TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

deaftoexcuses Archive

View 2 posts and 283 comments by deaftoexcuses 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)
1

Feminismdeaftoexcuses/r/MensRights29/04/20 10:28 PM
1

Feminismdeaftoexcuses/r/MensRights29/04/20 10:15 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Their CEO Tobi Lutke, also supports Trump's annexation attempts against Canada.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 03:37 PM
46

Feminism is a block that says women and girls need it more (whatever it is), and prevents help or honest research that men and boys benefit from, any time there is a proposition to help men and boys. They are being used as a block to prevent those who need the most help from getting it, so the government and wealthy don't have pressure to raise or pay more taxes, when men need the most help. And society tends to take care of women automatically. So you are right in essence, but putting on kid gl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/07/26 07:28 PM
3

Like I said earlier: "it's obvious unless one is trying to excuse it". I guess you wilfully deny or are oblivious to societal influences that don't benefit your agenda. The tell of your disingenuous intent is how you try to turn it on me as a backhanded insult: : "Are women holding you hostage too", lol. Women have far more social influence than men do and use it aggressively to ostracize males partially thought their sexuality. Not all but many, it is a real social phenomenon. Deny it if you wi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/06/26 03:39 PM
1

"Canada's Standing Committee on the Status of Women", have always been bigoted hypocrites.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/26 05:03 PM
4

They are not "getting lucky" if it's forced on them. And feminists have contempt for men and boys suffering, it's obvious unless one is trying to excuse it. Also, women condition men and society with the idea there is something wrong with them if they don't desire women at all times. So the "get lucky" thing is inculcated fools and young people who don't know better, spouting what they think they are supposed to say to avoid emasculation or ostracisation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/26 03:31 PM
10

Indeed, I've been noticing that about them for decades.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/06/26 07:48 PM
6

Which is quite telling of their true natures.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/06/26 07:31 PM
2

Which just perpetuates a cycle of continued re-brutalization of the men (and society as a result) and guarantees that society will remain short sighted and violent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/26 07:47 PM
8

And because it's extremely difficult to hold women fully accountable under law thanks to feminist legal influence. I heard an undercover officer once, lamenting that no matter how much evidence they have against a woman running a child trafficking ring, it's never enough to charge them even though it would have been more than enough to charge a man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/05/26 05:24 PM
2

Nice litany of false assumptions and petty attacks from you. All indicating one thing, bigotry.
/r/EverydayMisandry11/04/26 01:25 PM
10

That's what you're doing here: discrediting male sexuality in order to white knight for your "older woman fetish", stating men who want younger women are automatically immoral and making nothing but subjective arguments. Men are touch starved, meeting their sexual needs is a part of a relationship, a woman refusing to have sex with a man is much like a man refusing to emotionally be present with a woman. So wouldn't a man have a pretty good reason for leaving a woman who withholds sex? Men needi…
/r/EverydayMisandry10/04/26 04:07 PM
9

And of course, women should love short, poor men who are mild mannered and emotional instead of treating them like losers. And if they can't become attracted, are shallow and immoral yes? Kind men are lovely. And women who date men for their money are predators right? Or is this you trying to pigeonhole male sexuality as somehow pedophilic unless they get with older women? What if they choose nobody instead?
/r/EverydayMisandry10/04/26 03:51 PM
3

So they are essentially anti human rights protection for men laws, framed speciously. Or double speak.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/04/26 05:10 PM
18

In other words, inculcate your sons into reinforcing selectively directed bigotry, while beating down their psyches in a plausibly deniable manner. Training them to self administer the tools of Feminist control; like the self-reinforcing aspect of Machiavellianism. Appear virtuous as they turn people into puppets.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/26 04:09 PM
2

Yep, people hate the homeless because they are assumed to be men (most are) and it gives them a viable vector to express their true misandry and dehumanizing zeal. It's quite revealing as to who the true bigots are.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/02/26 05:35 PM
32

If "small penis", is used to ridicule insecure behaviour in men and is acceptable, should we also be able to say "cavernous vagina" in regards to insecurity or some other form of unacceptable behaviour in women and have it be accepted? Or is the very idea sexist?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/26 04:24 PM
12

Yes, because there are no MAGA women like the traditionalist ones who are shaming their men into supporting it from behind the scenes. And certainly no wealthy women gathered together in a gaggle to stare lovingly at Trump when he came into power again: here . And I guess all the female MAGA's like Coroline Leavitt get the P-pass automatically. So Democrats still like gyno-supremacist bigots it seems.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/10/25 03:58 PM
2

That's my all time fave anime.
/r/MensRights31/08/25 05:55 PM
18

Excellent observations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 10:15 AM
-1

Well said. Points two and three specifically.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 09:54 AM
10

She started to point out the need to protect male victims after estimating; through talking to the women in her shelter, that around 65% of the women there, were themselves domestically violent. One of the first challenges to the idea that DV is something men do to women. Indicating, that DV is largely mutual. Pointing out the parity of domestic violence, advocating for more help for men and criticizing the radical feminist's who were using these shelters to spread misandry, got her: death threa…
/r/EverydayMisandry09/04/25 10:31 AM
4

True, too many are easily led and the right plays on it ruthlessly. It's strange how the smugness of comfortable relatively wealthy people, using left wing ethics as accessories, has managed to subvert so much of the clarity of the left. Almost as if it was intended. Makes me wonder what the multitude of right wing think tanks have been up to, all these years.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/25 10:38 AM
23

Selling to men is not synonymous with supporting men. They want men trapped in traditional roles, so that labor can remain a devalued commodity that they exploit. At least the left let's you know they intend to fuck with you so the fanatic's can be marked and avoided or obstructed. It's also the only side that has any chance of giving us full modern standing as citizens and not making us borderline cannon fodder.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/25 09:53 AM
2

Generally that, often using mistreating a women accusations, as a provocation and the quick enabling of it, from a vast number of people. As well as many people and institutions being willing to snap down in judgement of a man so accused without evidence. Especially if the claimed reason is in some way sexual. It just doesn't work the same way if a man accuses a woman or tries to raise it against them. There are political, strategic levels of proxy violence too. It's an effective tool for those …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/25 03:43 PM
1

Truth hurts bigots and cowards, I guess...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/25 01:55 PM
2

A great deal of violence is incited and carried out by proxy. Most women are in a position of societal privilege by which, they can drive men into conflict with each other and not be held accountable. It is not just men doing this. It is very often women proxying it and would not happen otherwise. So Misandry probably maims and kills more than misogyny or as much. But it's men being harmed and the feminine influence on it has plausible deniability. So in a display of true Feminist ethics they de…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/25 10:24 AM
18

Reminds me of WW1, when soldiers with shell shock; who's minds were ruined, would be yelled at and mocked for not being real men and made infinitely worse. Like that could ever have a positive non-dehumanizing outcome. You would even see these poor men shaking uncontrollably, minds clearly badly damaged and they would still smile sheepishly and try to comply with these insane demands. Rather than you know, treating them with empathy and compassion which is the only thing that makes sense.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/25 07:14 AM
36

So anything that isn't kissing women's asses, is misogyny to you? How about the misandry of men doing worse and no one wanting to help or caring? When they fall all over themselves to facilitate women, even allowing them to get away with social aggression in way that men can't and countless women only initiatives in the workplace? Which is part of why women are doing better: uni-directional social dominance and excessive facilitation of their needs.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/01/25 07:48 AM
6

Ah the supremacist, dehumanizing perspective of a true bigot. Nice generalizations there...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/25 06:05 AM
5

It's the way misandrist's absolve women of guilt, by pushing the culpability of any men involved and ignoring women's social influence and history, of getting men to attack those they don't like. As though more men involved means they started it. But they want to play sophistry with truth. So they imply instead of state the conclusion they want you to reach: knowing that feminist conditioning is leading people to misandrist assumptions and playing on it. Forcing us to go in a circle of pointing …
/r/MensRights17/01/25 12:48 PM
9

Because women never proxy violence and the instigators aren't the most actively guilty parties...
/r/MensRights17/01/25 06:46 AM
4

This is essentially it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/01/25 06:20 AM
1

You haven't noticed the obvious history of influential women telling men to do something about the other men they find creepy, undesirable or suspicious? You know proxy violence, most men don't attack each other because they want to, they get pushed into it often under threat. Women's proxying of male violence probably has an even more illustrious history than men engaging in tournament sports. Also very disingenuous for feminists to keep using this point as a wedge considering the things they t…
/r/MensRights13/01/25 12:59 PM
9

In Toronto about two years ago, a group of 8 girls who met on social media, carried out the group stabbing murder of a homeless man. Judges giving them massive breaks too. Like 30 months probation for one and believing she didn't set out to kill someone. They also said that 13 year olds brains aren't mature (true), and so they can't be fully guilty of their actions. Which is hysterical because I've seen them try to throw the proverbial book, at teenage boys who were up on far less serious charge…
/r/EverydayMisandry08/01/25 08:22 AM
4

Homelessness and the normalization of violence towards and the scapegoating of, men in numerous societal situations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/24 09:14 AM
42

Oh look, they're pretending to be ethical while advocating mass death of men again. Remember, misandry isn't a serious issue, says people like these, probably.
/r/EverydayMisandry13/11/24 07:26 AM
2

Thanks, and I will always remember.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/11/24 05:39 AM
1

No, the throw young men's lives away in war to"set them straight", is a classic right wing/ traditionalist mantra.
/r/EverydayMisandry08/11/24 10:14 AM
17

Sure is living up to the gyno-supremacist stereotypes though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/11/24 11:36 AM
17

I've seen people defaulting to calling those who criticize games or politics incels. Always the hateful inculcated assumption that dysfunctional men are behind it. Of course were it assumed to be a woman, it would be sexist to demean her mental state or imply some kind of group histrionics originating from their inherent nature, being the reason for delusion or wrongdoing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/10/24 07:51 AM
3

The core of leftist values has always been about supporting the poor and defenseless, recognizing that social conditions shape identity—not the other way around. Yes indeed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/10/24 11:52 AM
5

That test is rigged: I answered that men don't need to be in a relationship with women to be complete or that women do not have a "special purity" whatever that is. Or that feminists often have unreasonable expectations of men or that women don't have a "superior moral sensibility" and got voted a hostile sexist even though I'm generally fair minded. I'm a Socialist leaning egalitarian. That PBS test is a Feminist ideology purity test. If you are not almost totally Feminism supporting, they mali…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/10/24 05:38 AM
10

Lol, and if that happened, it probably wouldn't stop many of them from faulting the dead guy. Expecting that a "real man" could somehow stop a curb hopping car with his patriarchy power or something and should have sacrificed for her.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/24 11:05 AM
16

Meh, I've heard quite a few women say it's about keeping women safe and men should volunteer or deserve disrespect. Do women need to be kept safe from mud?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/24 09:06 AM
45

Ya, next they'll start acting like men crossing to the other side of the road from women or walking on the car side so they can be the ones to get killed, is rational or ethical. Which they actually do, just not so boldly yet. When it actually represents bigotry and supremacism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/24 08:15 AM
5

Men have been the main targets of almost all genocides, so she is simply advocating the very violent malevolence that has always been inflicted selectively on poor men. Men have always been dehumanized far more than women. So ironically, what she accuses men of, is more aptly applied to herself. Perhaps her prescription should be applied thusly as well. Not advocating anything just pointing out the true dangerously violent bigots ie: men and women like her.
/r/EverydayMisandry03/10/24 08:39 AM
13

Except in the eyes of a dehumanizing bigot like the misandrist in question.
/r/EverydayMisandry03/10/24 08:33 AM
23

Most people are never ready for emergent truth when it comes. And people with power won't give way unless they are made to in some form. Many base their wealth on men being expendable and exploitable. But they also talk about rights and freedoms. We should make that hypocrisy a constant wedge issue that reveals bad intent. And teach men once again, that the idea of solidarity was made for and most needed by common men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/24 07:47 AM
2

Yes, we should never forget Earl Silverman and what the government; under the influence of institutional Feminism, did to him and the abused men who needed his/their help.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/24 07:39 AM
12

It's one of the hallmarks of violent supremacists. So it's kind of ironic that they want to pin all violence on men based on the actions of a few, considering women's equal contributions to human suffering and the lack of parity in understanding men's "lived experiences". However, also quite understandable once you know what kind of people they really are.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/09/24 08:14 AM
4

Indeed!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/24 07:23 AM
39

Here's a classic that happened during a Warren Farrel speech on male suicide, at the University of Toronto: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx5x0Ztffm4
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/24 06:59 AM
2

Yes and also attempting to determine when cases of unjustifiable male violence have been incited by women and carried out by men, who falsely think they are protecting women. It won't be easy to do but it needs to be done somehow because it's a significant; and largely hidden and denied, vector of conflict in society.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/24 08:12 AM
3

It may not have been motivated by racism but he definitely killed a homeless man for yelling and gesturing while he didn't actually attack anyone. And even I was trained to notice when a person goes limp under the effects of a choke and I have relatively minor martial training. So I find it hard to believe that marine couldn't tell when he was using excessive force. Especially since he probably would have started seizing after going unconscious. Seems like some here, believe that men below a cer…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/09/24 03:45 AM
21

Fanatical bigots often misinterpret ethical principles, until they are no more than accessories that can be used as weapons against those they hate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/09/24 05:45 AM
4

That is actually what I am implying. A type of men (white knights), get off on excuses to destroy other men and quite a few women as well as Machiavellian's in the upper classes, encourage and escalate these tendencies as a plausibly deniable, fear inducing mechanism. Some men still mistakenly think this form of vigilantism can be justified, they need to understand how they are just making things worse for all men and women, including themselves. If they don't care to understand, then I have no …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/24 06:27 AM
8

Advocating violence against men without the proper substantiation. This policy, if it were applied en masse to society would (and has), lead to vigilantes assaulting and sometimes killing unpopular men at the behest of women. And other's using protecting women as an excuse, who simply didn't like them. Women would demand something be done about that "undesirable" and Stupid men would beat those guys to death innocent or not, for approval.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/24 04:29 AM
36

This is propaganda not explanation. 'Progressive' is now what helps the rich and the already protected women. That way, you can pretend to care without helping those who truly need the help and keeping them divided and afraid through proxies, while saving tax money. Through a built in shame inducing mechanism, that will silence most opposition. And can deny not helping men with the smokescreen of: Progressive is protecting women. Slowly moving the meaning of civil decency via the Overton Window,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/08/24 10:01 AM
3

Correct.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/08/24 08:52 AM
1

Everyone apprehended or imprisoned, isn't necessarily guilty. The authorities fuck up all the time and generally refuse to own up to their mistakes and correct the issue.
/r/MensRights14/07/24 07:24 AM
1

Indeed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 07:02 AM
5

The "rich or not" or "in control of social narratives or not", parts of classism are really the only parts that matter though. Corps and the wealthy, don't care about classist statements against men because it can only affect poor to middle class men really and helps to socially suppress the men they most want to exploit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 07:00 AM
4

Posting this response I made to Protecintegrity when he reported it, slightly altered, again for information. I did too and this is the response: Thanks for submitting a report to the Reddit admin team. This content has already been investigated from a previous report. After investigating, we’ve found that the reported content doesn’t violate Reddit’s Content Policy. If you’d like to cut off contact from the account(s) you reported, you can block them in your Safety and Privacy settings. You can…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 06:39 AM
2

I did too and this is the response: Thanks for submitting a report to the Reddit admin team. This content has already been investigated from a previous report. After investigating, we’ve found that the reported content doesn’t violate Reddit’s Content Policy. If you’d like to cut off contact from the account(s) you reported, you can block them in your Safety and Privacy settings. You can also hide any posts or comments you don’t want to see by selecting Hide from the “…” menu. If you see any oth…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/24 06:11 AM
3

Yes but borderline or openly misandrist comments and rhetorical games, routinely don't get erased. I know I report them. And I check!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/24 04:33 AM
3

Voting down inconvenient truths lol!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/24 07:36 AM
3

Canadian Conservatives are callous Corporatists. Much closer to American Republicans, since their merging with the far right "Reform" elements. All forms of taxation; like that needed to help citizens with social programs, is bad and wrong in their view. Except for pittances so small they don't help. All that matters is big business, the wealthy and manipulating fools into believing that they are the only competent managers of society. While they steal that society from the majority of its peopl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/24 04:35 AM
2

Who was unable to resist after several seconds and possibly beginning to seizure and could've been safely restrained at that point. A Marine veteran could certainly be aware of that. It's not like I don't believe in people defending people. I despise people who cause disturbances. I believe that it's too easily used as justifications to do violence to fellow men. Like the Marine who judged the life of a man forfeit, for uttering threats but apparently not attacking anyone. Lots of wannabe tough …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/24 01:17 PM
4

People in a left wing space, upvoting praise for a man who murdered a homeless man by holding a choke for several minutes when brain death starts to occur after several seconds. Better be careful with the extenuation's that come from these kinds of assumptions. All you need to happen, is to be deemed undesirable or have a mental breakdown in public as a man and....
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/24 03:51 AM
11

Why must all mentally ill people be immediately confined to asylums or psychiatric wards with people like you? Most can safely live in the community, if a society is actually decent enough to help people with programs. Psychiatric wards are for the most severe cases. I think Americans want to use institutionalization to scare the 'mental health fakers' back to work (as if that would work as most aren't faking) or punish them for something that is usually more the fault of corrupt plutocrats infl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/24 04:02 AM
3

Then why is the right wing the "tough on crime" side that persecutes low income men? The left wing historically sought to ease the mistreatment of lower income men in particular (such as being railroaded by courts if you can't afford good representation), that was brought about by traditionalists ie: right wing. Right libertarians tend to be even less merciful as they define citizenship essentially as the possession of assets and property even more than many conservatives do. Left Libertarian ma…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/24 06:39 AM
2

The downvotes are because you are coming close to expressing a dangerous sentiment that traditionalist men and women and many feminists take to heart: when men become troublesome, cull them with wars. The one genocidal epithet that is actually considered to be reasonable by far too many, due to still unchecked evolutionary biases. Some may believe that you are giving ammunition to those bigots directly or indirectly. As they tend to opportunistically seize on everything they can use, in or out o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/02/24 05:50 AM
6

This is a good one in Canada: https://menandfamilies.org/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/24 08:22 AM
3

No I said if society is going to keep doing it to men exclusively; in the face of it's claims to respect human rights and dignity, then it is only fair to make women do their share and hypocritical and vindictive the other way around. Rather selective interpretation there. I would also support abolishment of conscription, if it were possible.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/24 03:42 PM
3

No it's based on the axiom: that if a society expects any segment of it to egregiously suffer or sacrifice health or life in the maintenance of said society, then everyone should have to make the same sacrifice or the concept is ethically inconsistent and oppressive. Expecting men to keep sacrificing alone; given the current societal perspectives on discrimination and rights, is the truly vindictive thing here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/24 06:53 AM
2

Possibly this book no indication of being a bestseller though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/07/23 05:52 AM
3

Voting down the truth how lovely. Would it help if I said it was American Libertarians and the corporations, playing this game with truth and not Americans in general? I would but Americans and some other nations are regurgitating this antisocial indoctrination on a routine basis and it's preventing real help and empathy and giving power to those that want citizens to be more commodity than person.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/23 04:38 AM
8

This is American propaganda. Housing first is one of the only things that actually works. Just because America hates the vulnerable and puts so many punitive conditions into their programs that it ruins their effectiveness, does not mean that it doesn't work. Housing first initiatives in Canada lack enough funding but where they can be applied, work extremely well.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/23 02:42 AM
2

English teacher was failing me on every essay I wrote, even though I knew how to write them just fine. I questioned her about her behavior and she eventually stated that education is for girls and boys don't belong in school and should leave. Ironically, I left for a pre-University english literature program the next year, (intentionally made much harder than first year to test applicants) with a hard-ass professor. Interestingly, where I couldn't pass 300 word essays in high school under that s…
/r/MensRights11/08/21 06:11 AM
3

Agreed and well said!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/21 05:08 AM
1

When I was in grade school, a girl was trying to force me to kiss her and was grabbing and hitting me due to my refusal. So I pushed her to get her away from me. She fell down and I got reported for hitting a girl. The principal was instantly convinced of my guilt; even though I was known for being peaceful and never starting trouble. Some older girls were friends of mine and took it upon themselves to question the girl involved. They convinced her to admit her guilt to the principle. The differ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/06/21 05:12 AM
30

Yep, and this primitive game is getting old. Our leaders and teachers etc. reveal their "old world" natures, by continuing to rely on this ethically obsolete tactic.
/r/MensRights19/02/21 04:20 AM
6

Yep, if they can constantly piss men off and get us to act irrationally, they can further self-justify their bigotry. By pointing out that the behavior; they indirectly instigated or implied the existence of, is evidence of our violent natures. And move the Overton window a little more each time they do.
/r/MensRights18/11/20 02:38 AM
4

I think the groups you mentioned, were encouraged to embrace their most fanatical aspects by those groups funding them. They work to divide groups of common people and to all but terminate, certain 'inconvenient' streams of thought. They saw the seeds of divisive fanaticism so they nurtured them, Machiavellian style. The wealthy and ruling class have always done this and the original anti-classism left, was making it difficult for them and improving conditions for common people. As well as givin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/10/20 01:48 AM
1

They would never tolerate this reasoning in reverse.
/r/MensRights22/08/20 01:06 AM
1

Well said. We are all being played and the root of the issue, is classism.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 01:08 AM
2

They're privileged and no one is permitted to challenge them, in the way a low status man would be challenged. All kinds of elitist self-justification is likely to occur in such an environment. Especially when one will be attacked if their rhetoric isn't almost perfect, while trying to make these kinds of points against them. As most people, rail at the sight of an unhappy woman (or group of woman) and wants to harm whoever displeased her/them. And society would be over without the efforts of me…
/r/MensRights18/06/20 01:07 AM
5

men are by NATURE disposable. that is not my rule. that is not your rule. That is NATURES rule. I have men I care about in my family but they also are biologically disposable. BLAME NATURE ​ Do you know the Allied troops raped 280.000 German women? Surely you have seen the film schindlers and have seen women suffering. not to mention Anne Frank? anyone with compassion and sensitivity would be careful about posting things on war on a mens rights sub. Male disposibility is predicated by nature as …
/r/MensRights17/06/20 11:51 PM
303

I've noticed that. Seems like the privilege of controlling sexual access, has gone to their heads.
/r/MensRights16/04/20 10:56 PM
1

I didn't say a single pro-Nazi thing. But apparently disagreeing with your bullshit "socialismilieu", makes me a Nazi supporter in your interpretation. So non-agreement is synonymous with guilt. You have a serious reasoning and assessment problem. In fact judging by your doctrine of unsubstantiated guilt assumption: you and the Feminist movement would appear to have much in common.
/r/MensRights11/02/20 05:39 AM
1

Is accusing me of supporting National Socialism (Fascism) another relation game or are you missing something? I hate Nazis I knew some people growing up, who were in concentration camps. Even surviving it ruined them and they were family friends. I read about and hated what they did. I am politically left and hate Fascism (like the Nazis). I see Fascism as generally funded and encouraged by big business and the very wealthy. That makes it more to the right where those political interests lie. An…
/r/MensRights10/02/20 02:35 PM
2

Okay, but that still is a lot of effort to spend on something that is essentially meaningless. Oh and Nazis were right wing and Fascist, they were Socialist in name only and hostile to Socialism. So you're right, they are unrelated. I'm not really defending against anything other than the seeming implication; from quite a few on the political right and libertarians, that fanaticism only emerges from left wing concepts like Socialism, and that even Fascism is left wing. And it never emerges on th…
/r/MensRights10/02/20 10:25 AM
2

Awfully strong reaction to a true statement. Which is also apparently pointless because it was taken separately from the general sarcastic impetus of your comment, according to you. So why react at all? I know what you are getting at but the Nazis were not socialist, they were right wing and supported by many among the wealthy and facilitated by big business at the time. Socialism wouldn't be good for them, so why would they support a political philosophy that wants to effectively destroy their …
/r/MensRights10/02/20 09:25 AM
2

How long are they going to double down on this self-justifying propaganda? Every year they pull this. This unidirectional, dehumanizing attack on male human dignity is quite telling, considering how they ignore all negative aspects of female behavior, except possibly to project onto and scapegoat men. They speak of empathy and human rights, but then allow their base instincts to blind them to the very kind of enlightened, self awareness that is required to possess true empathy. They masquerade a…
/r/MensRights10/02/20 04:24 AM
2

The Nazis were right wing. Their first order of business (while calling themselves Socialist, to appear like they gave a damn about their citizens who were suffering in poverty, due to the after affects of a punitive Treaty of Versailles), was to destroy all Communism across Europe. Possibly even ahead of their racial purity agenda.
/r/MensRights10/02/20 04:11 AM
3

Kind of reminds me of Germany's anti-Juden posters from the 30's and 40's.
/r/MensRights23/01/20 03:10 AM
3

Well said.
/r/MensRights01/01/20 04:33 AM
3

Corporate entities that are quick to state: that business is in it exclusively for profit and doesn't care about social issues, will still fund Feminist groups to the tune of billions. It's doubtful that women; who seem on average to love consumer products, will stop buying if companies don't pander to the gynocentric supremacists among them. So why is this one of the only social or political causes that the big corps and the extremely rich care about? Why do they never push this hard to end hom…
/r/MensRights28/12/19 03:23 AM
3

No actually it's more of a men's issue if anything. As many more men are homeless and in need of dignified housing than women are. But encroaching corporatism, does seem to be increasing poverty and homelessness for everyone in the west; which obviously includes women. The difference, is that you won't usually see men as a group, erasing more than half of victims (intentionally or not), in order to control the narrative and increase their power. But you will see Feminists and Corporatists doing …
/r/MensRights13/12/19 04:36 AM
16

It's a supremacist group that wants absolute power for its demographic. They see men as having all the power. They need to silence potential challenges in order to affect such power. So they use evolutionary biases: to create an adversarial situation by which they can attack the "other", while having it seem to outsiders that their transgressions are actually defenses against the attacks of the other. Allowing a bigoted aggressive posture, to appear defensive to most outside observers largely be…
/r/MensRights08/12/19 06:00 AM
12

Sounds like this bigot is; intentionally or due to derangement, trying to maneuver towards some kind of "Krystalnacht" vs men's advocates. She's either been indoctrinated in her vulnerable state, to hate and fear men by feminism or is simply a true believer. The event staff should have removed this criminal bigot and/or get her the objective mental health care she seems to need. Which would of course, be far more accommodation than a man doing this to women would be given.
/r/MensRights08/12/19 04:13 AM
8

This. And they've been doing it since at least the mid 70's. Had some downright hateful things said to me and other boys by (mainly female) teachers; and the odd direct Feminist fanatic invited to lecture snidely chastise the boys, in the 70's and 80's. It was pretty clear that they were inculcating and justifying these assumptions, in their capacity as teachers.
/r/MensRights19/11/19 04:36 AM
3

This is the kind of behavior, that institutionally influential feminists tend to engage in. Which when compared and contrasted with the accommodations they expect for themselves, also helps to demonstrate what they are: supremacist bigots.
/r/MensRights11/11/19 04:02 AM
1

Why the hell do so many people not get this?
/r/MensRights11/11/19 02:22 AM
3

There are some great combat mechanics in Warframe, if you like the idea of space Ninjas. It's nice to see Digital Extremes being supportive to men.
/r/MensRights10/11/19 03:32 AM
7

Agreed, if people like this don't get checked when they pull this crap, it just serves to embolden them and enables them to further self-justify their assumptions. And allows more corrupt elements, to callously utilize said assumptions in the creation of false socio-political narratives.
/r/MensRights29/10/19 01:10 AM
7

As much as I hate Trudeau's feminist pandering, he's much better than Scheer. Scheer is a corporatist proxy, who simply wants to break anything that interferes with his rich buddies agendas; which means the things regular people depend on. Canadian conservatives are basically republicans now and they don't belong here.
/r/MensRights21/10/19 12:21 AM
5

Good work! I'm looking forward to their response, please keep us posted.
/r/MensRights08/10/19 08:40 AM
3

The idea that hostility toward the billionaire class is rooted entirely in envy is an extremely dubious claim. Orwell made the argument in The Road to Wigan Pier that some bourgeois activists/journalists were motivated more by envy than a commitment to justice; but Orwell himself was a democratic socialist who believed that capitalism is fundamentally oppressive and unjust. Some people may be motivated by envy, but many more may be motivated by a sincere (and imo entirely justified) belief that …
/r/MensRights19/09/19 02:47 AM
3

Yep, the most important aspect (class), glossed over in favor of glorified tribalism. Tribalism, is great at dividing the citizens who were once largely unified around the idea: of controlling the callous influence of large corporations and the classism of the wealthy. Ensuring that common classes divide into infighting, while big corps and the super wealthy, remain unchallenged politically and unified around their obsession with greed and power.
/r/MensRights10/09/19 03:11 AM
6

Haven't played No Man's Sky in several days..... rape urge, rising.....
/r/MensRights30/08/19 05:20 AM
28

The NDP needs to get off of the identity politics bandwagon and remember the common citizens they exist to serve. Otherwise, they're just a bunch of elitist hypocrites; dismissing vulnerable men in order to further assist the already fully assisted. Feminism, does not represent all people justly and they need to stop deferring to its assumptions.
/r/MensRights26/08/19 10:00 AM
12

They seem to have gone from dehumanizing men in a Feminist way, to dehumanizing men in a traditionalist way. The one thing they can't seem to do is humanize us in a supportive and understanding manner. That's too much for big corporations and Feminists. After all, you can't have the livestock sniffing out other options in the air; we need to stay in our place.... but only us.
/r/MensRights23/08/19 12:20 AM
2

Finally, for good or ill, the process and practice of masculinity is and always has been in large part defined by the way that heterosexual women react to heterosexual male behavior. If you want to know why, after half a century of 'fighting gender stereotypes', the modern man still won't open up emotionally, you need look no farther than the nearest "Male Tears" mug. If you want to know why so many men seem to be laser-focused on coitus to the exclusion of more ethereal relationship aspects, lo…
/r/MensRights20/08/19 03:04 AM
1

Hyperbolic nonsense, I've heard this shit so many times now. It was nonsense then and it's nonsense now. Safety nets: make all societies that rationally implement them better. I get it, you're a far right winger; you got yours fuck everyone else, helping people is Communism. See, I can be irrational and hyperbolic too but my original points hold. I also never said we don't have problems with Feminism. Just that the general assistance programs are equally distributed between the sexes. And they a…
/r/MensRights15/08/19 12:57 AM
1

You probably can't achieve permanent victory. But beliefs can be eroded over time, with intelligent, timely, careful counter-propaganda and exposure of the opposition's bad faith actions. Plus studying and exploiting the opposition's weaknesses. Combined with figuring out how to appeal to emotion and belief in such a way, as to cultivate empathy for men's issues. Watch your society closely. Keep modifying and adapting the approach, until something has an effect and be prepared to modify again, w…
/r/MensRights13/08/19 12:54 AM
1

I do too, in Canada; while there is some specific funding for women's issues (like DV shelters), the programs of the general social safety net, are offered in an egalitarian manner. America still seems to be factoring some traditionalist assumptions, into it's decisions regarding who gets what. Canada and much of western Europe (but not all of it), seem a little more even handed. Women should indeed be contributing equally to these programs and should fully expect to have to support vulnerable m…
/r/MensRights08/08/19 12:38 AM
10

Ms. I don't like Mondays), would beg to differ about the "caused by toxic masculinity" statement.
/r/MensRights07/08/19 11:05 PM
3

It surprises me that people can look at the safer, more stable societies produced by welfare states and conclude that's a bad thing. That it's better to be untaxed and live in an unstable shithole or push your vulnerable citizens into ghettos; increasing their desperation and violent tendancies. When the burden of paying for the safety net is actually less (financially and socially), than the cost of expanding the police and prison system; which usually leads to increased corruption and brutalit…
/r/MensRights07/08/19 01:28 AM
5

I see, so she is going to fight this non-crime unidirectionally: by committing sexual harassment or possibly sexual assault. That's quite the method of demonstrating bigotr.... err principle. If she sat on my lap, I think I would have to hit up my doctor afterwards. Just to be sure I wasn't infected with something.
/r/MensRights06/08/19 01:21 AM
22

Indeed, and all it took was enough institutional influence, to control the sociopolitical narrative. Backed up by the threat of force or ostracisation, to silence any reaction.
/r/MensRights01/08/19 06:47 AM
6

It's essentially the same kind of propagandized dehumanization and dismissal of suffering, of the targeted group. They just haven't carried it as far as the Nazis did.
/r/MensRights01/08/19 06:37 AM
5

And Indian men accused of rape without substantiation, periodically get beaten to death in the streets by mobs.
/r/MensRights04/07/19 07:28 PM
9

Hmm, should I also sit at the back of the bus and only eat at certain restaurants, in order to make sure women feel safe? False accusations are a real problem for men. What are women and Feminists doing to help us be safe?
/r/MensRights24/06/19 02:46 AM
1

Most vigilantes; such as so called "pedophile hunters": are violent, deranged individuals, who simply want an excuse to exercise violence and intimidation against other males. That motivation plus inherent gynocentrism, produces a blind spot regarding female pedophiles. And a certain percentage may even be latent perps themselves, attempting to assuage their own guilt by attacking those they've self-justified as being the "true bad guys".
/r/MensRights22/06/19 01:13 AM
1

Victims should die if their existence and experience counters your narrative and they seek justice? The denials of reality coupled with violent ideation; that is off the charts compared to most of what men say about women: really shows the nature of these individuals. And how unacceptably permissive society still is, towards views that would not be tolerated against other groups.
/r/MensRights20/06/19 12:41 AM
5

If men truly have issues that require redress: then groups like this just reveal themselves as the regressive bigots they are, as they dismiss inconvenient reality in order to self-justify.
/r/MensRights20/06/19 12:00 AM
1

I'm suspicious of this message. It sounds like an attempt to silence discussion of mens issues by forcing us to stick to "quantified" issues; which as a largely academically taboo, underdog group: research funding is not forthcoming towards. So there would be nothing we could say, technically. Also perhaps to prevent the espousing of any perspectives that paint women in a negative light. Or displaying our displeasure at our treatment. Showing the horrible things that women do and often get away …
/r/MensRights16/06/19 10:59 PM
21

Albert Villa sounds like a dangerous moron. And his local Police force should be watching him carefully.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 01:56 AM
2

"We're just serfs, it's not our place to question the nobili...." err, the "job creators". Our desire for civil society is socialism but their desire for profit and control at our expense isn't fascist; or corrupt in any way. Yet more ideologues trying to limit thought that doesn't benefit them.
/r/MensRights03/06/19 01:57 AM
7

Cases like these are basically: legally enforced, unidirectional gender based persecution. And institutional Feminism would have us pretend that it doesn't happen and do nothing to stop it. While they make it ever easier to achieve.
/r/MensRights05/05/19 10:19 PM
8

Institutional feminism has always been a gynocentric, supremacist movement.
/r/MensRights28/04/19 09:32 PM
3

I love watching hypocrites (and the callously indifferent), stumble into their own bullshit.
/r/MensRights12/04/19 12:56 AM
1

You keep putting words in my mouth, which shows you do not understand my position. It's what I gleaned from you challenging my initial position, which was simply: that uncertainty is the most logical position, when lacking all the required information. I understand your position essentially, except for where you seemed to challenge my contention, that uncertainty was most logically correct and claim that the atheist position wasn't also a belief.
/r/MensRights06/04/19 05:52 AM
-1

So even though we don't have the information to fully answer the question either way: your contention is the only possible correct one? And there is no logic in allowing something currently unknowable, to simply be considered, unknowable? Why is it asinine to argue the unknowable when we truly do not know enough about the universe, to fully conclude whether or not it was created or just occurred? And if we don't have enough information either way: how is your position and the former not both cla…
/r/MensRights06/04/19 04:43 AM
0

You missed the point. Human beings don't know enough to answer the question either way. You are not disproving a negative, you are disproving a contention that we don't know enough to prove either way. And I said that I ask the reverse question to religious people, so why do you just assume I am religious?
/r/MensRights06/04/19 03:50 AM
-1

So are you stating that humanity knows enough about it's reality, to conclusively prove the nonexistence of a creator being; when most of what we know is still theoretical? How do you prove this nonexistence? Same question I ask religious people in reverse. Seems like both groups are taking a "leap of faith".
/r/MensRights05/04/19 10:36 PM
1

Well said.
/r/MensRights25/03/19 11:00 PM
5

No, you are not. But I understand how it can feel like that.
/r/MensRights22/03/19 12:32 AM
5

Agreed, the idea of chivalry as a justifiable motivation, should be utterly destroyed.
/r/MensRights16/03/19 11:09 PM
1

Yes, you don't beat rhetorically manipulative movements; that twist public perception, with integrity alone. You have to outmaneuver them.
/r/MensRights11/03/19 09:16 PM
12

I've already seen incel used inappropriately against men who are merely critical of feminism or other women's issues, many times now. Seems the idea is catching on.
/r/MensRights11/03/19 08:59 PM
5

Incel is now the term, for all men who question gynocentric assumptions apparently. Didn't take long to misappropriate that word did it?
/r/MensRights09/03/19 08:57 PM
0

Indeed, feminists tend to project.
/r/MensRights08/03/19 02:20 AM
2

We should become better at not accommodating women who: due to gynocentric instincts, see said accommodation as weakness and proceed to collectively undermine our rights and standing, with their bigoted assumptions and dogmas. Same to the rest of society, when they blindly allow such dogmatic thinking. Sentient beings control their instincts.
/r/MensRights08/03/19 12:24 AM
1

If they can dismiss and dehumanize the targeted group: then transgressing against them without guilt or consequence, (in the eyes of society) becomes easier. It doesn't even have to be contrived. It's often more like a reflex, in those compelled towards zero-sum, adversarial fanaticism. Over time, these unchecked messages being repeated: tend to create corresponding belief systems, making the callous disregard seem almost acceptable. Idiots can be very dangerous in groups and are also highly exp…
/r/MensRights23/02/19 12:44 AM
11

Yep, many people; especially those in positions of power (political, social, etc.), would rather double down on justifying mistreatment that they can exploit, than accept emergent truth that doesn't advantage them. That's why some forms of change, have to be (gently, whenever possible) forced.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 10:22 PM
2

Well stated, I have similar suspicions.
/r/MensRights05/02/19 10:02 PM
5

No I'm not entirely anti-capitalist; I question every flawed construct, but you are completely pro-capitalist, to the detriment of an honest debate about it's negative aspects. Anarcho-Capitalist I presume. Interesting how in your 'objective' assessment: questioning any aspect of capitalism; despite it's many negative aspects, warrants the condemning of me personally. We must not ever question capitalism. Again you reveal yourself as biased and polarizing. So, why do you have a problem with me p…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 10:20 PM
1

Masked thugs beating people as a manifestation of fanatical belief, happens for many misguided reasons. The right does it too. The media works for big business: they are gaming you mostly for the benefit of corporations and billionaires, who have long seen profit opportunites in encouraging conflict and division and then playing both sides. And I was never indifferent, I briefly believed in feminism until I saw how supremacist and hypocritical it was. I was still in my teens when I started quest…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 10:04 PM
1

I just pointed out strong and confident men, who were on the left. I acknowledged the entire codex of identity politics, as being wrong so what you've implied about me not "acknowledging a pathological hatred of strong confident men" simply isn't true. But for someone who claims to hate the conditioning on 'both sides', I routinely see you going after lefty views, but never the righties. Maybe you're the one revealing your beliefs? There is wisdom on both sides but you ignore one and claim their…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 09:24 PM
4

Strong and confident men occur only on the right wing? Guess all those "lefties": who pushed back against the robber barons of the Gilded Age for example, to create modern working conditions with a shred of fair compensation and dignity were total pussies then. And all those "righties", kissing the asses of multinational corporations: who want to send humanity right back to said conditions (more or less), are the real men. Do you really believe the right wing cares, considering the way it's alwa…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 08:55 PM
3

Agreed, an underdog movement like ours needs to avoid this politically polarizing behavior. This isn't the place to push right wing, left wing or other politics. It's about men's issues and no political wing gives a damn about them.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 08:03 PM
7

Trudeau, seems like some upper crust, monocle and top hat wearing, Victorian chivalrist; trying to protect society women, from the unwashed masses (low status males), or something. For a supposed "progressive", he seems utterly.... old world. He is of course, just trying to raise his profile at the expense of many of the least protected people in society. Just like the old days, really. ​
/r/MensRights05/12/18 11:57 AM
4

This stuff infuriates me. Police need to be held to a higher standard, or else they become liabilities to civil society. There was a case in Vancouver, years ago, where cops went to the wrong address on a domestic violence call and then proceeded to just beat the poor guy up, here. Chivalry, is not an excuse to assault someone; especially in an empowered and potentially dangerous position, like that of a police officer.
/r/MensRights11/10/18 02:32 AM
1

Had to move outside the comment stream to continue your tirade I see. Someone wants attention lol. That mathematical theory doesn't prove that an indirect consequence of an action, was the fault of the person committing the action. Of course chains of events occur and influence each other. But the fall and head hit caused the coma and that is outside his control, so legally he's not responsible and the head hit is still secondary to the punch and shouldn't be considered to be his fault; especial…
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/18 10:44 PM
5

Ah, the real motivations come out. Your links are not sufficient to defend your point that incidental injuries, suffered after the fact; that cannot be proven to be intended are the fault of someone who for all intents and purposes was merely defending himself. Yes death and injury can happen in several ways during a conflict. But the fact that someone can die from a single punch does not demonstrate that: a) he did hit or intended to hit, hard enough to injure and/or kill b) that he intended to…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/08/18 12:32 AM
3

My contention remained the same throughout every comment. You're either too smug to notice your own flawed reasoning or have a comprehension problem. Hitting her head on the ground caused the coma, the punch was not the cause, the report even says so. So you do then contend, in the hypothetical example provided: that someone pushing back in self defense is responsible, for the person he pushed being hit by a car, after stumbling in to traffic. The comment was apt your responses however, demonstr…
/r/PussyPassDenied26/08/18 11:49 PM
3

Man you really love the childish shit talk don't you. It even says in the report, that the coma happened from hitting her head on the ground. Show me what law holds an individual accountable, for an injury not suffered directly by the attack; when intent can't be demonstrated. You're having a comprehension problem: you cannot assume that he intended to knock her into a coma or even inflict severe injury, all that can be proven is the punch. And the punch didn't cause the coma. Or is somebody who…
/r/PussyPassDenied26/08/18 11:30 PM
4

No rebuttal? So moron or troll it is then, bye now!
/r/PussyPassDenied26/08/18 11:02 PM
3

Did you watch the video or are you just a reactionary fool who has no point? Because it's obvious from the footage she fell and hit the side of her head; the punch didn't put her in a coma. Like I said, it's not uncommon in fights for such things to happen. So, refute the point of piss off moron.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/08/18 10:59 PM
3

The guy in question, did not put her in a coma. She swung first, he retaliated once, she fell over and hit her head. That's what caused the coma. He wasn't charged because he can't be held legally responsible, for someone hitting their head after the fact; it's fairly common for people to get severe head injuries from falling over after being hit, during a fight. But she started it and he had a right to retaliate. I get the point, but the framing is a little disingenuous.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/08/18 02:11 AM
5

More supremacist hatred from privileged, well off feminists toward the truly vulnerable. This of course, must be a demonstration of "Women's greater empathy and understanding"....
/r/MensRights06/08/18 11:45 PM
23

They consider anyone who disagrees with them, to be fascist. Whether right, left or other, politically. White males however, do seem to be the prime "untermensch" scapegoat currently.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 08:39 PM
2

Not sure how you confused an allusion to western democracy in general, with my previous statements about prison. I can't possibly be that incoherent. I'm implying, that the checks and balances; which are essential in a democracy are not being applied properly, here. The final statement was phrased like that because it was bit of a reference to this song.
/r/MensRights06/07/18 06:07 AM
46

I wonder when they will conclude, that no crime is ever "serious" enough to warrant imprisoning a woman? Of course for us men, we barely even deserve rehabilitation. And nonviolent criminals, still get to be locked up with violent freaks and rapists. And they call it democracy.
/r/MensRights05/07/18 08:44 PM
12

Heard some people on another Reddit, claiming that Buzzfeed has upped it's game and is producing "legit" journalism these days. Didn't know whether to laugh or facepalm.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 12:15 AM
7

How were the Suffragettes good? Was it the bombing of a civic library? Because they did that. Was it intending to get the vote only for "well off" white women, while forcing their mostly non-white female servants, to campaign for a vote they were to be denied, on threat of dismissal? Because they did that too. Perhaps it was decrying war as male violence but then shaming, through handing out white feathers of cowardice, to any man they thought wasn't enlisting in support of said "pointless war"?…
/r/MensRights14/06/18 10:47 PM
4

I see, she wants unidirectional traditionalism, more or less. Otherwise, she would consider both sides and seek lesser work pressures for both men and women. Or should men be compensated for yard work, fixing stuff around the house and driving the kids to their various engagements?
/r/MensRights07/06/18 07:24 PM
22

Oh look, wealthy feminists want to start yet another witch hunt against men. Based on a trumped up excuse. Yes, perhaps if you harass and ostracize them even further; you know more of the stuff that set them off in the first place, they will somehow improve. They probably want to push these guys into killing themselves. Or cause them to snap more often, so they can justify more attacks and dehumanizing legislation against men. But there are unexpected consequences connected to that path. They ar…
/r/MensRights04/05/18 05:17 AM
19

Oh look, wealthy feminists want to start yet another witch hunt against men. Based on a trumped up excuse. Yes, perhaps if you harass and ostracize them even further; you know more of the stuff that set them off in the first place, they will somehow improve. They probably want to push these guys into killing themselves. Or cause them to snap more often, so they can justify more attacks and dehumanizing legislation against men. But there are unexpected consequences connected to that path. They ar…
/r/MensRights04/05/18 02:19 AM
4

Indeed and I think westerners have been conditioned, to experience cognitive dissonance at the mere idea, of powerful people working intentionally against their common interests, vs. the example they (and we ourselves), would like us to believe. I think most know on some level that it happens, though.
/r/MensRights01/05/18 12:15 AM
8

I think the purpose is more Machiavellian: they want to terrorize and break male resolve in the lower classes especially, by using the ostensibly respectable, plausibly deniable excuse of protecting women, to break common men of their rights under law and make them unable to stand as a group. Perhaps rich guys are planning another war or a return to Gilded Age economies or something. I don't know exactly why. But this game has been played before.
/r/MensRights30/04/18 11:24 PM
1

I've told them a few times.
/r/MensRights30/04/18 11:18 PM
10

I found this brief description, linked in another article.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 08:52 PM
1

When I was in school during the 70's, a bunch of boys and I were sitting outside at the front of the school, before class. The female vice-principal comes up and tells us that we shouldn't be there. We give her some playful attitude about it and her response, is something to to effect of: "You boys are nothing but trouble, women are going to make the world a better place by getting rid of you.". All with a big smile on her face. Even earlier in the 70's, my mother had just died a year earlier an…
/r/MensRights20/04/18 06:33 PM
4

If he can keep his life together, isn't causing undue harm to others and is reasonably respectful of others then, I personally, don't care how a man acts.
/r/MensRights16/04/18 04:33 PM
8

And they are trying to roll it all back, using every divisive proxy mechanism against common people, that they can.
/r/MensRights01/04/18 03:52 PM
5

Yep, the regressive are masquerading as the enlightened. And they render convoluted and hypocritical, almost everything they touch.
/r/MensRights31/03/18 02:25 PM
1

One I read years ago, that was pretty good is "The Woman Racket", by Steve Moxon.
/r/MensRights29/03/18 02:38 PM
1

Thanks for the informative reply. Your points sound valid to me however, I'm just glad that more males who may have been sexually harassed or assaulted by women, are coming forward. But you're right, the cases need to be extremely strong.
/r/MensRights13/02/18 05:22 AM
1

If I change my comment to a few, will that satisfy you? Is it completely invalidated by not doing so? Is it your contention that more than a few claimants, conveys legitimacy and fewer does not? And what's with the god talk; is it implying that lobbyists are taken too seriously, or a veiled insult? Is it then your position, that men who make sexual harassment/assault claims against women, are taken seriously by the authorities? If so, can you prove that with non-feminist partisan, sources? Which…
/r/MensRights12/02/18 08:47 AM
7

Telling isn't it? And their whole position seems to revolve around: simultaneously claiming we should work with feminists (whose institutionally powerful members actively work against men and boys and inculcate prejudicial and downright hateful views in law and academia) and then not being like said feminists; while being petty and calling us incels (childish and stupid). I wonder if they go after these powerful feminists, for their blatant inculcation of hate, or just us?
/r/MensRights10/02/18 06:29 AM
8

I wonder if the investigation will be conducted as seriously as it would be, if it were several women accusing a man? Or will the authorities jump at any chance to obscure evidence, and avoid charging her; or make excuses for her actions?
/r/MensRights09/02/18 06:34 AM
1

Well isn't that lovely. Canada's social programs and social policy, were properly egalitarian. Until the feminists got their hateful little hands on the institutions. Men clearly have far more need for social housing, by any genuine measurement; or simple observation.
/r/MensRights03/02/18 05:10 AM
4

This initiative, has Paul Nathanson and Warren Farrel etc., on the advisory board. So, it's reasonable to conclude that it's not the Eve Ensler, Gloria Steinham led, type of "Male Studies" program. Unfortunate choice of names though.
/r/MensRights30/01/18 07:56 AM
5

Trudeau, is advocating unidirectional persecution. He might want to think twice about this. Unless his perspectives, are consistent with the kinds of people who advocate for such dystopian behavior. Kind of demonstrates though, how the seeds of tyranny are always germinated by the wealthy and powerful. These things start as misguided fringe behaviors, among common groups of people. But become dangerous institutions, when the upper classes and political classes start enabling and using them for t…
/r/MensRights29/01/18 05:52 AM
5

Interesting, people teaching Psychology are apparently inferring that mocking the mentally ill is okay. If they are of a certain gender. True Psychologists, are supposed to understand the intolerance and dismissal, that the mentally ill already face and endeavor not to make it worse, or to judge them. Here we see bigots, approximating the role of Psychology teacher in order to push sexism. These people, are helping to defeat the efforts of all in Psychology, who have been trying to make it a leg…
/r/MensRights11/01/18 06:36 AM
1

Yep, those old tribal drives are far too functional in us, still. They encourage excuses to: divide, justify conflict and enable manipulative psychopaths, in positions of power to use our natures against us, far too easily. I hope this species has what it takes to make the necessary changes. Both to our natures and the systems that organize us. Though we've been repeating versions of these cycles, ever since the emergence of mass civilization and before.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 03:57 PM
2

I see, it does seem that doing the right thing for men in western society, still needs group divisions and qualifiers, for too many people. As though they fear the idea, of men having legitimate issues, as a general group. Hopefully legitimizing the men's movement, will enable some degree of cohesion and leave these people with no choice, but to redress some of these issues; for the benefit of all of us. And keep this corruption at bay.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 03:06 PM
8

I know and agree. Demographic, refers to a specific segment of society; and my usage was meant to include men in general, of all races.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 02:25 PM
11

Police forces and courts conspiring to withhold evidence, in order to persecute a specific demographic, seems like a dangerously tyrannical precedent to be setting. Almost proto-fascist in nature. Something significant needs to be done, to curtail this trend, quickly.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 12:40 PM
2

This is very good to hear, congratulations CAFE!
/r/MensRights07/01/18 05:37 PM
5

She's a sick, twisted monster. As is anyone, who supports her positions on men.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 04:50 AM
9

Feminists pushing tyranny in the name of 'justice' again, I see. Of course, proposing measures that she's positive, won't affect her. Like a true power tripping bigot; irrespective of any of her past experiences. If women were fully penalized (sometimes persecuted) under rape/sexual assault laws (to the degree that men are), when accused; and women like this, could wind up in prison over a poorly adjudicated false claim: they would stop this shit.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 03:46 AM
5

The "better sex", no need to frame it like that. Unless he's deluded or a pandering sycophant.
/r/MensRights21/11/17 02:24 AM
3

Yep, high status men have an unfortunate habit, of stepping on lower status men, almost reflexively. They do it to save face and/or raise status; instead of simply being better people or owning up to their bullshit. It's one of the reasons they like to jump on the "protect women" bandwagon. Which they use as an excuse to beat down other men and raise their own profile, in the eyes of women and society. It's amusing, that people so often mistake these guys as having genuine character.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 12:05 AM
16

The "against" crowd, is using "We Hunted the Mammoth" and "Now Toronto" as the sources for their claims against MRA's; and CAFE specifically. Two entirely biased and constantly lying feminist partisan sources, are what they use to expose the 'lies' of CAFE. Of course, their own constant lies and misrepresentations; as well as efforts to malign or block every single men's initiative that isn't a cover for more Feminism, should just be excused.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 04:21 AM
561

So, what are they going to do, sue him until they bankrupt him? Destroy his life twice, in the name of a hateful ideology? These frivolous lawsuits, need to be blocked posthaste. And these malevolent feminists, need to be put in check for the sake of justice and civil decency.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 02:17 AM
54

Well to be fair, they do seem to be concerned about having the right to inflict violence, unilaterally. If I remember correctly, Elizabeth Sheehy believes that women should be permitted to murder their husbands, on the mere claim of domestic violence. I've heard and seen plenty of similar things from other feminists, over the years.
/r/MensRights05/11/17 10:53 PM
71

Wealthy female narcissist, castigating lower status men. That's most likely who she's targeting. Why am I not surprised?
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:26 AM
5

After the things you've been saying, it takes nerve to make a statement like this; I'll give you that. The entire impetus of your argumentation, has been that of this proverbial "emotional 13 year old girl" you accuse me of being. You're such an irrational fool, that you don't even see it in yourself. Stop doubling down, you sound like a child.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 02:07 AM
6

Your arguments consist entirely of calling people who raise logical counterpoints: apologists, dicksnaps, fucking idiots, etc.; while throwing the accusation of illogical argument, back at them and making none of your own. I've made several logical points (much more than you), you simply ignore, that which doesn't suit your position. This is just a competition to you isn't it?
/r/MensRights01/11/17 01:32 AM
6

It goes to the character of vigilantes: they tend to be motivated by the same things. You're not even trying to cover your reactive irrationality, now. And instead, compensate with an ever increasing litany of personal insults vs my rational points. And you say I have no integrity? While you defend vigilantes? I'll just go ahead and defer to your obviously superior reason, lol.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 12:47 AM
6

Integrity in my arguments: says the ad hominem spewing, vigilante supporter. The Canadian version of these guys have been caught assaulting people several times now; vigilantes are rarely in it for good reasons. This is police work and citizens are to stay out of it, period.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 12:36 AM
5

Nothing worse than people, who prevent important questions from being asked and justify vigilantism, with blanket accusations of apologist. These guys are not just. They are violent fanatics, looking for excuses to assault other men for fun and prizes. Notice they never go after female pedophiles. So who's the apologist?
/r/MensRights01/11/17 12:23 AM
3

And possibly, opportunistic predators themselves. Gaining reputation and status, from a kind of "witch hunt". I know the 'pedo-hunters' in BC, have been caught assaulting 'suspected' men, several times now. If they won't go after female pedophiles, then this is just socio-politically motivated persecution.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 12:16 AM
2

Ah, yes and when called on it, they start the condescension and shaming. Case in point....
/r/MensRights27/10/17 09:29 PM
4

Women like this need to dehumanize us, in order to assuage their existential guilt. Due to their continual, unsympathetic exploitation of males.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 07:23 AM
7

She demonstrates true sexism, quite effectively here. As well as an inherently unjust mind, it would seem.
/r/MensRights21/10/17 10:22 PM
14

So, when is the research demonstrating women's propensity for harassing and ostracizing, males they see as low status or weak going to be done? And when is this hypocritical behavior, going to be called out by society as the shameless gender based discrimination that it is? *crickets*
/r/MensRights18/10/17 10:35 PM
13

That's what happens when a group of people have too much privilege and don't get their baser traits, checked by society; but encouraged. They tend to become oblivious, half-savage, perpetual children.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 11:04 PM
3

Interesting, I wonder how they would feel about "gallant men", only wanting to help demure women.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:14 PM
13

They would probably, contrive an ideological mechanism to make challenging your female professor's, an act of harassment. If a male challenges them, it would be sexual harassment. Or they would simply, automatically fail the challenging student (as already happens in University). These people are downright Orwellian.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 08:05 PM
3

Also the idiots, who might beat this guy into a coma in order to be seen as "The One Good Man".
/r/MensRights02/10/17 10:54 PM
14

I would still prefer jail time for false accusers. Well off women, might still get enough "victim cred." from falsely accusing someone, to justify paying what to them is: virtually a pittance. However, this is a good start.
/r/MensRights02/10/17 09:09 PM
7

Yes, they do it to obfuscate men's issues away and to prevent the development of any sympathy, for said issues.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 08:49 PM
2

I'm generally a social democrat. But I support some conservative, libertarian and socialist perspectives.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 05:24 AM
12

Hmm, if a man took a picture of a woman's crotch; without permission, for any reason: it would be sexual harassment. But she also shames him, about something that his gender requires of him, for proper comfort and to some degree, health. So, shouldn't she be up on sexual harassment charges? And accused of sexism?
/r/MensRights29/08/17 08:01 PM
2

Yep claim to be principled: then create mechanisms, to justify remaining unprincipled towards those you wish to exploit and/or get no "warm fuzzies", from helping. Then of course, there is the divide and conquer motivation.
/r/MensRights17/08/17 11:43 AM
1

That's essentially the right wing, in general. As well as far too much of the left.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:16 PM
3

Yes it is a word, so is "I". If it were a mere letter, it wouldn't have any meaning, when used in a sentence. Do I actually have to explain this?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:04 PM
57

Five words: sexual assault of a minor.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:53 AM
11

It's interesting, considering many of the things feminists say. How much of that is projection?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 01:53 AM
1

Wow, I've been getting downvoted for effectively pointing out, that it was the political left, that traditionally maintained the balance for common people. While the right mainly served the rich, at the expense of the poor. How is this not true?
/r/MensRights08/06/17 01:29 AM
3

Claiming that my issues, stem from how you are treated; when you are on average treated much more positively and leniently than I am, is a conceit.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 07:12 AM
-2

If only the left could see through this, divide and conquer and get back to dealing with the transgressions of the upper and ruling class, maybe we could push back. The right, seems to be plutocratic and doesn't want to deal with it.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:09 PM
2

Class-based elitism: the foundation of justification, for the supremacist/tyrant.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:56 AM
1

Yep, the fact that people in positions of authority, can't or won't accept that women can be monsters, is more than a little disturbing. It's truly wrong, that men are dragged through the mud yet truly vile women, are constantly given a pass. Hell, their prisons are country clubs compared to male prisons. Despite, many prison guards claiming that female inmates are much more violent. I'm sorry you had to get caught up in this ugly mess.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 03:39 AM
12

Oh look, closed minded non-reasoners doing what they do best.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 11:10 AM
15

Feminists, were insidiously clever in their utilization of Intersectionality. Much like Phrenology did: it allows the dismissal, of the suffering of any unapproved of group and opens the door to denying their issues; as well as dehumanizing them.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 03:42 AM
1

A little good news. It appears that Karla Homolka is no longer allowed to volunteer at her kids school. http://montrealgazette.com/news/karla-homolka-no-longer-allowed-to-volunteer-at-n-d-g-school
/r/MensRights03/06/17 01:15 AM
0

The problem with death sentences is that they are handed down by flawed humans, who tend to make mistakes. The legal system needs a serious accountability overhaul, before it could be trusted with such responsibilities. Too many mentally ill guys and men who later turned out to be innocent, have been killed under such systems. Otherwise I kind of agree, as I'm angered by the obvious pussy pass given here; for someone who turned out to essentially be the ringleader of these vile acts. You can see…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 12:24 AM
3

Yep, these people have regressive minds and they need to wake up to the modern age.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 01:04 AM
3

Don't forget pedophile and misogynist.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 01:00 AM
3

Women run many of the child trafficking rings, due to how high the bar on arresting them already is. Let's just forget that they (like all humans), evolved from a violent, self-serving species of primates and make it easier for them. Must satisfy that limbic system at all costs, lol.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 12:37 AM
7

Definite conflict of interest here. They need to be removed and the program restructured, to prevent feminist (and traditionalist), influence.
/r/MensRights16/05/17 02:24 AM
11

Yep, I think he's actually trying to imply that males being attracted to youthful features, is somehow pedophilic. Why else would it be deemed gross? Guess his feminist indoctrination has firmly, taken hold.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 11:47 PM
7

Feminists have been doing this for a long time (same with other types of tyrants). I remember feminists in the 70's and 80's playing nice one minute and making us feel bad for "not accommodating girls better" in school; with seemingly egalitarian appeals. Then, almost in the next breath, maligning boys as virtual subhumans and setting up things like: abused children programs that were only for girls, (the only such programs, even available to students at the time), but run through a public schoo…
/r/MensRights12/05/17 12:18 AM
10

Many people need to be reminded of this fact, when they're busy blaming men for all violence. I've noticed some virtually go ballistic, when it's pointed out that female mate selection practices, make them partially culpable for male violence.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:54 AM
12

Selectively aborting male fetuses, is advocated by some feminists. As well as simply denying male children affection and nurturance, so that females will be healthier than them mentally.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 09:56 PM
9

Did a little searching. Apparently testosterone caused an increase in bargaining behavior that could smooth social interactions when it was given to women, in an experiment. Women, who thought they were receiving testosterone (whether or not it was a placebo), "behaved much more unfairly" than women who knew they were given a placebo. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7279/abs/nature08711.html
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:25 PM
10

Exactly, a feminist approved men's movement, is a good way to ensure that none of our issues ever gain redress.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:05 PM
3

Didn't a study also find that testosterone was connected to fairness?
/r/MensRights28/04/17 10:59 PM
19

Many feminist's like to claim, that all or most violence is always the fault of males. That female leaders would be inherently nonviolent, superior leaders. The history of female leaders, would seem to contradict the sexist notion that only males are bad leaders. It's a tangential issue that influences peoples perceptions and is worth bringing up, from time to time.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 10:56 PM
11

Well said, did you notice the scare quotes around "significant issues for men"? They just can't help themselves can they?
/r/MensRights06/04/17 08:26 PM
4

So, at what point can we just start calling this behavior persecution?
/r/MensRights06/04/17 02:38 AM
9

And especially, if those men are low status.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 07:16 PM
11

Seeing as you've already started with the ad hominem, let me just point out the fact, that your response was pointless and you sound like an idiot.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 06:56 PM
15

Women are generally more protected, everywhere in the world. Nobody even cares about the plight of low status men in these countries. Yet they over-report, everything women face and that's why they seem to have it worse. Boko Haram, middle eastern dancing boys, domestic violence equivalency, women leaving compounds in Africa to get water because they will be raped and let go (which is atrocious in itself) but a man would be raped and then killed. We all want to protect women; it's programmed int…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 06:51 PM
7

No mistake was made. There are people subscribed to this sub disingenuously. We don't block and ban here and our socio-political position, conflicts directly with human evolutionary assumptions. So, it just stands to reason that not every subscriber actually supports men's issues.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 05:33 PM
2

Oh, I didn't realize that subscribing to a sub was synonymous with supporting it's position.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 05:24 PM
-3

Actually, I was going more for callous dismissal than hate. But feel free to imply whatever helps you spin your narrative. And I don't need any days of praise, personally. You clearly have an axe to grind with the men's movement, so I'll just leave you to it.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 05:13 PM
8

Good point. Though our techniques are as much about improving the self, as anything else. Women's techniques refine coercion skills; which, while useful, tend to have arguably worse affects on their character than ours do.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:54 PM
43

If it's a light hearted affair and everyone gets their day; dignity intact, then days celebrating various groups wouldn't bother me. It's when one group always takes precedence and then uses these days to backhandedly diminish others, that I lose tolerance for them. Ironically, forcefully pushing the narrative of this one arguably privileged group, as though they must count for more than other's, does indeed seem sexist.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:47 PM
18

Young women, think males are stupid because they are taught from an early age to manipulate your libido and emotions. They equate being able to manipulate a males libido and emotions, with him lacking intelligence. But it's just pressing biological buttons. Women also have equivalent buttons, that can be pressed. Men just don't get taught by other men, from a young age, to push those buttons. Everybody is an animal and what separates us, is what we cultivate in our minds ie: self awareness.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:35 PM
96

So, everyday regular men are such shit, as far as the U.N. is concerned, that they indirectly compare us to feces. While simultaneously trying to erase or obscure the one day that celebrates us; or just arrogantly not noticing that they are.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:28 PM
2

Done.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 02:13 PM
10

Interesting, shortly before this they closed down their comment section. The comments were often, admittedly lame and many of them were virulent (men are bad) feminist comments. Yet they went unchecked for years. However, I noticed that more recently, there were more commenters challenging the man haters. And then IMDb suddenly closed the comment section. Coincidence?
/r/MensRights07/03/17 03:15 PM
3

If a group of people are denied anything sacred, anything "just for them", while the group doing the denying aren't: what does it say about the latter group? If the privacy and dignity of a specific group is violable while the same for the offending group isn't: it would seem to perpetuate the notion, that the targeted group need not be considered and are somehow, lesser humans. Perhaps it's a way for the group who are pushing into these spaces, to demonstrate their perceived superiority or to s…
/r/MensRights01/03/17 04:37 PM
5

Also he could've pointed out, that a punch to the face which accidentally strays to the side, could strike the neck and tear loose the carotid artery and cause him to bleed to death internally; it takes no strength to do this. If he was caught by surprise, he also might fail to clench his jaw protectively and get his brain rattled causing unconsciousness. It's not uncommon to fall over and hit one's head, in that situation. And it's not uncommon for the consequence of that to be death. So in a w…
/r/MensRights15/01/17 04:00 AM
15

One has to be pretty callous and/or hateful, to casually dehumanize an entire group of people for money, though. Especially, if they understand the psychological and historical ramifications, of the "othering" game.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 01:48 PM
6

A radical feminist being incorrigibly bigoted and hypocritical. So, business as usual, then.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 01:40 PM
2

Indeed, stay the hell out of Canada, Lena.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 02:53 PM
20

And then they still blame men, for all the world's violence. While instigating so much of it themselves, on so many levels. I've always felt, that the one who proxies the violence is worse than the ones who carry it out. After all without the former, the latter would likely never happen.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 05:07 PM
29

To the fools who keep wondering how a "tiny little female" can rape a "big strong male": this is how. And rape, is only one of the life destroying accusations they can use. Another favorite is: "I'll say you hit me". Or to males, who may be insecure about their sexuality: "I'll tell everyone you're gay.", which in some places can bring serious violence down on a male, due to homophobia.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 11:06 PM
3

I saw an article a awhile ago, where a feminist implied that a few women couch surfing, was essentially a more serious problem than the multitudes of men literally sleeping in the streets. Shows you who the real sexists are. Here it is: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/Women-The-hidden-homeless-295363481.html Edit: I use noscript in my browser, which let me read the article directly. The site in question, forces you to sign up to read the article. And interestingly now has a dis…
/r/MensRights02/06/16 04:10 PM
2

Are these people robots or something? They don't seem to reason; just acting out scripts instead. Unless it's Machiavellian reasoning. In which case they're vermin.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:56 PM
4

It baffles me sometimes, how these people fail to realize that. Less advanced animals develop much faster than advanced ones indeed. That perspective, can instantly be thrown right back in their faces. But of course, then we're the sexists, lol.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:49 PM
4

Not surprised, Earl is a potentially compassion inducing, virtual martyr. Who's example, might be seen to justify many of the issues regarding DV, that we in the men's movement have been pointing out for years. Gotta destroy that shit eh Femmies?
/r/MensRights30/05/16 05:47 PM
2

Feminists, even have their own pseudoscience to justify "othering" the groups they wish to target: Intersectionality. Similar to the mentality behind Nazi's utilizing Phrenology, to justify their desire to attack a group, or groups. On the grounds of inferiority or inherent "evil". Though I think the Nazi's were right wing Fascist's, utilizing Socialist ideas; to appeal to an economically depressed German population, at a time when these ideas were extremely popular in much of Europe. Vaguely si…
/r/MensRights29/04/16 03:33 AM
2

Don't they already do that on International Men's Day? Oh well, guess these 'oppressed' cupcakes, don't miss an opportunity to punch down on their supposed 'oppressors', heh.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 07:04 PM
3

The academic feminist agenda, currently seems to be to malign the name and reputation of any group, that has any success in representing men's issues. While claiming to not have a problem with men's groups in general. Just any men's group that, you know, has a chance of influencing anyone or (rightfully) criticizes feminism. They are tearing into C.A.F.E. and the MRA for it's "radicals", while ignoring the much more prevalent radicals in their own midst. Looks like a containment strategy, by way…
/r/MensRights30/01/16 04:07 AM
1

And you're just looking for excuses to invalidate any defense against the gender card that was already used. The least threatening demographic would be non-islamists. It has been made into a gender issue by those who believe: that blaming all males for the actions of a few is more valid, than blaming the extreme tendencies of religious sects. Which is actually more apt as an argument: if ones aim is to prevent the most direct vector of said violence. The impetus is ideological and not rational.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 06:39 PM
1

I never implied you did, but banning single men because some are violent, is much more specious reasoning than simply going for the root of the issue and banning the religious group, that is generating the violence. Given that all members of that group, (including women) have the propensity to inculcate and act on the beliefs, that lead to the justifications for terrorism. Married women and men indoctrinate children, single women also engage in terrorism. It would seem that those who make it abo…
/r/MensRights19/12/15 06:07 PM
5

By your own reasoning then, Islamist's should be kept out. As virtually all of the terrorist activities, in these regions, are caused by Islamist extremism. Are you okay with disallowing Islamist's into the country?
/r/MensRights19/12/15 05:15 PM
2

Make sure to always point your phone at the ground though. Wouldn't want to be accused of leering through the camera.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 09:15 PM
4

I wonder if Phrenology will be making a comeback soon.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 12:05 PM
2

I know, I couldn't think of another quick concise way at the moment, to paraphrase the endless streams of hypocritical rationalizations, pitted against rational queries and valid points, that I've been encountering. Lol, I see what you mean though.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 11:16 AM
1

And the Syrian women will become radicalized feminists; or held up as examples by feminists; who's anecdotal experiences, will likely be used to shame and silence any western males who get "uppity" about men's issues.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 11:04 AM
3

Then, so do young single women.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 10:49 AM
34

Speculative point: "Islamists have a much more recent and active history of extreme violence. So, perhaps we should only allow the Christian Syrians in." Response: "That's just Islamophobia you bigot." Same respondant: "It's good that they only allow women and attached men in, after all, men are responsible for all violence." Speculative point: "Isn't that the same argument, as: Because some Islamists are violent, it's okay to discriminate against all Islamists?" Response: "What kind of man does…
/r/MensRights23/11/15 10:28 AM
3

Because Google is contemptuous towards roughly, half the species. If it were just indifference, they could simply disregard their own lack of concern in favor of popular opinion. Which increasingly seems to be in support of men's issues; at least being given equal billing. It costs them nothing unless, Google staff is personally opposed to celebrating Men's day. In a similar vain, "International Toilet Day" being declared on the same day seems more than a coincidence, no? Last year iirc, the Wom…
/r/MensRights20/11/15 08:05 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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