Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.
It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.
I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.
Support the archive
[–]Ok_Significance_7038 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
We don’t need to bring left and right into this we all believe in men’s rights and that’s what matters the most so let’s focus on that
[–]Deadlocked02 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Except this is not about left or right. Being conservative, at least in the way OP speaks, is not the same as being right wing. The argument is more about tradcons who pretend to care about male issues, but evaluate men based on how useful they are to women, who say that it’s every man’s duty to provide and protect women, who seek to erase all kinds of masculinities other than their ideal one. Most men are completely worthless to these guys. They do not care about men’s mental health and freedom to express their masculinity however they see fit and their solutions will hardly improve things for men.
[–]WingsofSky 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Maybe you should understand. That some women "hate" everything about men and reproduction.
Every last bit. They'd rather destroy the whole human race, than let one "man" live.
They live and love sexist hate towards the whole male sex.
[–]RockmanXX 18 points19 points20 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Humanity is a GynoCentric Species, Conservatives are more upfront&honest about their less than glamorous GynoCentric imperatives. They outright spell it out that Men are nothing to them if they're not "Real Men"(AKA useful). Progressives/Feminists lie to men that they value their lives equally but in reality, they also believe that men are less important than Women and also have a GynoCentric Imperative, albeit disguised under the pretense of "Gender Equality".
At the end of the day, i'd much rather have a Conservative or a radical Feminist openly say that they despise "Low Value/Weak" Men and thus have no intentions of helping suicidal or homeless men. I prefer brutal honesty over pleasant lies.
[–]WeaknessTechnical654[S] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah there are too many MRAs in this sub who pretend to care about men but just want men to be "manly" and women to by "ladylike". Kind of stupid. This is about fighting for equality and making sure men aren't judged for their gender.
[–]PoggersWizard -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
True true
[–]storming_bridgeboy 11 points12 points13 points (16 children) | Copy Link
I don’t see the value in posting an obviously biased post from /r/LEFTWINGmaleadvocates in order to try to bring political discussion into a politically neutral subreddit regarding men’s rights. The only purpose I can think of is that you are seeking validation from like-minded lefties - in which case I suggest remaining in the lefty subreddit.
The post makes the observation that this subreddit seems to have a right-leaning demographic and then seeks to inform this demographic of the errors of their ways, because obviously if they haven’t seen the “objective truth” that conservatism can also be anti-men’s rights than they just must not know. Yet have you ever stopped to consider that the simplest answer for why this subreddit appears primarily right-leaning might be because the left has the largest overlap with anti-male ideologies?
[–]WeaknessTechnical654[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points (15 children) | Copy Link
Yes. I know that. What I am trying to say is that many MRAs become righties because feminists are "lefties". In reality, real leftists just want social progress. Feminists are a version of a false leftist.
[–]THEMADMAN1942 9 points10 points11 points (12 children) | Copy Link
From what I’ve seen leftist don’t want social progress. They have a you’re with us or against us mentally. As where I feel conservative will fight for my rights even if they hate me.
Note: I’m for neither side. Each side has ups and downs. This is just a observation I’ve made.
[–]Bluebird_North -5 points-4 points-3 points (11 children) | Copy Link
You must not be gay or trans. Or atheist.
[–]storming_bridgeboy 8 points9 points10 points (9 children) | Copy Link
Trump was the first president that was elected with a pro-gay marriage stance.
What trans rights are being infringed?
What atheist rights are being infringed? I am an atheist conservative.
This idea that conservative want to take peoples rights is a false one perpetuated to you for very specific reasons that I urge you to consider.
[–]Bluebird_North -1 points0 points1 point (8 children) | Copy Link
I was really referring to the GOP working to unwind gay marriage and stepping in on trans rights. Also referring to the heavy religious slant of the GOP. Not attacking any person, but GOP policy based on legislation being pushed out.
[–]storming_bridgeboy 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
Obergefell v. Hodges solidified gay marriage in the eyes of the law. It isn’t going anywhere. Especially since Trump appointed more constitutionalists as Supreme Court justices.
You also gave no examples of trans rights or atheist rights being infringed. Currently you are just making up falsehoods.
And fuck the GOP, for real. Just spineless RINOs at this point.
[–]Bluebird_North -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
We agree. GOP is fighting a “culture war.” I just don’t think father’s rights needs to mixed up with that crap.
[–]storming_bridgeboy 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
We agree in regards to the GOP. But you have given no examples of trans or atheist rights at risk or being currently infringed yet you have made the claim more than once.
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]storming_bridgeboy1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
Ok so you have no examples of atheist rights being infringed.
Preventing cheating in sports is not an infringement of rights.
[–]THEMADMAN1942 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Actually I’m atheist. Funny how you idiots are quick to judge without not knowing shit about anyone.
[–]storming_bridgeboy 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I don’t think MRAs become righties. Righties become MRAs.
This is a No True Scotsman.
[–]WeaknessTechnical654[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, good point. Should have worded it different.
[–]FerdinandvonAegir124 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I’m a liberal who’s for men’s rights
[–]Bara-enthusiast 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Tradcons are still gynocentric. We need a radically new outlook on life.
[–]ThrowawayGhostGuy1 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Beware of tradcucks.
[–]MuchBigNice 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Nobody loves to convict males with the hardest sentences possible while never seeing women as anything but innocent victims more than conservatives.
[–]WeaknessTechnical654[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Indeed.
[–]Test-writer 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Women like strong, masculine men, and men like feminine women, on average.
If you don't want relationships with the opposite gender, then don't worry about those things.
But don't complain if you're a feminine man and can't find a woman to date you.
Men and women are different, and the idea that society can treat women exactly the same as men is untenable. That being said, legal and resource support equality (i.e. prostate cancer research) is desirable.
[–]WeaknessTechnical654[S] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
The key word is on average. Men and women can have any dating preference they want. I really don't care about that. A man can like feminine women and a woman can like masculine men. If men and women were inherently that way, they wouldn't have to be told to conform to a gender role. I am sure that men are more "masculine" and women are more "feminine" on AVERAGE. Why should we force people to act a certain way because of their gender. If a woman wants to be feminine, let her be feminine, I couldn't care less. Same goes for masculine men. Obviously, a person's personality is influenced by their gender in certain ways but there is a lot more to people than just feminine and masculine. My worldview isn't that men and women are exactly the same or that masculinity and femininity aren't real. I think people should just act how they are naturally, regardless of their gender.
[–]Test-writer 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Not for men however?
Studies show little impact on the capacity to pair-bond in men, however I think sleeping around in general tends to give you a warped view of relationships. Plus, it's kinda gross.
I think people should just act how they are naturally, regardless of their gender.
To a degree, but there's something called 'social binary theory': Pluralism exists as a transitory phase between various super-doctrines. Appeals to pluralism are merely a means to an end - to weaken the dominant super-doctrine and eventually replace it with a new super-doctrine. Even if people do believe in the pluralist ethos, it is inevitable that a super-doctrine rises out of a pluralist transitory phase.
Essentially, societies inevitably produce models for behavior for people in society. I.E. there is always a 'norm' a standard that behavior is judged against, which are labeled 'super-doctrines'. Claims for pluralism only mask a transitionary period between one super-doctrine and the next.
You see this in how all the social super-doctrines have inverted over the last few decades. First, being straight with a family and kids was the best thing to be - then, you have the 'we just want gay tolerance' movement. That movement became 'you need to be accepting of the gay lifestyle', and finally we've arrived at the new super-doctrine: being gay is better than being straight.
For men, it went like this: the original super-doctrine was 'man up' - you need to be masculine, stoic, self-sufficient, and a protector. Then, it became 'it's ok for men to cry'. Finally, you arrive at: being stoic, self-sufficient and traditionally masculine is evil and harmful. You have to be a weak, effeminate emotionally-unstable man or else you're bad.
I really don't see how one can get away from super-doctrines - the key is to pick and create the right ones.
For example, the super-doctrine of 'white is better than black' became 'people who don't see color are better than people who do see color' (though that's changing now unfortunately).
The second of the two super-doctrines is not only less harmful, it's actively the best super-doctrine on that particular subject.
Now, undoubtedly the 'traditional masculine' super-doctrine had its flaws, but it's so much better as an aspirational ideal than the current super-doctrine for men.
Ideally, one could tweak and refine the 'traditionally masculine' super-doctrine into something more modern, that doesn't try and suppress and destroy men's masculine behavior like the current super-doctrine does.
[+]EcstaticConstant22 points [recovered] (11 children) | Copy Link
Conservatives are the ones who push the notion that men can’t show emotions, that men getting abused by women isn’t a big deal because they are stronger, etc,. I wish this sub would see that.
[–]ModsAreThoughtCops 15 points16 points17 points (9 children) | Copy Link
Conservatives aren’t the ones rolling back protections for accused males on college campuses.
Feminists are the ones saying men abused by women isn’t a big deal.
Feminists are the ones saying men should show their emotions, but then laugh us down and degrade us for “fragile masculinity”.
We can go back and forth all day if you want, but from a culture perspective, modern feminism and their influence on media is what is harming men’s self esteem. Feminism is a left-wing ideology, point blank.
From a legal perspective, well let’s just look at the legal protections the current left-wing administration is ripping away from men for no other reason than pleasing the feminist lobby.
Feminism and left-wing progressive parties have an incestuous relationship that just doesn’t exist between feminism and right-wing parties, at least in America, but I would bet you an apple that it holds true in other western countries as well.
[–]PoggersWizard 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly. We can go with the stereotype that conservatives push harmful tropes onto men, but we can see clear evidence of left wing harm to men’s actual rights. Trudeau has on multiple occasions favoured women for jobs instead of men, solely based on their gender. Gender discrimination laws are no where to be seen. Whose pushing “believe all women”? Not conservatives. No matter how much conservatives call any non super manly man a pussy (if they even do that often), it doesn’t match nearly as much in terms of harm that liberals push.
[+]EcstaticConstant2-3 points [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link
I haven’t seen this much. Can you give me some examples?
I completely agree that the left does not do a good job advocating for men, but I’m saying many conservatives push toxic notions that end up negatively impacting men.
[–]SamaelET 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Feminists push the same exact "toxic notions" but they have far more power and impact.
Feminists stopping male victims of female rapists from being recognized in India, Israel and USA.
Feminists try their best in academia to deny gender symmetry in partner violence by forcing their antiscience theories
Feminists are more likely to sacrifice men and show more implicit in-group bias (more likely to always side with women and against men):
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29781373/
Feminists protest against a talk on male suicide.
Domestic Abuse "minister" in UK abused her husband , where is the outcry from feminists ? Nowhere, they work with her to exclude male victims from the law.
Jess Philips, a big feminist MP in UK, laugh at male suicide.
Bunch of feminists saying "Kill all men" is ok:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/lkalii/how_do_you_deal_with_killallmen_people/
Feminists cancel International Men's Day event (again suicide) at University of York.
Feminists shut down male voices in Toronto University.
Feminists steal money from male victims to protect female perpetrators.
Feminists protect female sexual harassers.
[–]EvilSapphire 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I remember reading an article that spells out in much clearer terms feminist groups in India protesting against amendments that tried to give recognition to male rape victim. I remember how surprised I was and it was one of my first eye openers. Can't find it anymore on the net.
[–]Bluebird_North 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I’d say judges in family court that rule against men are more conservative. No?
[–]storming_bridgeboy 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Probably true but not sure we can prove that. Regardless, no one is claiming “all conservatives are pro-men’s rights” - that was a straw man put forward by OP. We are pointing out that while it is shades of gray on both sides, the left certainly has the largest overlap with ideologies that are anti-men.
[–]Bluebird_North 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
As a liberal - I find my experience has altered more “feminist” friends because I’m liberal and they see the injustice. Father’s Rights is an easy sell one-on-one with liberals.
To be honest: Father’s Rights is an easy sell. The Men’s Rights Movement should be picking this low hanging fruit and hold the other issues in reserve once the window has shifted.
[–]fishnpaddleman 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Telling men to sack up a bit is often appropriate advice. Capitulating to the leftist attempt to eradicate gender norms is not going to help men.
[–]mrmensplights 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This is the spotlight fallacy which I see over and over again with this subreddit.
This subreddit allows many different voices and opinions and people who are very sensitive to a specific type of opinion or argument tend to blow it out of all proportion. I've seen feminists do this here, right wing people do that here, liberals do that here, and as is evident left wingers. It's a peculiar property of open free speech... we tend to select from the noise the opinions that confirm our own biases or the opinions that defy them.
When someone becomes politically activated they become very sensitive to the opinions and arguments of their enemy tribe. I think it's fair to say the original poster is politically tribal as they posted in a left wing men's rights subreddit criticizing this subreddit for right leaning sentiment. This sensitivity creates a bias when interpreting the noise of a variety of different opinions in any given sub. This bias is magnified further by the fact that this is reddit which is left leaning generally and also that left wing spaces online are more likely to ban right leaning voices so they don't have a lot of exposure to those ideas outside of caricature.
Men's advocacy has no political party. There may be good ideas for addressing men's issues in society and helping men cope with them from both sides. If I were to guess I'd say most MRA's are center-left in that they believe in advocating and lobbying government in order to fix public and social institutions so that they better work for men. For example: Someone from the left may say "We need advocacy and lobbying so that public schools can stop failing boys" while someone from the right may say "We need to increase opportunities for private schools and increase school choice so parents can choose the best school for their male child." Both may be viable solutions.
[–]billsull_02842 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
conservative women crave money and prefer not to do their exchange walking down the street but would rather walk down the aisle for big money.
[–]Paradoxes_Suck 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
the conservicucks who just want to reestablish gender roles r just as annoying as the libs