Genuine albeit probably the most controversial question on here.

lostcymbrogi · 2023-11-10T12:18:26+00:00

I would say yes, but also no. I hesitate to use terms such as "blue party." Instead we need to take a look at philosophy of liberalism, and how it was twisted by feminism.

Liberalism, as originally accepted, was an interesting mix of enlightenment ideas combined with what me described as a 'liberal' live and let live policy. You should be free to do whatever you want, as long as it wouldn't hurt others. Speech, under this philosophy could not harm unless you were directly calling for violence, similar to freedom of speech restrictions in the US constitution.

This concept necessarily demands that you must be tolerant of behaviors or speech that you might abhor. It also assumes a concept called freedom of association. This means you have the right to associate or do business with whom you please and the right to not associate with anyone you do not care for.

While freedom of association, similar to freedom of speech, was uses in questionable ways, such as refusing service to a native american or african american, it was a bedrock of liberal philosophy. If you can force some to associate with those they dislike in a private setting, long-term there is no end to what you can use force to do.

While a society should eliminate freedom of association for public settings, such as schools, universities, and hospitals, doing it for private settings that aren’t owned or subsidized by the state is at best questionable.

Feminists were able to take the public elimination of freedom of association and roll it into one eliminating private versions. This was done in the name of equality and by actively marketing men to the public as the 'enemy,' or their preferred term, patriarchy. They essentially either brought down or forced the acceptance of women in every private institution.

Part of their reasoning for doing this was a claim that all humans are not only inherently the same, but have a "right" to access the space as every other human. This somewhat specious claim, however, has had knock on effects.

If you can claim freedom of association needs to be effectively eliminated as "public good" then anything that actively interferes with the elimination of freedom of association can be viewed as causing harm.

While this initially went women's way at first, in the modern era it has led to what can best be described as chaos. At what point do you reconsider this elimination of freedom of association, the chess club, the gym, the restroom. If freedom of association is not allowed for any and, in fact, it is viewed as a public harm, there are no limits.

Combining this concoction with a post modernism that claims all definitions of any type are basically enforced by society and to be actively ignored, mocked, or even resisted, turns the whole thing into a devils brew.

The only thing unchanged at the end as that "patriarchy" is still the stated enemy. Essentially the one thing they can all agree on is that having male genitalia makes you "evil."

No_Discipline_7867 · 2023-11-10T07:21:38+00:00

I’m sure my answer will piss off some people, but my answer is “none”. One party caters to one crowd, the other party caters to another crowd, but both main parties only care about three things, which are votes, money and power.

JC2814 · 2023-11-10T22:01:13+00:00

Most controversial question?

You must be new here 😂

plainoldusernamehere · 2023-11-10T21:03:44+00:00

There’s plenty of republican feminists out there.

https://youtu.be/fmJF-yRVRAM?si=kKhRlkYYc_eaZTkk

When there’s laws on the books that incentivize feminist behavior it will be across the board.

WeEatBabies · 2023-11-11T03:06:56+00:00

I don't mind woke-ism, I usually vote left, feminism needs to be stopped, I will not vote at all next election, no party represents me or any of the middle wage earners!

Illustrious_Bus9486 · 2023-11-11T07:33:53+00:00

Whoever becomes the Libertarian Party candidate.

LateralThinker13 · 2023-11-10T16:55:52+00:00

I'd vote for Pinochet if he was running.

EpicHajsownik · 2023-11-10T08:02:02+00:00

The woke feminism is the least concerning one. The worst kind of feminism is the terf one. Liberal feminist at least tried to Focus on mens issues like not being able to cry but still had to make an agenda about how its because of patriarchy etc. And didnt really do much anyway

Terfs on the other hand Just hate men

ithinkmynameismoose · 2023-11-11T00:40:19+00:00

I’ll say it.

I’ll vote for Trump.

I’d rather vote for many of the other republicans, but they’re not going to beat him in the primary.

Biden is far too old and not just old, but it has caught up with him to the point where it is clearly impeding his ability to lead. He shouldn’t be in the office now.

Mycroft033 · 2023-11-10T07:41:54+00:00

Personally in this election I’ll probably be throwing my two pennies behind Vivek if he wins the nomination. If the gop nominee is someone else, I might be willing to vote for them but it’ll depend on who it is

elebrin · 2023-11-10T15:18:04+00:00

I either vote against incumbents or to balance the legislative body as much as possible.

If any action that might happen is something I might find undesirable, the best thing to do is make sure that taking action is very, very difficult for either side. I vote for locking up the system as much as I can.

ButWhatOfGlen · 2023-11-10T19:27:33+00:00

Best to leave politics out of this sub entirely. They're all liars and thieves.

masakothehumorless · 2023-11-10T16:20:05+00:00

Even though feminism is traditionally associated with the blue party, Dems are also the only ones open to any kind of change. It may be uncomfortable for some people to hear, but "traditional" values weren't actually any better for men than the current situation, unless you were all of the below: white, straight, neurotypical, and employed OR rich. Even though some of the changes espoused by the liberal party of America are detrimental to men and society as a whole, it's better than the Repubs gleefully feeding us to the corporations and frontlines. One side helps part of our members(the POC, LGBTQ+, etc) the other side helps only those rich enough to buy them. Not voting isn't a bold way to make your disapproval known, it's a fast track to being ignored completely.

SparkleCharm · 2023-11-10T07:26:14+00:00

Voting is useless.

1) My lone single vote won't change the outcome of the election.

2) There is not a single candidate which support my moral views anyway.

reddit_pleb42069 · 2023-11-10T06:31:32+00:00

Feminism and "woke" is what you get when a movement actually wins its cause.

Mobile_Lumpy · 2023-11-14T01:05:19+00:00

I vote for the person who can keep my gas price down. MRA is good and all, but it doesn't beat my bleeding heart paying 6 dollars a gallon price every time I go to the pump. Or the fact that everything is going up because gas prices are going up. Who ever can make gas price go back down to around 4 dollars a gallon will get my vote.

Title	Genuine albeit probably the most controversial question on here.
Author	Foreign_Law3727
Upvotes	12
Comments	35
Date	November 10, 2023 6:20 AM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/17rxwj9/genuine_albeit_probably_the_most_controversial/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/genuine-albeit-probably-the-most-controversial.1237980 https://theredarchive.com/post/1237980

Comments