Lets talk about the double standard on here when it comes to rape and false accusations

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago* (47 children) | Copy Link

Even if you buy in to the dishonest way feminists discuss it and believe that only 2% of accusations are false, you are more likely to be falsely accused of rape than you are to be murdered. That only counts false accusations made to the police, by the way.

You're also ignoring that avoiding interaction with women is not just about avoiding false accusations, but is about avoiding a demographic who are behaving in a hostile and unreasonable manner and think anything they don't like is sexism, which can get you fired these days. The psychological and social violence women engage in is far more common than the violence men engage in.

1/5 women openly identify as feminist (I.E, hostile and abusive to men.). More than that will behave the same way despite not identifying as feminist. I personally think if a woman shows some signs of being pro-MRM or at least pro mens issues you shouldn't be wary of them, but otherwise, its just good sense and you don't need to care if women throw a tantrum about not being invited to lunch, because they are actively seeking reasons to justify their contempt for men. Appeasement doesn't work and has never worked.

This isn't a matter of the piano teacher refucing to teach men piano, but instead refusing to be friendly and refusing to invite men to a party her other students get to go to. Men aren't proposing "You shouldn't hire women", just "You shouldn't interact with them anymore than is professionally necessary.".

Big difference.

[–]neverendingwaterfall -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

I seriously love the basic idiocy of the arguments and logic you're using.

That only counts false accusations made to the police, by the way.

You know because if they weren't reported to the police that means that by definition they were not false accusations because an accusation wasn't made. If someone makes a false accusation against you without reporting it to the police they are putting themselves up for defamation lawsuit. So why you think this is a problem is really just you making bullshit up. There are a laws and punishments on the books for women who falsely accuse men of rape to the police.

1/5 women openly identify as feminist (I.E, hostile and abusive to men.).

Again an argument from bad faith. Feminism only means hostile and abusive men to you, because you're a biased little cretin who thinks the feminist movement is authoritarian and reminiscent of the KKK in its behavior and tactics. I have yet to hear of a single lynching of a falsely accused rapist though so you're obviously way off base.

But hey don't question your basic bad faith argumentation let it just dig you deeper into your ideological hole for you to wallow in.

[–]azazelcrowley 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago* (45 children) | Copy Link

An accusation can be made to ones peers, family, workplace, and so on. It does not need to be a legally formed accusation, and a defamation lawsuit is not something many have the resources to file. For similar reasons people may not be inclined to report a rape to the police, people may not be inclined to challenge a false accusation.
Hardly only to me mate, more people conclude feminism is anti-male than think it is an equality movement according to polls. Lol dude, the KKK lynched plenty of falsely accused rapists, so... Also, merely identifying as feminist is a form of gaslighting and abuse if you pretend feminism is an equality movement, given the reality of the feminist movements activities.
You like calling people idiots and insulting them going by our past interactions and your post history. Either you're pretty insecure about your intelligence (makes sense, you're a feminist and feminists like to abuse people by gaslighting them and insulting them, so in order to feel like you're not an idiot you parrot what the people who call everyone idiots think to distinguish yourself from the people being labeled idiots, but in reality you're distinguishing yourself as belonging to a group with nothing better to contribute and who are clearly insecure), or you get off on being abusive to people. Either way, you know, you kind of need help mate and this is a place where you can be honest and work through your issues by talking to us. We'll listen.

[–]neverendingwaterfall -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago* (43 children) | Copy Link

You treat plenty of people like it mate, so nah.

They aren't ideological distortions, they're evaluations of the consequences of feminism and its theory. Just because they aren't the consequences you think will happen doesn't make them untrue.

Actually i'm nothing like what feminists would think a "classic toxic male" would be like in my interactions with people, nor my choice of profession, personal tastes, and so on. I'm quite a feminine guy and so on, merely an anti-feminist.

Men being falsely accused of rape happens and is a problem that needs to be addressed and isn't as rare as you'd like to pretend. I didn't compare it to actual lynchings, I compared the mechanisms by which feminists have empowered false accusers, their rhetoric and reasons for doing so, to historical hate movements. I was quite clear that it's like the prostitute joke. We both know what you are and are merely haggling over price. You are of the same substance as the KKK, and we're just discussing the quantity of that substance. Both poison though. What you refuse to understand is that if the Klan were going around trying to get black people expelled from university by violating their due process, that would also be bad and still make them racists and a problem for society. You refuse to understand it, because then you might have to admit feminism Is a hate movement too.

The Duluth model and campus kangaroo courts aren't strawmen, and you defended the latter :)

[–]neverendingwaterfall -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

You treat plenty of people like it mate, so nah.

Yea people like you who have ideological distortions and are defined by beliefs rooted in irrational foundations. I'm pretty consistent in that regard.

They aren't ideological distortions, they're evaluations of the consequences of feminism and its theory. Just because they aren't the consequences you think will happen doesn't make them untrue.

No they're fairly obvious strawmen that you use in bad faith. Like the prostitute example, we know you cherry pick it's just a question of how much. You even admitted you were strawmanning and I was under no obligation to respond to those arguments, but hey this is what happens when you're an intellectual fraud like yourself.

Men being falsely accused of rape happens and is a problem that needs to be addressed and isn't as rare as you'd like to pretend.

Never said they didn't happen, I said they were rare, even when you use the broadest of definitions such as non police reported accusations.

I didn't compare it to actual lynchings, I compared the mechanisms by which feminists have empowered false accusers, their rhetoric and reasons for doing so, to historical hate movements. I was quite clear that it's like the prostitute joke. We both know what you are and are merely haggling over price. You are of the same substance as the KKK, and we're just discussing the quantity of that substance.

Pick a lane, you can't say they aren't lynchings and then make a direct comparison to the lynchings of the KKK. This is just further evidence of your bad faith or basic contradictions in logic.

What you refuse to understand is that if the Klan were going around trying to get black people expelled from university by violating their due process, that would also be bad and still make them racists and a problem for society.

Yes and the feminist movement isn't doing this. The examples you use of the Duke lacrosse team are gross exceptions to the rule which, surprise, you cherry pick to try to make a false pattern of evidence for yourself and for your fellow morons here. But again we know you're not trying to be fair or objective in your critique of feminism. You're basic idiotic comparison of feminism to the KKK. Can you name hate group feminist movements that are independently recognized as hate groups not from your self defined definition of hate group? Nope.

You refuse to understand it, because then you might have to admit feminism Is a hate movement too.

You know you're an idiot when your conclusion is that feminism is more dangerous than real hategroups which actually exist. Like at charlottesville but hey there's a lot of overlap between the alt right and the mensrights movement. It has to annoy you and cause a lot of cognitive dissonance that you have to put so much energy into constantly building a false narrative about feminism. It's feminism which gave you paternity leave. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a feminist, she represented men in her practice and gained them civil rights in the process. I don't see any MRA lawyers doing the same.

The Duluth model and campus kangaroo courts aren't strawmen, and you defended the latter :)

No we're back to me saying... again, that you totally misunderstood my argument. Which you didn't respond to because you're a little bitch and you knew I was right and you had misread it. And again you can only use the Duluth model as a singular example of something gone wrong, there's no pattern behind it. No feminist today is advocating it, you've built a wonderful little fantasy for yourself.

[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

I compared the rhetoric, mechanics, arguments, motivations and so on of the feminist movement to the KKK in regard to campus rape, and all of that is apt. The punishment they dole out (while violating due process) is what differs. That is the comparison I made, I have never claimed the harm caused is the same. That's you strawmanning, not me.

The duke lacrosse team is one famous example, but the campus kangaroo courts are the result of feminist activism on the issue, and you have personally defended them. Furthermore they have been routinely ruled to violate the due process of accused students, so yes, the feminist movement is in fact doing this.

MRA lawyers routinely represent men mate. We're the ones who got the gendered draft ruled unconstitutional (NCFM) and might be going to the supreme court to get a repeat ruling on that, that's one example. Feminists got paternity leave, but also did all they could to ensure women had control over family dynamics at the expense of men, functionally meaning the paternity leave was there so a woman can keep her job if she wants, it wasn't introduced to help men.

Feminists today do in fact advocate the Duluth model, it's the most common form of intervention programme, and the Istanbul convention utilizes it too. The campus kangaroo courts are another example of feminism being anti-male.

A third example would be feminist organizations opposing anti-male hate crimes being illegal, but supporting anti-woman hate crimes beng illegal. There's plenty of examples. On the issue of paternity leave, you've got the behavior of NOW and other feminists with their efforts to defend the tender years doctrine that gave primary custody to women when they demanded it, and so on, and furthermore routine feminist opposition to legal parental surrender and a whole host of feminists not actually respecting mens family planning options and fathers rights and working against them being recognized.

On the boys crisis in education you've got feminists denying its down to misandry and so on, up to feminists denying it exists, and people like Mary Cook have acknowledged it doesn't get fixed because feminists actively prevent it being fixed.

Plenty of issues. They aren't cherry picked. Your example, paternity leave, is cherry picked, andit doesn't hold up to scrutiny for the reasons I laid out. They demanded it so women who wanted to work, could. They didn't do it for men, and where men wanted to decide a family dynamic, they've actively made that harder.

[–]neverendingwaterfall 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

and all of that is apt

No, it's only apt according to you.

That is the comparison I made, I have never claimed the harm caused is the same.

Yea that's because you just leave it to insinuation and call feminists a hate group.

On the issue of paternity leave, you've got the behavior of NOW and other feminists with their efforts to defend the tender years doctrine that gave primary custody to women when they demanded it, and so on, and furthermore routine feminist opposition to legal parental surrender and a whole host of feminists not actually respecting mens family planning options and fathers rights and working against them being recognized.

So we're switching from paternity leave to custody? Again moving the goal posts to make your point. The point is that feminists got men paternity leave, not mens rights groups. And you purposefully ignore all the feminists who advocate on behalf of men regarding custody to make your strawman argument.

On the boys crisis in education you've got feminists denying its down to misandry and so on, up to feminists denying it exists, and people like Mary Cook have acknowledged it doesn't get fixed because feminists actively prevent it being fixed.

And again when you live in fantasy confirmation bias world you ignore all the good science from feminist journals arguing against this.

They aren't cherry picked.

They obviously are, you saying it's not cherry picked isn't what makes it not cherry picked.

Your example, paternity leave, is cherry picked, andit doesn't hold up to scrutiny for the reasons I laid out.

Go show me the groups which advocated for male paternity leave. Because it wasn't MRA like you who accomplished that one. Unlike you I'm not cherry picking I was just selecting a fairly obvious counter example to showcase against the false narrative you use. I'm not the one making sweeping statements based on propagandized perspectives about feminism. That's you and you think I'm mirroring you when all I'm doing is mocking you for fun on your own subreddit because you're easy pickings and your arguments are self evidently flawed and biased even to people who would support your positions.

They didn't do it for men, and where men wanted to decide a family dynamic, they've actively made that harder.

Can you open a bank account without your wife's approval? Are you allowed into the same colleges as other people? Can you get the same jobs? Women could just be left desitute by their husbands if they got pregnant, they could be raped in marriage and forced to have children. Those are the real prejudices women actually faced and you think using undefined terminology like "family dynamic" is somehow equivalent to that. Is indicative of a hate movement against you? For a guy attempting to appropriate feminist characterizations to his own civil rights "struggle" you sure aren't educated on what actually constitutes prejudice and hate against you versus sometimes the world is a little tough. Men have plenty of agency in their choices regarding "family dynamics". You just have a bunch of dumbasses here who got burned in divorce and are taking their anger issues out on the made up boogey man of feminism.

[–]neverendingwaterfall -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Married ta, and demography surveys show MRAs are in line with population norms in terms of relationship status.
There's never been an MRA terrorist.
Everything you've said so far has been wrong or ill informed, but you keep lashing out with insults. You aren't contributing anything so we have to conclude you just get off on being cruel to people. That's the sort of person feminism produces. Your behavior is pretty good evidence of how hateful feminists are in practice, just saying. You didn't address the point I made, because you can't. It's not a matter of not having the time, because you're happy to sit there insulting people. But here's the thing dude, you're not getting to me. You're doing it purely to give yourself an emotional response. feminism has given you the excuses you need to engage in sadism and cruelty while convincing yourself that's okay, and so you do.

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nforne1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nforne1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You do realize that social scientists with PhDs are aware of this right? You think you're going to walk into an academic conference and just blow their minds with this thought. Naw you're right I'm sure they'd be like, "aww shit my data models worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in grant money habe been foiled! We'll get you for this dastardly deed /u/nforne!"

Now given the choice between that or the actual reality being you're just some men's rights tool bag who doesn't know they account for multiple attempts at suicide. They don't look at men and women attempting suicide 5 times and count that as 5 different people you moron. It's one person who is now a part of the population which attempted suicide just like the one person who attempted suicide and actually succeeded.

Does it upset you that you're just going to have to accept that women attempt suicide more often and the fact that men actually die more often is a separate issue? That it doesn't play into the fake narrative /u/azazelcrowley try to make about feminism causing male suicide. Military suicides cause more male suicides. Economic downturns. Opioid addiction. Hmmmm yes all the work of those dastardly feminist hate groups with their KKK ambitions! Muahahahah

[–]nforne1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Right, Incels have done so. MRAs haven't. MRAs don't use the same rhetoric as incels, you clearly have no understanding of what either believe.

Men report attempting suicide less often, big difference there. Feminism is the problem, because it insists on approaching the problem from a gynocentric framework where they believe the way men think needs to be changed to fix things, rather than acknowledge institutional discrimination against men.

In the UK, when the coalition for men and boys (An MRA group) began working on male suicide from the starting point that therapy was feminized and built around womens needs more than mens, and began providing alternative therapies, male suicide rates decreased. Feminists meanwhile continue to be in denial and refusing to accept systemic gynocentrism and male disadvantage, instead telling the most feminine generation of men in history that the problem is they aren't feminine enough and that's why they are most likely to commit suicide.

Demonstrably, putting MRAs in charge of the issue works. Putting feminists in charge doesn't.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminists across the board support the issue about the education crisis. You are simply delusional and bigoted and choose to ignore those feminist so you don't have to face the cognitive dissonance that feminism on the whole isn't the boogeyman you've created of it.

Again we're discussing suicide because you don't want to admit that feminists haven't directly killed anyone while movements affiliated with your political views have. MRA like you fill incels minds up with this antifeminist ideology which only fuels their anger and hatred. We've studied the internet media sphere and the relationship between people like you and incels which are just one part of the culture you steep yourself in.

Feminists are a hate group No different than the KKK. Except they aren't killing anybody. Unlike the guys who committed these atrocities this week. There is one common thread among right wing extremists and that is antifeminist ideology just like the type you espouse here.

Those are just the facts. You think in 20 years you're going to have some moment where your truth finally gets proven true by the historical record? Or in 20 years are guys like me just going to still be laughing at bigots like you who didn't have a clue? Even the most extreme out if this world crazy post modernist third wave intersectional feminists I know don't shake a stick at the bigotry and bad logic you espouse here which makes me laugh since that's a low bar you're failing to reach

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They don't actually support solutions to the education crisis beyond telling boys it's their fault for not being like girls. Show me proof.
Those movements aren't affiliated with us except in the minds of our opponents. Lol "Incels". I'm married, demographic surveys show most MRAs are in relationships.

2-Incel; An Incel is someone who buys in to the Incel ideology. The issue is that misandrists are deliberately using it as a slur in order to both obfuscate their virgin shaming of political opponents after being called out on it, and to strengthen it by associating it with an extremist political ideology, which thus also allows them to call for sanctions against their critics.

It's an escalation from claiming their critics only behave that way because they are virgins and thus socially undesirable losers whose points you don't need to address, into claiming they only behave that way because they are virgins, socially undesirable losers, and violent terrorists.

The escalation is a natural progression of their caricature of their political opponents. Because they have been routinely claiming the only reason to oppose feminism is misogyny borne from virginity, when a group of people come along who show what misogyny borne from virginity actually looks like, feminists have to pretend the two groups are the same to avoid admitting they have been lying. It also allows them to continue to surreptitiously virgin shame opponents like they have been doing at a time when more and more people are calling that out as fucked up and sexist, by giving them plausible deniability and a means to gaslight people by denying they are dogwhistling. The other benefit is that it allows them to treat criticism as de facto affiliation with violent terrorists.

The flaw goes as follows;

"Opposing us means hating women."

"Our opponents hate women because they are virgins."

"Incels hate women because they are virgins."

"Therefore our opponents are incels."

"Therefore our opponents are terrorists.".

Only one of these statements is true; "Incels hate women because they are virgins.". The rest is merely the prejudices and bad faith feminists engage in in order to lie about critics and demonize them.

3- Studied it eh? Show me proof. Not assertions, show me proof that MRAism is the same as Incel.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They don't actually support solutions to the education crisis beyond telling boys it's their fault for not being like girls. Show me proof.

Here's an actual article about gender and boys in school. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3516000?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

This is standard fare that I read in my hate mongering gender studies classes. I wonder why a feminist scholar would have us read this!?

Here's a link to a feminist paper which challenges the idea of a boy crisis. Just because we know that to challenge your false narrative about feminism you won't believe me. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40535485?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

I don't see anything in that article that they are failing because they are not acting like girls. While the title is polemic for sure, the author actually just disagrees with the hypothesis of the "boys crisis" narrative that people such as you espouse. You see her condemn things like a toxic masculinity that might discourage boys from reading novels, and her just thinking that class and social status might be better explanations for the boy crisis in education that your boogeyman feminism. And you know what she's right being poor is a much stronger predictor of success or failure for men, because the world is complicated and you can't lay it all at the feet of feminism you dolt.

"Opposing us means hating women."

Know you just clearly hate feminists I doubt you would deny this since you label them as the same as the KKK. It's not a hop skip and a jump logically to assume you hold irrational perspectives which pretty much are misogynist in nature or that men propagandized like you are just trying to rationalize misogyny. That's how radicalization occurs online.

The rest of your logical flow doesn't even make sense. I tend to just make fun of incels because of the immature rage and lack of self responsibility the movement takes on solving life's problems.

3- Studied it eh? Show me proof. Not assertions, show me proof that MRAism is the same as Incel.

I didn't say they were the same, I said they were politically adjacent. And yes we have studied things like social media networks to see the interrelationship between MRA and Incels. Incels are generally seen as an extreme offshoot from the core ideology of MRA which is really just anti-feminism and you're the perfect example of that, but the two movements are definitely interrelated, and they're killing people. Both truths you may not want to admit, since the reality is you're more closely related to hate groups than I'll ever be talking with feminists.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/male-supremacy

It's from the Southern Poverty Law Center, because I assume you're probably one of those morons who derides the SPLC

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"The boy turn" is a term used to dismiss concern over the boys crisis in education. Anderson is one such feminist who does this, claiming its due to male entitlement and there is no crisis. The link you have given is feminists responding to increased reporting on the boys crisis, not the boys crisis itself. They are critiqueing the increase in people noticing male disadvantage.
Congratulations, you now understand what feminists actually do instead of help. You merely didn't understand the first link or read it properly. Read it again and pick out the bits you think are relevant mate.
Yeah, blaming toxic masculinity for boys not reading novels instead of acknowledging the publishing industry is gynocentrist and there is a lack of male-friendly literature for children, also blaming toxic masculinity instead of noting parents read to boys less than girls during infancy. (In fact parents teach girls more than boys in infancy in general.). That's an example of blaming men for not being girls. The assumption she makes is that the books are neutral and there's something wrong with boys for not liking them, when in actuality the texts are often more suitable for girls than boys and providing boys with suitable texts increases the chances of them reading.
Being poor is also a bigger predictor for being in a bad position for women than being a woman. It's besides the point.
Yeah, I hate feminists. Different from hating women. I hate feminists because they cause harm in society and I think it would be better if there weren't any feminists anymore. You make assumptions about me being irrational but so far haven't managed to demonstrate it, you also haven't shown any misogyny beyond me disliking feminism. "Radicalization", mate, you are the radical. Feminism is a fringe movement and the overwhelming majority of people do not support it, there are more anti-feminists than pro-feminists.
"Politiclaly adjacent" how, because everyone who isn't a feminist are all on the same side? You're delusional mate. Which MRAs have killed people? Lol the SPLC. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/80rebm/old_splc_article_on_the_mrm_reveals_misandristic/

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Read the article again and tell me I'm wrong.

You're wrong

Anderson is one such feminist who does this,

Not the authors I provided. You see you wonder why I insult you, but it's not my premise. You're an idiot because you can only have a conversation with the strawman you've built up. Again I'm under no obligation to engage with this other than to mock you mercilessly for being a man who apparently "studied" (lies) gender studies but can't actually engage with the authors ideas.

They are critiqueing the increase in people noticing male disadvantage.

According to your totally non-biased opinion I'm sure. The point was that you're wrong. Your characterization of feminist hating boys in school and deriding them and blaming them is false. Blatantly and obviously false and it rests on a rebuttal "no true feminist scotsman would say this! Anderson is the true feminist BECAUSE I SAID SO!"

Your arguments are a joke in and of themselves moron, that's why I call you a moron, moron.

Yeah, blaming toxic masculinity for boys not reading novels instead of acknowledging the publishing industry is gynocentrist and there is a lack of male-friendly literature for children, also blaming toxic masculinity instead of noting parents read to boys less than girls during infancy.

Again is this really a fair characterization of what she said? Not really and you know that, and again I'm in no obligation to engage with it. There are plenty of feminists who believe in affirming narratives (such as novels, plays, etc) for boys. For example Okopny would say that part of toxic masculinity is not reading to them as infants just like she said cultural values preventing boys from reading in school were bad. You're living in a pretend world if you think feminists like her are against men succeeding. You focus on toxic masculinity because you just have this idiotic trigger words and go "reeeee" rather than think for a second. Okopny would say that the mothers (women not just men) would be a part of that toxic masculinity that socializes boys as not to read from infancy.

Being poor is also a bigger predictor for being in a bad position for women than being a woman. It's besides the point.

Why because you say so? I don't think so. This is just further proof that you ignore what you don't want to hear so you can perform your confirmation bias of hating feminists for zero good rational reason. Ignoring data isn't what rational people do.

You make assumptions about me being irrational but so far haven't managed to demonstrate it,

Yea I have, just did and have previously multiple times.

"Radicalization", mate, you are the radical. Feminism is a fringe movement and the overwhelming majority of people do not support it, there are more anti-feminists than pro-feminists.

There more people who disapproved of MLK than approved of him. Truth and equality aren't a popularity contest. And this is a false narrative you project anyway so again I can just toss it out because I'm under no obligation to take your strawmen seriously.

Yeah, I hate feminists. Different from hating women. I hate feminists because they cause harm in society and I think it would be better if there weren't any feminists anymore.

Why because you're a propagandized piece of shit? That's all this proves. You don't hate feminism, you hate the monster you've made of it in your imaginary play time.

"Politiclaly adjacent" how, because everyone who isn't a feminist are all on the same side?

That's how you fallaciously perceive it. But no it's the common characteristics between the different groups and subcultures

Which MRAs have killed people?

https://thinkprogress.org/no-coincidence-california-synagogue-shooter-john-earnest-posted-about-the-red-pill-movement-aa46b31c01ad/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Isla_Vista_killings

Anti-feminism fuels a lot of this stuff. But live in denial.

Lol the SPLC. See the article you link claims we're misogynists because we claim men and women are linked at similar rates, they say this is misogyny because we're undermining a womens issue.

"While some corners of the men’s rights movement focused on legitimate grievances (male homelessness and rates of suicide, male conscription, lack of male shelters for domestic violence victims or some discrepancies in the family court system around the issue of child custody and alimony) to draw in followers, it then oriented those followers to who they believed was the root cause of all these issues: women, aided by a large feminist conspiracy."

So first off you're an idiot for not saying similar rates of WHAT (suicide). But lets move on the your point. They aren't saying your misogynist because you're undermining women's issues, its the fact that your perspective is undergirded by irrational understandings of feminist rooted in a belief in a large feminist conspiracy. This fits your opinions to a T. You think feminists are akin to the KKK, despite obvious counter examples of hate groups shooting up and committing real acts of terror. You choose to ignore things like poverty in education as "besides the point" so you can irrationally lay the blame on feminism as the root evil to society. It's absurd your absurd and this is why MRA are associated with the label misogynist.

Then they cite stats which exclude women rapists from being counted to claim we're exaggerating.

That or you're a radicalized idiot who's been propagandized with this talking point. I've been over the rape data, even from the CDC the MRA like to criticize, male rape happens, much less often than female rape, we use the exact same methodology to measure for both, no one is trying to cover up male rape, and again it was feminists who pushed for recognition of this issue. They just don't take people like you seriously because your propagandized windbags.

It's a good example of how feminists lie about the MRM and use misandry to justify calling us misogynists.

No it's not, it's just an example of some loser on the internet desperately trying to cherry pick and warp the interpretation of so he can rationalize his beliefs to himself. You can't even make compelling arguments here on a subreddit designed to put you in your best light. Like most people with a childish worldview instead of face the failings of your beliefs you blame all the external factors as biased actors conspiring against you. I bet you're one of those losers who couldn't pass a test in school, but instead of studying more like women do to do better, you jumped on a computer and started blaming feminism for your problems. Jesus you people are sad at heart.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you didn't read it again then.
Anderson is a feminist whose work i've read in depth. The authors you provided behaved similarly and used the same rationales.
It doesn't rest on the no-true scotsman premise, it rests on you having failed to demonstrate feminist authors actually dealing with the boys crisis in education anywhere.
"Affirming narratives" built around what women think boys should find affirming is not genuine concern, but another expression of their fundamental belief that boys are broken and should be like girls, and confusing their contempt for boys and belief they should be more like girls with "concern", like wishing black people would act more like white people being called "concern" about gang crime. I don't focus on toxic masculinity because of the terminology (though this is indeed a problem), but because it is an expression of the feminist predisposition to assume the problem lies in how men think rather than in structural disadvantages and institutional biases. I don't contest that some feminists accept women perpetuate stereotypes and masculinity, I contest their entire way of viewing the problem as being rooted in masculinity rather than failure to accomodate boys tendencies. It's akin to men saying the reason women can't reach items on the top shelf is they don't try hard enough to be tall because they have a view of themselves as short, so the solution isn't to make shelves shorter so everyone can reach, is just to tell women they need to try harder to be tall, like men. That's how feminists approach these issues.
It's besides the point because it's changing the subject from sexism to class in order to derail the conversation. That's not acceptable when its done to women and its not acceptable when its done to men either.
You merely think you have mate.
You can't claim i'm radicalized by the internet if i'm mainstream for society in general though, can you. It's not a strawman, it's pointing out you don't understand what's going on.
No, pretty sure I hate feminism, I just don't believe in the whitewashed fairy tale version you do.
Which characteristics? Opposing feminism?
The first is a red piller and the second is an incel. Neither are MRAs. You have no idea what you're talking about. This is a good example of how you conflate all your critics into being one homogenous group.
Male rape doesn't happen much less often than female rape. The rates are equivalent. More and more of the things you believe are being shown to be misandrous.
Is there a particular reason you're so abusive and cruel to people? See here's the thing, no matter what you say, it comes down to the fact you're rationalizing excuses to be cruel and actively seeking out opportunities to do so because you enjoy it. You say they deserve it, but all cruel people think that. This is an example of how feminism has convinced you that it is okay to be cruel to people.

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The link you provided didn't demonstrate that. It demonstrated feminists criticizing people trying to claim there was a boys crisis in education.

Your link collects data from the national victims of crime survey, which uses a definition of rape as "Forcibly penetrated", which means women who force men to penetrate them aren't counted as rapists, and the men aren't counted as victims. When you use a neutral definition of rape, the numbers show half of rape victims are male, and that most male rape victims are raped by women. The reason you don't know this is you hang out with feminists who fill your head with anti-male propaganda, and dont' actually address biases like this in their sources because they don't sincerely care about men.

It took an MRA to educate you on it, and now that will always be true.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Forcibly penetrated", which means women who force men to penetrate them aren't counted as rapists, and the men aren't counted as victims. When you use a neutral definition of rape, the numbers show half of rape victims are male, and that most male rape victims are raped by women.

Go show me an academic study that has been published. I'll wait.

The link you provided didn't demonstrate that. It demonstrated feminists criticizing people trying to claim there was a boys crisis in education.

I provided two links. But because you're a cherry picking moron you obviously only focused on one. "They don't actually support solutions to the education crisis beyond telling boys it's their fault for not being like girls. Show me proof." This is how you characterized the article would be. The article is nothing close to this characterization even when it's against the boys crisis narrative. The don't blame the boys, she wants them to improve and she definitely doesn't blame them at all let alone for being girly. You live in a fantasy world my friend. The fact that as an adult you actually have an expectation that people would consider your arguments seriously shows a real lack of self awareness.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Here's one; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/

Here's a good article on it interviewing a researcher.

"Stemple has long focused her research on how sexual violence against men goes under-reported. In 2014, she released a paper on male victims of sexual violence which analyzed several national surveys and found that, when taking into account cases where men were "made to penetrate" someone else, the rates of nonconsensual sexual contact between men and women were basically equal: 1.267 million men said they had been victims of sexual violence, compared with 1.270 million women." https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kze8qn/the-hidden-epidemic-of-men-who-are-raped-by-women

As for your second point, the first link on the boys crisis is the one I am discussing. For the second boys crisis link, Merely because the terminology they use differs doesn't mean that the speech act she is engaged in is different from the one I said it is. Functionally, she is blaming boys for not being like girls, because she adds extra steps of calling differences in boys to girls as "toxic masculinity" and so on.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Functionally, she is blaming boys for not being like girls, because she adds extra steps of calling differences in boys to girls as "toxic masculinity" and so on.

No she never says the boys in school are the perpetrators of toxic masculinity. You also purposefully misunderstand her point. She isn't blaming the boys for toxic masculinity she is saying it is bad and holding them back from success. You're characterization is just in blatant and obvious bad faith. But that's what you need to do to preserve your fragile cognitive dissonance about feminism.

Although it remains tolerated and entrenched in many pockets of the world, feminist analysis has gone a long way toward revolutionizing thinking about the sexual abuse of women, demonstrating that sexual victimization is rooted in gender norms1 and is worthy of social, legal, and public health intervention. We have aimed to build on this important legacy by drawing attention to male sexual victimization, an overlooked area of study. We take a fresh look at several recent findings concerning male sexual victimization, exploring explanations for the persistent misperceptions surrounding it. Feminist principles that emphasize equity, inclusion, and intersectional approaches2; the importance of understanding power relations3; and the imperative to question gender assumptions4 inform our analysis.

Hmmm... so an academic article recognizing the importance of male rape is rooted in feminist methodology. Not the best argument you're making.

And there's plenty of article from feminists talking about how toxic masculinity didn't take men's sexual assault seriously because it portrayed them as effeminate or gay and thus not worth considering.

Either way you're not making a compelling argument at all that feminism is ignoring this. Looks like they're collecting data and reporting on it to me. Again when you only choose the worst examples to make your characterization you'll make dumbass conclusions.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She doesn't have to claim they are the perpetrators of it to be doing what I say she is doing. Right. She says it's bad and holding them back. She's blaming the boys for being different rather than acknowledge the system is not accomodating their differences. She then acts like they're different because they got broken somehow by other people, but fundamentally she's still acting like boys being different to girls is wrong somehow. What she isn't doing is demanding the system facilitate boys education. This is why feminism is anti-male. It presupposes women are normal and the default, demands systems center themselves around womens experiences and needs, then tells boys that the reason those systems are failing them is that they aren't like girls, and the reason they aren't like girls is because people tell them not to be. That, functionally, is just "Blaming boys" with extra steps. The idea that boys and girls are naturally different and need different approaches to nurture them and nobody is making the boys broken is heresy to a feminist. It's not a mischaracterization, it's the consequences of her belief system. As I said, it is like women not being able to reach the top shelf and men turning around and saying the problem is that people are telling women they have to be short so we should stop that and that will fix everything, because OBVIOUSLY the shelves should be tall enough for men and if women can't reach it's because there's something wrong with them, oh its not their fault ofcourse that there's something wrong with them, someone was mean and said women should be short, but that's neither here nor there and the solution is obviously women need to grow a foot or two, not say, make the shelf a little lower so we can both reach it. The notion of changing the education system so it can teach boys better is never advanced, the feminist approach is to always find fault with boys and to demand the impossible, that they stop being different to girls. Just because they think the boys are different to girls because someone broke the boys doesn't make them less anti-male for thinking boys are broken in the first place, and for treating girls like they are the obvious default boys should aspire to. It'd be like if instead of "Black people just have lower IQ's" racists went around gaslighting people and saying the reason for all the discrimination is people telling black people to be different to white people and if they just copied white people, all their problems would be solved.
Feminism is a movement, and functionally the number of feminists making this issue worse is larger than the ones trying to fix it, especially on an institutional level where policy is advanced. You are an example of one making it worse. Think about this, you're a feminist and spend time in feminist spaces, reading feminist sources and so on, and NONE of them pointed this out to you. It took a mens rights activist to show you an example of a feminist who wasn't dogshit. That's because most of them are dogshit, and the only way to find the ones who aren't and have them heard above the crowd is to go to mens rights places. You can't deny that, because you didn't know this until you came here, despite yourself being a feminist. That's why feminism is ignoring the issue, because as a movement, the mass of it is anti-male and unwilling to change. The small sections who are are more discussed in MRM spaces than feminist ones for a reason.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She doesn't have to claim they are the perpetrators of it to be doing what I say she is doing.

Yea so you get to move the goal posts as to your needs. Again you're not engaging in anything serious here.

She then acts like they're different because they got broken somehow by other people, but fundamentally she's still acting like boys being different to girls is wrong somehow.

She says nothing of the type. You're really like a child who hasn't learned that just because YOU interpret it that way doesn't make it true. YOU are a moron who apparently can't read material objectively so you can only throw childish totally biased critiques against a paper. A paper which in no way shows the truth of your beliefs about feminism and a paper of two which you are blatantly ignoring the other one because it shows feminists take men and boys in education seriously and with academic seriousness.

The idea that boys and girls are naturally different and need different approaches to nurture them and nobody is making the boys broken is heresy to a feminist.

Toxic masculinity isn't NATURAL to feminists. They believe in a natural difference in boys and girls and a lot of overlap between them as well. She isn't saying NOBODY is making the boys broken, she's saying toxic masculinity is breaking them. She is in no way advocating a female centric education paradigm, she thinks that if we got rid of some of the social-cultural values negatively impacting boys it would be a large step in making an inclusive environment to each of their needs. Jesus christ man, there are plenty of legitimate critiques to that paper but you're making a really fucking stupid and uneducated one that literally purposefully misreads here arguments.

The notion of changing the education system so it can teach boys better is never advanced, the feminist approach is to always find fault with boys and to demand the impossible, that they stop being different to girls.

Dude you're literally making this up. Go quote the article you dumb piece of shit where she says something like this. I'll wait and what I'll get is a quote that you are warping to mean something else to your twisted understanding. I mean something that actually reasonably reflects this.

Does it annoy you that you have to literally lie on the internet to me to try to make your point? I mean it's really laughable that you have to make such bad faith arguments.

That's why feminism is ignoring the issue, because as a movement, the mass of it is anti-male and unwilling to change.

No, the real feminist article which is mainstream and cited over 200 times in other sources is the article you chose to ignore. That article is more representative of feminism you retarded mouth breather. You're extremist characterization of feminism is just that extremist and stupid and guilty of a whole host of cognitive fallacies and biases in order to pretend to yourself that your anger is justified and you're not an idiot just ranting on the internet.

Think about this, you're a feminist and spend time in feminist spaces, reading feminist sources and so on, and NONE of them pointed this out to you.

Jesus fuck you are dumb. I baited you, I'm in control of this conversation you moron. You live in such a distorted reality regarding your understanding of feminism that you literally can't see arguments against your position. I know about male rape in jails, I've read the article you posted before. Do you honestly think (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/) is new to me? Do you really think feminists haven't read that? Of course you do because you only read the most extremist feminists out there, which aren't respected academically nor in the mainstream of feminist thought. People like you are easily manipulable. Your cognitive blindspots are so strong I knew that if I challenged you to find an academic article there's only a limited few of them available. And SURPRISE THEY'RE BASED IN FEMINIST THOUGHT.

YOU'RE AN IDIOT WHO USES ACADEMIC THOUGHT FUNDAMENTALLY ROOTED IN INTERSECTIONAL FEMINIST METHODOLOGY IN A CARTOONISH ATTEMPT TO DISPROVE THE FANTASY-FEMINISM YOU BELIEVE IN!

It's fucking incredible the basic stupidity of walking someone into that brings me real joy I have to admit. And the best part about human psychology is are you going to reflect on this and see this as evidence that maybe your missing something regarding this topic? Nope you'll just keep charging forward desperate to "prove me wrong" with your clear cherry picking and circular logic which doesn't even begin to engage with ideas outside your head honestly and by their own terms like an actual adult would do.

You're a 30 year old man on a rampage over a myth you've made for yourself about feminism. You're beliefs have walked you into contradicting yourself and being used as a joke on the internet because your own beliefs make you a simplistic trope.

But before I go I'll be honest with you. I hate people like you. I'm not the feminist you think I am. At best I'm just a nominal feminist, I feel no need to kowtow to the radical feminists and some of the cultural tautology that stems from that. But there's a key difference between them and you. When you challenge extreme feminists as I have the core underpinnings of their beliefs there's an actual honest engagement in ideas and thought, when we talk to people like you, it's just childish totally unselfaware dribble like this of people chasing their own tail ideologically and when they catch it they think they've defeated feminism (hooray for the morons!). My impetus against you isn't your anti-feminism it's your complete lack of basic rationality regarding your beliefs. And people like me have had to sit around morons like you and treat you decently for years. You're an ignorant piece of shit weakminded asshole who can't tell the difference between feminism and real hate groups. This is just basic stupidity and I don't need to be some radical feminist like you've preferred to treat me to call you an imbecile for this belief. And just know that the feeling you have from friends and family who may question you when they discuss it. They hate you too. They're just like me, they tolerate your stupidity for Christmas and then look at the idiocy of your facebook feed and see you for the imbecile you are too. So fuck off I'm tired of you now. People like you are 10 times worse than any crazy feminist I've had to listen to with your fucking stupid backwards beliefs and ideologies divorced from any factual or reasonable interpretation of reality. You idiots can even start a legitimate academic discipline like feminists did, and even when you think to yourself, "feminism isn't legitimate you idiot" then you should ask yourself why MRA can't even meet that bar of intellectual thought. It's just a bunch of morons on the internet watching youtube videos and then a few of them shoot people like in Dayton. That's your movement be proud boy!

You can't deny that, because you didn't know this until you came here, despite yourself being a feminist.

Again just the most glorious example of idiocy I've had since the Holocaust denier I trolled

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's not moving the goal posts. You've done this a number of times, where you misuse arguments like that. I'm not making this up, and it's fairly evident that you're not understanding the criticism, you failed to grasp basic english there. I said the idea that nobody is breaking the boys is heresy to feminists, and then you agreed with me, saying toxic masculinity is breaking the boys. You miss the point. The boys aren't broken, they're just different. I gave an example in the second comment.

The tantrum at the end of your reply is just you lashing out some more and isn't worth addressing beyond noting that yes, MRAs do have an academic discipline, such as with Warren Farrell and so on. And it's not surprising that you're going to scurry away now that it's gotten harder for you to substantively argue the points i'm making and you're forced to into just outright denial of reality and insults.

You're also ignoring that feminist ideology is different to the principles they claim belong to them and them solely. Much like "Conservative values about the importance of family inform our work" on a study about anti-conservative family structures would be eye-roll worthy. It's done to give lip service and prevent extremists lashing out at people.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I said the idea that nobody is breaking the boys is heresy to feminists, and then you agreed with me, saying toxic masculinity is breaking the boys. You miss the point. The boys aren't broken, they're just different. I gave an example in the second comment.

You can really only talk past feminism than engage with it.

Let's break this down logically. The boys could be fine the way they are and the system could be broken (which doesn't inherently mean feminism, it could mean things like poverty but fuck it lets go with your idiocy). Or that something could be impacting the boys (such as toxic masculinity, maybe it's lead in the water that only boys drink etc) but the system is functioning fine. In either case you characterized feminism as maliciously acting against boys and use the fact that you have a different hypothesis as proof of this. This is shit logic and you know it. While feminists hold a different explanation, they are not blaming the boys for what is "breaking" them, and they are proposing policies they think would help boys perform better in school. Literally zero of your characterizations of the demeanor towards boys from feminists was true. Zero. And I don't have words for the level of imbecility you have to not understand this. Even if scientifically the feminists were proven wrong and that it really was the school system, your characterization of their motivations would be wrong. And again to emphasize this is from the article I cherry picked to affirm your point of view, you've entirely ignored the more reasonable article because you're openly biased and bigoted towards feminist thought on a crusade to prove your validity.

And it's not surprising that you're going to scurry away now that it's gotten harder for you to substantively argue the points i'm making and you're forced to into just outright denial of reality and insults.

No it's just your circular logic and reasoning. You're more battling the imagined depictions you have of feminism in your own head which led you to make a fool of yourself. Again "You live in such a distorted reality regarding your understanding of feminism that you literally can't see arguments against your position." If you want to run that strategy and pretend you won do you really think I care, your ego is tied up in this, not mine? It's just a further example of your idiocy that I'll use to mock MRA for the rest of my life. I mean you seriously cited an article using openly feminist methodology to pretend that feminist ideology is fundamentally opposed to men's problems. That's like breaking your own nose and pretending you knocked out Muhammad Ali. A dog chasing its own tail and yelping when it bites down on it. The basic stupidity of pretending like I can't respond to your arguments is laughable to me. It's belied that you haven't beaten my arguments that you're still trying to one up me now which is just a tacit admission that you still feel like you haven't won.

You've made a fool of yourself here.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's all well and good and I wouldn't be making the claim they hate boys if there hadn't been an active attempt to prevent alternative views on these problems from being investigated and tried. They behaved the same way on domestic violence too, and a whole host of other issues. It is not an isolated incident, but part of a pattern. Feminists care less about helping boys than they do about upholding feminism, even if it doesn't actually help boys. Because of that they are hostile to attempts to help boys which reject a feminist framework and try to shut them down, rather than allowing them to play out and then we decide which works better.
Iowa conservatives decided to buy houses for the homeless because it saved money on incarceration, crime prevention, homelessness programmes, and so on. Liberals loved it and pointed this out. Most conservatives didn't care and would say such a thing is socialism. It would be inane to pretend that the Iowa conservatives were being true to conservatism as it actually works in society, no matter they justified their behavior with "Fiscal responsibility". So it goes for feminists that the MRM likes to champion, but who get nowhere in the wider feminist movement. The overall trend of feminism, its followers, and institutions where it is normalized, as well as the policies it brings about, are anti-male. You say i'm making a fool of myself, but I and plenty of people disagree. Most people in fact.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's not a tautology. You claim you walked me into contradicting myself, but really we don't know that, you could just be pretty desperate to avoid admitting you needed an MRA to teach you something, wouldn't be the first time feminists behaved that way. Beyond that, i've explained why it isn't a contradiction to you in fairly simple terms and you haven't addressed it. Instead you've just said "No i'm right though".

Some Imperialists wanted less bad treatment of natives because that was part of the civilizing mission. Doesn't mean imperialism isn't anti-native. That's another example of how this isn't a contradiction. I showed you a study by a single person, and you're acting like this is proof my point that the movement as a whole is bad is wrong, despite you citing RAINN, an entire organization with millions in funding, which used the wrong stats and excluded female perpetrators. Kind of seems like she might be the outlier here, and the norm is for feminists to be rape apologists, no?

You keep saying cherry picking and bad faith, but don't actually back any of that up. In fact you freaked out when I showed you the example from Scotland where the feedback on hate crime legislation was that feminist organizations did not want hate crimes against men to be against the law, but did for women. That was the feedback from the overwhelming majority of them, not cherry picking. Where such data has been collected, it demonstrates similar results.

There's also the recent study showing that belief in male privilege correlates with sexist attitudes which is a pretty concrete one, but why go for the easy thing eh?

I'm not particularly interested in shutting up mate, nor moving on. This is our place and we're happy to answer any questions or address any points you have. If you're done, you should leave.

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Some Imperialists wanted less bad treatment of natives because that was part of the civilizing mission. Doesn't mean imperialism isn't anti-native. That's another example of how this isn't a contradiction.

This is called begging the question. Another perfectly possible explanation is that feminism isn't the caricature you think it is. But begging the question like this is a key characteristic of tautological thinking. Instead of admitting that something goes against your assumptions you posit constant hypothetical explanations for how you're not wrong rather than showing that you are right.

You claim you walked me into contradicting myself, but really we don't know that, you could just be pretty desperate to avoid admitting you needed an MRA to teach you something, wouldn't be the first time feminists behaved that way.

Lol if you think I'm lying feel free. I don't care, we'll just keep going on this merry go round. This is what ideological and dogmatic people do. You talk in circles and circles and use this as evidence of your superiority when you're just doing what most irrational delusional people do which is live inside your cognitive biases and pretend they are reality.

You keep saying cherry picking and bad faith, but don't actually back any of that up.

I have, and I have proven it multiple times now. You're just acting in bad faith. Feel free to have a fellow MRA go through this. You think you'd come out as if you won? Probably not. Go post it up on the subreddit so people can read it.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]neverendingwaterfall0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why not show actual policy impacts feminism has done to benefit men, for mens own sake?

I already have done so, you choose to ignore it. You've already posted an article showing feminists are taking male rape incredibly seriously. And I know studies like that have filtered through the literature and are taken seriously in academia. I also show two feminist academic articles talking with concern about boys in education. One you idiotically chose to ignore because it doesn't fit your narrative about feminism. And like I said famous feminists like Ruth Bader Ginsburg have fought for men's rights in the court room. The fact you choose to ignore it proves nothing other than that MRA are intellectual shills like yourself, not that MRA is based in a rational reasonable interpretation of feminism.

The duluth model, campus kangaroo courts, istanbul convention, normalized casual misandry, examples from the boys crisis, and so on.

We can do a dick measuring context of which political movements have done more harm, feminist movements or anti-feminists movements. Anti-feminists resists women's rights to vote, abortion, be single mothers, pay women equally, subject them to marital rape as a norm, inability to open bank accounts or credit cards in their own names. The harms a civil rights abuses of anti-feminists far exceed the faults of feminism. The faults of any movement are real, your critique pretty much rests on the sad fact that any movement towards progress has its faults. America had slavery, feminism had the duluth model. Neuroscience had phrenology and other disciplines had eugenics. This is a part of academic discourse is weeding out the bad ideas, which feminism is doing. The fact that bad science exists in feminism isn't a basis to characterize it the way you do. Based on the whole context of those studies they have shed those issues, feminism isn't any different. You depend on an absolutist reductionist critique of feminism that only focuses on its faults (which especially inter-sectional feminists won't deny as your own article proves beyond a doubt.) because you have for no good reason a vendetta against feminism.

So I don't think i'm begging the question.

Which is what people with cognitive biases think. They always feel self justified in them. You prove nothing here other than you don't understand logical fallacies and you're an imbecile. I love it.

How about this why don't you tell me how feminism raped you. How it assaulted you. So I can ignore it and prove your false narrative real.

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I posted an article showing one is doing so, while you haven't addressed my point as to why this is immaterial as a condemnation of the wider movement and the ideology itself. You posted a feminist organization with hundreds/thousands of staff members who did the opposite, so the best you can get from this is that feminisms ratio of decency to hate movement is 1:1000 from the data in front of us.

You showed me two feminist articles about the boys crisis which I have debunked as adequate for the reasons I laid out, which you just refused to actually engage with, instead throwing a tantrum and calling me names instead of addressing the points I made. (That the first only describes feminists reacting to more press about the boys crisis and discussing the phenomanae of the boys crisis being given more attention as negative. That the second falls into the problem of pathologizing boys rather than actually addressing the system failing them.).

Ginsburg made her ruling because she concluded it was anti-woman to put them in the role of caregivers, not to help men, which is in line with my evaluation of why paternity benefits were given to men by feminists, and you also ignore that feminists like NOW and so on have actively worked to try and make it the case that such benefits and custody and so on happen for men only when the women request it or a woman isn't present, such as with their defense of the tender years doctrine. I.E, the benefits are there to help women keep a job, not to help men be parents. Custody bias is perpetuated in part by feminist norms where the importance of fathers is downplayed and men portrayed as superfluous at best and dangerous at worst to a family, while single motherhood is celebrated. (This too is beginning to change now that feminists have figured out they need men to be fathers more often, once again not for mens sake, but in order to help womens careers, and once again they are stuck in a situation of only wanting men involved when the woman wants them involved.).

Equating all anti-feminism is ridiculous. Criticizing the racism in America that led to slavery is pretty much like what i'm doing, criticizing the misandry in feminism that led to these outcomes. Except we don't have to live in feminism like we do a country, we can just invent a new movement instead of detoxifying that one.

As for what feminism did to me, there's plenty but the one that sticks out would be the duluth model. However, it need not do anything to me personally for my criticism to be valid. A lot of my activism is on behalf of other men. I've not been to prison, but still want prison reform, and still note feminist norms and activism in cases like the UK where feminists have altered sentencing guidelines to recommend women be given lesser sentences on the grounds they are oppressed for the same crimes contributing to the sentencing gap that harms men.

[–]neverendingwaterfall1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]azazelcrowley1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Example of the first point;

https://returntonow.net/2017/11/21/texas-school-beaths-adhd-tripling-recess-time/

Instead of pretending there's something wrong with boys and people are raising them wrong, adding more time to recess kills ADHD problems in school because it gives the boys more time to expend their excess energy. Recess times are tailored to girls needs and then boys are viewed as ill for not being the same as girls and needing more exercise.

It's nothing to do with what you think it is. That is merely an expression of gynocentrism and anti-male ideology where you assume the system is neutral, when in fact it is designed around girls needs. The feminist approach would be to act like the reason boys have these problems is people raising them wrong and not teaching them to sit still and things.

That is anti-male hatred, and you can't bare to admit it. It's no different to if we decided everyone had to eat the same amount of food now, and we based that calory intake on womens needs. Then feminists sat around saying the reason men are lethargic, tired, and ill all the time is masculinty telling them it was okay to be lazy. It's totally delusional. It's merely a means of gaslighting society and *pretending* to care about men, when really all they are doing is assuming that if men are different to girls its because they are broken.

[–]jameswalker431 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link

But pale in comparison to actual rapes, so what you've just said does not alter the point in any way.

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

I enjoy how you call me a clown right after pulling random numbers out your arsehole to prove a point you have no evidence for.

Of course you forget whilst your hand is up your arsehole fishing for nonsense numbers, all of the rapes and sexual assaults that go on which never get reported.

Try and apply a bit of balance to your thinking before you start slinging insults around.

[–]aussietoads 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Except we have plenty of data on sexual assault and know exactly what the figures are. It's called a census.

[–]aussietoads 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]martynhare 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

Why are you asking me for statistics and then following that up with you taking stabs in the dark about the actual numbers......right after making a post claiming that the 'data' suggests false allegations are rather common.

What you're essentially doing here is coming into this thread on the defensive, then admitting that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

Use your common sense.

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]BotDaBot 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BotDaBot 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BotDaBot 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BigBlueWookiee 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RightTwiceADay80 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (24 children) | Copy Link

The things men are afraid of are neither illegal nor discouraged by society. In fact they are often encouraged by society or praised.

I mean your argument here is just complete and utter nonsense.

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (18 children) | Copy Link

Good faith? You just stated that false rape allegations weren't illegal and that women aren't actually afraid of sexual assault.

You might want to unpack that first.

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (11 children) | Copy Link

Again, it is illegal. Whether it be a report to the police or an allegation on social media.

This is stretching the discussion off in a pointless direction either way.

20% of women in the UK above the age of 16 have experienced sexual assault. What percentage of men have been accused either publically or charged by the police? About 0.0005%?

Hopefully you'll now understand how stupid it is to compare them both.

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

it isn't even a crime for a woman to rape a man there.

Another lie.

You're doing a good job of talking complete horseshit aren't you?

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

I know you're thick as pig shit, so let me spell it out for you crystal clear.

When a woman rapes a man, it falls under a different name in the UK.

That doesn't mean it's 'legal', it means it falls under a different term.

[–]DavidByron22 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Statistic comes from here

It actually doesn't matter how loosely defined sexual assault is classified because the same standard then applies to the false accusations that get reported.

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"grandstanding about not being alone with a women at the same time as getting angry about a women not wanting to be alone with a man is absolutely mental double standards."

I actually agree with you here.

As for rape versus false rape accusation ratio, this is extremely important to me. I believe that the current rape hysteria has both broadened the definition of rape to absurdity and consistently used bad statistics to inflate the proble.

On the other hand, I believe false rape acccusations are swept under the rug. Ive heard that they are extremely rare, (This assertion usually manifests as a bad inference from the Lisak study.) Ive heard that they cause minimal damage to victim. ( Not true. False rape accusation permanently taint a victims reputation.) And Ive also heard that worst case scenario, a false accusation is a good learning experience.

I am extremely concerned and interested in the current rape hysteria versus false rape allegations. I have personal anecdotal experience that has led me to read quite a few studies.

The truth is that there is very little good data and all of it comes from before #metoo. I suspect that the movement has enabled quite a few sociopaths to become social media darlings, "victims" assigned special moral status, and the only price they have to pay is to throw a man under the bus.

Ive seen multiple instances of this and it resembles nothing so much as a witchhunt.

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

It's covered under libel laws if it's a public statement. If it was a police report then it's covered under filing a false report.

Ergo illegal.

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Have you been to planet earth? I feel I'm having to explain very basic things to you.

In our society women are valued and protected so faking fear is functional for them and as a result women pretend to be afraid of things, often trivial things, all the time. For example screaming in fear over a spider or a beetle.

I don't even know what to say. You genuinely come across as one of those low IQ retards you meet on a bus who thinks they know what they're talking about.

You're either an old lonely gimp with a bitter, twisted (and completely fucking warped) view of the world, or you're an incel.

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

You're getting downvoted because you're either a fantasist or a liar.

[–]RightTwiceADay80 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

While there are no figures on the rate of false accusations we do have some numbers.

https://reason.com/2017/09/14/we-need-to-talk-about-black-students-bei/

This article mentions that black male students get accused of rape twenty times more than white male students. It seems like white girls love to make their stories about a strong black man raping them. Racism aside this allows for some sort of handle on the number of false stories. It's obvious at least 95% of the accusations made against black students are false. That assumes black students are no more likely to be rapists than white students and that at most 100% of accusations against white men are true. But it's probably a lot less than 100% true against white male students in view of it being at most 5% true against black.

This is why I estimate the ratio of false accusations to be maybe 10 to a hundred times more than rapes.

Note that this is still only counting false accusations made to an authority figure in an official setting. Informal false accusations (not made to an authority figure) are probably a lot more common.

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

It's obvious at least 95% of the accusations made against black students are false.

You're completely making that figure up though.

You're also conflating non conviction with false allegation.

This is why I estimate the ratio of false accusations to be maybe 10 to a hundred times more than rapes.

Aside from that being absolutely absurd, you're again not taking into account the vast number of rapes that go unreported.

[–]RightTwiceADay80 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

I linked to the article.

Which doesn't say what you're claiming at all. You linked to an article and then started pulling figures out your arsehole which your link does not back up.

I am not. These cases didn't even go to the police so that's all a non-issue. Use some common sense before you reply next time.

Yes you are.

All of the rapes in the article were unreported to police. Duh. Did you even glance at the article?

We're not just talking about rapes on college campuses, and yes I did read the fucking article.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]timwhy1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

You linked an artickle about campus accusations against black students. You then took that article and claimed that 95% of accusations were false. Absolutely nothing in that article claimed anything of the sort.

You lied. For about the 5th time.

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RightTwiceADay80 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ACGWander1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Comments