Is this group even left winged?

griii2 · 2026-07-25T22:55:25+00:00

Last time I checked, most people here identified as left wing, including the mods. What exactly is your problem? Can you be more specific?

Training-Cook3507 · 2026-07-25T23:07:27+00:00

Never voted Republican in my life. Aren't you allowed to be a liberal and not a feminist?

AfghanistanIsTaliban · 2026-07-25T23:16:57+00:00

It certainly isn't a subreddit for male-only conscription apologia.

Have I read what? Why are you asking such an obvious question? The loss of men doesn't have the same implications on population growth as women. That's why mobilization into combat roles has to be men. I'm not really interested in arguing this point so if you make no attempt to answer my question I will not respond to you. If you want to say something about this point in your answer you may. If it makes you feel better you could look at a mirror, ask a question, and think really hard on the answer.

George Orwell already made a response to this anti-male sentiment many decades ago.

https://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19440714.html

I HAVE received a number of letters, some of them quite violent ones, attacking me for my remarks on Miss Vera Brittain’s antibombing pamphlet. There are two points that seem to need further comment.

First of all there is the charge, which is becoming quite a common one, that ‘we started it’, i.e. that Britain was the first country to practise systematic bombing of civilians. How anyone can make this claim, with the history of the past dozen years in mind, is almost beyond me. The first act in the present war—some hours, if I remember rightly, before any declaration of war passed—was the German bombing of Warsaw. The Germans bombed and shelled the city so intensively that, according to the Poles, at one time 700 fires were raging simultaneously. They made a film of the destruction of Warsaw, which they entitled Baptism of Fire and sent all round the world with the object of terrorizing neutrals.

Several years earlier than this the Condor Legion, sent to Spain by Hitler, had bombed one Spanish city after another. The ‘silent raids’ on Barcelona in 1938 killed several thousand people in a couple of days. Earlier than this the Italians had bombed entirely defenceless Abyssinians and boasted of their exploits as something screamingly funny. Bruno Mussolini wrote newspaper articles in which he described bombed Abyssinians ‘bursting open like a rose’, which, he said, was ‘most amusing’. And the Japanese ever since 1931, and intensively since 1937, have been bombing crowded Chinese cities where there are not even any A.R.P. arrangements, let alone any A.A. guns or fighter aircraft.

I am not arguing that two blacks make a white, nor that Britain’s record is a particularly good one. In a number of ‘little wars’ from about 1920 onwards the R.A.F. has dropped its bombs on Afghans, Indians and Arabs who had little or no power of hitting back. But it is simply untruthful to say that large-scale bombing of crowded town areas, with the object of causing panic, is a British invention. It was the Fascist states who started this practice, and so long as the air war went in their favour they avowed their aims quite clearly.

The other thing that needs dealing with is the parrot cry ‘killing women and children’. I pointed out before, but evidently it needs repeating, that it is probably somewhat better to kill a cross-section of the population than to kill only the young men. If the figures published by the Germans are true, and we have really killed 1,200,000 civilians in our raids, that loss of life has probably harmed the German race somewhat less than a corresponding loss on the Russian front or in Africa and Italy.

Any nation at war will do its best to protect its children. and the number of children killed in raids probably does not correspond to their percentage of the general population. Women cannot be protected to the same extent, but the outcry against killing women, if you accept killing at all, is sheer sentimentality. Why is it worse to kill a woman than a man? The argument usually advanced is that in killing women you are killing the breeders, whereas men can be more easily spared. But this is a fallacy based on the notion that human beings can be bred like animals. The idea behind it is that since one man is capable of fertilizing a very large number of women, just as a prize ram fertilizes thousands of ewes, the loss of male lives is comparatively unimportant. Human beings, however, are not cattle. When the slaughter caused by a war leaves a surplus of women, the enormous majority of those women bear no children. Male lives are very nearly as important, biologically, as female ones.

In the last war the British Empire lost nearly a million men killed, of whom about three quarters came from these islands. Most of them will have been under thirty. If all those young men had had only one child each we should now have an extra 750,000 people round about the age of twenty. France, which lost much more heavily, never recovered from the slaughter of the last war, and it is doubtful whether Britain has fully recovered, either. We can’t yet calculate the casualties of the present war, but the last one killed between ten and twenty million young men. Had it been conducted, as the next one will perhaps be, with flying bombs, rockets and other long-range weapons which kill old and young, healthy and unhealthy, male and female impartially, it would probably have damaged European civilization somewhat less than it did.

Contrary to what some of my correspondents seem to think, I have no enthusiasm for air raids, either ours or the enemy’s. Like a lot of other people in this country, I am growing definitely tired of bombs. But I do object to the hypocrisy of accepting force as an instrument while squealing against this or that individual weapon, or of denouncing war while wanting to preserve the kind of society that makes war inevitable.

FroggyRibbits · 2026-07-25T23:54:09+00:00

I'll engage with this instead of denying it like others might.

Whatever you are seeing that prompted you to make this post is a result of men becoming disenfranchised with the left. Read the issues that are actually posted here and talked about and ask yourself if any of that is talked about by the mainstream left.

Also, couldn't you say this subreddit is leagues better in terms of discourse compared to other more mainstream MRA subs? You're kind of just coming to the best behaved male advocacy place we have and saying it's not enough. That should probably tell you something about how male issues are being treated right now.

Feel free to correct me if I misunderstood your post, but we are trying and it's not easy when society ignores your issues and tells you that they don't matter or that you're bringing it up in bad faith anywhere outside a male advocacy subreddit.

edit grammar

Valarian514 · 2026-07-25T23:45:36+00:00

Your question seems to inmply this sub isn't left-leaning enough just because we don't bow down to the feminist agenda...

UnarmedRespite · 2026-07-25T23:14:33+00:00

Here are some left-wing points I found in a quick search of the 5 most recent posts

—

I'd also argue gender equality is itself left-wing.

Beautiful-Act-8639 · 2026-07-26T05:30:21+00:00

This sub is very big tent. There's some Marxists and some anarchists, and then there's some SocDems, and there's also some liberals. I wouldn't consider liberals to be leftists, and even SocDems are more just center left, but I think it's more important for this discourse to spread than to be a specifically left wing space.

There's also definitely a contingent of anti-idpol leftists on here as well, and I disagree with a lot of the things they say about certain things. But I think they bring something to the table, at least as far as the topic of the subreddit goes.

TheRealMasonMac · 2026-07-25T23:30:57+00:00

Be specific.

KPplumbingBob · 2026-07-26T07:10:15+00:00

A pro male only conscription conservative asking if this group is even left winged. You can't make this up.

ilikepizza2626 · 2026-07-26T07:03:49+00:00

Like the comment said, this group is titled leftwingedmaleadvocates but I see a large lack of left winged support.

I haven't seen that

I'm okay with a larger dialogue but the title is a bit misleading. Maybe just male advocates.

It's male advocacy from a left-wing perspective. Concern-trolls like you might not understand the distinction. We advocate for males against misandry, but from the perspective of the left. So we focus on misandry, not generalizations of left-wing positions. There's a reason you don't post this in feminist forums who claim to be left-wing.

cheapcheap1 · 2026-07-25T23:22:21+00:00

I am happy you're being critical of people's self-assessed political beliefs, because a lot of people are full of shit about that nowadays. But I can't help but be a bit surprised that this isn't an obvious yes to you. Did you not notice any difference to other male advocate places? They're usually either

- completely subservient to feminist thought even where it is in open conflict with advocating for men's issues, itself, or reality itself

- or they have a ton of people who advocate for going back to conservative gender roles and whose criticism of Feminism stays at the surface level of trying to turn back time rather than freeing men of their oppressive gender role as well.

This group has neither, or when they do, they are clearly identifiable as guests/exceptional perspectives. And I think that is much, much better.

BRCityzen · 2026-07-26T21:01:49+00:00

but I see a large lack of left winged support.

I don't see that.

I know can be disorienting to see a reddit space that doesn't become an echo chamber for one or the other form of political correctness, due to heavy-handed mods permabanning anyone who expresses views that disagree with the majority of the sub.

But just because this space tolerates even conservatives like yourself, doesn't mean it's not a left wing space. It's kind of refreshing to see a left wing space (or really any space on reddit) that doesn't force you to conform to a particular ideology in order to participate.

hello_marmalade · 2026-07-25T23:06:54+00:00

Left wing doesn't mean leftist, in case that's the confusion here.

Capable_Sky_2637 · 2026-07-25T23:36:33+00:00

Specificity is required OP. Keep in mind that there are clearly some people here who know words but don’t know what they mean. I was basically accused of being a libertarian (with the implication being that I wasn’t speaking toward left wing politics) for daring to suggest that conscription is not a moral human invention—my point here being that what even constitutes left wing politics clearly isn’t that clear to some participants

SpicyMarshmellow · 2026-07-25T23:49:24+00:00

What does left-wing mean to you?

Savings_Surround_997 · 2026-07-26T01:16:19+00:00

To be honest, which ideology or set of thoughts are left or right actually depends more on the region and topic than you think. Specifically here I think sub is left-wing/progressive. In my opinion, being progressive is not what popular people or loud masses allow you to be; but it is how you question everything and respond to change. In this context, I always considered myself to be leftist, and I dont think being left or right should be decided just by your votes or your social circle, but rather your character and actions

Langland88 · 2026-07-26T02:31:50+00:00

I consider myself left of center. I ultimately align with the left even though I am more moderate.

TheKep27 · 2026-07-26T10:46:25+00:00

No. If you have doubts, don't ignore them. They are very much justified.

Huey-_-Freeman · 2026-07-26T19:36:50+00:00

I guess in the post I’ve looked over too much I don’t see too much about class, race, environmentalism, economic systems in general , which is what I would assume a “left wing” sub would talk about . Or maybe this is a sign that the modern (U.S. centric) left has become so focused on identity politics, “privilege” and academic buzzwords that I don’t recognize left wing thought when it doesn’t come with all of that.

My question to the sub - how much is society responsible for providing help to men (any anyone else) who are not succeeding financially or socially on their own, and who should pay for it? And in what context is it okay or not okay to restrict individual freedoms in the name of public good or safety?

In my mind the answers to those questions determine where people fall on the left-right framework.

Kiss-the-carpet · 2026-07-28T20:49:06+00:00

I tend to align personal core values of ecumenism and humanism with my political beliefs, for the sake of moral integrity, I don't really know how left being a humanist, really is.

optimistapocalypse · 2026-07-27T20:55:46+00:00

I pick my political beliefs based on my values and not whatever social group I get to be apart of.

Just because reactionary misandrist slop permeates progressive circles doesn't mean that I'm going to just abandon my progressive and socialist principals.

Happy-Impact-5069 · 2026-07-28T00:50:08+00:00

I'm not really left-wing but this sub seems to be one of a kind.

AutoModerator · 2026-07-25T22:51:25+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.

Nearby-Difference306 · 2026-07-31T06:51:22+00:00

I wouldn't call myself right wing atleast on personal level, more like a classical liberal or moderate libertarian. But this sub is literally the best place for male discussion. The mra sub is also decent but this sub way better and more nuanced in my opinion.

BaroloBaron · 2026-07-27T16:21:56+00:00

Personally i'm more of a slightly left-leaning centrist. However I can confirm that whenever this group discusses more traditionally political topics, it's with clearly leftist opinions.

Grand-Feeling-9301 · 2026-07-27T14:10:44+00:00

This place gets very angry when people (rightfully) question just how left wing it really is.

I do think there are plenty of genuinely left wing ppl here who post good faith discussion. But it's very obviously a lot of right wingers invade this sub to grievance post.

There is a lot of concerning hand-waving of the current state of American politics for one that boils down to "yea trump facism bad but feminists amirite!?"

A lot of people chop of their nose here to spite their faces.

Important-Leg-2154 · 2026-07-29T20:31:39+00:00

Honestly, there is so much complaining about feminists that we pretty much turned away all allies.

And i would rather die then take a step to the right

Comments