I feel it should be illegal to abort bases on “it’s a man”

Reddit View
May 14, 2020

I saw down below a few posts about a woman aborting her child if it was a man (#killallmen) and I seriously think that should be illegal killing a child just because it’s gender to prove a point?

Can’t I just start shooting women to prove my point?

Seriously it’s fucking disgusting and it’s another reason I dislike feminists

Post Information
Title I feel it should be illegal to abort bases on “it’s a man”
Author ZenkaiLane
Upvotes 46
Comments 99
Date 14 May 2020 01:22 PM UTC (12 months ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/709963
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/gjm8qa/i_feel_it_should_be_illegal_to_abort_bases_on_its/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:

[–]ZenkaiLane[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Can we all just agree this angry witch guy has issues?

[–]Jakeybaby1255 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

While I agree with what your message is, don't sink to their level. It's not worth it mate

[–]iHaveAtinyWoody1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

He is being sarcastic to prove a point. I dont think hes actually asking for permission to shoot women lol.

[–]Jakeybaby1250 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

He triggered one SJW in this post which was hilarious.

[–]b1tchyBetty1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

A lot of people dont even view it as killing anything

[–]Covered-in-Thorns0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I’m gonna say no cause freedom shit, but if you post about it like she did, that should be called hatespeech

[–]allgespraeche0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Dislike feminists for something that has nothing to do with it?

[–]ZenkaiLane[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Ahhh the sweet smell of controversy in the morning

[–]Poseidonram1944-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy

I do support abortion, but you shouldn’t be allowed to terminate on the basis of it being a male.

[–]iHaveAtinyWoody5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

Abortion should be done under strict circumstances.

  1. If a woman is raped and this results in pregnancy.

  2. If having the child is a threat to the mothers physical well being in a possibly fatal way.

Those should be the only acceptable circumstances for abortion.

[–]Poseidonram1944-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

Maybe if protection fails or something...

[–]iHaveAtinyWoody1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Nope. That's what adoption is for.

[–]ZenkaiLane[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

That’s kinda my opinion

You wouldn’t kill it if it was a woman?

Why not?

Because it’s a woman?

There is no good reason

[–]femenisthere-1 points0 points  (68 children) | Copy

this isn't feminism. Feminism is about equality of all. To shoot a baby would be a anti-man which would make someone a misandrist not aa feminist. I agree with you that what they said was disgusting and shameful. While your opinion is something I agree with that doesn't make it anti-feminist and if anything makes it feminist.

Also its worth noting that not all feminist are pro-choice. Sorry you had to hear that mate.

[–]ZenkaiLane[S] 1 point2 points  (40 children) | Copy

The lady I’m referring to said the #killallmen which I only ever see used with feminism so I just thought it might fit here

[–]femenisthere-2 points-1 points  (39 children) | Copy

That is associated with the misandrist movement which are not a feminist movement and are despised by feminist circles. I would hate to see them associated with us but unfortunately they usually are :/

[–]Jakeybaby1251 point2 points  (38 children) | Copy

Look, if you want an actual equality movement, look at egalitarianism. You may say that feminism is equality for all but it's not. It only focuses on problems facing women and completely ignores mens problems.

[–]femenisthere-1 points0 points  (37 children) | Copy

that is literally not true. We do focus on male issues such as MGM and male mental health for example. I myself have finish a policy brief on IPV and used male victims specifically. Where on earth did you see feminist academics say they dont care about male issues?

[–]Jakeybaby1251 point2 points  (35 children) | Copy

Hmm let me see. How about dozens of feminists constantly objecting to making rape and the draft gender neutral, protesting institutes about male health because they take away from women. There's also gender violence being seen as only one-sided by feminists. Men are also told to man up whenever they talk about their feelings. MGM is encouraged by most feminists because they say it looks better. Please come back when you've actually changed some laws.

[–]femenisthere-1 points0 points  (34 children) | Copy

An example I have used before is just because North Koreas offical name is 'Democratic Peoples Republic of North Korean' does not make it democratic. Likewise, some of these people are outright misandrist who just claim to be feminist. For other issues its because there are waves of feminism, as I just told you I just did a paper focusing on male victims of IPV as a - guess what - feminist. New wave feminist consider male victims in IPV while old feminist thought regarding IPV is from the last wave who are dying out. My wave does not like the past wave for being privileged and non inclusive. My feminist policy review was based on changes being made to my countries law or that will be made soon so yeah we are actually making legal changes you're just ignorant of them.

As for some other claims you make they're outright bs. Feminist hate when society tells man to man up as thats the patriarchy that for so long has told man that to show feelings is emasculating. Feminist are on your side! Also, why havent man changed the game for the past many centuries where only man could make laws or have authority in conversation???? I have also never heard a feminist say MGM is good and should be encouraged hell I havent even seen a misandrist do that, youre just pulling shit out of your ass. Regardless these small bad cookies dont represent the movement at whole or ruin the logic of feminism. Look at the bigger picture and dont base everything entirely on your few interactions.

again you havent mentioned contemporary academics so please do

[–]Jakeybaby1251 point2 points  (32 children) | Copy

[–]femenisthere-2 points-1 points  (31 children) | Copy


I said academic sources not a post which focuses on small scale examples. Besides none of the points are about any of the things you just mentioned like MGM so how about you send me a link of a feminist academic text that says MGM is good instead of distracting from the core of our debate and your claims which you have not yet proven. Another point worth mentioning, the link is related to historic revisionism which is is another topic entirely however to remind you in case you forgot we are discussing contemporary feminism interests. The next link better be a link to a paper and a relevant one at that.

[–]Jakeybaby1251 point2 points  (30 children) | Copy

Here's something if you think feminism is still about equality: ttps://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9v6tqj/a_list_about_feminism_misandry_for_anyone_who/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Also, why are you on here?

[–]mhandanna0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Firstly forget the academics, the media is more pertinenent, and I dont think you need me to tell what feminsit media has produced in thep ast 6 months.

This is a better list. THe following list is ONLY feminsits leaders, orgnaisations etc. not random feminsits.

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".

That's not just "no true Scotsman". That's delusional self deception.

Listen, if you want to call yourself a feminist, I don't care. I've been investigating feminism for more than 9 years now, and people like you used to piss me off, because to my mind all you were doing was providing cover and ballast for the powerful political and academic feminists you claim are just jerks. And believe me, they ARE jerks. If you knew half of what I know about the things they've done under the banner of feminism, maybe you'd stop calling yourself one.

But I want you to know. You don't matter. You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."

You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.

You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.

You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.

You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.

You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.

You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.

You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.

You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."

You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.

And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.

You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.

[–]mhandanna0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Firstly thank you for trying to engage in dialogue and I am happy to to this

Here is a thorough academic break down of why feminism will not solve toxic masculinity and how it in fact makes it worse. It is not an "antifeminsim" source it is simply a critque..


Actually read it, it has clear examples of how feminsim in fact enforecs gender roles.

I am aware of new wave feminism, and also some types of feminism, leftist feminism and the altenrative meaning of liberal feminism, who critiscise post modernism and modern feminsim today. However, you are a barely audible voice and you are not the feminist in power, who are contorlling laws (and uncenssarily gendering them). With meta modernism you might awell just drop the term feminism, something that has too much toxicity with it

You keep dismssing the examples people give, not realisng your academic papers are irrelvant unless they change laws. For example the university of York still does not have a international mens day... so what is your paper going to do? Or more to the point, actual harmful laws are being passed, in the UK feminits are despeatly trying to gender the domestic violence bill going through... their moticavaton is simple, for money, I dont even think these feminsits believe half of the rubbish they are spoutinh. And it workds 98.3 percent funiing is feamle only... CEO of reguge can keep her 500,000 dollar a year govenment paid job... like she gives a damn about women and DV.

They key issue is that gender equality needs to mean gender quality. Now all it means is womens issues.. for examples candadas gender equality day ONLY talks about women e.g. lets pick 1 domain... it mentios homelessness in women... OK great but how is this gender eaulity in UK 12 homess men and 1 woman die a week so why gender it, but if you do why to women?

Also expecting men to tag along and only discuss feminsm in feminsts spaces is absurd and hyporctical... how about groups of men meet up and discss feminism?

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (26 children) | Copy

Feminism is about equality of all.

No it isn't, which is perfectly fucking apparent in the name FEMinism. It is a movement that seeks to benefit women. The movement that seeks to have equality for all is egalitarianism. Claiming that feminism is the same as egalitarianism is a feminist lie that seeks to sneak a pro-female agenda in through the back door.

If a woman is a feminist and chooses to abort a male baby because she thinks having more women in the world is better for women's rights, then that's a feminist action. Not one that all feminists agree with, but a feminist action nevertheless.

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

😳😳 pack up ladies... he’s exposed the hive mind group which harbours our sneaky agenda

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

pack up ladies

Please do.

[–]femenisthere-1 points0 points  (23 children) | Copy

Feminism is egalitarian, this is something completely accepted in the academic world. It just is. You cant have the audacity to just say academia has no integrity and what people have been writing for decades just isnt true because it doesn't suit your narrative. You can’t just say it isn’t so without actually looking at the consequential logical arguments of feminism or deconstructing them and pointing out their fallacies. Where is your evidence? Where are your points that prove the inconsistency in logic?

The best point I have to offer you is that the term feminism was first used before the word egalitarianism so why don’t you egalitarians use feminism?

I am willing to put this aside as contemporary feminist literature maintains that it would fall under the umbrella of egalitarianism however with a specific focus on equality for sex. I genuinely cannot think of a single text that claims otherwise so how about you give me reputable feminist texts that says it hates egalitarianism and only cares about women. Just as you can’t claim to be truly egalitarian if you don’t want to fight for equality between different races and classes, you cant claim to be egalitarian if you don’t want to fight for different sexes. So as a feminist I guess I am just more egalitarian than you. How does it feel admitting you believe sex should have an impact on whether they’re considered equal? Unless of course you don’t think it should matter in which case you should be a feminist. Anyhow, feminism is not the only movement under egalitarianism as libertarianism, socialism and social anarchism etc are also apart of the social focuses of egalitarianism with their own specific interests such as class or with their own method to achieving equality such as limited gov intervention. Many movements develop different groups fighting under the umbrella term so to focus on specific issues that the larger term is brushing over or because people develop different ways to achieve that larger term.

Moreover, the term egalitarianism has a lot of debate as to what it means and if It should assume equality or if is about a search of equality. There is also debate about the types of equality it expects to achieve so I would rather stick with a term that is very clear and concise. Here is a reputable link if you want to look more into it https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egalitarianism/

Besides when Karl Marx first used the term ‘egalitarianism’ did people unite to ensure than women were included in measures for equality? No! that is why we needed feminist to fight together to ensure that at least some egalitarians were fighting for equality on the basis of sex and I am glad they did because decades upon decades later there is equal legality. Think of unions and how theyre apart of the wider union movement but specific unions focus on specific careers to ensure that their people were getting the resources and attention they needed. They are all still unionist !

Also you’re so clever picking up that feminism has ‘fem’ in it. You little semantic genius, you. The word ‘female’ also has ‘male’ in it and the word ‘unresolved’ has ‘resolved’ in it wow oh wow my mind is being blown. Yes, feminism has ‘fem’ in it because for a long time most of the sexism pertained to inequality experienced by women. It began with a focus on women suffrage and then other legal rights that women just did not have so the foundation of that word makes sense. Regardless, ‘fem’ in a word doesn’t change the core of what we believe in. The word neckbeard doesn’t mean you have to have a neckbeard you just have to be involved in that culture. termology means very little I mean why dont you use the word humanist or man of equity or any other synonym or do you but only they are ok and not fEMIniSm?

So as you can tell it is in fact about equality of the sexes. That is the point and the core paradigm that all the texts I have studied at uni and beyond maintain. Sorry this goes against everything you were told about us but you were just told lies. Maybe actually read contemporary feminist texts, you might have fun. You can’t label yourself a feminist if you don’t believe in that core equality paradigm even if you may claim to. You can hate other groups that claim to be feminist but don’t actualise this paradigm or claim to subcultures but the movement itself doesn’t represent the small subsection of feminism or misogynist pretending to be feminist that you have been exposed to and for some reason has made you very aggressive. Good thing for you I’m not afraid to be aggressive here because I can tell nothing is going to pass your thick skull as you seem pretty set on these ideals. I understand when people have someone disagree with deep held beliefs (in this case that feminism just has to be evil and just has to involve hating men) then when you’re exposed to evidence on the contrary you’ll feel as if your identity is being attacked and will only settle deeper in to your cave. If youre interested in learning more here is an interview with neurologist about how you wont change your mind because I figured a podcast will work better for someone who doesn’t like to read https://youarenotsosmart.com/2017/01/13/yanss-093-the-neuroscience-of-changing-your-mind/ if you actually did read I would send you the link to their actual paper but I thought better not :/

Is everything I have read from actual recognised and degree bearing feminist a lie because some dumb ass from a minuscule place on the internet is convinced they know better than academics about what authority figures are trying to say??? How come other feminist didn’t let me know about our secret agenda to take over the world by killing one man at a time :0 damn I feel so left out :/ here I thought I had actually studied feminism as an egalitarian movement but this internet man must know better than me since he has other hivemind assholes to back him up !

It is perfectly normal for ideologies to develop submovements with focuses on specific groups/issues and that is not limited to just egalitarianism and feminism. To put this into perspective into something I am sure you can understand even the genre of rock has different subcultures from grunge to hair rock. It’s a perfectly sensical sociological and political science expectation that manifests everywhere. I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand. So you could listen to fact or you could keep on insisting on this dumb narrative with your dumb conspiracies because of your silly feelings. Instead of insisting on made up shit to sell a completely invalid point actually read the literature and use some critical thought. Just because Lauren Southern told you it’s true doesn’t make it fact unfortunately.

Notice how I have a full coherent argument and all you have to offer is a conspiracy and the fact that your genius brain realised 'fem' was in the word feminist as if that means anything about the logic of the movement.

[–]GhostTheEternal1 point2 points  (21 children) | Copy

Feminism is egalitarian, this is something completely accepted in the academic world. It just is.

That's an outright lie.

Where is your evidence?

Hilarious that you chastise me for not providing evidence for my claim when the justification you give for your claim is "it just is". On that basis I decided not to read any further.

Edit: Typos.

[–]femenisthere0 points1 point  (20 children) | Copy

of course you decided not to read further you coward. Cant handle being challenged. I love how you selectively skipped the fact that I referred to it as academic. Thus to clarify again for you 'just is' was meant in terms of the fact that gender theory curriculums and texts accept egalitarianism as the premise and there is no need for debate. However, for your viewing pleasure I have found a free text that focuses specifically on feminism in a study that observes indicators of egalitarianism across different countries (so you can see it presumes egalitarianism in women liberation) so pretty please read my response and provide your own damn sources


I also am certain you did in fact read the rest you just dont know how to respond to it so you're pretending. Ha! If you really want the world to be a better place and change my 'corrupted' feminist mind than you would read it all and deconstruct each point. Either you dont care or, as im sure we have all guessed, you know there is no adequate response. As I said in my reply I expected that you would stay stead fast in your views so I am not surprised.

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (19 children) | Copy

of course you decided not to read further you coward. Cant handle being challenged.

Coward, says the feminist posting with a one day old account.

Didn't read past here.

[–]Creaming_Pies0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

Take the L man. That’s a weak as piss response

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Nice alt account, psychopath.

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

I’m embarrassed for you here. You keep missing the arguments. Pick up your game soldier

Edit: nice edit

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Before you came into this thread just to heckle me, you'd made one post in the last year. Pretty obvious what's going on here, psychopath.

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

Amazing how you can only attack me personally because you know you're illogical and you cant actually attack my argument. I hope you realise how this looks

Also yes my account is new because I only just found reddit/this sub, that doesn't mean anything. You'll find me here in a years time, assuming i havent gotten bored, if that's any consolation.

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy

Amazing how you can only attack me personally because you know you're illogical and you cant actually attack my argument.

No, I'm certainly not an illogical person. I absolutely can attack your argument, but I choose not to waste my time on psychopaths who make 4,400 word responses like this.

I clicked on your account and saw what you were about before allowing myself to waste time on an energy vampire. I'm not here to debate feminists. You don't belong here.

assuming i havent gotten bored

I think you mean banned.

[–]femenisthere-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy

yeah sure keep using those excuses. Again nice personal attack with 'psychopath' (I would like to remind you that writing long responses isn't a symptom especially not when putting actual thought into forming an argument as one should) rather than discussing critical thought.

Oh banned? I didn't realise this was meant to be an echo chamber. If you dont want to question your thought processes and would prefer to live ignorantly than sure I'll leave. I cant imagine being that uncertain in my ideology

[–]GhostTheEternal0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy

Yes psychopath, this is meant to be an echo chamber. That's why Rule 3 says:

No pro-feminism

This sub is for pointing out feminism problems.

I've debated feminism for years. I'm not going to do it with you, and I'm not going to do it in a sub that's for circle-jerking. After you're banned you'll be back here with a new account in no time, I know. But we'll know its you by the psychopathy dripping from your replies.

I'm going to ignore you now.

[–]ZenkaiLane[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

“You can’t say something isn’t true just because it doesn’t fit your narrative” (idk how to do the quote thing)

That’s literally all feminist seem to do though...

Women abuse kids more statistically NOPE NOT TRUE BECAUSE I DONT LIKE IT

Women bullied the government somewhere into making it where only men can be charged for rape NOT TRUE I DONT LIKE IT

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter