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

Don’t let ignorance destroy a movement with legitimate claims! Just an example of some of the things I’ve been seeing...

ckershaw6

May 7, 2018
32 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://i.redd.it/ic0cbwsu4hw01.jpg
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 Don’t let ignorance destroy a movement with legitimate claims! Just an example of some of the things I’ve been seeing...
Author

ckershaw6

Upvotes 32
Comments 64
Date May 7, 2018 6:07 PM UTC
(8 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8hpku3/dont_let_ignorance_destroy_a_movement_with/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/dont-let-ignorance-destroy-a-movement-with.901653
https://theredarchive.com/post/901653
Top posts by ckershaw6

Would does this sub actually think about women’s rights/condition?

6 upvotes
April 17, 2018
/r/MensRights

Why are so many people saying that women have never been oppressed?

3 upvotes
April 23, 2018
/r/MensRights

Why drivers insurance costs more for men (hint: it isn’t discrimination)

0 upvotes
May 1, 2018
/r/MensRights

What I have found.

0 upvotes
May 10, 2018
/r/MensRights

There is no compulsory military service in the United States

0 upvotes
May 18, 2018
/r/MensRights

Men who make false “false rape” accusations should receive the sentence that the rapist would have gotten

0 upvotes
May 9, 2018
/r/MensRights

Take on “toxic masculinity”

0 upvotes
April 28, 2018
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]plathd 21 points22 points23 points 8 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

You need to take class into account. Rich white men are doing fine. However in the UK, a recent report stated that poor white males now get the "worst start in life"; at the same time, a recent Labor party youth convention barred straight white males from attending. So there is definitely merit to OP's general sentiment, even if his claim is both Western-centric and incorrect.

It's difficult to quantify as there are too many variables involved to make such sweeping statements. Nevertheless, it is a fact that white males are being attacked in the media and discriminated against in schools and the workplace. Poor white males in the US are now suffering at least as much as other poor demographics and probably more, since feminist intersectionality stresses helping women and "people of color" while viciously attacking white males regardless of socioeconomic class.

Privilege theory should be rejected for a number of reasons, foremost because it is virtually impossible to quantify just by looking at someone. There are Native American men who have lived charmed lives, and there are white women born into the upper class who have been abused as children, suffer severe depression and live in misery. I think structural (class) inequalities should be addressed, but this is not going to be accomplished by focussing primarily on identity.

Since white males will continue to make up the majority of the western male population for at least a few more decades, the end result of feminism will be the rapid growth of the far right, and possibly a return to an extreme form of patriarchy. Ironically the men's rights movement -- regarded by feminists as their biggest foe -- is the only way of saving them from their own stupidity.

[+]ckershaw6 -16 points-15 points-14 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I think that you do not understand privilege theory. It does not have to do with individual condition, but more with group condition...blacks did not have the chance to accumulate capital because of slavery, Jin crow, and other weapons of systemic racism. On the other hand, whites had no such barriers in place.

Based on statistics, the best way to do well in life is to have parents that have money. Black Americans, and many other racial minorities, were denied that opportunity for many years, and are still denied it today. So privilege theory is perfectly valid.

There is no merit whatsoever to OPs “general sentiment”. But I’m also glad that you have identified two fatal flaws. Maybe we are just misunderstanding each other.

[–]plathd 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that you do not understand privilege theory. It does not have to do with individual condition

It absolutely does, and that's one of its fatal flaws. It views human beings not as individuals but as representatives of a racial or sexual collective. Feminists try to get around this by saying "we also take class into account", but that's not the way it plays out in the real world. People are simply judged/attacked according to their racial/sexual characteristics. Thus during Occupy Wall Street, straight white males were told to go the back of the line, and the recent labor party youth conference in London barred straight white males from attending.

Identitarians/intersectional feminists have nothing whatsoever in common with the traditional left. In fact they closely resemble the far right. The only difference is that instead of scapegoating blacks or Muslims or some other enemy du jour they scapegoat straight white males. Not only does this not help us overcome our differences it exacerbates them. This is why identitarians and feminists are heavily promoted by the billionaire class. Meanwhile, at the ground level, "privilege" theory is just a way of bullying people and creating new social dominance hierarchies in quasi-activist groups and institutional settings.

Even if privilege theory were correct -- which it isn't -- it would still be an absolutely terrible way of trying to help disadvantaged people. Accusing working class men who in some cases risk their lives on the job of being "privileged" is a sure-fire way of alienating them. It's especially obnoxious when it comes from bourgeois gender studies professors working in comfortable offices.

On the other hand, whites had no such barriers in place.

Um, yes, they did. During the time period you're talking about, thousands of white men in the US were murdered and maimed simply for trying to unionize. The average white person lived on about a dollar a day and had no opportunity whatsoever for "accumulating capital."

Based on statistics, the best way to do well in life is to have parents that have money.

Yes, that's true, and just as many women as men have parents with money (though women are not subject to institutional discrimination like men are), plenty of black and Latino people are born into wealth etc. Meanwhile plenty of white men are born into abject poverty. You're about 50 years out of date. Here's a terrific article written by a radical leftist black man on the subject. His conclusion:

"It’s a recipe for impotence and futility."

So privilege theory is perfectly valid.

No. Privilege theory is not only invalid but perhaps the single greatest recruitment mechanism for the far right.

Edit: few words

[–]Tikylme 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Upvoted because I respect your coming here holding the beliefs that you do, I wouldn't be able to do the inverse in a feminist forum. But I take severe issue with what you say.

I think that you do not understand privilege theory.

Yes, I do. You don't understand it, because the thing about privilege theory is that thinking its understandable reveals that you don't.

t's not learnable, it doesn't have the academic qualities of having an apprecation or subtlties that can be deepened with time and application.

It's just an attack dog on a chain, a dumb ugly bulldog, used to intimidate people. Used to ensure the whip hand is safely held by you, the one who insists on having its power and protection, before you engage.

There is hardly a man on the planet who has ever known freedom in a gender conversation, because he knows, and has been taught to fear the fact that:

"If you say what you really think is true, and women or feminists don't like it, then you can be destroyed for it, and there will be no way to defend yourself. The power is all theirs."

And they think this way because they have been told all their lives that that is their privilege.

This is true of men who've never even heard of "privilege" as a construct (blessed souls!), and don't ever go anywhere near gender issues. They know instinctively it's wise just to steer clear if you possibly can.

I bet that factor's not incorporated into your privilege theory.

You don't see it that way, because you're the one holding the dog on the leash (which is what you do every time you suggest a right to invoke privilege upon somebody else), and it's your pet, so of course you think it's cuddly and sweet natured, and makes the world a better place.

If we had the dog, and were pointing it towards you, threatening you with it's very real power, you wouldn't like it either. Even if we told you we never actually had any intention of sicking it on you personally.

But only on you and the other people we group with you as legitimate targets.

All this without knowing the first fucking thing about me, or men.

I won't be told that I'm obliged to be condescended to.

If yu're really not against men, then you have to give up this privilege bullshit.

(And I don't care if you consider yourself feminist or not, if you use the word privilege, you're essentially the same thing to me.)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that you do not understand privilege theory

Ah yes, the go to flimsy defense of privilege theory. Where are all you people when some asshole employs your pet theory to justify their discriminatory behavior? Funny, there don't seem to be many people telling them they don't understand privilege theory. Imagine that.

It does not have to do with individual condition

Why do you guys jerk-off to "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" then?

[–]subthrowaway321 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, just no. Please give this a watch and get back to me. It isnt even twelve minutes long. https://youtu.be/-XvI6Y5Yq8o

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

It does not have to do with individual condition, but more with group condition

Then we arent interested. The correct way to do these things is to advocate for the rights of the individual. Re-frame all of yur cult of choices language to gender/race neutral, do not prop up any one group as being of greater need for protection.

A re-write of all laws to remove any reference to identity and being replaced with 'The Individual' with a legally recognised, airtight definition for 'The Individual'.

[–]bufedad 17 points18 points19 points 8 years ago (73 children) | Copy Link

You don't think White Males are the most discriminated against, at least in the first world?

Let me introduce you to the internal communications exposed from Google...

[+]rainman206 -14 points-13 points-12 points 8 years ago (64 children) | Copy Link

Ummm, aren't you forgetting about something?

Like perhaps the Black men that are routinely killed in police custody?

[–]bufedad 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (62 children) | Copy Link

Routinely killed in police custody? No one is routinely killed in police custody.

250-ish (this is from memory...I recall 268, but I'd have to look it up) black men are killed by police a year.

500-ish (again from memory... I recall 512, but I don't feel like looking it up) white men are killed by police a year.

That's total, that's not in custody.

No one is routinely killed in police custody.

Furthermore, more white men are killed by police than any other demographic (women being the smallest with 9 black women and I honestly don't remember the number for white women).

Furthermore, while white men are treated as badly as black men by police, they are the only demographic where you are allowed to publicly, and loudly discriminate against them in hiring, membership, education, etc...

[+]rainman206 -7 points-6 points-5 points 8 years ago (61 children) | Copy Link

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/21255937/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/study-died-police-custody-over-years/

Here's a source for you. Keep in mind, the 32% regarding black men is a hell of a lot higher then the 17% of the general population that they represent. In fact, that 17% includes females, so really it would be 8% of the population accounting for 32% of deaths in custody.

[–]bufedad 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago* (45 children) | Copy Link

2,000 over three years.

Half were killed in escape attempts.

1,000 were killed in police custody over three years.

1,000 / 50 states

20 per state over 3 years.

That's 7 per state per year.

I'm sorry, but 7 per state per year, is ridiculously low to be claiming this is a regular occurrence.

Did a little more digging. There are over 18,000 police departments in the US.

1,000 deaths over three years means that.

1 in 54 police departments has a death of a suspect in custody every year.

Let's actually look at the data your study provided.

55 percent of the 2,002 deaths were while fighting with police, or attempting to escape.

901 deaths that did not involve suspects forcing officers to use force (which is always risky).

  • Alcohol and drug related - 13 percent (260)
  • Suicides - 12 percent (240)
  • Accidental injury - 7 percent (140)
  • Natural causes - 6 percent (120)
  • Unknown reasons - 7 percent (140)
  • Fighting with officers/attempting to escape 1101

I'm not sure what you are expecting. With 12.4 Million arrests every year and 2.9 Million deaths, there are bound to be some in police custody.

That being said, what is the only demographic that it is acceptable to demand the police discriminate against? White Males

[+]rainman206 -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

That's also just killings in custody. It doesn't account for folks gunned down in the streets.

That's also the worst part of being a black dude. There are much "lighter" forms of oppression.

When Jason and Duquan both apply to the same job and there's only one interview to go around, do you really think Duquan is getting the interview?

When a black kid acts out in class, he's FAR more likely to be labeled as a problem child and sent down the "school to prison pipeline" than a white kid.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

Police kill more white people than black.

One is more likely to be shot and killed by police if one is white tha black.

It's just that black males by their own choices have more run ins with police.

What are these "lighter" forms of oppreasionyou speak about?

As for your school reference has nothing to do with skin colour. It has everything to do with behaviour and the parents. The problems with those children are coming from the home, and with black kids...mostly single mothers. Those with single mothers are the ones that act out and get in trouble the most often. It is more often the children from single mother households, particularly boys, that act out and get in trouble at school.

And the Teachers are RIGHT!!! Numerous case studies supporting the same findings. And skin colour does not matter...how one is raised matters. It's the black community with a culture problem.

My wife has said the same thing about several of her students...most white or aboriginal.

[–]rainman206 -5 points-4 points-3 points 8 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

You're going to need proof for the claim that white men are more likely to shot by police...

I listed two examples of "light oppression."

It DOES have to do with skin color. It also has to do with cultural problems. Causality can never be perfectly explained.

[–]girlwriteswhat 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

A study out of the University of Washington that put civilians, police and military into a simulator, found that all three groups were more hesitant to shoot a black suspect than they were whites or hispanics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/04/27/this-study-found-race-matters-in-police-shootings-but-the-results-may-surprise-you/?utm_term=.78d37ee87d66

In three different experiments, cops were 3 times more likely to shoot an unarmed white suspect than an unarmed black suspect.

This is REALLY interesting given that: "In 2001, a statistical study showed that black people comprised 12 percent of the population but committed 43 percent of the killings of officers."

So as of 2001, blacks were committing 3 1/2 times their "fair share" of cop-killings, yet in 2016 they were less likely to be shot by cops while unarmed than any other race.

Cultural problems. Yeah. I would suggest that the high rate of fatherlessness in the black community is a BIG cultural problem (one that can't necessarily be entirely laid on the doorstep of blacks) that leads to higher propensity for crime, violent crime in particular.

[–]rainman206 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

As long as criminals have guns they will shoot cops.

A disproportionate amount of criminals are black, which reflects centuries of policies deliberately designed to keep black people impoverished.

Given our history, the fact that many cops are killed by black people ought to be unsurprising.

Regarding the studies you mention, I wonder about the conditions. Other studies show that people feel much more empathy towards folks of the same color. Is it possible that participants in the study had time to process the decision and consequently decided to do everything they could to avoid having a racist response?

[–]plathd -4 points-3 points-2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

leads to higher propensity for crime

Higher propensity for certain types of crime. African-Americans are under-represented in eg: destroying entire economies via Wall Street banking speculation, or launching wars of aggression that kill millions of civilians, or using Ecstasy and Coke rather than Speedballs and Crack. Obviously this is not because African Americans are in any way morally or culturally superior, but because until recently they didn't occupy positions of power. Colon Powell and Condaleeza Rice were major players in the genocidal assault against Iraq.

Drug prohibition, which accounts for a huge number of American prisoners, does in fact have racial origins. The first drug laws were against opium and targeted the Chinese around the time of the Chinese Exclusion Act, and one of Richard Nixon's top advisors, John Ehrlichman, flat out admitted that the "war on drugs" was motivated by a desire to imprison blacks and leftists:

“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalising both heavily, we could disrupt those communities.

“We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes… and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

Ironically, during the same time period, the CIA was importing heroin into the US from the "Golden Triangle." In the 80's, the CIA again worked with drug traffickers in central and South America, allowing them to import cocaine while domestic right wing political leaders simultaneously upped the ante of the "war on drugs." Shockingly few Wall Street bankers were arrested for snorting cocaine during this time period, and shockingly few war criminals from Western nations were arrested and tried at the Hague ;)

So the history is clearly there, and your right wing bias against blacks is clearly evident. You also strangely seem to think that murdering an individual ("violent crime in particular") is much more serious than murdering a million or more people. Recall that the attack on Iraq was a war crime under the Geneva Conventions.

Having said all that, this is not 1882 or even 2003, things have changed quit a lot. As mentioned, it is poverty and (I agree) fatherlessness that need addressing, along with oppressive drug laws; and no, discriminating against white males and labeling them "privileged" is certainly not going to help matters.

[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

More than double the number of white men are killed over black men.

[–]rainman206 -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

When you account for the % of total population, no.

[–]ckershaw6 -4 points-3 points-2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now that’s just blatant racism hahahahahaha

[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's also just killings in custody.

Yes... that's also just the deaths (not killings) we were talking about. Natural causes is not a killing. Suicide is not a killing.

When a black kid acts out in class, he's FAR more likely to be labeled as a problem child and sent down the "school to prison pipeline" than a white kid.

And when a black kid struggles in class, he's FAR more likely to have support specifically funded just for him.

[–]PIG_CUNT 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bullshit. There is no pipeline. That’s a myth that’s been disproven just like “the pay gap is the result of discrimination against women.”

[–]PIG_CUNT -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Duquan is discriminated against ONLY if he behaves like a ghetto person of ANY race.

Who would get the job, a black man named Duquan who dresses professionally and looks and sounds like Wayne Brady? Or a white “wigger” named Charles who acts and talks like a ghetto black person, wears sagging pants and a sideways hat?

Most “racism” is actually culturalism and has nothing to do with race... but LOTS of black people are steeped in that culture.

[–]Sarin_G_Series -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

2.9 Million deaths per year? That's at the hands of police? That's almost one percent of the US population.

Edit: I read further where it's said that's deaths-in-custody, still, almost one percent of the population dies in custody every year? That's fucked.

[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

2.9 million deaths in the us every year, not just in police custody. Only 2,002 happen in police custody

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

That makes more sense

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Representation does not mean racism or discrimination .

Black males also commit more crime than any other demographic and therefore have far more opportunities to have run ins with police and therefore be in custody more often.

Stop choosing to be a victim.

[–]rainman206 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

The original point was that white men are discriminated against, more so than black men.

There's a fuck ton of evidence that black men face harder lives. I listed a few examples. There are plenty more.

Nobody is pro-crime or defending criminal actions. The point is this... white folks get the benefit of the doubt, Black Men don't.

[–]girlwriteswhat 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's illegal to discriminate against POC.

In Canada, it's still perfectly fine for the government to post a job with the phrase "white men need not apply." Which means that in Canada, at least, it's perfectly legal to discriminate against whites and men. Women are a "protected group" (including white women). So are POC (including men of color).

So basically, the only group that it's legal to discriminate against in the west are (cisgender, heterosexual, non-disabled) white men.

[–]plathd 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't have a link handy, but there was a Marxist on the KIA forum who linked to a bunch of studies showing very similar rates of police shootings, police brutality etc. in poor white communities as poor black communities. His basic argument was that while race was an important factor historically in creating black poverty, it is the poverty itself (and the corresponding social dysfunction) that we should be looking at. Poor communities have always been overpoliced, and poor men are subject to much more mistreatment by the police than men and women in rich communities.

Another interesting fact is that women were heavily responsible for creating the first municipal police forces in the US. They found the "leisure activities"* (in the words of the anarchist Kristian Williams) of the working class offensive, so demanded all sorts of "vice" laws -- which not only created bloated police forces but police corruption

*Leisure activities such as drinking at the saloon, gambling and having sex with prostitutes. Of course rich men enjoyed all the same activities, but typically behind closed doors and outside the view of snotty rich women.

I can attest to the poverty argument from my own experiences working as a taxi driver on Vancouver Island. I frequently encountered cops beating the shit out of white men in trailer parks, far beyond what was necessary to subdue to the suspect (typically the crime was public drunkenness).

By making it about race rather than class we prevent working class people from uniting over issues like police brutality. This is why groups like BLM receive funding by billionaires like George Soros, while actual radical leftist websites like CP, WSWS, ICH etc. are given the same treatment by the tech giants as the populist right.

I was watching CBC the other day (which is decidedly not a left wing organization, as you have claimed -- whereas all left wing websites condemned Trump's recent attacks on Syria, the CBC didn't allow a single dissenting voice during its cheerleading for the bombing campaign. Politics are much more complicated than "left" vs. "right". Establishment and anti-establishment are much better indicators.) The panelists were all talking about how women and people of color have suffered in the criminal justice system. What!? I'll concede the point that Native Americans -- mostly men -- have disproportionately suffered, but as you know the gender sentencing gap is much larger than any racial gaps.

Of course the other elephant in the room is fatherlessness caused by feminism. This has probably played just as large a role in mass incarceration as any other factor.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Racial divide in the MRM is not what we need. However to dismiss that white males are discriminated against is beyond retarded as MRA.
To dismiss that black men are also discriminated against is equally retarded.

Men are discriminated against and with your background being black or white comes a set of discriminations.
Blacks I can imagine will experience "bigotry of low expectation" where as whites will experience "bigotry of high expectation".

Depending on your angle both are discriminated against and to dismiss the suffering of white males is simply so freaking stupid. How about non-whites shut up and listen for once when whites speak about our issues?

Listen to each other and unite under MRM or fuck off.

[–]rainman206 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Here's the thing... the original comment states that white men are THE MOST discriminated group.

At no point did anyone say white dudes don't face discrimination. The whole reason we are here is because ALL men face discrimination.

You can thank others for bringing race into this conversation.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

White men are constantly under attack by the privilege social justice police so you can thank them for introducing race.

If you look at institutional sexism, then white (and asian) males are the least privileged group.
Blacks face other issues but depending on your metric of measurement of "most discriminated group" it is completely valid and uncontroversial to state white males at #1.

[–]rainman206 -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The social justice police aren't involved in this thread. I'm not sure how you can possibly blame them for bringing up race...

[–]ckershaw6 -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That’s the wrong attitude to have.

We didn’t question whether whites were discriminated against (which is debate-able, but not the point of the post). The point of the post is to point out blatant and seemingly popular ignorance that will destroy the MRM. Blacks face more discrimination that whites! Period! It’s not even comparable.

As much as the MRM doesn’t need a “racial divide,” it needs blatant racism and ignorance even less...

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

which is debate-able

Seriously? White males are drafted for the army. White males lose custody rights constantly. White males commit suicide constantly. White males are discriminated against in affirmative action programs. Ridiculed in media. etc.

Debate-able!? Seriously, dude?

Blacks face more discrimination that whites! Period!

Black women have access to affirmative action programs. White males do not. Black women do not face the "school-to-prison" pipeline concept that both black and white male experience. Black women have a lot of privileges compared to white males. A lot.

Black males also benefit from institutional racism such as affirmative action programs

What laws or programs benefit white men? There are countless that are designed to or directly benefit black men.

[+]ckershaw6 -8 points-7 points-6 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yikes.

[–]PIG_CUNT 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, there’s a fuck ton of evidence that embodying “black culture” causes a hard life. NOT being black.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is not true at all.

Post your sources.

[+]contexistential -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Let me introduce you to the white guy who thinks a career at Google is a key marker of oppression...

[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

So, can't rebut my point, so build a strawman you can?

[+]contexistential -7 points-6 points-5 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don’t have to say a thing to disprove your point, you discredited yourself when you unironically equated “oppression” with “google employee.” Your opinion is the very definition of white privilege.

[–]Meyright 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Where does he speak of "oppression"? You can't even quote right. Fuck off troll

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, so you admit you can't disprove it. Wonderful

[–]pobretano 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If, e.g., a black woman at Google said she is treated as less competent by her white male peers, would you say she is "filling the tub of black tears"?

[–]contexistential -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

91% of Google’s total population is white and Asian. Men make up 80% of tech roles. 2% of Google employees are black. 1 in every 100 tech roles is held by a black man or woman. I have no doubt that these employees are looked at as less competent by white male peers.

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

0 - Isn't "Asian" a "minority"?

1 - You clearly said "privilege" is present in "google employee". A black woman inside Google has even less privilege than a redneck outside it?

2 - So, 'because numbers', a "fucking white male" can be actively bullied, with zero rights to seek any type of compensation or mending whatsoever? Bully isn't oppression if you aren't a "protected" by social justice tenets?

[–]Lethn 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well at least you provided a quote there so I give you credit for that. If we're extremely generous towards your point of view, let's actually look at your evidence. I happen to have seen the exact post your talking about and there are two there, that's it.

The people who upvoted this are 20 counting the OP, maybe, if we're really generous to you 16 of the upvotes on the other post are all original so that's 36 people in total, this number is pathetic in comparison to rest of the sub. How exactly do these 36 people represent the sub? You are being cowardly and this is classic behaviour from somebody who is not concerned with the subs appearance but wants to use these sorts of posts as a way of controlling this movement.

Feminists and the left are going to use anything they can to smear MRAs, they always do, don't be so concerned with trying to keep up appearance when any intelligent person looking at these posts will understand with the way the sub is run there will be people who post shit like this.

This reminds me so much of people who come onto the Ancap sub whining about Neo-Nazis while completely ignoring the fact that anti-capitalists can freely post there too.

[–]plathd -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Feminists and the left are going to use anything they can to smear MRAs

You're sort of proving OP's point by attacking the "left" as if it's one single identity. This would be similar to characterizing the "right" as Neo-Nazis. The left-/right dichotomy is actually a really poor way of determining a person's political beliefs. Most people are all over the map.

[–]Lethn 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I hate to break it to you, but the fact is the left as it is currently is one identity, they attack anyone who is left wing that breaks from the fold or simply disagrees with them.

Let's look at the list shall we? Sargon of Akkad, Sam Harris, David Rubin, Brett Weinstein, Chrstina Hoff Sommers, Lindsay Sheperd. These are all people who considered themselves left wing and still do to a degree but the mainstream left has gone so far left that they now consider all of the people I mentioned as 'alt-right'.

[–]rainman206 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Seems like there has been a growing conservative element in this sub. It's unsurprising, considering the current political climate and the pseudo-political nature of the sub.

Thats not inherently bad; Mens Rights issues are felt on both sides of the spectrum and people might actually find common ground.

However, I've been taking far too much personal shit here for respectfully expressing dissenting opinions. I've been called a waste of air, a soyboy, and told to kill myself.

Like, what the fuck is that about? The slippage from TD, and the redpill to this sub is really shitty.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am sorry you feel this way

MRM is not supposed to be divided on the political nor racial spectrum

[–]rainman206 -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, reality falls WAY short of that expectation.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It would be pretty great if we did a project to put racial issues in the context of MRM on this subreddit so everyone can listen and acknowledge and understand that it's men being chased out by society and that different backgrounds experience different issues. Black MRAs might have a different context than white MRAs or Asian MRAs or whatever.
I'm from Denmark and our welfare state is literally designed to drain money from men into the pocket of women. That's regardless of race. Someone from another country that doesn't have a welfare state might experience different but also important issues.

I saw a video the other day about asian boys being mocked in the media for having a "small penis" and being "short" and I honestly never saw it from their perspective until recently. I've always found it funny, sadly.

A black dude is expected to fail and as such is getting help in various ways that a white dude isn't. On the other hand, a white dude benefits from high expectation too and get opportunities that black dudes don't. It's called "bigotry of high/low expectation" and are two sides of the discriminatory coin depending on the context.

It's so easy to only see it from our own context that we forget what other experience.

[–]plathd 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

There has definitely been a shift to the right, which I agree is unfortunate, but there are also people like myself who are anti-capitalist and completely reject feminist intersectionality and "privilege" theory.

[–]ckershaw6 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I have experienced the same!

[–]rainman206 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm a grown-ass man and can handle conflict and shit-talking.

The question is, what is it worth to me?

I care about boys, the future of men, the valuation of male vs female life, parental custody, the judicial system, ect... I'd hate to walk away from that because pussy starved basement dwellers want to trigger liberals.

I won't jump on the misogyny train, hopefully that doesn't force me out of this community.

[–]marauderp 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem is that you're a racist with a guilty conscience, and you're projecting it onto everyone else.

Don't feel too bad about it; a lot of people share your affliction.

[–]rainman206 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Really, bro? You're justifying online bullying by calling me a racist? That's straight up shameful, not to mention completely retarded.

[–]randomusername51sda -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I got used to it. You can't please everyone.

[–]RacelessSexlessName 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

yay I'm in a screenshot... but not the top circled one 😂 I stand by what I said in it tho? 😂

[–]ckershaw6 -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

My point exactly

[–]RacelessSexlessName 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I try not to make sweeping generalizations, sometimes it can't be helped. I think I was pretty specific about the people (those in the reply section of the tweet) I was pointing at. Twitter is abhorrent for sexism and racism against white men though, so I wouldn't exactly use that as a gold standard 😂

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