Men bad and women good circlejerk from the reddit hivemind

Impossible_Serve7405 · 2026-02-21T22:33:45+00:00

PreviousNextBack to Grid ViewPreviousNextBack to Grid ViewPreviousNextBack to Grid ViewPreviousNextBack to Grid ViewPreviousNextBack to Grid...

[–]UnarmedRespite 51 points52 points53 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dont_Bully3D 35 points36 points37 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 18 points19 points20 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EnormousPurpleGarden 28 points29 points30 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AfghanistanIsTaliban 14 points15 points16 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

apparently the explanation of female efficacy is less food consumption (2000 vs 2500 kcal) and stronger immune system

The strong immune system comes with the threat of autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis so it isn’t an absolute advantage (unless there is some positive expected value math that i’m missing)

but -500 kcal is a laughably insignificant change. The agri industry has many inefficiencies and also the vast majority of the world is still omni (vegan diet is much more efficient). One example of such inefficiency is chick culling

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick_culling

It shouldn’t take much effort to show that growing then throwing away a % of chickens is indicative of massive waste/inefficiency. Or feeding intermediate animals (who move around, breathe, sleep, talk, etc.) to humans rather feeding the humans directly is also wasteful.

[–]Dependent-Match4726 24 points25 points26 points 5 months ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ChaoticAligned 9 points10 points11 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MaximumTangerine5662 2 points3 points4 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mousepotatodoesstuff 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]awisepenguin 11 points12 points13 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MaximumTangerine5662 5 points6 points7 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FanaticUniversalist 11 points12 points13 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DarthDragon117 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MaximumTangerine5662 5 points6 points7 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 4 points5 points6 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xX_SkibidiChungus_Xx 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Double_J123 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hungrybularia -40 points-39 points-38 points 5 months ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnarmedRespite 30 points31 points32 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]BeneficialInspector0 -9 points-8 points-7 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnarmedRespite 7 points8 points9 points 4 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BeneficialInspector0 -1 points0 points1 point 4 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnarmedRespite 1 point2 points3 points 4 months ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BeneficialInspector0 -1 points0 points1 point 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]UnarmedRespite 1 point2 points3 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Late-Hat-9144 29 points30 points31 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]DistrictAccurate[M] 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago*locked comment (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Kyuubimon90 -7 points-6 points-5 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Late-Hat-9144 17 points18 points19 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Emergency_Title1521 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Kyuubimon90 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]BeneficialInspector0 -7 points-6 points-5 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Late-Hat-9144 5 points6 points7 points 4 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]More-Bed-2557 -6 points-5 points-4 points 4 months ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnabsolvedGuilt 1 point2 points3 points 4 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]More-Bed-2557 -2 points-1 points0 points 4 months ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnabsolvedGuilt 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That’s what I said though, his last reply wasn’t even a counter argument- he just made an accusation of misandry as an insult then blocked. If you are the previous person he replied to; your arguments were already clearly stated as I am choosing to engage with them in our other thread.

Maybe the upvote system on Reddit makes people more sensitive to this, but blocking exists as a feature for a reason and can be used without any greater justification than they just don’t want to talk to you anymore. Implying that someone should not use that feature due to the unfair appearance of a gotcha just seems like ego talking bc I can’t imagine a similar situation playing out irl where you’re having an argument- someone calls you an insult and says fuck off before walking away, and you chase after them to continue arguing bc you thought you looked bad to people around you? It’s just not a big enough deal to warrant hopping onto an alt to continually speak to someone who doesn’t want to engage with you

I only commented on it cause I see it at least once in various comments regardless of the subreddit, and the behaviour of switching accounts to reply always comes off as insecure, like trying to get one last word in to control your sense of self that can’t handle a stranger’s callousness. If they are insulting you then the convo is already over and even tho I was on his side of the argument, I think that last comment from them definitely says more abt them than it does abt you. Anyone reading that honestly wouldn’t take it as them “winning” the argument, and the people who would dishonestly think that are the ones that would also not engage w your points- so there’s truly no convincing them

[–]BeneficialInspector0 -1 points0 points1 point 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

His argument was that because I said statistically men commit more violent crimes against strangers, that I am misandrist and should be banned. My "argument" in return was a bit childish, I will not lie, since I gave a sarcastic reply, but if he didn't want to have a discussion he wouldn't of replied to my comment. If someone posts something negative about me in my own comment thread, I will defend myself, it is just common sense. If he wanted to proverbaly "walk away" as you stated, he wouldn't have blocked me. He would have replied, and then just not responded to any other of my replies, like I did to his on my alt.

Unfortunately, in the case of 'winning' an argument, not everyone is as logical as you are. If you do not defend yourself or give a counter-argument to something, people will usually take the person who spoke last as the authoritative voice in the dicussion.

And, yes, it is also a bit of my ego. I would not lie about that lol.

[–]UnabsolvedGuilt 2 points3 points4 points 4 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What is the purpose of the argument here? As in how it relates to what the other commenters were saying

I don’t think it’s disagreeable that stranger violence is more likely to come from a man, but stranger violence is generally not nearly as much of a problem as interpersonal violence and I think the was important to make as a counterpoint

Not to mention we understand to a decent degree that bullying and violence expresses itself very differently between the sexes- with many of those cases of male perpetrated violence being female by proxy even though they tend to receive far less social and legal punishment for it. Like esp when talking abt big urban areas/cities and a lot of violent stranger crime comes from poor areas that tend to be black, where the fathers are almost always dead or in prison and adolescent boys are groomed to be the “man of the house” by their mothers who they grow very protective of. A lot of black on black crime stories (that account for a lot of the crime stats being used in this convo) cannot be accurately viewed from a reductionist gendered lens that paints it as a male issue when women are involved in every part of those stories up to the bullets actually being fired, meaningfully involved that is by backdooring guys or setting them up like emmit till by telling the men who are protective of them lies against the men they want to see hurt

Tl:dr - I think the person you replied to was right to insinuate that it is an intersectional issue that is not best served thru the lens it was being portrayed thru, so I don’t get the point of rejecting the interpersonal violence stats when they are relevant and worth bringing up here. Everything I said is barely scratching the surface of it and not even accounting for things like homelessness and drug use which will also heavily increase the predictability of violent crimes, many factors that can and should be controlled for outside of reducing it to just seeing men primarily commit violence and thinking it’s gendered issue- especially when the types of men who do that fall well out of average into extremes that predict they are very likely to end up in prison at some point in their life.

[–]BeneficialInspector0 -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnabsolvedGuilt 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Okay I get your counter claim, I have a refutation for it that might bridge the gap so lmk what you think

The relevance in bringing up non-stranger violence was to substantiate his claim that women are also CAPABLE of mass violence. I don’t think it is explicitly stated in that comment but what he’s likely alluding to as a general men’s advocacy talking point is that societal violence is largely emergent and not innate to gender. For that claim, it matters to express how women can be violent too in situations where they are also collectively overrepresented in the extremes

So to say women commit more infanticide- if an argument were to be made similar to this one that bc some commit more infanticide babies and children would be safer with men, a strong counter claim would be that women disproportionately spend more time with children and babies to begin with, so if that (amongst other things) were accounted for you’d find similar emergent violence from men to children.

Applied to this argument: if cities were 70% more women and 30% men, the violence expressed by the men on extremes in currently reality would be emergent in women in this hypothetical as they are forced to take on the same conditions that lead to that violence, even absent the different levels of aggression between sex. So if the point of that hypothetical is to say an all female society would be safer in terms of stranger violence, that is not true and doesn’t account for why stranger violence even happens if those majority women take on factors like being dominant and over represented in homelessness the way men are now, that factor alone would account for a large portion of it.

There are a bunch of different premises to support this argument but that’s the main one, women if forced to take on the social roles and expectations of men absent a majority of men would definitely express the same violence that occurs for men that are not biologically innate. Part of that was built into my previous reply abt how they express violence through proxy which can’t be quantified in research abt stranger violence- but absent men to take on those roles to them, a woman who would use proxy violence would be far more inclined to be directly violent, esp for reasons that relate to economic disparity

Thoughts?

[–]BeneficialInspector0 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I do see where you are coming from, and I agree that if all of society or a large part of it became women, a more "dominant" characteristic in women would take the place of where males were originally.

But, the hypothetical didn't mention all of society becoming 70% women, only a single city. With this in mind, a single city would not be enough to cause a massive gender role shift like you are talking about. The main reason for this is the continuation of outside influences on the city. Media tailored to men showing them as strong and brave would still show up, tourists and travellers who are men would still come through, women who live in the city would also travel to cities where this 70% disparity would not exist. So the cultural and environmental aspects that would cause these changes would not be as strong.

Though, I of course could be wrong. It would be an interesting experiment, but pretty unethical. So there's no real way of finding out whether each of us is correct here.

[–]UnabsolvedGuilt 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I get that point bc it would be inference to extrapolate from a city to larger society. I think you can reasonably infer from that type of hypothetical that no outside influence is built in, but either way I think you can reasonably make some claims isolated to big cities bc they are really societies of their own

Like if this were to happen in New York City or Tokyo then even just isolated to those cities you would see significant behaviour changes worth talking abt since that type of violence is already condensed to urban areas anyway, but fair enough if you think the sample size makes it moot

I think it is considerable tho that there are already micro societies where women have largely shifted to taking on male roles due to the lack of males due to things that would start a way larger conversation from things like systemic criminal injustice and wartime

[–]shonmao 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reddit_boi222 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BeneficialInspector0 -5 points-4 points-3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Emergency_Title1521 6 points7 points8 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]BeneficialInspector0 -6 points-5 points-4 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Men bad and women good circlejerk from the reddit hivemind
Author	Impossible_Serve7405
Upvotes	87
Comments	52
Date	February 21, 2026 10:33 PM UTC (5 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/EverydayMisandry
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/everydaymisandry/comments/1rb4mnz/men_bad_and_women_good_circlejerk_from_the_reddit/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/EverydayMisandry/men-bad-and-women-good-circlejerk-from-the-reddit.1573975 https://theredarchive.com/post/1573975

Comments