TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

6 Truths About Dads Feminists Don’t Want You to Know

MHRA_Leander

March 20, 2015
240 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2015/03/6-truths-about-dads-feminists-dont-want-you-to-know/
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title 6 Truths About Dads Feminists Don’t Want You to Know
Author

MHRA_Leander

Upvotes 240
Comments 33
Date March 20, 2015 8:09 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2zqiaq/6_truths_about_dads_feminists_dont_want_you_to/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/6-truths-about-dads-feminists-dont-want-you-to.985251
https://theredarchive.com/post/985251
Red Pill terms in post
feminist
Top posts by MHRA_Leander

Feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye: women's rights have gone too far are now silencing men.

5771 upvotes
December 1, 2016
/r/MensRights

Heartbroken mum of teen who killed himself after false rape allegation found hanged at family home

2233 upvotes
July 29, 2016
/r/MensRights

Three schoolgirls who falsely accused a California teacher of being a "perv" who touched them inappropriately have been ordered to pay him $387,000 for defamation. The ringleader of the group, who was 11 years old at the time, must also pay punitive damages.

1591 upvotes
November 18, 2013
/r/MensRights

5 Feminist Myths That Will Not Die

1260 upvotes
September 2, 2014
/r/MensRights

WATCH: Psychologist Leaves Reporter Speechless Explaining Why Free Speech Trumps Someone's 'Right' To Not Be Offended

1040 upvotes
January 18, 2018
/r/MensRights

Woman who cried wolf about rape may have to face her victim in court

752 upvotes
November 7, 2013
/r/MensRights

Number of wives and girlfriends convicted of assaulting partners reaches new high

539 upvotes
September 17, 2016
/r/MensRights

We must stop indoctrinating boys in feminist ideology

481 upvotes
July 20, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]Ultramegasaurus 48 points49 points50 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Great post with statistics, citations and, again, proof of mainstream feminism's toxicty.

The feminist defense in the comment section? Why, NAFALT of course. Like a broken record.

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

NAFALT is beginning to seem more just plain false than like a cop out. I don't understand how you can believe in the patriarchy, male>female power dynamics, male privilege, etc., and not be like that. NAFALT is beginning to mean "Not all feminists have any idea what feminism actually is and prefer to just don the title without spending five minutes even asking what the title means."

[–]guywithaccount 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

NAFALT has always meant exactly two things: "don't hold me accountable", and "don't hold feminism accountable".

I don't understand how you can believe in the patriarchy, male>female power dynamics, male privilege, etc., and not be like that.

You can't. Feminism is fundamentally sexist. If you are a feminist then you are a sexist bigot and you support sexist bigotry.

"Not all feminists have any idea what feminism actually is and prefer to just don the title without spending five minutes even asking what the title means."

Who would they ask who would tell the truth? MRAs?

Convincing "feminists" who are really misled egalitarians to drop the title and recognize the bigotry isn't going to be quick or easy. What's going to make the biggest difference is just changing the zeitgeist (not quick or easy either, but "neutrals" are easier to convince). As public opinion starts to turn against feminism, specific criticisms of feminism start to become more common, and people talk about and push back against SJW bullying, feminism's gonna start to lose its politically correct shine, and all the coffeeshop feminists will move on.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's so unbelievably weird to me how attached feminists, no matter how soft, cling to that label like their lives depend on it.

[–]percocet_20 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's about accountability, or more so passing accountability to someone else. For some toxic minded people feminism has become a vehicle to push their agendas and feed their narcissism all while giving them excuses to pass responsibility and accountability by blaming men, the patriarchy, racists, "rape culture", and basically anything that might dissuade the focus from their negative actions and onto someone else. A real feminist believes in real equality, I've said it before and I'll say it again the wrong people with the wrong goals are yelling too loud to hear the right people with the right goals

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's a big part of why I don't associate with it.

I'm pretty conservative, but some of the shit that the mainstream representatives of conservatism (Republicans, at least in the States) do is awful, and I simply will not vote for it. In effect, I am holding "my group" accountable for their shitty behavior, because that's how we'll get support in the long run.

Does it make me not believe in conservative ideals? No. It just makes me cognizant of my place in the world and in my ideology.

Feminists think that they've got it all figured out, and anyone who's critical is evil, obviously. A movement like that either needs to take a sharp tack towards empathy and self-reflection... or it needs to fuck off and die. It's up to the feminists, I'm not grinding an axe for either outcome in particular.

It would be desirable to have a feminist movement that was considerate of men, that we could work with arm in arm.

[–]Cee-Jay 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"Not all feminists have any idea what feminism actually is and prefer to just don the title without spending five minutes even asking what the title means."

I was tempted to cautiously disagree with this (to a reasonable extent, of course), but then recalled this Fusion.net piece erroneously declaring the new Thor a feminist simply because she's a woman.

Not all women are feminists, just as some, arguably many, men are. Sadly (or perhaps thankfully) many so-called "feminists" subscribe to radically different definitions of feminism. This is where the MRM must define itself; MRAs have the opportunity to very clearly separate ourselves from PUAs and the Red Pill "community," such that it is. If we maintain this clarity over our use of language, we're half-way toward the important goal of defending ourselves from false accusations against the movement's goals.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a bit of an understatement to say not all women are feminists. When they run polls, it turns out that very few of them are.

[–]eletheros 27 points28 points29 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

  1. “Deadbeat Dads” are largely a myth [75% of dads pay their child support]

1a. At least 75% of dads who don't pay child support have support orders so high compared to their income that they could not mathematically pay their full debt in ten years.

1b. 70% of men in arrears on child support have income of $10k/yr or less.

[–]Doomblaze 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

1a. At least 75% of dads who don't pay child support have support orders so high compared to their income that they could not mathematically pay their full debt in ten years.

Thats the case with my dad. My mom doesnt need any of it though, so she just gives him the money and he gives it back to her as child support to keep the courts off of his back.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wait what? Doesn't she have some kind of say in the process of determining whether she needs child support? Couldn't she go to the courts and tell them they can stop making him pay?

[–]Energy_Turtle 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I agree this is a problem but what is the solution? I've worked with many of these fathers (and been one myself). Lots of the fathers (including my girlfriend's kids' dad) are only required to pay ~$25/month and still don't pay anything. Should they not have to pay anything at all? Should they not be accountable for the hundreds or thousands in debt they stack up when the initial requirement was so low to begin with? I honestly don't know the answers to these questions. The whole situation is much more difficult than it seems on the surface.

[–]eletheros 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Should they not have to pay anything at all?

Under the right circumstance, they should not. As a possibility, if a father has an income low enough that they would be collecting welfare if they had custody of the child, then they should owe no child support.

It is inequality under the law to give dole to mother+child while demanding money from an equally poor father.

[–]Energy_Turtle -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Fair opinion but I disagree unless some middle ground can be found. It's inarguable that children cost money. A father should have to produce something for the child lest it be neglect. A custodial parent would be guilty without a doubt if they did not purchase food, clothes, etc. If both parents are on welfare I think your argument is a bit more viable. Even if the custodial parent is on welfare they should not be made to purchase all of the necessities for the child though. That is far from equal.

[–]eletheros 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A father should have to produce something for the child lest it be neglect.

So you consider the mother being on welfare as neglect as well? Because to fail to do so is inequality, yet again.

If both parents are on welfare

Welfare in the US is not available without child custody. It's not strictly illegal, but funds are insufficient to provide for others. So the criteria of "both parents are on welfare" is impossible if they are separated.

Even if the custodial parent is on welfare they should not be made to purchase all of the necessities for the child though.

If the non custodial is similarly poor, then it is entirely equal since only the custodial parent receives welfare. It's not really the custodial parent paying for the child, it's society.

[–]Energy_Turtle 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You totally misunderstood. Not providing anything is neglect. .

Your second point is straight incorrect. Many people on welfare do not have children. Welfare comes in many shapes and forms.

Where are you getting this idea that only custodial parents can get welfare? It's absurdly incorrect. I worked for CPS and often dealt with the equivalent agencies in other states. What you are saying is not true at all.

[–]eletheros 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You totally misunderstood. Not providing anything is neglect. .

The custodial parent receiving welfare is not providing anything. Rather, the State is. Were you consistent, you would be calling them neglectful as well. Except, you're not consistent.

Your second point is straight incorrect. Many people on welfare do not have children. Welfare comes in many shapes and forms.

And the context was one of the US program of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. SSI isn't relevant. Earned Income Tax Credits are not relevant.

Where are you getting this idea that only custodial parents can get welfare? It's absurdly incorrect. I worked for CPS and often dealt with the equivalent agencies in other states. What you are saying is not true at all.

It is absolutely true. It's right in the title

[–]Vandechoz 20 points21 points22 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Only 3% of Dads said the perfect Father’s Day gift would be time away from the kids, while 11% of Moms chose time alone.

This one's easy. The more you're around the kids, the more you need to take a break from them. They're cute and fun and all, but kids are a huge energy drain. To be honest, I'm surprised both numbers weren't larger.

[–]chavelah -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, so it's not because women are "more selfish," as the author concludes? Whoulda thunk it. /s

[–]ghebert001 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The following absolutely needs to be made into a poster:

"In 2011, only 25 % of custodial mothers did not receive any child support payments, while 32% of custodial fathers were left high and dry.

Oops. Looks like “deadbeat moms” are more common as a percentage of the population than “deadbeat dads”."

[–]chickpea_ 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't understand why feminists wouldn't like these things? Honestly men who are great fathers who spend time with their kids and help with housework would be a feminist daydream. And feminists believe that men have the capability to do all of these things and more.

[–]nitzua 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

child custody is the only battle where they took all the spoils. you think they'd give that up over some silly biotrufs?

[–]geminia999 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only 12.7% of Dads didn’t want their children to have contact with the other parent, while 21% of women indicated they wanted their children alienated from the other parent.

This part just makes me want to interpret these stats negatively. I mean, in most cases where a father would get custody, wouldn't the mother of had to been pretty horrible to actually have the father win? And then despite that fact they still wish for the mother who was potentially abusive to still be in their lives is kind of scary a bit.

And while that scenario is likely a fraction in their, it just seems like it implies something a bit bigger behind the scenes.

[–]Amphabian 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

This is gonna sound really shitty to you guys, but where are you all seeing this constant stream of bad-feminism? I see maybe a handful of posts that are angering here and there, but not to the extent that you all talk about.

Can I have some examples?

[–]Peter_Principle_ 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/g2eme/feminists_tell_you_that_the_solution_to_mens/

Right in the side bar.

[–]Amphabian 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shit. Thanks.

[–]ProphetChuck 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

i don't get why you got down voted, it's a reasonable question.

[–]Amphabian 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Knew that was gonna happen. Maybe it's because I vaguely stated I'm not entirely against feminism.

I equally support the feminist movement and men's rights movement. I intend to be able to call both out on any bullshit they my propagate.

[–]chavelah 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ideologically-based massaging of statistical data on one side of an issue cannot be effectively addressed by resorting to the exact same lazy, dishonest tactics on the other side. It may be a good way to get hits on your blog and please your fan base, but it's a shitty way to address important social issues.

X percent of fathers "don't want their children to have contact" with the noncustodial parent, and Y percent of mothers want to "alienate" the noncustodial parent. Same survey data, framed differently for some reason.

Fathers in the home "protect children from the mother's abuse" - it couldn't possibly be the lower poverty and stress rates reported by all two-parent households (two moms, two dads, one of each, whatever).

X percent of dad's don't pay any support, compared to Y percent of moms, so that means mom's are more likely to be deadbeats - right after asking us all to give noncustodial dads a pass on paying support if they are poor, and without noting than the poverty rate for women is higher than the poverty rate for men.

Dads are obviously important. Blog posts that slag on moms are neither an effective nor an ethical way to advance that demonstrable, verifiable belief.

[–]Peter_Principle_ 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

X percent of fathers "don't want their children to have contact" with the noncustodial parent, and Y percent of mothers want to "alienate" the noncustodial parent. Same survey data, framed differently for some reason.

Not wanting children to have contact with the other parent IS alienation. The section heading is "Dads are more likely to refuse child support, and less likely to alienate the other parent". Right there, intro sentence, fathers alienate. Is it possible that the author is merely rewording so she doesn't have a paragraph that is the same word over and over?

Fathers in the home "protect children from the mother's abuse" - it couldn't possibly be the lower poverty and stress rates reported by all two-parent households (two moms, two dads, one of each, whatever).

Um, she's only expanding on the previous idea, "...not only were fathers less likely to engage in child maltreatment...", not rejecting any other explanation.

X percent of dad's don't pay any support, compared to Y percent of moms, so that means mom's are more likely to be deadbeats -

Given the generous definition of deadbeat the state likes to employ, they are.

right after asking us all to give noncustodial dads a pass on paying support if they are poor,

Right, because women so desperately need someone to stand up for them against all the feminist bashing of deadbeat moms that goes on.

and without noting than the poverty rate for women

And also not noting that women are less likely to be hit with a CS order, their CS orders are lower, they're less likely to be punished for non-payment, traditional gender roles make it easier for a woman to find someone willing to give her a free ride...

Blog posts that slag on moms

Stop looking so hard to be offended.

[–]Corn-Tortilla 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't look to see who makes posts before I read a given post. When a post catches my attention, then I scroll back up to see who posted it. In this case I didn't need to scroll up. I had a good idea who posted this steaming pile of shit.

[–]TechnoSam_Belpois 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

and without noting than the poverty rate for women is higher than the poverty rate for men.

You'll note that the only reason this is true is because of single mothers. These women have to do everything for children while still making enough money to pay the bills. You simply can't do it, even with a child support check. So either you spend no time with your kids, or you spend very little time at work, or you balance the two, and don't work as much as needed to escape the poverty line. And I have to question how many of these women initiated the divorce or shoved the father out of their lives...

Additionally, you make your point without acknowledging the purchasing power of women, and the fact that they actually hold the majority of all personal wealth in the US. So it's hard to paint it so black and white... There's clearly nuance here that you seemed to have missed.

It appears that we're both on the same side here, so please don't take my post as an attack, I don't intend it to be. I'm just not agreeing with your thought process 100%.

[–]elwahrio -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree. My first thought when reading that more custodial mums receive child support than custodial dads was that we needed to compare the total amount of funds being awarded to mums vs dads. It's a bit cherry-picked.

Likewise, the adjectives used for 35% and 51% being so drastically different seems a bit heavy handed. If the facts and stats are so conclusive, you wouldn't need to dress then up.

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

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter