TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

XGC75 Archive

View 1 posts and 160 comments by XGC75 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
18

XGC75/r/MensRights07/11/16 06:20 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-3

Because the internet isn't one person. These are different opinions Edit: gotta love that the truest answer is downvoted. If we only speak with emotion, how can we be anything but reactive?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/04/22 02:59 AM
1

Yeah, I mean a lot of philosophy overlaps and creates conflict where there doesn't need to be any. Hasty generalization and the simulacra can both be used to arrive at that point about misandry, so on that topic they overlap. But as a Venn diagram analogy would suggest, the simulacra theory can arrive at conclusions hasty generalization would not and so too can hasty generalization arrive at conclusions the simulacra could not. Depends on the topic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/22 02:18 PM
2

Are you saying I am attributing something to someone? You? No not at all. You asked for an explanation of the theory so I provided an example. My intent wasn't to implicate you or anything you posit into the example at all. In any case, saying "what X copies had no original" is incomprehensible, at best. If there was no original, then the process of creating X was not copying. I find that in a lot of postmodern theory, traditionally incomprehensible sentences are common. A lot of the time it jus…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/22 01:45 PM
2

It's a great framework with which to assess the world. One way I like applying the simulacrum on internet comments, for example, is "them attribution". When a commenter (usually upset) starts to justify their stated hatred for a group by calling out the things said, actions done or positions taken, they're sometimes painting a picture of one person saying all the things, committing all the acts and taking all the positions. In reality, that person (usually) doesn't exist and therefore the real h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/22 12:39 PM
1

I'm tired and not up to the debate but it seems you're curious so I wanted to drop some of my favorite postmodern topics: simulacra and the hyperreality. A couple of topics to mull on and help us all through the transition into the information age. C'est ne pas un pipe
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/22 03:44 AM
23

Frankly, they were just interpreting the law. The law sucks and needs to be changed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/21 10:56 PM
14

Erections are as involuntary as a high heart rate during a suspenseful movie.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 09:15 PM
33

You're absolutely right that rape is harmful for girls. It's harmful for boys. It's not an 'either/or', it's not an 'also'. It's both. Let's advocate and fight for what's right for all.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 09:12 PM
123

Guaranteed. They're not parsing all images for the text inside then evaluating the text for false information. That'd be a programmer's nightmare, and they're smart enough to avoid that mess. The algorithm probably biases the user more than the post content. It's easier to manage as opposed to parsing the text of a post, similar to how any /r/mensrights commenter (👋) automatically gets banned from twox.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 07:01 PM
5

I think we all could strive for 0, yes. But I don't see it coming from everyday vigilance, or that number would skyrocket. I see it coming from how we treat others and how we teach the next generations to treat others. Which is why I think that ig post linked in the OP is so full of shit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/21 11:48 PM
7

Can't express enough how regressive a "copy and paste" post is. 1) This is your voice, not the voice of the poster who would use this. You swear, use improper english, combative voicings and provocative terminology. It may be great for very particular (ahem heated) circumstances but it's never right to be inauthentic in these discussions. Academic approaches and voices would be most effective most often to gain traction in these spaces. 2) The poster of this copypasta won't know the ins-and-outs…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/01/21 02:01 PM
14

I always use the analogy of heart rate. Can you control your heart rate? No. You can control your actions, and to a limited degree, your thoughts, in order to change your heart rate. But given a situation, you can't. If you're scared, your blood pressure and heart rate will increase. If you're running, your heart rate will be high. If you're reclined in your chair your heart rate will be low. It's a good analogy for women genuinely curious how erections work, and it's effective at diffusing some…
/r/MensRights06/12/20 04:30 PM
3

Through?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/20 01:53 PM
24

If you would do just one thing: listen. MRAs get that bad rap for acting shitty in a lot of situations (whaddaboutism, gender reversal scenarios, etc.) stemming from a refusal to give men a space to be victimized. If you decry men's issues, and convince your peers that men's issues aren't issues, you block out any space to have conversations or reason about things men feel threatened by. That happens when men are told to "man up", or when feminists say they're working on men's issues so there's …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/10/20 12:09 PM
5

This is where I'm at, too. It's an opportunity to raise Androcide as the same term for men. However, that may in the end just fuel this unhealthy sexism debate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/20 02:57 PM
5

Biden has a shitton to fix up there on the hill but this is not one of those issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 01:25 AM
7

It's name calling. The same as calling someone an idiot, with a sprinkle of virtue signaling on the side.
/r/MensRights30/08/20 06:45 AM
-8

Incels are men who have had bad experiences with women. Extreme feminists are women who have had bad experiences with men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/20 11:19 PM
1

It's the chicken and the egg. Do men come here and be toxic because there's no where else for them to go that's positive? Or do male issues breed toxicity because there's no where for men to go? I like your statement below, though. Inaction is action.
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:40 PM
10

In the same way it's insulting to say #alllivesmatter. You're saying that the problem is killing, not killing PoC specifically. Of course killing is bad, but the problem disproportionately affects Black people so distraction from that fact is counter-productive. Distracting from the fact that men are disproportionately killed in police actions (in particular I'd like to point out black men) is counter-productive. I have no issue with the artist that produced this image. In fact I really like it …
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:37 PM
3

Unfortunately I think a lot of the gatekeeping in the left reflects the maturity of the group on average. Young people don't typically see the problems with gatekeeping and the behaviors of children suggest it's something innate to human nature. I say on the average because there's a very active minority that shift the average, where the majority probably aren't as stringent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/06/20 11:52 AM
7

Heh. A while ago I subbed to FeMRADebates but I left after it was brigaded for days by menslib. Every male perspective was decried for being male with no critical thought to the underlying point raised. Maybe I should give it another go.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 02:47 PM
8

Indicative of a larger problem, yes. Because anyone on their main who wants to talk about male issues is ostracized.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 02:11 PM
9

I feel like that's the issue as a default sub. It's a great place to vent issues due to the empathetic nature of the sub, but because it's a gender related sub it naturally suggests the other gender is to blame for non-gender related issues. Cue the hivemind and in time another issue becomes male-created.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 02:09 PM
6

I feel the issue here is that men aren't given the same quarter to express their male-related issues. I agree with most commenters there (not always with their tone) that twox shouldn't be inundated with "me too" statements... Just let the ladies rant. If men have that same place to go (and it isn't raided by hur durr mysogynists or trumpeters), they wouldn't be dealing with that. Which, to your point, is really showing their entitlement. This is my biggest issue with gender issues today: men ha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 02:06 PM
3

I like the mention of the trolley concept here. I think if anything, this pandemic has highlighted how differently people value life. I was hoping it wouldn't become so political, but what can you expect with the current political/media climate. Now I fear our guidance into the trolley concept isn't internal or moral but political. Me personally, I think our response was well measured and our approach to reopening is going well, aside from impending ppe supply chain issues and continued lack of …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/05/20 03:32 PM
4

Poisoning the well Exactly. Like, These crazy women Seriously can't expect to be taken seriously when the only tool you take to instruct a pottery class is a jackhammer.
/r/MensRights12/04/20 05:51 PM
-5

I'm going to assume that you mean well, and there isn't deliberate manipulation involved By making any comment on the internet, one could be assumed to be attempting to manipulate the opinion of any audience that scrolls by. Always. Simply by calling manipulation or well-meaning to attention of the reader, you assert that I am being disingenuous. This move is itself disingenuous. The audience will make their own judgement based on the arguments made, and yours have holes. One assertion: if femin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/20 02:59 PM
-2

Your argument only works in a very limited group with similar experience. You know how many people would just ignore such a triage? Like a guy on his soapbox claiming armageddon. That's you. And as soon as you don the MRA cap you damage this whole community to any potential onlookers.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/20 02:24 PM
16

It's important to identify that op is committing the same simplification. Not all feminists think circumcision is okay. Many feminists take a stance against domestic violence against men. Not all feminists denounce the men's rights movement. Give an inch, take an inch. It's how we get traction. We'll get nowhere going full throttle on everyone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/20 02:53 AM
2

Agreed on all points. I only asked to make the point that we need to give the same quarter we would want to receive from them. If we would ask to be evaluated based on our most rational drivers, we need to say the same for them even if the truth may be elsewhere. Acknowledging their most radical empowers them, and vice-versa.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/01/20 07:01 PM
2

Would you say the same of MRAs? That the radical right-wing affiliated ones are driving the discourse?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/01/20 06:17 PM
5

No, of course not. If I were to define the "bottom 10%", I would consider economic factors (not all may consider this as their definition, mind you). The bottom 10% of women could therefore be considered homemakers whose husbands are the breadwinners. You wouldn't even see the single mothers working 3 minimum-wage jobs to feed her multiple children that still can not pay the rent. If you wanted to further cut that demographic, you'd find a large portion of women whose husbands are employed in th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/10/19 03:53 PM
1

You're so angry your making his point for him. You're illegitimizing MRAs. Why are we to believe you're not a plant by feminists so they can hold you up as an example of violence among our ranks?
/r/MensRights17/09/19 02:59 AM
1

It's true, we have a lot to learn and a lot to do for those displaced by automation. However, I personally stand behind the automation of any driving. I've been a part of many accidents and can say with certainty each one was caused by a mush of tissue between two ears. If we can do all that thinking ahead of time, literally automate it, we'll save tens of thousands of lives per year and spare hundreds of thousands from injury and medical bills. There's just too much upside to get in the way. Ho…
/r/MensRights03/09/19 11:36 PM
1

It certainly is! Cher's comment isn't about male circumcision. It's about fuck Republicans, hypocrisy and presented in a shell of satire.
/r/MensRights12/03/19 04:18 PM
6

Don't be a dick
/r/MensRights08/03/19 11:32 AM
23

Paraphrasing one: Maybe women aren't getting the promotions they deserve and that's why they're paid more?
/r/MensRights04/03/19 11:51 PM
1

Not what I was asking for. Currently there is 0 protection for men. No baby to throw out with that bathwater! (Too many bad jokes to play on this one... I'll let others take a stab at it)
/r/MensRights17/12/18 11:26 PM
3

You're one in 5. For every you, there are 5 more fathers that have to pay child support and may or may not even get to see or know the "you" in this situation.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 10:54 PM
4

I mean we could focus on the awful pieces or praise the good pieces. There are bad and good parts of either side of the egalitarian movements. You've seen plenty of bad pieces of feminism following this sub, so it's understandable to think the majority of feminists believe the bad parts of feminism. However there are good parts. The more you lift those up the more you legitimize good parts of ours.
/r/MensRights04/11/18 11:04 PM
16

My cousin had two boys recently. I loved seeing the turn-of-face in her, pointing out the little things that men face every day that make subscribe to this sub. However, I see her turning to the dark side more and more and fear it's the kind of overcorrection that delegitimises the MR movement on the whole. Taking each situation with a level head is the key to staying afloat!
/r/MensRights04/11/18 07:55 PM
15

Makes me wonder if the KKK or similar hate groups labelled other hate groups as hate groups. And if those labels actually swayed *popular" opinion about the motivations of those groups.
/r/MensRights26/03/18 02:58 AM
3

The way you explain the episode it sounds beautifully satirical.
/r/MensRights16/01/18 11:09 AM
19

I really appreciate that Crews came out and said a lot of the things he said. Especially the way he said then there. He's such a macho personality that his image saying those things are going to break down a LOT of barriers for men who see themselves in his likeness. For as much good guys like Javier Muñoz are doing by coming out about their instances as well, a lot of guys aren't going to sympathize because he's gay or (maybe) has a femininity about him that many guys can't relate to. Well, tho…
/r/MensRights15/11/17 11:55 PM
8

You know that popular aliens meme? Russians. Sick and tired of people blaming shit on Russians without any more believable evidence than conspiracy and unnamed sources. Literally alien conspiracy level bullshit.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 11:50 PM
0

Reaching.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 06:00 PM
-1

Exactly. Men and women are each stigmatized in their own ways. Women are sensitive about their weight, while men are sensitive about their build.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 04:00 PM
3

I didn't argue that it was. I argued that the expectation of malice would fuel this argument from them.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 02:45 AM
7

Aaannd we're right back to the enemy mentality. This is the evidence feminists could use to show we're mysogynists. 2nd in the comments and expecting the worst from feminists. As long as there are as many twoX posters falling for confirmation biases as there are here, the gender wars will never cool down.
/r/MensRights27/09/17 09:47 PM
3

You're right, we're looking at a ~10 billion person stabilized world population. Considering also the habitable land across the world.
/r/MensRights23/09/17 03:57 PM
0

The conservative party? You mean the Republicans right? U mad bro? The only reason I can imagine you pointing that out is an effort to delegitimize my point of view. Not really that effective though. I said conservative instead of Republican because Republicans only exist in the US, whereas men's issues extend globally. They were pro slavery? Wow, taking things to extremes. No, I don't personally think there is a thread of legitimate pro-slavery sentiment left in the Republican party. I'm sure t…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 02:11 PM
1

I wouldn't want them to. No better way for any cause to get caught up in the stagnant whirlpool of "us vs them" than if a political party adopted it into their platform. Especially one with the history the conservative party has for anti-egalitarian policy.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 02:44 AM
9

The most interesting part of this sub is the intersection of the values-driven narrative and the libertarian-driven narrative. One would seek to denounce feminism for its wrongs against Western family stability and the other would seek to promote egalitarian ideals (not necessarily feminist ideals as some are extreme) for men's liberties. The two are clashing hard in this thread in an attempt to take hold of the headline as their own.
/r/MensRights10/09/17 03:23 PM
5

That article makes no sense.
/r/MensRights10/09/17 02:12 PM
45

Dropping into one post from /r/all and subscribing to /r/mensrights are different beasts.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:55 AM
17

I just want to know when our issues will be recognized. This is clearly discriminatory on a systematic level and will be treated as such sometime in the future. I just want to know when so I can feel good about raising a boy in this world.
/r/MensRights29/08/17 10:29 PM
128

they always project This is key. I find most hardcore sjws are actually quite empathetic people, which is in itself a really laudable character trait. It's the kind of trait that would make you want to be friends with them if you knew then IRL. Where it goes wrong is their empathy leads them to obsess about topics of marginalization and prejudice, which ironically leads to their discrimination against others. It's like they read something that triggers their empathy and they get tunnel vision, o…
/r/MensRights13/08/17 12:39 PM
4

I couldn't agree more. The rhetoric on this sub certainly sounds similar even if the topic is different. Any pattern-recognizing human could make the connection. It's sad, really, that those mens rights impassioned people are the ones delegitimizing the movement.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 12:33 PM
2

Talking semantics here, but saying "never satisfied with progress" is a terrible way to conduct a healthy lifestyle. Maybe you meant to say "never satisfied with laziness"? I've been living a healthy lifestyle for a couple years now. Went from 180lbs to 165 and I'm back up to 170 after some weight training. I'm extremely satisfied with myself. Not only my self image but my mental state, as well. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop, because I know that if I do I'll lose the great mental …
/r/MensRights10/03/17 09:14 PM
-1

It matters because it's derogatory to people who were born and circumsized through no intent of their own. If you're wearing a green shirt, you can just not wear a green shirt. And no, I'm not asking for censorship. I'm just holding the bar higher. White people don't joke about slavery for a good reason.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 05:20 PM
3

... you want me to define the word "okay"? Use whatever interpretation you want. Any interpretation would yield an "acceptable" response. I was vague for a reason. And you question my interpretation of "tongue-in-cheek? I mean I just want to know the point of this. Are you legitimately being inquisitive? Are you attempting to discredit me? Seems the latter to me, but you came at me with such weak criticism I'm legitimately not sure.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 04:58 PM
0

That makes the dialog okay?
/r/MensRights20/01/17 04:42 PM
6

It was so bad, but the audience was just soaking it up. It made me so uncomfortable at the end when everyone was leaving. Even though I sunk as far into the chair as I could, I still got some pretty nasty stares from strangers.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 04:40 PM
0

I've seen 3 this year. View the top posts of the month, the pattern is clear.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 04:02 AM
6

I have to agree. I'm very pro-free speech, but the MRM is in dire straights. I bring up men's issues all the time with friends and family and it's never a problem casually. Even organization around men's issues is lauded. But when I talk about the MRM the conversation ends quickly. We're a laughing stock to normal people. We're the VW of activism. This whole being needs a forceful separation from the sickly bits. And I don't believe it's too hard to filter - even conservative filtering is going …
/r/MensRights17/01/17 04:00 AM
2

Hahaha I'm in the same boat ;) It's easier to point it out than it is to fix.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 10:08 PM
23

While it's totally sane to be agitated by the content, the "warrior feminist" bit really dilutes the effectiveness of the message. It's like calling out "libtards" in those Facebook images crazy people share. Moderates see it and think, "oh, that's just radical/alt right speech". I want people to see this for the double standard it is, not crazy things MRAs say.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 01:18 PM
7

The nfcm could use a better web designer. That page is straight out of 2002.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 02:07 PM
2

There's no point in a tedious reddit comment triage over this. Smarter people than you or I have figured out the criminality of an armed mugging.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 01:48 AM
4

Sticks and stones vs words.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 12:58 AM
3

I watched a video on /r/media_criticism recently (probably still on their first page) where the video narrator tore down the tenancy towards racial categorization of the reporter based on his apparent political categorisations. It's not that there wasn't a good argument for him to make, but he didn't choose those arguments. Just kept spouting different derogatory names for liberals.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:02 PM
19

Feeling safe should be a secondary result of public policy, not the direct result. The direct result of public policy should be actually being safe.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 10:47 PM
2

No no just the psychoanalytic approach. The offenders I was talking about would take the same approach. Again, not trying to throw you into that category. It's obvious to me that your curious but neutral intentions were genuine.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 11:50 PM
3

No, it's really the context of the sub. This sub is frequently brigaded by other subs that will come in and use common questions from radicalized feminist viewpoints to try and usurp the comments sections here. I imagine many readers read your questions and were reminded of those sorts of people. I, for one, didn't find those questions too out of hand.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 11:13 PM
5

Source: ISIS executes hundreds of Mosul area residents You're not kidding. They couldn't be damned to even point out that they were battle-aged, much less men.
/r/MensRights23/10/16 12:51 PM
1

There isn't a one to one ratio of evacuees to refugees, by definition. Not all evacuees leave the country.
/r/MensRights23/10/16 12:44 PM
3

This is one of the central issues with 2X: They mix support on gender-related life issues (my mother passed and I'm the matriarch, or my 12 year old was catcalled on the street) with news and commentary on feminism. Therefore you have a mentality that feelings need caring for, which doesn't mix with some commentary on those gender issues that have the potential to be emotionally harmful to the audience. Mixing the two makes it very easy to be bigoted because you are trying to 'protect' the audie…
/r/MensRights04/10/16 12:51 AM
4

Eeeh. As much as I 110% agree with that statement I hate to think it's a part of a partisan platform. Maybe I'm cynical but whenever one takes a position the other has to take the opposite position because "rival" or something. That's not going to bring us progress.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 11:00 AM
1

I think that the free exchange of ideas has had the effect of making it easy to absorb only the ideas you want to hear. Like the free exchange of food stuffs - we'll only eat the food we enjoy eating, which has an adverse effect on our health.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 12:52 AM
3

I think that's because theological study requires that distant conceptual connections be made in private, thoughtful study. If you curate the brain to perform this task you're naturally going to improve and therefore create philosophical connections and theories where there was no prior understanding. What that implies here is that we're not committing enough time to private, thoughtful study of issues. Instead we're inundated with the narrative of others and we are typically satisfied by it and…
/r/MensRights12/07/16 10:48 PM
4

I'm still seeing this post 7hrs after your comment... did you intend to remove the post?
/r/MensRights07/07/16 09:42 PM
1

Here's an example. It's good criticism, but it's not the place of a forum for Men's Rights to make that critique. If you look into the comments, you'll see the same line of criticism that dilutes the MRM. Edit: linked to the Reddit post instead of the article.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 08:11 PM
1

Yes I agree with this, because I see value in feminism that's well-placed. The MRM should be segregated from anti-feminism to help feminist activists feel less attacked and more likely to see us as victims of the same sort of institutional discrimination they see themselves victimized by. Just my opinion, of course. I know such a seggregation would take this sub in a new direction and omit a lot of the feminist activity that ultimately discriminates against men, but it would be helpful to remove…
/r/MensRights05/07/16 06:24 PM
4

I agree with your points and appreciate the well-heeled response. My only retort would be that the comments here and elsewhere do not exhibit the same mantra that we should only be critical of feminists when they are anti-male. For sure we should highlight misandry when there is misandry but I see a LOT of instances where the worst is assumed and not cited and/or evident. This is the fuel I'm talking about.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 02:59 PM
16

Furthermore, the less you see from them the better. The more we can focus on raising the issues facing men the less we fuel their cause. As much as it pains me to point out here, we give a lot of energy to trying to de-legitimize feminism. Is it warranted? Sometimes it is. Very often it is not. Hating on other groups is not the best way to legitimize the MRM.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 02:21 PM
3

Let's not forget that the editor is just as twisted: Maggie Lam writes about reclaiming the Asian-American narrative surrounding the immigrant experience.
/r/MensRights01/07/16 03:46 PM
1

This is exactly what I meant. MRA do not have a good name in the public space, but really all we are by definition is a group that seeks to raise awareness of men's issues as feminists raise awareness of women's issues. The reason our image is so bad is because there is a vocal minority among us that is trash talking like amateur political foes.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 06:52 PM
1

What does this even have to do with men's rights? It's okay in general to keep a critical eye in feminism but this is a men's rights sub. That's not our job unless it has to do with men's rights directly. All this hate mongering over feminism is discrediting anything else we want to achieve because "MRA just blindly hate women and feminism".
/r/MensRights23/06/16 12:49 PM
11

I think there is, generally, an issue of expectations around male emotional expression. However, there's a way to approach it and it's not to ask men to start crying on shoulders. Men do have emotional tendencies and their emotional needs do need greater recognition in the broader social norm, however to apply female emotional characteristics to men is a gross misunderstanding of the need. My wife and I are working this out now after 4 years of marriage. I told her I was receding emotionally lik…
/r/MensRights21/06/16 03:28 PM
1

Oh, I hadn't seen the second picture. Only the first. I do agree with the content of that comment. It's a bit terse, but it's true. I don't think either comment should have been removed.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 09:01 PM
0

"Men write all the software, women use it to deride men" Yeah there's no way of getting around the sexism in that statement. That said, it shouldn't have been removed.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 06:23 PM
1

we don't allow those differences to hate one another. My experience has been very different. In the past when I butt into a discussion to share my viewpoints around gender egalitarianism I expect to receive a ton of anti-feminist rhetoric. I've actually received heated personal messages telling me to keep out of the sub. These haven't been regressionist left-leaning comments, by the way (I appreciate that you brought up the term because I as well lean left but have identified some far-left objec…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 08:20 PM
1

Brilliant. http://media2.giphy.com/media/ENagATV1Gr9eg/200w.gif
/r/MensRights01/03/16 02:11 AM
0

As much as I hate to see it, /r/mensrights commenters are very conservative and reactionary. You typically don't see the kind of environment that supports healthy debate and, as a result, you don't get traction for progressive ideas and solutions to the problems and systemic discrimination men face. It also creates a lot of ammo for Feminists to point out flaws in otherwise egalitarian viewpoints. I'm totally with you, OP - I think this sub needs to take a good hard look at itself and assess whe…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 10:09 PM
1

men write the dictionary. Women are underrepresented in the publishing industry! We need to have the female perspective in the definition of words!
/r/MensRights22/02/16 05:53 PM
1

:-) . a cunty fuckface
/r/MensRights22/02/16 03:50 PM
2

You don't even need to pull up the definition of system. Just look at every dictionary's definition of sexism.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 03:47 PM
8

Yeah I'm inclined to say it's a necessary evil at this point. Sanders has repeated some of the BS statistics that don't get enough scrutiny from the mass media such as "women make 78% of what men make" and "1 in 5 women will be raped", however the policies he calls for are pretty even-handed. For instance, mandate equal pay for men and women performing the same job, and don't discriminate against a person's sex in the hiring process. That's something we can all agree on, right? Regardless of the…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 11:40 PM
8

Oh that's great to hear. I'm no expert and neither are my circles but I'd heard it's pretty much a wipe if you have a stroke before 8 years of age. That's probably true in limited severe cases, then?
/r/MensRights01/02/16 05:55 PM
21

Unfortunately he lived through the stroke caused by that physical trauma. He's likely to be mentally challenged for the rest of his life.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:32 PM
76

I've been on a tear lately showing Facebook friends and acquaintances how this works. More often than not they're actually not offended but surprised that they could even be misled with numbers. Spread the word!
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:07 AM
2

I agree. The creepy part is just her rationalizing the crazy "he/she should be this" or "he/she will be better than me at that" projections. It's the projections that are so damning to that child's life. You can't force a person to be the things they're not. We all felt this as kids when our parents would force us to try (and sometimes perpetuate) activities we didn't like.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 09:50 PM
18

The fallacious extension is that rape denies another's right to education. Title IX is meant to prevent policy from denying someone's right to education, not to prevent a degraded capability or capacity for education. It could very well be the case that a man or woman feels too impacted by an unwanted incident to effectively learn. This isn't a matter of campus policy. No written rule is denying his or her access to education. If anyone is being denied an education by means of a campus policy, i…
/r/MensRights13/01/16 04:50 AM
-12

You know what looks like lies to me and 90% of the lurkers that read through the /r/mensrights commentary? It's your insistence on painting me as a person that doesn't believe what you said. Even when I said that I believed you. What is it? Do you love to argue? Get your blood boiling fighting fake battles with random people? Surely you're going to up and fabricate some naive interpretation of my reply so you can continue a meaningless rant. All you're doing is impressing people with the stereot…
/r/MensRights07/01/16 04:55 AM
-11

most Means: not all. Though I wouldn't say Jesebel has gone completely Feminazi. They have some editors with reasonable filters. Some without. My wife nearly worked for them but didn't want to. For one they don't usually pay their content staff, so the only people that stick around are those that feel they're fighting for a cause. Which of course is a recipe for radicalization.
/r/MensRights07/01/16 04:48 AM
-18

If you want to make a difference in this "MRA vs Feminazi" bullshit then drop the crazy act and be reasonable. Don't add fuel to the fire. You'll do us all a favor. I hear you that the website is a sham. I know it is. Know, then, that most of the batshit-crazy Feminazi sites are actually run by the radicalized MRAs. Don't pull up the "they're all crazy, none of us are" double-standard as it's just going to radicalize each group further. Most reasonable people can see right through this and when …
/r/MensRights07/01/16 04:00 AM
-10

Here ---E
/r/MensRights07/01/16 03:39 AM
3

egalitarianism Ftfy
/r/MensRights18/11/15 02:57 AM
2

Look if we're going to get traction on men's rights issues we have to be educated and very specific about our concerns. When we aren't, it's very easy for the public at large to dismiss them as a fringe group with nothing to complain about. Third wave feminism has this problem in spades. You're mixing up the legislation with the reality. The legislation is not the problem. The law is fine. If men aren't being accepted into these shelters, against the law, then that's what we need to talk about. …
/r/MensRights14/11/15 03:06 PM
1

That's just not the same issue. I have no delusions about the sufferage of men.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 02:24 PM
0

Despite the title of the act, it doesn't say only women can be accepted into these shelters. If men are not being accepted into these shelters that's a different issue than men being legislated out of the picture and rather reflects a perception issue for those that run the shelters (which opens them up to judicial action). The fact that men aren't given access to these shelters is upsetting. I truly hope that someone would bring judicial action against them because that carries far more weight …
/r/MensRights14/11/15 02:23 PM
1

Back up your claims that this bill won't service pets battered by women.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 05:53 AM
-1

Op's title reads that the government cares about women's pets more than it cares about men. It could have read that the government cares more about pets than it does about men, but that one particular distinction isn't correct and makes us all look less credible and as though we have a particular agenda against women.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 10:08 PM
1

ITT: Men showing OP to be correct. I agree with a lot that's been said, though. I think it's morally repugnant to circumvent due process of law based on a group's supposed or historical superiority. That's what does it for me. However, at the same time I think we should focus on the matters that will have the greatest impact. After reading earlier that prostate cancer funding is 25% that of breast cancer which has equal diagnosis and lower mortality rates I'm inclined to use that as my new go-to…
/r/MensRights13/11/15 09:15 PM
-1

Womens' goldfish Blatant pandering. This bill has nothing to do with who owns the pet. The title is more sexist against men than anything because men own animals too and you're disregarding our capacity to love animals. Feels pathetic to even point that out. Sometimes /r/mensrights really comes off as a fringe group of radicals, and this shit is exactly the reason why.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 08:20 PM
3

What aspect of MR was she touting?
/r/MensRights03/10/15 04:19 PM
3

Thanks for sharing, I learned a few things. I knew about the skeletal muscle, joint flexibility and fat retention differences between men and women but I didn't know that higher testosterone leads to a bigger heart. Or that women can injure themselves more easily.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 03:14 AM
4

You have great arguments and I appreciate you bringing your personal experience into the conversation, so I upvoted. That having been said, I don't think your last few sentances about the role of women in sports adds to your point about intrinsic male/female roles supported by biological differences. Any couch-occupying feminist will jump on the opportunity to point out the pay gap between men and women in sports and how women have been left out of plenty of arenas or treated with "watered down"…
/r/MensRights08/09/15 10:01 PM
3

So say we al- Wait, no.
/r/MensRights08/09/15 08:58 PM
3

And yet she'll objectify the shit out of a guy on the street if she thinks he'll cat-call her.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 12:16 PM
4

Related: That author doesn't know the difference between thermal regulation based upon temperature feedback and regulation by legislation. Same word, vastly different meanings when it comes to systematic discrimination.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:37 PM
10

My wife brought this up yesterday. She went on about how the typical male attire is a suit and tie and that women wear clothes with exposed cleavage (which has higher body temperature than, say, exposed hands). I added that, perhaps, one could take out two birds with one stone by wearing clothes without extensive cleavage to not only help them be more comfortable in their environment but also fight the objectification of women. She proceeded to argue that men objectify women and cleavage had no …
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:32 PM
-16

A few bad apples don't make a bad bunch. They certainly don't make apples a bad fruit. Don't denounce Feminism altogether because some advocate things that are egalitarian. Doing so just makes you their doppelganger. Nothing better than them. I truly hope you can come to see this.
/r/MensRights29/06/15 01:17 AM
2

Egalitarianism! Huzzah!! Buzzfeed
/r/MensRights19/06/15 03:03 PM
1

Your bitterness comes through not only in the sensationalist title but this ugly fucking response. Be a decent human being, first and foremost.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 02:24 PM
2

I, for one, am not just going to tell you to lawyer up and follow up with all the reasons we should fear feminazi's. It's a very delicate balance. On the one hand, you could lose your job if she blows this out of proportion and it spreads with support. You could be unable to fight it and lose your ability to get a job at a later time. However if you do lawyer up and take her to court, you're looking at $30k+ legal fees with a chance that you could be proven to have broken a law (I don't know wha…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:07 PM
1

This actually helped me understand my bisexual sister better. Very cool.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 12:04 PM
2

I want to know how Laxter made the jump from "legitimizing MRM" to "mainstream misogyny". That's a wide gap to leap, and panders to simple minds that give feminism a bad rap.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 03:56 PM
1

I fall on the for most things. The economy, social issues and egalitarianism. However I do think that smaller, leaner government is a good thing, just not in the same ways most think of when they hear "small gubberment"
/r/MensRights01/06/15 03:26 AM
9

Started reading, In January of this year, the Huffington Post crowed that “2014 Was A Great Year For Feminism” but of course, like all feminists, they are liars Then stopped. Really, MRAs have to stop sounding sensationalist. It's one of the reasons I can't stand SJW feminists: hiding behind strong language and accusation. Be egalitarian. Present egalitarianism. Then we can be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 03:42 AM
1

I'd consider them to be "more human" if they'd vote in a government that doesn't systematically kill off Palestinians or take their land without consent. Right now, they have FAR more important things to worry about than the shelving of a bill that likely does a lot more than its title.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 04:37 PM
-13

Who cares what Israel does? They're on the other side of the earth. Aside from the weapons contracts and shitty cross-political polonation with the US and Britain they're just a small country left to commit terrible crimes against humanity.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 02:47 AM
3

Huh. I wonder if they ever thought about alleging sexual assault against their partner out of intense regret?
/r/MensRights29/04/15 12:58 PM
8

Just lol'ed at the idea of a parent signing a consent form for one of these children to have sex with this teacher. Because "the dream of every student".
/r/MensRights29/04/15 12:56 PM
161

Three women sat in on a piece in All Things Considered on NPR this afternoon that tried to pass this result off as a positive for gender discrimination. She made a mockery of herself, and I can't help but think the same of the presenters at NPR. Edit: Especially because not one of the presenters could cite the four claims Poe brought before the court!
/r/MensRights30/03/15 11:28 PM
12

Why do so many mothers receive custody of the children when, as the segment points out, women only tend to not recieve custody when they're in poverty?
/r/MensRights10/03/15 05:04 PM
4

Serious question: do these things ever get coverage by anything other than what I like to call "old crotchety man blogs"? Doing a google search of the Harvard Law Review snippet I found a bunch of sites like downtrend.com, personallibery.com or redflagnews.com. I don't mean to sound demeaning, but these sites don't exactly lend credibility to the cause. Any average Joe takes one look at the URL and is reminded of all the crap his father and uncle post from similar sites about how Obama shouldn't…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 11:46 PM
2

Boom. Hit the nail on the head. Thanks DAE_ ... FAP
/r/MensRights16/02/15 07:21 PM
7

Heard about a rally this morning raising awareness for women exposed to violence. The stat read, "One billion women are the victims of violence worldwide." Note the lack of "domestic" in that quote. That got me thinking. If 28.5% of women (considering a 50/50 pop distribution of men/women and 7 billion people worldwide) are victims of violence, how many men are victims of violence? We know that 70% of single-sided domestic violence is perpetrated against men. I'm fairly confident that men are mo…
/r/MensRights16/02/15 04:00 PM
1

I'd hate to use the word 'rate', because it implies that I'm going to compare her. That wouldn't be a particularly nice thing to do to her or, for instance, the friends she is with since it puts her and the compared in a position in which one could be better, creating tension. Rather, I could be objective and tell her her eyes are radiant and she would like it. Or that I like what she does with her hair. So yeah, objectification leads to the kinds of praise women love, not just the things they h…
/r/MensRights15/02/15 02:09 PM
2

To be objective is to be impartial or uninfluenced by opinion. If you look at "objectification" in a dictionary, it means to externalize or treat as an object. Feminists have commandeered the word to mean something negative rather than the totally impartial thing it is at its roots.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 05:42 AM
1

I'm with you, op. Beauty is beauty. It's disingenuous for men to ignore the beauty in a woman as it is for a woman to ignore the beauty in a man. Of course, cat-calling is another story.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 05:32 AM
15

Anyone know how well his wife is doing? Or the judge overseeing the divorce?
/r/MensRights11/02/15 07:54 PM
-11

On point. I don't believe the op should have framed it as sexism because there is not systematic discrimination against his gender based on his butt. HOWEVER, the overbearing "get over it, be a man" overture (to use a hilariously placed word from the /r/askfeminists sub response) is certainly sexism. Feels like the OP sacrificed his post to sling mud on the feminists faces. At least it gets the conversation going.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 07:59 PM
1

Come on, the wookie
/r/MensRights31/01/15 02:47 PM
1

Because it exists
/r/MensRights27/01/15 04:46 AM
5

I'd have upvoted if not for that last one. While we as people can do more to break down social norms that divide sexes, nature doesn't give a fuck. Therefore we should be discriminatory for the medicine and care each gender needs, such as breast exams for women and blood pressure medicine for men. Also, I do sincerely want my significant other to have birth control. Not only does it permit sexy time any time, it keeps those $500k noisemakers from popping out of the sexy time hole.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 07:57 PM
3

Lol spoken like a lawyer
/r/MensRights20/12/14 05:13 AM
1

Ah, I see where I misread further down in the report. I'll clarify my OP.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 08:04 PM
23

While this is true, don't extrapolate the notion into "we need to trust any and all accusations so that victims get their justice." Doing so is outside the law and invites false accusations that can and will ruin lives.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 07:25 PM
4

There's a lot of "face value" reading going on here and in the linked article. All statistics were taken from those who reported to the police (i.e. the 6.1 in 1000 and 7.6 in 1000 figures). Of students, 20% reported their assault to the police, which can be interpolated to "3.05% of students experienced rape or sexual assault." Of non-students, 32% reported to the police. That can be translated into, "2.38% of non-students experienced sexual assault." Edit: Disregard the paragraph italicized ab…
/r/MensRights11/12/14 07:12 PM
1

Thank you so much for pointing this out. This whole sub is full of outrage over feminist talk that I haven't learned a thing about true MR issues. I want to talk about how hyper-masculinity can drive a man unhappy but I don't see anyone that wants to engage on that level. On a few occasions, in fact, when questioning the need for dichotomies like feminism/mra that seems to be such a staple around here, I get the kind of reaction that the "never back down," "stop complaining" hyper-masculine norm…
/r/MensRights02/12/14 01:31 AM
2

Welcome to the club. This isn't actually men's rights, it's anti-feminism. Because when women win, men lose.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 03:42 AM
-1

I still don't understand what? That there are barriers we put up ourselves that hinder progress? There is no vis-a-vis here. People unconsciously look for dichotomies in a world that naturally does not foster any. Even now, you're finding ways to oppose what I say under the belief that if I win, you lose. Such a notion is not only a hyperreal, it is damaging to yourself. As soon as you ditch the "us and them" outlook you'll find all kinds of ways to make meaningful progress in either manner.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 08:10 PM
3

I don't see this style of policing improving journalism in the digital age. My intuition tells me it won't improve content here, either.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 07:58 PM
-8

I'm going to start downvoting /r/mensrights posts that aren't about men's rights but rather about anti-feminism.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 04:27 PM
-3

/r/anti-feminism?
/r/MensRights19/11/14 08:52 PM
0

I just love how this title pokes fun at women by leveraging an insult rendered in hypermasculinity.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 08:42 PM
-1

Thanks for coming on here and laying it all out for us. Personally, I think r/MensRights is just as extremist as r/TwoXChromosomes and likely in response to the perception of the other "side's" extremism (quotations to highlight the hyperreal there). That being said, I do worry that the extremism will only balloon over time as narratives are skewed in either sides favor. Therefore I ask of you, as a professor, just present the facts without the narrative. For instance, when you tell people that …
/r/MensRights16/11/14 10:18 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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