Surely this is obvious to many but I just realized this and I have to share it with someone. I have a humanities degree (I'm not American) and the vast majority of my male friends are manginas. Even among my closest colleagues (who are dedicated to the impact of biology on the traditional issues of the humanities, certainly an area not very dear to feminism) manginism increased considerably lately. Especially I have a friend of this group who is a consummate mangina: he is a militant for the issues of gender and morally sanctions everyone that says something "offensive". Last week we had a dinner together, I mentioned some issues related to the last wave of complaints about sexual harassment and the conversation we had helped me to realize something. Most manginas I know, predictably, adhere to feminism because they believe that only those who are morally virtuous (i.e., the nice guys) should have access to vaginas. But unlike the White knights, the manginas --in addition to acts of chivalry-- believe that a triumph of feminism will reverse the sexual dynamics between men and women and that they will replace Chad (instead of having muscles, they have the right attitudes and beliefs about women).

• Sunk cost fallacy: I realized that the most fervent manginas I know have a female partner since a long time ago. Also, like most of us, they invested much more time and money than they would prefer only to chase vaginas. But instead of realizing that this investment is not profitable, they irrationally try to put it in terms of moral virtue: "Surely I have made a lot of effort in being a mangina and I have obtained little sex in return, but acting like this [giving my time and my money to a vagina] is the morally correct thing to do [because wymyn are opressed or something]". Simply, it is a way to rationalize the time they have lost and nothing elese (this is one of the lessons I learned in this subreddit: instead of fantasizing about another state of affairs, accept that men have been deceived by the system and move forward). For example, my great mangina friend has as girlfriend a feminist stereotype: an obese woman, all tattooed, promiscuous ("sexually open" says my friend), has a very mediocre job, all the time needs emotional assistance, etc. My other friend who is becoming mangina has as a couple an extremely attractive woman, but as attractive as a obnoxious: she is always angry about everything and is extremely demanding.

• Confusion between what women say and what they actually look for in a man: the manginas I know simply repeat and validate anything women say about men. Their function is to validate, the only exepectation is to show themselves as morally virtuous to access their vagina. They believe that the knowledge of our mating patterns comes from feminism and not from biology (the most curious case is this fervent mangina friend who likes to read about evolutionary biology and neuroscience, but when it comes time to talk about feminism his mind is totally contested). That is a recipe for disaster.

• Manginism as ideology: As I said, these guys really believe that if feminism triumphs it will have great benefits for them. They think that it is necessary to establish the idea that access to the vagina must be mediated by a series of moral virtues, conveniently the alleged moral virtues that a mangina has. What the triumph of feminism consists of is not clear to them, but they always support any idiocy that a self-proclaimed feminist says. But after reading the evidence that comes from biology and psychology I'm convinced that mating strategies are rooted in our genes, it is not something that can be changed that easily. Naturally, culture has an impact in that, but all it does is amplify the effects of what is already written in our reproductive mechanisms. It will be very sad for these guys to realize that after all their effort the women are still looking for Chad.

What I wonder is how to talk to them about this, about what they really want (to have sex, to be loved) and not about feminism or magninism.