708,624 posts

They now want to destroy families... how far do you think they'll go before getting smacked in the face?

Reddit View
April 2, 2020
post image

Post Information
Title They now want to destroy families... how far do you think they'll go before getting smacked in the face?
Author jai_broarmy
Upvotes 292
Comments 67
Date 02 April 2020 09:43 AM UTC (6 months ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/706860
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/ftjilj/they_now_want_to_destroy_families_how_far_do_you/
Similar Posts

[–]VestigialHead60 points61 points  (7 children) | Copy

Why would anyone want a feminist future?

How about an equalist or egalitarian future.

[–]jai_broarmy[S] 30 points31 points  (2 children) | Copy

It's those delusional feminists mate ...... it's all they want .. Special treatment and placing women over men

[–]NohoTwoPointOh13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy

No delusions for these types. Their brand of feminism is purely a misandric, female-superiority movement.

[–]GiveMeTheBroccoli4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

First we have fem suprem I would call it

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

Because a feminist future IS an equal one.

Feminism is about leveling a balance that has favoured men for centuries. It's not about flipping it around and putting women on top for a change. Anyone who tells you it is, is lying to you. It's propaganda. If you only look at screenshots of articles with click-baity titles, angry reactions of young naive sjws, then you're going to have an inevitably warped view of what feminism is and who feminists are. Remember, propaganda is usually made by someone with more extreme views than you, so if you've lost sight of what the real issue is, if you only see polarising sides, that's because someone has constructed that discourse to pull you along their path.

If you want an equal future, get out of this shit-hole subreddit, leave the anti feminist spaces, and join us on the right side of history for a change.

[–]VestigialHead2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

I know that modern feminism cares nothing for equality. The evidence is strong. I did not learn this from any reddit sub or social media. I learnt it from real life. i saw over and over again men I knew getting fucked over by unequal laws. Divorce rape is a serious problem in the west. I see what feminists are saying and what the agendas they are pushing are about.

So I can see through your lame attempt to try to reinforce the absolute lie that feminism is about equality. I will give you a hint - the word is FEMINism. It cares only for raising the rights of females and that is it.

If it was about equality then it would have stopped pushing for more female rights 30 years ago when women gained all the rights men had (without most of the negatives). It would have then been trying to balance rights. But modern feminism has not pushed to improve men's rights even once.

That is why I am in subs like this - to drum up support t o create groups that actually care about equality and are not one sided and biased. I understand that not everyone in r/antifeminism wants equality but many do.

[–]Hemi_Sphere0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

"It cares only for raising the rights of females and that is it." That is just categorically incorrect.

"If it was about equality then it would have stopped pushing for more female rights 30 years ago when women gained all the rights men had (without most of the negatives). It would have then been trying to balance rights. But modern feminism has not pushed to improve men's rights even once." Just because on-paper, women have the same rights as men, doesn't mean that women are treated as equals in everyday life. In the same way that when the civil rights movement restored the rights of african-americans, racism didn't magically disappear overnight.

You are in subs like this because you're sexist and this is your sexist echo chamber. Read through the comments here and tell me honestly that they're about equality. The comments here are about thinly-veiled hatred of women, not respecting women as equals. This place is as one-sided and biased as it gets.

[–]VestigialHead1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Equal rights is not about how someone is treated. It is about what rights they have. If you expect to get to a Society were women and men are treated identically then you are dreaming. Men will always be treated much more harshly in some things than women and women will always be treated mor harshly in other areas and that is how it should be.

This treatment has not come about because of sexism or hatred or bias. It is this way due to nature and the differences of men and women and their perceived roles in society.

Men are treated MUCH more harshly in the street when it comes to disagreements. If you want that treatment then expect to get beaten very intensely when you scream at someone or tell them off. Expect to have to fight on the front lines and be conscripted to go to war.

Expect to be shamed for showing any emotions.

The issue is women seem to think they can be treated the same only in the positive areas of life and skip the negatives. It just does not work that way.

This sub is not about hatred of women in the slightest. It is about exposing and discussing the actions of feminism - not women. It is not even close to being misogynistic. There are other subs for that if you want to go down that idiotic road. So no it is not one sided. If this was an echo chamber or one sided you would have already been banned. Notice the difference? If I go to r/feminism and even slightly question any post I will be insta banned. I would be banned just for being a member of this sub. This sub is happy to discuss and debate the topics we speak of as we are doing right now.

[–]DrPVM18 points19 points  (3 children) | Copy

Feminist and 'thinker'-are two words that don't ever belong together in the same sentence.

I've seen so many 'feminist thinkers' pitch their arguments and it is clear that they lack the ability to think, having only swapped their 'thinking' in another echo chamber full of women who think and rationalise like a bunch of butt-hurt 12-year-olds.

I have a radical proposal for what comes next. A one-way ticket to Saudia Arabia would do her the world of good.

[–]Hemi_Sphere0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

The irony of this post is so strong. This place looks like an echo-chamber to me... What thinking did you do about the article exactly? Or did you just see the screenshot and react? What exactly is not butt-hurt about sending someone to a place you know oppresses women for having a thought you don't like?

[–]RedTheCat10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

And fds and r/ feminist subs aren't echo chambers?? Please. Do you go to those subs and pontificate there? Do you go to those subs and call them out on their misandry and double standards?

[–]TheBabou2680 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Ah, I saw your comment just when I started thinking this sub was being reasonable.

[–]MisPlacedNeuroBlue29 points30 points  (2 children) | Copy

Feminist “thinker”? Hardly.... more like domestic supervillain.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (1 child) | Copy

Come on. Supervillans are badass. This ugly baboon is just a femicunt nothing more

[–]laptopdragon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

agreed... there's nothing "super" about her ramblings. More like a cultural calamity.

[–]RockmanXX6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

"Radical Proposal"? Let me guess, buying 2 Cats instead of one?

[–]Accidental_Edge6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy

Well as someone whose family split at an early age I can tell you it will not help anything

[–]laptopdragon1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

as someone who has never had a real family, it is all I ever wanted when I was younger, and I can easily detect great parents from shitty ones. Yet even the shitty ones were better than what I dealt with.

[–]Accidental_Edge1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yeah, people who say stuff like "we need to get rid of the family to be feminists" had very good families that at most didn't like that they had toxic views of men and society

[–][deleted]  (3 children) | Copy


[–]TheBabou2680 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I must be blind for being a feminist and not seeing this part as large as you guys seem to find it.

[–]TomToms80 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is so true and we would meet with them to discuss but they are mostly anti-free speech sadly. And even when they do talk they are too brainwashed where it would take a lot to wake them up.

Civility is our strength, the problem is, is that civility only works on civil people.

[–]DaddyGroove11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy

Just look at her miserable, resting bitch face. She looks like she's about to cry.


[–]Deathbysugar20208 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

"No man wants to have a family with me. Surely it's because of the patriarchy. I'm jealous of women who are better than me, so I'll just convince other women to not raise a family either."

[–]VaultGuy19955 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

The family unit has essentially been destroyed already, so what's there left to destroy? They've already won the culture war, so now they're just splitting hairs.

[–]chambertlo5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

So feminists, ugly women who are incapable of finding men desperate enough to wed/fuck/impregnate them, want to decide what the future of humanity should be? Those cunts can’t even decide on a Fucking restaurant for date night.

Women are a fucking mess. Lmao.

[–]Hemi_Sphere0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

"So anti-feminists, ugly men who are incapable of finding women desperate enough to wed/fuck/impregnate, want to decide what the future of humanity should be? Those cunts can’t even decide on a Fucking restaurant for date night.

Incels are a fucking mess. Lmao."

Fixed your post.

[–]septune_sirens5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think I've seen a video of this lady. She tried claiming that the family unit was a huge source of sexual abuse / inappropriate relationships. Please. If no one grows up in a stable household, then abuse would just be even higher.

[–]Chezmatic4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is nothing new. Feminism has targeted marriage and the nuclear family for decades now.

Take this quote from Linda Gordon:

The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process.

The fact is they’ve gone very far already and society has payed a dear price for it.

[–]thereslcjg20004 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

They’ve wanted to destroy families for fifty years. It was stupid then and it’s still stupid now.

[–]GiveMeTheBroccoli3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

They’ll never get smacked in the face because you can’t hit women, side note, in Melbourne, the March for Men certainly got a smack in the face, they were just normally marching, just like feminists do all the time and NOPE, counter march and riots happen soon, caused by the feminists trying to shut it down

[–]spitfire_user4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Didn't want a feminist future anyway

[–]ZubinB3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

The fact that this is on VICE is worse.

[–]GeneraleArmando4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes, then feminism will die because modern feminists won't have any child to talk about their ideology.

[–]Gretshus2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I figured 2016 was a big enough smack, but ideological devotees don't exactly live in reality.

[–]I-Say-Im-Dirty-Dan2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Good thing we're not going to have a feminist future!

[–]HIV-negativator7 points8 points  (9 children) | Copy

How is she just called a "thinker" when nobody has ever heard of you. That's like me proclaiming myself the greatest philosopher of the 21st century.

[–]sh1ftyswar7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

more like..."my friend Sophie thinks"...

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (7 children) | Copy

She has literally written books about it. Where must your magic moving goalposts be before you consider her a thinker?

[–]HIV-negativator0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

I too can write letters on paper, yet I'm still not considered among the ranks of Plato, Aristotle and Archimedes.

Every idiot can write a book. If you want to be called a thinker you should at least have knowledge to back up your theories. Just saying radical stuff with the sole purpose of offending others isn't gonna cut it.

Like you are doing by coming on this sub, solely to annoy others because you feel like acting like a douche towards people you disagree with is more effective than trying to change their minds. You're just a troll.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

Those guys were genius philosophers who revolutionised their fields. She is also a philosopher. You are an arm-chair sexist. I think I know out of the two of who is closer to Plato, Aristotle and Archimedes.

[–]HIV-negativator0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

All I said is that I think you should actually achieve something to be called a "thinker". Yet you're still calling me a sexist just for the name of this sub I'm in, which is meant to fight inequality between the sexes. Also Plato and Aristotle both were flagrant sexists who thought of women as inferior in every way to men, just like any other Greek from that time period. Though still I never claimed to be close to Plato or any other great philosopher.

Literally all I'm saying is that if you haven't really achieved anything in life, you shouldn't claim to be a thinker and act like you are superior. I can sum up hundreds of complete idiots who wrote books. Hitler wrote a book, does that mean that he is knowledgeable about sociology?

I think the same about any male philosophy students. But you can keep on brigading this sub and calling me sexist, your hate won't get you anywhere. I just feel sorry for you that you feel like you have to debate me just because I'm male.

[–]Hemi_Sphere0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Well yeah, feminism is about balancing equality between sexes, and if you're an anti-feminist, then you're anti-equality between sexes. Do as many intellectual gymnastics as you need to justify your position and pat yourself on the back, but that doesn't change what you are, just how you rationalise your view point. If you really want to improve equality between the sexes, but think that some aspects of feminism go too far, then you are a moderate feminist! You just don't like the label because, to you, the term 'feminism' has been poisoned by the radical stuff you disagree with. If you're pro-equality, then ONLY anti-feminists will tell you you're anti-feminist, because they have an agenda.

Technically, you could say that 'anti-feminism' isn't anti-women, but reading-the-room of this subreddit for less than 10 minutes shows that is simply not the case. This place is a cesspool of thinly-veiled misogyny, and it'd be dishonest of anyone here to say that it isn't. Just because occasionally dog whistles are used, doesn't mean everyone else is oblivious to the sub-text.

Re: magic goalposts. What's good enough for "achieved anything in life" if being a published, peer reviewed, philosopher and social critic isn't? Sophie Lewis is an independent thinker whose work is original and peer reviewed. Sophie Lewis doesn't claim to be superior anywhere, and I'm not saying that she everything she says is flawless. The classical philosophers of ancient Greece were also wrong about all sorts of stuff. Like sexism, as you rightly point out! Everyone is fallible.

I'm not debating you because you're male. I didn't know you were male, although I did guess. I'm debating you because your sexist view point is damaging to you and others. The sooner you get out of this place and it's toxic thought patterns, the happier you'll be later.

[–]HIV-negativator0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You say that anti-feminism is about hating women, but you also say feminism is about equality. Doesn't that sound like a contradiction to you. Feminism is a word that derives its name from the struggle for female rights in the early 20th century. That struggle no longer exists, everybody agrees that women are of equal worth to men. Everybody agrees that women should be able to vote. The reason I dislike third wave feminism is because it's not a small percentage of feminists that exhibit this extremely toxic behavior towards men. It's almost a majority.

You're a movement that claims that it advocates for equality yet your misandrist members deter any men from joining it.

I feel like the movement has become more and more about diminishing the rights of men instead of protecting them. The hellhole that is Tumblr is a perfect example of this. If the name is so poisoned and controversial, and degenerate why don't reasonable feminists step away from it and come up with a better one. That's honestly the only way to disassociate yourself from those nutjobs.

But if you're just not gonna stop trying to argue with me, please stop trying to brigade this sub. I don't go on r/feminism to post about my ideology either, so why should you stoop to that level. Read the sub rules.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

What critical analysis of the knowledge backing up the book could you possibly make when you haven't read the book, the article, or any of her other work?

Anyone can write a book, but could everyone get them published and respected by experts in the field. The books and articles aren't perfect but they ADD to the discourse instead of assuming the you're already right (and always have been) and any extra discourse is unnecessary.

"Just saying radical stuff with the sole purpose of offending others isn't gonna cut it." Sounds like you just disproved this whole subreddits game-plan huh?

I've come to this sub because by having these toxic views, you're damaging yourself. This echo chamber of disinformation is only going to pull your further into your weird incel hole and that's no place to be. I used to be there a few years ago and it took a lot of time and thinking and questioning what I thought I knew to get out and to see with a fresh head that wasn't poisoned by a handful of weird woman hating losers who have nothing but vitriol and time to cherry pick anecdotes that align with their warped world-view.

Save yourselves. get out of this shit hole.

[–]HIV-negativator0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Dude it literally says in the article that it's radical. If that's what it's gonna take to have our world be "not-sexist", I think most people would rather have a "sexist" world. Prove to me that our world is inherently sexist and bad first, and then you can talk about taking actions so radical that our entire social system needs to be changed around it.

[–]Diogenes--6 points7 points  (16 children) | Copy

how far do you think they'll go before getting smacked in the face?

Until they get smacked in the face. Seriously. It is a child's instinct to push boundaries to find out where the lines are. And women are children.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-2 points-1 points  (15 children) | Copy

"Until they get smacked in the face. Seriously. It is a child's instinct to push boundaries to find out where the lines are." This is exactly what you're doing though. OP asked that in the post, that wasn't in the headline. Physical threats to those that don't agree with you, is that childish?

[–]Diogenes--1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy

It's not a threat, just an observation. Only a soy-guzzling "words are violence" weak little SJW bundle-of-sticks would think it was a threat rofl.

Personally, as a MGTOW, I advocate for men to completely avoid women.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (13 children) | Copy

Hate speech is a form of violence, that's a fact.

"Personally, as a MGTOW, I advocate for men to completely avoid women." Can't be a healthy life-style. Don't you think things would be easier if you didn't see women as 'other' and you could get on with them without all this vitriol? Do you think that helps you somehow? Sounds fucked up to me. By forming this echo chamber around yourself, you're only going to further isolate and 'extremify' yourself, you're only going to hear things about women that make you hate them more. How is that helpful?

[–]Diogenes--1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy

Hate speech is a form of violence


that's a fact


Can't be a healthy life-style

  • Federal US hate laws VAWA and Title IX punish innocent men

  • The divorce rate is over 50%. Women file 70-80% of divorces. Feminist divorce courts give women everything, and usually ignore prenups. So if we lowball the figures at a 50% divorce rate with 70% filed for by women (the actual numbers are higher), we end up with 50% x 70% = 35% chance that she'll divorce you and take everything. That's more than 1 in 3. Russian Roulette is only 1 in 6.

  • There are countless double standards in our society. Most not hard-enforced by law, but rather soft-enforced by social customs. Like how it's fine for a woman to hit a man but not vice versa.

Given the state of society, relationships are a bit like a minefield for men, except minefields aren't as dangerous. MGTOW is the wise, rational choice.

Btw, I'm guessing the Try Guys look downright masculine and Chad-like compared to you. Unfortunately unless you have a weight set (which you clearly do not), you can't get started on a 5x5 during the quarantine. So instead, check out r/bodyweightfitness and start doing some stuff. The leg stuff like squats is especially important for testosterone production.

Once your testosterone isn't in the gutter, you won't be such a pathetic weak piece of shit anymore. Once you're not so weak and pathetic, you'll realize words are just words, and laugh at stick-bundles weak enough to be hurt by them.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

Why do you view relationships as a zero-sum-game? Do you think the financial outcomes of a relationship are the only thing to consider? If you think marriages are so unsuccessful, why don't you also blame the men who also enter into them willingly? Unless you cite a course for "Feminist divorce courts give women everything, and usually ignore prenups" then I am not willing to grant that in this discussion.

Feminist divorce courts, are just normal divorce courts, because, news-flash, feminism is about equality, not choosing women above men. However, the traditional family unit, that 'red-pillers' fetishise so much, has women as primary care-giver in the marriage and so it should not be surprising that in the case of a divorce, majority custody of the kids, and resources necessary for raising those kids, should go to primary care giver. If you think more men should be primary care giver, then I agree with you. And then in the case of a divorce, those men should get majority custody of those kids (unless some other arrangement is agreed to by both parties).

There is nothing wise or rational about excluding half of the population from your life purely based on their gender. Do you avoid women because of your fear that you'll end up in one of these unsuccessful marriages? What if you fell in love, got married, had the best 2 decades of your life, but then grew apart. Does that count as a failure because it didn't last forever? You seem to be forgetting that divorce can be a healthy end to a relationship.

[–]Diogenes--0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Do you think the financial outcomes of a relationship are the only thing to consider?

We're not talking about misplacing a $5 bill, or losing $50 to a poor investment decision. We're talking about a man losing his car, his house, and half of his future income. And that's just the financial devastation - being legally prevented from seeing his kids is often on the table as well, usually due to the woman lying for more attention and money. The suicide rate for men is extremely high, as you probably know. You might not know the rate for divorced men is more than 2x the rate for unmarried men.

Feminist divorce courts, are just normal divorce courts

Yes, feminism has taken over our society. As I mentioned, we have two federal hate laws on the books, both due to the feminist hate group's control of the democrat hate party.

feminism is about equality

When you're punishing innocent people for being born a certain way, you're a hate group.

Feminism is responsible for VAWA and Title IX, federal US laws which punish innocent men, through its influence & control over the democrat party.

This means feminism is a hate group, and the democrat party is a hate party.

There is nothing wise or rational about excluding half of the population from your life

For thousands of years it's been said that women have no soul. Either billions of people over the course of thousands of years were hopelessly stupid misogynists - and for absolutely no reason, mind you - or we can accept Occam's razor and the fact that women have no "soul" - or in our modern parlance, no conscience. They are evil. They abuse children wantonly, and those kids are the lucky ones... the unlucky ones aren't even allowed to be born. Every year, American sluts alone murder a million unborn babies.

There's nothing wise about allowing soulless, evil child abusers & murderers into your life.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

Why do you assume the car, house, income belongs to the man? What about women who are the majority income earners in the household? You assume that women lie for attention and money, but don't you think men do the same? Aren't mothers also legally prevented from seeing their kids when fathers win custody? Do you ever even consider any of these issues from a woman's perspective? Are you friends with any women?


Title IX:

Prohibits –> Prohibits discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance (e.g., athletics, courses), such as at UNC-Chapel Hill. Also prohibits sexual harassment, which includes acts of sexual violence, and retaliating against a person for filing a complaint or speaking up about rights protected under Title IX. Action –> If the University knows (or should know) about an instance of prohibited conduct that creates a hostile environment, Title IX requires the University to take immediate action to eliminate the conduct, prevent it from happening again, and address the effects of the conduct. Procedures, Prevention, and Resources –> Requires schools to adopt procedures for addressing reports and designate a Title IX compliance coordinator, and recommends preventive education and making resources available for those impacted. Section 304 of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (reauthorizing VAWA):

Policies and Procedures –> Requires University policies and procedures to address sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. Education Programs and Campaigns –> Requires education programs, prevention programs, and awareness campaigns on sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. Resources –> Requires information about available resources, law enforcement options, and protective measures such as changes to living situations or class schedules."

Yeah, it's positively EVIL to put procedure in place to protect victims of abuse, and prevent discrimination.

Occam's razor is the principle that the explanation with the fewest assumptions is most likely the correct one, NOT which ever argument you can sum up in a sentence must be right. Sexism has existed forever. And so it's a much simpler assumption that while sexism was always around, people said sexist things like "women have no soul". The alternative being that somehow, despite all we know about the biology of men and women that somehow women's brains are made without consciences, and all the women we know magically don't count. That's such a preposterous claim I didn't think I'd ever have to dispute it.

Leave this shitty subreddit, it's bad for you.

[–]Diogenes--0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Title IX didn't always punish innocent men. What you googled up is what it was prior to 2011. That's when demon-rat hate president Hussein wrote the "Dear Colleague" letter which changed this law to punish innocent men. Start your search there.

it's positively EVIL to put procedure in place to protect victims of abuse, and prevent discrimination.

What VAWA aims to prevent (violence against women) was already illegal. You can't write a law which says "That other law, which already exists, is a good law. We should follow it." Thus the only way for VAWA to have moved forward was to widen the net and catch innocent men. Which is exactly what it does. It is a hate law.

Leave this shitty subreddit

The only shitty thing about this subreddit is the influx of figs like you that we've had lately. Why don't you go back to menslib and talk about how toxic your masculinity is, and discuss which horse replica dildo is the most realistic? That's what you really want, don't lie. Go be with the other betas. Bye.

[–]Diogenes--0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy

Gonna make a new reply rather than edit my other one, because seriously, wtf?

feminism is about equality


What the fuck are you doing in this subreddit, you idiot?

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (6 children) | Copy

If you don't think feminism is about equality, that's because YOU choose to cherry pick the more controversial items under the umbrella of feminism are ignore the more reasonable. That's the whole job of this subreddit! Why are you here unless you want to become more biased? What's the point? Why poison yourself like that?

If you use a different private definition of feminism to everyone else, it's intellectually dishonest to deliberately conflate the two definitions when it suits you.

[–]Diogenes--0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Feminism is a hate group. Only a brainwashed beta male could possibly think it's about equality. Women and masculine men are well aware of what feminism truly is.

If you use a different private definition of feminism to everyone else

Feminism is a hate group. This is the truth. I speak the truth. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I say anything other than this about feminism, maybe a soy-fueled hallucination.

[–]Hemi_Sphere-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy

Only a brainwashed misogynist could possibly think it's a hate group. But anti-feminism is totally not a hate group, just ignore all the hateful things said here, that's just a (very) loud minority, probably (hopefully?).

And here's some science on soy; https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(10)00368-7/pdf

[–]IServeTheUSSR2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Or killed

[–]Panzerkampfwagen2122 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Of course it’s from vice

[–]Ayiteb1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I didn't read the entire article but the headline seemed misleading.

[–]AlliedAnchor1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Not to mention there are some that want to wipe out all males (seriously, look at u/AspenGoddess)

[–]succ-me-thanos0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I told her she is a fucking idiot

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Lol no

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter