TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

rusty083 Archive

View 2 posts and 211 comments by rusty083 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)
423

False Accusationrusty083/r/MensRights25/07/25 01:17 AM
119

Generalrusty083/r/MensRights01/08/25 10:16 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
20

Correct. Boys are better at numeracy. Society has a hard time saying “boys are better at…” anything so the prevailing narratives are that “girls are better than boys at literature” and “the gap between boys and girls in numeracy is closing, almost non existent”
/r/MensRights01/10/25 12:21 AM
5

I asked GPT about it’s answers and it says its answers are shaped by cultural, social and conventional attitudes and mainstream perspectives. It’s not this independent thinking machine that seeks truth and deeper understanding. Most of the time GPT can be persuaded to conform fo your point of view however once the chat ends it just reverts to the default position.
/r/MensRights29/09/25 10:25 PM
7

This mimics my own upbringing. Just me and Dad and Mum with the occasional visits. She scared me a little bit and the mother son bond was lacking, if not completely non existent. Some people just aren’t cut out to be parents. Luckily my Dad was ever present and I really look back on my childhood with such fondness. Just me and him in that big old house but I don’t remember feeling lonely. How could it when it was full of love? Anyway, I have 3 kids now and being a dad is amazing. As long as your…
/r/MensRights29/09/25 11:23 AM
1

Oh there it is, all your anti Catholic hostility dribbling out now. Sure you can oscillate, who are you to say that I can’t? All i said was some days I was atheist, other days Catholic, that is essentially an agnostic position when faith or lack of teeters on a knifes edge. I’m not saying it’s reasonable , I was only relaying my personal experience. Pointing to Catholic and saying “unsound” does not make Protestantism more sound. So when you say “the only thing that matters is Jesus” I disagree,…
/r/MensRights29/09/25 04:58 AM
1

Yeah I said I oscillate between Catholicism and atheism, that’s different from saying I am an atheist. Jesus said a bunch of other stuff too, but I don’t want to get into petty doctrinal disputes. If it’s true that the relationship is the only thing that matters, then there was no need to splinter the church into thousands of denominations with their own rules, doctrines, hierarchies, places of worship etc. I actually used to be Protestant , I believed the same as you, but Protestantism is intel…
/r/MensRights29/09/25 03:07 AM
1

I never said I was an atheist. And sure, peoples faith can waver. But yeah, you keep pushing Protestant doctrines. Catholics, orthodox etc just don’t believe faith alone is enough, so when you keep saying “relationship with Christ is the only way” you’re pushing a distinctly Protestant doctrine.
/r/MensRights29/09/25 01:02 AM
9

Blaming feminism and women is the wrong target. Sure they spread gossip and lies, but there are enough males to counter the tide of false narratives and misinformation, but the majority of men sit idly by and do absolutely nothing about it. Being pro man is seen as homo and uncool, and the bravest strongest most desirable of men among us are white knights who defend the honour and lives of women. In other words they get all the pussy. The biggest enemy of men is in fact other men.
/r/MensRights29/09/25 12:54 AM
9

Ah. So when it’s girls and women who are lagging behind in some area it’s because of the naughty patriarchy, but when it’s boys and men it’s because it’s their own fault. Got it.
/r/MensRights29/09/25 12:47 AM
1

Thanks but sounds like you are pushing Protestant ideology not Jesus. I’m a Catholic.
/r/MensRights28/09/25 11:59 PM
13

One of the obvious reasons is that boys are more likely to take stem subjects than girls. However subjects are usually given equal weighting, so if a girl studying knitting and sandwich making obtains an A, she will be considering “better” at school than a boy studying advanced math, chemistry, physics and obtaining a B. Combined with the fact that subjective subjects like art, literature, etc tend to favour girls due to gender bias from heavily female teaching cohort.
/r/MensRights28/09/25 10:19 PM
5

Who cares if they are grifters or sincere. We need as many as possible to spread male rights narratives. The more the merrier.
/r/MensRights26/09/25 02:42 AM
42

This is the correct answer. The right won’t fight for men, however the left will actively campaign and conspire against men. Now if men continue their recent trend of voting for right wing parties, the left will respond by giving more policy to men, because even left wing parties need men’s votes. So ironic as it may, men need to pull right in order for the left to drag us back to the middle. Hopefully through this whole process feminism or at least feminism as an effective poltical tool gets nu…
/r/MensRights25/09/25 05:22 AM
2

They have power and they know it. They will always win. All you can do is slash their tyres.
/r/MensRights25/09/25 01:14 AM
2

If I rejoin it will be Catholic not Protestant
/r/MensRights24/09/25 12:54 PM
1

Oh you mean prostestantism? No thanks. Even those churches have their own buildings, doctrines, etc. They are still religions.
/r/MensRights23/09/25 11:04 PM
5

I oscillate between atheism and Catholicism, sometimes daily. Religion seems at times completely absurd, and other times atheism seems impossible. I’ve been near re-joining the church a couple times, I probably will eventually, but I dont expect to ever have complete faith.
/r/MensRights22/09/25 11:59 PM
1

Maybe don’t read it then. The toxic extremes don’t define the majority. Our war isn’t really with people on TikTok who say nasty things about men it’s with structures of power and privilege that collude with feminism to silence and oppress males. That needs to be our focus of our attention not edgy kids on TikTok saying mean things to get likes.
/r/MensRights22/09/25 04:52 AM
2

Leftists ultimately view ethics from a utitliarian perspective - the greatest good for the greatest number of people. They may ostensibly promote things like democracy, free speech etc but ultimately if they don’t move fast enough they will jettison these temporary ideals for more expedient ones like violent rhetoric and violent action. They are rationalise it by arguing it’s necessary to protect the vulnerable and the right are all evil fascist nazis who deserve to die.
/r/MensRights19/09/25 08:03 AM
3

Good point. Notice how they point to big data population surveys to claim 1 in 4 women raped, but when it comes to false allegations they point to small data crime statistics. They will never ever carry out a general public survey on false allegations, because they know the data would utterly destroy their narrative around rape and false allegations.
/r/MensRights18/09/25 11:45 PM
10

Mary Koss literally looks like she was created by AI
/r/MensRights18/09/25 12:51 PM
32

Sadly in Australia the right wing parties are as beholden to the women vote as they are in UK and Europe. At least in America there are signs of men starting to organise and fight back
/r/MensRights18/09/25 10:51 AM
5

Certain politicians and conservative media outlets might run it
/r/MensRights18/09/25 08:16 AM
20

The best thing to do is somehow infiltrate one of these groups chats and collect some evidence and then post it here so we can disseminate it to media, politicians etc.
/r/MensRights18/09/25 05:08 AM
2

Amen brother. It’s no surprise the decline of the nuclear family has coincided with the decline of western living, moral and cultural standards, and a rise in mental illness, greed, social tension and political violence. Its all interrelated.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 11:52 PM
1

It feels magnificent. Emotions are wonderful. If you don’t have a child you’ll never understand, that’s why you make silly statements and think you’re getting under our skin. People with children were also once child free so we have a basis to compare, the child free can only guess (and usually guess wrong)
/r/MensRights17/09/25 11:42 PM
8

I have 3. It’s challenging and hard, but it’s the greatest thing ever. They’ve done social experiments where they ask random people walking dogs if they would sell their dog for a million bucks. No one agrees. With children magnify that feeling by a million. There’s no amount of money or personal freedom that can compare to the love bond of your own children.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 11:36 PM
25

Yes separation from family is one of the main reasons cited for suicide. Male suicide that is. The laws are misandrist but no one cares and nothing is going to change.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 01:44 PM
22

Fathers risk losing access to their children, so they are less inclined to divorce. That is the only reason.
/r/MensRights17/09/25 12:55 AM
-1

No definitley his Iq
/r/MensRights14/09/25 01:09 PM
1

I dont think there is a single person in this world who endores euthanising homeless people
/r/MensRights14/09/25 12:26 PM
-9

What do you mean? The specific context wasn’t homeless people lying in the street eating from garbage cans it was homeless people murdering people.
/r/MensRights14/09/25 12:21 PM
0

Yeah your IQ isnt high enough. Im sorry
/r/MensRights14/09/25 12:15 PM
-2

He didn’t actually endorse that. I cant be bothered explaining it, if you have half an IQ point between your ears just watch the full video with full context it will immediately make sense.
/r/MensRights14/09/25 11:55 AM
22

Your post ignores a few important points boys are far more likely than girls to be sent to incarceration for the same crime girls tend to only receive incarceration for severe crimes (ie homicide, gbh etc) severe crimes among youth (homicide, gbh etc) correlates with higher rates or vulnerability and mental health issues So we end up with a situation where girls with mental health issues, risk of self harm and vulnerability end up on cosy care homes where boys with mental health issues, risk of …
/r/MensRights11/09/25 07:49 AM
5

It’s accurate. It’s entirely by design. It used to be that men had privilege in the workplace and women have privilege in the home, but now women have privilege everywhere. Decades of hostility, misinformation and indoctrination we are now seeing men collectively relegated to second class citizens. The only way to fix it a political correction, basically the majority of men voting for right wing parties to design and implement policies specially aimed at and for men and boys. I’m not saying that…
/r/MensRights11/09/25 02:51 AM
58

You handled this well. Most likely when she heard the words “i would prefer to write on her husband” it provoked an involuntary knee jerk reaction to blurt out the “sexist” or “misogyny”. She may not even he consciously aware she said it, which might explain why she attempted to flee. Many women are have been programmed to respond this way due to decades of indoctrination.
/r/MensRights11/09/25 02:35 AM
1

Maybe read some news or something about some man running into some dangerous situation to save some woman, child or a bunch of children. Then extrapolate that for all men. Because women are very very very rarely heroes. They will rarely risk life and limb to save another person. Even if their house is burning down and their children are inside they will usually just sit on the sidewalk crying waiting for some male to go and save them. Men are heroes and you should be thanking us. Hope this helps…
/r/MensRights10/09/25 08:56 AM
7

Expect the suicide rate to drop as well
/r/MensRights08/09/25 11:24 AM
11

We don’t really have to do any of this. The reason women have such power as a group is because both side of politics need to appeal to them. That’s why you get ridiculous amounts of policy and funding thrown at women every election cycle, because politicians feel the result could swing on the woman vote. Whilst men are more included to vote conservative there is less volatility in the male vote. Progressive men and conservative men are more likely to repeat the same voting patterns every electio…
/r/MensRights27/08/25 11:04 PM
9

Eventually society is gonna eat itself. One day men will stop going to war because it’s “disproportionately” women who’s lives are saved.
/r/MensRights27/08/25 11:45 AM
11

Look at you trying desperately to evade the question. I already gave you a viable solution, allow women to serve with other women, with all female commanders, but you choose to faff on about rape, and hijack women’s suffering to cover up your misandrist belief that only men are fit for wartime disposal. If women are too chicken shit to go to war they are unfit to call themselves equal to men.
/r/MensRights27/08/25 10:12 AM
19

Excuses excuses. You could address that by creating all female units with female command. Cmon don’t you want equality? I thought women were supposed to be strong.
/r/MensRights27/08/25 04:22 AM
41

How about an equal rights bill to force women into the draft? That I would absolutely love to see.
/r/MensRights27/08/25 01:46 AM
11

Misogyny doesn’t really kill women. What is the lifetime risk of a woman actually being killed by a man because she is a woman? About 1 in 5000. If that. But feminists persist with the claim anyway, because it packs a powerful rhetorical punch, and serves as a way to disregard male suffering.
/r/MensRights26/08/25 11:14 PM
11

The only thing you need to know is that mostly everything you hear about feminism is a lie. The wage gap. Male privilege. Patriarchy. It is all purified undiluted gold standard bullshit. The lies fester because feminist claims usually go unchallenged, because high profile people who oppose feminism usually get cancelled. So feminists have free reign to shit out lie after lie and manipulate cultural, politicians and laws to their nefarious, misandrist ends. Sometimes the lies can be difficult to …
/r/MensRights26/08/25 02:46 AM
5

It doesn’t matter. It has absolutely no relevance at all. It’s pure victim blaming. But feminists deploy it anyway because it’s effective at shutting down conversation of men as victims
/r/MensRights24/08/25 10:09 PM
6

Oh I see If Elon Musk is white and male And I am white and male Therefore I am like Elon Musk That makes sense
/r/MensRights24/08/25 10:04 PM
36

Men lead nearly all of the victimisation categories. Men are more disadvantaged than women homeless homicide armed robbery violent assault workplace deaths drugs and alcohol suicide bankruptcy high school drop outs imprisonment cancer heart disease Additionally women are far more privileged than men and boys graduating school at higher rates than boys and with better grades more likely to win custody battles receive less punishment for the same crimes receive more gender specific health funding …
/r/MensRights24/08/25 12:58 PM
39

No feminism is fucked everywhere. Especially USA. Maybe Saudi and Afghanistan exceptions. Women, especially western women are the most privileged, spoilt, entitled cohort in all of global history, and somehow perceive themselves as the most victimised. There has to be some sort of dunning Kruger effect going on.
/r/MensRights23/08/25 07:17 AM
86

A feminist would interpret this video as “Toxic masculine Russian police intimidate and frighten vulnerable girls and mother in car”.
/r/MensRights23/08/25 12:03 AM
38

I don’t really have a huge problem with describing such incidents as “tragedy”. Whenever someone turns the gun on themselves there’s obviously more than just “evil” going on. The problem is when men in similar situations murder their families and then themselves , and the default is to categorise them as monsters. Why the double standards? Are men not allowed to suffer, or assumed to suffer from psychosis as well? There just has to be consistency. Either men and women who do these things are mon…
/r/MensRights21/08/25 05:27 AM
3

Not sure we should even bother. Nothing will happen and Harvard will probably just release a statement saying “Prof Wrangham is a valued member of our community. He has spent decades researching issues affecting women blah blah . Harvard values inclusion and respect for all genders, but we shouldn’t shy away from important conversations..”. Before men as a collective are to have any influence on any domain of society we need to first mobilise as a political unit. Basically that just means protes…
/r/MensRights20/08/25 11:12 PM
6

Healthy marriages are literally the opposite of what your silly friend said. Those game might work in high school but a 43yo spruiking them is pathetic.
/r/MensRights20/08/25 03:36 AM
9

I honestly think this is a cynical attempt to hijack the conversation about men’s mental health. Every issue that affects men and boys somehow gets re-engineered a woman’s issue. No exception here.
/r/MensRights18/08/25 10:59 AM
2

notallmen just means I’m not responsible and have nothing to do with what someone else does. If I’m white and a white woman murders her baby I’m not responsible because we’re both white. If Im straight and some straight person bashed a gay person, I’m not responsible because we’re both straight. If another man violently rapes a woman I’m not responsible because we’re both men. If a Christian or Muslim detonates a bomb killing innocent people that doesn’t make Christians or Muslims collectively r…
/r/MensRights18/08/25 02:54 AM
–

notallmen just means I’m not responsible and have nothing to do with what someone else does. If I’m white and a white woman murders her baby I’m not responsible because we’re both white. If Im straight and some straight person bashed a gay person, I’m not responsible because we’re both straight. If another man violently rapes a woman I’m not responsible because we’re both men. If a Christian or Muslim detonates a bomb killing innocent people that doesn’t make Christians or Muslims collectively r…
/r/MensRights18/08/25 01:38 AM
2

Apps are terrible because the odds are stacked in the woman’s favour simply because for every woman using the platform there’s about four guys. So apps have this culture where a female average looking will receive an inordinate amount of attention from guys who are simply looking to get laid, but the female will see the attention as validation of her attractiveness and falsely inflate her perceived self worth relative to how men see her generally. The solutions seems to simply not use apps for o…
/r/MensRights16/08/25 03:28 AM
53

I’ve only been physically assaulted twice in twice. Once was in high school by a girl who elbowed me in the head. She said “its so funny how guys can’t hit girls but girls can hit guys”.
/r/MensRights15/08/25 08:29 AM
1

I have no idea that point you’re making. So what if testosterone levels drop, who gives a shit? What has that got to do with anything? I simply observed that men often are reluctant to get involved in child care duties because they think it’s gay or their value is defined by their job or income not their parental skills.
/r/MensRights15/08/25 04:23 AM
5

Yeah I know. That’s is because it sounds corny af. All these self described “boss girls” who work part time in retail and speak in deep tones are fucking cringe.
/r/MensRights15/08/25 02:46 AM
3

Honestly just learn to say thank you and show appreciation for the things men have done for you. Having manners and respect for men doesn’t make an instrument of the patriarchy. Men have done so much for the world and you wouldnt be where you are today without men. For instance you wouldn’t be reading these words right on your chosen technological device if not for men. Men are fantastic, amazing, powerful and vital to everything we know and love about the world. So there isn’t anything specific…
/r/MensRights15/08/25 02:39 AM
24

Have they? I haven’t noticed. If anything it seems the term is being thrown around more flippantly, as a perjorative to describe just about anything. For example it used to mean something like “ostentatious displays of male aggression and/or competitiveness” now it basically just means being being in the company of other males without a female to moderate. Working out at the gym = toxic masculinity. Night on the town with the lads = toxic masculinity. Tinder dates for the purpose of casual sex =…
/r/MensRights15/08/25 12:04 AM
37

Where the fuck was Movember when the tea app was unfairly destroying men’s reputations? Why the fuck does it take a TeaonHer app for them to finally respond? Are they that blind to the audience they are supposed to serve? It seems Movember continues to nose dive in popularity and relevance, so we should probably just disregard anything they opine. I’m all for the teaonher app. Quid pro quo.
/r/MensRights13/08/25 04:38 AM
2

Yes
/r/MensRights12/08/25 11:13 PM
44

I have 3 kids. I’ve just adopted a who-gives-a-fuck attitude about societies retarded expectations and gender norms. I’m affectionate with my three kids and have no problem displaying affection. If some stranger kid wants to chat or whatever, I’ll happily do so, as long as its in full public view so I cant be accused of anything. Its the same with my own kids regardless of gender. If people have a problem with that they are retarded and need to go to retard therapy. I love my kids I hug and kiss…
/r/MensRights11/08/25 11:27 PM
9

No not just women, men have this weird thing about being affectionate around children too, like it makes you gay, feminine or paedo or something. Of course society is doing absolutely nothing to change attitudes around this. 🙂
/r/MensRights11/08/25 11:17 PM
4

But if you argue that women should be grateful only to the men who saved them, does not that imply those particular man were in fact not oppressors?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 10:43 PM
1

Yes , but not all men are the same as they?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 02:12 PM
5

Think of it this way. If a man is abusing a woman, and another man comes along and stops the abuse, do you think the woman owes that man at the very least a “thank you”?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 01:53 PM
1

You make an excellent point. It sounds like you’re saying it wasn’t just men who built society, but straight men who oppressed women and homosexuals. Is that fair to say?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 01:46 PM
1

They would thank the men who liberated them
/r/MensRights11/08/25 01:27 PM
13

Well darling, apparently you don’t “just have equal rights” because as feminists like to remind us every single day, the system was set up by man (man first, woman second), and it was this way for THOUSANDS of years. The whole “equal rights” phenomenon is an outlier of history. So if one day men collectively to decide to liberate women and make them equal, would not at the very least a simple “thank you” suffice? Because the alternative is men could decide to withdraw those rights any second, an…
/r/MensRights11/08/25 07:19 AM
1

Why not? If I am an oppressed by someone or something, and someone else comes along and unoppresses me, don’t I owe that person a thank you? Do not the Jews thank Schindler for saving Jews in ww2, even though he was Nazi?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 06:01 AM
1

Why not? If I am an oppressed by someone or something, and someone else comes along and unoppresses me, don’t I owe that person a thank you? Do not the Jews thank Schindler for saving Jews in ww2, even though he was Nazi?
/r/MensRights11/08/25 05:39 AM
49

But if men set the system up, didn’t men also grant women equal rights? If so, don’t women owe men gratitude and at the very least courtesy towards men? Instead it seems they celebrate and rejoice in male suffering, as if all those dirty homeless, maimed soldiers and men killing themselves are getting their well deserved comeuppance.
/r/MensRights11/08/25 01:17 AM
4

You’re referring to healthcare spend, which is different from funding for research and innovation of which approx 0% total funding goes to males. Even the study you cite is misleading. Of those diseases that might predominantly affect men, the funding disproportionately goes to females anyway since females are more likely to seek care. Even of those conditions that predominantly affect women, the funding doesn’t necessarily reflect disease burden, because there are all kinds of variables and inp…
/r/MensRights08/08/25 08:35 AM
51

They would simply argue that even casual misogyny feeds the patriarchy and its patriarchy that kills women. Since there’s no “trickling down” of misandry from the oppressors then misandry isn’t as harmful. Everything in feminism reduces to patriarchy. Men kill women? Patriarchy. Women kill men? Patriarchy. Women kill women? Patriachy. Dog kills cat? Patriachy? My balls itch? Patriachy. Literally every fucking thing links back to patriarchy.
/r/MensRights07/08/25 01:33 PM
1

Men aren’t the empathetic gender. We are hard wired to compete with other, rather than lend a shoulder to cry on. We are also hard wired to deal with our issues in private, or if we do confide, we choose a women to bear our souls too. This pattern has been established through thousands of years evolution, and isn’t going to change any time soon because some people want to erase gender norms.
/r/MensRights07/08/25 03:42 AM
1

Vote pandering is perfect. That’s the only reason feminism has exploded - lawmakers pandering to the woman vote.
/r/MensRights07/08/25 01:12 AM
2

Wow. How do you reconcile other studies which show men’s rape of women to be far more prevalent of than womens rape of men? I don’t understand the huge disparity.
/r/MensRights05/08/25 11:05 PM
36

“Though I think they know only 2% of the male population commits these violent acts.” Are you sure? I think they think something like 50% of guys are rapists and domestic abusers. The DV lobby doesn’t get the funding they do without making women terrified of men.
/r/MensRights05/08/25 11:31 AM
10

This is a real men’s right. Women live on average 5-6 years longer and get approx 98-100% gender specific health funding. If you’re arguing women’s health has been ignored despite getting billions, and men get nothing, what do you call that? Extremely hard titanium level ignoring?
/r/MensRights05/08/25 05:58 AM
16

“Just one percent of the healthcare research and innovation spend went to female-specific conditions beyond cancer, a 2021 analysis by McKinsey & Co found.” I love how they frame this. “Just one percent”, which translates into literally billions. How much do men get? 0%
/r/MensRights05/08/25 05:45 AM
3

There should be a bus shelter nearby
/r/MensRights05/08/25 04:19 AM
4

She still been allowed to compete and hasn’t faced a single question from reporters. It’s most likely not the first time she’s done this.
/r/MensRights04/08/25 11:05 PM
2

Because the main issue affecting boys is they are doing poorly at school, often due to things like bieing marked down due to bias, gynocentric classroom environment and teaching methods, lack of male teachers and role models, and basically being defacated on by the state education system, but the main issue affecting boys has been reframed as that they are watching Andrew Tate and engaging with manosphere content which is making them sexist towards girls. Classic bait and switch.
/r/MensRights03/08/25 09:52 PM
-16

You probably just don’t understand what I meant. Have another go, take your time, there’s no rush
/r/MensRights03/08/25 02:58 PM
97

Funny how issues affecting men are always reframed as women’s issues boys doing shit in school = misogyny against girls men’s suffering poor mental health = man-keeping men killing themselves = more women attempt suicide men die 5 years earlier than women = lack of funding for geriatric women’s health men 5x more likely to be victims of homicide = women 5x more likely to be killed by an intimate partner
/r/MensRights03/08/25 01:58 PM
0

Yeah but if majority prefer the bad standard that is the standard regardless of your personal feelings
/r/MensRights02/08/25 02:34 PM
1

Whoa whoa whoa. Calm down. Let’s go through this slowly. Firstly what is the Ten to Men study? The Ten to Men study (short for The Australian Longitudinal Study on Male Health) is a major research project focused on understanding the health and wellbeing of Australian males.’ -ChatGPT So first question, if the purpose of the study is to focus on health and wellbeing for males, why aren’t victimisation rates being disclosed? What makes perpetration relevant to mens “health and wellbeing” but not …
/r/MensRights02/08/25 06:49 AM
1

I have no idea what you are talking about. The study reports that 35% of men admit to having used intimate partner violence. This isn’t just my extraction this government press releases and media news currently doing the rounds. The definition for IPV here includes all kids of abuse including intimidation, threats etc. The study also reports that 25% of men have used AND experienced domestic violence. So we can infer that at least 1 in 4 men have been victims of domestic violence, but this data …
/r/MensRights02/08/25 02:25 AM
3

Basically What’s incredible here is that the data in relation to men who have experienced dv but not perpetrated it has been completely buried. The survey asks two questions Have you made an intimate partner feel anxious or fearful Has an intimate partner made you feel anxious or fearful The survey results report those who ticked yes to question 1 and question 2, those who ticked yes to question 1 but not question 2, but completely ignores those who ticked yes to question 2 but not one. That dat…
/r/MensRights02/08/25 01:44 AM
1

No I’m simply stating that most western jurisdictions include emotional abuse as a type of IPV. Whether you think it should be included or not is irrelevant because that’s how the researchers, government agencies, politicians, media and dv advocates define it. If you don’t think this particularly survey is hiding anything, where is the survey data in relation to men who have experienced dv but not used it? We know AT LEAST 25% report experiencing IPV as it is currently defined, but that’s based …
/r/MensRights02/08/25 01:37 AM
1

If it isn’t for men then it isn’t for women either. All I want is consistent standard for men and women. For example the current statistics of “1 in 4 women” would need to be reframed as “1 in 10 experience physical or sexual violence”. You can’t say “1 in 4 women experience DV” but then “only 1 in 13 men experience physical or sexual violence”. That’s a double standard.
/r/MensRights02/08/25 01:24 AM
2

It wouldn’t be deceptive because that’s how IPV is defined and that’s how public policy and debate is framed. It would be wrong if I said all types IPV were equal but that’s not what I said or implied. when DV is framed as a ‘women’s issue’ and that men are primary perpetrators it’s not based on the types of IPV it’s based victims surveys which looks at aggregates. That’s where we get public sound bites like “1 in 4 women have experienced IPV” and “1 in 3 men have perpetrated IPV”. Of course if …
/r/MensRights02/08/25 12:31 AM
1

All three types of abuse count as IPV.
/r/MensRights02/08/25 12:13 AM
4

But that’s how IPV is defined across many western jurisdictions. If it was defined as just rape and physical assault perhaps only 10% of men would admit to it and then men wouldn’t seem so bad, so they need to expand the definition in order to make the number bigger and hence men badder. Unwittingly in doing so they net a lot more women which kind of equalises the issue, but they handle that by simply refusing to report on it.
/r/MensRights01/08/25 09:03 PM
0

What’s misleading? The survey simply asks randomly selected men two questions Has your behaviour made your partner feel fearful or anxious Have you experienced feeling fearful or anxious by your partners behaviour In relation to question 2, 35% of men ticked yes, which meets the definition for IPV as it is currently defined. So 1 in 3 have experienced IPV It sound like you just rewrote what I said but in a different way.
/r/MensRights01/08/25 08:56 PM
12

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-17/indecent-treatment-childcare-centre/105540888 They left ‘male’ or ‘man’ out of similar headlines so it’s not really bias in this case.
/r/MensRights31/07/25 10:43 PM
0

Nah. Women are primarily valued for their beauty and sexuality so when they give it away too easily they reduce their value and prestige. Scarcity is more desirable sorta thing. Men are valued for other things like wealth, intellect, social status so even if they fuck around a lot they can still maintain high value. Women don’t hold themselves to the same standard as men for income, he has to earn more.
/r/MensRights26/07/25 02:38 PM
4

I don’t understand
/r/MensRights25/07/25 09:14 AM
6

Because of the enormous wealth inequality. They get paid a stupid amount of money for uttering a few lines and showing their cleavage, so identifing as feminist or socialist is a trendy way of maintaining “solidarity” with all the scum in the trough below who fund their lifestyles
/r/MensRights25/07/25 09:10 AM
14

Actually, statistically, of all sex assault allegations, about 5-10% are proven false allegations and about 5-10% lead to conviction, so the notion that men rape way more than women is untrue
/r/MensRights25/07/25 08:59 AM
18

1 . The vast majority false allegations are made by women 2. Men more likely to have had false allegations made against them 3. Most criminal trials for sexual assault fail
/r/MensRights25/07/25 07:43 AM
19

If men are violent then women are liars. That's my point.
/r/MensRights25/07/25 06:35 AM
1

It seems like you’re trying really hard to convince me ( or perhaps yourself) that the violence women face (intimate, persistent etc) means we need to give greater attention, empathy and resources to violence against women. But you haven’t empirically justified it I and I don’t think you can. Just because men and women experience different kinds of violence doesn’t mean one is worse than the other, it just means they are different. DV homicide might sometimes be more layered than non DV homicide…
/r/MensRights25/07/25 06:29 AM
38

For statistical purposes it wont count as false. False allegation stats are derived from police investigations where they are coded as false, not failed prosecutions.
/r/MensRights25/07/25 01:54 AM
11

Men have always been disposable, and women put on a pedestal. Remember Titanic? When all the women who gleefully walked onto life boats and watched their husbands freeze to death and turned their noses up at the odd male who managed to sneak on. What about all those pesky men who got blown to bits protecting their countries in wars, while the women sat at home knitting and gossiping with other soldier wives? This was literally decades pre feminism, even before women got the vote. The hilarious t…
/r/MensRights25/07/25 12:04 AM
5

There’s literally no argument you can win against a feminist. Even if you argued prostate cancer was a male issue they would turn it around and say something like “the prostrate is part of the male reproductive system, which includes the phallic symbol of subjugation and oppression and women globally, so it’s also a women’s issue”.
/r/MensRights23/07/25 10:41 PM
7

Education- boys are doing less well at school and graduating university /college rates at lower rates than girls . Teaching - men have been pushed out of the education sector. They make up less than 3% of daycare educators and < 20% of primary and secondary education teachers Teaching bias - there’s evidence that only 15% of teachers are gender neutral and boys are marked down than girls for similar or better work Courts - fathers lose custody battles about 75% of the time. Females are also more…
/r/MensRights23/07/25 12:34 AM
2

Patriarchy isn’t just men numerically outnumbering women in positions of power. That’s not the “actual definition”. If the majority were people in power own cats that wouldn’t mean we live in a Catriarchy. Patriarchy is a social system whereby men dominate women and where being a man is necessary prerequisite for most positions of power. This is a totally different from say a modern republic whereby women have equal vote and those voted into power are based on merit rather than gender. That the …
/r/MensRights21/07/25 06:27 AM
2

I guess it depends on how you define patriarchy. If you define is at “a system where the majority of the c suite are men” well then shit, ya got me. Check mate. But if you define it as most feminists define it “a system built by men for men, with all the systemic power, advantages, privileges and entitlement conferred to men” then no, a male majority in C suites does denote a patriarchy. As for those websites, it’s nice that they exist, but you neglect to mention they receive little if any fundi…
/r/MensRights20/07/25 12:10 PM
28

She will avoid if she claims she felt pressured not to refuse his advances . Let’s see how smart she is.
/r/MensRights20/07/25 10:10 AM
8

Really?
/r/MensRights20/07/25 09:56 AM
79

The CEO has already “resigned” following an internal investigation. The HR lady will presumably face no consequences at all, for the simple reason she is a woman.
/r/MensRights20/07/25 08:13 AM
2

The patriarchy is already dismantled. The only legacy of patriarchy that exists is in a very tiny, niche, elite section of society know as the c suite. But there are good biological reasons for why there are more male CEO’s , entrepreneurs etc are majority men. In virtually every other sector of society, women are outperforming men. It’s not because women are better, it’s because society has been organised in way that ensures women have more privileges and opportunities than men do. Men are basi…
/r/MensRights19/07/25 11:52 PM
28

All you can do is spit facts at them men 5x more likely to get murdered 4x more likely to committ suicide dying an average 6 years before women 3x more likely to be homeless 2x more likely to receive false allegations account for 90% workplace deaths far more likely to lose custody battles less likely to graduate more likely to do drugs Etc etc etc. Then explain that women’s perceived issues are miniscule compared to men and boys, and the biggest gender gap is in fact the entitlement gender gap,…
/r/MensRights17/07/25 10:58 PM
2

You’ve only explained a different context, you havent explained why that makes women “especially vulnerable”? Sure you’ve argued that women are “especially vulnerable” in a private setting, but what makes it a more vulnerable place than in public? Maybe I can enlighten by re-writing what you wrote but in a slightly different context.. “Most violence against women happens in private (home). It’s awful, but it’s a very different experience from the kind of public and open threat that men live with…
/r/MensRights17/07/25 02:01 PM
-8

Being raised a single mum doesn’t give you an inside scoop. It’s silly to extrapolate your own unique experience for all cases. It’s just shitty logic to argue that kids go their dad because they “earn more”. Sometimes they do, sometimes they earn less. Men on average earn more precisely because there aren’t many single custody fathers compared to mothers. If you were to give all the products of relationships and marriages to the fathers the pay gap would invert, because women would have more ti…
/r/MensRights17/07/25 03:02 AM
1

Being raised a single mum doesn’t give you an inside scoop. It’s silly to extrapolate your own unique experience for all cases. It’s just shitty logic to argue that kids go their dad because they “earn more”. Sometimes they do, sometimes they earn less. Men on average earn more precisely because there aren’t many single custody fathers compared to mothers. If you were to give all the products of relationships and marriages to the fathers the pay gap would invert, because women would have more ti…
/r/MensRights17/07/25 03:02 AM
-6

It’s not a fair comparison because for a variety of reasons single mothers are far more likely to be financially insecure than single fathers. So you’re supposing that fathers make better parents but it’s actually external factors such as socio economic situation that is more deterministic of outcomes. If you took the products of relationships and marriages and gave them all to the fathers those factors would equalise and the results be equally shit. Kids would just be inherently better off with…
/r/MensRights17/07/25 02:25 AM
-14

Err no, it would usually mean some shared custody arrangement, where the kids gets the benefits of being raised by both mother and father.
/r/MensRights17/07/25 02:08 AM
3

Yes I understand women often experience a unique kind of violence, and that is terrible, but what you seem to be neglecting is not only that men experience unique kinds of violence as well, but that we are also far more likely , about 400-500% in fact, to be murdered than women. But the energy in your previous posts, and let’s be honest , society at large, seems to convey the idea that violence against women is more reprehensible than violence against men, and that it is deserving of more attent…
/r/MensRights16/07/25 02:52 PM
4

But why are women “especially” vulnerable? You already admitted men make up the majority of homicide victims. Not only that, but violent crime generally. When you combine all types of violent crimes, men are more likely to be victims. Yes, sexual violence is one type of crime, but why does that type of crime garner greater compassion than other types? It’s interesting that you say that men force women to cover their drinks etc, but since men make up the majority of violent crime victims, “especi…
/r/MensRights16/07/25 11:50 AM
10

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4201052/ “Results demonstrated that the most frequently endorsed motives for IPV by both men and women were self-defense, expression of negative emotions, and communication difficulties. With the exception of expression of negative emotions and retaliation, with women endorsing these motives more often than men, there were no significant differences between men and women’s self-reported reasons for perpetrating physical aggression.” So in other words, whe…
/r/MensRights16/07/25 05:19 AM
2

Imagine if a man referred to classic feminity “as an old, mouldy box”, then in the very next breath accused women of being tone deaf.
/r/MensRights15/07/25 11:21 PM
11

Why do you say “especially women”? Do you realise men are overwhelmingly over represented in violent crime statistics? For example men are far more likely to be murdered by a stranger than a woman. I saw some ridiculous statistics like only 4% of homicide victims in the USA are female. Male victims are also over represented with regards to assault, armed robbery and most crimes generally. So why do you say “especially women”? It just sounds ostensibly sexist, perhaps echoing cultural mores which…
/r/MensRights15/07/25 11:16 PM
7

If women have problems, how can we fix society? If men have problems, how we can protect women?
/r/MensRights15/07/25 10:34 PM
5

Will it never? I think people are just asleep to it. The problem is when people eventually wake up it won’t be empathy, compassion and conversation that brings change, it will be force.
/r/MensRights15/07/25 11:01 AM
74

Not just teenage boys but boys generally. I guess they are just frusturated because their plan to drive out male influence from the education sector in order to de-masculanise and feminise young men has had the opposite effect. What’s interesting is there doesn’t appear to be any analysis to understand why boys hold the views that they do. Nobody bothers to ask “why do you feel this way and how can we help?” It’s nothing but judgment, ridicule and scorn. Fancy that virtually purging positive mal…
/r/MensRights15/07/25 10:43 AM
1

I don’t think men are seen as entitled for wanting relationships. I have no idea what that even means. Stacks of folks are hooking up and having casual or committed sex. Some might argue men are wrong for objectifying women blah blah but that isn’t stopping anyone from doing it. Women are more sexually available than ever. Of course not everyone is going to get a seat at the banquet, that’s probably just natural selection rather than feminism.
/r/MensRights15/07/25 06:59 AM
1

Yeah it’s not really an issue from an MRA standpoint. No one is entitled/guranteed to get laid or have romantic relationships. With the advent of apps dating is easier than ever, simply a swipe left or right. Maybe the problem is incels think they are entitled to high quality women and don’t want a “fat girl” that they think reflects on them poorly. Perhaps if you’re an incel this is defcon 5 but there’s more pressing issues with empirical substance.
/r/MensRights15/07/25 06:13 AM
1

Those are incel issues not MRA issues. I hate that conflation between suicide and incels as if all the men killing themselves and injecting heroin into their eyeballs is because they can’t get laid. The majority of men aren’t incels, and incels have always existed, so you can’t really blame feminism for that.
/r/MensRights15/07/25 04:06 AM
1

I’m pointing to homicide statistics not violence generally. The data I’ve seen suggests DV homicide is highest among same sex couples
/r/MensRights14/07/25 10:51 PM
-5

Did you see that on a YouTube short or something? It’s horseshit. The real world isn’t like that. Men past their 30s still want to fuck things, if not their wife they will cheat or pay for it.
/r/MensRights14/07/25 03:33 AM
-19

Don’t go off YouTube and TikTok for relationship advice. Men just don’t want women to be respectful, loving etc we want them to look good and please us sexually. We want them to cook our food, tidy the house and raise the babies. Women also have standards and usually that’s providing financial stability. Sure the lines are blurred but don’t look at all women as the same and don’t expect them to look at all men the same. If you’re broke and ugly you can still get a lady probably just need to be f…
/r/MensRights14/07/25 03:06 AM
12

Can someone explain why feminists think when women it’s because they are women? I’ve heard this a lot to justify inordinate amount of focus in female victims but it doesn’t really make any sense. For example they will say things like “when a male kills a female partner it’s because he thinks he has right to control her blah blah”. But how do they know it was because of gender? Do they interview the killer and he says “i did it coz that my bitch yo”? Interestingly, the homicide rate for intimate …
/r/MensRights13/07/25 11:51 PM
1

Maybe they’ve been created to distract from real MRA issues and to make us seem all pathetic? I really couldn’t give a flying fck if someone can’t get laid.
/r/MensRights13/07/25 10:34 PM
6

1 . Men are objectified too. Our value is our labor. Is the idea of a man enslaving and exploiting female workers a joke? Probably, but incels isn’t an MRA issue. Lots of MRA’s get laid and have families. The notion that most MRA’s are just sexually frustrated pizza faced chronically masturbating losers is a just a trope designed to oppress us. Maybe. But the bigger issue isn’t the way they design classrooms, it’s that they keep marking boys down (consciously or subconsciously) for the same or b…
/r/MensRights13/07/25 04:00 AM
1

Your problem is you apply inconsistent and often contradictory epistemic standards to the available data. For example you say that victim surveys prove SA is prevalent, but you deny anecdotal and surveyed data that shows men are often victims of false allegations. You say that we should believe women and hear their stories, but don’t apply the same courtesy to men who plead and are found not guilty. Instead you undermine their lived experience with conflations about deficiencies in the system. Y…
/r/MensRights12/07/25 03:10 PM
8

Women who say they hate men are really just suffering an inferiority complex. They look around and all they see and enjoy are things designed, built and maintained by men. Women really haven’t contributed much to evolving society, all of the innovation and achievements are by men, so they invent this narrative that if men weren’t so mean and oppressive to them then they would have achieved just as much. But that isn’t actually true, because women aren’t wired to create and innovate the same that…
/r/MensRights12/07/25 09:45 AM
4

They don’t actually say that. They say that men can sometimes be victims too, but women are the primary victims. As soon as you try to flesh these ideas out and make thorough arguments you get branded as misogynistic and an angry incel. They control the entire narrative, and there is no place at the table for men, other than weak cursory acknowledgement before quickly pivoting back to women.
/r/MensRights12/07/25 12:28 AM
45

The best argument against patriarchy is the inverted patriarchy - a type of social system or type of society where the most hopeless and powerless are men. This is the society we live in. Homelessness, prisons, bankruptcy, suicide, homicide, violence, drugs, alcohol, war.. these are all domains of men. Sure if ya look up you might see a few men walking tall but look down and there’s millions more curled up in the gutter.
/r/MensRights11/07/25 01:57 PM
13

Violence takes many forms and false allegations are just one way that women inflict violence on men. Unlike physical violence which might leave scars false allegations can completely destroy someone emotionally and socially. Just because you cannot see the damage doesn’t mean it isn’t there. If I had a choice of being continuously punched in the face and being accused of SA I would pick the former 100 times over. I think we have seen enough false allegations of male celebrities to understand tha…
/r/MensRights11/07/25 11:54 AM
3

From the same handbook “While men can be victims of family violence, men are more likely to be harmed by a stranger than by a family member.” While this is true, it is only because men are far more likely harmed by strangers. When you exclude strangers and intimate partners and look at the incidents of male victims by other family members, the difference is minimal, 8% for women and 6% for men. Yet apparently this minor difference is sufficient to exclude men almost entirely from the family viol…
/r/MensRights11/07/25 06:10 AM
12

This is the fundamental issue with patriarchy - the idea that society is built by men for men. Even if all the positions of owner and influence were occupied by males, their order of priority is as follows Themselves wives girlfriends, mistresses and concubines Daughters and sons Friends and fraternity buddies Strippers and prositututes All other Women Pets Termites, insects and vermon all other men So as you can see this is not a system that benefits men generally. The power and privilege doesn…
/r/MensRights11/07/25 05:12 AM
1

I think you’re misunderstanding the “inflated” statistics. While some studies might say the rate is ~70%, the ones I am referencing propose an upward limit of -70% and a downward limit of ~2-3%. They are simply acknowledging the significant amount of grey area which shouldn’t be surprising since false allegations are usually so difficult to prove. The Lisak study is measuring the rate of false allegations that ARE proven to be false across a bunch of jurisdictions, it doesn’t measure the potenti…
/r/MensRights11/07/25 12:00 AM
2

Why do you say Lisak is the “best evidence”? And why do you say “claims of 70% have been debunked”? These studies usually report a range, from as low as 2% to as high as 70%? They aren’t saying the false allegation rate IS 70% , they are merely stating a range, that due to difficulty in corroborating false allegations there is significant UNKNOWN as to whether the claims are true or false. The actual rate of proven false allegations ,say around 5-10%, is likely an underrepresention of the true r…
/r/MensRights09/07/25 03:24 PM
1

Men are built to lead not to follow. That is why there are so many strands of masculinity and cultural definitions about what being a man is. Are real men caring fathers? Entrepreneurs? Buff dudes? Alpha males? Romantic casanovas? MAGA republicans? Feminists? We refuse to be pigeonholed and often organise ourselves into little subcultures that are essentially in competition with each other. No one really coalesces around a singular idea or narrative of what being a “real man” is. Actually femini…
/r/MensRights09/07/25 02:02 PM
-22

Don’t agree. The issue of whether males should have a say is a separate issue. Personally I don’t think either parent has a say, the responsibly for both starts at conception.
/r/MensRights09/07/25 11:09 AM
1

No at its core gravity is just a theory.
/r/MensRights09/07/25 04:08 AM
2

It isn’t false equivalence. Just because there are differences doesn’t equate to false equivalence. In terms of the law there is the alleged offender, allleged victim, and either guilty or not guilty. This is the same for SA or false allegation. When you say “false allegations” are rare, how do you know this? Are you referring to the conviction rate? Can I also point to the low conviction rate for SA and argue same, that SA is rare? When you say SA survivors face stigma, disbelief, impossible st…
/r/MensRights09/07/25 01:05 AM
2

I don’t see how there false equivalence. Both are crimes yes? Both benefit the accused (innocent until proven guilty)? Both have real victims agree? Both are underreported, underprosecuted and underconvicted correct? Again, how is this a false equivalence? Just how easy do you think it is to prove someone lied or mislead about being SA?
/r/MensRights08/07/25 11:14 PM
0

Thanks for posting
/r/MensRights08/07/25 11:24 AM
2

The feminists will tell you the solution to male suicide is ending violence against women and closing the gender pay gap.
/r/MensRights08/07/25 07:59 AM
13

It’s a double standard because they argue a low conviction rate of false allegations infers that women rarely lie about these things, but they argue a low conviction rate of SA allegations infers imperfections and bias within the legal system and the actual incidence is much higher. If they were consistent they would need to acknowledge the lack of false allegation convictions is also result of imperfection and bias within the legal system, and that the actual incidence is much higher. But then …
/r/MensRights08/07/25 01:42 AM
94

Why do the optics concern you? Feminists are clever. They will point to the low conviction rate of false allegations to argue that false allegations are extremely rare, therefore alleged victims can be believed on their word. On the other hand, they point to low conviction rate of SA to argue that SA is too difficult to prosecute, and that victims should be believed on their word. It’s an absurd double standard but they get away with it all the time because no one challenges them.
/r/MensRights07/07/25 02:36 PM
1

Yeah it does matter, because there’s point arguing with people who can’t accept evidence and prefer to obfuscate by playing semantic games
/r/MensRights07/07/25 01:43 PM
1

Even if I provided sources you wouldn’t accept them
/r/MensRights07/07/25 12:46 PM
1

Since you just continue to straw man me by stating things that aren’t true ( “all men are paedos”)I’m not gong to waste any more time engaging with you and your bad faith arguments. I hope you find some help to cope wth your anti feminist derangement
/r/MensRights07/07/25 12:11 PM
1

lol quoting Wikipedia articles great job feel smart now? Lol
/r/MensRights07/07/25 11:51 AM
1

As it is the person who claims gravity is real, but ultimately then have better things to do with their time than debate morons
/r/MensRights07/07/25 11:50 AM
1

Don’t waste your time with incels, they are immune to logic. You say “most rapes are caused by men” but what they hear is “all men are rapists” then use that straw man to promote polices that enable paedoohiles to sexually abuse young children. They don’t actually care about kids being raped they are all consumed by their anti feminist worldview. It’s nice to know that there are other MRA’s who just don’t knee jerk oppose every single feminist talking point and can still think objectively.
/r/MensRights07/07/25 11:45 AM
1

Can’t prove gravity either
/r/MensRights07/07/25 11:35 AM
1

I’m not characterising men as paedos I’m characterising most paedos as men which is blatantly true. You keep running these straw man arguments and it seems that you’re head is up your ass and you are incapable of admitting universal accepted truths because it conflicts with your precious MRA agenda. It can’t admit something as straightforward as this then either you are arguing in bad faith you’ve fallen so far down the rabbit hole or anti feminist despair that your cognitive facilities are comp…
/r/MensRights06/07/25 04:38 PM
-2

I’m not the one making ludicrous claims . If someone said the earth was flat it wouldn’t be the responsibility of the globe believer to cite evidence in support of their view. That would legitimise the idea that the earth may be flat when it isn’t. Likewise the idea that most paedos aren’t men is also ludicrous claim and I have no interesting legitimising such idiocy by citing evidence.
/r/MensRights06/07/25 04:10 PM
1

It really is . Just google it. Look it up.
/r/MensRights06/07/25 12:51 PM
-3

The studies aren’t 100% perfect but they’re plenty good enough. You’re making it seem like because there might be some underreporting of female paedos then that delegitimises the significant body of evidence which shows males to the vast majority perpetrators. But you can apply doubt and “dark numbers” to literally every study and every facet of the universe, that doesn’t undermine or invalidate consensus findings. For examples perhaps the true number of males paedos in education is underestimat…
/r/MensRights06/07/25 12:50 PM
1

It may skew the data a little bit but it’s unlikely to skew the data a lot. There’s no hidden agenda that women are really more potent paedos than men, that’s all in your imagination. Men really do the majority of baby fucking. you’re making a category error, the policy wouldn’t be racist because you’re not banning certain races. But if we were forced to ban a specific group, such as feminist white women from the UK because of a legitimate terror threat they possessed, I would be totally comfort…
/r/MensRights06/07/25 07:42 AM
-3

I mean I agree with what most of you said especially about female abuse etc being underreported etc but that doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority of paedos are male. Especially when we talk about really really young children and babies we are usually talking about male perpetrators. So the primary threat to these children isnt going to be women its always going to be some men. And these men have enormous potential to destroy many many lives and if we do nothing if we potentially puttin…
/r/MensRights06/07/25 02:36 AM
-2

As I said I can see what’s probematic with the ban but the imperative is to protect children from being sexually abused. The way the MRA’s on here brushing off a hundreds of kids being molested and potentially infected with stds as if it’s no big deal just shows how they are willing to put ideology before pragmatism and public safety. In a way they are behaving and thinking exactly as feminists do. Abortion is a totally separate issue.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 11:48 PM
1

No i didnt, i said that it might be necessary to characterise certain races as more inclined to criminality if thats what the evidence inferred. And in the very next sentence I said the evidence did not infer that. Furthermore the jim crow laws were more than just belief but a practical approach to dealing with such beleifs, and even IF those beliefs were true there are many practical approaches other of segregation, eg increased police presence, targeted social security etc etc. In the case of …
/r/MensRights05/07/25 01:16 PM
-3

Ah i see what you did there you swapped “downplaying female sexual abuse” with “ignoring the possibility of female perpetrators” to make your shitty strawman point
/r/MensRights05/07/25 01:02 PM
1

Yep men rape more babies than women. Fact
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:38 PM
-8

thank you
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:37 PM
0

No , but it might be necessary to characterise people of that race as more inclined to criminality, if thats what the evidence inferred. But the evidence is clear that socio economic status, environment etc have far more influence on criminality than race, which has minimal or zero significance . Not so in the case of paedophiles, which is strongly correlated with gender to the exclusion of things like environment, etc.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:36 PM
-12

oh no youve exposed my inner feminissm arrgggg
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:22 PM
-4

fucking babies in the ass isnt gender neutral. Its nearly always men doing it. Downplaying female sexual abuse might be true but it doenst change the fact that men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators when it comes to child sex abuse. im not advocating pre-judging men im advocating for protecting children from sexual predators who are almost always men in the absence of mpre non gender biases solutions. im acknowledging the bias but arguing the imperative to protect children is greater.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:19 PM
0

No they are proposing a ban on men in that field on the basis that their gender makes them far more likely to be a predator. Which is true.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:11 PM
0

You cant even get basic facts right. Men overwhelmingly commit more sexual abuse of minors than women.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 12:08 PM
-4

i think what you’re saying is that men shouldnt be singled out when women can also do bad things but it doest make sense because im arguing a gender correlation between males in childcare and sexual abuse rates whereas that same correlation doenst apply to the armed forces. In other words if you increase the number of men in childcare the sexual abuse rates will go up, if you eliminate them the abuse will go down perhaps disappear altogether.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 11:19 AM
-7

Blaming all men isn’t the point at all. The point is that children need to be protected at all costs even if it’s at the expense of gender equality and fairness. Not being allowed to change nappies is a small price to pay if if means these sickos (almost always men) aren’t able to rape children. The cases here in Australia have been quite bad with the males going from centre to centre molesting and raping literally hundreds of kids and often unloading the contents of the dark web. These are just…
/r/MensRights05/07/25 10:51 AM
32

They are the useful idiots of feminism
/r/MensRights05/07/25 09:46 AM
-3

It’s a pretty stupid analogy. We’re talking about small kids and babies being fucked in the ass not some money going missing.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 09:36 AM
1

I know the point you’re trying to make but it doesn’t make any sense.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 08:39 AM
-2

Tons on waffle in there but broadly I agree, we need better modern solutions to things, but if currently those solutions don’t exist we need to adopt cruder solutions until those modern solutions become available
/r/MensRights05/07/25 07:26 AM
1

No idea what point you’re making
/r/MensRights05/07/25 07:21 AM
1

For the logic to be consistent men would need to constitute a significant minority of the armed forces of which they aren’t so it’s not consistent logic
/r/MensRights05/07/25 06:47 AM
1

You seem to be missing the context of what’s being discussed here, which is the policy of males changing nappies in daycare centres with kids 0 to 5. If you want to make a separate post arguing for women to be banned from teaching or changing nappies in high school setting be my guest.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 06:44 AM
1

The context which we are discussing isn’t rape of adolescents, it’s the rape of childcare age children , which relates to the policy change highlighted by this post . Men haven’t been banned from changing the nappies of adolescents so your point is mute and silly.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 05:33 AM
-17

yes all the recent incidents of mass sexual abuse within childcare settings have been men. That you cite sources about women who have abused teens shows how you’re either missing the point or desperately trying to conflate it with broader issue that aren’t really relevant to what we are discussing.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 05:30 AM
-1

Im not downplaying it, just pointing out that adolescents generally dont go to daycare, which is what we’re talking about here.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 05:01 AM
2

No, because you haven’t demonstrated gendered correlation. Its like saying ban men from the armed forces because the perpetrators of war crimes have all been male.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 04:29 AM
-9

Im not assuming its proven that women rape and molest and far lower rates than males. Also female child sex offenders tend to target adolescent age children rather than extremely young. Sentencing rates is a completely different issue not sure what that’s got to do with this. Red herring. In all the recent cases of mass child sexual abuse in childcare setting in Australia involving hundreds of victims ALL the perpetrators have been men. All of them. That’s not that to say that women can’t abuse …
/r/MensRights05/07/25 04:28 AM
-1

Death ? No. What is severe abuse? Death and severe abuse are unlikely in childcare settings for various reasons. Even if they were prevalent due the fact that women are 95% of the workforce it would be difficult to argue a gendered correlation.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 04:19 AM
-9

For your argument to be convincing you would need to find a comparable scenario which you’ve failed to do. Females obviously make up the majority of nurses, are you suggesting that women are inclined to murder patients more than men? Your argument makes no sense.
/r/MensRights05/07/25 03:56 AM
-26

Its simply a fact that paedos are more likely to be men. So for every male that works in childcare there is a significantly greater risk than he will be a paedo and sexually abuse children than a female. That’s why in all the cases of mass sexual abuse all the perps have been male despite representing <5% of childcare workforce. It’s not saying “men are bad” it’s saying “paedos are bad who are more likely to be men therefore lets do something about it”. The counter argument “men arent bad lets n…
/r/MensRights05/07/25 03:41 AM
-44

It’s not that “all men are considered too dangerous” rather that some men pose a huge risk and there is currently no way to mitigate the risk other than banning all men from childcare OR banning them from bathrooms. The latter is a far softer option and enables male childcare educators to participate whilst at the same protecting small children from paedos. The theory is the similar the US and other countries banning immigration and travel from some countries due to the risk of terrorism from a …
/r/MensRights05/07/25 01:45 AM
-2

I would argue that general crime statistics and recent multiple cases garnering significant national attention suffice. If particular data adjusted for sample comes along great but it will only reinforce the general trend.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 12:59 PM
-8

I have evidence that men are way more likely to sexually abuse children. I dont see how background checks and training is supposed to act as some great equaliser. All of the cases of mass sexual abuse of children in Australian daycare centres have been committed by males with clean criminal records and passes all the necessary checks and training to work in the industry.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 12:31 PM
1

What do you mean my logic is impeccable? I don’t think you comprehended what I wrote. Do you realise these single perpetrators have dozens to hundreds of victims across multiple daycare centres? The moral panic is justified. Many of the kids and families are fucked for life because the current policies dont mitigate the risks.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 12:21 PM
1

I should clarify that my comments were directed towards males working in daycare settings , specifically 0-5 years. This is because this is the age group that is most vulnerable. I think I read yesterday that the paedo targeted children 0-2 years. The one last year up to 5 years - again a kindy/daycare setting. When the child is a bit older they usually have some language and understanding to convey any concerns to their parents, so this acts as a deterrence for serial paedophiles. The daycare m…
/r/MensRights04/07/25 12:13 PM
-13

That is true, but I’m taking about proportions rather than aggregates. Men have a higher proportion of abusing unrelated children relative to their own compared to women.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 11:31 AM
0

I’m from Australia too. As a parent i feel anxious about male childcare workers. My kids have had a few and while they seemed OK you can’t have total confidence in them as much as you do a female worker. Simply because men are more likely to sexually abuse children. Something like 96% of paedos are men, and often they will seek out careers them that give them access to young kids such as childcare, schools and ministry. It’s just a fact, and the fact naturally comes with increased risk which nat…
/r/MensRights04/07/25 10:26 AM
-17

Men are way more likely to sexually abuse children, especially children who are not their own. Experiencing maltreatment is not the same as having some sicko stick their cock in some kids mouth.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 10:13 AM
5

Sometimes anger is necessary for change. That’s how feminism was achieved, ya know, the whole bra burning, man hating , etc. Arguing our positions with facts and and logic does nothing to fuel the emotions necessary to snap the men of this world out of their stupor and something resembling collective action. If we are all gentlemanly we will get stomped on, so I’m all for the pettiness, hatred, anger and vile abuse if it opens more eyes.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 08:35 AM
9

This is actually not true. If you want any issue solved, physically or abstract, you always need men. What abstract problems have women solved by themselves? Their achievements as a collective are almost zero.
/r/MensRights04/07/25 01:20 AM
-1

Probably goes back thousands of years to how we evolved as a species. Men were out in the bush killing each other whilst women were together sharing baby raising tips. I actually believe there is a sense of brotherhood along most men however most are ashamed or embarrassed to express it. Societally there is a big stigma against being pro male or MRA because it runs contrary to the dominant feminist narratives about men being born assholes and inherently toxic. So anyone who questions or challeng…
/r/MensRights04/07/25 01:17 AM
7

For the most part women are wonderful. As are men. Some men can also be awful. As can some women. Neither gender has a monopoly on toxic or altruistic behaviours. What we really need to rally against is the idea that men are inherently dangerous or masculinity is toxic. Feminists are great at double speak in that they will go around sounding the alarm about toxic masculinity but when challenged they will argue that they are criticising a specific kind of masculinity , not masculinity in general.…
/r/MensRights02/07/25 03:45 AM
0

I don’t agree that men are deemed worthless, but we are certainly disposable when contrasted with women. There are many examples of this -Males make up 96% of homicide victims in the US -Boys are graduating less than girls from schools and college -Males are more likely to be victims of violent crime and armed robbery -Males make up 75% of homeless -Males are dying about 5 years sooner than females -Males receive higher incarceration rates and longer sentences for the same crimes -Males make up …
/r/MensRights01/07/25 05:25 AM
10

It doesn’t suit the male oppressor female victim narrative. But why blame feminists? Men are shyte at defending their own rights. Most men can’t be bothered because they don’t want to be accused as misogynist or even worse as gay. Their wives will be less likely to fuck them. It’s uncool and contrary to our reproductive value for men to defend other men, when we are hardwired to destroy each other for women and resources.
/r/MensRights30/06/25 08:41 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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