TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

dzialamdzielo Archive

View 0 posts and 103 comments by dzialamdzielo on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

It’s linked at the bottom of the article you posted… http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000311
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/22 11:14 PM
2

Or that children with larger feet are better at math?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/22 06:56 AM
5

I read the actual underlying paper not the random article describing the findings. correlation was astonishingly strong, very very very strong. undeniably so. Lol, no it wasn’t. And the confidence intervals were also massive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/22 06:43 AM
13

A "link" is not a scientific term; they found a correlation. They claim to have adjusted for nation wealth (as people in wealthier, healthier nations live longer and get cancers of all types more often) but I sort of find that hard to believe and their methods section is suspiciously empty. They corrected several data entry errors (which is probably why the paper didn't get much traction) after the fact. Condom use also correlated with prostate cancer which also points, imo, towards the wealth h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/22 05:16 PM
26

Surprisingly not tiny! The amount of skin removed is about the area of an iPhone. There’s actually circumstantial evidence that circumcision increases male to female HIV transmission because the increased friction of foreskin-less sex creates micro tears that allow HIV to cross into the blood stream. The study on this (wawer et Al, 2012 or so) was put on ice bc it was deemed unethical to continue. The (weak) evidence is all regarding female to male HIV transmission.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/09/22 11:29 AM
1

That was fairly common knowledge among the relevant patient populations by, like, 2016. So its surprising to hear that the data was never published? Gilead was on a real PR spree with it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/02/22 08:16 PM
1

The PrEP data was known at least 8-10 years ago, I'm just now seeing that published. What do you mean by this? That PrEP works or that there's something wrong with it?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/02/22 07:38 PM
3

I was vaccinated during that campaign… this is some wild conspiracy theorizing, dude.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/22 12:41 PM
8

HPV can cause throat cancer in men. Depends on the strain of HPV s as I understand it. All cancer has the potential to metastasize, but at different rates. Prostate cancer is fairly slow, for exactly. There’s really no such thing as benign cancer, though. Are you suggesting men risk throat cancer to stick it to the CDC for advertising based on cervical cancer rates?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/01/22 11:19 AM
25

I think the average person is much more of a biological realist than an ideologue, so that doesn’t surprise me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/21 09:42 PM
42

The TERF thing is interesting because they're not actually gone and they're not not feminists. They're just "bad" ones? TERFs obviously identify as the real feminists and the others as sellouts. That's my understanding at least. I've never done it but I wonder what a mainstream, not necessarily normie, feminist would say if you told them you didn't like feminism because of TERFs. Or that you did like it because of TERFs?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/21 08:45 PM
126

This is really insightful, actually. I think I agree with you. It's sort of an epistemological gotcha: "No, it doesn't matter if your experiences led you to a very functional, albeit negative, definition of feminism. Only my definition is correct and it's your fault you don't share it."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/21 08:32 PM
5

What other connotation does “rite of passage” have? Lame cop out
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/21 12:15 AM
7

The willfully ignorant perception among some (many? most?) in the pro-choice movement that men, in contrast to women, have control over their body when that is 100% demonstrably false, is so enraging to me. It's also where some of them say the quiet part out loud, like Cher: "REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THEY’VE GOT GOD GIVEN RIGHT 2 DICTATE WHAT WE DO WITH OUR BODIES.WOMEN MUST MAKE LAWS 2 CONTROL MENS BODIES. NO VIAGRA,ROGAIN, TESTOSTERONE‼️ALL MEN MUST BE CIRCUMCISED,& SHOW PAPERS OR PENIS 2 PROVE IT.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/21 07:11 PM
13

Grammatical feedback: you meant “there” throughout, not “their” There = “there is” like here was Their = “their house” like her house They’re = “they are” like we’re/we are
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/11/21 07:14 AM
9

I can't read the study so I can't see if that was their only criteria. Or what their definition of original data is. And since you glossed over the results of actual data, I'll write it again: Conclusions: Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 08:12 PM
-2

Read what I said: "don’t respond well to shaming."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 07:42 PM
7

Brian Morris isn't really a valid source given that he just cites himself in an endless circle jerk of reviews and this isn't his specialty. Like the one you linked, for example, out of 2,675 publications they only looked at 36 because they met their "inclusion criteria." Morris looks for his evidence to build his pro-circumcision case, not the other way around. None of the library systems I have access to even subscribe to that journal, so I can't further dig. But let's look at actual science o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 07:40 PM
7

That's a bit of a misinterpretation of neuroplasticity, I'm afraid. The brain will also reorganize to attend more directly to map a body with a missing arm, for example. That doesn't mean you have the feeling of two hands in the remaining one. With circumcision the issue is more that the mechanics of the penis are fundamentally changed. With most childhood circumcisions, the entire external frenulum will be removed. It's a bit of a male G-spot. And the gliding of the inner foreskin over itself p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 06:30 PM
9

Where/how. You can’t tell me removing 50-80% of mobile penile skin and their attendant nerves has no impact penile sensitivity. Or do you just mean the glans? Because sure, what if the glans isnt desensitized? Whoop de doo, you’re still missing that much more important 50-80%!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 02:38 PM
3

It’s only a certain segment, but they really hate hearing criticism re: tactics. As an aside: Expecting parents also don’t respond well to shaming. It’s the result of, I think, two dynamics. The very normal tendency within a struggling subgroup to trend towards ever greater purity/extremism to compensate for actual progress. You can’t just be against circumcision because it’s harmful anymore. You have to be double plus angry about how awful and mutilating it is. That’s actually how many guys fee…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 02:36 PM
17

Since we're fighting with anecdata, u/Justice_is_a_scam is correct. I will not bottom for a cut guy without a lot of lube. And sometimes even then it's still rougher than an uncut guy without lube.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 01:44 PM
4

Yes and no, and it's not the lobby you're thinking of. tl;dr: American circumcision has its roots in the Protestant Third Great Awakening sex-negativity before it medicalized and became a run-away train in a for-profit healthcare system. The early 1900s were a time of great surgical "innovation" because powerful analgesics and anesthesias were newly invented (first forms of morphine ~1880) and it became possible to perform what we might call a "routine" surgery somewhat humanely. Before that you…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 01:40 PM
32

Something more like Aesop's Fox and the Grapes, imo. I think it's a bit more than the sunk cost because it involves passing/iterating that cost onward to others. Maybe like an abstracted societal level sunk cost fallacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 08:59 AM
101

People shame as a means to avoid talking about something that makes them uncomfortable (and to punish socially undesirable behavior in their view). Childhood genital cutting *should* make you really fucking uncomfortable, and given its ubiquity in America in 2021, there's a lot of people with a vested interest in not addressing their actions or preferences. "It's the norm because it's the norm, stupid."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 07:51 AM
27

Are they? Yes, plenty. Several in this thread. I’m delighted to be circumcised... Non sequitur. It's great that you feel fine with your body; did you choose it though? ------ Opting into a tissue-destroying genital cutting procedure is always going to come with loss of the tissue. It's fine to opt into that loss. Forcing that loss onto someone, however, is never appropriate and leads to a real sense of grief and long lasting distress for many men, and the American ones get extra shamed for it. […
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 07:47 AM
4

Imo, although feminists don't generally buy what they pretend to sell (i.e. your average feminist is fairly gender conservative), they have a framework for respecting individual autonomy independent of expected gender roles. Conservatives generally don't even pretend to give a shit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/21 10:02 AM
15

It’s actually even a myth perpetuated as part of the campaigns. The “protection” circumcision is purported to provide is minimal under the best circumstances and you’re supposed to continue with condoms and everything, ie nothing changes. No one in their right mind would do it if they understand the underlying claims and the people who get paid to perform the circumcisions know that and ALSO know that these very poor communities have high rates of illiteracy and poor education, so they lie and s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/21 12:57 PM
2

No, even that is too far. The Wikipedia on the experiment is actually pretty clear on why the findings aren’t even meaningful. The guards were instructed to behave as they did (they even had a consultant on the project to brainstorm fucked up things), the men in the study did not by any means come to act that way of their own accord.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/21 02:33 AM
3

Stanford Prison Experiment
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/21 06:41 PM
3

He’s also famous for a wildly unethical and non-replicable study that is literally taught in psychology programs as what NOT to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/21 03:04 PM
3

Men must sign up for selective service which would facilitate a draft but there hasn’t been any actual drafting for decades.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/21 11:57 AM
-1

I genuinely don’t care enough to sift back through months worth of social media from someone who I think is a right wing idiot. Sorry that’s not gonna be convincing for you but there’s only so much time in the day.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 04:21 PM
1

I mean... yes? This is a left wing sub, look at the URL, bud
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 02:21 PM
-2

It’s not just the one time, then that might be valid. But he kept/keeps repeating it and that, paired with his actual Trump support, is enough for me to think he actually believes it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 12:15 PM
-4

If it walks like a duck (votes for Trump) and talks like a duck (repeats unhinged GOP talking points repeatedly), then it’s probably a duck.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 12:13 PM
0

He did it repeatedly for weeks at a time - once or twice is a cutesy thing but he seems to legit believe it. Especially paired with his legitimate support of Trump
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 12:12 PM
-2

The dude spent several weeks after the election moaning about imaginary voting fraud. That's what's full whacko. https://twitter.com/conceptualjames/status/1344732908116963329
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 09:12 AM
1

Claiming that Biden/the Dems stole the election through voter fraud
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 09:06 AM
-2

Insinuating that Biden stole the election is just fact-free kuckoo nonsense https://www.facebook.com/ConceptualJames/posts/political-comfort-maintains-election-fraud-complicity/215825419950694/ EDIT: removed point A because I forgot which sub I was in. Podcast I referred to was Blocked and Reported with Jesse Singal and Katie Herzog.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 09:05 AM
-1

He went into voter fraud conspiracy land. It's not just that supporting Trump signals that you're not a liberal, spewing the voter fraud conspiracies signals you've stopped thinking critically altogether
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 09:02 AM
12

James Lindsay had since gone off the deep end of Trump apologia and conspiracy theorizing but Pluckrose is pretty solidly liberal, principled and generally sticks up for men when it matters.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/21 06:15 AM
2

On the initial link, click DOI and that should take you to the landing page of the journal and there's a PDF option. The study is comparing circumcised and uncircumcised men as sexual partners; uncircumcised men were the control group and circumcised men are described in relation to them. Also from the article, pg. 1375: Circumcised and uncircumcised men had comparable sexual histories, they considered a good sex life equally important, they were equally likely to be sexually active, and their f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/21 06:18 PM
2

The results are comparative: the conclusion it only says women had a harder time orgasming with circumcised men Harder compared to what? An intact penis. All the data is laid out in Table 2, [PDF Warning]
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/21 01:05 PM
2

It literally does, those are the second set of numbers in brackets. Click the link and try reading, it won’t kill you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/21 10:17 AM
4

The data disagrees with you “ women with circumcised spouses more often reported incomplete sexual needs fulfilment (38 vs 28%, OR(adj) = 2.09; 95% CI 1.05-4.16) and frequent sexual function difficulties overall (31 vs 22%, OR(adj) = 3.26; 95% CI 1.15-9.27), notably orgasm difficulties (19 vs 14%, OR(adj) = 2.66; 95% CI 1.07-6.66) and dyspareunia (12 vs 3%, OR(adj) = 8.45; 95% CI 3.01-23.74).” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21672947/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/04/21 10:06 AM
3

To quote Cher: " REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THEY’VE GOT GOD GIVEN RIGHT 2 DICTATE WHAT WE DO WITH OUR BODIES.WOMEN MUST MAKE LAWS 2 CONTROL MENS BODIES. NO VIAGRA,ROGAIN, TESTOSTERONE[!!!emoji]ALL MEN MUST BE CIRCUMCISED,& SHOW PAPERS OR PENIS 2 PROVE IT.MASSAGE PARLORS PUNISHABLE BY [skull emoji].MEN MUST TAKE THE[Pill emoji]" https://twitter.com/cher/status/1104230766009999361
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 08:17 PM
32

Lol this post just triggered a rage memory for me. I had a co-worker once complain about the orgasm gap and how patriarchy leads to bad sex for women or whatever. Y'know what would help close the "orgasm gap,"? Both partners having natural and intact genital anatomy. The foreskin provides mechanical lubrication during intercourse. So not only would ending MGM not not-harm women, it would positively impact them! They'd have better sex -- there's nothing more feminist than wanting bodily autonomy …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 12:20 PM
43

As I've told a number of feminists over the years, you want to know how to get rid of MRAs? Actually take the serious concerns they have seriously and integrate it into feminism. There's some silly stuff I roll my eyes at but circumcision is 1000% not one of the fake pity party tools. You wanna get on a "my body, my choice" high horse and have people take you seriously? Then walk the fucking walk. Actually believe your slogans.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 12:12 PM
37

The sub is small, but there is already a post mocking MRAs for comparing MGM and FGM, so I'm not expecting much in the way of genuine egalitarianism from it. What's deeply frustrating about this is that FGM is a much broader category with a far lower floor than MGM, so like, not even damaging tissue by drawing a few drops of blood counts as FGM (which it should! I'm not disputing that!). But comparing Type IV to male circumcision... circumcision is significantly worse. Like objectively, for circ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/21 12:05 PM
4

Capitalism does actually play a large role in American circumcision culture. It’s a high profit surgery that doctors love pushing and is covered (illegally because it’s not therapeutic) by Medicare in around 30 states. In a public healthcare system with good safeguarding like Europe and, ironically, Mississippi, non-religious cultural circumcision like in the US can’t get a foothold. If a state with a high percentage of socialized healthcare with either a) good standards (like Australia, which a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/04/21 05:48 AM
1

Page 217 (Table A .1 Lifetime and 12-Month Prevalence of Sexual Violence Victimization — U .S . Women, NISVS 2012) The 12-Month prevalences are listed in the right three columns, weighted % is third in from the right. Contact sexual violence is the first row: 3.8 The male data is built the same but on page 222.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/04/21 05:19 AM
2

Well that and banning non-medically necessary sex "normalization" surgeries for intersex children, too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/21 04:51 PM
1

So treating the genitals of all children the same should be right up your alley, no?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/21 04:41 PM
4

Human rights and a respect for human dignity isn't inherently leftist? Right-wingers, globally, actively want to be able to mutilate children with abandon, ergo it's left-wing to fight for only consensual genital cutting. Plus feminism isn't mentioned once in the post you're responding to. EDIT: it's EXTREMELY progressive to want to extend protection against forced genital cutting into childhood for children of all sexes. Are you under the impression that that's somehow, somewhere the status quo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/21 10:26 AM
2

What about this is not left-wing? It's pretty much apolitical by my reading. Mind pointing out what you find to be political and/or non-left-wing?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/04/21 09:58 AM
5

So the link gives some clues but there's no waywayback page for it to know for sure: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/index.html The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) is hosted here: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/datasources/nisvs/index.html On their data page, there are several reports that are kind of confusingly sorted. However, the report I link below is from 2011 to 2012 and was published in 2017. The Scientific American article was also publi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/21 09:34 PM
22

Ads are valued by number of eyes on them. Shut down subs -> less content -> less time on Reddit per user -> lower ad reach -> reduced value of ads -> pain on bottom line. If it continues long enough to dent their ad metrics, it will definitely be felt.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/03/21 01:56 PM
3

What’s wrong with porn? I don’t see the point but if people enroll in them then sure... I’d just rather proper disciplines take a balanced/scientific approach to a given situation rather than ignoring inconvenient truths. Feminist neutral/skeptic. I wouldn’t trust one unless I knew them very well personally but I’m skeptical of ideologues writ large. If you’re so into a framework that you can’t think outside of it... we’re not gonna get along. Narcissistic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/21 09:15 PM
2

Seriously
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/21 08:25 PM
34

In America, statistically viewed, a boy's first experience with sexuality is most often going to have been his aesthetically-motivated non-consensual circumcision. That speaks volumes about how we view boy's bodies as canvasses for their parent's will far earlier than for girls and also is a world unto itself about hypocrisy re: sex. Like maybe we should work on giving boys a right to consent before we start lecturing *them* about getting consent?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/21 11:29 PM
16

You see this really clearly with anti FGM campaigning (it’s really misinformed white-savior propaganda) where the WHO just refuses to believe it is women and the female areas of society where FGM is enforced and perpetuated. I think it was a region of Nigeria where the WHO went on a female-empowerment kick and elevated witchdoctors and midwives because they were women and subsequently INCREASED the rate of FGM. Meanwhile in Somalia, most men prefer uncut women because the sex is better (essentia…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/21 07:38 AM
2

In the process of giving up a child, the mother has many opportunities to hide the child from its father and/or otherwise present herself as the only person with an interest. It's gotten "better" over the years sicne according to the Atlantic article I'll link below "[u]ntil 1972, single men like Emanuel had no rights to children they’d fathered outside of marriage." Here's a few recent/common cases. There was a guy who got his daughter back this year but I couldn't find that article, so here's …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/02/21 08:29 AM
4

My comment was explicitly not about abortion, though, but rather about unilateral adoption rights. Once the kid is on this earth, it has a right to its parents. The mother should not be able to unilaterally abrogate the child’s right to its father and the fathers right to his child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/02/21 07:28 AM
1

If I got in trouble, and they said I was associated with NOW, it would be technically true, but misleading. It implies that what I did was condoned by that organization. Yeah, I definitely agree with you in this case. I think the trouble is a certain vagueness that comes in with a posthumous interpretation and the past tense, because then there is a plausible implication that a given claim is relevant across the deceased's lifetime. "X was not [and never was] associated with NOW." vs "X was not …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/21 09:55 PM
3

I agree with your larger point (especially about groups not internally policing) but want to quibble on the interpretation of "was not associated," which makes it seem like he had never been associated, which is false. I think it's (probably unintentionally) misleading and agree with the guy above you on that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/21 09:40 PM
12

I have unfinished opinions on abortion so I'm going to dodge the core of your question. What I think is more outraging is for mothers, in some jurisdictions, to have strong rights to unilaterally give up a child that may very much be wanted by the father.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/21 09:22 PM
7

At least some of us (i.e. me) recognize the othering patterns from experiences with homophobia. The sort of disgusted way homophobes describe perfectly normal human behavior as performed by gays is similar to how really far-gone sexist people describe perfectly normal human behavior as performed by men. The sort of "there's no way to win with these people" nihilism is very familiar to me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/21 11:31 AM
2

About a third of men globally are circumcised, most in childhood; wanna try again?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 06:42 PM
-3

Yeah sure whatever but I find sitting around and whining, even if you're right, annoying
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 05:22 PM
0

Is there a lack of "policing misandry" here? The topic of discussion is this sub. Let me worry about what I'm annoyed by and where I choose to focus my energies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 04:30 PM
2

I mean you're more than welcome to find a larger organization, but the point is that they're important and have a seat at the table. That they are willing to say in quite direct and plain language that male circumcision is degrading and detrimental to human rights is of immense importance. Particular when in 2012 the head of the Green Party partially justified her vote to specifically enshrine the legality of male circumcision on the grounds that it wasn't a "degrading" (dt. entwürdigend) practi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 04:24 PM
2

European orgs are generally small and divided by country. And Mitglied is a dues paying member - it’s not easily translated into the North American/Anglophone context
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 03:15 PM
1

They’re the largest feminist/women’s rights organization in Europe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 03:03 PM
2

Their theoretical foundations are irrelevant so long as their principles are sound - who cares what they have to tell themselves to be one of most useful allies in Germany. They wield a lot of power and that statement is important, particularly for the way male circumcision is legislated in Germany. You can quibble once you’ve got allies to choose from. I’d much rather have these people in my corner than neo-Nazis mumbling about being oppressed by “the ones who make world decisions wink wink”
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 02:55 PM
3

Yes, I volunteer my time & money and write against forced circumcision. But then again, I’m also not motivated by a hatred of feminism & also find that tendency of the sub annoying.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:39 PM
29

Terre des Femmes - explicitly opposed to non-consensual male circumcision and co-campaigns with male-focused organizations on the issue
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:29 PM
3

...exactly...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:24 PM
6

It used to be the case, that not screaming and yelling “no, stop” during a sexual assault could be used effectively as evidence that the sex was consensual. The whole concept is fuzzy because consent is indeed often given by innuendo. You’ve got three broad categories: Affirmative non-consent (“No! Stop!”) -fuzzy ground of neither- Affirmative consent (“yes”) The old problem was that the middle ground would often be interpreted in courts as affirmative, when it is per se neither. Innuendo happen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:22 PM
8

It’s a fringe attempt to change the standards of sexual assault such that anything less than “enthusiastic consent” is not evidence of consent. It’s deeply infantilising of women (“sometimes they’re too scared to say no so they say yes but mean no”) but is an overreaction to a legitimate problem. Lack of non-consent (not saying no) used to be considered consent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:10 PM
-2

(Some) feminists may only care about women’s consent, but normies (the vast majority of the pop.) are being sold a gender neutral principle.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 12:05 PM
2

No but also yes. Feminism has mainstreamed concerns and care for sexual consent and bodily autonomy (“my body, my choice”). The widespread acceptance and reverence for those values is invaluable to ending non consensual genital cutting of male children a/k/a circumcision, for example. Edit: reading comprehension, my dudes. That slogan is now in everyone’s minds because of feminism and most people intuitively agree with it. That’s good for men even if feminism isn’t intending to do good for men w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/21 11:47 AM
-2

By that standard pretty much everything is clearly bigger than any time in history.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/21 07:13 AM
5

Fruit fly doesn't require an asterisk ;)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/21 05:37 PM
14

She was appropriately apologetic or whatever and claimed she just forgot what 'cis' really meant (??) but I've treated it as a Freudian slip and cooled off relations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/21 05:36 PM
45

Personal anecdote: A sociology studying, performatively socially conscious person in my circle of contacts (a straight woman) was excited to join in an upcoming Pride parade because there would be no "cismen" there and how that's so freeing. I about flipped a shit because the idea that gay men aren't real men is about as homophobic as it gets.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/21 04:35 PM
2

I’ve never really claimed a majority of feminists are anything. My point was that it’s not really possible to be completely dismissive. Plus like my original comment was a defense of the emotional reaction many here seem to have to feminist bad behavior. People aren’t just criticizing (which is 100% valid) but proper enraged. That response makes less sense when you mostly deal with good feminists in your life as the post OP claimed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/01/21 07:46 AM
8

Agreed. I find it about as distasteful as I would if I were invited to a strip club for a stag night which is to say I’d decline the invite but I don’t think it should be illegal... I think the urge to ban sex work writ large is fundamentally conservative and the more progressive angle is to regulate the working conditions such that it’s always safe and consensual. That some liberals hold conservative positions here but pretend otherwise isn’t really that earth shattering to me. I’d also add tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/21 05:46 PM
1

I mean, some intactivists are basically pubescent Nazis but the cause still has value. It’s just pragmatism. The work needs to get done somehow. You can’t just throw in the towel because you find other people bothersome.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/21 08:46 AM
2

None of this is going to help your thesis b/c the take away is that there are good, well-meaning & principled people under pretty much any large umbrella. They're not a new wave, if that's what you're asking. One of my best friends did a lot of activist work in the sexual assault prevention sphere as well as taking part in feminist academia (whether she actually got a gender studies minor or not escapes my memory; it's been a while) while we were in college. And was a very visible feminist but s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 11:20 PM
1

Sexual assault advocacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 10:00 PM
1

You can't call me dishonest and then also say I'm right at the micro-scale, which is the scale I was pretty fucking explicitly dealing with. I should've just downvoted you and ignored.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 01:15 PM
7

As I explained in my top level comment, I suspect there is a significant emotional component to this response. You have had plenty of positive personal, emotionally fulfilling interactions with feminists. That's wonderful. For me, the ratio is probably 30/70. I have a very close friend who considers herself (and is) an egalitarian feminist and she's wonderful. In my personal experience, most people who identify outwardly as feminists (instead of just agreeing with some milquetoast points) have b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 01:10 PM
1

Let me put it this way (and you kind of just got here): the best criticism of my point of view is that abstract feminism is irrelevant, you need to look at what is achieved in the name of feminism to have a discussion. Which, to that end, is also my point of view. I just additionally think that it is a waste of time to get wrapped up in the metaphysics of the culpability of abstract concepts like "feminism" or "masculinity" or "socialism" because it doesn't just vary across time, but also betwee…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 01:01 PM
7

More or less, though I would degrade "culpable" to "contribute." My point with that change is that these organizations are magnifying some pre-existing inequalities (ones that don't impact them) while trying to minimize others (ones that do impact them). Doesn't even have to be in the realm of gender; it's a common intersectional complaint within feminism that mainstream feminism entrenches racism via its focus on punishment for transgressions at all levels
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:45 PM
2

Sure, I'm not contesting the details of VAWA or, really, any specific policies. 1) I'll walk it back and expand to funding and power. 1a) These orgs have a monopoly on all funding and influence that flows from the moral high ground of fighting domestic abuse. 1b) They have an incentive to preserve that status quo that flows, imo, not from evil feminist ideology but from a shared human preservation instinct combined with their moral conviction that they and only they are fighting for a better wor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:36 PM
15

With that as their end goal? No. Are they willfully ignorant & indifferent? Often, yes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:25 PM
3

It's a literal written document that physically exists in reality... that's kind of the opposite of abstract.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:21 PM
7

in the abstract were the critical words of that sentence I wasn't talking about MRM objections, but about the objections from the feminist org point of view
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:07 PM
18

No? If those organizations were moral, they'd just call for appropriately high funding (and they'd likely get it) but instead they suppress evidence of the incidence rate of bidirectional abuse and actively oppose/lie about the need for men's services. Capitalism doesn't really have a role there. It doesn't have to be zero-sum, but that's the game these orgs in general (but not all) play
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:04 PM
10

???? 1) More than one thing can be true at once. 2) That doesn't really contradict my point?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 12:00 PM
16

I don't think feminists are to blame for the lack of support for male domestic abuse victims Perhaps not in the abstract, but female-oriented domestic abuse prevention organizations, which are often explicitly feminist, absolutely fight against anything oriented towards men because that would mean sharing their funding.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 11:55 AM
10

Also new here, have a milder impression of the same. But I think this is an important point: I guess I have a lot of friends in my life that are feminists and they're chill as hell. Like if I say, "men sure are being systematically and institutionally hurt and that sucks", they go "yeah I agree." Not everyone has that in their lives. I've been more disappointed in my 'friends' than not but have enough "good feminists" in my life to be unable to be sooo acerbic. But my perception is that that's n…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/21 10:28 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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