TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SamHanes10 Archive

View 2 posts and 360 comments by SamHanes10 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)
4

You're going to get a lot of pushback with this idea on this particular forum, but my only views largely mirror yours. In fact, I make it a point to try to treat women exactly as I would treat men; I'd encourage everyone to do the same.
/r/MGTOW15/07/21 10:33 PM
6

Of course not. But people who love themselves can live happy and fulfilling lives regardless of whatever else happens. People who don't love themselves will never be happy even if they do find a partner.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/21 12:09 AM
3

Have you guys noticed how often people excuse bad behavior from some women that they wouldn’t tolerate in other circumstances? The "other circumstances" here are simply the same bad behavior from men. Stop beating about the bush. There's a term for this - sexism. Start calling it that. Plenty of people are sexist in that they tolerate bad behaviour from some women that they wouldn't tolerate from men. Call them out for that using that exact term.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/21 12:06 AM
3

The first thing you need to learn is to love yourself. Then you will have someone that loves you, and you can move forward from there with other things in your life.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/21 12:02 AM
3

I think men should learn how to paint nails if they want to. If they don't want to paint nails - whether their own or someone else's - that's up to them.
/r/MensRights13/07/21 03:05 AM
2

Because men have become too afraid of standing up for themselves. In my view, this is the crux of the issue. It is both the reason why discrimination for men and boys continues unabated, but also the means by which discrimination against men and boys will be overcome. Unlike women, men's position in society is not going to change by trying to invoke empathy of others - most people simply do not care as much about men and boys as they do women and girls. And they likely never will, at least not a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/21 10:41 PM
5

I'd suggest you stop being so sexist and start treating women as adults rather than children who can't look after themselves.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/21 05:43 PM
3

In terms of books, there was a list and ensuing discussion posted elsewhere on this forum: https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/lg2wkj/five_indispensable_books_for_men_a_brief/ The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell was one of the first books that started me on this journey. Plenty of the others in the list are somewhat focused negative aspects of female behaviour rather than masculinity. I haven't read "The Rational Male" but have read some material by the author, and have …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/21 04:21 AM
3

This post suggests to me that you have a only a surface understanding of traditional masculinity. Please don't take this the wrong way - I don't think it is any fault on your part, but rather a societal issue. In my view, understanding traditional masculinity in modern Western is generally very poor. I believe that this is due to the influence of feminism, which has a very poor and superficial understanding of masculinity, likely because men in most feminist discourse are treated as caricatures …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/21 11:39 AM
1

I was previously in an abusive relationship with a woman. A large part of me putting up with the abuse was my perception that abuse by a woman was not a big deal due to ideas perpetuated by things like these posters. What you've dismissed as simply "what about men" whataboutism is actually about treating everyone equally and looking to help men in abusive relationships. In doing so, you've shown you have little regard for abused men. Hopefully, you will learn something from this forum and start …
/r/MensRights18/09/20 11:33 PM
1

It's 240 now. Do you want to retract your statement, or are you just one of those idiots that can't admit to being wrong?
/r/MensRights28/08/20 10:20 AM
3

This is a terrible idea. While this is only a symbol, I can't take this sub seriously when it has a white feather as it's icon. Remember that this sub is meant to advocate for men. To do so, we need more people on our side. We can't do this is other people see this symbol and immediately associate us with cowardice. This will happen despite the intention to 'reclaim' the symbol.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/20 09:46 PM
22

Cricisism of 'simping' and criticism of 'nice guys' are actually opposites. That is, feminists don't want 'nice guys' to expect anything in return, they want 'nice guys' to 'simp' without any reward. In a bit more detail, 'simping' is criticised because doing something for someone else without getting anything in return is a recipe for being taken advantage of. In contrast, 'nice guys' are criticised because these 'guys' expect that by being nice to someone, there will be some reciprocity in doi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/20 06:07 AM
1

Whether or not New Zealand did the 'right' thing is not clearcut. The SARS-Cov-2 will become endemic throughout the world. New Zealand has prevented the virus spreading in its population, but unless we wish to stay isolated indefinitely from the world, the strategy is simply delaying the inevitable. A vaccine, or improved treatment strategies, may reduce the toil of Covid-19, but this will not reduce it to zero. It is likely that the economic effects of isolating the country in this way will cau…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/20 12:36 AM
3

You didn't directly say so, but did imply that people who listened to and started supporting some right-wing ideas would slowly turn into white nationalists. You also described some apparently 'bad' right-wing points that only 'bad' 'alt-right white nationalists' would believe, yet some these do have some truth to them. It's this insistence by the left that these issues cannot be discussed because they are considered wrongthink that is causing people to leave the left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 09:46 PM
2

FYI it's possible to agree with some right-wing ideas without being a 'white nationalist'.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 03:02 PM
20

I have to say, I'm surprised by this comment section. The woman stabbed the victim twice. That means she stabbed him, took the knife out and stabbed him again. I can't see how this can be considered justified self-defence. At best, he was abusive and the sole perpetrator of the abuse and she finally 'cracked' and lashed out at him. That might be somewhat less severe than murdering someone for other reasons, but it is not self-defence. Whatever he did, he did not deserve to die. At worst, they we…
/r/MensRights07/08/20 11:23 AM
9

Men who have sex with other men are well-recognised by the medical community as being a higher risk subgroup for HIV. If that presentation did not mention this, and instead only mentioned women as being 'higher risk', then it is this is another example of sexism against men.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 07:59 AM
5

I agree that having sex has become a de facto initiation into manhood, but I disagree that "it's just the best we have". In contrast, I think it's worse than nothing because it means that the initiating of boys to become men is being decided by women through their choices of which men to have sex with. This encourages men to prioritise service to women, rather than prioritising mature and responsible behaviour. I'd suggest a much better initiation barrier of boys into men would when boys show th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/20 06:12 AM
7

It's interesting that this post appeared at the same time as this one: Traditonal (Traditional) masculinity is exactly what is attractive to women and I feel so dumb because of it. (my correction) I'd suggest that the title of that post, and discussion within, partly answers this question.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/20 06:04 AM
5

It doesn't amaze me at all. It's obvious that they and (most of) their readers are sexist. Sexist people say sexist things. Sexist people enjoy reading sexist things.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 12:53 AM
2

I know children are a huge responsibility, but there are natural instincts that are supposed to be in place for women to be drawn towards having/raising children. A woman who scorns this is a woman who likely has deep seated issues, No, humans should not let their behaviour be completely governed by 'natural instincts', they should instead make informed decisions. This applies to having children as well. Saying that people must do this because of 'natural instincts' is simply biological (natural…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen16/07/20 06:09 AM
3

I agree that it's a bad message. But one way to make this point is to mock it, which is what sarcasm is often used for.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/20 07:17 AM
0

Sure, you can go ahead and contrast 'equal' and 'equitable', but the problem in doing so is 'equal' has a more objective ring to it, while 'equitable' has a more subjective wring to it. And subjectivity is the reason men have been taken advantage of for years - because it is 'fair' and 'equitable' that a man pays for access to a woman (because he has no inherent value), and it is 'fair' and 'equitable' that a woman doesn't need to do anything in return (because she does have inherent value). For…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre14/07/20 05:19 AM
0

equal return from their partners. This is unreasonable. Equal return doesn't mean identical return. It means return of equal value. If you aren't getting equal return from your partner, you are being used.
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre14/07/20 04:40 AM
18

Having seen some of the author's previous posts, I'm pretty sure it was a sarcastic comment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/20 04:17 AM
4

To me it shows how much of an inferiority complex most women have - they need people constantly telling them they are 'great' because otherwise feel inferior. It's a sign of weakness, rather than a sign of strength. I'm a man and an article saying how great 'men' are is pretty worthless to me. I know my own value. The value of other men is unimportant. I know what I'm good at. Just because other men are better at average than women on certain things is unimportant.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/20 05:18 AM
7

Nothing in life is guaranteed. This is especially the case with other people - few people have the concept of 'honour' these days, where staying true to your word, not backstabbing others and being fair to people is important. This is why trusting someone absolutely is a fools gambit. Yet too many men are willing to trust their female partners absolutely, despite ample evidence that many women do not behave honourable. Do not do this. It's important to always have an exit strategy in mind if she…
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre13/07/20 04:56 AM
4

One of the reasons why men are less interested in assuming traditional responsibility is due to the divorce of authority from responsibility. This post will analyze one extreme example of this. However, the core concept can be found all over society. This is why blue-pill thinking is outdated. A man being protector/provider is now largely a one-way exchange, where the man contributes a lot to the relationship, and woman just leeches off him. To avoid falling into this trap, men must insist that …
/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre13/07/20 04:44 AM
4

Great post. I agree with the use of the term "patriarchal feminism" to describe this form of feminism, and it's one I've used myself in the past here. To add, I'll like to point out that some of the biggest contributors to patriarchal feminism are male feminists. These men often take the male gender role of being a protector to an extreme and apply it to their feminist activism. That is, they feel it is their role, as men, to take 'responsibility' and do everything they can advance feminism. Thi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/20 01:18 AM
4

Egalitarianism
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/07/20 01:44 AM
2

"Some random person on a MGTOW forum said something so all people who identify as MGTOW believe that". This is a stupid low quality post that is not up to the standards of this forum.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/07/20 10:46 PM
5

Patriarchy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/20 03:38 AM
3

But "male gender expectations" just means masculinity. Seems like a meaningless change. I strongly disagree. To me, "masculinity" is the parts of my identity that I associate with being male. These things may or may not be expected from me by society at large. The important point is that they form part of my identity as a man. I also expect masculinity to be entirely subjective, as what I find important in my identity as a man may be different from what other men find important. That is entirely…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/20 03:28 AM
5

Save money. Saving money to achieve one's own financial goals is fine, but I strongly suggest not using money to try to attract other people. It's a surefire way to attract gold-diggers and/or get divorce raped.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 04:19 AM
5

Plenty of good-looking men display their bodies and attract attention from other people (both women and other men). It's not quite analogous to what women do, but well-fitting clothes generally is the way to go. I suspect, though, your issue isn't that men can't dress to impress, but rather, the physical characteristics that are attractive in men are much harder to achieve than for women. Men who are lucky enough to be genetically endowed, i.e. tall and have a wide build, are attractive. Less lu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/20 04:17 AM
9

No. You seem to lack reading comprehension. Using the "green apples" analogy, "toxic masculinity" would still imply that some masculinity is toxic (like some apples are green). The bolded sentence makes a point that this is incorrect. The problem isn't masculinity, whether it is all masculinity or some masculinity. The problem is society and how it treats men. No where did the sentence say that 'toxic masculinity' meant that *all** masculinity was toxic*. You simply parroted out this standard fe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/20 12:55 AM
1

Sure, I'd agree that some men have poor methods of emotional control and use emotional 'repression' as a means to accomplish this. I don't think this is true for a majority of men, however, as repression simply doesn't work well. In order to achieve the levels of emotional control exhibited by most men, it is necessary to use mindfulness/stoicism-type of techniques. This is where you observe your emotions externally and let them inform you rather than control you, not where you try to block them…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 11:36 PM
4

'Boys don't cry': Study suggests mothers, not fathers, show gender bias towards sons
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 10:47 AM
1

I think what used to be easier is that you could be open about your intentions and say that you are looking for someone to marry. If you try that today, then, well, good luck... I don't think that's strictly true. For example, my (anecdotal) experience with some conservative Christians is that often marry young (by today's standards - say 20-24). To me this is a clear sign that their intentions are to marry from the start (driven by taboos about pre-marital sex). In addition, most serious relati…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 10:38 AM
2

I actually strongly disagree with this. I think emotional control is a good thing, and women would be better served learning from men in this regard. Most of men's problems are not to do with 'emotional repression', this is just a feminist strawman. Instead, men's problems are due to sexism against men, which includes society not caring about men as a whole.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 03:46 AM
8

Others have made plenty of good points here. One perspective I'd like to raise is how a lot of the Western notions of 'romantic love' came about in a completely different social environment from what exists today. In particular, these notions came about when there was socially-enforced monogamy, pre- and extra-marital sex was unacceptable and divorce was rare (To avoid any doubt, I'm not suggesting a reversal to the these more conservative values, I'm simply listing my observations and thinking …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/20 03:30 AM
8

BLM is a feminist organisation, or at least supports feminist ideas about 'patriarchal oppression'.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/20 10:54 PM
31

Because women, including feminists, realise that they can use sex to control men. Porn and sex toys for men takes that power away from them so they are opposed to it. It's as simple as that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 07:09 AM
6

For a male feminist such as yourself, I expect your idea of a "healthy partnership" is one in which the man is constantly apologising for the sin of being a man and the woman is in charge of the relationship to make up for all the years of 'patriarchy' that her female ancestors supposedly endured. Thus, I suspect your opinion is more reflective of your sexism in favour of women and against men than anything else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/05/20 01:59 AM
1

And use cries of 'sexism' to manipulate people in to giving them that regardless of the facts.
/r/MensRights16/05/20 10:25 PM
9

https://www.beyondblue.org.au/media/news/news/2019/05/28/suicide-figures-are-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-new-research
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 09:56 AM
22

The other point is that there's undercounting of men who attempt suicide by hospital staff. A recent Australian study showed that the number of men attempting suicide was much greater based on reports of first responders compared to hospital staff, but the latter being the current source of statistics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/20 05:39 AM
1

Interesting idea. I like it - it's giving the finger to feminists who keep trying to use shaming tactics to make men do what they want. And it's something that could catch on. I'm going to adopt this tactic. It is a good idea.
/r/MensRights30/04/20 12:05 PM
8

I want to get out of this mindset that men are incompetent, unlike women, in multiple areas. You seem obsessed with this for no good reason. Group-wise statistics only tell us the probability of individuals within the groups of having certain characteristics. They are not deterministic in any way. Therefore, even if there was a statistic that group 1, on average, was more competent in scientific research than group 2, this would be of little value in figuring out how good any particular individu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/20 01:40 AM
2

I agree, but my phrasing was deliberately chosen to tailor my message for the target audience
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/20 06:39 AM
10

A great demonstration of the toxicity of menslib towards men, which is, sadly, unsurprising at all. What gets me is the refusal of many men, such as those on menslib, to realise that a lot of feminists are not on their side and never will be - such people are simply sexist against men and cannot be reasoned with. I think this shows the strength of the 'women-are-wonderful' effect. These people would easily criticise other men, feminist or not, that are hateful, but simply refuse to believe that …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/20 06:06 AM
6

I think a good term for what you are encountering is "a politician's truth". That is, technically, the mods do allow people to criticise certain aspects of feminism (e.g. TERFs or feminists that support men rather than women). Therefore, technically, the statement that "it's not against the rules (of that subreddit) to criticize specific feminist-oriented positions or policies" is true. Practically, however, only certain 'pre-approved' criticisms of feminism are allow, and thus the technical 'tr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/04/20 12:00 AM
3

I wouldnt have sex with any girl immediately after meeting her. But you still look at her and think "yeah I would". This is contradictory. You said you wouldn't have sex with her, than you said you would. Which of these is true? I think the reason for your confusion is you are confusing sexual attraction with willingness to have sex with someone. What you are saying is that you would look at a woman and decide if she is sexually attractive or not. A person, either a man or woman, can be attracte…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 12:33 PM
5

Speak for yourself. I'm a man and I would not have sex with a woman if she didn't 'court' me. I'd also be creeped out by a random woman grabbing my arm. Stop generalising about men and women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 12:08 PM
9

Male strippers and gigolos exist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 11:47 AM
3

Agreed but I don't think the order of logic is quite right. A good sexual experience depends a lot on the presence of sexual attraction to one's partner. A man is guaranteed a good experience because he finds most women attractive. Most women do not find the average man attractive (the famous OKCupid data shows this), and this is the reason for them being selective. So they choose to have sex with the most attractive men and do have good sexual experiences with these men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 11:45 AM
9

News flash: If a woman is attracted to a man, she will be willing to have sex with him in the right circumstances, and for some women this includes "having sex with him within 2 seconds of looking at him". If she finds a man 'creepy' it simply means she isn't attracted to him and that's why she doesn't want him touching her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 11:39 AM
2

However, the argument is that blinding measures do not "encourage" people to "counteract the internalized bias". And we should not buy into this at all, because it is simply saying that 'good bias' is alright and but 'bad bias' is not. This doesn't work because it simply means that whoever has the strongest ability to define 'good bias' wins - it's inherently unfair, easily leads to cheating and is an unstable system, as I've pointed out. In your two examples, (1) it is clear that female Uber dr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 11:25 AM
2

Sure, fair enough. I'm rather sensitive to feminist talking points because I see them as being completely self-serving and exploiting the good will of others. While it is very noble of you to want to try to be fair and inclusive to everyone, most people repeating these talking points aren't going to return the favour. To put in your analogy of a 'game', let's say we have a football game were we base it on a honour system rather than having a referee. Now let's say team 1 was willing to honour te…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 01:35 AM
3

My point is that the feminist idea of unidirectional sexism is just completely false, and needs to be called out, which is why I originally criticised your point. To avoid any doubt, (1) women have been, and are, more discriminated against in some facets than men. And (2) men have been, and are, more discriminated against in some facets than women. Yet the entire feminism narrative is about (1), and that (2) never happened. It's not possible to talk about (1) without (2), but feminists do so. Le…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 12:44 AM
4

I never said that this was unique to women, yet you assumed I was saying so. Of course men would do so if they could, and they do. You seem to be predisposed to believe any criticism of women is sexist. It's not. I'm saying women were not uniquely discriminated against. Plenty of men didn't have a chance to use their intelligence either, if they were of the wrong class. I suspect this always more of a class issue than a gender issue - high class people could use their intelligence in society if …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 12:21 AM
2

Imagine burning with the kind of intelligence you clearly have and wanting to offer it to the world but being denied that outlet because of your gender, something over which you have no control? This feminist narrative isn't strictly true. There are plenty of examples of women using their intelligence to 'offer' something to the world in the past despite quite strict gender roles. They certainly could if they wanted to, but most simply chose not to. Because it's easier use your physical endowmen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/20 12:14 AM
6

There are plenty of good comments here about reasons women might embrace 'victimhood', and one that is particularly of interest to me is that it provides benefits to the women how do so. By acting as a victim, it is possible to 'game' society to get financial, professional and social benefits, and it is therefore no big surprise some people who can take advantage of this to benefit themselves will. I think this leads us to another topic that is crucial important in society but very poorly addres…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/20 11:59 PM
3

I don't think this is actually that off-topic - there is a reason that De Beers' marketing campaign (and control of the market) worked. That is: the gynocentric expectation that men show their 'love' by spending a large amount of money on their would-be wife. While their are plenty of 'alternatives', whether or not diamonds are rare isn't really the point. The point is that they are expensive (for whatever reason). That's why most women expect them. They wouldn't expect them if they were cheap, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/20 10:56 PM
5

The tradition is for a women to receive a very highly priced ring, often with a diamond (which are expensive but not actually rare) - the engagement ring - when the man asks the woman to marry him. The man does not receive a engagement ring from the women. When they get married, each party receives a ring from the other - the wedding rings. These rings are much simpler in design and tend to be much cheaper - usually they are simple bands of a precious metal. If you look closely at the ring finge…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/20 10:46 PM
5

Others have raised several good points here. There is definitely a section of 'feminists' that are actually egalitarian, and it should not be difficult to get their support provided they are given correct information about issues affecting men. The problem is that 'patriarchal feminism' - which posits that society is a patriarchy in which men oppress women - is the mainstream form of feminism*. These people would never whole-heatedly support men's issues unless they turn their back on that form …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/20 02:07 AM
1

It was available on the recorded live stream that was available to conference supporters. I'm not sure it is publicly available at the moment, but if you do find it, it was one of the first speeches during the conference opening.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/20 02:29 PM
7

There was a great speech for Allison Tieman from last year's ICMI. In it, she outlined the main reason why she was standing up for men's issues. It came down to something very simple: As a woman, it was something she was better placed at doing than men, because she couldn't as easily be discounted as being a 'misogynist'. Given this, she felt it was her responsibility to stand up for men's issues. That speech was really quite moving, and quite telling for me. As a man, I've always felt responsib…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 10:28 PM
3

I don’t think one gender needs to put the other down to seek equality. Except that is what feminism does. The idea that "feminism is just about equality" is simply feminist propaganda. Those that seek equality are egalitarians, not feminists. The basis of feminism, according to almost all influential feminists is 'patriarchy theory', which is the posits that society is built by men for male dominance, exploitation and oppression of women. This is clearly a sexist idea about men, which has nothin…
/r/MensRights31/03/20 08:50 PM
3

While I'm glad you have achieved something that you were aiming for, I do have a word of caution. You are entering the realm that many people use to manipulate others to get what they want. Many people will have no qualms about using you to their own advantage, and intimate relationships are prime breeding ground for such behaviour. Remember to maintain your self-respect. This means sticking to you own values. And take care of yourself. This means being cautious and refusing to self-sacrifice un…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/03/20 12:47 AM
10

I am fine with that part. If you include the prison population, men get raped as often as women do, and its usually by women. As far as I know, these (new) laws are still explicitly gendered so only male on female sexual violence is included. Even if I'm wrong and the law itself is not gendered, if you believe that there will be significant enforcement against female perpetrators, I have a bridge to sell you. My point here isn't that dealing with female-on-male sexual violence is impossible. Rat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/03/20 10:19 AM
15

I'm not sure this is a good evolution of your constant question asking. By calling out particular users to comment on your questions, you are making this sub seem very clique-y and this may make it unwelcoming to others. I suggest if you want to have discussions with particular users you do it by PM or let it evolve naturally.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/20 11:53 PM
17

That's not really the point at all. The point of berating MRAs is to discredit MRAs in the eyes of their own adherents and the general public. They understand that support for their own views would be compromised if people realised that the views of MRAs were actually reasonable. Thus, they have no choice but to misrepresent the views of MRAs to prevent this happening.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/03/20 09:21 AM
9

Here's an example of what I consider to be poor faith. If you know anything about academia, you'll know that citing secondary sources for what a primary source says is very poor form. The primary source should be cited instead. Failing to do so is borderline unethical if carried out without necessity (e.g the primary source is genuinely unavailable). Yet, instead of acknowledging that this is bad academic practice, you expect the above user to point out individual 'lies' so that you can nitpick …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/03/20 07:14 AM
2

Nah. Many people, men and women, would do that if they could. Except they can't because other people will criticise them or tell them off. Feminists tell women that they can never be legitimately criticised, that anything negative said about a woman is sexism. Therefore, women who subscribe to that ideology become immune to criticism and all go around telling each other that it's completely normal to be selfish.
/r/MensRights19/03/20 06:54 AM
3

Great comment but it isn't going to make any difference to the person you are replying to. Their MO is basically to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about any non-feminist ideas of how to help men. I've never seen them contribute anything positive to this sub. It's always simply casting aspersions on (non-feminist) material posted here, complaining that this subreddit is 'bad for criticising their favourite subreddits (especially MensLib) , or wasting time arguing about definitions of various …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/03/20 04:36 AM
3

Yep. Successful people always try to win arguments by calling others 'virgins', 'incels' and kids'. Nah, actual successful people show it in how they act, and don't need to brag about being successful. I think you mean you're married and a successful manipulator.
/r/MensRights18/03/20 11:34 PM
3

Nah. You're just bitter because the manipulative techniques you, and others like you, use don't work on people like me.
/r/MensRights18/03/20 11:18 PM
3

Yes sexual assault is serious. But the conversation wasn't originally about sexual assault. She brought it up to 'win' the argument and when it failed put on the tears. Using past personal trauma as a weapon is classic emotional manipulation. Why was that stopping her from agreeing that men have problems too? It wasn't. It was simply a weapon to be the bigger victim in the situation so that she is 'right'. You're also sexist because you'd never allow a man to use personal trauma as a weapon in t…
/r/MensRights18/03/20 11:08 PM
1

As a man with experience online dating, those articles from women complaining about dating don't make any sense. Until you realise that all the women complaining are competing for only the very top men. And any man outside that top echelon is pretty much invisible to them. Then it makes sense. Classic apex fallacy. Not all women are like this, of course. The ones that aren't typically are smarter about dating and end up with someone, and are therefore attached. There are unattached women that ar…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/20 12:17 PM
1

For adults, crying is normal for serious stuff like someone dying. It's not normal for trivial stuff like losing an argument. Only children cry for such trivial things. Stop treating women like children and start treating them as adults.
/r/MensRights18/03/20 12:00 PM
6

The feminist concept of the 'pleasure gap', like most feminist concepts, is divorced from reality both in terms of the facts underlying it and the potential solutions to it. For example, I've seen people, usually feminists or feminist-leaning, claim that men always orgasm during PIV sex. I presume this people came up with this without actually asking men about what sex is like for them. For the record, I am a man and there have been times in which I did not orgasm during PIV sex, yet my (female)…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/20 04:23 AM
7

I do not have the feeling of "original sin" for being a man. Like u/SchalaZeal01, I also think that most people are not that gynocentric or that hateful of men. In addition, I think that feminist ideas such 'patriarchy' are actually not accepted by most people. To expand, I've often that ideas from feminist scholars such as 'patriarchy' or 'toxic masculinity' are often well-understood by these scholars but misunderstood and misapplied by the general population. In reality, I think it's the oppos…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/20 03:48 AM
3

I do not agree that it's a strawman. Others can look at your post history and decide for themselves whether you would ever support discriminating against women, even if it would be 'efficacious' to do so. I stand by my statements here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 04:06 AM
4

The excuse that efficacy is more important than the principles involved is often used by people with biased principles to justify their views.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 03:30 AM
9

You wouldn't be saying this if the policy was to only distribute food to men and not to women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 02:17 AM
5

I specifically stated that I am not talking about people who made a single problematic comment on September 23rd 2014. It is cancel culture because there is a line somewhere, even if the line isn't 1 comment in 6 years. So what's the line? What's the magic formula? Clearly 1 'problematic' comment in 6 years acceptable. What about 10 in 6 years? what about 10 in 3 years? What about 10 in 1 year? Or is it the proportion of problematic comments to non-problematic comments? What is the definition of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 10:42 PM
9

Sure, it's easy for you to make a judgement about whether you want to engage with someone else. But the decision of the mods needs to be more reasoned than that. How far back to you in someone's history to decide if their a 'bad person' and shouldn't be allowed to participate? How to we know that that comment is being taken in the right context? Perhaps the comment was meant to be sarcastic? This is all a lot of work for volunteer mods. It also invites people to trawl through others histories to…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 10:32 PM
10

I disagree. The mods should only judge people by what those people post here. The mods should not need to delve into people's post histories to make any judgments. Even if they only do this for people who are reported, that's more work than is justified. They're volunteers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 10:20 PM
17

The mods are volunteers. Their job is to make sure the discussion here abides by the rules. That's it. They aren't here to police people's behaviour outside this forum. This just gives them more work, which is unfair to expect of them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 10:12 PM
18

Looking at peoples post histories to disbar them from commenting here is the worst idea ever. The mods shouldn't be wasting their time worrying about what people do outside this forum.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 10:01 PM
25

Pretty standard poor understanding of men's choices plus reinforcement of the male 'protector' gender role. The comments assume that the reason that a man might keep working despite being sick is because he is being unreasonably selfish. In reality, there are many reason why he might do so. He might need to go to work to keep his job. Obviously he needs his job to earn money to feed and house himself (and maybe others). He might need to act 'tough' because other people around him (both men and w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 09:21 PM
1

Men are directly informative because they are a control group. Without the men in the study, any discrimination against married childless women could be attributed to general discrimination against childless people, not pregnancy per se. To show discrimination due to potential pregnancy, they need to show that this does not occur in married childless men in addition to showing that this does occur in married childless women. You seem to simply have a poor understanding of science and control gro…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:44 PM
1

I see you aren't happy to keep this discussion to it's original thread, and instead want to blow your trumpet here, and also take other peoples comments out of context. Unfortunately, it simply shows you have a very poor understanding of science and how control groups work. In reference to the original paper, the male group is an essential control group. It is not possible to infer that the 'discrimination' against married childless women is due to potential pregnancy without this control group.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:34 PM
1

To repeat, the male group is an essential control group. It is not possible to infer that the 'discrimination' against married childless women is due to potential pregnancy without this control group. It is possible that there is general discrimination against married childless people, that is nothing to do with pregnancy, for example, because people dislike childless people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:20 PM
1

To repeat, the male group is an essential control group. It is not possible to infer that the 'discrimination' against married childless women is due to potential pregnancy without this control group. It is possible that there is general discrimination against married childless people, that is nothing to do with pregnancy, for example, because people dislike childless people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:20 PM
2

It's not unusual for people to try to control other people they are close to. In normal circumstances between adults, both parties have the chance to argue their side to avoid being 'controlled'. Unfortunately, there has been decades of feminist activism, pushing the narrative that only men can be abusive and controlling, and women are all innocent and meek and only act in self-defence. This has seriously disrupted the "power dynamics" in relationships because it has meant men have less chance t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 09:05 AM
1

No. The men are a control group for their study. They cannot study their hypothesis within the 'female group' without also addressing effects on males. See my top level comment for more details.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:31 AM
2

Incorrect. Male applicants were a control group and an essential part of their research design. In order to show discrimination due to potential pregnancy rather than discrimination in general against married childless people, they need to show this only occurs for females and not males as well. The vastly different values for this control group is an important finding that must be addressed. See my top-level comment for more details.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:29 AM
2

I've had further thoughts about this study following my original comments in some threads, and I think these are worthy of a top-level response as they address the OPs point in some detail. This was an experimental study in which the researchers sent applications randomised by family/fertility type and then measured the response in terms of interview invites. The researchers included both female and male applicants in their study. Their hypothesis was that potential fertility would result in dis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:27 AM
2

Male applicants were part of the original study design.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 02:30 AM
2

The paper didn't actually need to report male callback statistics at all. It was part of their original research design. Withholding part of their dataset because it lead to findings they disagreed with them would have constituted academic fraud.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 02:29 AM
0

That is called p hacking. It is fine to mention those extraneous correlations. It's not p hacking because male applicants were part of their original design. Therefore, they were planning to do comparisons to males in the first place.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 02:28 AM
2

Are you serious. It's a paper about the effects of pregnancy. How many men do you know who have gotten pregnant Antovigo? Do you really think it's a "caricature of gynocentrism" for researchers to study pregnancy? If the study had been on discrimination against various groups of male applicants, yet had found greater discrimination against females than any group of male applicants, I'm 99% sure that this would have received a lot of comment in their paper.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 02:27 AM
2

Respectfully, no, that is not at all how science works. The finding of unexpected or novel results unrelated to your hypothesis is worthy of a note or "possible future work" reference at best. The flaw in this thinking is that 'male' applicants were part of their original research design. Therefore, drawing inferences from this aspect of their data is completely valid. Although their focus was on effects of potential pregnancy lead to discrimination of certain women, in all cases the discriminat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 02:25 AM
12

https://removeddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/fgf0h5/patriarchy_and_power_how_socialisation_underpins/ https://snew.notabug.io/r/MensLib/comments/fgf0h5/patriarchy_and_power_how_socialisation_underpins/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/20 03:13 AM
4

While the language is pervasively sexist, and I strongly object to that, I didn't see anything to suggest that "men go to jail automatically if accused." No law is going to literally say that "men go to jail automatically if accused". Whether or not this happens will come down to how the authorities enforce this law. I'm not Spanish and I don't have any evidence of how this law is enforced. In my view, "men go to jail automatically if accused" is probably an exaggeration. Nevertheless, the fact …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/20 11:02 PM
8

Have you ever met a feminist in real life...? How about a woman...? First paragraph scares me feminist propaganda feminism is anti-egalitarian lmao wtf what a hot take, please explain how “advocacy for women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes” isn’t egalitarian. feminism is an idea and movement rooted in equality by definition, you can’t be a feminist without being an egalitarian and you can’t be an egalitarian without being a feminist. however, the label “feminist” is a better a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 08:04 PM
3

That's an ad for a university looking to recruit more students (which increases their income from student fees and government per student funding). It's not a state-funded program to increase the number of male teachers. I'm not doubting that you would be able to find an example of such a program from somewhere in the world. But, as a contrast, I certainly haven't heard cries to increase the number of male teachers from NZ politicians as much as I've heard cries to increase the number of women o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 04:09 AM
14

I believe in equal relationships. Most 'actual' feminists, that is those that subscribe to patriarchy theory, expect men to continue their traditional role of protecting and providing for women to make up for all the 'oppression' women supposedly experience. It would not be possible to have an equal relationship with someone like that, so I would not date them. In contrast, I'd happily date egalitarians, including those that call themselves feminists based on the feminist propaganda that it's ab…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 02:07 AM
15

The term patriarchy [can be defined as] 'historically defined gender roles' This argument is a classic motte-and-bailey approach to defending feminist but any critical analysis of it shows it fails completely. Patriarchy is not defined as 'historically defined gender roles' by the majority of feminists or by feminist theory. For evidence of my claims, I will reference a recent essay by u/LacklustreFriend on this very forum that clearly outlines how patriarchy is defined by a majority of feminist…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/03/20 10:56 PM
2

To add, I'd suggest the collectivist "girl power" narrative is probably on balance holding women and girls back. What I'm talking about here is the idea that when a woman or girl does something good, for some reason other women or girls look at it and feel pride about it. And then use that to point out how "wonderful" women or girls are. Now I'm not saying we shouldn't appreciate other people's achievements, be they men or women, but it should be obvious to anyone that other people's achievement…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/02/20 10:12 PM
8

Agreed. I think this is a great comment because it cuts through a lot of the crap that I've see on this sub the last few days. Men asking other men to convince them that men as a group are 'good' and that men aren't 'bad'. That kind of collectivist thinking is just bizarre. As if men are all a hive mind that all act in unison, controlling each others actions. I can say that I've always felt responsibility to be a good person, but not guilt for what someone else - that I don't even know - has don…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/02/20 10:22 AM
4

I don't think there is much more to be gained for continuing this conservation but based on these later comments, it appears that you are unable to rationally reject feminist arguments. So I'll leave some final advice: (1) I think you need to be able rationally reject these arguments, perhaps by reading anti-feminist material such as "The Myth of Male Power" and (2) if your 'guilt' or whatever gets in the way, you need to apply mindfulness or cognitive-behavioural therapy to overcome this emotio…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 08:02 PM
7

I am beginning to think that a world without men would genuinely be a better place. I thought you could easily debunk feminist arguments, yet here you are saying this. Repeating such nonsense isn't going to help. Just stop it. It's wrong. It's actually evil - imagine saying, for example, a world without Asian people would be a better place. How can you possibly think such a thing?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 07:51 PM
1

I don't think I was. I mean, every boy gets taught that you must not hurt girls but be nice to them, but beyond that, I really do not recall anything. Unfortunately, this material is everywhere. I suppose you picked it up more than others. Debunking feminist arguments is not very hard for me, no. But I feel very guilty whenever I do it. This is what I'm getting at. For me, debunking an argument changes my beliefs. There is no guilt, because an argument stands on it's merit. If it doesn't stand u…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 07:32 PM
3

Women are taught at birth to refrain from fighting and be pacifist They aren't. They just fight differently than men - they tend to use emotional manipulation and indirect methods of fighting over direct physical violence. But this is largely because they are physically weaker than men. Change this, and they'd quickly start using that new power to fight.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 07:07 PM
6

Sounds to me like you've been brainwashed to have these beliefs from a very early age. I'm not sure I can offer much advice. For me, all I needed to 'de-feminist' myself was have actual unbiased information about gender issues put in front of me. As a rational and evidence-based person, this led me to reject any previous 'beliefs' I had and form new ones. Perhaps you could make your thinking becoming more evidence-based, but I don't really know how one would go about doing so. Learn to apply sci…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 07:06 PM
3

"Power corrupts" is a dogshit trope and a shitty excuse for one's descent into evil. It's not an excuse at all. It's simply an observation that the reason that many people don't abuse power is simply because they have no power. If they did have power, they would abuse it. Hence, the "purity test" you referred to. In reality, power serves as a "purity test" for one's ACTUAL alignment. And apparently, the socialization of women into peaceful and pacifist beings did not deter the women in the novel…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 06:46 PM
2

I'm on the fence on that one. I feel like utilizing electricity as a power... undermines her point and makes the women look EXTREMELY bad and primitive. We've invented the goddamn nukes and guns, but skeins generating electricity (where devices are made to produce it) is where we cross the "innate violence" threshold? Have you read the book? Anyone with the 'Power' is massively over-powered compared to anyone who doesn't have the power. They can virtually kill anyone at will or even control peop…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 05:11 AM
2

Can't really remember enough to elaborate. It's been a few years since I read the book. I'm not sure what the second part of your comment refers to. Anyone objective to the book portraying women in a "primitive amd violent manner (sic)" is completely missing the point - which is that power corrupts everyone. There's no reason why women with physical power would be less likely to be violent than men. The only people who doubt this are sexists who believe that women are all wonderful and men are a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 03:52 AM
3

Well, the "Power" was exclusive to women, and many women used it to torture, rape and kill men immediately after acquiring it. This lead to a world-wide apocalypse (I can't recall the details). This story is the main focus of the book. In the background, the book itself is presented as the work of a man in a future society and contains excerpts of historical events that occurred after the events in the books. In those excerpts, there were references to genocide of males and keeping men as servan…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/20 03:07 AM
3

I've read "The Power". I'd say it is certainly worth a read. It explores the idea of what would happen if females suddenly acquired a massive amount of power over males, and what would happen. As anyone with half a brain would realise, this obviously leads to many females abusing this power and using it to harm innocent people. It explores this idea over the short and long term, and over the long term it leads to things such as mass killing of male babies and absolutely male servitude. The 'femi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/20 11:27 PM
1

u/iainmf has a great comment about this article here: https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/f6k8bv/sexual_abuse_of_men_and_boys_is_still_abuse_and/fi6jwyc/ This is quoted in full below: The good news is the government is now funding support services for Male Survivors of sexual abuse. But there are a few things that I think need to change Change the law so that rape is not defined by penetration Change the current sentencing guidelines that treat non-penetrative rape unlawful sexual conne…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/20 06:16 PM
8

How is there not more outrage at this? A true "rape culture." It wasn't illegal (for females to sexually assault males, underage or otherwise, in New Zealand) until 2007. Yes, you read that right.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/20 03:18 AM
9

The story of Heard's abuse of Depp, and the media response to the suicide of another somewhat-famous woman, Caroline Flack, who was charged with physical assault of her male partner, are two stories that are very telling about the state of gender affairs in Western societies. The simple fact is this: The amount of sexism in favour of women and against men is mind-numbing. We are now at a state where, as you've rightly pointed out, innocence itself is no defense when a man is alleged to have abus…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/02/20 09:12 PM
5

Well, my reaction was simply because accusing others of having 'bad' ideas is a commonly used mechanism for shutting down debate, especially regarding gender issues. After all, how many times have we seen feminists accusing those who support due process as being 'rape apologists'? As for the the OPs point, I think there is a lot of nuance in it that is not immediately obvious, and they have done a good job expanding on this. From what I can see, their point is that sexual attraction is a motivat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/02/20 12:21 AM
51

People care about women, especially middle-to-upper class white women. People do not care about men. That's the message, being blasted at full volume. Men need to realise this and plan their lives accordingly.
/r/MensRights17/02/20 11:30 PM
2

This comes off as excussing sexual harasment as natural male behavior. My problem with this comment is that all you're really saying is that the OPs point of view as 'morally bad' and therefore 'wrongthink' and something we shouldn't discuss. This prevents people having an intelligent conversation about these ideas.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/02/20 11:17 PM
17

Ah. You must be a admirer of Mary Koss who feels that rape of men by women is just 'unwanted contact'. It's great to have you here to tell male victims that they aren't real victims. Good on you /s. Edit: Looking at this again, perhaps I was interpreting your comment too uncharitably. All you did was point out the legal definition of 'rape' which is highly sexist, without putting any spin on this, so it doesn't necessarily mean you agree with the legal definition. Nevertheless, an important poin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/02/20 08:57 PM
2

Agreed. One thing I like about this sub compared to r/MensRights is the latter is 90% clickbait/ragebait-type posts that are just a waste of time, whereas this sub has been mostly filled with intelligent discussion about men's issues. Let's hope it stays that way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/02/20 08:46 PM
2

To add, a stronger immune system isn't necessarily a good thing as it can lead to autoimmune diseases, some of which are pretty nasty (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/20 06:42 PM
3

I think "we don't control our feelings" is a good approximation of reality, even if it isn't strictly correct. In many cases, what people refer to when they say they are "controlling their feelings" is simply ignoring these feelings, i.e. choosing not to act on them, rather than 'controlling' the feelings themselves. In terms of actual 'control' there is probably a lot of overlap between what we do about our feelings and the long-term consequences of how our brains respond to the same stimuli. T…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/20 11:58 PM
12

You're tackling this from the wrong direction. This is a classical example of how feminist ideas are completely divorced from reality and counter-productive. Firstly, there is nothing wrong with being sexually attracted to a woman. It's completely normal and there is little you can do to change that feeling. Trying to suppress these feelings simply won't work. We don't control our feelings. The feminist complaint about men "sexualising" women is essential accusing men of committing "thoughtcrime…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/20 11:14 PM
2

Seriously. You equated men as being misogynists by default, and that only feminist men are "non-misogynist", citing the misandrist Clementine Ford, who has called for "All men to die" (yeah, I'm sure it's totally in jest, not harmful to boys or men in any way, and I'm sure you 100% wouldn't have any issue with a man saying all women must die). And then u/Strikester101 quotes the feminist talking-point that "men wanted to subjugate women", which is equally misandrist. You seem care far more about…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/20 02:19 AM
5

Agreed. I think one of the biggest current challenges for MRAs is to push their ideas into becoming mainstream enough so that they are able to speak their minds publicly, without fear of serious repercussions such as being 'cancelled' by everyone around them. And the only way they can do this is to criticise and expose those that are preventing them from having a voice, i.e. feminists, and spreading the word about their issues, which pretty much boils down to 'talk'. Regarding domestic violence,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/20 12:40 AM
3

Well, whether or not the X chromosome is essential for a functioning human has nothing to do with gender equality. It's basic biology. It's not a problem that you don't know it, it's more that a 1-minute Google search would have answered this question for you: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=is%20the%20x%20chromosome%20essential I agree that lots of stuff regarding 'gender equality' is misandrist. I avoid most of this stuff because it's not worth my time (it typically doesn't tell me anyth…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/02/20 12:20 AM
2

All the better if this gets spread more widely!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 11:50 PM
1

It's not possible. You really need to go out and learn more by yourself rather than expecting to be spoon fed everything.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 10:43 AM
7

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.5042/jacpr.2010.0141/full/html Abstract: An article in the NIJ Journal (Websdale, 2003) notes that domestic violence can provoke suicide. The 2003 Massachusetts Domestic Violence Homicide Report (Lauby et al, 2006) notes that suicide can be attributed to domestic violence incidents. Utah Domestic Violence Related Deaths 2006 (Utah Domestic Violence Council, 2006) notes that the majority of domestic violence‐related suicides are not covered in their …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 09:59 AM
16

I haven't read the link and don't intend to, but from the comments here I suspect it was complaining that MRAs never do anything. While MRAs have fewer achievements than feminists, the average MRA probably has achieved as much as the average feminist, i.e. virtually nothing. Both are full of people who talk a lot but not a lot other than talk. The difference then is that feminists have a lot more political power than MRAs, partly due to gynocentrism in society and partly due to feminism being th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 09:53 AM
6

This sub could be so much more. There was a very fruitful discussion here about menslib's treatment of male victims of domestic violence in this sub (re: Amber Heard's abuse of Depp), that at least in part lead to InitiatePenguin posting about this on menslib: https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/ezxgmi/men_cant_be_victims_of_domestic_violence_amber/ If you would step out of your "stop being mean to my favourite sub" mindset, you may actually be able to engage in useful discus…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/20 03:27 AM
5

I remember my first look at menslib - there was a post from a man being upset that a woman wouldn't date him because he was Asian. In the post, he was trying to come to terms with her racism without blaming her, yet still blaming himself for his 'toxic masculinity' for being attracted to her (paraphrasing greatly, but I think the general idea correct). One look at that and I noped the hell out of there - too much guilt for the 'sin' of being male and believing that women should be placed on a pe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/20 02:18 AM
4

I should be disappointed. And all the comments saying how this is such a great thing! I've nothing against anyone wanting to explore their sexuality but doing it only to please someone else is a terrible idea. And, if it "felt a little weird" and they "didn't feel any sexual attraction", it should cause alarm bells to start ringing. In my view, the comments there supporting it without any nuance are encouraging men to become doormats and potential victims of abuse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/20 01:48 AM
2

This is very good work. Well done. Saved and will cited this when a discussion about 'patriarchy' comes up.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 11:29 PM
7

You forgot this recent pot of gold: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/f1o802/i_explored_my_sexuality_and_never_felt_better_nsfw/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 11:06 PM
14

Great comment, I underwent a similar self-realisation as well. Around 5-10 years ago I started becoming with pro-feminist, and over time started to absorb the feminist ideas about men - about how men were the problem and it was men's responsibility to improve things for women (all very chivalric). Needless to say, it wasn't great for my self-esteem, especially when it was coupled with me being in an abusive relationship, followed by period of being exposed to the modern dating world (which is a …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 10:24 PM
4

At least the victim's son had a first-hand experience of how society is sexist in favour of women, so that he can accordingly make life decisions to protect himself. A valuable lesson to be learned! (it's sad but this is not meant to be sarcasm at all).
/r/MensRights07/02/20 04:00 AM
35

Simple: They're sexist in favour of women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/02/20 08:21 PM
4

Go ahead. It's something I've picked up from elsewhere and I agree it is very apt.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 10:07 PM
11

A few points: The article says that "Around half (the leave) can be given to the other parent." If this is true, men are likely to be pressured into giving that leave to their female partners, thus the "doubling of leave for fathers" ends up actually being an increase in leave for women. The motivation behind this change suggests very much a "trickle down equality" approach. The main reason they have made this change is to benefit women, with the side effect of benefiting men. Finland still has …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 08:34 PM
13

It's good to have a high profile case to highlight female-on-male abuse, but sadly I don't think it will cause much shift in people's attitudes towards male victims and female perpetrators. There is just far too much sexism against men that is both prevalent and accepted, such as rhetoric being pushed by various quarters (ahem, feminists) that men are all bad abusive people, and women are all good people that should be believed by default. There is no sign of this abating. If anything, it has on…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 03:20 AM
5

It's easier to be a shut-in introvert now than ever before because of the internet and streaming services. I'm not trying to pick on you by barging into another comment of yours, but I just want to point out that this seems to suggest an unnecessarily negative view of introverts that is all too common. Introverts are not antisocial and there is nothing wrong with being an introvert. Instead, they are badly misunderstood in modern society. The main thing about introverts is that they are highly s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 02:41 AM
5

I think that assumes too much self-awareness. I mean, this is a thing I'm struggling with right now. How can I help my son grow up emotionally literate when I don't speak that language? In my view emotional literacy is more about understanding one's own emotions. I think many men do understand their own emotions, even if they don't tend to communicate them to others directly. This in itself helps open the door to implicit communication of emotions - understanding one's own emotions allows one to…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 02:32 AM
2

I read your post, and I guess for me, my question is at what point does 'self-reliance' become 'isolation'? Obviously self-reliance can be taken too far, so like everything, it is a question of balance. But you'll see in my post that I believe that male-to-male relationships can also moderate this self-reliance. Communication about how life is going for a man, even if devoid of explicit emotional content, contains information that other men can use to infer whether or not their friend needs help…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 11:20 PM
4

There's basically a cycle of emotionally stunted men being role models for their sons. This is a common feminist talking point, but I think it misses the mark to some degree. While I have no doubt there are some 'emotionally stunted' men, I think feminists and perhaps women in general do not understand the depth of emotional content that is present in male-to-male communication because a lot of it is implicit, rather than explicit. Here's is a comment I wrote in the past explaining this: https:/…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 10:15 PM
3

Sure, but you thinking that isn't really going to change many peoples minds. Instead, we end up in a situation where everyone condemns it if a girl is talked about in this way, and most people don't care if boys are. And the double standards continues. At least Bettina is using her platform to raise awareness about men's issues, even if her statements aren't always perfect or right.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 07:17 AM
2

I agree with drawing a hard line regarding inability to consent for underage individuals, but many in society do not - witness, for example, the many cries about how underage boys must have 'wanted it' or 'not been harmed' when were abused. Thus, I'm unwilling to condemn her for this any worse that the numerous other commentators who do the same for abused boys (that is, I'll point out that it's wrong but I'm not going to take a single statement and use it to condemn them for all eternity - I'm …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/20 07:06 AM
9

That was just blatant, like it's literally in the name: it is the name. Whatever happened to it? Ran out of steam pretty quickly. I suppose it never really caught on under that name. The white knight sentiment, however, remains strong. That kind of thinking was embedded in the infamous 'Gillette' ad, and is extremely prevalent in communities such as MensLib. Helen Pluckrose wrote a good piece criticising this sentiment here: https://areomagazine.com/2018/03/20/an-appeal-to-male-feminists/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/01/20 12:17 AM
2

I do think your point has some merit in it, but I'd like to take a different tack. I think the male libido is more of a problem for (heterosexual) men themselves, it that it opens men up to being exploited by women. In addition, I think the male libido is could be managed effectively through a completely different means - educating boys and men about the ways in which their libido allows them to be exploited, and making them mindful to avoid being taken advantage of by women in this way. However…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 09:58 PM
29

Because many men are raised from a young age to be white knights. It takes a lot to break away from this conditioning. This is one gender role most feminists are happy to perpetuate and they continue to do so (see for example, the HeForShe movement).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 09:37 PM
1

In various countries (such as New Zealand), a mother killing their own child is charged with infanticide. This carries reduced penalties compared to murder or manslaughter. This reduced charge is not available for fathers and the child does not need to be her biological child. It's not 'getting away with it' exactly, but it is treated less harshly than other killings.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/20 02:15 AM
1

I think there is some chance that things could change. This requires men to stand up for themselves and have enough self-respect to refuse relationships with women that aren't equal. Ultimately, this means men have to be willing to stay single (possibly forever) if they can't find an egalitarian partner. This will go some way towards ensuring that any heterosexual partnerships that do result are relatively equal. On the negative side, I'm reminded of studies from dating sites that show that most…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/20 04:02 AM
3

They generally expect men to be the primary provider. I disagree with your point that "many women would be ok for a man who earns and works less if they take care of children and chores". Most women prefer spending time with their children over working (most men probably would too). The reason the division of labour remains in most non-traditional countries is because women generally have more power in romantic relationships, and use this power to ensure the arrangements are to their own liking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 10:49 PM
5

The biggest barrier to equal separation of work is women's dating preferences. Most women refuse to date a partner who earns the same or less than them. Until that changes, heterosexual men will have to take on the burden or being a provider or stay single (or get lucky and manage to attract an egalitarian partner).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/20 10:28 PM
3

Jemma Beales was tried and convicted in a court of law and found guilty of falsely accusing numerous men. Her appeal was thrown out. The least you can do when posting potentially defamatory information about her victims is provide a caveat about the source and authenticity of that information. That's all I have to say.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/20 08:13 PM
5

Isn't that a website created by her supporters to slander and further harm her victims? See here: https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/04/03/we-cannot-let-false-accusers-get-away-with-it/ And here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/b8gck4/the_hard_lessons_of_jemma_beale_serial/ Why are you posting this? Your post propagating this information is further harming her victims.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/20 11:19 AM
2

My reading of u/magus678's point isn't that there is more desire for women to control relationships than men, but rather there is more ability/power to do so, because they better understand how to manipulate relationships. I think this is in agreement with data indicating that relational aggression is more commonly employed by women than men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/01/20 04:58 AM
12

My comment was probably a bit of a cynical exaggeration, but I think there is at least some truth to it. I guess I just don't really understand what's so objectionable to feminists about a comment like, "Just approach a woman casually and if she freaks out, back off and be glad you dodged a bullet. Some women are unfortunately paranoid about being approached by men, and you're best off staying as far away from them as possible." I think there are two aspects that answer this. The first is that m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/01/20 09:58 AM
24

Probably because anything that isn't BP chivalry/m'lady bullshit is called misogynist by people such as feminists. Therefore, only subs that don't care about these accusations, such as TRP, or completely capitulate to feminists, survive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/01/20 06:42 AM
11

The head of CALM in england is the feminist The CEO of CALM is a man named Simon Gunning. I can find no evidence online that he is a feminist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/20 11:33 PM
13

And I don't agree with that. I think that's misandry. This is documented on Wikipedia, with citations from primary sources supporting this (emphasis mine): In the 2013 Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, rape and sexual harassment crimes were gender neutral. The term "rape" was removed and substituted with "sexual assault". But strong objections were raised by feminist groups that made the Indian government decided to restore the term "rape" and state that only men can be the rapists of women.[5…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/20 10:57 PM
14

Feminists successfully argued for and advocated for the actual VICTIMS of rape. I don't think the current rape laws are the be all and end all, but they are a great improvement over what they were replacing. No. Many feminists have explicitly advocated against male victims of rape. For example, Mary Koss. Another example is the gender neutral rape laws in India that were repealed in response to lobbying from feminist groups.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/01/20 09:52 PM
3

But menslib ultimately leaves that up for women Which is the exact problem I'm talking about. While any person can't directly change what another does (so a man can't change what a woman does), they can make good decisions for themselves. This requires an open discussion about what they should be expecting, and what they should watch out for, so that they can make an informed decision, and look out for signs of potential unfairness and abuse. It's not just a matter of leaving it up to someone el…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 04:56 AM
4

For one, it can help men choose what kind of women to associate with and what kind of women to avoid. This is a very good point, and one that I think was completely absent from the thread. I am very egalitarian in nature, and was shocked when my partner in a previous relationship suddenly put a lot of the pressure on me to be the breadwinner. I had never agreed to this, and I had thought that everything would be shared equally (domestic chores and paid labour). But we also hadn't confronted this…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 03:04 AM
2

MensLib community knows full well to see solutions as descriptive measures, not prescriptive ones. Even if it does come down to a user saying men "need to do" this or that. But the unilateral discussion still misses out on what the men should be expecting their wives to do in return, and how to negotiate a good relationship for themselves. Thus, it primes these people to expect to do all the work to make their relationships work, rather than it being a two-way street. This is a very unhealthy wa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 02:57 AM
4

Of course it does. And women's behaviour affects men too. So it should be discussed. Not forbidden.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 12:26 AM
8

Whoosh. My point was that menslib happily talks about women when they are put on a pedestal, but is unwilling to talk about women when they are not. So the "men talking about men" principle is pretty selective. I note that no female feminist ever suggested that they (female feminists) only ever talk about what how women can change and never talked about the (wrong) things men did. Bottom line: I stand by my point that menslib is a deeply sexist sub in favour of women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 12:25 AM
5

Men-as-a-group and women-as-a-group are each incapable of consenting to a particular division of labour. We would not be having this discussion if there were not systemic biases to address. I don't doubt there are systemic biases, but I disagree that we necessarily have to have equal division of labour between men and women at a population-wide level. What is important is ensuring the societal pressures are gender neutral, so that if any person, man or woman, can be the primary provider, primary…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/01/20 12:13 AM
6

I disagree that we must address multiple inequalities at once. Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. In any case, my point still stands that this has to apply to a given relationship in question, and within relationship in question it is unfair to address the complaints of only one party in the relationship without regard to the other parties complaints. i.e. it is not possible to address these issues completely separately without being unfair. In the end, tit-for-tat inequality at a socie…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 11:53 PM
7

??? Yet menslib happily talks about how men can please women. Based on your logic, shouldn't they only talk about how they can please men?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 11:45 PM
1

Fair enough, I stand corrected. I should have read on to section 4. I have corrected my comment. However, like New Zealand, I note that the sentencing guidelines for offences under section 4 (Causing sexual activity without consent) in the UK suggest lesser custodial sentences that offences under section 1 (Rape), even when the offence includes penetration. See: https://www.iwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/inline-files/Sentencing%2520Councils%2520Sexual%2520Offences%2520Definitive%2520Guideline%25…
/r/MensRights09/01/20 11:32 PM
6

It is a statistical fact that women take on more of the load of managing the home Statistical facts are meaningless in the context of a single relationship. What matters is what each party is contributing, and what each party is receiving with respect to the actual relationship in question. that is also an inequality worth addressing, but we don't need to bring that up to discuss the first point. Yes we do. If one party is working longer hours and contributing more to the financial well-being of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 11:11 PM
15

sexist for lack of a better word. I think sexist is the correct word for it. Patriarchy theory is sexist, pure and simple. This means feminists who subscribe to patriarchy theory are sexist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 10:42 PM
13

It's off because it's sexist. There is no reason why husbands would be the ones contributing to a poor relationship any more than wives would be. Yet the whole thread is all about perpetuating sexist stereotypes about how men don't contribute equally to relationships, and therefore it is the men that need to change, rather than taking a holistic and non-sexist view about what each party is contributing and receiving in return.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 10:38 PM
1

It is often claimed the UK law has unequal penalties for women but it doesn't, in 2004 a new offence was created which gives women exactly the same penalty for forcing sex I've read the legislation and this is a not true. 'Rape' and 'Assault by penetration' carry sentences of life imprisonment, and both can only occur if the perpetrator penetrates the victim. Thus female-on-male forced envelopment is not covered under either of these. A female may be liable under the section 3 'Sexual assault', …
/r/MensRights09/01/20 09:47 PM
1

The whole point of the "women are wonderful" effect is that people see women as superior humans ('goddesses') and men as inferior humans ('demons'). Sure, this doesn't mean people with this bias will see all women as superior, but in generally they will see women as superior to men, and thus their sexism (against men) will perpetuate even if they change their opinion about any one woman.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 07:51 PM
2

I don't doubt there are studies showing a correlation between 'benevolent' sexism and 'hostile' sexism (towards women). However, any study depends on how these are measured. The 'women are wonderful' effect is clearly a form of 'benevolent' sexism (towards women), and it is exhibited in droves by male feminists and those in menslib. This is, at the very least, an unconscious bias that will affect how they act in real life.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 07:12 PM
6

This is true, but I suspect such a study has no chance of ever being published in a peer reviewed journal given the ideological bias present in 'gender studies' academia. The entire thesis is available, however, which means everyone can read and review it by themselves. In my view, it is certainly limited in scope, but the methodology seems reasonable and I have no reason to doubt the findings. It would be interesting to try to replicate or extend this study, but again I suspect few people will …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:58 AM
11

Note that 'benevolent sexism' as defined here is actually simply 'hostile' sexism against men. Thus, this study is actually showing that men are perceived as being sexist if they are not sexist against men. I think this shows how ingrained sexism against men is in society, and how little awareness there is about this form of sexism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:52 AM
5

The funny thing is that the men who do benevolebt sexism are also the ones who do the hostile sexism. While this may be true for some people, there are many men who happily adopt 'benevolent' sexism (towards women), but reject 'hostile' sexism (towards women), e.g. most of the members of the menslib subreddit. Of course 'benevolent' sexism towards women isn't actually 'benevolent', it just isn't directly harmful towards women (it is often directly harmful to men, but such people don't care about…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:49 AM
13

that if they play up vulnerability and weakness and flaws, women will rush in to fix them. I agree that the motivating factor for many of them may be to attract women, but I think the starting point for many of them is that they want to be 'good people' because they believe all the bulls*t in the media that women are attracted to 'good people' instead of the reality that women are as shallow as men, and are *actually attracted to things such as good looks and wealth. This is exacerbated by the f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 04:32 AM
31

I think it's largely because feminist theory (e.g. patriarchy theory and unidirectional sexism against women) does not stand up to scrutiny when critically analysed with reference to the real world. Since it is not robust to criticism, proponents of feminist theory have no choice but to resort to appeals to emotion and 'righteousness'. As a consequence, menslib, like other feminist communities, have no choice but to paint their ideological opponents as being wrong or 'evil' (even if it means lyi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/20 02:20 AM
2

I think a lot of our gender issues in society come down to attraction and relationships. I agree with this, and I think it leads to a useful insight. Men (well, at less heterosexual men) will only truly be able to liberate themselves from their gender roles if they are willing to forego romantic relationships with women. The emphasis on the word willing is important here, because it doesn't mean that mean must reject romantic relationships with women, but that they are willing to say no if they …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/01/20 02:16 AM
4

because women appear somehow "sacred" to me This is sexism, pure and simple. I'm willing to bet that you are happy to reject beliefs that men are somehow inherently more "capable" than women, yet still accept the belief that women are more "sacred" than men. That belief is easy to reject if you are actually willing to - just use your objective mind to tell yourself it is wrong to believe such a thing, because people should not be treated differently due to demographic factors such as gender, eth…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/01/20 02:09 AM
3

I note that the moderators have removed this post, which is fair enough. This post is some advice to the OP. If you aren't able to inoculate yourself against the misandry and sexism prevalent in feminist communities, I suggest you find a way to distance yourself from these communities. It seems to me you readily accept their misandry and believe their sexism and this can't be good for your, or anyone's, mental health.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/01/20 02:03 AM
1

One of the biggest drivers of climate change is simply the number of people on the world. Calculations show that that having one fewer child would save 58.6 tonnes of CO2 per year, when every other change pales in comparison to this (living car free, for example, would save only 2 tonnes of CO2 per year). This is the elephant in the room than very few people are willing to talk about.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/19 04:12 AM
3

And wouldn't it be great if instead of OP we got a conversation about power imbalances in relationships or how a male teacher would have been treated differently? Yes, I agree that the OP's take home from this was very unnecessary and could have focused on what that teacher actually did. And just as men need to learn to throw off those expectations so do women. But please, let's just talk about the women please. I get your point, but I think that 'talking about women' is part of the means by whi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/19 03:37 AM
3

cannot be any clearer, the ciriticism given about the woman in OP has zero to do with her actual situation. And I took your responses to be an insistence of that fact. That "any women" explicitly included the women in OP. It's nothing to do with being "sexist in the favor of women". Okay, fair enough. I withdraw my statement that you are sexist, and I apologise for saying this. My peeve is feminists are always very quick to shut down any criticism of any woman, even abusive and manipulative wome…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/19 01:47 AM
3

Okay, but that's what you did. And your criticism isn't even applicable to her. My comment was entirely in general terms. It was in response to your statement that I quoted, nothing more. I didn't even mention the original article, nor refer to any of the people in that article. [I'm building awareness for men to realise the subtle ways they might be manipulated by women] Sounds like gendered generalizations No. Women are not all manipulative. But some women are. And chances are, since most peop…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/19 01:27 AM
21

Yeah, I find the cheering in favour of sexism by the crowd to be the most striking thing about this clip.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/19 01:17 AM
5

I just don't understand this emphasis with complaining about women, you don't have to date or marry those women. And the good ones are not some statistical anomoly. I don't think generalising about people (men or women) is useful. However, I also disagree that people who do engage in certain behaviours should be immune from criticism. I think any woman who pressures her partner into working harder without being willing to work harder herself is a hypocrite, and should be criticised. While I agre…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/12/19 11:46 PM
10

A lot of the appeal of feminism is that women can be together and feel inherently empowered because of their gender. Having to monitor their speech about men doesn’t exactly feel empowering. I disagree with this. While it may be the case that these feminists use 'empowerment' as an excuse for this behaviour of theirs, the reality is that pouring hate on men to feel 'empowered' isn't empowerment, it is hatred and bigotry. There is no reason to hate or even stereotype another demographic group to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 08:48 PM
6

Even if we assume the mod's argument is valid, isn't it possible the father was following patriarchal norms or the stereotype he may not be a good father? This is one of the (many) areas where the feminist term "patriarchal norms" makes no sense. Why would it be "patriarchal norm" for a father to not have custody of children. Surely, to be a patriarch, by definition, a man has to be the head of a family, and you can't really be the head of your family if your family has nothing to do with you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/19 04:30 AM
2

Here is a write-up by u/Tamen_ about several studies that include Baltic and Eastern European countries: https://tamenwrote.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/bias-and-unasked-questions/ Unsurprisingly, when the studies find that more males report experiencing violence than females in some of these countries, and the authors seek to hand wave this away.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/19 07:48 PM
1

Sure, I agree that it is difficult to attribute the drop due to any particular reason. One thing that does strike my interest, however, is that it shows that in this data set, at one time the number of intimate partner homicides of males and females was similar. This suggests that the it is not always the case that more females are killed than males. Therefore, the current trend of more females being killed than males might not be due to males being more violent in general, but rather due to the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 02:06 AM
1

Thank you very much. I've had a look at the paper and the graph is rather striking. Here it is for others to see: https://imgur.com/a/6Hx9dJt
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 10:10 AM
1

I have seen studies that showed that while the number were almost equal before the 70s, with the appearance of women's shelters, the number of men killed dropped. Would you be able to provide some sources for this? It something that I consider very interesting, and is also a useful piece of data to point out when people try to push the narrative that domestic violence is mainly a male problem based on statistics of females killed by males.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 10:35 PM
4

Kia ora, e hoa. Great article! Well written and I think does a good job straddling the desire for most men to be self-sufficient, yet still needing help on occasions. Happy International Men's Day to you too! Tēnā koe.
/r/MensRights18/11/19 10:53 PM
2

Here's another one for pro-female bias in hiring: National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418903
/r/MensRights17/11/19 09:55 PM
5

Great. I'm going to tell everyone I talked to toxic spudmix today. I expect they will take the effort to find out the definition of my term. If they misunderstand my language, that's on them, not me. I'm the first to make up the term so I make the rules.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 07:14 AM
2

It seems to me that everyone is convinced that those offended by the term are the ones who define it, rather than the feminists and sociologists who first proposed it and tend to use it to mean something, rather than talking about the term itself. That doesn't seem like a healthy way to look at it at all. I'm going to define a term called 'toxic spudmix'. It doesn't mean that spudmix is toxic, is actually means that spudmix is pressured by society in various ways that sometimes leads to spudmix …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/11/19 05:58 AM
3

I think I've clearly laid it out in the previous comments. You defined 'toxic masculinity' as "someone using masculinity as a tool of abuse". Here, your point isn't that masculinity itself is toxic or abusive, masculinity is simply a set of traits. Rather, it is how these traits are used that causes 'toxic' masculinity. Okay fair enough. Similarly, though, one could define an analogous term 'helpful masculinity' which is "someone using masculinity as a tool to help people". Again, it isn't mascu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 04:34 AM
3

No it didn't. Your original post has some point to it, but it was completely lost by your adherence to the concept of 'toxic masculinity' without being willing to acknowledge any other such terms. Edit: Is see you've edited your comment to imply that I am a 'women hating MRA'. I have little interest in continuing an exchange with someone who insults me, and I expect your comment to be modded as well (as per rule 7). For the record, I am somewhat anti-feminist, not anti-woman, although even my an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 04:27 AM
5

I can't wrap my head around your train of thought anymore. I'm not surprised. You have such a negative view of masculinity that you can't even accept the possibility of 'helpful masculinity'. Based on your previous comment, you seem to believe that masculinity is like cancer, and can only ever cause harm, never provide any benefit. This is deeply troubling, and reinforces my views about the harms that feminist thought can cause.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 04:22 AM
3

The alternative of toxic in this case isn't helpful. Its benign. No, I didn't say that 'helpful masculinity' was an alternative to 'toxic masculinity', I merely said that it is possible to define a term 'helpful masculinity' as '"someone using masculinity as a tool to help people'. Do you agree that it is possible to define such a term? You may as well say the existence of malignant cancer postulates that a "helpful cancer" must exist. Are you saying that masculinity is similar to cancer? Edit: …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 04:00 AM
3

I disagree with your conclusion outright. The capacity to hurt doesn't provide for the capacity to help. My comment made no claim that men exhibit 'helpful masculinity', I merely postulated that such a term must be a valid term (in theory) if one accepts the existence of 'toxic masculinity'. Please explain to me why the term 'helpful masculinity' cannot exist, if the term 'toxic masculinity' can exist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 03:21 AM
5

I do not reject it. It describes a toxic way that masculinity is used. Not traits that are toxic. Right, as I was suspecting (but I did give you the benefit of a doubt), this whole post is basically a semantic argument to come up with a reason why 'positive' masculinity doesn't exist. However, your desire to retain the term 'toxic masculinity' while rejecting 'positive masculinity' means that it quickly falls apart on close inspection. Based on your definition of 'toxic masculinity', which is "s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/11/19 12:16 AM
2

Your argument isn't clearly presented but I can understand what you are trying to say. 'Masculine' (and 'feminine' traits) are neutral traits, and it is how they can be used to help or harm others. In other words, the 'positive/negative' axis is orthogonal to the 'masculine' axis. This is an interesting way of looking at things, and I can see some benefit in looking at things this way. Under this characterisation, however, it also means that 'toxic masculinity' is just as much a junk term, becau…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/19 11:13 PM
2

What she is saying is that men who are currently alive share responsibility for things that men in the past have committed, simply because they share the same kind of genitals (apologies to any trans people excluded from this statement). Yes, it is absolutely ridiculous, but it is common for gender feminists such as her to apply collective guilt to men. This kind of sexism against men needs to be called out more for what it is - an appalling justification for hatred and sexism against men. Note …
/r/MensRights26/10/19 12:05 PM
2

There's a fundamental difference between these two scenarios that Ms Problem Glasses is hoping we won't notice. Actually, I don't think she even realises it, she actually thinks they are the same. Many feminists believe in collective responsibility for behaviours of other people who just happen to also be the same (male) gender as themselves, that is all men are responsible for the behaviour of 'bad' men. Thus, all men share collective guilt for anything bad that any men does to a woman, and all…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/19 03:35 AM
7

I can't stand r/menslib either. A big issue with any 'feminist' analysis of masculinity is it often misunderstands masculinity, sometimes in subtle ways. I think this is exemplified quite well by a concept from Buddhist teaching, which is the concept 'far enemies' and 'near enemies'. Here is an excerpt from an article that explains this concept: According to this way of thinking, for every desirable habit or state of mind, there's a "far enemy", which is its obvious antithesis. Thus hatred, it w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/10/19 03:57 AM
1

Which of these two people had greater impact on humanity: Isaac Newton, who never married and never had children. Some random dude who lived in the same era as Isaac Newton and had 20 children.
/r/MensRights25/09/19 11:20 PM
1

Okay, fair enough. Perhaps focusing on empathy is putting you on the wrong track? I suggest reading a book called "Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion", which argues that empathy is a poor basis for deciding what's right and wrong and extending compassion to others.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/09/19 11:15 PM
2

I agree that the choice of language is essential, as it words have a lot of associations with them beyond the direct meaning in the context they are been used. A classic example is the one you brought up: 'toxic masculinity'. In my view, the choice of this term is deliberate - it has an 'academic' meaning that people fall back on the justify it's use, but it also has other connotations - that masculinity itself is 'toxic'. In essence, this is a 'motte-and-bailey'-type term. The insistence of peo…
/r/MensRights24/09/19 11:50 PM
2

I'm not there yet at the point of understanding the harm of sexual harassment against men, I have received one once and it was a wonderful experience for me. FFS, you are saying that you can't understand that sexual understand cause harm to men because it happened to you and it was a "wonderful experience"? This is appalling. Don't use your standards to tell other men what they are and aren't allowed to feel. No wonder men don't talk about it (to people like you) when you've already decided it i…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/19 11:18 PM
4

Okay, well it seems you agree with a lot of what I say, and there is little point continuing this debate in it's present form. My final point though is this: Even though there agreement between what we were talking about, the language you were using was a barrier for me understanding your points. It was a barrier because it was feminist language, not gender neutral language. If you want to truly advocate for men's issues, I suggest ditching the feminist language and adopting inclusive gender neu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 06:43 AM
8

I think that always needs to be called out, the average feminist you meet in real life will not be a full on cult member but rather just misguided on what feminism currently stands for because of a sense of loyalty to the past and the cultural narrative position it holds, not out of devotion to its tenants of belief. I agree with the point that most 'feminists' are actually just egalitarians as they perceive feminism to be about treating men and women equally. Unfortunately, I also see this kind…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 06:30 AM
3

Lead by men. And an ideal about what is is to be a man. Armed service as a rite of passage into manhood. But notably, post industrial era and the enlightenment, this equality wasn't given to woman. Why the focus on 'lead by men'? Are gender roles only enforced by men? No, they are enforced by society, which includes both men and women. As I pointed out earlier, there is evidence of women, including early feminists shaming men when the men refused to fight in a war. So, clearly the 'ideal about w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 05:55 AM
2

It's not the most well phrased statement in the world, but I don't see how my interpretation is 'ignoring grammar conventions'. I am reading that statement figuratively, which is what the word 'effectively' implies. Anyway, I have no interest in overanalyzing one sentence in a large essay.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 05:45 AM
6

And I'm trying to illustrate to you that the newest branches of it are not like the old. Sure, believe that if you will. I note that you refuse to acknowledge the validity of any criticism of feminism as a movement (or at least 'modern' feminism), and are thus I see you as a roadblock in the way of men's issues. It doesn't. It does to Rome. Modern conscription goes to Prussia. Historical conscription goes back to ancient times. I see no reason to limit the discussion of 'conscription' to some ar…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 03:56 AM
4

Thanks. That's useful.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 03:44 AM
8

No movement is a monolith. I can only point out trends and what's been outmoded. I also try really hard to never read opinion opeds in the national papers. It's a grade less than even pop-feminism. That article was written by "Suzanna Danuta Walters, a professor of sociology and director of the Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program at Northeastern University" and who "is the editor of the gender studies journal Signs. " I accept that not all feminists are misandric, but will you accept …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 03:27 AM
4

So I looked this up. And like I expected. it isn't the full quote. Can you post a link to this? I expected it would be bullshit so it'll be good to have evidence to counter the next time a feminist tries to defame Farrell in such a way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 03:11 AM
8

We are now in the 4th wave and many feminists and particular male feminists are elevating the concerns men. Right. "4th wave" feminists are so supportive of men that they write articles asking "Why can't we hate men?" And modern Feminism is combatting both sides of traditional gender expectations. Because you know who originally decided the draft to be all men. Men. Particularly white men. Do really think most conflict in human history was caused by white men? Most societies in human history wer…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 02:59 AM
10

Modern Feminism supports that women might be uniquely oppressed but not exclusively. Both men and women suffer under traditional gender norms. No, modern feminism is about female supremacy. For example, feminists fought for years against the idea that domestic violence is experienced and perpetuated at similar rates against and by males and females, and it was feminists that came up with the Duluth Model that posited that domestic violence was committed by men to retain power over women. By hist…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 02:17 AM
8

I'm not signing up for the oppression Olympics. Nor a zero-sum definition of equality. Nothing about the former negates the latter. I don't read that as Oppression Olympics or nullifying female disadvantages in society. Instead, the author is pointing out that evidence of male disadvantage nullifies the feminist argument that males are 'patriarchal oppressors' and females are uniquely 'oppressed'. It's not immediacy or perpetual action. It's frequently not even beyond the point of acknowledgemen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 01:25 AM
1

I'm not suggesting that more men than women would prefer to be 'stay at home' parents; I'm simply suggesting that this is an option for women who want to prioritise their careers. If they want to focus on their careers and also be parents, they should be selecting partners based on their partners willingness to be the primary caregivers of the children.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/19 12:07 AM
2

What's stopping women from working and allowing men to stay at home and look after the kids? There are plenty of men who would be happy to do this (if supported financially and otherwise by their female partners, as 'stay at home' mothers currently are by their male partners).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/19 11:24 PM
2

I've thought that too. Luckily enough someone has actually done are study on this and your guess is correct: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238346862_Domestic_violence-related_deaths
/r/MensRights14/09/19 01:25 PM
7

I think there was a recent study in Australia that looked at attempted suicide numbers for males as reported by first responders and revealed a huge increase in the numbers over those reported by hospitals. Edit: Here it is: https://www.beyondblue.org.au/media/news/news/2019/05/28/suicide-figures-are-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-new-research The ambulance callouts suggested 30,000 suicide attempts by men but only 10,000 were detected by hospital reports. These data offer strong support for your theory…
/r/MensRights28/08/19 10:45 AM
5

So why isn't there similar parity when it comes to false rape allegations? Because men are not believed when they allege a women has assaulted them, even if it happens to be true. So there is no point making an allegation, or even reporting being assaulted.
/r/MensRights26/08/19 02:28 AM
5

BDSM involves safe words, which are understood by all parties to mean no.
/r/MensRights22/08/19 10:37 AM
1

But they did choose to redefine racism, rather than just embracing the racism, suggesting that they knew racism was wrong and didn't want to be racist. Also, I don't think that many 'normal' people actually buy into this argument. In any case, my point was if you tell someone that "women's in-group biases were 4.5 times stronger than those of men" then a lot of people will be scratching their heads about what this means. In contrast, if you tell people that "women are 4.5x more sexist in favour …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/19 11:42 PM
3

This research found that while both women and men have more favorable views of women, women's in-group biases were 4.5 times stronger[5] than those of men. To really understand the issues facing men, this dynamic is absolutely paramount. In my personal opinion it is likely the most important thing. To put it in political terms, the left often criticizes the right for being "immune to the quality of its candidates," and voting for them pretty much regardless. This is a very good point. I'd like t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/19 11:24 PM
5

You are making the mistake of taking the 'rape' numbers at face value. This only includes male victims that are penetrated by the perpetrator, and thus excludes most male victims of sexual assault by females (included under the "made to penetrate" numbers). Note that the others lines in your source say: An estimated 43.9% of women and 23.4% of men experienced other forms of sexual violence during their lifetimes, including being made to penetrate, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and no…
/r/MensRights11/08/19 11:05 PM
1

Great. I hope your future contributions to this sub will be in language that is less inflammatory to the target audience.
/r/MensRights09/08/19 03:59 AM
3

And to be clear, toxic masculinity does not mean "men are toxic". It means that many people's (not just men's) ideas of what it means to be masculine is twisted, and that's harmful. I understand the 'academic meaning' of the term 'toxic masculinity', yet find it easily misinterpreted and hurtful. Would you consider using a better term? I believe that better terms for the same concept are available, such as 'toxic male gender roles'.
/r/MensRights08/08/19 10:59 PM
6

Your analogy with fire alarms quickly breaks down. While a fire station will respond to a fire alarm, they won't suddenly start dousing a building with water without investigating if there is actually a fire first. Similarly, while it makes sense to investigate an allegation, it doesn't make sense to jump to the conclusion that it must be true.
/r/MensRights08/08/19 10:38 PM
3

The biggest positive environmental impact one can have is to have fewer children. In Western countries, it is usually women who are in primary control of the number of children they have. Men tend to go along with what their female partners want, either willingly to keep their partners happy, or begrudgingly because they have virtually no contraceptive options and are effectively 'stuck' when their partner becomes pregnant. In that sense, then, women have a much greater negative environmental im…
/r/MensRights06/08/19 11:46 PM
2

See, you are still focusing on what makes "a man attractive to a woman". My point is to stop caring. Be who you want to be. If a woman is attracted to that than great. If not, than that's also great, because it's more important to be true to yourself than to be an "attractive mate for a woman".
/r/MensRights26/07/19 01:55 AM
3

If you want to fuck around, all power to you. But I disagree with your point that men "should be men so that they can pull pussy" (paraphrasing). It's really no different from the OPs point. If someone wants to lift weights and work out because the enjoy it or want to do it for their own sake, good for them. But doing it with the main goal being to attract women is still prioritising women's wants and desires over their own. Men need to stop caring so much about what women want and care more abo…
/r/MensRights25/07/19 08:37 AM
4

Yes, it was mentioned by another user on a different subreddit so I looked it up. I think it's pretty damning because it strongly suggests that the life expectancy gender gap could be eliminated, and that a large part of it is down to sexism against men (e.g. through gender roles that encourage men to end up dead quicker). The "gender life expectancy gap" should therefore be a used as a measure of gender (in)equality, and effort should be made to reduce it. Naturally, feminists don't care one bi…
/r/MensRights19/07/19 02:16 PM
3

Yeah, agreed. I think it's definitely a troll. Still, it'll be interesting to see if it gains any popularity on female supremacist sub-reddits.
/r/MensRights19/07/19 02:05 PM
3

No, both men and women have mitochondrial DNA. It is the genetic material/DNA in the energy producing organelles called mitochondria (these organelles are actually descended from bacteria but now live symbiotically inside eukaryotic cells). If you had no mitochondrial DNA you'd have non-functional mitochondria and be, well, dead. What you are thinking of is that mitochondrial DNA is inherited through the maternal line (as mitochondria in offspring come from the oocytes, not the sperm).
/r/MensRights19/07/19 02:00 PM
36

Here's a couple of responses off the top of my head: Superior body Men have greater muscle strength and are stronger and faster than women on average. Whether a male or female body is more "optically pleasing" (probably meaning "aesthetically pleasing") is entirely subjective, however, many people consider male bodies to be highly aesthetically pleasing, for example, consider the many statues of Greek gods. Chromosomal superiority Due to their Y chromosomes, men have additional genes than women …
/r/MensRights19/07/19 05:36 AM
3

Yet there is "manspreading" and there is "mansplaining". This is one of the rather more obvious feminist double standards.
/r/MensRights18/07/19 10:44 PM
1

Yes, I agree. I suppose the point is that men (and women) should be encouraged to stop prioritising romantic and sexual relationships above everything else.
/r/MensRights18/07/19 10:36 PM
4

People need to stop worrying so much about exercising their bodies and have bigger muscles and start worrying about exercising their souls to have bigger hearts That's great in theory, but unfortunately a huge amount of male energy is devoted to attracting women, and women love big muscles and big wallets. I agree that we should encourage men to devote their lives to other things (but I have nothing against men who exercise because they enjoy it, or those who are naturally ambitious), but to ach…
/r/MensRights17/07/19 10:47 PM
2

I agree completely with you. This individual is one of worst types of feminist, and is completely unable to accept that women, as members of society, must (obviously) also be responsible for "toxic masculinity". For this person, saying anything negative about women would be blasphemy misogyny. Of course, since females are controlled by society yet do not have any influence on society as a whole, the logical conclusion of this argument women are merely passive individuals controlled by men. In ot…
/r/MensRights17/07/19 10:33 PM
3

I agree. The term "benevolent sexism" is ridiculous, because it involves making a value-based judgement that certain types sexism are "benevolent" or "good". As you've point out though, a value-based judgement such as that is inherently subjective. Who gets to define what is "benevolent" and what is not? In addition, what is "benevolent" in favour of one sex, is usually non-benevolent for the other sex. Nevertheless, I seem some value in understanding the term and using it in some conversations,…
/r/MensRights16/07/19 04:07 AM
2

As it says in the linked comment, CDC NISVS does not consider "made-to-penetrate" to be rape. Thus, most male victims of serious sexual assault by females are excluded in the "official" statistics of "rape".
/r/MensRights09/07/19 11:48 PM
1

A major one for me would be the lack of awareness of male victims of domestic violence, and a lack of resources available to these men. As you will know, men make a substantial proportion of the victims of domestic violence and women make a substantial proportion of the perpetrators of domestic violence. This is support by numerous studies, including the Dunedin longitudinal study. Yet, like most Western countries, the focus of domestic violence in New Zealand is entirely on female victims and m…
/r/MensRights09/07/19 11:05 PM
6

Aha. Another "true" feminist telling us that criticising feminism is intrinsically wrong because feminists spouting gynocentric and/or misandric rhetoric aren't "real feminists". Here's the best response to this, which is a highly reusable comment by Karen Straughan: So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing…
/r/MensRights09/07/19 02:30 AM
2

Good job. Your hard work is definitely paying off.
/r/MensRights01/07/19 11:23 PM
1

Good job. Keep up the good work!
/r/MensRights30/06/19 12:19 PM
22

In my view, he doesn't have to disclose the vasectomy but if asked he should be upfront that he doesn't want children instead of lying or misleading someone he is dating about it. If he wasn't asked, then he didn't do anything wrong. There is no reason that wanting to have children should be the default.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 10:56 AM
1

In certain contexts (e.g. if that someone is just whining), then yes. This applies to both men and women (although you might want to use the phrase 'woman up' or 'toughen up' to be gender neutral). In fact, I think women in particular would benefit from being told this e.g. screaming when they see a bug. FFS - are you an adult or what?
/r/MensRights25/06/19 01:04 AM
2

To the one person talking about mod policies - I would not think they would make a substantive difference. I don't see how you can be so sure about this. Mod policies effectively imposes a filter at several levels: 1) You may never detect deleted comments and thus these are completely absent from your dataset. 2) Any deleted comments can not be voted on after deletion. Therefore, the upvote and downvote counts are confounded by deletion. 3) Most users will tend to not make a comment that will be…
/r/MensRights20/06/19 10:32 AM
1

There is a study on male monks and female nuns that shows there is very little difference in their life expectancy (Google for "The Longevity of Nuns and Monks"). This suggests that most of the gap in life expectancy is not biologically predetermined and could be reduced in men and women had the same jobs and lifestyles.
/r/MGTOW06/06/19 03:18 AM
5

The GDI has a built-in 5 year gap in life expectancy. That is, in countries were women live less than 5 years longer than men on average, this is considered unequal in favour of men. Thus, counties that make efforts to improve the life expectancy of men may be penalised in this index, even if women still live on average longer than men. Similarly, the GII has a female "health component" (maternal mortality rate and adolescent pregnancy rate) but has no corresponding male health component - the m…
/r/MensRights27/05/19 08:43 PM
3

We really don't know because the survey was shitty enough to not specify what specifically was happening there. I'm sorry but this is a ridiculous comment. There are some potential issues with the survey (e.g. around the wording of the questions, "drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent" could be interpreted as unable consent only applying the the final phrase in the question - passed out), but this is not a "shitty" survey at all. Instead, you simply don't understand enough ab…
/r/MensRights03/05/19 12:31 AM
5

Yes, I think you need to brush up on your understanding of statistics to properly understand the issue, but the gist of it is the number of respondents in this category was not large enough to get a reliable estimate of the population-wise figure given their sample size, or they chose to suppress the frequency in that cell for confidentiality reasons. A larger sample size would have helped. This should not be interpreted as "virtually zero", however, since among say 4000 male participants, the c…
/r/MensRights03/05/19 12:23 AM
3

The -- doesn't mean zero, it means "Estimate not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.", which you can see at the bottom of the table. That is, they don't have estimate of this number that meets their criteria for publication.
/r/MensRights02/05/19 09:30 PM
2

Just because there might be an underlying human instinct at play, doesn't mean that there isn't a religion built on top of it. The reality is that we humans are very good at controlling our instincts. Therefore, we can make a conscious decision to reject gynocentrism, rather than being fatalists who say that it is an "instinct" that can't be overcome.
/r/MensRights30/04/19 12:27 AM
2

This is a very good article. I've often been dismayed at how men, including MRAs, are so quick to overvalue women and promote male disposability because of their simplistic "evolutionary psychology" arguments such as how only a few men are needed to support a 'tribe' because that tribe can still produce a lot of babies, without considering all the other things that are necessary for the babies to survive and to allow a 'tribe' to continue to exist. This article thoroughly puts these simplistic n…
/r/MensRights30/04/19 12:24 AM
2

This is a very good article. I've often been dismayed at how men, including MRAs, are so quick to overvalue women and promote male disposability because of their simplistic "evolutionary psychology" arguments such as how only a few men are needed to support a 'tribe' because that tribe can still produce a lot of babies, without considering all the other things that are necessary for the babies to survive and to allow a 'tribe' to continue to exist. This article thoroughly puts these simplistic n…
/r/MensRights30/04/19 12:20 AM
7

Sure whatever. You believe what you want. I don't have time to check but I'd be very surprised if a custodial sentence or significant fine were unusual for an repeated and highly dangerous offence like this.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 04:05 PM
10

Whatever. You obviously have a problem with facts which are: 1) This is the criminals third offence. 2) This offence causes significant damage and could easily have lead to serious injury or death. 3) The judge had the option of a custodial sentence or a significant fine and chose only a suspended sentence. 4) The judge literally said that the criminals gender affected the sentence imposed. You can yell 'clickbait' all you want, but that doesn't erase the reality that this actually happened, and…
/r/MensRights12/04/19 03:49 PM
5

The sexist judge is the one doing the sentencing and she did have the option of jail time and a fine (read the article). Furthermore, this is the criminal's third offence.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 03:31 PM
4

That's ridiculous - merely staying out of "trouble" for 11 months since committing a crime isn't grounds for leniency. The reason she is being sentenced now is simply because it took this long for the case to work it's way through the justice system. How many people commit another crime while still awaiting sentencing for a previous one? That should be the default, expected case, and certainly not grounds for leniency.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 03:24 PM
7

You are wrong, please read the technical notes about these indices. The GII is "ranges from 0, where women and men fare equally, to 1, where one gender fares as poorly as possible in all measured dimensions." (see page 7). That is, anything above 0 is considered an "inequal" country. As I pointed out, in any country in which the MMR is above 10 and the AFR is below 0.1 will be have an GII of above 0 (possibly substantial so), and thus considered unequal, even if the other components of the index…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 05:24 AM
4

The way the GII is designed, it will almost always find inequality. For example, it includes maternal mortality rate (MMR) and an adolescent birth rate (ABR, or adolescent fertility rate AFR) but no corresponding health component for men. By definition, male health is set to 1 (the maximum). Any country in which the MMR is above 10, or the AFR is above 0.1, will be considered inequal, even if everything else is equal. See here: Consider a hypothetical country with PRf = PRm, SEf = SEm, LFPRf = L…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 04:48 AM
2

I used to think similar things until it occurred to me that being socialised as a man, and treated as a man, made me what I am. It made me stronger. It made me tougher. It made me braver. It made me able to cope with plenty of shit that life threw at me. It helped me understand the way the world works. It brought out my talents and abilities. I like who I am. And if I had been raised as a female and treated as one, I would be nothing like that. One thing that feminists fail to realise is that th…
/r/MensRights05/04/19 10:46 AM
3

Happy cake day!
/r/MensRights20/03/19 01:48 AM
6

Good article. Being 'fearless' is not the same as being brave. Being fearless is actually a near enemy of bravery.
/r/MensRights10/03/19 04:23 AM
8

This is very well written. And I can appreciate how you must feel. But I'm confident you'll find a way to rise above it all and succeed. Throughout history, though, men have been in similar situations, discounted, disliked, backs against the well. But these men have found the strength within themselves to fight back, to achieve despite the odds, and overcome adversity. And if there truly comes a time when you're stuck, in a rut, within seemingly no hope, then turn to other men. Other men underst…
/r/MensRights01/03/19 04:35 AM
6

I find the stat on disparity between heterosexual and gay breakups interesting Note that the state isn't about "breakups" but about "intimate partner problems". The definition of this is provided in the National Violent Death Reporting System Web Coding Manual, quoted in part below (see page 84): Code as “Yes” if at the time of the incident the victim was experiencing problems with a current or former intimate partner, such as a divorce, break-up, argument, jealousy, conflict, or discord, and th…
/r/MensRights01/03/19 04:13 AM
1

Think of the bright men that couldn't get into these programs In the female-dominated STEM fields there tends to be a lot more students than actual jobs, so increasing the number of people who want stay in them will only lead to more competition for these relatively scarce jobs. In fact, these fields tend to be quite exploitative in that a lot of the labour is done by students for virtually no pay. It's absolutely unsurprising that people who have an easy way to leave take that opportunity.
/r/MensRights23/02/19 05:21 AM
25

Very well done. I think this shows that advocacy through official channels can bear fruit if one is persistent about it, and sets a good example for others to follow.
/r/MensRights23/02/19 02:22 AM
7

Intergenerational inequality has validity when accounting for inequality caused by socioeconomic class and ethnicity (due to the perpetuation of the effects of racism in past generations through socioeconomic status today), but is completely invalid for inequality across gender lines. The reason for this is simply: both males and females have ancestors that are both male and female. In contrast, for example, poor people tend to have poor children and this can persist across many generations if t…
/r/MensRights17/02/19 11:59 PM
6

According to the data from the US CDC, the numbers suggest similar numbers of men and women experience sexual violence, and in addition, the majority of the perpetrators against men are female. Details below: These numbers are taken from the NISVS: 2010-2012 State Report, which is produced by the US CDC. The main findings are in the two tables below: Female victims (Table 3.1), showing estimated 12-month prevalence. Estimated number of victims Contact sexual violence 4,804,000 Rape 1,473,000 Mad…
/r/MensRights12/02/19 10:43 PM
6

Yes, according to the data from the US CDC. In fact, these numbers suggest similar numbers of men and women experience sexual violence, and in addition, the majority of the perpetrators against men are female. Details below: These numbers are taken from the NISVS: 2010-2012 State Report, which is produced by the US CDC. The main findings are in the two tables below: Female victims (Table 3.1), showing estimated 12-month prevalence. Estimated number of victims Contact sexual violence 4,804,000 Ra…
/r/MensRights12/02/19 10:42 PM
1

A more biased distribution for men, yes. As to the exact proportions, I don't think the data are good enough (or consistent enough) to say.
/r/MensRights05/02/19 03:53 AM
4

The CDC data also shows that females have significant higher rates of chlamydia than males. Also, the discrepancy between the mean number sexual partners for males and females is a widely known issue in studies looking at the number of sexual partners individuals have. Assuming only binary couplings and heterosexual relationships, the population mean for the number of partners for males and females must be equal (this is a mathematical certainty), yet surveys do not show this, indicating either …
/r/MensRights04/02/19 10:27 PM
1

This is a very good point. In support of this point, there was a recently published study that provided evidence that feminists encourage sexist behaviour in men due to their dating preferences.
/r/MensRights23/01/19 12:11 AM
7

You joke but your point has some truth to it. Women have higher STD rates than men and mathematical modelling has shown that this can be explained by higher variance in the number of sexual partners for men i.e. a small proportion of men having most of the sexual relationships with women.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 09:25 AM
7

I used to call myself a feminist because I was mistaken in the belief that feminism was about equality. But when I looked into feminism in detail, I realised that they were for 'equality' in name only. Some of the biggest pushes of sexists terms and ideas, ranging from the sexist idea that men are 'oppressors' to nonsense such as 'mansplaining' and 'manspreading', were actually feminists. I also realised that there was little point in supporting feminists, because they would never return the fav…
/r/MensRights10/12/18 04:06 AM
1

All this is based on the logic that men must have a relationship with a woman, and therefore they must take 'whatever they can get'. I hate this attitude because it causes men to see their value entirely based on their ability to please women, thereby leading to gynocentricity and all the problems associated with that. The alternative way of thinking is for men to find value within themselves, and if no woman can see that value, then it's the women's loss no the men's. Relationships are not need…
/r/MensRights09/12/18 11:39 PM
4

If she refuses to listen to your arguments simply because you're male then she's being sexist. Next time call her out on her sexism. It might not get you anywhere but I think it's time men stopped tolerating women being sexist against them.
/r/MensRights09/12/18 07:16 PM
1

So my advice to men dating is that they should offer to pay, not because it's fair or just but because the cost of not doing so is too great. What's this cost you are talking about? Not getting to go on a further date with a woman who wants to take advantage of you? I'd say that's a benefit rather than a cost. In other words, expecting the woman to pay her share is actually a great way of weeding out women who aren't worth dating.
/r/MensRights09/12/18 12:23 AM
4

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of those groups exhibited a huge amount of misandry. The trick such people use when justifying their misandric opinions is that they phrase things in a way that implies all men are bad thing x, y or z, but at the same time when pushed they will probably insist that of course they 'don't really mean all men'. The latter is a form of gas lighting that gives them 'plausible deniability' about what they mean. #NotAllMen undermines their opinions by explicitly pointin…
/r/MensRights05/12/18 04:13 AM
15

There are plenty of ways to be non-lonely, happy, and have a legacy without being married and having kids. Only an idiot would insist that there is only one path in life.
/r/MensRights05/12/18 04:00 AM
4

Meh. Not every one gives a shit about 'ending their bloodline'. For those who men don't want to contribute even more children to a world that is already full of humans, a vasectomy is a perfectly good choice.
/r/MensRights30/11/18 11:12 PM
9

For men who don't want any more/any kids, having a vasectomy is a perfectly rational choice. It is actually very empowering being in control of your own fertility, and I think whoever makes safe reversible male contraceptives is going to make a killing.
/r/MensRights30/11/18 11:09 PM
5

You don't seem to have much of an understanding of absolute risk vs relative risk. Here's a useful resource to get you started on your journey of discovery: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK115435/
/r/MensRights26/11/18 07:59 AM
5

I'm not sure I'd consider it 'minor'. It's not serious, but it's clear to me from the video that Dae-Seung is actually fearful of her approaching him. In this case, I think it's reasonable to expect her to keep her distance, and not harass him by continuing to approach when he clearly doesn't want her to. That being said, I think she should simply be told not to do it again, and not shamed or punished in any way, unless she repeatedly does it despite being warned not to. As for the rest of your …
/r/MensRights22/11/18 11:17 PM
27

It's not just 'lesson learned'. What a lot of people are failing to notice is that Park Dae-Seung is being sexually harassed in this video - he clearly does not want any contact with the woman but she chases after him despite this. Yet, no one cares, or even seems to realise that this is, in fact, sexual harassment. I suspect most people are treating it as a bit of a joke, but it isn't - it's clear from his reaction that he is not enjoying the situation. Although the woman might argue she is 'on…
/r/MensRights22/11/18 09:26 PM
1

Here's one source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/leah-mclaren-are-men-really-the-victims/article23426535/
/r/MensRights11/11/18 08:40 PM
1

Because these are the best statistics we have. No statistics are perfect, but these are unbiased and have a clear methodology. One threat only available to woman is the threat to claim that the man raped her if he doesn't co-operate. This is only available to women as men are unlikely to be believed when they claim to have been raped by a woman. If the man then uses physical force to get away from her, any bruises or marks he leaves on her will be evidence that he attacked her, making her even m…
/r/MensRights30/10/18 12:45 PM
4

Here's an article from The Telegraph, that contains most of the same information minus the 'Corbyn-supporter' tilt: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/24/university-uk-mens-officer-scraps-role-candidate-withdraws-alleged/ And an article from the Independent published a few days ago where James Knight is feeling positive about being elected and making a difference, with the beginnings of the harassment at the end of the article: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/uw…
/r/MensRights24/10/18 10:52 PM
0

What you are seeing, I think, is an interaction between traditional chivalry and feminism. Traditional chivalry is already gynocentric, but at least is balanced by providing a position of responsibility to men. Feminism takes the gynocentric bits from that but throws out all the benefits to men. It's also an 'easy sell' to gynocentric societies as it's built on female victimhood, and such societies are already focused on the protection of women.
/r/MensRights21/10/18 09:45 PM
9

I haven't watched the new series but Doctor Who was already becoming too 'companion-focused' in recent series. Like you say, Doctor Who was meant to be about the Doctor and their adventures, but it had become a show that was mostly about the Doctor's relationships with their companions. With the announcement of the Jodie Whittaker as the new Doctor, I made a decision to stop watching it. I've nothing against Doctor Who being a woman per se, but I am against their choice of actress. Based on your…
/r/MensRights21/10/18 09:38 PM
12

Did you even read the article? It's full of criticism for feminists in that they only pay lip service to male victims, and are potentially causing more harm than good.
/r/MensRights04/10/18 12:27 PM
3

It's to protect the identity of the victims. Since they were her children, their identities would be revealed if her identity was revealed.
/r/MensRights03/10/18 02:30 AM
1

The thing is I don't think there is actually any deception at all. He's made it clear he doesn't want kids. Beyond that, anything he does to his own body is his business, and it's up to him whether he wants to tell her or not.
/r/MensRights16/08/18 01:27 AM
4

Nah, they're in East Asia, but being rather far north they're not in South East Asia. It's not a major issue, but it helps to use the correct terminology when discussing the fact that 'Asian' is not homogeneous grouping.
/r/MensRights07/08/18 03:59 AM
7

SE Asia Neither South Korea, nor mainland China, are in South East Asia.
/r/MensRights07/08/18 02:10 AM
4

While I agree she got off quite lightly the title of this post is factually incorrect and misleading: 1) It wasn't her child that she tried to hang (not that it makes it any better). 2) "She is not allowed have unsupervised contact with her daughters or other minors."
/r/MensRights18/07/18 02:27 AM
3

It might, but I have no doubts that it's generally possible. Men have combined parenthood and high-flying careers for years, and women can as well, provided they follow the 'male model' of parenthood and allow their partner's to take the lead with child-rearing.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:18 AM
20

This is an excellent article in the way it gives an almost equal focus to the importance of the role of the child's father, Clarke Gayford, in being the primary caregiver, when many other similar articles gloss over this fact. I do think Clarke Gayford is providing a positive image for men and I think gives other men who would like to primary caregivers a clear example that they can point to when they face any criticism about this choice.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 10:29 AM
3

(although it's use a non-gendered pronoun is somewhat new) It's not new at all. Source is wikipedia, but has citations giving examples of usage of 'singular they' dating back centuries ago.
/r/MensRights20/06/18 02:28 AM
1

If the difference in tax rates is substantial, that would be one thing, but if it's marginal, then the argument makes no sense. It may not be a huge disincentive depending on the exact incomes of the two spouse, but it is a disincentive nonetheless. With income splitting, the already-working spouse putting in more hours at a higher wage would bring in more income than a non-working spouse working the same number of hours at a lower wage. Without income splitting, the higher earning spouse would …
/r/MensRights14/06/18 10:28 AM
1

Income splitting refers to the ability of a couple to divide the income of one spouse to both spouses, effectively halving their income in the eyes of the tax department. When there is progressive income tax system, this would mean lowering of the couples effective income tax rate. Under such a situation, if the non-working spouse was to start working then their income is effectively taxed at a higher rate, creating a disincentive for them to start working.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 02:14 AM
1

How did you become an MRA? Was there a specific event in your life that led to you joining the movement? I identify as an egalitarian rather than an MRA. This means I am MRA when it comes to fighting to equality for men, and I support feminist causes when it comes to fighting for equality for women. What do you personally believe is the biggest problem facing men that the MRM is fighting? Unequal treatment by the law and by society. This includes: domestic violence, where most Western societies …
/r/MensRights29/05/18 10:52 PM
3

Fewer.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 10:26 AM
18

"When aged 22-29, women earn an average of £1,111 more than men. " Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-business/11832042/Women-earn-more-than-men-in-their-20s-until-the-pay-gap-hits-at-age-30.html
/r/MensRights10/05/18 02:46 AM
6

This is great news, it's been a long time coming and hopefully it will pan out. I've thought for a long time that the invention of a reliable reversible male contraceptive would be a game-changer, much like the female oral contraceptive was for women. This will substantially reduce the chance of men being 'trapped' into pregnancy by a deceptive women and it will be empowering for men to take their fertility into their own hands.
/r/MensRights19/03/18 02:14 AM
1

You do have a point. I agree that some men express their masculinity in unhealthy ways, probably because they haven't picked up the traits that allow them to do so. (I refuse to use the term ‘toxic masculinity’ though, as I find that using it inevitably leads to connotations that masculinity itself is toxic). I think 'masculine' traits can also be detrimental in other contexts too, particularly if they taken to an extreme. An obvious example is men remaining stoic when it is unhealthy for them t…
/r/MensRights28/02/18 04:33 AM
2

I think this is an important issue, but as others have pointed out, it's not like we can actually expect women to have relationships with whom they don't actually want to. Everyone can make their own choice. Still, from a men's rights perspective, I think there are several things that can be done: 1) Removing the social validation aspect of being in a romantic relationship. Sure, if one wants to be in a relationship and is able to find one, then good for them. But a person's relationship status …
/r/MensRights28/02/18 04:03 AM
3

Google says it's from this unexpectedly good article at the 'GoodMenProject': https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/the-problem-with-saying-men-should-show-their-vulnerability-wcz/
/r/MensRights27/02/18 10:30 AM
4

This article isn't a complete loss cause. It does point out that a restrictive 'man box' can be detrimental to men. But it's missing a few key points: 1) Many of the traits ("Be tough. Be a leader. Be stoic. Be athletic. Be strong. Be self-sufficient") in the 'man box' are actually desirable in most people. The problem isn't those traits but when they are enforced absolutely rather than in correct context. 2) In my experience, the 'man box' is enforced more by women than by other men - women gen…
/r/MensRights27/02/18 10:18 AM
5

I've heard about men being physically abused by their partners. I just don't quite understand it. I suppose some men are just very passive. It's not hard to understand. Men are socialised to never hit women. Not only that, but if the man retaliates he's likely to end up being arrested.
/r/MensRights29/01/18 09:15 PM
1

Not all will be false accusations. Some will be burglary etc. where a crime actually happened but the police have arrested the wrong person.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 04:56 AM
2

For anyone interested in this, here's a source: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/08/sydney-university-under-fire-for-vet-scholarship-giving-preference-to-males I think it's a good example to keep in hand, as it provides evidence that many feminists aren't actually interested in 'equality' unless it benefits women.
/r/MensRights24/01/18 10:21 PM
1

If you know what parameters to look you can even spot paternal fraud at sight with 99,99% fiability. If that's true, you know what would really throw a cat among the pigeons? An app that could spot paternity fraud based on pictures of a man and 'his' children.
/r/MGTOW14/12/17 06:42 AM
15

So much of sex is about power, and in Cat Person Roupenian sketches a scenario familiar to many women: one where they feel powerless to stop a sexual encounter. Those who have connected to Roupenian’s story have done so because they relate to an encounter when allowing sex to continue feels less complicated than stopping it. If sex is a negotiation of power – and in many ways it is, especially when it’s with a new partner – women are often disadvantaged by the limits of verbal consent, and by th…
/r/MensRights12/12/17 11:52 AM
22

How is it justified? In a witch-hunt, someone could make up a false accusation and you'd still be f**ked. Telling people 'I had a sign up so I must be innocent' would just be met with laughter, or worse, prove to others that you are a misogynist and thus more likely to be guilty.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 04:51 AM
0

How is an article from 2015 "today's made up problem"?
/r/MensRights08/12/17 10:11 AM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights20/11/17 07:16 AM
3

I'm not disagreeing with you about the lack of options for men, but I think your failure rates are incorrect - the failure rate quoted for contraceptives are usually expressed as unwanted pregnancies per year, not per sexual encounter.
/r/MGTOW20/11/17 03:24 AM
2

http://archive.is/Fd4vo
/r/MensRights16/11/17 10:27 AM
1

Do you really think that men being better chess players is purely a product of socialization? All of that spacial reasoning stuff? Could be. Since boys and girls are socialised differently from birth, it's virtually impossible to perform an experiment to test whether the behavioural differences observed between males and females on average are due to biology or socialisation. Plus individual differences trump the average differences between genders anyway. One of the problems with a purely const…
/r/MensRights16/11/17 10:25 AM
4

Given the large number of comments in a recent post that seem to be adamant on pushing a deterministic agenda where men and women are 'intrinsically' different, I thought that this article from AVfM would be a useful reminder that exaggerating differences between men and women leads to chivalry and is detrimental to men's rights. I'm not going to argue whether or not men and women are 'biologically' different beyond anatomical differences. In my opinion, that is simply a distraction. Irrespectiv…
/r/MensRights15/11/17 11:29 PM
1

It's completely unsurprising. At the end of the day, the prices charged for products are largely down to market forces. The reason a 'pink tax' exists is because women are willing to pay more for 'female' versions of an item even if the difference between the 'male' and 'female' versions is inconsequential (e.g. the colour of a razor). In terms of the article posted, men and women buy female lingerie for completely different reasons (one is usually a gift, the other is for themselves) and theref…
/r/MensRights15/11/17 11:03 PM
35

Examples of privilege: 1) Women quitting a job so they can ''figure out what to do next" while being supported by a man. 2) Women feeling that it's appropriate to cry in the office, whereas a man would be heavily shamed for doing so and therefore does not do this. 3) Women feeling they are entitled to huge amounts of their manager's time to dissect performance issues, a man doing so is likely to lose his job rather rapidly because he's too much work to manage.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 10:51 PM
7

I can't believe she wasn't fired. That is serious misconduct. Even if he had been wearing underwear, she would still have been embrassing him in front of the whole class, and that's completely unacceptable.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 08:47 PM
1

Are you seriously suggesting that 'willingness to seek revenge' is a good way of measuring how much someone loves another?
/r/MGTOW15/11/17 11:38 AM
2

Males are make up >80% of drownings in NZ so it's good to see an initiative targeting young men.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 11:21 AM
2

Catfish, surely?
/r/MGTOW15/11/17 10:08 AM
2

Some people on the internet are toxic? What a surprise! /s. I don't get the point of this post. You've peripherally linked it to men's rights but really all your seem to be doing is offering unsolicited advice on how to deal with radical feminists and toxic conversations. This is unlikely to be well-received for obvious reasons. Anyway, surely a better strategy is to simply pick your battles and remember that the audience isn't who you are arguing against, but the people who are watching.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 07:03 AM
0

Huh? Are you referring to /r/TheRedPill/ ? MGTOW and TRP are completely different - the whole point of MGTOW is to not give a s**t about getting laid, whereas TRP is about learning game to get laid. TRP is just a bunch of PUA bull - you're never going to be free to live your own life if you are still focused on 'getting' women. The concept of 'taking the red pill' refers to realising that we live in a gynocentric society, but the term has been co-opted by those TRP PUAs.
/r/MGTOW15/11/17 06:07 AM
2

The point about 'primary caregiver' was simply Labour's rationale for opposing the amendment, nothing to do with the law itself. While the law is written to be gender-neutral and the parental leave can be taken in turns by the two parents, in practice it is unlikely that this will mean both the mother and father take leave (how often would the mother go back to work while the father switches to being the one to stay home?) Instead, it will be taken up entirely by the mother. National's amendment…
/r/MensRights15/11/17 01:23 AM
2

You're on the something here. I feel that we as men have been indoctrinated socially conditioned to believe that the 'right' thing to do is to look after women. We do this despite the fact that plenty of women take advantage of it and treat us like shit. After swallowing the red pill it became obvious to me that I didn't need a woman at all. I'm self-sufficient and, more tellingly, I was also self-sufficient when I was in my LTRs. This self-sufficiency comes from being a man. I was getting so li…
/r/MGTOW14/11/17 01:21 AM
1

Background: There is a new left-wing government in New Zealand. One of their policies is increasing the length of paid parental leave. The main opposition party (formerly in government) has proposed an amendment to allow both parents to share the paid parental leave if they choose, but the new government is against this amendment because it may leave the 'primary caregiver' (read: mother) with less paid time off.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 11:50 PM
3

Meh, skimmed it and it's advocating returning to 'traditional' gender roles, which are every bit as sexist and gynocentric as modern feminism.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 02:52 AM
5

Exactly! Those women's responses show absolutely no empathy or even an attempt to try understand things from the other side. Instead it's just regurgitating buzzwords such as 'entitlement' and basing their ideas on preconceived prejudice about what 'men' are like, without ever having experienced being male for themselves.
/r/MGTOW10/11/17 02:41 AM
52

Jessica Valenti is clearly a misandrist. I think it's best to give her as little attention as possible.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 10:48 PM
3

I don't have any particular suggestion of resources, but here's a few pointers that come to mind: 1) As you've clicked on to, he does need to realise himself that he's been abused. You are doing the right thing by being a supportive friend. Keep doing that and maybe point out the instances where he's being abused by his wife so he starts seeing these. 2) Even when he sees the abuse for what it is, he may have difficulty leaving because most men are socialised to be responsible for their families…
/r/MensRights05/11/17 11:18 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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