~ archived since 2018 ~

It was only a matter of time...ridiculous sjw comic advocates cuckolding.

[deleted]

April 30, 2017

0 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	It was only a matter of time...ridiculous sjw comic advocates cuckolding.
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	0
Comments	8
Date	April 30, 2017 7:25 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/68hats/it_was_only_a_matter_of_timeridiculous_sjw_comic/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/it-was-only-a-matter-of-timeridiculous-sjw-comic.923689 https://theredarchive.com/post/923689

Comments

[–]Dembara 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dembara 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dembara 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dembara 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

It is addressed at males.

So you don't think a woman might see this comic, realize it communicates the message that her boyfriend is a dick if he doesn't let her do it and there's nothing wrong with doing it, and then decide to cheat on him?

At worse, it might damage the one person who chooses to participate.

Assuming you're right and it affects one person, that's one person who is hurt. If at least one person is hurt by something, it's toxic. That's what that means.

In fact, even if no one was affected, it would still be a toxic ideology. An idea that carries the potential to cause harm if adopted is still toxic by definition, and therefore worth talking about in my opinion. We're talking about the raw rhetoric itself. So if an idea is demonstrably toxic specifically to one group of people, regardless of how many people are actually affected by it, it is an issue for that group.

a choice which should be afforded to them if you ask me.

I'm not arguing people shouldn't have the choice to make stupid decisions. They should. But it has nothing to do with the conversation of whether or not an idea is toxic and should therefore be considered worthy of discussion on that grounds.

Example: nazism was a practice people freely chose. It is still a toxic ideology, as (hopefully) you would agree.

To continue the example, if you accept it's a toxic ideology, does that mean we shouldn't talk about it? Should we not say how bad nazism is, simply because being a nazi is a voluntary choice that people should be allowed to make? Should we not talk about how damaging nazism is to the world?

Yes, that's an extreme example, but it illustrates my point nicely.

EDIT:

it would be more akin to men choosing not to take custody

Perhaps. But the ideology that men should choose not to take custody simply because they're men (they don't deserve it, they're terrible at raising children, etc) is harmful. It's damaging. That's an evil point of view.

Maybe you have this cavalier attitude about free will. That you think if people make dumb, degrading, self-harming choices they deserve it, regardless of the fact they were influenced by a malicious outside force. That's fine, I guess. But I disagree (perhaps an argument for another day). I highly doubt I'm the only person on the subreddit who feels the same, though.