Is this sub getting taken over by feminist and menslibers?

[–]mtcapri 32 points33 points34 points 6 years ago (104 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (95 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. As far as I know, the founder of this sub has decided to adopt a high-tolerance policy on moderation, in the interest of free speech. That means that a variety of views is tolerated. I think this is a good thing.

As far as the actual "menslibbers" go, I've seen them complain on Twitter that /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates is a place for right-wing MRAs and incels who only whine about feminism and that every men's issues sub that doesn't maintain a strict moderation policy becomes a RedPill cesspool. Actual hardcore menslibbers have a low tolerance for dissenting views and won't stick around long on this sub. The menslibbers that we do get are mostly moderate and open to conversing with others, which is good. Occasionally you do get a combative one, but this isn't a real threat to the sub.

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]gas_the_tradcons -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (89 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

So by your own words. the only "genuine" dialogue can only happen in an ideological echo chamber? Where nobody can do things like

Be critical of a movement that has put misandrist practices into law.
Talk about how certain ideological narratives are actively harmful to men.
Discuss how certain ideologies are pushing men into redpill/incel ideologies by demonizing their sexuality and labelling them as entitled for wanting to be loved.
Discuss how and why those redpill/incel ideologies are so enticing to men. so that we can actively figure out a better alternative.
Talk about how sexism against men is often brushed under the carpet by people insisting that women have it worse in some other often unrelated area.

and etc.

I mean. How genuine is this dialogue when people simply aren't allowed to bring up genuine issues.

[–]LacklustreFriend 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sure, I'm kind of bored.

This one "isn't even wrong" in the sense that "feminism" isn't a universally agreed-upon set of policy proposals, but at any rate it isn't, nor has it ever been, prohibited on MensLib to criticize specific policies or positions. We have a whole big thing in our sidebar. I wrote it!
Nearly everything we talk about is about how certain ideological narratives are harmful to men. You disagree on which ones those are, but you can't say we don't talk about ideological narratives that are harmful to men.
We talk about radicalization a lot, but truly, young men aren't being radicalized by "feminism" "labelling them entitled for wanting to be loved." That simply isn't a thing that's happening. This is the same kind of sloppy and ultimately harmful-to-men's-issues thinking and rhetoric we're opposed to. (Incidental to the interests of this subreddit, it's also a deeply liberal as opposed to left-wing analysis of the issue, in that it focuses on individual interactions and not structural critique.)
Again, we discuss that a lot, but also we don't claim to (and in fact actively dissuade people from thinking we) have the monopoly on that particular solution. That's an open discourse and to my mind one of the biggest modern masculinities challenges to solve.
Your last one here is vague to the point of uselessness, honestly. What I can tell you is that we have a hard and often-enforced rule that MensLib is for discussions of men's issues, and while anyone is welcome to participate, we won't allow anyone to diminish those issues by derailing the conversation. That sort of zero-sum thinking (again, incidentally, a thing that this sub does constantly from the other side, and which is pretty much definitionally not left-wing) was more or less the entire problem I started MensLib to address. You just don't see, or even really have any concept of, the stuff we remove from the other side.

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This one "isn't even wrong" in the sense that "feminism" isn't a universally agreed-upon set of policy proposals,

Yet feminists are the ones that put them into place.

Nearly everything we talk about is about how certain ideological narratives are harmful to men. You disagree on which ones those are, but you can't say we don't talk about ideological narratives that are harmful to men.

yet by ignoring the damage that narratives like "toxic masculinity" and "privilege" do. you're ignoring the needs of men.

We talk about radicalization a lot, but truly, young men aren't being radicalized by "feminism" "labelling them entitled for wanting to be loved." That simply isn't a thing that's happening

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/ This offers several examples of EXACTLY That. One being.

https://jezebel.com/no-one-is-entitled-to-sex-why-we-should-mock-the-nice-5972788

From about the very real problem of male sexual entitlement. The great unifying theme of the curated profiles is indignation. These are young men who were told that if they were nice, then, as Laurie Penny puts it, they feel that women “must be obliged to have sex with them.”

Again, we discuss that a lot, but also we don't claim to (and in fact actively dissuade people from thinking we) have the monopoly on that particular solution. That's an open discourse and to my mind one of the biggest modern masculinities challenges to solve.

Do you not realize how counterproductive it is to not offer a better alternative when telling men to "avoid these beliefs" They're enticing to men because the other options they have are "Feel ashamed of your sexual interest"

Your last one here is vague to the point of uselessness, honestly.

The conversations on MGM are a good clarification.

[–]mtcapri 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (69 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (68 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago* (64 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (57 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (56 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[–]plitox_is_a_bitch 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LacklustreFriend 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ciceros_Assassin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]plitox_is_a_bitch -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deeisabird23 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deeisabird23 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deeisabird23 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]gas_the_tradcons -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri[M] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]banmale 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] [score hidden] 6 years ago* stickied comment (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm the original creator of the subreddit. There was a period where I had to step back a bit from moderating, so there may be things I've missed, but I don't think the place has been taken over by feminist menslibbers.

I would say there are a number of ideological tendencies here and tensions between them. Some worry the place is dominated by feminists/menslibbers, some worry it's dominated by economic liberals/capitalists, some worry it's dominated by incels, etc etc.

As far as I can tell, most people here agree to varying degrees with the values outlined in the Mission Statement, but are at different points along the three "moderate to radical" spectra I outlined. I'm certainly keeping an eye out for ideological drift, but I don't want to define the boundaries too strictly, because if I did there would be even fewer people here.

I admit the ideological tensions can be a bit chaotic, but there are upsides to having a place where there can be discussion and debate between different views. We might end up getting closer to the truth.

[–]AskingToFeminists 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AskingToFeminists 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely[M] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Solid_Rice 12 points13 points14 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bkrugby78 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]is_done 17 points18 points19 points 6 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

[–]thereslcjg2000left-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

https://time.com/4919011/donald-trump-alt-left-antifa/

The “alt-left” designation helps explain the Democrats’ emerging civil war, with extremists assailing centrist liberals, and turning the word “neoliberal” into one of their overused epithets. It exposes the postmodern fanatics: bullies who violate liberal principles by shutting up speakers they dislike; brats who riot in Berkeley, Portland, Oakland and elsewhere when they don’t get their way; hypocrites who denounce their opponents’ unreason and violence yet can’t see their own; and brutes who whip each other into vulgar frenzies on the Internet. The “alt-left” is populated by ideologues who reject the American value of compromise. They see a world of conspiracy theories, imagined enemies and exaggerated slights. Ironically, they echo their far right rivals by demonizing Wall Street, the Big Banks, the Mainstream Media — and, frequently, Jews or Zionists. Both far right and far left radicals represent a politics of backlash and lashing out, not consensus-building or reaching out.

[–]serpentineeyelash 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ParanoidAgnostic 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]fcsquadleft-wing male advocate 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]24-cell 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gas_the_tradcons 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

[–]banmale 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Dude, what on Earth are you talking about — this was a mostly facetious comment, I am not a part of some gender jihad choke-full of conspiracy theories like you claim.

Edit:

You have slightly saner views than most here, but it's all moot because you prefer to take aggression on marginalized groups and avoid upsetting feminists on the other hand, arguing mostly semantics to give credence.

A compliment! Thank you.

With Tamerloon in charge, you'll be an anti-feminist that dumps on faces of marginalized groups.

Is that a fantasy you like to entertain? The contrails aren't a government's job, good man. What I'm proposing is that we maintain an intellectual atmosphere that is neither a replication 4Chan's anger-and-hate festival of alienated and miserable that could never turn into a constructive social movement than changes something for the better, nor a censorious cesspool of MensLib.

I'm not sure what exactly you are proposing, besides being angry at me for reasons I don't quite understand, but what you offer isn't a middle ground, and it isn't helpful.

[–]banmale 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]banmale 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mtcapri 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LacklustreFriend 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thereslcjg2000left-wing male advocate 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]24-cell 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cromulent_weasel 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetje 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss -13 points-12 points-11 points 6 years ago (66 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]LacklustreFriend 12 points13 points14 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RockFourFour 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]LacklustreFriend 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AskingToFeminists 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Here is the biggest meta-analysis on the subject of domestic violence ever made

Here's a relevant part :

"Motivation

Male and female IPV perpetrated from similar motives – primarily to get back at a partner for emotionally hurting them, because of stress or jealousy, to express anger and other feelings that they could not put into words or communicate, and to get their partner’s attention.
Eight studies directly compared men and women in the power/control motive and subjected their findings to statistical analyses. Three reported no significant gender differences and one had mixed findings. One paper found that women were more motivated to perpetrate violence as a result of power/control than were men, and three found that men were more motivated; however, gender differences were weak
Of the ten papers containing gender-specific statistical analyses, five indicated that women were significantly more likely to report self-defense as a motive for perpetration than men. Four papers did not find statistically significant gender differences, and one paper reported that men were more likely to report this motive than women. Authors point out that it might be particularly difficult for highly masculine males to admit to perpetrating violence in self-defense, as this admission implies vulnerability.
Self-defense was endorsed in most samples by only a minority of respondents, male and female. For non-perpetrator samples, the rates of self-defense reported by men ranged from 0% to 21%, and for women the range was 5% to 35%. The highest rates of reported self-defense motives (50% for men, 65.4% for women) came from samples of perpetrators, who may have reasons to overestimate this motive.
None of the studies reported that anger/retaliation was significantly more of a motive for men than women’s violence; instead, two papers indicated that anger was more likely to be a motive for women’s violence as compared to men.
Jealousy/partner cheating seems to be a motive to perpetrate violence for both men and women."

If you care to look just a little bit into the Duluth model, the authors themselves admit that they created it based on ideological grounds in spite of the contrary evidences that they were collecting. ("coordinating community responses to domestic violence : lessons from Duluth and beyond" chapter 2, p28-29, by Ellen L. Pence)

"The Power and Control Wheel, which was developed by battered women attending women's groups, was originally a description of typical behaviors accompanying the violence. In effect it said, "When he is violent, he gets power and he gets control." Somewhere early in our organizing efforts, however, we changed the message to "he is violent in order to get control or power." The difference is not semantic, it is ideological. Somewhere we shifted from understanding the violence as rooted in a sense of entitlements to rooted in a desire for power. By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. Like those we were criticizing, we reduced our analysis to a psychological universal truism. The DAIP staff—like the therapist insisting it was an anger control problem, or the judge wanting to see it as an alcohol problem, or the defense attorney arguing that it was a defective wife problem—remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with. We all engaged in ideological practices and claimed them to be neutral observations.Eventually, we began to give into the process that is the heart of the Duluth model: interagency communication based on discussions of real cases. It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find. The DAIP staff were interpreting what men seemed to expect or feel entitled to as a desire. When we had to start explaining women's violence toward their partners, lesbian violence, and the violence of men who did not like what they were doing, we were brought back to our original undeveloped thinking that the violence is rooted in how social relationships (e.g., marriage) and the rights people feel entitled to within them are socially, not privately, constructed" (and there's more like that)

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mewacketergi 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ParanoidAgnostic 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is the dominant framework for discussing gender issues. In fact it asserts itself as, and is broadly accepted as, the only framework for such discussions.

This is a framework which has, at its core, the idea that men are only ever privileged and women are only ever oppressed. It is impossible to talk about men's issues in this framework because there's no place for even recognizing disadvantages men face. Blatant advantages granted to women are called "benevolent sexism" in order to claim them as disadvantages.

Not only does feminism not allow for a theoretical understanding of men's issues, it discourages people even caring about those issues in the first place. Men are presented as the oppressor class. Who is going to have empathy for the oppressors?

Feminism even leverages and promotes norms which harm men. They even harm women but less obviously. They are actually at core of what feminists would call "patriarchy." They call on men to sacrifice for the sake of women. They inflate men's influence on the world and diminish women's. They present women as weak and fragile and unable to compete with men without concessions being made.

This is why feminism is one of the most important things to deal with if you want to fix men's issues.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Intersectional feminism lays a monopolistic claim over the discussion of all gender issues, including men's issues. It posits concepts like "toxic masculinity" and "male entitlement" as the root causes of all men's issues. According to some of these woke neolibs, the main reason men are fucked is because our dads spent our childhoods collectively chanting "boys will be boys" while standing in a line barbecuing and egging us on to engage in gladiatorial playwrestle fights for their entertainment.

MensLib is actually a good place for discussing some men's issues as long as it falls within the narrow parameters of that sub. For example, guys who grew up in hyper macho households and who feel like they can't like musicals because everyone around them told them that was "gay". Since breaking gender stereotypes is the main project of MensLib, this sort of stuff fits the sub's M.O. perfectly. The problem starts when the problems don't fit snugly within this paradigm, because they might vaguely imply some less-than-flattering about women or whatever other reason.

Almost any position we take here has to compete with the official feminist explanation (which has been co opted by woke capitalism), so it makes sense to talk about feminism often.

I do agree that it often becomes stale. I for one have posted a post complaining about the tradcons to change things up a little. Complaining is easy, I acknowledge that. I'd certainly like to see some more critiques on this sub that link men's issues to capitalism or neoliberalism.. I know that /u/Melthengylf has his own theory that is linked to kinship modes of production

[–]Melthengylf 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you!!! I don't disagree with SirSourPuss. While undoubtedly feminism is not the best framework to understand male issues (toxic masculinity is a useful concept, but limited), feminism isn't the cause of men problems either. I say this not because I believe you, Blobbartus, think that, but because I believe for many, specially MRAs in the menrights sub, it is the easy target. But that is just a reaction, since feminism is a reaction to a previous pain caused to women, and male issues preexisted feminism. Arguing against feminism creates the illussion that the problem was that women rebelled against the previous system, and that to solve men's issues we need to go back to the precious system. This is, of course, false. And feminist solutions to male issues (say, toxic masculinity) at least try to change something. But it is important, to me, to subordinate critiques to feminism to a change of society away from the traditional society. Whether this subreddit manages to do that, I would say that not as much as I would want to.

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Try on another browser.

I'm not sure how can this sub talk about equality when half of the members want to do with feminism completely and nobody here is giving an alternative vision of feminism, everyone is only hurling criticisms and complaints.

the alternate is not feminism. Not a movement that demonizes men. Not an ideology that treats men's issues as if they're caused solely by men being inherently bad.

That IS the alternative.

What more do you want to see?

There was a documentary made to show our issues. it was demonized and in some cases shut down. BY FEMINISTS.

there have been talks in universities. protested and shut down BY FEMINISTS.

There have been people who tried to open up domestic violence shelters for men. Can you guess what happened?

There have been people who tried to tackle mens issues. How do you think that ended up?

What would you like to see us do?

[–]SirSourPuss 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What would you like to see us do?

Discuss what the systemic root causes of men's issues are that predate feminism.

Discuss how does capitalism affect men's issues. This is a left wing sub ffs.

Discuss the liberation of masculinity from the constraints of both traditional and contemporary norms and how would it look like. What kind of a man would it be best to teach one's child to be in order to both succeed in today's world AND make it a better place?

Discuss how much power do other men vs women hold over male stereotypes. How is it best for men to avoid defining their self worth by what women think of them (incels).

How to reach out to ideological incels and convince them to drop their right-wing perspectives?

When you do discuss feminism make it productive. Explore:

Why and when exactly did feminism go so wrong for men? What incentivized its perversion?
How could it have not done so? What part of history would have had to unfold differently?
Separating the good from the bad. What has feminism achieved that should remain a part of our culture/society and what has it achieved that we should discard?
How did feminism define gender activism as the pioneering movement, and whether a men's movement would pursue gender activism in the same manner or define it altogether differently?
How does feminism influence our (not society's - our) definition of what are legitimate and illegitimate men's issues?
Does dysfunctional capitalism favour the thriving of toxic feminism at the expense of men's issues? Would a men's rights movement thrive better under a socdem/demsoc or a straight-up socialist society?

There's A FUCKTONNE of things to discuss that isn't perpetual histrionic bitching about feminism, even if feminism is involved in the discussion.

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Discuss what the systemic root causes of men's issues are that predate feminism.

We do. Domestic violence predates feminism. Rape predates feminism. Male disposability predates feminism.

Each has been affected by feminism. And in many ways the issues are inseparable. We can discuss as much as we want how men were beat by their wives and humiliated for it Hell there's folk songs about it.

But if we want to do something we have to tackle the issue of WHY IT'S NOT BEING ADDRESSED.

Discuss how does capitalism affect men's issues. This is a left wing sub ffs.

Left wing =/= anti capitalism. But if you want to have these discussions you're more than welcome to.

Discuss the liberation of masculinity from the constraints of both traditional and contemporary norms and how would it look like.

Cool. So we have to do this while entirely avoiding the topic of how those constraints are being actively reinforced and upheld by a massive well supported ideology? Let's look at the notion that fathers are worse parents. Do you know who has put that notion into legislation?

Discuss how much power do other men vs women hold over male stereotypes.

Without ever mentioning the MASSIVE IDEOLOGY that actively reinforces many of these stereotypes.

How is it best for men to avoid defining their self worth by what women think of them (incels).

We do have discussions about incels. I've put them up myself. that's why many here know that this isn't the case generally.

How to reach out to ideological incels and convince them to drop their right-wing perspectives?

We have had discussions on this. Here's a link to one made by yours truly. https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/ckh73r/so_you_want_to_help_incels_well_the_first_step_to/

Why and when exactly did feminism go so wrong for men? What incentivized its perversion? How could it have not done so? What part of history would have had to unfold differently?

This is the very criticism you seem to take issue with.

Separating the good from the bad. What has feminism achieved that should remain a part of our culture/society and what has it achieved that we should discard?

How did feminism define gender activism as the pioneering movement, and whether a men's movement would pursue gender activism in the same manner or define it altogether differently?

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/cri2hu/what_we_can_learn_from_feminism_to_advance_mens/

How does feminism influence our (not society's - our) definition of what are legitimate and illegitimate men's issues?

Nearly every feminist critical post I've read through. (and remember, I'm a moderator here. I read through a lot) has touched on this.

[–]serpentineeyelash[M] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

> Discuss what the systemic root causes of men's issues are that predate feminism.

Because other people benefit from them being in place, or believe they do, at least subconsciously, whether other men or women. Feminism is merely another incarnation of that; it benefits feminists to cast gender issues in a way that has harmed men for womens benefit, and it benefits feminists to demonize men and have an outgroup so they can rally political power and resources to themselves. Other than that you've got people being stubborn and believing nonsense for no particular reason other than it "Seemed right" at some point like all manner of pseudoscientific waffle, except here applied sociologically, and that nonsense producing bad outcoms.

> Discuss how does capitalism affect men's issues.

Way too much to answer even in brief in just one post.

> Discuss the liberation of masculinity from the constraints of both traditional and contemporary norms and how would it look like. What kind of a man would it be best to teach one's child to be in order to both succeed in today's world AND make it a better place?

Adopt a view of masculinity that the mens rights movement does; that is, it doesn't prescribe anything at all and doesn't discuss it much. There is no need to envision "A New Man" and tell people they must aspire to be like him, that's precisely the crap we're opposed to. Maybe adopt the mythopoetic MRA view of masculinity as an innate, driving force behind a man, personal to them, a sense of being a man.

> How to reach out to ideological incels and convince them to drop their right-wing perspectives?

With anti-feminist but egalitarian mens organizations engaged in activities and social events.

> Why and when exactly did feminism go so wrong for men? What incentivized its perversion?

Immediately, from the outset. Its foundational principle is epistemic injustice against men through the denial of misandry as relevant, even if a faction of modern feminists are seeking to reverse that decision.

Myopia, self-absorbtion, etc.

> How could it have not done so? What part of history would have had to unfold differently?

The best opportunity to salvage the movement was in the 80s with Farrell. Instead they doubled down and called him a misogynist, leading to the schism between MRAs and Menslib, with menslib supporting feminists in their demands that presumed equal custody not be enforced because men were abusers. So basically, they'd have needed to listen to farrel before that schism took place.

[–]serpentineeyelash 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]banmale -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you know why this sub is such a failure? Yes, men refuse to stick together and get each other's backs. You get feminists who disingeniously dismiss any evidence, move the goalposts and declare themselves victors. You get concern trolls that will argue it's not equal to burden women with their kids. You get trad cons who waffle on about rich conspiracy and the need to impose on each man a wife in a lifetime monogamy. You get yesterday menslibbers who are pro-feminism but don't want to suck up the consequences for their actions and want to pass responsibility for their subhuman status in eyes of women and society as externality onto other sane men in this sub. And there are voices in this sub that oppose all this scum, but they are still getting the short end of the stick. Answer short? You're dumb. Answer long. Mansplaining. Not to mention the time it takes to tackle all those people.

Once I was told that political power is all that matters, ergo, no matter how miserable men are, they are still responsible for all the evil in this world, and must be prepared to write checks (some will use the qualifier "rich men"). Yet when I point out to "sympathisers" that women have all the power in a family unit, my position is somehow invalid because of biology and women's fragility, and you can garnish men's income because it's supposedly easy to track, but you can't justify even the slightest of social means like collective disapproval to nudge women to uphold their end, because it might lead us to a police state. That's how dumb those people are, wage garnishment requires a complex state tax apparatus and doesn't lead us to a police state.

When men will relinquish this obligation to be semantically correct, take care of all the parties, have an extensive citation book that was not questioned by any the least credible feminist or trad con Christian ideologue? When will men just stick together because we are men and we speak for each other's interest first, the way each other group in existence does? RBK was comparing us men's righters with house builders who have an obligation to make the best and most compliant with every authority in the world, house on the tightest of budgets. Meanwhile gay men got their human rights when society hated them unanimously. Meanwhile feminism can't even outline the house project, but gets shit done by pestering both the left and the right.

Yeah I'm a free speech motherfucker, but on the condition that we bootstrap ourselves out of being such fail. All our opponents use dirty tactics and strike us in the fork of our legs and get cheered for that, because we innately perceive it as a victory for team female. I don't propose us stooping to the level of our adversaries. I propose a radical move forward: start with the assumption that women oppress men via their control of the family unit. That women were never oppressed in the past, being in possession of the most important political lever in the world from the very beginning of human history. As such, all issues women face as a group are the result of women's own choices. Every time anyone deviates from that assumption, all free hands get at him, making short statements that tip the scales in favor of the party that stands for male interest. Men should have empathy for each other? Haha, we can't diss off of each other's throats for using terminology that is not in favor of our foes.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Well, considering the fact the feminism is opposed to addressing men's issues, actually yes we can. If feminism didnt oppose male progress, I would agree with you.

The amount of attention given to feminism on this sub is disproportionate to this motive. If it was only about feminists opposing men's issues then we'd see much less such discussion. The problem I'm getting at is that there are *lots* of people who blame the majority of men's issues on feminism. These morons act as if men had it all fine and dandy before feminism. One can make a case about feminism blocking the progress on men's issues today, or that it had the opportunity for including men's issues in its earlier 1st/2nd wave incarnations, but "they excluded/are excluding us" is different from "they are the cause of our suffering". The latter is histrionic, pathetic mirroring of the feminist victimhood narrative that IMO does not belong in a male advocates group.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

we can safely attribute feminism as a men's issue

Is it the only one? Is it the most important one? Is it the first one we have to address? Is it the easiest to address? No, no, no and no. So why the constant bickering? Does the excess focus on it hurt the cause? Yes. Am I saying to completely stop talking about it and act as if it's not an issue at all? NO. But this excess stinks of a complete lack of collective self-awareness.

This space seeks to distinguish itself from other men's issues spaces, not become just like them. Given today's political climate it's easy to fall into the outrage/whining/professional victimhood trap, and given the visibility of feminism it is easy to paint is as enemy #1 of your cause. But this leads nowhere. Bah, it leads backwards. Nobody here is trying to imagine a different history of feminism, to think about where it went wrong and why did men end up getting the short end of the stick just so that we can find an entry point for injecting ourselves into popular discourse. Hardly anyone here is trying to formulate a narrative that explains men's issues with dysfunctional Capitalism, yet this is supposedly a left-wing group. And it's getting worse with time, as this sub was much cleaner from histrionic bickering earlier on in its life.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSourPuss 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]serpentineeyelash 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Is this sub getting taken over by feminist and menslibers?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	14
Comments	152
Date	December 14, 2019 10:42 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/eaqjj7/is_this_sub_getting_taken_over_by_feminist_and/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/is-this-sub-getting-taken-over-by-feminist-and.1202097 https://theredarchive.com/post/1202097

Comments