rate.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 10:12 PM
1

Let’s use logic: can I be raped? Yes. It’s possible. Have I been the target of sexualized male violence? Yes. Have I been threatened with sexual violence? Yes, when I was a kid (as far too many men have been). So male on male sexual violence is something that has impacted my life. It’s something that could happen in the natural order of things. Sexualized violence (as opposed to sexual violence) is something that happens to me occasionally. So this isn’t some sort of hypothetical for me. Secondl…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 09:45 PM
1

Oh, that I most definitely agree with. I do think that societies are, by and large, more careless with male lives and that includes when it comes to locking them up. So, are MRAs big into police reform? How about the issue of prison rape and violence in prisons? These all seem to me to be issues men’s rights advocates should naturally gravitate towards. Instead, we hardly hear anything on these topics from the manosphere. Why is that, do you think?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 09:37 PM
0

Because you seem to feel oppressed by conscription and that would be pretty silly if it’s something you’ll never face. If you are a Brit, American, Canadian, or Australian — and chances are that you are — the proper focus for you anger is to make sure that NO ONE ever gets conscripted. That your countries never reinstate the draft. If you’re a Brazilian, like me, the focus should be to do away with conscription entirely, which is something I feel safe in saying every feminist organization in thi…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 08:19 PM
1

And do you live in one?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:45 PM
1

Crioula here in Rio de Janeiro, for example. Our country’s largest women’s studies nucleus, Pagú. The federal women’s ministry, both before and after Bolsonaro (although I don’t know if I’d qualify them as feminist these days). COYOTE. And if you don’t think there are schisms within feminism, you really haven’t been paying attention. But seriously: you haven’t noticed feminist support for more and more powerful women in the military? Presuming you are American, one would think that would at leas…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:43 PM
1

My particular focus isn’t on male sex workers, but I do interview them from time to time, yes. I know a hell of a lot of them and once did sex work myself. Stripping only, but still. https://read.dukeupress.edu/south-atlantic-quarterly/article-abstract/120/3/609/174128/Tricks-of-the-LightRefractive-Masculinity-in?redirectedFrom=fulltext
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:41 PM
1

Can you please link me to this supposed gold standard study you mention?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:38 PM
1

I am aware of the genetic evidence. What that evidence points to is not a golden age for women. Again, evolutionary success has nothing to do with individual happiness, let alone freedom, as you seem to think it does.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:38 PM
1

Orly? So what society do you live in that has conscription?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:36 PM
1

ARCHEOLOGICAL data. Granted, archeology is one of the four fields of anthropology, but I think you are mistaking it for social anthropology. That data shows fewer women in positions of power (particularly in religion). A purging or diminishing of goddesses in pantheons (the most notorious being the Abrahamic tradition). Few to no rich burials of women with a simultaneous increase in rich burials of men. Women clearly being buried as objects to enhance a man’s wealth. There’s a lot of linguistic …
/r/MensRights11/04/22 07:32 PM
1

I meant genetic. Excuse my auto check. Also, Reddit is not interfacing well with my ipad today. Hard to correct things. You realize that article straight up confirms the work of feminist historians and archeologists? What it shows is that around about 8000 years ago, right at the time patriarchy became established as a thing, powerful groups of men seem to have controlled women’s procreation. Apparently, this new evidence shows that this was much more draconian than we thought. At the same time,…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 06:17 PM
0

Nope. That article you linked me to talks about male rape victims. Did you read it? As dor the rest, non sequitur much?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 06:09 PM
1

Really? So what do you see as being good evidence which disproves the thesis that men have been in a dominant and privileged position for the last 4000 or so odd years? What does generic data have to do with any of this? That’s a bit of a non sequitur and I am not even sure you are correct. Do you have a source that explains that? I am Thaddeus Gregory Blanchette. Who are you?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 05:58 PM
1

What does your age have to do with anything? Doctors were still doing this a few years ago, so unless you’re, like, 15, that’s a non sequitur. I certainly don’t believe you give a whit about women’s sports. Even if you did care about fairness, the proper way to do that is to establish if a given trans body falls well outside of the female norm, rather than to just presume there’s some magical quality to once having a dick that makes a trans woman a super performer. The proof of this position is …
/r/MensRights11/04/22 05:11 PM
1

I understand. What I am saying is that defense won’t save you. It’s better to engage with feminists on their own rhetorical ground. If you’re going to be snubbed anyway, make it obvious that it’s not because you are being “anti feminist”. Take C.J. Pascoe’s book, “Dude You’re a Fag”, for example. Now, I love C.J. to death and her book is really groundbreaking. But occasionally she tries to shoehorn too much of a “girls are the real victims” analysis into it, when she’s properly looking at boys. …
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:56 PM
1

Hmm. I don’t know. It certainly isn’t our job as ethnographers to validate or invalidate the experiences of our interlocutors. However, we do have a duty to point out where what they say and what they do clashes. Malinowski’s old dichotomy between structure and practice. Being an ehtnographer is not to be neutral. It is to understand what perspective one approaches an issue from in order to recognize and allow for that. In short, it is to be self-aware.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:53 PM
1

Ooh, bad ethnographer! No cookie. :)
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:48 PM
0

Absolutely! In full agreement here.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:47 PM
0

Hey, more power to them, then. I certainly don’t want to be drafted. But, again, who is responsible for this state of affairs? Not feminists. Feminists have been fighting tooth and nail for more women in the military since forever. The people opposing them are the exact same people who refuse to draft women. Those people are neither feminists nor women. So if this is a huge issue for you, you should be fighting, with feminists, to make military service gender neutral. Me? Frankly, I’d rather fig…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:47 PM
1

You’d have to do some pretty heavy lifting to convince a neutral observer that men have not been, by and large, privileged since at least the Bronze Age. Being “valued” is not the point. Slaves were valued and a lot of archeological work points to women being the first true slaves. Here’s a word for you: intersectionality. Are you familiar with it?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:42 PM
1

And what happens to those male victims in those programs that is so gawd awful dreadful that it qualifies as State oppression? Realize that you are talking to a guy who works with sex workers and has seen literally thousands of women remanded into state directed “diversion” programs for whores… Many of whom weren’t even sex workers. Can you show me a Magadalene Laundries style set up that has been applied to men, anywhere? Because those things are coming back in style for women, big time.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:39 PM
1

My point with “black lives matter” is that it is a term that is easy to be turned against itself. We clear there? With regards to “men’s rights”, I think most feminist groups are sympathetic to quite a lot of them. Anti-circumcision. Untrammeled military service. Dealing with male violence (which yes, is a thing). Even saner child support and custody reform. Here in Brazil, we have a really good system which was built largely by feminists. With the MRA as a movement? Not so much, given the numbe…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:36 PM
-1

I find it interesting that that author has to reach for marginal cases to make her point. Far many more men and boys are raped by MEN. If our real focus is on protecting men and boys from rape, rather than demonizing feminism for the lulz, then we should be all over that issue like flies on shit. Instead, what we see are things like this, which talk about the relatively (extremely) rare cases of women raping men. Too much of MRA is misogynists looking for a plausible cover and it’s things like t…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:20 PM
1

I think you’ll find more men and women are against conscription, period.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 04:12 PM
1

Except there ARE no elective gender surgeries being carried out on children, anywhere, are there? With so much really nasty shit going on in the world, why have you decided this is your hill to die on? Funny how people like you NEVER complained about gender reconstruction surgeries back when doctors did then as soon as the baby was born and without parent’s permission. Just like y’all never cared about women’s sports — Trump wanted to gut title nine — until now. Be honest and be at least a littl…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:57 PM
2

Oh, a whole boatload. Divorce and child custody reform. We here in Brazil do it much better than y’all do in the U.S. Unconditional opportunities for military service for everyone, including the draft, if necessary. Anti-circumcision. A renewed focus on men’s sexual health that goes beyond erectile dysfunction. A recognition of men as victims of sexual violence. Definitely decent emotional and sexual education for boys. Anti-bullying policies in schools. But my REAL passion is the one most MRA p…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:45 PM
0

Yes, but did you see what fields were being included in that “medical” category? I cited them above. It includes chiropractors and pharmacists, for pete’s sake! Give me a break down of surgeons and highly paid specialist professions, please. I very much doubt women are over represented in those. That “health care” field was massively padded with what feminists call “caring professions” to make it look like women were outstripping men in health. I’d bet every last dime I own that statistical cate…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:50 AM
0

So there are more women in college than men. We are agreed. Men, however, predominate in which fields again? Oh, STEM fields. Those highly unregarded and unfunded areas of higher education, which nobody hires from, let alone pays good salaries to. I would bet quite a lot that men still dominate in law, too. Also, if you actually dig into the stats presented there a bit deeper, you’ll find a bit different picture. Take health sciences, for example, where women supposedly predominate. Did you both…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:29 AM
0

As I said elsewhere in this thread, let’s talk about women supposedly dominating all fields in the university. That OK by you?
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:26 AM
-4

What? You missed all that “All lives matter” stuff? How? I think we can both agree that Stoltenberg was neither sane nor a serious theorist. I understand the logic behind what he was saying, but that’s neither here nor there. The guy certainly isn’t anyone’s “go to” when it comes to toxic masculinity except, perhaps, for polemicists. I don’t see feminists as being a clearly defined side. Also, queer theorists — many who are in bitter conflict with certain branches of feminism — use toxic masculi…
/r/MensRights11/04/22 03:22 AM
0

Give me one point to address, not a laundry list. If you’d be so kind. And if you notice, we’ve already decided on that point elsewhere.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 02:57 AM
-1

I didn’t invent the term. But it’s one of those things like “feminicide”, “black lives matter”, or “post modernism” that makes perfect sense until idiots and fools make a conscious effort to misinterpret it. No theorist I am aware of — no sane one, at least — has ever said masculinity is ipso facto toxic. And yes, I realize that there are a lot of empty headed twenty somethings who like reading it that way. Also? I don’t think there’s a clearly defined “side” that uses this term. A wide variety …
/r/MensRights11/04/22 01:15 AM
0

To the people who seriously study toxic masculinity, neither of those two examples are toxic. I’m sorry, but we’re not responsible for how 20 year old tik tokkers use our jargon! :) It’s rather like saying evolution sucks as a theory because evangelical Christians keep on insisting that it means humans are descended from chimpanzees.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 11:52 PM
-3

That’s two, Fearless. Let’s take the draft. Have you been drafted or live in a country where there is a draft? Most feminist groups I know of have been fighting tooth and nail for women to serve equally in the military. I think you’ll find that most feminists these days feel that if there is a draft, everyone should be subjected to it. It’s not feminists who are saying “women can’t fight”. Women aren’t responsible for efforts to keep the military a boy’s clubhouse. Men are.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 10:51 PM
1

So let me get this straight then: you think parents are the proper guardians of their children’s health and the State shouldn’t interfere in that?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 10:49 PM
-3

OK, let’s take your assertion that women are the majority in all university fields. Care to give a source on that? (By the way, asking you to not use cheap rhetorical tricks like the gish gallop is not “toning policing”. It’s now HOW you’re saying something I’m objecting to: it’s the commonly used debating tactic of the “bullshit waterfall”.)
/r/MensRights10/04/22 10:48 PM
-14

Don’t Gish Gallop me, boy: let’s take this a bit at a time. Give me ONE solid example of men being abused by society. Shouldn’t be hard.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 09:15 PM
-3

Give me an example, please.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 08:45 PM
1

A cult’s tennets might be a truth regime. But, again, truth regimes are self-regulating. Cults typically do everything in their power to keep acolytes from accessing other information. Truth regimes don’t need to do that. A parallel idea, to me, is Karl Popper’s idea of a “paradigm”. Check that out and see what you think.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 08:27 PM
0

Have fun, man!
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:52 PM
0

Hey, you implied I abused you. There’s also a lot of terms for people unable to argue in good faith.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:49 PM
-4

So men’s trauma comes from being shut down?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:47 PM
-2

I’m curious as to how you think men and women are incredibly traumatized.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:39 PM
1

Yes. Total decriminalization. I don’t know enough about Sweden’s system to really make intelligent critiques for change outside my area of expertise, which is sex work. I just know that the sex work and gender laws, which are presented as utopian, do the opposite of what they claim, so I am very chary of anything Sweden says about itself, officially.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:27 PM
0

I definitely have said the exact same thing to women in the past. Most recently, a woman who complained that men talk too much. I said “yeah, women have a reputation as the sex that never speaks, right? Please”. So I gather you can’t find an example where I abused you? You seem rather sensitive.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:26 PM
1

Only that, then? Seems like you have a REAL specific and flexible morality, there. Should parents be allowed to vaccinate their kids? Should kids be allowed to vaccinate themselves without parental permission? I mean it seems to me that what you are defending here is no consistent view of the relationship between parents, children, and the State, but rather something else.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:22 PM
1

According to Foucault, IIRC, nothing is deliberately constructed as a truth regime. They just sort of occur and there’s a lot of discussion as to how and why. One can tackle that question via a Marxist approach or a Bourdieuian approach, or any number of other ways. But I think Foucault would be against the idea that these things are constituted by self-aware agents whose goal is to do precisely that. They end up being axiomatic, certainly, but not in the closed and rigid ways mathematical theor…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 07:15 PM
1

Not at all. Reacting exactly to what you said. So in your view, when are parents allowed to intervene in their children’s body and development?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 06:21 PM
1

Well, I do like the thrust of much of Sweden’s sexual equality laws. I do, however, think that they are very poorly thought out in terms of how they applied. Let’s take prostitution, which is my area of expertise. Although criminalizing clients was supposed to protect women, Sweden has used anti prostitution law to deport and strip far many more women of social benefits than it has actually condemned clients (who get a relatively small fine, in any case). It has made sex work more dangerous for …
/r/MensRights10/04/22 06:20 PM
1

So you’re saying Alabama is legislating to influence England…? Btw, just looked up that clinic. And…? What’s the problem with it?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 06:13 PM
1

You can most certainly change the body of a minor and parents do it all the time. Are you seriously saying minors should be prevented from having any kind of reconstructive surgery, for example?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:56 PM
2

In a biomedical setting? Yeah. When you’re simply talking about what men and women do most of the time? Not so much.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:55 PM
1

I mean I am a very good friend of Pye Jakobson and the folks in the Rose Alliance, so I have good first hand information on how Sweden’s sex and gender laws work and how they are fucked up. You are preaching to the chorus, friend, but probably for reasons different from what you think.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:54 PM
1

Thanks. Read it. Girls with hormonal development problems are not unambiguously covered by that subsection B. Also? Given what we know about the biochemistry of sex and gender these days, trans kids can very definitely be described as having hormonal or biochemical developmental problems. Again, this bill is trying to solve a problem which doesn’t even exist in Alabama (or anywhere else for that matter) and it does so by raising the bar for those who legitimately need hormonal therapy. Shit, eve…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:52 PM
1

I am not a Foucaultian, but I know something of his work. Not alot, by my colleague’s standards. But shoot away! I’ll answer as best as I can.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:46 PM
1

What legitimate complaint have you made here that I have dismissed? I agree with you that men have their emotions policed. I disagree with the idea that this only or mostly happens with men. Dismissed your view as unworthy of comment? I am commenting on it. And, as you can see above, I don’t entirely disagree with it. What abuse have I given you, exactly?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:44 PM
1

Nope. I think you did a great job! I’m just saying, be prepared for the backlash when some of your informants discover what you really did. They think you’re speaking TRUTH, not describing their truth. If they manage to understand that, you’ll get BIG blowback. Happened to me with sex tourists. Again, in my experience, guys like this do not like being put under the microscope. When they discover that’s what’s going on, they get a wee bit upset. Curiously, prostitutes seem to have a much less vio…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:42 PM
2

Yeah, but humans are much more than biological sex. When you are talking about their behaviors, you’re typically talking about gender, not sex, in any case.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:38 PM
1

Lol. Dude, call it what you like: you are taking on feminist theories. Don’t fool yourself there. Take it from someone who has been doing this for twenty years in the field of sex work research. Personally, I find it a lot more effective to simply pick out those feminist theories that are actually helpful in describing what I see and then saying “this is not a point that has passed unnoticed in feminism”. Instead of DENYING feminism, roll with it. Because it is so diverse and rich, you can find …
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:37 PM
1

Where can one find the bill, entire?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:17 PM
1

Yeah, well, the academics are talking here in a very specific sense when we use that word. Your objecting to it and them complaining that this is reddit kind begs the question.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:17 PM
1

Hey, Anjuna! Thanks for tackling this, btw. Especially in Sweden which shows some… well, balls. “Comspiracy theories”. Surely you are aware of QAnon and how it came about on 4Chan? The whole rhetoric of “revealed truth” and “great awakening” doesn’t come out of nowhere. In fact, you might want to take a look at Adam Kuper’s “Culture” for an insightful reading into current beliefs re: identity and their startling symmetries with Protestant notions of “revealed truth”. Kuper makes the point, for e…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 05:12 PM
0

What emotion have you expressed, exactly? You have expressed an opinion, which I find incorrect. Does that make you feel emotions?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:36 PM
1

This thread is talking about a thesis. You understand that, right?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:35 PM
1

Take a look at the comments that think you’re revealing the truth, when what you are doing is revealing how a certain group of men who use a term think of themselves. These guys think you’ve discovered some etic insight into men and gender which, as far as I can see, is something you’ve sensibly steered far away from. “Nothing to see here, ma’am! We’re just doing ethnology and asking questions!” :)
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:34 PM
1

Nope. This law blocks them for all kids, period.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:32 PM
3

So there’s your problem. You know who routinely gets prescribed hormone blockers? Girls with menstrual difficulties. That’s going to be a much larger group that’s negatively affected by this law than any putative trans kids. And for what, exactly? What social good comes from banning hormone blockers?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:31 PM
0

OK. So now we have established that men ARE allowed to express emotions. Do you think women don’t get mocked and shamed for expressing inappropriate emotions? Again, why is this a “male” thing, let alone “modern”? Seems to me to be a human thing as old as time. As for men not being able to talk about their failures and successes…. Oh, please. Just… please. Remember, I study sex work for a living. It’s my concrete experience that it is almost impossible to get men to shut up about themselves, par…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:29 PM
1

The law’s side effects can hurt people. For example, hormone blockers have a ton of uses in children for many different reasons. If the law is making unnecessary hoops to jump through, it’s not harmless. Even so, here’s my question: how do y’all justify a state congress wasting time on shit like this?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 04:14 PM
0

Uhm, I don’t know about you, but I have always been showing emotions, just like my father snd grandfather before me. What world do you live in where men are not allowed to show emotions? Go into any bar or pub — particularly on game night — and tell me how emotionally repressed men are. Or do you think feminism is causing those emotions? Again, men showing emotions is neither a role nor is it modern. Q.E.D. As for feminists telling women to show emotions… my god, that is what first wave feminism…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:55 PM
1

I am sorry, but that’s a non sequitur. It didn’t answer my question, which was why is this a male role or even modern?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:42 PM
1

Well, that’s pretty easily disproven in a scientific forum. Your opponent can show literally hundreds of feminist groups and philosophical lines that don’t want more power for women. In fact, there are feminist analogies to MGTOW. You need to remember that a thesis defense committee isn’t 4chan or Reddit. You don’t just get to say whatever you think: you have to show your work. If you’re taking on feminist theory in your masters, then you need to take it on scientifically. If you say “all femini…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:39 PM
1

And this is a “male role” (let alone “modern”), why? You might not have noticed it, but men are allowed to express boatloads of emotions and have been since pretty much always. What KIND of emotions are perhaps the issue.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:35 PM
1

It WAS mainstream for several thousand years. Some would argue it still is.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:35 PM
2

Right. And this is coming from the same political party and point on the political spectrum that constantly complains about mask mandates and “government overreach”? Please. Creating laws for problems that don’t exist and which may have horrible side effects is the very definition of “government overreach” and authoritarianism.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:33 PM
-4

The more appropriate metaphor would be this: why are you prescribing radical chemotherapy to a patient that doesn’t even have cancer?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:23 PM
1

Has there even been one?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:22 PM
1

Unfortunately, in science, you’d then have to prove that. Can you?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:22 PM
1

As a prostitutes’ rights advocate, believe me, I know all about Sweden.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:21 PM
1

Hormone blockers and sex change surgeries are two entirely different things. I repeat my question: how many minors have had sex change surgeries in Alabama?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:21 PM
1

Well, the very premise of science, David, is that “previous work is lacking”. I have faced this same depression in my own work and here’s the conclusion I have come to about it. It is not that “previous work” isn’t there. It is that so much of previous work about men, qua men, presumes male supremacy or a natural, stable, and enduring division between the genders that is ultimately anchored in biology. It is “lacking” in the sense that it has become empirically unsustainable. Feminism, quite rig…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:17 PM
1

What is “the modern male role”, exactly?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:09 PM
1

C’mon, kid. You known the stock answer to that as well as I do: “Feminism is a hugely diverse field”. What would your answer to that be?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:07 PM
1

Also, Sebastian? You are lucky most men posting here don’t have the slightest clue as to what “emic” means.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:38 PM
1

Yeah, that’s nice, but EVERYTHING dealing with gender is a Foucaultian truth regime. This seems a bit straw-manny here. I mean, it probably comes as news to radfems and such, but why is this news to anthropology?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:37 PM
1

“Second awakening” sounds very Q adjacent. As a social anthropology professor who focuses on gender issues, I’d ask you (if I was on your committee) if you fully investigated what that emic term means to them. I would be fascinated if it turned out it had nothing to do with all the conspiracy theories floating about these days. As for men going their own way, I’d also caution you against thinking this is an entirely new thing. There have always been men who refuse to deal with women in social an…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:35 PM
10

Now THIS is a men’s issue I can get behind. Given the outrage over female genital mutilation, you’d think there’d be at least a peep of outrage over the same thing happening to men. But no! It is completely legal!
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:25 PM
4

Just as a point of information: how many minors have undergone sex change surgeries in Alabama, exactly? Seems to me it should be pretty easy to find out if this is such a big problem.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:23 PM
-16

So let me bet this straight: his proof of his theory is a fictional novel he himself wrote? “Toxic masculinity” is a form of masculinity that is directly harmful, most notably to the men who have it themselves. And yes, most toxic behavior is indeed trauma induced. When said trauma occurs in order to reinforce gender roles (say, for example, beating a six year old boy found playing with make up) it often produces toxic behavior around gender roles. This guy is confusing mechanism for result. And…
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:20 PM
-2

Uhm… so we are agreed that women should be allowed to do all jobs they are capable of in the military? I think you will find very few feminists disagreeing with that. In fact, feminists organizations have been doing their best to pry the military open to women at all levels. Also, maybe it’s just me, but most me don’t want to be drafted, either.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:13 PM
-11

Well, probably because gender is a human construct and sex a natural one. When you refer to “males” and “females” outside of a strict biomedical context, you are subtly dehumanizing people.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:11 PM
-3

Yes, men are primarily the victims of violence. And it is mostly other men who target them. And much of said targeting also occurs because the targets are perceived to be unmasculine. Feminism and queer theory has been talking about this stuff since the 1980s, at least. So why is this news?
/r/MensRights10/04/22 02:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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