TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

hymenopteron Archive

View 0 posts and 65 comments by hymenopteron 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

lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:57 PM
1

tbh you do, you basically made up a load of stuff and couldn't back it up. You do you though pal edit: I enjoyed "don't push me", made me chuckle
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:54 PM
0

Is that the only thing you got from what I was saying? Ok lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:47 PM
-1

> Not when they're abused and weaponized like they have been against men like me. So it's just the word not the concept? ok fair enough. > You support a movement and a mindset that DOESN'T see women as human like I do. What movement? Where are you getting this from? > blames the male gender for it. no I don't. > Don't push me. Provide a quote then...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:41 PM
1

Ok I think I get where you're coming from. She talks about patriarchal masculinity as being fundamentally dominating, and she contrasts it with her 'non-patriarchal masculinity' which is just masculinity that doesn't seek to coerce/dominate. She doesn't cover female domination at all even though she does talk extensively about the role women play in indoctrinating young boys by conditioning them to dominate. I guess you're right, but more by her omission to discuss female domination within the p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:36 PM
-2

I'm sorry for being harsh to you in my earlier replies elsewhere. I almost entirely agree with what you have just said tbh. I think the difference comes mostly from our definitions and choice of words. Words like Patriarchy carry a lot of baggage and I get that. None the less, they are useful words to have in our vocabulary to discuss these problems. I am not sure whether it is the word itself or the idea I described which I am defining as 'Patriarchy' which you are disagreeing with. I would ima…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 10:14 PM
2

Thanks for the write up and the recommendation. I can see you've sat with it for a while so I appreciate your point of view. I think what I would first like to say is that something that I notice when reading feminist literature or talking to women, is that they often really struggle to put themselves into a male mind space. Feminists in particular have this issue because they spend so much time describing and justifying theories about their own oppression that they don't ask why things are the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 09:46 PM
1

I'm interested in what youre saying but I genuinely don't understand. As far as I can tell, the way she sees patriarchy is as a culture of domination/subordination. Her alternative is equal partnership and respect. Her idea of love requires freedom of choice, so its expressly against coercion. Am I reading this wrong?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 07:26 PM
-1

I believe that you need to define it thus in order to justify being offended. It's more useful if you see it like I do. What do you actually believe? You have spent a lot of time writing in caps but I still don't really know where you're coming from. What aspect of it do you disagree or agree with? How do you think this actually works? I'm happy to have a chat with an open mind if you're up for it?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 05:04 PM
1

Why would it be universal and inevitable?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 04:57 PM
1

Which is what?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 04:55 PM
3

Ah, apologies
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 12:58 PM
-2

Case in point
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 12:58 PM
0

What was your argument again? You're just pissing in the wind mate, and you don't even see it's blowing your way..
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 01:54 AM
1

Maybe spend more time telling THEM Trust me I do... there's far too many people who believe that patriarchy means a conspiracy of men to dominate the world and this is completely wrong. It doesn't align with what the original definition was (but you can research that yourself). Or attempting to dump such garbage on to my head. Don't be offended mate, I'm too drunk rn, luv u ♡⁠ (⁠Ӧ⁠ｖ⁠Ӧ⁠｡⁠)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 01:51 AM
0

I am so grateful to not be American reading things like this. I sincerely hope it never effects you or those you love pal. Much love from across the paddling pool <3
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 01:46 AM
-6

Yes this is correct, too many people here are offended by the term before they understand what it means
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 01:44 AM
10

Lysenko is a soviet joke, all his theories were famously wrong. He's a goddamn moron. He turned thriving agriculture into famine. I didn't realise he did gender studies too
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/26 01:42 AM
9

I haven't heard the activism Vs social justice distinction before, you've given me something to think about, cheers!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 04:39 PM
0

It depends on what the origin of Patriarchy is and how it's propogated. If you hold the view that men are all inherently evil and are biologically programmed to dominate, then Patriarchy itself isn't misandrist, it's just an accurate reflection of evil people inevitably doing bad things. But this view is gender essentialist and insane. To hold this view would make you a misandrist and would cause a lot of issues for the theory that gender is socially constructed. Many 'feminists' might believe t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 04:35 PM
150

We treat women's issues as if they're systemic in nature, while we treat men like they're individuals. I think this is bang on. Feminism was meant to be about breaking down gender barriers but it falls into the trap of traditional gender expectations. They see women as passive and therefore with no agency. All their problems are external and happen to them. They have no responsibility and no ownership of their own, they are helpless victims. This is deeply misogynistic but feminists tend to rein…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 03:28 PM
1

I appreciate your well thought response. I absolutely agree about the use of "domination", she does refer to it a lot. My reading was of this that she was reaching for a definition of patriachal masculinity and that domination was the core aspect of it. This aligns with her concept of "imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy" - it's all about the subjugation of others instead of partnership and companionship. I think she did this to differentiate patriarchal and non-patriarchal mascu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 03:10 PM
1

I agree that this is how patriarchy is perceived generally but hooks argues against this exact line throughout the book, it's practically her thesis. "Despite the contemporary visionary feminist thinking that makes clear that a patriarchal thinker need not be a male, most folks continue to see men as the problem of patriarchy. This is simply not the case. Women can be as wedded to patriarchal thinking and action as men." "It was difficult for women committed to feminist change to face the realit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 01:40 PM
1

It doesn't blame men, both genders are to blame and both genders benefit. I said that explicitly. Tbh I think you're just offended by the word and not the idea it represents, if there was an alternative word for describing it then I would use that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 09:28 AM
1

It's not a 'one way or the other' thing. Patriarchy isn't a big conspiracy where men subjugate women, that's nuts. It's a system that crushes men into their social roles in the exact way OP mentioned. Little kids don't have gender roles as toddlers, slowly they get indoctrinated by society through trauma. It's deeply misandristic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 09:25 AM
4

You have a different understanding of the word to how I'm using it and how Bell Hooks is using it. You also clearly haven't read her book so I don't know on what basis you are calling her a witch or whatever lol. I don't know your personal circumstance and I'm sorry that you've been hurt. What you're doing is practicing willfull ignorance though. I would strongly recommend you read her work because I genuinely think you'd get a lot out of it. Edit: The way in which I'm using patriarchy is a syst…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 09:01 AM
-10

I mean, it sounds like you just have a different name for it but it's also still called patriarchy. caused all those females to hurt me when I was a child who expressed and thought differently Yeah she talks about this a lot actually, and very sympathetically to men. Have you actually read it? Edit: Patriarchy is just the name of the system that forces gender roles on men and women. Bell hooks goes on at length about how this hurts men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/07/26 12:09 AM
6

Thankyou for the recommendation my friend! Added to the list
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 06:41 PM
2

I had a quick search and child soldier demographics do vary considerably between cultures with more leftwing groups (eg Maoists, FARC, etc) having a much more even ratio, even if still biased towards boys. There's an interesting tension between biology and culture here, and both probably are significant. I would just note caution about biological deterministic reasons such as: men being seen as more expendable due to relative reproductive differences. You don't want to end up arguing that its in…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 06:40 PM
8

I just finished reading Bell Hooks - "The will to change". There's a lot of stuff in there about how boys are raised differently to girls. Her framing is that basically the patriarchal culture and expectations traumatise young boys whilst denying them the ability to express any emotion other than anger. Boys are loved conditionally. Girls are permitted (even expected) to cry and express need, while being taught subordination. Boys learn that emotional expression forfeits love and invites punishm…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 06:29 PM
0

This is a nice explanation, but maybe there might be different factors and different subcategories that make it more complex? Is this bias towards male children a cultural or biological thing (nature/nurture)? Does it vary between cultures and why? Can it be changed? How does this macro scale factor manifest in individual instances where children are recruited as soldiers. I'm basically just saying that it's clear it's a serious problem, but the explanation and the possible solution deserve more…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 04:20 PM
1

Hang on, are you arguing that women are worth more to society than men due to inevitable biological realities?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 01:20 PM
3

Male expendability is an elegant explanation but it's very difficult to prove I think. It'll be wrapped up along with other biological deterministic factors if it doesn't vary between cultures as you say. It also won't explain differences between cultures which would imply other complex causes. the macro importance of women You have to also be careful here. Theres a difference between seeing women as being more generally valuable than men, versus seeing men as more specifically valuable in terms…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 12:40 AM
4

Thankyou for the write up! I think you put it really well. What I find interesting about your conclusion is that by distinguishing existential survival (first case) from the other cases, you can see the point at which socially constructed gender roles kick in. In an exististential fight for survival there are no gender roles. I didn't know about the family units in the Warsaw ghetto but it makes complete sense (in a heartbreaking way) that gender doesn't matter in a 100% fully mobilised populati…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 12:22 AM
3

This works at a macro scale but at a micro scale you have to be able to explain it on a granular individual basis. There are mechanisms by which mostly boys find themselves becoming child soldiers. The macro scale point of male expendability doesn't address why a particular person actually becomes a child soldier. You may be right though that macro scale effects play a role in increasing the likelihood for boys becoming child soldiers but you would expect this to vary across cultures with differ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/26 12:05 AM
22

The 12.3% statistic is mind blowing. I'm interested in the possible reasons for this, is it biology or is it social role? Male and Female children don't really have significant physical differences up to puberty, so this difference isn't explainable due to physical capability. This factor is notably different than for adults. To play devil's advocate, males tend to be more aggressive, even as children, and boys often enjoy military themed toys and games. There's a nature/nurture question here (t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/07/26 05:30 PM
10

Not commenting on the phenomena in general but the person in the vid is a moron. These sorts of commentators make sweeping generalisations without any statistical backing. Their discourse is speaking their opinion as if it's a prescriptive objective truth.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/26 09:46 AM
1

It isn't about women and men being positive or toxic, it's about Masculinity and Femininity.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/26 08:55 PM
-1

mythological all seeing eye of patriarchy that makes the homeless men The Patriarchy is probably part of the reason he's homeless in the first place. Its not just women who are oppressed by it. The Patriarchy is just one name for the system in society that forces gender roles on people and keeps them there. I reckon you believe in it too you just call it something else. Do they still think women are still oppressed? Women are oppressed. Look at domestic abuse and SA/rape statistics, the gender p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/26 08:53 PM
1

I have a lot of female friends who are feminists but who are sympathetic to mens issues. I don't know if you accept anecdotal evidence? Idk, I think tbh some of the 'anti-feminism' stuff puts people off and could seriously damage credibility. I definitely prefer a big tent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/26 02:54 PM
9

Yeah, I mean I've had the same. I completely understand where you are coming from. Im just stubborn I guess, I don't want to vacate using the term 'feminist' and I also read their books to understand it better. If I was born female I know I would have been massively into it, its probably why I'm into this as a man. I want to find common ground, its why I dislike people like the bloke in your screenshots.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/26 02:39 PM
5

Thanks for the link I'll look through your references. My take is basically that their diagnosis of the problem is correct (that society forces gender roles on people that systematically opress them), but I think they often make the mistake that it must be some sort of male conspiracy and men are to blame. It's this specific animosity towards men that I don't like. It's Illogical and often hateful and I really don't want to mirror it from our side. I'd rather leave the door open, even if that's …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/26 02:23 PM
10

Thanks for sharing this, I don't think you wasted your time posting. Ignore this bellend, he said nothing constructive or intelligent. He's a troll with bad intentions, it's not worth rising to. I have to say though that being a feminist in my mind isn't inconsistent with being a male advocate. The problem here is that he's a dickhead rather than that hes a feminist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/26 01:42 PM
1

I agree we should condemn gendered expectations that are involuntarily forced on people. There are a lot of people who want to be (or just simply are) masculine or feminine though. It goes beyond gendered expectations. Masculinity and Femininity are very different to eachother and can't be treated in the same way. They both have positive and negative aspects and can be adaptive or maladaptive depending on context. We cannot treat them as the same thing. I also think it's useful to have specific …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/26 11:53 AM
1

This is true, There is still a social construct called masculinity, which is different to femininity, which has many negative consequences for people that inhabit it as an ideal (or are expected to inhabit it). It's good to have a word for that. There should also be an equivalent for femininity. Lumping masculinity and femininity together makes no sense because they are very different things.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/26 11:21 PM
1

I guess gendered expectations is different to masculinity and femininity in that case. I'm talking about the latter. If you're saying that women can't be masculine and men cannot be feminine then that is gender essentialism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/26 06:39 PM
1

Masculinity and femininity have different issues, I don't think the term you're using is specific enough. It would be better to have a term that focuses on masculinity or femininity individually, because the negative aspects of each are completely different. It also is ignoring the fact that masculinity and femininity aren't gender exclusive. Men can be feminine and women can be masculine. The toxic aspects of those constructs can affect either gender (even if it's normally cis-linked). 'Toxic G…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/26 10:41 AM
0

If women can display "toxic masculinity" too then why is it even gendered in the first place? Women can be masculine, therefore they can have toxic masculinity. It's not gendered. The problem is that despite any actual usefulness the term MIGHT have had.. it was picked up and twisted by misandrists and has now essentially lost any sort of usefulness it could have had as it has now been warped into a misandrist term used to judge / blame men. I agree about the misuse, but it's still important to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/26 12:56 AM
6

If you take them as looking at the toxic aspects of masculinity and femininity, rather than as criticism of people of either gender, then I do think they can be useful concepts. This means btw that women can display toxic masculinity (and vice versa) and so it's not necessarily a misandrist term. I do think it gets co-opted and misused a lot though. For example I don't think it should be used to attribute blame or fault, its more useful not to pass judgement. I'll give a couple of examples: Masc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/26 11:42 PM
51

If you answered "by reinforcing patriarchal ideas about masculinity and feelings", you'd be right!! This is the baffling thing, they want to oppose the patriarchy but end up backing it up by saying "you are a man, therefore you are privileged". They have to reinforce the idea of male privilege in order to justify the Misandry. It defeats the whole point of feminism which should be about accepting change rather than rejecting change in order to hate. It's similar to TERFs who say they are feminis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/06/26 10:48 AM
1

I'm anti-feminist because of the many things feminism and feminists have done "In the name of equality" which have caused substantial harm to men. Can you point to specific examples of this in feminist literature? I'm convinced that the feminists you are talking about are not the big thinkers but garden variety ignorant rad fem types who shout the loudest online but misrepresent what feminism is and why it's important. I agree that there is a problem with Misandry in these spaces, but imo it's a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/06/26 11:03 AM
1

No, I do NOT mean "Women" No I think you mean women, or at least women's advocates. There's a lot of people like me (men or of any gender) that consider themselves feminists but don't see that as being inconsistent with being a mens advocate and actually see that as part of it. Tbh it's sad if this movement becomes an "either or" thing and there's no room for being an ally of other identities. Actually imo it will put mainstream people off if it's just the mirror image of Misandry. Tbh though I …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/26 10:38 PM
1

Sorry I never replied to this, I would expect feminists to give equal time and consideration to men's systemic issues I mean the original waves of feminism came about to address particular issues that women faced. You would expect the women that pioneered it to have less insight into issues men faced. That's why we as men we need to fill this space. I admit there are issues with Misandry amongst some feminists but I also don't want this movement to go down that same track and become misogynistic…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/26 09:59 PM
0

I mean do you accept that there is (and certainly was) a need to look at systemic issues specifically affecting women? I think if you can see that there are systemic issues facing men then it's not too much of a stretch to see that there are/were different issues affecting women in a similar way. If the end goal is equality, why is the name of the movement gendered after women? I hear what you are saying here. The reason for the name is because feminism is specifically interested in womens issue…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/26 12:05 PM
2

It's a good question. I would say that misandry shouldn't have a place in feminism and the word 'feminism' has been co-opted by misandrists. If you're looking at what the big feminist thinkers say (rather than the garden variety of "feminists" you get on 2X), you might be surprised. They tend to criticise power structures rather than blaming men themselves or falling into gender-essentialism. I like Gloria Steinmen's definition: "a feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 10:35 PM
5

It shouldn't be a zero sum game, you should be able to support men whilst also supporting women. I would say that I am a feminist, in the sense that I believe in gender equality, and that maybe that could be partly achieved through the empowerment of women. It doesn't change the fact that I care about mens issues and I think there isn't enough awareness about them. I believe gender equality can also be achieved through the empowerment of men. Men and women have different issues and need help in …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/26 12:09 PM
14

the idea that men want it and they’re always lucky to get any sexual validation from women. I agree with your point about grooming, but I wanted to comment on this phenomenon more generally and it's implications. Guys being encouraged to see women as the gatekeepers of their validation is so toxic. It encourages men to see women as a means to an end to prove the man's value - ie objects and trophies (it goes without saying but a lot of this is very negative for women too). If a man isn't romanti…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/26 05:57 PM
5

I completely agree. The problem isn't men, it's violence and the system that creates the environment for it. If you look at the stats, whilst men are more likely to be perpetrators of most forms of violence, they are also most likely to be victims of it. This is across the board from murder, assault, robbery, police brutality, etc. There's also a strong likelihood that even things like sexual violence and domestic violence are underreported for male victims. My issue with the 'bear thought exper…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/26 09:54 AM
9

Have you come across the thought experiment with the bear? It goes: Would you rather come across a random man or a bear whilst hiking alone in the woods? A lot of women will choose the bear. I've seen "feminists" treat this as a gotcha for justifying their Misandry. (Tbh in reality idk how many people have experience dealing with bears.)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/26 09:10 AM
16

What's interesting is that feminists will actually acknowledge systemic misandry but relabel it as "toxic masculinity". Toxic masculinity is anything associated with men that has a negative impact on someone. It could be outward directed (eg male perpetrated domestic violence or sexual assault) or inward directed (eg suicide rates, homelessness, substance abuse). Toxic masculinity is a catch-all term to conveniently explain away these issues. For women it's different, many issues will be put dow…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/26 07:10 PM
-12

Tbh it's one thing doing the study and another thing doing something about it. There is such a strong narrative out there about how much women are oppressed in the job market/ (largely valid tbh). When something like this comes out it's surprising because it goes against that narrative. Idk how but we've got to change the narrative to say that sometimes, often, frequently it's men who need some help too. It's great that things are getting better for women though according to the study.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/26 08:29 PM
74

Leftists who see this sort of thing and don't call it out are helping to create a left wing which is hostile to men. Hating men is not progressive. If you want progress you need men on board too
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/26 08:25 AM
14

The thing that always gets me is that the moment you open your mouth to talk about it, inevitably someone (probably a woman) will cut you off to change the topic to women. It's like "ok sure, I totally agree that women have many many issues to face but right this moment I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about men".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/26 11:00 PM
38

Using the term "unfuckable losers" is incel-ish imo, He's saying "I'm worth something because I'm fuckable, these guys are lesser than me". It's not that far from saying "I can't feel good about myself unless people want to fuck me". You shouldn't judge your value based on how hot/fuckable/popular you are. You also shouldn't knock other people down to make yourself feel better.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/05/26 07:59 PM
16

the butch lesbian woman running the group and she asked to see my ID What kind of ID was this? Queer credentials?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/05/26 12:40 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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