TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

echonian Archive

View 0 posts and 87 comments by echonian 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)
2

Do you think anybody gets married thinking it's going to fail? Countless people get married to people they didn't know very well at all, after extremely short times of dating or even after just getting pregnant after something like a one night stand. Obviously nobody thinks their marriage is going to fail from the beginning, but plenty of people rush into marriage when they shouldn't.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/23 05:58 AM
1

If you only think a woman you are marrying has a 50% chance of screwing you over down the line, then you shouldn't be getting married in the first place.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/23 09:34 PM
2

The issue is that women can be fickle. Yeah, many can be. Many are not. If you are of the opinion that you might have to worry about a woman suddenly deciding to divorce you because of some inherent flaw with women - as though they are somehow incapable of being faithful on a genetic level and only will care about "incentives" - I don't really know what I can say. I already have made it clear that I think we should have less bias in our legal system against men when it comes to things like divor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/23 04:37 AM
-1

Your arguments would be true if men and women were treated equally in divorce court. But we aren't. My point is that it doesn't matter, because marriage as an institution isn't supposed to be about looking for "incentives" or who is "treated equally in divorce court." If you are getting married because you are worried about what might happen if you aren't married later on, then you probably shouldn't be getting married. Obviously it would be ideal if men and women were treated equally in divorce…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/23 08:03 AM
0

I understand that women tend to benefit from divorce more than men do. But the entire point of divorce is to form a life-long commitment. The fact that breaking the promise of marriage enacts a financial toll is precisely why it is a promise that can be taken more seriously than empty words. You can make any promise you want, but the fact that a divorce could lead to issues means that you are incentivized to only offer marriage to someone when you are truly sure you both are willing to make that…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/23 03:01 AM
11

Don't get married unless you are willing to make a life-long commitment to someone and you know one-another well enough before marriage that such a commitment is actually likely to work out. Obviously marriage has "risks," but that's why it shouldn't be entered into lightly. I hope to settle down and get married myself some day, but I have seen many marriages fail.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/23 03:08 AM
1

I think society should stop pushing the idea that we need role models and instead push for ideals instead. I agree with you in principle, but it's much easier for the average person to associate themselves with a person than with abstract ideologies gained from across a wide variety of sources. For someone with a mature world view, they shouldn't need to model themselves after anyone else. But for those who are cast adrift in an ocean of competing ideologies, good role models can be a guiding be…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/05/23 04:37 PM
33

This line of "thinking" is stupid because it is not intended to be correct. It is merely intended to limit discussion over an issue in order to bend the narrative to your own purposes, by arbitrarily declaring who is and isn't allowed to discuss an issue and therefore shaming people into compliance. Of course I think it is important to listen to the view points of those who are directly affected by societal issues the most. For example, a woman who has gone through the process of getting an abor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/04/23 02:24 PM
9

The issue with modern gender roles is that men are still expected to have all of the positive traits associated with masculinity, while still being shamed for all of the negative traits. Yet women are not held to those same standards for their own gender roles. When women behave in a negative manner, the blame is always put on men somehow, but when men do the same we are able to have that "agency" as mentioned in this post.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/04/23 06:48 AM
8

Advocacy starts at the individual level, by talking with others in order to attempt to convince them that your cause and/or ideology is just. Convincing individuals is the easiest way that most of us can make a difference, and if enough people did so we would be much better off as a society. I think that it is very difficult however for many people to bring up such subjects, out of fear of being labeled a misogynist or because they have lost hope. Of course, you can do more direct advocacy as we…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/23 05:25 AM
6

It's an uphill fight, but I have seen a lot of progress made. It is true that the level of progress made so far is mostly on the level of merely making people aware of the issue, but that itself I think is hugely important. Only when people are aware of the problems, can we actually demand that the problems be fixed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/23 06:03 AM
0

No, people haven't "redefined" intersectionality. Intersectionality was defined as such from the get go. That is still entirely irrelevant to the practical usage of the word.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/23 11:06 AM
2

Your entire argument as I see it amounts to "people have redefined the concept of intersectionality for personal benefit," which frankly is something I already pointed out in the comment you just replied to. Redefining intersectionality to be effectively everything you hate doesn't make the original concept bad in any way. Society in itself is inherently unjust, as a whole, down to its very own fabric. And the goal of intersectionality is to change all of it. Such as by posting that sort of thin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/23 07:35 AM
6

Intersectionality as a basic idea is perfectly reasonable. As with just about any other reasonable idea however, when people take that extreme far beyond its original context and misuse it, it will lead to harm. The point of intersectionality is to provide a better understanding of the conditions of society, so that we can better treat those conditions. The point is not to use the knowledge gained to create privileged classes and discriminate. Those who pretend to be "intersectional" when it com…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/23 11:54 PM
5

I agree with you in principle. But the difficult thing to define is always: what counts as being "Left Wing"? Being "Left Wing" is about as meaningless of a phrase nowadays as saying you are a "Liberal" or a "Conservative" or a "Libertarian." Because not only do countless people use those labels incorrectly for personal convenience (especially "Left Wing"), but opponents of those who use those labels often are totally incapable of understanding who they are attacking - labeling millions of peopl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/23 09:06 AM
11

It really depends on your definition of oppression and it's always a matter of degree. In theory a "patriarchy" could actually be to the benefit of women over men, depending on how it is set up. Men running things after all could be culturally, religiously, or otherwise conditioned in a way that has them put the well-being of women over their own. Though in practice patriarchal societies pretty much always lead to women being treated like second-class citizens, and then further brainwashes and c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/02/23 11:58 PM
4

When the issue is largely caused by people not "giving a shit" about certain groups in the first place, I think focusing on those groups makes sense. Obviously police reform and accountability more broadly is important as well, but we also need to change attitudes towards how men are treated in the first place.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/23 10:51 PM
9

That likely can account for some of it, but it would be very daft to behave as though the lives and bodily integrity of men is not treated as absolutely worthless in our culture compared to women. That is bound to have an effect when it comes to things like police brutality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/23 10:50 PM
5

I would argue that both perspectives are true. How can someone see the existence of porn and not see that a very large percentage of it is degrading? After all, porn itself turns those engaged in it into an abstract object used for sexual gratification by total strangers, and that seems degrading to me. Of course, "that seems degrading to me" requires me as a statement to admit this is just my subjective opinion. What does "degrading" even mean? Does it mean that men won't respect women, or some…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/23 11:50 PM
8

Of course not. Why would I actively tell people I don't know that I am Autistic, when people are largely prejudiced against people who are Autistic? Telling that to someone you just met is either going to end up with them thinking you're lying, or just being prejudicial towards you, or maybe they'll be "nice" but end up being patronizing instead. I don't expect people to know I'm Autistic when they don't know me well. I just expect that decent human beings will not read into my intentions withou…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/23 08:16 PM
7

Well yeah, because for most people who are Autistic it isn't immediately obvious. It's a mental difference, not a physical trait. I just take an issue with how people who are not Autistic frequently totally lack the ability to consider that not everybody thinks the same way that they do, because they aren't forced to do so merely to be able to have semi-normal social interactions. Then those same people start treating us like we're actively harmful, without ever caring if they themselves are har…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/23 07:40 PM
10

Autistic men may not be the ones harassing women, but we certainly are the ones who are frequently blamed for making women feel awkward or for unintentionally offending them in casual conversation or interactions. That's not the same as harassing, but it might feel the same to many women, and unfortunately a lot of people lack the empathy or understanding of Autistic people to realize the basic fact that just because we sound like a jerk - doesn't mean we are one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/23 06:02 PM
14

It really depends on how severe the autism is. I'm considered "high functioning Autistic," having been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome when much younger. I have learned social skills over the years, sure. When it comes to my ability to empathize with others I would argue I can do so better than most people when I am given the time, and I can come up with a logical and reasonable solution to social issues if I have time. Friends and family frequently come to me for advice on social situations,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/23 05:57 PM
8

I'll never understand how people cannot seem to grasp the difference between "who built a system" and "how the system functions in practice." Sure - if a certain group builds a system, you can guess that it might be built to their benefit. Except the systems in the USA in particular (and a lot of the rest of the world) weren't really built "by men," so much as they were built by "the elite ruling class" who just happened to historically be men. They were built to benefit that class, and any "adv…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/23 06:43 AM
3

I understand what it is used for. I just think that if I were a "Radical Feminist" or "Social Justice Warrior" or whatever else reading some guy talking about an issue relevant to men and then mocking my use of "the Patriarchy," it would make me hypothetically more likely to tune out the rest of what they say. It isn't "badly placed" so much as "not ideally placed," by my own subjective standards. I feel that most people reading such a thing who aren't already Left Wing Male Advocates (who alrea…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/23 06:48 PM
18

It's true that women tend to get more funding for their health issues, and that's the sad reality of living in a society which sees men as expendable and sympathizes with women preferentially over men in all areas. Although I do think that the NIH Suicide Research Budget statistics at least aren't as bad as they look. They "are" bad in that too much is put into helping "women only," but at least the vast majority of funding still is going towards both sexes equally. Until people recognize that m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/23 01:02 PM
5

How can someone be "against feminism" using the commonly held definitions of feminism? It just means pushing for equality for women at the end of the day. Yet the problem is that many people who do not just want "equality for women" hide behind the label of "feminism" in order to justify their acts of misandry and outright discrimination against men. The label itself is considered so widely sacred in society that it becomes useful as a shield, as people have become socially conditioned to react …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/01/23 07:44 AM
6

Yeah, the "pendulum" definitely has swung the other way in recent decades in the "West." I'm happy of course for women no longer basically being treated like second-class citizens at the whims of what men want constantly. I'm glad they can succeed at just about anything they put their mind to, rather than being discriminated against actively or even legally treated like garbage. There was a time not that many decades ago for example where things like marital rape against spouses wasn't even seen…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/22 03:28 PM
22

The only thing I can think of that is good about being a man is that people are less likely to see me as a victim by default, and that I can be proud of my physical traits (like being stronger than the vast majority of women without even being that strong for a man). Of course, being less likely to be seen as a victim is also precisely the problem a lot of the time as a man, but I would also hate to be a woman if it meant people treating me like a child who needs constant protection at all times…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/12/22 05:05 AM
3

I think that the divide has always existed, to some extent, but it has gotten worse in the last decade or so in particular. Maybe the last 15 years. In the past the "Left" largely was more united on social issues and economic issues, but they were always held in check by a more "moderate" group which wasn't really all that "Left" but did often end up supporting their social issues once they got enough traction. The people who were pushing for social reforms - such as during the civil rights move…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/11/22 07:07 PM
12

There are two kinds of "the left." The first kind is authoritarian. They support left-wing social issues and sometimes economic ones, but give deference to the social issues above all. To them - winning the culture war and feeling self-righteousness are more important than anything else, including the material conditions of people, but they'll maybe get around to those material conditions when it's convenient for them. The second kind believes that material circumstances are more important than …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/11/22 10:00 PM
18

If the label is stupid, we can reject it. If the label is a basic descriptor though that has no reasonable substitute, then we should 100% use it properly and not allow others to act like it's some kind of slur. The idea that the word "male" is a bad word is laughable from any reasonable perspective. Male after all is a term applied to biological sex in a scientific sense by definition - it is based on your genitals and genetics, and has nothing to do with gender identity (which you could argue …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/11/22 05:33 PM
34

The same social standards that lead to women being "objectified", partially based on biological norms but also largely dependent on cultural happenstance, also lead to women being treated as more vulnerable and men as expendable. That's just how it works, and has worked for thousands of years. In the past I think this mainly meant that women were at a disadvantage socially for the most part, but they "always" have had benefits (averaged world-wide at least) compared to their detriments. For exam…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/22 05:25 PM
2

I think it depends largely on the word whether or not it's worth fighting over. For something like Racism - I'll argue endlessly against people who try to redefine it to only include "Institutional Racism" (so it conveniently isn't racist to be discriminatory against people of certain races who you happen to think are part of the "institution"). But for Feminism? Well, I don't feel like it's a phrase which is needed as a description for helping people overall. It's useful only if I'm talking abo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/22 08:56 PM
2

NONE of the more or less neutral sources I could find support the idea that "Feminism" is a gender-neutral term that simply means you support equality of the sexes, instead ALL of them acknowledges that feminism focuses primarily on the rights of women. Yeah, that's not exclusive with the point I was making though. My point wasn't that Feminism advocates for both genders. My point was that Feminism advocates for women - which leads to equality in cases where women are discriminated against, and …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/22 08:54 PM
3

What if a woman isn't permitted to do one thing, while a man is not permitted to do something else Well obviously then Feminism won't find equality. But that's not the context where Feminism has been useful historically. It was useful when women didn't have the right to vote. It was useful when women didn't have the right to work without their husband's permission. It was useful when companies could discriminate against women in hiring and otherwise. It was useful when women could be raped by th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/22 12:25 AM
0

Feminism has never been about equality for men. It has been about equality, but it's obviously from the assumption that women are worse off than men on any given issue - so equality means bringing standards for women up to those of men. Obviously this isn't helpful for equality in situations when men are worse off. Feminism also requires a belief in Patriarchy Theory, the concept that men conspire to subjugate women. Got a source for that? Seems nonsensical as far as I can tell. Feminism require…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/22 08:10 PM
17

Being Feminist might technically mean you support equality of the sexes, sure. But that's only when looking at the definition of the word, and this has little to do with the actions of people who claim to be Feminists on a larger scale. This ignores the actual context within which Feminism exists in the modern day - used very often as a means to push for supporting female issues over that of males even in cases where equality might require the opposite to be done. I could argue then that many "F…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/22 06:25 PM
5

CEOs being competent is what companies themselves want. They might push for a woman over a man in a vacuum if both are equally competent - because they know that will give them a PR bonus - but that's not going to override their greed for having someone in place who can make them as much money as possible.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/22 11:33 AM
3

That means that any time a woman says yes but really means no, she has sexually assaulted him (in theory anyway). I don't agree with your reasoning. Mainly because I do not think that you can consider sex under "false pretenses" as "sexual assault." Because "false pretenses" are incredibly subjective and impossible to get around without literal mind-reading in many situations, and I think that for something to count as sexual assault it needs to actually mean you weren't okay with the sex prior …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/10/22 12:56 AM
12

I, for one, will be glad for whoever can save democracy. Women - hurry up and save it! Hold leaders accountable for corruption. Advocate for things like voting holidays. Campaign against people losing their right to vote over victimless crimes that just happen to be labeled as "felonies" which have nothing to do with voting rights. Volunteer and get the word out on good candidates. I'm half-joking of course. I know that it's a silly headline, and women aren't going to "save democracy" any more t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/22 10:23 PM
1

My point is that it's hard to gain public support without putting some kind of identity politics behind the cause, in practical terms. I wish that wasn't the case. I wish that people were more willing to support causes that were more generic. But the number of people in society that care when you say something like "help the homeless" - really care - is very small in reality compared to the number of people who would care if you say "help homeless women." People care more if you say "help disenf…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/22 10:16 PM
1

You can say "homelessness affects men more, let's focus on that", without making men-only programs and ventures. In theory yeah. But when regarding Feminism in particular, the only way they gained so much support in the first place was by framing issues to largely be affecting women - as though they were the uniquely oppressed sex within our society. This was incorrect even in the past (though women were worse off then in many ways), but if your goal is to gain public sympathy then the last thin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/22 08:43 PM
1

The problem here is that we as men can not gain any form of traction or acceleration in the same way that feminists have because feminists are literally gatekeeping the resources needed for us to do so. That is indeed a problem, but isn't that why we need to keep advocating and bringing people to our side for these issues? We have to fight against an entrenched power structure to get stuff done, but that's no different than has been the case for any group of people that has had to get things don…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/22 08:38 PM
0

They could have easily campaigned for the ban of all genital mutilation, no gendering. Sure, but that wouldn't be pushing for women's issues, so they weren't able to push for it as effectively as a result. It's the sad reality of people that they tend to be very bad at pushing for reforms that aren't narrowly targeted. Help the poor? Too broad. Help disenfranchised African Americans out of poverty? Full support. Stop genital mutilation? Too broad, and people treat circumcision like it's just nor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/22 03:35 AM
-1

Feminists did all the research to get FGM banned, and then left boys out of it. The fact that feminists largely champion women's rights rather than men's rights, when they were dedicated largely to improving conditions for women that - for most of human history - have been discriminated widely against - seems obvious to me. That's something that is changing to an extent and needs to change more quickly, but I don't think it's particularly fair to act like current discriminatory practices against…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/22 09:45 PM
-1

The misandry is how it is still allowed to be done to boys How so? It seems like clear religious and cultural discrimination targeted at boys due to an original desire to reduce their likelihood to have sex - stemming from the same ideals that stop girls and women from doing the same. while girls are federally protected in the states So you consider something to be misandry if it stems from discrimination that isn't targeted towards men specifically, but just happens to affect men more due to ot…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/22 09:22 PM
-1

I'm not sure how you can say in the same breath how it's "systemic misandry" while simultaneously pointing out how it was popularized alongside recommendations that affect both men and women, but you do you. Religious induced stupidity which seeks to reduce the sexual activity of men and women isn't misandry. Misandry would be modern attempts to downplay circumcision by some, if they were also against female genital mutilation. Most people don't think about it that much and there definitely isn'…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/22 08:51 PM
0

That's not really misandry so much as ignorance on behalf of both men and women, to be honest. It's a systemic issue, but I think it needs to be considered in the right context. There is definitely misandry in society though, on a systemic level. It can be clearly seen in aspects such as our educational system - which favors women and girls, often to the point of giving them exclusive support groups or scholarships and such that are greatly restricted for men. It can be seen in family law and do…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/22 01:36 AM
5

A 12-year-old making a false accusation is almost certainly because they wanted to punish the person. Not because they "misinterpreted" something like that. They are definitely capable of malice by that age, and even if such false accusations are rare it's always sad to see people punished merely on the word of a 12-year-old.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/09/22 10:46 AM
14

I get the idea that citizens should take some responsibility for the actions of their collective government, but the more authoritarian a government is - the less say any individual person actually has in what is going on. Short of literally risking their lives and dying in some kind of revolutionary battle, and while some might be willing to do so, I think expecting that of every single person in society is incredibly naive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/22 07:49 PM
5

I mean, it's true that a minority group can be a threat to security. It shouldn't be true, and it's unfortunate that such ideas have led to discriminatory actions in the past. But the fact remains that people who have a particular heritage are more likely to sympathize with nations and groups where that heritage comes from - making them more likely to be a threat to security in cases of war or such. This kind of profiling is discriminatory, but it also can work. It becomes so unfortunate when it…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/22 07:47 PM
3

No. It's true that boys often struggle in school compared to girls in modern times especially, but this isn't due to some inherent biological difference as far as I have been able to find. Rather, it's due to parental and societal attitudes which put less emphasis on teaching and guiding boys from a young age. In modern times (at least here in America), parents and schools are under a lot of pressure to put extra effort into teaching girls. While the intentions are good, this has led to boys bei…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/09/22 09:31 PM
14

The term itself is fine. It effectively aims to bring greater nuance into social issues in particular, which I think is a good thing - nuance is good! Understanding that issues can be relevant in a wider context than you might initially define can be useful to solving those issues in a better way. The problem is with people misusing such a phrase to include irrelevant details into an issue, polluting it and making discussion or actual progression very difficult.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/02/22 09:31 PM
8

So, effectively, even robbers often feel enough guilt that they are unwilling to be violent against women to rob them that often - but of course they lack that shame regarding men. I mean, obviously women are less likely to be victims if men are seen as disposable even to literal criminals. With that being said, both men and women can be victims of just about any danger at night, and I personally think that said fear should be taken seriously. Any woman who claims it's "not equality" to not be p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/22 06:36 PM
155

That's the crux of the issue, really. Society doesn't want men to actually behave how we want to behave. They want us to effectively fulfill traditional gender roles where they are difficult - such as having men do dangerous jobs, be protectors to others, and be generally forgotten when convenient. While simultaneously asking that we do not fulfill gender roles in cases where it might benefit us - such as men traditionally having more authority in society or within the household in general. Of c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/01/22 06:24 PM
10

Maybe it started that way. It also certainly is an odd tradition. But I don't see the problem with it really. If it is expected - that is sexist. If you prefer to kneel to present a ring in a "traditional" way though, that's your choice and I don't think calling it "sexist" is fair at all. Pretty much nobody who is in this situation ever thinks of the sexist aspects of it, and without it leading to sexist discrimination - how can the act itself be sexist?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/21 05:47 AM
47

The fact that somebody can be guilty of rape "beyond a reasonable doubt" when the person wasn't even able to properly identify them consistently, and there was no good direct evidence linking them to the crime - baffles me. These kinds of miscarriages of justice are totally unacceptable, but sadly they will continue for as long as the justice system is not held accountable to standards of evidence.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/11/21 09:32 PM
31

I even understand women being cautious with men they don't know. But there's a difference between reasonable caution, and immediately assuming that every male you see could rape you at any moment. I don't think that most women are going much further than simply being "cautious with men they don't know." But a lot of the problem boils down to a lack of social skills for the men and women involved in such situations. I say this as someone with Asperger's syndrome as well - it isn't my strong point…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/21 04:22 AM
8

Exactly. While this doesn't mean you need to dump more on someone than is reasonable - if you care about someone (whether as just a friend, or as something more), you should be willing to spare them at least a bit of empathy to the problems they go through. Someone who isn't willing to put in that bare minimum of effort of listening to your problems, isn't probably a good person, unless they're someone like a random stranger on the street. I have honestly felt a bit annoyed at some of my friends…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/21 12:13 AM
2

This is the cultural outcome of thousands of years of stricter gender roles being utilized throughout human history. Even if - in modern warfare - women are equally as capable as men in military service (even if that means you need to just place them mostly in support roles, rather than direct combat roles), good luck convincing people who have been conditioned over thousands of years and through our evolution itself to prioritize women over men when in danger. Women are seen as in need of prote…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/21 10:57 PM
8

So why do people still think male circumcision is healthy? or not harmful? Primarily due to cultural reasons, but also due to religion for many. As far as it being "not harmful" is concerned, for most people who have been circumcised - it isn't usually that harmful. Being circumcised doesn't meant that somebody can't live a good life, or that they somehow aren't going to be able to enjoy sex necessarily specifically. Plus it is obvious that somebody who has never known how it is to live without …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/10/21 10:12 PM
9

This also has a flaw in that you would need some way to guarantee a man is even "aware" of a pregnancy. While rare, there are cases of women getting pregnant from things like one night stands or who break up with their boyfriend and then surprise the guy after the child is basically born by suddenly demanding child support. I would say that if a woman discovers she is pregnant, and she wants the man to be a part of the child's life - she should have a legal obligation to inform the father within…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/21 10:08 PM
5

It is terrible when put into context, but fortunately - most people don't really put so much thought into it. Fortunate in the sense that I doubt women (or men) who agree with this ideal think of it as cruel, so a simple change in perspective could do wonders. As a general rule in romance - if a man doing the same would be seen as shallow and cruel, a woman doing it should be seen in the same way. Of course I do not expect complete gender equality on how relationships play out in practice - biol…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/08/21 02:11 AM
17

Yeah, it is somewhat of a common trope. That ia more or less what I despise, however. People who are shallow and selfish shouldn't be idolized. To me - "romance" of this nature is even less healthy than the nonsensical relationship shown in something like "50 Shades of Grey." It's similar in terms of wish-fulfillment though, so continues to be peddled to the masses even if it would end up being a bad idea in reality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/08/21 02:05 AM
85

Romance in the media leads to a lot of unhealthy perceptions, sadly. One of my most hated movies ever due to this sort of thing is "Sleepless in Seattle." In it, a woman who is engaged - to a good man who loves her and supports her - falls in love with someone else literally by hearing his sob story over a radio station. She then decides to leave her committed relationship for "true love." Shallow, self-serving, impulsive behavior like that should not be encouraged as "romance." Yet fiction is f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/08/21 08:03 PM
1

If men were oppressing women, they’d give themselves the less challenge role and make the women do the more challenge role. No, they wouldn't. They would give themselves the role that lets them survive as a group, and then treat women like objects in every other way outside of that mere convenience of survival. Obviously though this doesn't mean that every man would do that, and I'm stating this solely so people do not again misunderstand my point. What you're calling "gender roles" are the exac…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/07/21 09:09 PM
2

No, women wouldn't have been the ones in the mines even if they were being oppressed. Because it was more convenient for many men to have them stay at home, doing all household chores and taking care of children. Especially when throughout history most families have had to rely on manual labor to get enough food to survive, it would have made no sense for men to send women to the mines. Men had to deal with harsh circumstances as well. But the harsh circustances most men have had to deal with hi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/07/21 08:23 PM
10

I think it's wrong to judge all men or all women based on the isolated actions of individuals. People are more accepting of people being, for lack of a better word, bigoted against men than against women. As least in much of the "developed" world, or places like here in the USA. The reason for this is quite simple, and is explained easily by the way modern feminism has developed. Feminism in the modern day has made any public comments about women in general unacceptable if they are in any way ba…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/07/21 10:47 AM
2

Thank you for clarifying that. I admit I may have gotten a bit heated over the topic, but I do think that speaking and writing clearly are important factors to getting across a proper message. 20+ years of typing messages online for others has led to me occasionally taking shortcuts which lead to unfortunate misunderstandings, so I will see about correcting that somewhat.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/21 04:43 AM
-2

It isn't an unfair generalization when the nuance is so clearly implied by my related statements. I did not say "men are oppressors," I said "men have oppressed." In the English language, those two statements are very different in their implications. The former implies men in general are oppressors, the latter implies (by "have") that certain men have been oppressive. Though I admit this nuance is perhaps not as universally understood as I had thought. I will see about being more precise with my…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/21 03:22 AM
-1

I just find it to be unfortunate when my statements are voted down or otherwise attacked due to misinterpretations of the definitions of words. People should be able to understand from my context what was meant, and not making that effort is unfortunate. As far as historical interpretations of oppression against women are concerned, these have very often been systemic. Which is to say - implemented in the laws, culture, customs, and other societal systems of the time which most people would foll…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/21 03:08 AM
-1

I wouldn't blame men in general. Even in extremely patriarchal societies, no doubt some men were of better moral character. I agree with you on this. But others do seem to deny that oppression occured - that is my issue. Obviously that fact should not lead to men being treated as monsters today or anything like that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/21 01:03 AM
-2

Well, women have been oppressed both by society at large and by individuals. When the laws and culture of a society say a man can beat or rape his wife - it seems pointless to me to argue over semantics. The historical reality is there no matter what words we use for it. That history is important to note. Because we should never allow our civilization to again allow any group to be treated so poorly. Whether men, women, or whoever else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/21 01:02 AM
-11

Women were typically oppressed by individual men just as much as by culture or government, historically. Men had the power to make women do what they wanted them to, and regardless of if these imposed roles were a "necessary evil," they led to women being treated like second class citizens for thousands of years. I would argue that it went much further than a "necessary evil." Women having to put up with being raped by their arranged husband for the "good of society" is not the sort of thing I t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/21 06:14 PM
21

Because homeless men much more often choose this lifestyle. To a point this is true, but I would be very surprised to find that a majority of homeless men truly "choose" that lifestyle. More than women, sure, but practically nobody truly wants to live on the street. They reject government services, There are far less government services available to men than there are to women, at least here in the USA, regarding homelessness. So even if men do reject them, if every homeless man decided to utili…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/21 03:54 AM
32

There are interesting answers in the comments, though I do feel quite a few of the most highly upvoted ones are a bit blind to the specific issues in men in favor of sympathetic calls for women and children (though I do understand the need for that to a point). My own understanding is that women are more likely to be victimized if homeless, are more likely to seek help than men due to largely cultural reasons, and have far more resources available to them in terms of help if they do want help ge…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/21 03:50 AM
3

I disagree in principle. It is true that masculinity is relatively subjective, but it also has many consistent aspects to it that I think are at least partially based in biology - not just culture. Things like "men like to take more risks" are masculine, yet I would argue that "men are more likely to be aggressive" is also partially biological. Yet anyone who claimed that tendency towards aggression justifies men acting irresponsibly (boys will be boys and such) is guilty of "toxic masculinity" …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/07/21 06:13 AM
4

To fight for mens rights. Specifically, to fight for fair representation and treatment of men in areas which are culturally or legally lopsided. This may involve breaking down the idea that men have to be strong and stoic protectors, and instead should be treated as individuals with their own choices in that. This may involve fixing laws which benefit women over men unnecessarily. The final "goal" is for men to not be at any societal disadvantage over women in any area where we are. I view it ju…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/06/21 06:06 AM
11

It may be significantly due to biology, but when that difference is exaggerated by social and cultural norms, you end up with a lot of annoying situations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/21 06:23 PM
19

Fragile masculinity is used as an insult for men who take offense, blaming their "maculinity" for it. It isn't literally saying someone isn't masculine enough, though I could see why you would assume that at a glance. Though it is a sexist insult in any case, so saying "toxic femininity" also is a no-go I think. Blaming someone for getting offended on their inherent masculinity/femininity is reductionist nonsense that pretty much always only ever can be used to justify being a jerk.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/21 11:16 AM
5

Yeah, I did say that was the case, so I'm unsure as to how that addresses the rest of what I said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/06/21 06:36 AM
11

I may make an exception for those with disabilities, the elderly or children. That honestly seems at least as weird to me as making an exception for women specifically. If you're looking at it from the perspective of protecting whoever is vulnerable, women are very often more vulnerable than men - though admittedly that would apply more in a brawl than in an active shooting situation (since bullets do not discriminate). If you're looking at it from the perspective of what is "best for society," …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/06/21 05:10 AM
0

You literally seem to not have read the points where I said it has to be considered on a case by case basis, and that we should try to remove gender from the equation, but okay. You're in agreement with me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/06/21 01:51 AM
-4

I am conflicted somewhat on this issue. In theory, sure, men should be considered just as accountable or not accountable while drunk as women should be. That would only be fair, and reasonable. But men also are physically stronger and more capable of engaging in sex against the will of a woman, than the reverse. Which means that - if a woman gets too pushy with a man while she is drunk and he doesn't want to have sex with her, it's far less likely he'll be harmed in any way, as opposed to the op…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/06/21 10:12 PM
6

Yeah, things like that are what terrify me about getting back into dating as a guy with autism myself. I can't deal with that kind of testing - to me it's just dishonest bullshit. Why are so many people so vain that they think it's acceptable to treat another human being like that? If you can't even be honest about whether or not you want to split a bill, you certainly aren't likely to be honest about anything more important, and that is what scares me. Because at my core, it causes me discomfor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/06/21 06:10 AM
1

Another reason for it could be that many men go into trade jobs or such which do not always require a degree, honestly. That seems to match things fairly well. If men are more likely to become electricians, construction workers, plumbers - etc - then that means proportionally fewer men will attend college. Though I do think some systemic discrimination exists against men with women-only scholarships, student organizations and support groups, etc - I do not think this accounts for the entirety of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/21 07:42 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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