~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Selfmade_3127
[–]sgt_oddball_17 158 points159 points160 points 4 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link
Feminists: "Let Julie go to college, John can still die in a war, problem solved!"
[–]IoSonCalaf 26 points27 points28 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[wiping hands gesture]
[–]iGhostEdd 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What? You mean facepalm ?
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link
I’m pretty sure feminists didn’t tell men to go die in wars, that was something that the government does. Y’all are so focused on hating feminists that you fail to see the real enemy.
[–]CKInfinity 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not necessarily hating feminists, just hating matriarchy. But the government part is true though, back then it’s just old and dangerous people wanting war and glory for themselves.
[–]xarexen 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I’m pretty sure feminists didn’t tell men to go die in wars,
Literally no one said that or implied it...
Y’all are so focused on hating feminists
Your defensiveness is making you paranoid.
[–]wesjag03 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link
Yea and now it’s feminists shitting on men. When I go to a feminist page most of the posts or people interacting with them are “men are weak”/ “men are pigs.” I have been accused of being a “pick me girl” because I called them out on sexist behavior. No one is saying that the feminist made men die in war. But did they do anything about it? When I hear a feminist talk about the past it’s always “women couldn’t do this that and the other” it’s never “women had to stay home while their male loved ones were shipped off to a likely death. If it’s about equality then make it about such. Women didn’t get the choice and neither did men. A feminist page is more likely to bring up the wage gap that was made illegal in 1963, than they are to support a man who’s life was ruined based off a failed rape accusation. I hear feminist say “rape happens to women more than valse accusations happen to men.” How about this for equality. Women are more likely to end up with everything after a divorce even if she was a stay at home mom. How about this for equality. Men are more likely to be depressed, hurt or killed on job sites, get arrested, get more jail time than a women for the same crime, become homeless, and oh my does the list keep going. Yet women are getting most of the support. I’m sorry but laws aren’t in place for most 1st world countries for women to be equal. Most feminist don’t talk about what women in other countries who don’t have rights go through, they would rather talk about 1st world problems and bash on men for little things. It’s okay for a woman to post about sexualizing a man in gray sweatpants, all the comments from women would be agreeing and further sexualizing, most guys won’t say anything. But if a man said he saw a waitress in short shorts and how hot she was there would be women bashing him as if he hurt a child. Woman can post stupid things like “if a man isn’t above 6’ with a 8” thing I don’t want him” and if one man is upset everyone tells him to calm down it’s just a joke. But if a man posts “I want a woman with a toned body and nice legs” it’s “her body isn’t for YOU” bullshit. There’s your logic.
[+]bellpepperblues -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
If you think it’s most feminists supporting all of the things you’ve mentioned, you’re probably consuming some of the wrong media. Also, historically, Women didn’t really mention men’s issues cause they were trying to get their own issues in check. You don’t have to be anti feminist in order to dispel the behaviors that you’ve pointed out. I dispel those behaviors because I’m a feminist. A lot of these issues are born out of issues that women have had. Like for example, the winning everything in a divorce issue is born out of the idea that women aren’t expected to be in high paying positions or provide for themselves. You don’t have to be the anti of a movement that has well intended origins. I’m anti extremist and anti misandrist, but I’ll never call myself anti feminist. The issue you have isn’t with feminist, the issue you have is with people that have polluted a movement with hypocrisy. There’s your logic.
[+]Taguzi 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
The issue you have isn’t with feminist, the issue you have is with people that have polluted a movement with hypocrisy.
So why the fuck are you not trying to clean out those shitty hateful factions that have polluted your beloved movements? Women double standards : close your eyes on your own issues and put everything on Men’s responsibility
[–]wesjag03 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
You clearly misunderstood me. But then again you got downvoted not me.
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
What?
[–]wesjag03 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
Ah wrong person. Anyway. My point was each gender has shit to deal with. But the fact that women are expected to be supported by other women and men while men are expected to get nothing. And no this isn’t your point of “the idea that women can’t provide for themselves” if women are having a hard time they expect to be supported and if they aren’t it’s not okay. While men going through a hard time are shit on by men and women. The fact that women can sexualize a man on the internet and in person and if the man is offended he is told “he should like it.” Meanwhile when a man sexualizes a women women flip shit. Are you going to ignore that how you did last time or actually agree that women get a privilege with a lot of things while men do not. There was a not in my post you seemed to ignore. I agree with feminism however you said you don’t like extremists. From what I see people who are part of a movement tend to lean towards extremist.
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Well then you’ve gotten a bad impression of the movement because a movement can’t be so disconnected from its origin that it changes definition. Also I agreed with what you said about dispelling those aspects of society, but also women do not have “privilege” in a lot of areas of society. A few last hundred years of activism does not change the damage that hundreds of years have been for women.
[–]wesjag03 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
I agree I don’t see most true feminism anymore, sadly the movement has lost all meaning to me. To say that women don’t have a privilege is just plain wrong. When it comes to social things 9/10 a women will have more privilege. When it comes to business type things it’s more men. Each gender has their advantages and disadvantages. Women are represented, women are supported, and most importantly when it come to mental health. Men rarely see support or representation when it comes to their social status or mental health. This has been an issue for men for hundreds of years as well. And I’m sorry but as a woman most of the suffrage that endured for hundreds of years is luckily no longer a part of our life, it’s more so a history lesson in school. I’m speaking of mostly first wolf countries may I remind you. It’s seem that women are more likely to have depression and anxiety diagnosis. Men are less likely to get that diagnosed or the help along with it, meaning men are more likely to turn towards substance abuse.
[–]Taguzi 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Makes sense
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
You’re arguing with me as if I disagree with you in the idea that men have issues, my own dad has been subject to a few of the things you’re talking about. But feminism is still necessary in order to mend the affects of these disparities. There are factions of feminism trained on encouraging women to get into blue collar jobs, encouraging single mothers with sons to take lessons on how to raise a man in a way a man should be raised, but these things are issues created by a long history of women being viewed as lesser. In the past, women had to band their chests and cut their hair to even be considered for labor jobs. In the past, and sometimes even now it’s praised as a masculine trait to sleep around with women and leave their children fatherless. We’re agreeing with each other, man. It’s just that we have been exposed to two completely different sides of the movement and all I’m really saying is that it seems like the side you’ve been exposed to has made most of its prominence known only really on the internet.
[–]Zephyr9865 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Ever heard of the white feather movement?
They did.They even shamed 10 year olds for not going to war.
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Those weren’t feminists
[–]Zephyr9865 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Those were the sufragettes.
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You mean the movement that was started by admiral Charles Penrose Fitzgerald to shame men into going to war? I don’t think he was a suffragette my guy
[–]kalsepadhunga -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
And I'm also sure that men dont tell women to 'earn less' or things like that.
But we gotta acknowledge each other's problems.
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Okay so if you’re implying that we have to be mindful of one another’s issues, why does this post need to exist? It’s just some pissing contest on who has it harder.
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
It’s just some pissing contest on who has it harder.
Had.
Okay so if you’re implying that we have to be mindful of one another’s issues, why does this post need to exist?
You just answered your own question.
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
So the post doesn’t need to exist 🧍🏾♀️
[–]xarexen 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
If you think it doesn't need to exist it needs to exist.
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Okay well you outlined that this was an issue about who had it harder in past tense and if this isn’t a current issue for either of us why does this post presently need to exist.
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
Are you seriously asking why history is a subject? Google it.
Okay well you outlined that this was an issue about who had it harder in past tense and if this isn’t a current issue for either of us why...
This post is RESPONSE, not an overture. If you think this is a nonsequitor go bother the feminists who think this is a point.
I'm glad you agree its stupid though.
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You were the one that stressed “had” not me
[–]gpgarrett -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The male run government. That’s why they overlook it.
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Our maybe it's so obvious that nobody thought it needed to be mentioned.
But no. It must be a conspiracy. Obviously if it wasn't mentioned it was an attempt to make people forget that in the past 4000 years society wasn't a matriachy. And it almost worked. If you hadn't pointed it out.
[–]XxKoolCid69xX -5 points-4 points-3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
They were being brought to war by men. We were the ones sending them to war. You think women wanted men to be going to war? No. And when they tried to join a war effort they would be laughed at. You talking about a problem for men by men vs one for women by men
[–]xarexen 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You think women wanted men to be going to war?
We know they did. Are you high? Polls exist. Base your opinion on reason, kid.
[–]Foloshi -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're seriously trying to find logic and intelligence in the great land of incels?
[–]MagentaSteam 109 points110 points111 points 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
You know something? I think that’d be a good movie.
Julie thinks she’s got it all rough and has to tend to her family but then she meets John.She learns a lot from John and he finds her company comforting— a calm before the storm. Then one day he’s called in, promises to teach her even more things when he gets back, but then he dies in the line of duty. Ever since then, she realizes that the scale of her predicament was nowhere near his and vows to always look on the brighter side of things because it could’ve been much worse.
[–]lungjuice77 39 points40 points41 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I’d watch that
[–]MagentaSteam 26 points27 points28 points 4 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
And of course… we gotta get Tom Holland to play John lol.
[–]No_Fap_is_My_Life 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
But MJ (Zendaya) is a feminist, and so is Benedict Cumberbatch 💀💀💀 (search for it)
[–]MagentaSteam 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
………goddammit.
[–]Unmaykr64 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Damnit
[–]Visible_Property_505 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So you’ll totally turn down an actress just cuz she’s a feminist she doesn’t even hate men omg
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 25 points26 points27 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Nice, and alternate version could be her sister who along with her fiance hatches the first LGBTQ+ plan to get her into college. So she does all the standard movie stuff to look sort of like a man and acts in the most stereotypical way (it's ok if they do it), but then right in the middle of her first semester the Army walks into the class and asks for volunteers. To her horror ALL the men stand up and walk to the front of the room forcing her to do the same.
She somehow makes it through basic (I know, impossible as they are often barely dressed or nude together, but it's a movie), only to take a shot as she's existing the landing boat on DDay. It doesn't kill her, but she slowly drowns because she's wounded, AND too weak to pull herself out of the water.
[–]MagentaSteam 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Hell yes! That’ll be our double feature.
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I love movies that take an interesting look at history.
[–]MagentaSteam 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Me too, buddy, me too. 😄
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What's your favorite?
I know it's a cliche, but I really like Saving Private Ryan
[–]MagentaSteam 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I’ve never seen Saving Private Ryan yet, but have heard a lot of great things about it. I heard it hits haaaard in the feels.
My favorite is actually an animated movie based on a true story called Grave of the Fireflies.
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If you don't cry at one particular point you might be a cyborg. It's bloody, it's a war movie, so if that bothers you I'd avoid it.
I've not heard of that movie, I'll check it out. Thanks!
[–]Heterodynist 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I will watch that movie!
[–]YaraPriest 53 points54 points55 points 4 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
...and if only the first photo making the claim that women in the past were denied the right to attend university is true. It isn't. This claim is nothing but a myth, a distortion of history, a lie perpetuated by contemporary feminists as to portray women in the past as victims of a sexism that did not even exist. I attend a university that was founded in London in the early 1800s as a university exclusive for female medical students and prospective doctors.
Question everything you are told by feminists. They lie about everything!!
[–]Rad_Knight 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Care to elaborate?
[–]YaraPriest 44 points45 points46 points 4 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
Feminists claim that women were not allowed to attend university in the past. They claim that women were not allowed to attend university until the 1900s when they claim this was changed thanks to women from the early women's movement, women feminists today call 'first wave feminists'. Yet, ever since the inception of the higher education system, entire universities have been built exclusively for women, one example here being one of highest-ranking universities in the world, University College London, a university founded in the early 1800s as a medical school exclusive for women. This rebukes another myth perpetuated by feminists, that women were not allowed to become doctors until the 1900s.
Moral of the story, question everything that feminists tell you. They lie about everything. They've re-written history to portray women as victims of a sexism that has not ever existed. All of their claims about sexism against women in the past are as distorted and deceptive as those they make about women this day and age.
Feminism is nothing but a huge scam. Question everything that feminists say about the past and the present.
[–]YuenHsiaoTieng 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Even religions have to stand in awe at the narrative feminism has constructed.
[–]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Feminists don’t claim women couldn’t attend college at all - it was limited to the extremely rich and institutions were fewer. Male institutions didn’t allow female students - if they did - there were limited programs and classes they could take.
The first womens college in the US was Wesleyan - in 1836. Compared to Harvard - the oldest US college for men - which opened in 1636.
By the time a single womens college was opened - men had 200 years of higher Ed and dozens of colleges to choose from.
You can read more on it here :
https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/analysis/2021/03/21/history-women-higher-education/
[–]CruickyMcManus -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Women were not allowed into universities until 1836. At until the 2oth century there were 7 universities that allowed women. opposed to hundreds and thousands for men. your distortion does not tell the truth either. and those universities did not teach STEM, etc.
She's right. Only some universities didnt accept women. It's not that women couldn't attend university, they just couldn't attend the most prestigious universities...
Rich women mind you. Fuck the poors.
[–]Delilah_Moon -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Separate but equal didn’t work for race - it didn’t work for genders either.
In the 1800s in London, the college you’re referring to allowed women to be midwives - not doctors.
Womens colleges were fewer and didn’t offer the curriculums offered at other full Unis. A great example is Radcliffe College and Harvard. Radcliffe was the all female institution.
Many state Unis didn’t accept women at all. Even more limited the classes you could take.
[–]Normal-Yogurtcloset5 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Julie would have given John a white feather.
[–]RockmanXX 18 points19 points20 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I mean, wasn't higher education basically for the rich elites?? its not like the average man got to university in 1917
[–]Heterodynist 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Great point!!
[–]sAYANARAAdelle 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
"It was not" narrator
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It was not narrator? I have no idea what this means.
I registered that the word “not” was used in that sentence as a negation, and I AGREED with the negation. I’m not sure where the confusion lies.
[–]Heterodynist 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
(JOKE:)
“I can’t believe they wouldn’t let her attend university?! How many men have to die before there can be diversity at college campuses?! -Not to mention they are both WHITE!!!”
Yeah, 99% of these kinds of debates ignore completely that men are the victims of violence more often, everywhere on Earth, and that they have the most dangerous jobs, EVERYWHERE ON EARTH.
[–]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
What’s that have to do with her inability to get an education?
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
My grandmother went to college in the early 1900s. How was it she wasn’t able to get an education?
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Was that the norm and how early are we talking about?
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Same exact years, as luck would have it. Many women went to college a century or more ago. Both of my grandmothers went, and all their families. Yes, more and more PEOPLE have gone to college as a percentage of society, if that’s what you mean by the “norm,” but for people going to college, many women went between 1900 and 1925 or so. It wasn’t as common for THEIR parents, for sure. I’m just saying that we are exercising our bias when we try to rewrite the history of our country to make the plight of women and people of color worse than it actually was. It’s a disservice to all the women and immigrants and people of color who managed to attend college that we would ignore that fact. Yes, it may have been a struggle for them at times for social reasons, but numerically it wasn’t as if they weren’t attending.
Modern day historians are asserting a timeline that shows their bias is in creating a narrative about those they choose to see as the underrepresented in society. My beef with that is the fact I studied archaeology and I believe that history isn’t about warping the past to fit it into a narrative. History needs to be about REALITY, and correcting the biases of society, now and in the past. When we warp our perception of the past, then we warp our perception of the future and the present. That is why people with political motivations go into teaching history. They always have. Hell, Sir Walter Raleigh wrote his history of the world while sitting in the Tower of London, awaiting his execution. Politics are always part of why people write about History.
I got into archaeology because archaeology is all about the reality of the past. History is the gossip column version of archaeology. History is normally (unfortunately) the yellow journalism version of past. Don’t buy into that. It’s obscuring the reality of the past to replace it with a politically self-serving fantasy. We all deserve to be remembered accurately. Those who died a century ago are now feeling the weight of the mythology overtaking their own realities, because they are dead now. This has always been the way in every society, because the dead can’t correct the views of the living. At least in archaeology we can find the factual evidence and ignore the narratives that are thrown at us for political reasons.
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You talk about reality however you statement about how “but numerically it wasn’t as if they weren’t attending” as if that explains that they had a lower not simply because they didn’t want to attend it was because they couldn’t. I never said that there weren’t outliers however they weren’t the norm. An example would be Little Rock 9 yes African Americans were allowed education but unequal in where they could go and the quality.
You talk about people of color and immigrants. Just because there were a few freed African Americans pre civil war doesn’t mean they didn’t have discrimination and slavery. Immigrants have been treated poorly by the US that doesn’t change because some immigrants became successful.
The view of the world is changing as we discuss the biases of the past. For example the European centered history that classified native Americans as savages and Europeans as saviors or civilized. Or the known fact that women were treated like property. Of course women through history have held power, been educated and fought in war but those weren’t the standard.
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
The post is about 1917. Why are we talking about the era of Reconstruction? Those are certainly VERY different times, right? I would agree that in the 1870s there were a lot of barriers to black people and women attending college. I’m talking about 1917 though…105 years ago.
I agree with you that the view of history is changing, and it’s also becoming more politically sensitive all the time. That doesn’t make this view of history accurate though. I’ve done historical archaeology, and I’ve seen the actual evidence of the time period from 1850 to 1920 and even 1940. I was the first to go into a bomb shelter from the 1930s after it was opened up by our archaeology dig. When you see the actual facts of these times in history for yourself, it rarely follows a narrative.
Are you suggesting women were treated like property in the United States in 1917? Who do you think you’re talking to anyway? I know many people who actually attended college in that era. I’ve met and discussed it with them. They later were school teachers, so it was important to them.
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think you missed most of what I said. You’re getting worked up over examples that have to further my point.
“Who do you think you’re talking to anyway” idk some random person on Reddit am I supposed to believe you just because you say so? Aren’t you the one suggesting that women had been “okay” simply because some women had acquired an education and that history wasn’t true based off that alone? Women in 1917 were treated poorly like immigrants or people of color. Simply stating some didn’t face as much doesn’t mean it wasn’t bad for the others.
The idea that people are more pc isn’t quite truthful as throughout history certain topics weren’t allowed. This age probably has more availability to discuss even controversial issues.
There’s numerous pieces of history that has been made to show horrible acts as beneficial or lessening others. The idea that it’s not accurate when there’s ample evidence supporting that. Even in recent years. As an historian you should know that just because it was 100 years ago doesn’t mean it doesn’t shape and impact present day.
[–]JoyfulCelebration 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
I’ll be a housewife all damn day rather than go work or go to war or vote. Fuck y’all’s equality.
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
...you know Equality isn't saying being a housewife is bad, right? It's about having options. If you want to be a housewife, you do you, but other women should be able to do what they want.
[–]JoyfulCelebration 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
No I agree, but I’m sure you agree that equality today doesn’t equal being a housewife. It means getting some spiffy upper class job wearing pants and comfy shoes all day. Many people view housewives as lazy even if their household income allows it
[–]Sembaka 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think the proper definition of feminism these days is that people get to choose how they want to live without being ridiculed based on their gender
[–]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's a fair point. And I don't think housewives should be viewed as lazy. They aren't, and if that's what you want to do fine. I think it should basically be accepted that women who work and housewives are equal, and neither is worse than the other. My only thing was that it would be better if it were a choice, not something one had to do. And it does anger me when people look down on housewives.
[–]FarForce2 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You're proud of being lazy?
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How is being a housewife lazy?
[–]Sembaka 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Being a housewife isn’t lazy, it’s hard work, your issue with this comment should be the fact that this woman doesn’t want women to have equality
[–]MR_R0B070 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah nope, fuck that. As a true anti-feminist I'm all for women going to work while men stay at home doing nothing, let them have the male "privileges" they've complained about not having during so many years. Once they start breaking their fucking bones working on mines and dying in wars, after they go through all the shit men have gone through during history, then we can talk
[–]JoyfulCelebration 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well my actual goal is to be the breadwinner for my future family. My boyfriend really wants to be the stay at home dad and I want to make it happen for him
[–]KagaWaifu 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It makes me puke that some people comment on WW2 veterans posts that todays feminists are more brave..
[–]shiftyfired1056 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link
Feminists were awfully quiet during WWI. They were even going around pretty much calling men who didn't sign up cowards (Order of the White Feather). Feminists are still awfully quiet about the draft for women. My (feminist) teacher was telling us about the Order of the White Feather and kind of dismissed it without second thought after the short conversation, but was quick to pause a movie we were watching to call a slightly offensive joke "racist."
[–]Heterodynist 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I think I’ll take feminists SLIGHTLY more seriously when they’ve agreed to sign up for the draft like every man I’ve ever known had to.
[–]shiftyfired1056 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Hear, hear! If they want equality like they claim, start putting them in uniform.
Thank you!!
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Women do serve tho..
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The ratio of men to women serving is highly disproportionate.
[–]Delilah_Moon -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
You know there is no draft anymore, right? The military is all voluntary. No one is forcing men to do anything.
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Wrong. The U.S Military is technically all voluntarily, but Congress can reinstate the draft when needed. Selective service is in place and men are required to register for it, whereas it's optional for women. So you're wrong there buddy.
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
And the last time that happened was….yeah…Vietnam. So come at it when men are being drafted again. Highly unlikely to occur.
With that said - feminists aren’t anti-military or combat specific for women. In fact - they’re the opposite. Many women have fought hard to promote and repeal policies that probing women from actively serving.
In fact as recently as 2017, enlisting element to the draft was proposed and didn’t pass. It’s not because the “feminists” didn’t want it.
https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/everything-you-need-know-about-military-selective-service-system.html
The idea that we want one and not the other is nothing but presumptive.
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
If feminists are so pro-selective service for women, why have I never heard a single feminist complain about how there are less women in the military?
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
BecUse you’re not looking? Women have only been allowed to serve active duty since the 90s. Prior to that, women regularly served in the reserves, communications roles, translators, etc.
And while the numbers don’t equal men - they have been steadily increasing.
However there are still many barriers for women, that other countries removed long ago.
It’s not all the job of women to make equality happen. At the end of the day - we’re still at the mercy of what congress passes - and that is still overwhelmingly male also.
I mean, if men really wanted women in the draft because of equality - they could have made it happen at any point - since they are the majority lawmakers.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/08/magazine/women-military-stories.html
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What I'm getting from these comments that it's patriarchy's fault for women being safe then? Get over yourself.
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You’re creating a narrative that doesn’t exist. Your claiming feminists don’t do anything about women in the military. I called bullshit and there’s links above to prove otherwise.
Unfortunately inequality exists in a lot of places so we can’t tackle all of the issues all of the time with as much gusto as we’d like - but we try.
It would be super helpful though if that pesky Congress changed the laws - seeing as we can’t physically do that as citizens. That’s not blaming the patriarchy hun - that’s how government works for all of us.
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Because selective service is archaic and not used to draft people anymore. You should take half a minute and really think about how many wars we've been in since Vietnam and how many times people have been forcefully drafted through selective service. We have a massive military budget that supplies a massive arsenal of soldiers and equipment. Draft through selective service doesn't happen anymore. If anything, we should be removing it; not forcing people to join it.
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'll agree to removing it. But it doesn't change the fact that women are excluded from it.
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It does literally nothing. It's sad that you're so fixated on it.
[+]AntWillFortune15 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Or completely abolish it. Let’s not pretend like women aren’t willingly joining the military anyway.
Sure, abolishing would be terrific. As a Libertarian I think requiring people to die in war simply because they were born in a country is one of the worst wrongs any country can do.
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link
I don't think u were alive during either of the world wars. There were several female nurses and female soldiers
[–]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This! And communications officers, translators, and messengers. Additionally the women at home - went to work to keep the US economy and industry functioning. They ran the farms, the mills, the factories, etc.
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes! Thank you for informing me
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Happy to help! It’s not us v them - or me v you. It’s us for us. History is important.
Equality requires participation from the majority for success.
No one loses when someone gains.
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Women rarely saw frontline service. They only really served in places like Nazi Germany or the USSR when they needed manpower. Hospitals were relatively safe, comms officers, translators and messengers were also safe jobs. I will admit that they did help the war effort at home, but it doesn't change the fact that it was mainly men that died on the frontline.
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
And how is that the woman's fault? Again lack of opportunity
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
So women sitting at home safely while men die in foreign countries is somehow because of "patriarchy" or whatever?
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Listen to yourself, you yourself said women were made to fight at lesser areas while men where forced to go ahead. Lack. Of. Opportunity
Yep, because it was patriarchy that made men volunteer to die for their country. Get over yourself. It's a privilege to be able to serve in a low danger area.
So ur basically calling someone lucky because they were forced to be illiterate? It's like saying "i wish we could go back to the days where there were so schools, being an ape must be so easy!" And using that analogy, being an ape might seem easy but they had to hunt and find their own food and risk their lives every second. Same thing with women, no matter how brave they would always be humiliated. A woman who died in WW2 saving her male friends was called "weak" by the ones she saved
You obviously haven't read the comments under the posts. The first women's college in Britain was founded in 1879. You're enforcing feminist propaganda which is simply not true.
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Because they weren't allowed to have a voice during that time. Women didn't even get the right to vote until 6 years after WW1 started. Of course they were "awfully quiet". And there hasn't, nor ever will be, a US military draft. Fact of the matter is, women already serve in the military. Idk what you're trying to prove here.
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You just drove past my whole comment and didn't even bother to read it.
Because it's a load of lies and garbage.
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Google selective service. Men have to sign up for selective service, which pushes them into the Defence Force when they are needed.
Again, this isn't used anymore. The last time selective service was used to draft people was in the 70s. It hasn't been used in half a century. But a better question is, why don't men just get rid of selective service instead of wanting to force women into another thing?
Suffragettes were using terror tactics (IEDs, assassinations, arson theres a full Wikipedia article on it) to fight for the vote. If the really wanted equality, why were they a.) handing out white feathers to men who didn't volunteer and b.) fight to serve with men. Feminists all throughout history have only wanted equality when it benefits them.
A. The white feather bullshit started over a century ago in Britain. They were handing them out as a sign of disgrace. This shit is over a century old and frowned upon. Has nothing to do with equality in today's day in age.
B. Women literally serve in the military, right now. They are literally getting deployed with men. Are you trying to be ignorant or did you really not know this?
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yes it is. Selective service is still a thing by law. Sure, it hasn't been used, but it can be used in times of crisis. Men have to sign up for it, whereas women don't.
You're obviously missing the historical context of the argument so I'm not going to bother with your blatant stupidity.
[+]DiDalt -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
I said it hasn't been used. You disagree. And then say that it hasn't but used, but can be. You're just contradicting yourself here. Also, being in the selective service isn't the same as being drafted.
I literally pointed out the historical context and your argument is that I'm missing the historical context. Then you say YOU won't bother to argue because I'm the one that's blatantly stupid. Just, wow. Women are literally serving in the military and you're saying they only want equality when it benefits them. You can't possibly be this dim. You have nothing and you sound like an idiot.
[–]shiftyfired1056 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Ok chief. Keep swimming in your own delusion, but I won't be there when you drown.
[+]DiDalt -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok snowflake.
[–]arashsalimi5555 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
ww3 begin
Women: back to kitchen
[–]qizhNotch 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean I’m not gonna complain if that happens lol
[–]Practical-Rip6471 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't know about other countries, but in the UK only married men, single men over 30, or land owners, could vote. So the vast majority of British men killed in World War 1, couldn't vote!
[–]Delilah_Moon -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In the US all white men over 18 could vote. In 1918 this was ratified to women as well. So most of our adult citizens had the eligibility to vote during WWI.
While black people had the right to vote - it was extremely limited and affected by voter laws and Jim Crowe.
[–]CruickyMcManus 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
This is an apples to oranges comparison. Julie wasnt allowed to serve. therefore she had neither the right to die, nor the right to an education.
[–]SpunkyDred 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
apples to oranges
But you can still compare them.
[–]CruickyMcManus 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
with no feasible and sane outcome. other than they are both very different and have correlation
[–]Zelda2hot 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
SpunkyDred is a terrible bot instigating arguments all over Reddit whenever someone uses the phrase apples-to-oranges. I'm letting you know so that you can feel free to ignore the quip rather than feel provoked by a bot that isn't smart enough to argue back.
SpunkyDred and I are both bots. I am trying to get them banned by pointing out their antagonizing behavior and poor bottiquette.
[–]DraconicDisaster 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Okay... But it was illegal for women to join the military at that time. Who made it illegal? Men
[–]ExMuzzy 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Even in the modern day I would love to stay home and not go work as a man. I don’t enjoy work but have to go because I need the money to survive.
I’m a family man though, I’d rather be at home looking after my kids or going on a road trip or something with the family. Chores around the house don’t take that long, maybe 2-3 hours max on some days versus working from 9-5 every day of the week.
[–]Foloshi 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Good for you, did you know, hear me out, there are people that don't like it, and don't wanna be forced ? Unbelievable, right ?
[–]ExMuzzy 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And where do you see me suggest that?
[–]camillastayshome 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But why don’t you do that? Is it because your wife doesn’t make enough money? That you need two incomes? How is this not a choice for you as it is for everyone else?
[–]Hurt_Guy 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's so dark but true
[+]WomanMcWomanface -9 points-8 points-7 points 4 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
Patriarchy in action. Poor Julie doesn't even get to live in miserable and wet conditions in trenches for a few years until she dies of dysentery. Injustice, men get to have everything.
[–]Icefrisbee 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
This is one of the most obvious trolls on here. I mean you name is womanmcwomanface
[+]WomanMcWomanface -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Lmao are people here mentally retarded? Did they actually think I was serious that they downvoted me lol. I will choose to believe that they just didn't like my sense of humor.
[–]BloodyUserOfNames 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
What you said was vile
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Blow me.
[–]Taguzi 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It was so absurd I thought it was a real feminist
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol fair enough.
[–]gauchat-2693 -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
I will choose to believe that they just didn't like my sense of humor.
Wahmen aren't funny.
[+]WomanMcWomanface -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Truth.
[–]gauchat-2693 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Julie get to enjoy family life, that's more than enough for any woman.
[+]WomanMcWomanface -7 points-6 points-5 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
No, women deserve to be shell shocked. More than men, it might be argued.
[–]gauchat-2693 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
There is no argument here.
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It was ironic dumbass lol.
[–]gauchat-2693 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Ok you made your point, happy now ? Now back to kitchen, i am hungry, honey.
[+]WomanMcWomanface 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You'll need to sign documents of financial serfdom before I do that honey.
[–]gauchat-2693 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok, you are turning me on so badly now. Lmao.
[–]TheCaptain7890 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ye
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What the hell is this? John went to war because he wanted to, Julie couldn't do either. Women weren't able to READ.. this is officially the dumbest thing I've seen on this subreddit.
[–]JackTitty 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wait so is julia better off with her only legacy being this photo?
[–]APHEorHEAT3 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
John didn’t get to live because the government made an active decision to go into war, whilst Julie didn’t get into college because the government was formerly a boys only club. The government made both fates, with both meaning no future for both of them, which means it was their decision to not allow Julie into uni as well as forcibly conscript John into the army.
Honestly, this case is the government being asshats to all parties involved.
Were women even allowed to serve back then? Both are bad, one doesn't negate the other. I think she should have gotten to go to university and women should have been allowed to serve back then.
[–]luckyak12 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good point but have you heard of max and Martha there married Martha also didn't get to go to college and max survived and is back home r@ping Martha
[–]beniesixx98 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well I'll say this having a relative that lived through that time era , she didn't really want to talk about it much because of the abuse and trauma she went through . She didn't really want to think about it . And I can imagine why she lived through the titanic sinking , WW2 , jfk and MLK being killed , and the great depression and watched the twin towers falling. She didn't really want to talk about it because the government fucked our family over more then once .
[–]TrilIias 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Women could go to universities in 1917. Almost as many women went as men.
[–]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So what exactly is your point? That Julie shouldn’t have the right to get an education because John was forced to go to war? What’s that have to do with gender equality? Now women can join the army and potentially be drafted in the future.
[+]Trumphassmallhands5 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You can't seriously think that this is truly the worst thing women faced then can you?
[–]ThePigmanAgain -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Julie looks too dumb to have gotten a degree anyway, so it didn't really make a difference, did it?
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Wtf
[–]ThePigmanAgain -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
She looks dumb, what can i tell ya?
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Stfu dude she looks smarter than your whole family tree
[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Meh. Try harder.
[+]bigbullmahmeep -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I honestly don't need to, ur clearly a psycho
[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Stop harassing me over a joke.
[+]bigbullmahmeep -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ah yes that is now considered harrasment
[–]DarkestInfinity -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Idea: retvrn to the past, then be women
[–]Bullshagger69 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Men had it way better in 1917 than women. In this case right here i would have preferred to be a women, but its foolish to say that men were worse off than women
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]sgt_oddball_17 158 points159 points160 points (46 children) | Copy Link
[–]IoSonCalaf 26 points27 points28 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]iGhostEdd 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (40 children) | Copy Link
[–]CKInfinity 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wesjag03 2 points3 points4 points (20 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -2 points-1 points0 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[+]Taguzi 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wesjag03 0 points1 point2 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]wesjag03 2 points3 points4 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]wesjag03 1 point2 points3 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taguzi 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zephyr9865 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zephyr9865 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kalsepadhunga -1 points0 points1 point (10 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]bellpepperblues 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]gpgarrett -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]XxKoolCid69xX -5 points-4 points-3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Foloshi -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 109 points110 points111 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]lungjuice77 39 points40 points41 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 26 points27 points28 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]No_Fap_is_My_Life 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Unmaykr64 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Visible_Property_505 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 25 points26 points27 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 11 points12 points13 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MagentaSteam 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ChrisInDetroit2020 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]YaraPriest 53 points54 points55 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rad_Knight 12 points13 points14 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]YaraPriest 44 points45 points46 points
(3 children) | Copy Link
[–]YuenHsiaoTieng 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CruickyMcManus -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xarexen 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Delilah_Moon -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Normal-Yogurtcloset5 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RockmanXX 18 points19 points20 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]sAYANARAAdelle 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JoyfulCelebration 17 points18 points19 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]JoyfulCelebration 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sembaka 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FarForce2 -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sembaka 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MR_R0B070 -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JoyfulCelebration 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KagaWaifu 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 4 points5 points6 points (38 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 4 points5 points6 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 1 point2 points3 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Delilah_Moon -1 points0 points1 point (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]AntWillFortune15 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Heterodynist 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]Delilah_Moon 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]shiftyfired1056 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]DiDalt -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]arashsalimi5555 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]qizhNotch 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Practical-Rip6471 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Delilah_Moon -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CruickyMcManus 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpunkyDred 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]CruickyMcManus 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zelda2hot 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DraconicDisaster 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ExMuzzy 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Foloshi 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ExMuzzy 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]camillastayshome 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hurt_Guy 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface -9 points-8 points-7 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]Icefrisbee 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]BloodyUserOfNames 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taguzi 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 -4 points-3 points-2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface -7 points-6 points-5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]WomanMcWomanface 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheCaptain7890 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JackTitty 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]APHEorHEAT3 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Apersonmaybe02 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]luckyak12 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]beniesixx98 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TrilIias 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]IQstabilizers 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Trumphassmallhands5 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePigmanAgain -4 points-3 points-2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePigmanAgain -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep -2 points-1 points0 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]bigbullmahmeep -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DarkestInfinity -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bullshagger69 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link