TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

xaliadouri Archive

View 1 posts and 136 comments by xaliadouri 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)
48

Generalxaliadouri/r/MensRights08/04/25 11:20 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
24

One thing was that it interviews Mattie, who said his brother committed suicide, he was homeless, hungry, crying every night... So what does Theroux conclude? "It struck me that The Matrix they rail against more accurately describes the algorithmic prison they've created for their followers." A leftist might say The Matrix is capitalism + nation-states + etc. Like how people said "the system" or "Squid Game."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/04/26 02:09 AM
1

Remember I mentioned intersectional feminism. In Crenshaw's legal essay on it, she mentions that Black women are the class which "because of its intersectionality, is best able to challenge all forms of discrimination." All right, so let's use this lens to observe this phenomenon of a black woman threatening a white man with rape. Not just casually like a bored serial rapist, but also in a room full of lawyers, transcribers and cameras. If someone at the weakest intersection of oppression can co…
/r/MensRights04/04/26 02:09 AM
0

A prison is an artificial environment with systematic brutality. This is a feature, not a bug. It enables people to openly terrorize men without needing physical advantage. In the modern bureaucratic state, elites who run the system can have any skin color. Take for example Kamala, the prosecutor who locked up parents if their kids missed school too much. (edited for brevity)
/r/MensRights03/04/26 04:00 PM
4

In a study, "Roughly around 60% of women report being submissive, and 40% of men report being dominant." Maybe these women are projecting their urges onto men. They want to be dominated more than we want to dominate them!
/r/MensRights03/04/26 03:03 AM
20

Women are violent with physically weaker people, like their kids. They just know better than to attack stronger people. They also leverage state violence. I'm curious how intersectional feminists would excuse this video of a black woman threatening a white man with rape.
/r/MensRights03/04/26 02:57 AM
11

This is also why it frustrates me when they say shit like “most men’s issues are caused by other men!” Yeah, that's like saying most humans' issues are caused by other humans... And don't they notice that men organize and act against those elite men? Just to take some reasonably well-known examples, David Graeber didn't help organize Occupy Wall St just for men. Norman Finkelstein didn't lose his job just helping male Palestinians. And that's just famous names. Most of us toil without recognitio…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/03/26 02:47 AM
11

Because divide & conquer is the elites' biggest weapon. Liberating men would include liberating us from slaving half our waking lives under bosses and bureaucrats. Speaking of that, feminism is freedom to be a competing slave. If it were anything more, feminists would be organizing together with the majority of men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/26 06:03 PM
4

I don't understand, what identitarian language is the problem? Maybe I'm just busy and skimming the article, but this is something that a male advocate could find useful: There seems, indeed, a decided lack of sympathy for noncombatant men in war zones. Even reports by international human rights organizations speak of massacres as being directed almost exclusively against women, children, and, perhaps, the elderly. The implication, almost never stated outright, is that adult males are either com…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/03/26 07:18 PM
77

Classic bullying, as analyzed by an anthropologist: triad of bully, victim and audience the audience just watches, even abets the bully the victim's reaction is retroactive justification for the bullying the victim can't simply leave institution bully backed by institutional power bullying's about humiliation The egalitarian position is that violent female bullies deserve getting hit just as much as violent male bullies. Welcome to the world of violence, where dumb shit has consequences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/03/26 04:31 AM
-4

What? I just said you should go ahead and do that. I'm not the Conversation Police, I believe in freedom. Now personally, I think race is weird pseudoscience and am sad that anyone has to identify as black, white, whatever. But I get it. In the US you can't escape it, with bureaucratic forms asking your race, and people like Benjamin Franklin endlessly debating things like whether Germans and Swedes are too swarthy to be white. Europe is different. To my knowledge, they typically don't go around…
/r/MensRights23/03/26 10:19 PM
-5

Maybe I missed it. Anyway sure, you should go right ahead and talk about your issues however you want. It's sad really. A Neo-Nazi recruiter said: "Recruiting a neo-Nazi was two steps basically. The first step was to get this kid to identify as white. ... In the late 80s, most people racialized as white didn't identify as white." That means identity politics leftists have been doing Nazis' work for them.
/r/MensRights23/03/26 09:43 PM
-5

I haven't seen that on LeftWingMaleAdvocates, but anyway we're discussing stuff like this.
/r/MensRights23/03/26 09:36 PM
11

Yep. Neo-Nazi recruiter: "Recruiting a neo-Nazi was two steps basically. The first step was to get this kid to identify as white. ... In the late 80s, most people racialized as white didn't identify as white." Great, now identity politics leftists are doing the Nazis' work. Race is just pseudoscience. Benjamin Franklin said Germans and Swedes were too swarthy to be white.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/26 09:28 PM
2

All economic systems have tradeoffs. And any given concrete implementation of socialism can have flaws that others don't. Even worse, socialism lost its traditional meaning: "control of production by producers, elimination of wage labor, democratization of all spheres of life; production, commerce, education, media, workers’ control in factories, community control of communities, and so on." We can divide socialism into state vs libertarian socialism. One is top-down, the other bottom-up. The to…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/26 07:26 PM
2

I was just briefly surprised until I looked closer at the sidebar. For example, leftists generally associate anti-statism with left-wing anarchists, not (just) right-wing libertarian minarchists. Nor would they hold up Russia/China as anti-capitalist societies to argue in favor of capitalism. And liberal feminists frequently cite intersectional feminism. I'm not saying you have to change in any way; just that I made too many assumptions on conversations here. Which could lead to misunderstanding…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/03/26 02:19 AM
4

Makes sense. Based on our previous interactions, you're a doctor, professional-managerial class, pro-capitalist, doesn't bat an eyelid when a woman's opened to harassment without compensation for corporate profit because she "she signed a contract". Basically a liberal feminist. I was surprised, but looking at the sidebar, I see that can be expected here. I got this subreddit confused with another.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/03/26 11:28 PM
9

Yeah, nowadays the right wing are seen as the ones with a critique of bureaucracy. It's less well known that anarchists have left-wing critiques, like David Graeber's "Utopia of Rules". Why? Well, the old Soviet Union was basically ruled by a professional-managerial-bureaucratic class called the New Class. It was like one big corporation. In capitalist countries, they're not the ruling class, but a hidden 3rd class between capitalists and workers. They're often liberal, and in the US are represe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/03/26 11:12 PM
6

It's literally what Theroux said. He's an old media propagandist with his own media company, in contrast to these new media propagandists. They all operate in capitalism. So Theroux won't delve into the structural cause of homelessness/hunger, because modern propaganda works by leaving things out. That's the whole idea of the Overton Window. You're a feminist. Are you happy with how Theroux exploits women like Angie, who begged Theroux "thousands of times" to be let out of the documentary, citin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/03/26 10:37 PM
8

Theroux was the conspiracy nut. He concludes: "It struck me that The Matrix they rail against more accurately describes the algorithmic prison they've created for their followers." This is incoherent after Mattie's description of The Matrix: going homeless and hungry after his brother committed suicide, knowing that as a man, no one will save you. Through the red pill manosphere, he made friends, exercised and built skills. Most of us would spit out "It's capitalism" much faster than Theroux cou…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/03/26 07:29 PM
23

People spam "get therapy!" If they knew anything about it, they wouldn't talk that way. For one thing, WHAT therapy? There's many kinds. Psychoanalysis? CBT? Person Centered Therapy? These are hugely different. And then there's the puzzle of finding a decent practitioner (most aren't), maybe starting with looking for people who wrote good papers/articles and asking them for references. Maybe you want to find one outside your country. And then there's the bias for getting pre-packaged solutions f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/26 07:20 PM
5

I'm sorry to hear that! It could help to integrate the best of what you've learned and discard the rest. Many spam ideologies/mindsets in a totalizing way. Better to add them to your intellectual toolbelt. Your mother's clearly a conceptual spammer, on autopilot with minimal reasoned thought... at least on these topics. And that may be etched a bit into you. What's red pill concepts useful for? A hierarchichal, darwinian Squid Game world where you have no intrinsic value and must prove it. In co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/26 07:07 PM
3

I don't mean to be sarcastic; it's just either a utopian workplace or a description biased in favor of just the positive things. Rather than be argumentative by choosing the latter, I opted to take your description at face value. I've helped people reimagine hospitals (both patients and staff), read case studies of hospital unionizing, and learned about radically advanced healthcare systems in Rojava and Exarcheia). For analyzing workplace hierarchies, there's tools like "power mapping". Which c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/03/26 04:14 AM
2

Interesting, so you've achieved a utopian anarcho-syndicalist workplace? This is exceedingly rare. Could you point me to a documentary or book/articles/papers describing it?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/26 01:11 PM
1

Interesting... maybe I'm slow today, but how does hooks's definition of patriarchy reinforce patriarchy? I can see how "toxic masculinity" can reinforce toxic masculinity, by pushing us to a stoicism & meaninglessness that leads to nihilism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/26 03:56 AM
1

I hear that's a notorious problem in medicine — accepting things "without question", like that division of labor. No doubt due to all the hazing. Some physicists like Hossenfelder do question these things, and discuss problems like "Too much math piled on top of math piled on top of math" and "In the absence of guidance from experiments, theorists use aesthetic criteria". Social "scientists" like anthropologists can't just run experiments, so they resort to fieldwork and ethnographies. Anthropol…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/26 03:33 AM
57

Theroux's perverse. Mattie said that he was recently homeless and his brother committed suicide. "As a man, nobody's gonna give you a handout." So what does Theroux conclude at the end? "It struck me that The Matrix they rail against more accurately describes the algorithmic prison they've created for their followers." But that "algorithmic prison" didn't make Mattie homeless. It didn't cause Justin's mother to burn down his homes for insurance money. It didn't pressure HSTikkyTokky to make the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/26 10:45 AM
6

Theorists should do praxis: solving real-world problems. They can build powerful abstractions by interacting with reality, seeing how it responds, and thinking about the underlying mechanisms. I mean direct action, not rallies/protest. Regarding your questions... What do we mean by "love" — namby-pamby touchy-feelies, or someone out to fight for the underdog with integrity? Who says misandrists and misogynists were never loved? Can't you hate people while still considering them human? Take a wom…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/03/26 12:10 AM
22

I actually analyzed quotes from her work, analyzing what was good & bad, but my comment here apparently was just deleted. Assuming I'm not entirely hallucinating how useful my comments are, I think the world is hostile to "citations and facts". [Edit: Reddit auto-deleted it for some reason. The mods fished it out, so it's back.]
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/26 09:02 PM
25

bell hooks's "The Will to Change" can be useful; you just have to critically clean off the dirt and cook it. Just like anything else. What do I like about her book? For one thing, she criticizes feminists who: pushed the idea that all men were powerful in the first place. These were the women for whom feminist liberation was more about getting their piece of the power pie and less about freeing masses of women or less powerful men from sexist oppression. They were not mad at their powerful daddi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/26 07:18 PM
1

Depends on what "left" you're talking about. Anyone can call themselves left, including fascists. And many imaginative people don't call themselves left, but are more left than most leftists. So take the anarchist David Graeber, who coined part of "We are the 99%". He started co-writing a book to discover "the origins of social inequality" — than realized that's the wrong question. What's important is freedom, not equality. So they wondered why they're asking the wrong question. And discovered t…
/r/MensRights15/03/26 03:03 PM
4

Who knows, maybe zones of experimentation that includes ideas like Participatory Economics, and so on. We're talking about economic innovation, we might as well be medieval people guessing at what might replace feudalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/26 12:15 PM
23

If no one finds you in their interest ("interesting"), you get nothing, not even food/shelter. Not to mention love. Because they're scarce, usually artificially. I think the vagueness of "interesting" is its evergreen strength. It's completely defined by female and managerial gazes, whatever that may be; it differs a bit from gaze to gaze. And its mystery means you devote time and buy stuff: surfboard, musical instrument, foreign language lessons and trips, etc. Making you feel inadequate compar…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/26 05:30 PM
3

Couldn't have put it better myself! Guess that means I'd better steal it...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/26 05:01 PM
11

I'm sure that has happened but we're not working to fix individuals, we're working to fix a system that is incorrect/unfair Hmm, I'd say the person you're responding to is pointing out a systematic hazing that generates experiences that we individually perceive. So it's about institutional critique, not pathological individuals/cabals If women were treated similarly, I'd also say that's fucked up. Not a wise left
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/03/26 05:24 PM
3

Eh. Well, that's why I prefer to use the term "manosphere" while ignoring the absurd connotations put on it by mainstream society. So I'd say this subreddit is in the manosphere. Otherwise the notion of manosphere starts becoming incoherent: how can MRAs be manosphere and this place isn't?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/25 11:20 PM
1

Hmm, I guess people should use "men's media"? If manosphere strongly connotes sexism against women. Because this place is clearly part of men's media.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/04/25 09:23 PM
12

Ah, because women aren't expected to have integrity? Like a robber who justifies themselves by saying someone robbed them once... Perhaps it is true, that integrity is a male trait. We are praised for using rationality to arrive at truths and meanings, and derided as emotional when we vindictively misuse words like incel.
/r/MensRights28/04/25 02:35 AM
1

For anyone reading this in the future: I showed a video of a woman publicly threatening a man with institutionalized rape. (What male judge does that to women?) This replier doesn't give a damn. I actually have helped women fight back against rapists, much more than feminists actually do. Anyway, such trolls are out to eat people's time so they can't help more people fight attackers. Sorry for anyone I failed to help because I was responding to this troll.
/r/MensRights27/04/25 10:31 PM
0

There's many alternatives to capitalism and bolshevism. Despite the 1980's TINA doctrine: There Is No Alternative to two awful systems. Somehow, people think that tech gives us fewer alternatives, rather than more. For example, take Rojava in N. Syria, which is a large model of self-directed people. Here's a documentary, and check its notes for a recent update. And that's in a war zone, not an easy feat. Of course, we shouldn't impose One True Blueprint on everyone; that's dystopian. Rather, we …
/r/MensRights27/04/25 06:41 PM
1

Here's one way how women rape men. Any leftist (or even liberal) would tell you that it's similar to how white women got black men lynched. There's many posts here afraid of how women can ruin men's lives this way. Anyway, back to the point, both women and men are similarly violent. Yet this politician claimed "The problem is men." Carefully limiting herself to the subset of violence where women are scared to target men. I think you understand, so please understand if I don't keep spending hours…
/r/MensRights27/04/25 06:16 PM
1

Strangers are typically the least dangerous. Wanna see a fearful kid? Have them come home with bad grades, or not clean their room. But anyway, that line of argument just repurposes the Scary Black Man On The Street trope that racists use to "prove" that black people are more dangerous.
/r/MensRights27/04/25 05:19 PM
6

I remember visiting a mall, and one worker there discussed Tate. I asked him what he thought of Tate, and he said "He's not out for good, but he's important to listen to." I agree. It's funny that of all people, it's Andrew Tate who tells people to "Escape Slavery". Once upon a time, leftists used to oppose wageslavery. Of course, that's his tagline for his private school, rather than actually abolishing wageslavery. And when you look closely, he brags about thieving wages from his women workers…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/04/25 09:09 AM
5

Well, at least we share similar perspectives! I respect that. But ok, the previous poster probed the system and discovered its reaction. So I think that's part of the authoritarian-training itself, for the more free-willed students to discover the consequences. For professional-managerial type jobs, Jeff Schmidt's "Disciplined Minds" iirc points out that cynical professionals are often considered more sophisticated than true believers. Presumably those cynics had a few clashes with authority. Ma…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/04/25 12:31 AM
8

That's the problem. School teaches one how to subordinate yourself to bosses — "boss" was apparently introduced as a euphemism for "master". Life skills for unfree people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/25 10:46 PM
19

So many fallacies: If trans people were half the population, wouldn't she have negative interactions with some? What would possess a sane trans person to be rude in a women's bathroom, immediately causing hysteria and dedicated TERFs? Let's turn it around: how often do trans people have negative interactions with women? An uncharitable man exposed to such putdowns might wonder if women are more prone to statistical and logical fallacies.
/r/MensRights20/04/25 01:32 PM
85

Telling quotes: "poor pupil behavior" They're forced into rooms to be graded like beef, and solidarity is "cheating." In preparation to be good little wageslaves. No wonder they're rebelling. "They read lots of fake news and sensationalised stories that make them feel empowered and that they know better than the teacher." How terrible, they, um, "feel empowered". And dare to disobey the authority figure. Obviously, bullying is a problem, but teachers often encourage (or at least ignore) it, like…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/04/25 12:22 AM
5

As I understand, these women are mainly into classical liberalism? "Liberal feminism" is different: more led by the professional managerial class, which is in between workers and capitalists. This class was indeed the Soviet Union's ruling class, which is why the marxist label kinda sticks. Hillary Clinton is one famous liberal feminist. I agree bell hooks is far left. She doesn't seem marxist; she has an interest in anarchist ideas, which many self-described marxists dismiss. And she's very sym…
/r/MensRights19/04/25 12:44 AM
17

It's true. The left needs to focus on solidarity between humans, not partitioning people into as many warring genders as there are nation-states. Christianity started as the religion of the oppressed, and became the state religion of the Roman elites. Similarly, mainstream liberal feminism coopted the left (and I think women's movements too), and brought into the left all sorts of censorious anti-freedom professional-managerial class people.
/r/MensRights18/04/25 11:19 PM
1

Glad to hear, I think we agree! BTW, those two Daves are a serious anthropologist and archaeologist duo whose book was well received. I think they use "patriarchy" in a useful way: not to engage in propaganda, but to understand social reality — and identify real-world matriarchies. So they had good reason to be more careful than most.
/r/MensRights18/04/25 10:26 PM
-5

Patriarchy isn't exactly rule by male heads of household. More precisely, it's a symbolic model based on it, for other fields of social life. For example, a CEO runs a corporation kinda like his household; a head of state kinda runs a country kinda like his household, etc. In this light, most men are basically underlings in some household-like social structure. No wonder why many men fought it, including the man who coined "feminism", and many well known anti-authoritarian men. Now, reformist wo…
/r/MensRights18/04/25 05:03 PM
32

I'd say the problem isn't the term "toxic masculinity", but rather the context it exists in: pop discourse, with its low standards. For example, they throw around the word "patriarchy", but can't actually tell you what it means! Very unprincipled and inconsistent. We can imagine a better morality-based discourse. And sure, maybe sometime we'll discuss something we'd call "toxic masculinity", but it'd be in a context where we also examine women's complicity in reproducing it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/04/25 01:20 AM
6

Yeah, even feminists get surprised when they get this 'ick'. Not all women do, but you can't tell who beforehand, because even they might not know.
/r/MensRights17/04/25 02:27 AM
26

They're not so scared when they beat their kids more than men. They're fine targeting weaker people. Also interpersonal violence between lesbians seems about as common as among heterosexual couples. (Some say more.) Maybe they just know how violent they'd act if they were stronger?
/r/MensRights16/04/25 06:55 PM
12

When replying to a hateful person, I also find it helps to actually be speaking to openminded onlookers. It's extremely difficult to change a relentless debater's mind, but they're not the real audience. Norman Finkelstein does this in his classes, citing: "There are always good arguments on both sides of any real issue. [...] A professor must play both combatants in the classroom — the advocate and the devil’s advocate — while the student spectators actively engage, wrestle with the contending …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/04/25 05:38 PM
10

There's lit on men's suicides. Isak Niehaus mentioned two styles: - monologue: Men tended to do this. "Marked by an attempt to escape from unbearable situations, and to limit the effects of the death beyond the event" - dialogue: Women tended to do this. "Expressive acts that are directed outward as a means of communication and form part of an ongoing discourse between persons. There is an explicit attempt to affect other people and situations." Men's reasons differ, but it's generally because t…
/r/MensRights15/04/25 05:24 PM
1

Here's a good explanation by Chomsky. The Golden Rule says you apply to yourself the same standards that you apply to others. It's a double universal: we universally accept it in principle, but universally violate it in practice.
/r/MensRights14/04/25 07:02 PM
17

Women rape men using the prison system. Here's an example of a female judge threatening a younger man with rape. My brief analysis.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 06:42 PM
2

I totally agree. This hidden class is an incredibly powerful concept that explains why people rather vote for a rich kid rather than a liberal. Also explains who was the Soviet Union's ruling class, why white working class people hate professors, etc. I think Participatory Economics has the best explanation of it, calling it the "coordinator class".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 02:41 PM
-1

Do you know a non-misandrist feminism? Can you show me a single example of a notable feminist condemning feminist hate against men? [Don't bother, you can't, there is none]. Sure I can. Take bell hooks, the well known feminist: "Hating men was just another way to not take men and masculinity seriously. It was simply easier for feminist women to talk about challenging and changing patriarchy than it was for us to talk about men—what we knew and did not know, about the ways we wanted men to change…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 10:56 AM
9

Why would listing "progressive left's toxic positions" get the post removed? Is this subreddit heavily censored? Some points: The post clearly mentioned "misandrist feminism", as opposed to segments with more solidarity. No one's talking about a "false flag op by the far right". Simply that elites regularly coopts leftwing movements. Take for instance the Roman empire, which turned a religion of the poor into a religion of the elites. In particular, they divide people, as part of the usual divid…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 09:48 AM
143

Putting aside the CNN puff piece (I read the transcript), that's an interesting word: "insecure". Women use it so often. They're the most insecure people around, they paint their fucking faces and pad their bras. I guess confidence is an attraction trigger for them, and they lose attraction when a man wasn't hyper-confident out of the womb. God forbid we feel insecure because we have to scrap like dogs for artificially scarce food and shelter, or slowly build confidence through competence. Maybe…
/r/MensRights13/04/25 07:42 PM
9

Some feminists do call for men's freedom from toil, so we can all work together and fix our crazy world. But every political word is twisted and weaponized so we can't even talk: liberal, conservative, feminism, anarchism, etc. So in the US, "liberals" and "conservatives" are often good-cop & bad-cop. Many sympathetic men were ready to ally with feminists, but they got utterly humiliated, alienated and lied to. If you strip away someone's dignity and respect, they stop being loyal. Organizers kn…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 07:00 PM
25

I am sick of this. I've fought men who raped women & girls. I hope that gives me the legitimacy to say: - It's disgusting to focus so intensely on rape, when there's homeless people (more men, but also women) close to big piles of food and empty homes. Rape is traumatic as hell. You know what's also traumatic? Being human trash, all your dreams destroyed, no one gives a SHIT about you in an age of artificial scarcity despite abundance. This is the implicit threat that keeps people running on ham…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 06:37 PM
40

bell hooks even talked about how they even backstab women: Reformist feminist women could not make this call because they were the group of women (mostly white women with class privilege) who had pushed the idea that all men were powerful in the first place. These were the women for whom feminist liberation was more about getting their piece of the power pie and less about freeing masses of women or less powerful men from sexist oppression. They were not mad at their powerful daddies and husband…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 06:14 PM
4

It helps to ask what "right wing" means. And that gets us into controversy on the left. For example, Chomsky mentioned: If the left is understood to include 'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the left. Lenin was one of the greatest enemies of socialism, in my opinion, for reasons I've discussed. At the risk of angering many here, I'll say the right wing basically are the elites. Lenin was the ultimate elite of the Soviet Union; and Democrats are about 1/2 of the US business…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 01:18 PM
10

Women don't stop at mating & befriending strong men. They apparently want to raise strong men too. Weak men give them the visceral 'ick'. Especially since sons may protect them when they're old.
/r/MensRights13/04/25 05:29 AM
13

Why? Mothers seem to beat up their kids more than dads. (Study one, two.) But let's be generous and say women are just as violent to kids as men. Then we see women are at best equally likely to beat up weaker people. They just don't target stronger people. Which explains why some observe interpersonal "violence appears to be about as common among lesbian couples as among heterosexual couples".
/r/MensRights13/04/25 03:55 AM
15

Sadly, I recall over 50% of new mothers have intrusive thoughts about harming their crying babies. This leads to massive guilt. After all, crying children are like sirens; people often want to do anything to silence the baby, including disturbing thoughts of dashing its head against the wall. Many mothers punish displays of "weakness" in boys, rationalizing their actions by saying men need to be tough in this world.
/r/MensRights12/04/25 11:53 PM
11

First off, it's great you're honest. If you get backlash, remember you have the integrity to look hard in the mirror, and that says a lot about you! It's actually noble to provide comfort despite your secret lack of empathy. Many (not all) women have this problem. Like bell hooks said in "The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love": When I was in my twenties, I would go to couples therapy, and my partner of more than ten years would explain how I asked him to talk about his feelings and when…
/r/MensRights12/04/25 11:43 PM
7

I think people should say what they mean by "red pill". Like Orion Taraban, who by any standard is well spoken and evenhanded? Or Fresh & Fit, who may have lurid panels with women and promote rightwing politics, but also help men with financial advice and call-in shows? In anti-egalitarian societies, many men are indeed "losers". Whose dreams get crushed, unable to even care for themselves, much less others. Whereas winners often must act with pathological self-interest, like restaurant owners u…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/25 07:12 PM
6

That'd be great, but where's the movement or even subreddit that even comes close to that? That's what the left should be about, but currently it's about identity politics: fragmenting people into warring little nations along race, gender, [cough not class] etc.
/r/MensRights12/04/25 02:01 AM
6

There's some increasing pushback against identity politics, like with Norman Finkelstein's book "I'll Burn That Bridge When I Get to It!". Others might follow in the direction of men's issues. But who knows.
/r/MensRights11/04/25 10:56 PM
3

Pretty much. As Orion Taraban says, men see women, as women see children, and children see animals (pets). This relation of care starts from men, which is why no one will save us. I don't know how universal this is, but it's commonly true in cultures I've seen. We can imagine societies which support men, but many of us don't live in them.
/r/MensRights11/04/25 07:52 PM
2

There was a recent book (The Dawn of Everything) that started out looking at the origins of inequality. Then the authors realized it should be about loss of freedoms.
/r/MensRights10/04/25 08:12 PM
-1

The left is complicated. There's some on the left who support men when fair, women when fair, and unify both against elites who keep them down. I'm sure Noam Chomsky is one, though he reserves most energy for big issues impacting everyone like wageslavery, climate change and genocide. Or Norman Finkelstein, who spoke out against identity politics absurdity. But it's true, there's a problem on the left finding such people. Anyway, I don't believe in role models, though it can be wise to pick & ch…
/r/MensRights09/04/25 08:07 PM
1

What I think most people don’t know is that children really don’t know what they want and they spend a significant part of their development trying to figure out what’s important and what they should want (ie. what is “normal”). Good point. I think people should get honest pros & cons of different ways of living. With enough freedom to really choose and experiment. And I mean REALLY honest: both men and women are fucked-up talking animals with lots of attributes that come from evolving in a univ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 04:19 PM
2

I'm glad you find people here willing to wrestle together with these issues! I hope that doesn't change, and we don't one day disappoint you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 03:35 PM
7

Sad to hear these kneejerk fear reactions. When Chomsky reads the NYT or Wall St Journal, should we freak out that he's being seduced by the US propaganda pipeline? People (particularly leftists) are so closed-minded, unable to sift critically though diverse perspectives, keeping what's useful and discarding/modifying the rest. So they don't exercise muscles for extracting ideas from diverse sources. Rightwing media often contains useful insights. It's just often wrapped in a biased context. Lef…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:22 AM
-3

My relationships are fine, because I'm happy to also fight for underdog women, and I try to listen and use reason. Many women actually hate feminists overall. Also, I think my redpill influence makes me more attractive. Especially because I remove some of the authoritarianism that redpillers piggyback on their otherwise useful insights on being effective in society. Women tend to be turned on by some amount of authoritarianism, but you can get a lot of mileage by wielding it tactically like a ra…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 12:15 AM
15

While I see women regularly handpick some silly tweet by a guy with 33 followers, and declare "This is why I couldn't care less about the male loneliness epidemic" Like they ever would care
/r/MensRights07/04/25 10:43 PM
20

Women rape men all the time. They just use prison to do it. Here's a female judge threatening a younger man with rape. Gruesomely describing what happens when she throws men into brutal, unnatural conditions that provoke the worst instincts in any animal. Many feminists will say "No, it's just the prisoners being rapists, not the judge!" But we don't act that way in chess clubs or MMA gyms. No, that's like throwing someone to starved dogs, and then blaming the dogs for eating her. That's still m…
/r/MensRights07/04/25 10:36 PM
13

While this looks like a good initiative, just some hopefully minor quibbles. Now, I understand that maybe the mods are fine with all this. But just wanted to mention things that might actually have an impact... now or down the road. "zero tolerance" I'm not sure this sets the right tone. Leftwing online spaces are often pretty harsh and depressing, and I mostly avoid them. Rightwingers are able to pretend they're more into free speech, for a reason. Because we've adopted their cancel culture. "r…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/12/24 01:39 AM
16

Capitalism means humans are in positions of power. Therefore it benefits humans, one might argue! Obviously no leftist (or maybe even any sane person) finds that convincing. So let's look at the structure of patriarchy. Ever notice that feminists never seriously define patriarchy? bell hooks was mentioned by the OP, so let's take what she said: In patriarchal culture males are not allowed simply to be who they are and to glory in their unique identity. Their value is always determined by what th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/24 06:36 PM
2

Well, one theory is that about every 4 years, a new elite individual lives in a white house. This person is like a forum mod, but for the most powerful country in the world. Each such individual is surrounded by advisors and deputies. Sometimes they're innovative; other times they're just keeping the machine moving forward with little self-critical reflection. They oversee a global operation, meeting behind closed doors to conspire about... oil prices in the Middle East, quelling rebellions in t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/24 02:55 PM
6

Yep. Suppose you and I were constantly fighting each other, to get ahead. We'd accomplish more if we simply stopped fighting, or especially teamed up. As Noam Chomsky mentioned, "The fact that societies today are so stratified and divided by hatreds means that elites don’t have to go very far away to bring in people who are willing to repress you." We can easily see it when some conqueror plays groups off each other. Consider how most people spend half their waking lives in workplaces where they…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/24 12:10 PM
10

I agree. I've seen how women treat incels, and of course I mean the usual decent lonely ones who just want to swallow the blackpill and die. You see people's true nature, when you see how disrespectfully they treat underdogs. Nowadays I hope I can override my internal white knight. I'm not trained to intervene, and it may make the situation worse. Maybe there's a concealed weapon. For all I know, she did something violent that caused the attack. I have to consider whether calling the police is e…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/12/24 04:27 AM
5

Like others in the thread said, we should separate conspiratorial made-up definitions from historical/anthropological ones. This is a long response. But by the end, hopefully patriarchy's meaning & history will be far clearer than usual. So let's look at the definition offered by anthropologist David Graeber and archaeologist David Wengrow: ‘patriarchy’, after all, refers not primarily to the fact that men wield public office, but first and foremost to the authority of patriarchs, that is, male …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/12/24 08:10 PM
1

I'm sorry for what women put you through, my struggling man. Even feminists like bell hooks warn you: don't share your male pain with women! "My partner of more than ten years would explain how I asked him to talk about his feelings and when he did, I would freak out." Yep. Überfeminist bell hooks got 'the ick' because "I did not want my image of the strong man truly challenged by learning of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities." You may get fooled when women wheedle and beg you to open up, getti…
/r/MensRights25/12/24 12:56 AM
1

I've noticed that women I know sometimes fall in love with therapists. Last week, it suddenly made sense to me, as I helped a woman with an extreme crush on her narcissistic therapist. She texts him with mountains of words, and hysterically keeps asking me if he sounds like he's in love with her. Women want time and attention. Men want touch and sex. (Generally & relatively speaking.) A male therapist can become like a legalized prostitute for women.
/r/MensRights24/12/24 11:11 PM
0

It was probably inevitable. Any -ism is ideological programming. There's some exceptions maybe, like maybe anarchism is more of a tendency than ideology. But liberal attitudes have infiltrated even anarchist communities. Maybe partly because of woke liberals encountering anarchists and performatively acting astonished that anarchists aren't "radical" enough.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/24 07:54 PM
39

Yeah, if half the population were bears, I wouldn't leave home. I'd rather not have my eyeballs eaten by something that can't even debate the morality of it. This really makes women look hysterical, or liars. Not a good look.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/24 06:29 PM
1

Interesting analysis! I'll definitely think on it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/12/24 07:16 AM
21

Wow, it seems that many women just give a performative answer. Communicating something other than their ostensible answer. Not out to listen, just be listened to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 08:42 PM
14

Oh yes, definitely! Clearly you and your fiancee are able to have reasonable discussions where you come to a mutual understanding, and sound lucky to have each other. You winner. I've edited it to say "one's girlfriend." When I said "your girlfriend," I wasn't referring to her, but rather had in mind an ex of mine. And women I've observed, who at times seem to be out looking for trouble. Generally just emotionally increase confrontation, when peaceful resolutions are easier and they weren't sign…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 08:02 PM
112

Good points. Women are able to mobilize social violence through displays of fear and hurt. They don't have to pull the trigger; they just find men to do it. Maybe that's why many define "the patriarchy" in a conspiratorial non-anthropological way. Because from their perspective, Man World tacitly provides a pool of violence for them. Like police and male friends. When one's girlfriend picks a fight with a guy in public, she often stands back to watch men display intimidation and violence for her…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 07:48 PM
0

Maybe that's the issue. Part of getting good is showing up, and persisting. The etymology of "win": to desire, strive for. That's why I said there's many possible factors. We each can name 5 possible factors that aren't chess club sexism. When chess clubs bend over backwards in the name of diversity, hyped by movies like Queen's Gambit, do women show up and struggle like the men? If not, what are the conditions where women would be as "good at chess" like men? In the overall sense that we're dis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 06:33 PM
4

The pluralization may actually be useful due to its brevity. Lots of confusions do happen when people think of "The Left." Which contains many contradictory movements, many of which people doubt are actually "left." (Was Obama a leftist? Are Leninists rightwingers of an alternative system?) Just like any other political term is abused: Was the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) democratic? Is the US a real democracy?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 06:04 PM
1

Yep, I believe I understand your theory and analysis so far. It's just you mention it's all statistics, and I'm just wondering where these stats are, that support this theory and rule out some alternatives. Like results from those clubs that make an effort to cancel out sexism. When it comes to claims of sexism against women, I realize there's a common feeling that requests for evidence are de facto criticisms. But no, I'm just curious; and if there's good evidence, we must all consider changing…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/12/24 03:04 AM
0

Is there evidence that men and women would perform similarly at chess, absent prejudice? There's many other factors at work simultaneously; prejudice is only one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/24 04:35 PM
1

Depends. If by "socialism" we mean something like the Soviet Union, which was basically run like a big corporation, sure it would suck. Instead of capitalists, it'd be ruled by the professional/managerial/bureaucratic class. Who would beat the workers with the People's Stick. Instead, we might use its previous meaning before all the propaganda. Chomsky said it once meant: "control of production by producers, elimination of wage labor, democratization of all spheres of life; production, commerce,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/24 04:05 PM
11

I largely agree with this article! I just currently differ on a couple minor details, that I think are useful to share. I think we shouldn't put down the redpill, or treat it like "toxic masculinity." For example, is Orion Taraban toxic? Redpill is a movement that in general encourages you to do well in hierarchy. But as Graeber and Wengrow point out, "Egalitarian cities, even regional confederacies, are historically quite commonplace. Egalitarian families and households are not." So to the exte…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/12/24 07:21 PM
4

Very much agreed! tbh even I took some faint comfort in Trump's win (which may destroy the environment and more): Hey, at least it triggered some really obnoxious feminist-wannabee libtards. Your point with "The Problem with Modern Expectations" should already be understood by feminists who brag about reading bell hooks. She said: Yet this was the model of freedom offered men by mainstream feminist thought. Men were expected to hold on to the ideas about strength and providing for others that we…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/24 09:08 PM
9

People are obsessed with social purpose. They worry about and take pride in social competence, spend endless hours painting and shaping their bodies, brag about how seductively they look/act, try impressing others with their technical skills, photograph themselves for Instagram, talk with friends, raise children, complain about how unloved they were 5 years ago, etc. Just so they can be recognized as someone worthy to take a place in social relations. Even if they have adequate food and shelter,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/24 08:47 PM
0

Workplace organizers know to immediately exploit this error of bosses: stripping employees of respect and dignity. The boss can thieve wages or be shockingly tyrannical even by tyrant standards. But when they screw with your respect and dignity, they make it personal. Birthed a saboteur. Then the organizer pounces. Rightwing organizers have every right to do this too. Smart ones pounce on the left's lack of solidarity. Suckers. Leftists once considered it obvious that people need purpose in life…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/24 08:06 PM
12

I'm actually interested in the topic of redpill slut shaming! Does it happen much outside Fresh and Fit? I think Fresh and Fit are actually shaming MEN for getting into serious relationships with them. With panels of women, they're not really talking with the women. Instead, they're talking to the male audience, through the spectacle. So why are they shaming men for getting into relationships with high-bodycount women? I think because many men aren't allowed to openly admit they prefer women wit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/24 02:00 AM
15

I agree. It's more enjoyable to simply stop caring. When confronted by such dismissive female jerks on the internet, I just lean into my masculinity and shrug. "Yeah I'm a white knight. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯" I get a little Trumpian, saying I do it for the adventure. I ask when they've ever directly intervened to solve problems for women under attack. (So far, they never have. But I hope it'll happen one day.) Then I point out my credentials, offering case studies. They get SO angry! And still, anyone who m…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/12/24 09:06 PM
6

There's areas of antagonism between genders. One can attempt to unify people to generally avoid antagonisms (which I think would be great), but there's other solutions. Like raising one side's bargaining power relative to the other.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/12/24 12:55 PM
1

Well, I think the big question is: how to team up with potentially helpful individuals in the men's movement? Anyone using the word "patriarchy" should define it reasonably. I think this is a good one, that many people can get behind. Also, why label yourself "feminist"? Many organizers avoid labeling themselves. Political terms are notoriously distorted, carrying little information. What are your ideas? What value do you bring people towards winning freedom? Regarding your bullet points, I thin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/24 07:52 PM
0

One needs to make the effort to understand. If I understand what the OP is saying, then it's quite simple for me to understand why some women find men's communication patterns frustrating. Because it's the flipside behavior.
/r/MensRights11/12/24 02:22 PM
2

Well, it's true. In personal romantic relationships, this mental model helps: women want time/attention, and men want physical intimacy. It's just a mental model; and like all mental models, it's a simplified view of reality. But generally, people trade one to get the other, because there's a relative asymmetry in our powerful urges/desires. Men often like having women around, but not necessarily engaging in conversation. Hence the "man cave." There's of course lovely exceptions. Where both just…
/r/MensRights11/12/24 02:19 PM
6

From a real leftist standpoint, both parties are goodcop/badcop. They're two competing state factions vying to run the state for a few years. They agree far more than they disagree. Yes, goodcop's better on important problems like climate change and so on. But there's reasons why they're about 50/50. If goodcop seriously appealed to more people, with clear policies that better helped the majority of voters, it'd win virtually all the time. "Populism" means actually helping the populace, as oppos…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/24 01:21 PM
17

Kamala herself confided “We need to move ground among men,” unaware she was recorded. The OP's analysis is pretty consistent with much progressive and leftist thought. Not far from Breaking points or Norman Finkelstein. Smearing the OP as "agitator" is part of the woke cancel culture infighting that took root on the left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/24 01:15 PM
2

I've read the book, and am curious what criticisms you have about her frame of reference! I definitely have a couple criticisms, but otherwise I think she's self-questioning and tries to use theory to explain reality. So she doesn't go absurd with theory. I think her work held up well and explains many problems. Let's split most people's lives into three worlds: personal, workplace, and "third places" (like clubs, church, etc). In the workplace world: You're usually supposed to wear your "public…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/24 03:32 PM
1

Hey! I guess caring starts with knowing what you're going through. Would you like to tell us something about what's going on?
/r/MensRights10/12/24 01:24 AM
1

Winner
/r/MensRights09/12/24 08:08 PM
3

Yes, I do calculate, because I care about how my actions affect others and myself. Exactly what Florence Nightingale was referring to. She was a statistician and founder of modern nursing. She rebutted the claim that "women are more sympathetic than men": Women have no sympathy. Yours is the tradition. Mine is the conviction of experience. I have never found one woman who has altered her life by one iota for me or my opinions. Now look at my experience of men. A statesman [Sidney Herbert], past …
/r/MensRights09/12/24 06:54 PM
2

Thank you, I love the way you put it. Maybe I'll tell some friends that. Women can be so cruel to each other. Of course, I said: "Children seem far crazier and high maintenance." You interpreted that as: "women who are as emotionally immature as children." Is it inconceivable to women that I might have sympathy for those going through difficult moments? Probably explains why Florence Nightingale wrote: Women crave for being loved, not for loving. They scream out at you for sympathy all day long,…
/r/MensRights09/12/24 05:09 PM
2

We might ask: Why do women want babies? Children seem far crazier and high maintenance, for quite a while. This is why common advice is that men look at women, like women look at children; and like children look at pets. Women generally crave men's time/attention. Just like men crave sex. Why am I in relationships with such women? Because ideally, they provide me with things I value, that more than make up for what I give them. Like physical beauty, being chill with me erotically enjoying other …
/r/MensRights09/12/24 04:30 PM
5

I'm ready to deal with bawling women. I personally had girlfriends who freaked out, cried their asses off, or act similarly emotional when confronted with even trivially solvable obstacles. In many cultures, it's a mainstream notion that women are much more emotional than men. (Regardless whether everyone agrees.) And that men take care of women's tears, so women can take care of children's tears. Not all women are so emotional, but it's obviously common. It's "alarming" in the sense that a baby…
/r/MensRights09/12/24 03:58 PM
5

I'm sorry to hear that. Yep, the "ick" is real. For those who don't understand: what if your CEO started crying? Suddenly most people will start polishing their resumes. Some will start testing him to see what they can get away with. And that's not the only "ick." Women have the ick about all sorts of things. Which I guess is their heuristics to measure male attractiveness; men's measures are usually simpler: mainly appearance. I think it's a combination of biological and cultural, as usual. It …
/r/MensRights09/12/24 06:29 AM
9

Do you think society places unrealistic expectations on men when it comes to emotions? Not necessarily, because these are brutal societies. So being unemotional (aside from anger) helps you get through them. The problem is, they just lie about their brutality. And crush many men who'd actually become stronger if they found sympathy. How can we make it safer for men to open up without the fear of judgment or rejection? Honesty goes a long way. If we're just told upfront that most people are unsym…
/r/MensRights08/12/24 11:34 PM
9

Men already checked out feminism. So we know they're not that way. Only a subset of radical feminists are. Take bell hooks. Instead of saying "Yay feminists, we love puppies & rainbows," she instead talks about the masses of feminists "for whom feminist liberation was more about getting their piece of the power pie and less about freeing masses of women or less powerful men from sexist oppression." And now many women despise feminists too, because feminists don't even care about most women. Who …
/r/MensRights07/12/24 05:07 PM
3

This is why it's important to have a good definition of patriarchy. Women can be the patriarchs running institutions. As bell hooks points out in that link, this explains mainstream (liberal) feminism: "They were not mad at their powerful daddies and husbands who kept poor men exploited and oppressed; they were mad that they were not being giving equal access to power."
/r/MensRights06/12/24 09:20 PM
10

Sadly, this is often not the case. And a cause of divide-and-conquer infighting. The "hard left" (including radical unions, socialists, anarchists, etc) are often infiltrated by the professional managerial class. Like academics, administrators and bureaucrats. Which can cause other problems, like when teachers and school administrators are represented by the same union. This class is very censorious, has many interests at odds with workers, and takes control of worker organizations rather than a…
/r/MensRights06/12/24 09:03 PM
10

We have to be careful not to let mainstream feminists lower our intellectual standards. The vast majority repeat words without understanding them. Here's "patriarchy" defined in a recent book by knowledgeable scholars: ‘patriarchy’, after all, refers not primarily to the fact that men wield public office, but first and foremost to the authority of patriarchs, that is, male heads of household – an authority which then acts as a symbolic model for, and economic basis of, male power in other fields…
/r/MensRights29/11/24 05:29 PM
-4

The article says they don't know yet. They're still thinking and experimenting: "Researchers still struggle to pinpoint why people discriminate based on appearance,” Mehic concluded.
/r/MensRights27/11/24 03:32 AM
2

So my question is in what world are white men oppressed? Your post mentions capitalism. Like some other economic systems, it features a few winners and a whole bunch of losers. Even most white men are losers under it, being wageslaves. Structurally. Failing to recognize that, means you organize badly with poor white men.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 03:20 PM
1

If you're a radical feminist, why not read bell hooks's "The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love"? Here's a link. She evenhandedly critiques feminists and women, as well as some oppressions that men face. But of course she's a radical feminist (though maybe a different sort than you, depending), so you'll likely not have an issue with that source.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 12:27 AM
-1

I see. Well, I'm sure you'll excuse me, because this is still odd behavior. Due to the following: - Rapid responses. - Seeming not to know obvious answers. (The vast majority of informed people would know what I'm talking about.) - Repeatedly begging people to engage you. I don't know if this implies a troll, bot or pathological debater. But as always, you're free to make any points you wish. Naturally, I will not read your responses. I'm sure anyone would find this a reasonable defense of one's…
/r/MensRights25/11/24 03:49 PM
-2

Sorry, troll. Waste someone else's life with your behavior of requesting time & attention from others.
/r/MensRights25/11/24 02:35 PM
-3

I'm sorry, I don't play these weird coy games with modern genocide deniers. They're far worse than those who deny the Holocaust. Because the Holocaust happened almost a century ago, while this is happening right now. If they're curious how people could support the Nazi genocides, they merely need look in the mirror.
/r/MensRights25/11/24 02:30 PM
-2

Trump may be a proto-fascist, but the rhetorical gambit of calling him a Nazi makes people stop listening. Right now, the Dem party engages in genocide through a client state. Genocide (not being anti free speech nor alleged private admiration for generals) is the greater defining characteristic of the Nazi regime in popular imagination. Which is why you even mentioned genocide in your own post. Yet left out the big genocide of the day. That said, it seems plausible to say he's proto-fascist, as…
/r/MensRights25/11/24 02:17 PM
3

The OP leaves too little info; responders perhaps advise too confidently. It's possible she told him such terrible news, that he threw down his airpods and cried. This is fairly normal (if expensive), and a woman doing this might gain sympathy. Humans respond to intense pain and stress with explosive action, as part of our animal natures, and it should be socially acceptable if it physically injures no one. Even if admittedly startling, and some people can't easily handle seeing that. But it's a…
/r/MensRights25/11/24 12:54 AM
1

Not necessarily reject all hierarchies. For example, take Noam Chomsky: The core of the anarchist tradition, as I understand it, is that power is always illegitimate, unless it proves itself to be legitimate. So the burden of proof is always on those who claim that some authoritarian hierarchic relation is legitimate. If they can’t prove it, then it should be dismantled. There's a time and place for hierarchies, yes. One thing may be better than another. But does that mean we should have systems…
/r/MensRights24/11/24 12:24 AM
7

The Dems (what you mean by "blue") aren't the left. They're one of the two business parties, more finance and internationalist. Entirely fine with wars, genocide, etc Despite what Dems think, women aren't defined by their gender. So (surprise, surprise) they have non-gender concerns like the economy. Because the status quo felt intolerable, many found it rational to roll the dice for the "change candidate", even if it felt like a dubious bet As for Republicans, they wouldn't necessarily be again…
/r/MensRights22/11/24 06:23 PM
3

I don't think guys are particularly hierarchical. The most well known anarchists are guys, and many guys don't exactly like being at the bottom of some hierarchy It's often women pushing their guys to be dominant. I think there's truth to the old saying that women wait at the finish line to fuck the winners. We're fine being in relationships with lower-status women, but women are far less OK with that arrangement
/r/MensRights22/11/24 05:26 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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