The popularity of low effort bioessentialist retorts and responses among online feminists; is anyone else noticing this?

SpicyMarshmellow · 2026-04-28T16:21:51+00:00

Funny thing is George said absolutely nothing making it about women. All he did was challenge the idea of male privilege, and this other person comes along and goes "WAY TO MAKE IT ABOUT WOMEN". Deranged thinking.

It's also bioessentialist in the sense that they're appealing to patriarchy theory - that basically anything negative that happens in society is because of society being controlled by men. Which I know isn't what patriarchy theory is supposed to mean according to any academic definition, but is what it boils down to according to its usage in common parlance, with this being a perfect example. She's basically positing that female voters and leadership figures played no role in the creation of this war, or the way it's being fought. Which is obviously total bullshit.

Going to paste part of another recent post of mine from another thread

The reason there is so much debate between these in gender discourse is because feminists use social constructionism as part of their motte and bailey routine. They claim that men are responsible for most bad things in society throughout history, including near-universally conspiring to oppress women. But then claim that they're not demonizing men, only the culture that teaches men to behave this way. If we'd only change the culture that teaches men to be evil, they wouldn't have a problem with men, or so they say. But at the same time, they'll claim that men are 100% responsible for creating the culture they're criticizing.

Social constructionism is the only thing that differentiates feminism, in theory, from a clear cut fascist ideology that morally condemns people based on what body they were born with. The debate between it and evopsych flows entirely from that. Otherwise, it would be nothing more than a politically neutral academic curiosity.

ByronsLastStand · 2026-04-28T16:08:29+00:00

Same. Often when it suits them, they'll talk about culture, and then when they fancy it they'll bring up biology. Of course, you'll never see them do the same regarding women unless it's a bioessentialist piece about how women are somehow innately better..

Important_Gap8612 · 2026-04-28T17:07:45+00:00

Its how they silence you

1) they say you dont need your own movement or a egalitarian movement because feminist covers everybody

2) then when ask if they can address men issues they will tell you this isnt a space for men to talk over women etc. so make your own space if you want to talk about your issues

3)You then makes your own space where you point out injustices

4)and then they come in say that you are *buzzword of your liking" how women are getting endangered by men and men are at fault themselves and how you should stop blaming women for all your problems (you dont even have to say anything about women for this to happen you can see that pretty well in the post) and if you would join feminism we could destroy patriarchy because patriarchy is the problem

and if you should actually believe them then you can go back to step one

EL_overthetransom · 2026-04-28T17:49:51+00:00

When the Selective Service Act was passed, every woman in Congress voted for it.

BCRE8TVE · 2026-04-28T18:44:42+00:00

This kind of bioessentialism is not rampant these days, it has always been rampant. Feminism can't escape it because it is baked into the core feminist ideology that men are the oppressors and the villains.

As much as feminism likes to claim that it is for men and that feminism helps men, baked into the core beliefs of feminism is the unshakeable faith-based position that it is alway a privilege to be a man and that men cannot be oppressed or victimized the way women can.

They can try and weasel their way around it and soften their words, but at its core that is the essence of feminism, and at the core of identity politics, and at the core of intersectionality. And that is why all these ideologies fail to help men, because they all at its core consider men at best to be privileged no matter what, and at worst consider men to be the enemies no matter what. There is no room for male victims who are victims because they are men in this worldview, and male victims are always seen as an accidental by-product of a machine that is meant to oppress women.

Under that perspective, even male victims are a woman's issue, and under that perspective, men's issues not only do not exist, they de facto CANNOT exist.

The double standards have always been there and have always been baked into the very foundation of feminism. Feminism is the result of a cheap rebranding of Marxism, but instead of the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie and seizing the means of production, it is women VS men and seizing the means of reproduction.

There is no space in feminism where collaboration with "the enemy" is allowed, and the only way for men to get conditionally pardoned from the unforgivable sin of being born male, is for men to metaphorically castrated themselves and enslave themselves, unconditionally and uncritically, to the feminist cause.

I can assure you the older feminists hold much the same view, they've just had more time to cloak it in better sounding word bites and cloth it with nicer looking window dressing.

And if an older feminist dares to actually care about men and have pity for men as a group she will quickly find herself excommunicated, her reputation dragged through the mud, and be accused of treason, to be a pick me, and to choose the oppressors over the sisterhood.

Feminism is locked into a purity spiral, and it is fundamentally incapable of stopping itself from growing worse and worse, because no outside idea is accepted or tolerated the moment it goes against the core faith based ideology that men are the enemy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_spiral

forestpunk · 2026-04-28T21:16:20+00:00

Bioessentialism has only ever been an issue when it's levelled against women.

illkmsoneday · 2026-04-28T17:42:07+00:00

Because if something benefits them, in any way, they use it as an argument. I have yet to meet one wo cedes the tiniest of grounds.

asfh38 · 2026-04-28T20:29:57+00:00

Yes and biological essentialism is part of the typical two-step for feminist patriarchy theory. First its "The people in charge are men, therefore patriarchy. Simple dictionary definition" Then you may say, "Feminists claim to help men and fight for equality, so will you please help these powerless men being thrown in vans?" Then basically the tweet, "No those men are also patriarchy because men as a group oppress women. Its the rich eating the rich"

Following the biological essentialist thought path, passively supporting conscription is an obvious metagame of men being an oppressor class. Men as a class are united in their hatred of women, only usurped by their urge to violently dominate each other for power and resources. If these men weren't being thrown in vans then they would be oppressing women, so women have no side to take. Women hold no responsibility for their vote and have no obligation to hide their sons and brothers or physically defend them from other men. Women then become the vast majority of voters, and gain a larger share of employment, housing, wealth, etc, and its all because of patriarchy backfiring.

SvitlanaLeo · 2026-04-28T21:49:45+00:00

Men in power are alienated from men in society. Those who don't understand this are brainless. Those who understand this and remain silent about it are conscienceless.

UnhallowedGround · 2026-04-29T04:59:20+00:00

Three ways to respond to such statements:

Does it matter who dragged the man? It's a gendered issue because it's the men exclusively getting dragged.
There are women in government now, and female voters. So it's not the "men's fault" either way.
Even if only men were in government, and only men could vote (totally unrealistic in this day and age), it still wouldn't be the man's fault. Because, the laws are decided by the top less than 1% of men in government, and the average man has no effect after the elections are over.

We don't have to get very complicated about gender essentialism, and so on.

KPplumbingBob · 2026-04-29T08:57:10+00:00

It's not like women can vote or anything like that. Not to mention it is pure victim blaming. Not to mention THEY made it about women. I'm sure this person would be OK with men saying "not out problem" for any injustice a woman would face caused by another woman. In reality it is the exact opposite of that. Any problem that women face, men and society have to fix it. Any problem that men face, it is their own fault because they are men. And as we know all men are the same and therefore deserve the same treatment.

ashen-dawn_7980 · 2026-04-29T18:30:54+00:00

And George Floyd was murdered by male police officers. All of a sudden, it seems a problematic thing to say, doesn't it? (Perhaps lazy on my part, just the first one that came to my mind)

Low effort retort, yes, but these erode solidarity, especially if people will pounce on you to defend these low effort retorts (bonus points if they call you every name in the book) At which point it becomes, "what are you even trying to accomplish?" (I ask to both those who post these low effort retorts and those of us who would, or once would when we had the heart, however well-intentioned/misguided, argue with these people)

Posts like this piss me off, but in a good way. There is so much work to be done, but I am so happy to see how many of you are calling this out.

Salty-Map-942 · 2026-05-01T00:01:36+00:00

It's pretty funny how they criticise a fairly out of the blue statement trying to cause a gender war, by then criticising that gender with a red herring...

But yes, I've seen this a stupid amount of times. It has usually gone along the lines of:

"and what have men ever done for us?"
"they tend to be in occupations like soldiery and enforcement a lot more, fighting and defending against foreign threats, or maintaining order on our streets"
"against who though? That's right, OtHeR mEn!"

Sure, doesn't take away from the point that they're still defending you and maintaining the peace though... Lol I mean, would these feminists be so fucking smarmy about the typical gender of their soldiers/police, if it meant those institutions were gone, and therefore a foreign soldier or criminal who, even if they are men, could 'have their way' with them as they'd have zero protection? All of a sudden, I'm sure they wouldn't care about the gender or ethnicity of the soldier or policeman, they'd just want protection in general.

It's all just a dumb red herring essentially, to ignore the disproportionate amount of men in dangerous, or life and death occupations, by attempting to 'nullify' this. Acting like that just because also disproportionately many of the perps are likely men, that that somehow cancels out/makes irrelevant all the skin on the line that soldiers and enforcement do for the protection of the community.

Cbr77ip · 2026-04-29T01:26:22+00:00

So what’s the best/sharpest defeater? What’s the more detailed defeater?

LoganCaleSalad · 2026-05-04T20:18:16+00:00

It's funny you mention patriarchy as feminists are the most zealous & loyal warriors of the patriarchy. They push men towards it with their misandry while upholding draconian gender norms. It's a shining illustration of women's biological want to be lead & how easily so many of them are lead astray.

AutoModerator · 2026-04-28T13:40:49+00:00

Thank you for posting to r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates. All new posts are held for manual review and may take up to 48 hours to be approved. Please don’t message the moderators, we’ll make sure to review your submission as soon as possible. If this is your first post, be sure to review our rules to ensure it meets our criteria.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Title	The popularity of low effort bioessentialist retorts and responses among online feminists; is anyone else noticing this?
Author	Inquiz_
Upvotes	134
Comments	29
Date	April 28, 2026 1:40 PM UTC (2 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/1sy1s8x/the_popularity_of_low_effort_bioessentialist/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/the-popularity-of-low-effort-bioessentialist.1579096 https://theredarchive.com/post/1579096

Comments