~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Wietkrws
[–]robjob1990 62 points63 points64 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I would argue that far more men face domestic violence. We just accept it though and never report it. How many here have at least been: slapped, punched or kicked by a girlfriend? I bet far more than have slapped punched or kicked a girlfriend. There’s a reason that the number one group for domestic violence are lesbian couples.
[–]dontforgetthispw9 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Interesting. When I first saw OP I was greatly skeptical. I am still skeptical because I still wonder where she gets those statistics (it seems statistics would only exist for what's been reported).
I didn't however consider the scenarios that you mentioned, which have made me far less skeptical. I have never hit a girl, but I have been hit several times by them. I also wasn't aware of the very compelling issue of lesbian domestic violence. I think one of the problems is that some women are beat BAD by their male spouses. It's just part and parcel to the whole superior strength men have thing. These few douchebags who beat the shit out of their wives/girlfriends kinda ruin it for men in the public eye.
[–]dontpet 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The big divide the happens in the data is when you do population studies vs when you rely on more biased data such as police and hospital reports.
Another area of data manipulation is that services are provided for victims of family violence but people focus intimate partner violence. This sub is much less aware of this issue, letting others define the debate.
[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
These few douchebags who beat the shit out of their wives/girlfriends kinda ruin it for men in the public eye.
I think "public eye" is key. Women are told not to tolerate abuse from men, which is of course fine.
The issue is that I was never taught to stand up for myself as a man. Instead, I was programmed to avoid being a threat to women at all costs, including my own safety. As a result, I was with a girl for years who hit me, threw things at me, and nearly shoved me through a second-story window. I had to have my therapist call it abuse ten years after the fact, because to me it was "just" a woman hitting a man.
Apparently, abuse against men is a distant second priority for our society. Look at the unnecessarily gendered campaign from the NFL a few years ago (https://youtu.be/cfto6ZXgt70) to end domestic violence against women. People may say, "doesn't that make sense, since the audience is majority male"? Sure, it makes sense, if you assume your audience is comprised only of abusers, and not of victims.
My point being, the public messaging is so myopically gendered that boys and girls are raised to have completely different concepts of self-worth. We are trained to consider only the case where the muscle-clad man gives his wife a black eye, but there are cases of stabbings/beatings at the hands of women. Male abusers shouldn't ruin it for men any more than female abusers "ruin it" for women.
None of this is a disagreement with you, by the way. I'm just expounding on a point you made that was very personal to me.
[–]Mens-Advocate 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I still wonder where she gets those statistics (it seems statistics would only exist for what's been reported).
Check out the Fiebert meta-study: https://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
[–]Cocu11 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
2/3 of my significant others have repeatedly hit me and I never thought anything of it.
[–]Eastuss 147 points148 points149 points 7 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link
Patriarchy: A handful of sociopath takes advantage of everyone.
[–]M46Initiative 35 points36 points37 points 7 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link
The true nature of the Patriarchy is compassionate protector, provider, and strength. Don't twist it.
[–]Eastuss 23 points24 points25 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
My comment is a satyr. A true patriarchy is what you described. But by feminist standards we still live in a patriarchy because a handful of sociopaths take advantage of everyone, men and women.
[–]vettaleda 19 points20 points21 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Satire*
[–]Houdiniman111 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I was wondering what a fictional half-goat had to do with this.
[–]M46Initiative 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yes, my statement about twisting it was in support of your satyr.
[–]wreninbrattleboro 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What do little goat men have to do with any of this?
[–]Eastuss 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
oh ok sry
[–]limtittle 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Your comment
[–]Eastuss 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My comment is badass isn't it.
[–]thebodymullet -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
camera pans around the room
[–]idolatryforbeginners 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
A true patriarchy with these qualities seems about as likely as true communism benefiting the whole of society...
Or let me rephrase it. When have we ever seen this utopia or anything near it. Russia under putin? Saudi Arabia under the Royals? The usa, um ever?
Please explain how, supposition a, men dont have shelters for sexual assault (which is bullshit) means that conclusion b. women are therefore fine (despite sustaining the majority of abuse (her words)), makes sense. this compounded further by the statement men are benign protectors. Like how is this a logical progression.
I'm all for more mens shelters and mental health support, dont get me wrong, but the rest of the jumps are illogical.
[–]Mild111 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Nobody made "conclusion B." Except for you. Nobody has said "women are fine" and most who advocate for male victims want more resources across the board, with a focus on remedying the lack of ANY resource structure for men in most areas.
The statement about men being benign protectors is a true statement about the majority of men.
It's a simple question of ratios. It takes one bad apple to "spoil" the bunch. What you see is 2-3 powerful male monsters per thousands of moral men and your conclusion is that it's their gender and not their power that is the root of their evil. Or even worse, assume that their gender is the root of their power...which dehumanizes the powerless among them. That is the mentality that has led to this crisis of male abuse victims not having an outlet.
[–]idolatryforbeginners -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
conclusion b. is the lady holding the sign. "we dont need feminism". I paraphrased "we don't need feminism" to say women are fine; I think its a fair interpretation.
If it is power which incites this violence, then you are in agreement we live in a patriarchy. That is the definition. Men have power, and this power corrupts. And if we accept the dominant power group is likely to abuse that power more, How then can you turn around and say patriarchy is benignly good. men may be largely good as you say (and I agree), but the comment said patriarchy is largely good. If you have 1 to 2 bad apples as you say, multiplied by a few million. you have a lot of really hurt people.
The crisis of male abuse victims is in my estimation linked to patriarchy. Men (and women) have promoted the image of the alpha male, the superman, the club welding caveman, and soldierly protector of society. This institutionalized "toughness", so inherently linked to identity, leaves little room for, and little acceptance of, weakness or vulternability.
[–]Mild111 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Bullshit. Not all help of women is "feminism" based. Not all power a man can wield, is gender-based either.
You don't need "feminism" to help abuse victims of either gender, and you don't need "patriarchy" to have negative power in a man. Your definitions suck, and you should rethink your life.
[–]Burntskullcandy 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Women having problems doesn't mean men don't? Assuming this is correct women get abused more they should more support, but even a weighted 80/20 is better than the nearly 100/0.
[+]idolatryforbeginners -6 points-5 points-4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I never said men dont have problems. I fully believe men have problems that seriously need to be addressed. Drug overdoses, emotional support, lonelyness, abuse etc.. etc.. These issues have nothing to do with the post or the comment I replied to, which, want to extent somehow this notion of men needing help to feminisim and by extension, somehow, the merits of patriarchy.
Yes. Men need help, No that has nothing to do with feminism. Men rule the country last time I checked.
[–]D45_B053 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If we truly ruled the country, wouldn't we have as many things set up to benefit men as possible? It would be men's homeless shelters, men's abuse helpline, men's only health clinics, I could go on and on and on, but those things don't exist. This means that we can draw one of two conclusions men aren't really in complete and total control, or no one gives a crap about men and is actively ignoring their issues.
[–]spencer32320 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Their is a huuuuge difference between "Men hold the power" and "The people who hold power are men." The first implies that all men have power in our society, this is not the case. However most of the people who do hold power are men. But they don't give a shit about our problems. Their more interested in how to keep and expand their power.
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok, I got you now, your writings a bit messy though like this.
which, want to extent somehow this notion of needing help to (subject)
Isn't grammatically constant
Please explain how, supposition a, men dont have (x) means that conclusion b. women are therefore fine, makes sense.
Is why I was confused by what you were saying.
[–]M46Initiative 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I see your argument, but put simply men must live up to a higher standard that has been left by the wayside. A higher standard only other men and fathers can impart. The bad father/no father epidemic is a major reason behind the wounds men have deep within them. It's a wound that surfaces in mental health and identity. Too many generations have been let down. There is hope, a remnant remains. http://m46initiative.com
[–]Dancing_Anatolia 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What are you talking about "The USA ever". This place gets better every year, and you just have to look at the past to see it. Just because we aren't perfect doesn't mean we aren't among the most free, highest quality of life places on the entire planet. We never had to have some foreign power pressure us into doing the right thing, we just eventually get fed up with human rights abuses.
[–]AdHomimeme 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fun experiment: Check the marital status of all those sociopaths. The wives of the world's most powerful men enjoy all the same privileges of wealth, and power, but bear none of the responsibility.
[–]TheOldGuy54 54 points55 points56 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Great Book
American society has become anti-male. Men are sensing the backlash and are consciously and unconsciously going “on strike.” They are dropping out of college, leaving the workforce and avoiding marriage and fatherhood at alarming rates. The trend is so pronounced that a number of books have been written about this “man-child” phenomenon, concluding that men have taken a vacation from responsibility simply because they can. But why should men participate in a system that seems to be increasingly stacked against them?
As Men on Strike demonstrates, men aren’t dropping out because they are stuck in arrested development. They are instead acting rationally in response to the lack of incentives society offers them to be responsible fathers, husbands and providers. In addition, men are going on strike, either consciously or unconsciously, because they do not want to be injured by the myriad of laws, attitudes and hostility against them for the crime of happening to be male in the twenty-first century. Men are starting to fight back against the backlash. Men on Strike explains their battle cry.
https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood-ebook/dp/B00OFK22Y8
The dropout of the American father began much earlier, post WWII...
The evil of wars these generations fought opened the hearts of men to a darkness they could not shake. This darkness emotionally disconnected a whole generation of children from their fathers. The darkness consumed them, these fathers who worked too much, drank too much and womanized too much all in an attempt to appease the darkness. The void they left in their children resulted in a generation without a moral and character-based identity. They rejected the institutions their fathers came from and began to establish their own ideas of identity and institution. That gave us the counterculture, free love, and godlessness of the 60's, 70's, and 80's. By then the tide had turned and thus the character and honor starved culture we live in is a direct result of men who didn't know how to deal with their pain. The ironic thing is the solution was as simple as allowing themselves to be vulnerable enough to release the pain and the hold the darkness had upon them in the first place.
[–]mensmod 58 points59 points60 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
It might be more effective if it said:
"I don't want feminism because over 40% of domestic abuse victims are men, and feminism advocates that there should be 0 shelters available due to patriarchy."
[–]FissureKing 33 points34 points35 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
I think that number is low. In one study I've read women in non-reciprocally viloent relationships self-identified as the sole abuser 67% of the time. Men identified the woman as the sole abuser 74% of the time.
The researchers pot it at about 70%.
[–]pieonthedonkey 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Iirc that's only in non-reciprocal abusive relationships. As far as the total number of victims go it's approximately a 40/60 split of men/women.
[–]AiroDewitt 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let's run those numbers again WITHOUT the Duluth model and see what we get.
[–]Jim_E_Hat 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I have a client who is a mental health professional. She told me it's about 50/50 in her experience.
[–]Mens-Advocate 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Straus has been diligently proving symmetry for 30 years: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233717660_Thirty_Years_of_Denying_the_Evidence_on_Gender_Symmetry_in_Partner_Violence_Implications_for_Prevention_and_Treatment
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1077801206293335
[–]mensmod 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
That's some pretty bad math you got there...
But I was referring to the claim by the OP, not saying that I know what the actual numbers are.
[–]FissureKing 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Bad math?
The study.
"Among relationships with nonreciprocal violence, women were reported to be the perpetrator in a majority of cases (70.7%), as reported by both women (67.7%) and men (74.9%)."
[–]mensmod 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I am aware of the study. 24% of relationships had violence. 49.7% had reciprocal violence.
So we have N relationships with violence. 0.497N women and 0.497N men experienced violence from a reciprocal violent relationship. There are thus a total of N men and N women who are involved in DV, so 2N total people surveyed in this study.
Of the remainder, 70.7% perpetrators were women. Thus, 0.7070.503N men experienced violence in a one-sided fashion, and 0.2930.503N women experienced violence in a one-sided fashion.
Total men experiencing violence: (0.7070.503 + 0.497)N
Total women experiencing violence: (0.2930.503 + 0.497)N
Total number of victims: (0.7070.503 + 0.497 + 0.2930.503 + 0.497)*N
Fraction that are men: (0.7070.503 + 0.497)/(0.7070.503 + 0.497 + 0.293*0.503 + 0.497) = 57.0%
Fraction that are women: (0.2930.503 + 0.497)/(0.7070.503 + 0.497 + 0.293*0.503 + 0.497) = 43.0%
OF NOTE: This is actually about victimization rates, not actually people. Most people get into multiple violent relationships. So it is possible that women are more often victims, even with this study, if more men are multiple-offenders.
[–]FissureKing 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Wouldn't the women be multiple offenders as well? And possibly more often?
[–]mensmod 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There is no way to know or assume.
[–]modemthug 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I actually want to give my local community credit. I dated a girl who started becoming abusive, and after several incidents broke up with her and contacted local authorities. Victim's advocate took me very seriously, told me that 48% of domestic violence cases reported were perpetrated against men, and told me that the shelter in my community accepts both genders and all sexual orientations. So there's something good.
[–]perwiepie 40 points41 points42 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I have the same oppinion and same poster
[–]SadrageII 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There aren't zero though, more like 2 iirc?
[–]pieonthedonkey 22 points23 points24 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
There were 2 in America, one has since shut down due to lack of funding, we're back to one, I believe it's in Arkansas.
[–]StardustOasis 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The UK has about that many too.
[–]goodmod[M] 20 points21 points22 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Although this is a good post, its title does not say enough about its subject. This forces people to click and read before they can decide whether they are interested. It also makes searching impossible.
If everyone did this, the subreddit would become unusable.
So please don't do it in future. Take the time to describe your link, and save the time of hundreds of other people.
When making a title, it's best to assume the reader doesn't know what you're talking about - but don't go overboard with every detail. Then check if there are any words you can cut out without losing any important information.
[–]D45_B053 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So THAT'S why most of the titles in here belong in r/titlegore.
[–]bearintokyo 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
“Men need feminism because it is trying to dismantle the gender systematics which also pressure men to not seek help when they are victims of abuse because they should be a big strong man who doesn’t need help.”
[–]bluefootedpig 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Wouldn't patriarchy say that men don't need shelters? The whole idea that men are powerful and don't need help is part of patriarchy. Patriarchy isn't just, "men get everything.", it is a set of conditions, like Men are held more responsible for their actions, that is patriarchy.
So 0 shelters is a patriarchy thing, and I guess if you want shelters, you need to stop the patriarchy.
https://nypost.com/2017/10/29/these-shelters-help-male-victims-of-domestic-violence/
Like here, it is showing that there are shelters for men, but the problem is getting men to be willing to come forward. I don't see how feminism is the reason men don't come forward and use the shelters.
[–]Mild111 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
First off, that's not how I read that article AT ALL.
Secondly a quote right from your article might shed some light on your query
"Hines said some men don’t even realize they’re being abused until they read pamphlets — mostly geared toward women"
The problem isn't getting men to come forward. The problem is showing men that by coming forward, they will be treated like an abuse survivor and not an abuser. Which isn't the case in MANY areas. And you can thank the feminist Duluth power and control model for that. NOT "Patriarchy"
The "Men don't need help" mindset isn't a patriarchal construct. It's a fundamental principal of Feminism/Identitarians. "Male Privilege" wasn't a term coined by the patriarchy. It's not masculine men going around in "I bathe in male tears" shirts.
Blaming survivors for the lack of survivors resources is kinda shitty, so maybe fuck right off with your narrative.
[–]isperfectlycromulent 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So if we're 'getting everything' then what are we supposed to be getting instead of a shelter? That's what I don't get, like, does this mean that being beaten and kicked out into the cold after a false arrest and jailing doesn't affect our emotions or something?
[–]D45_B053 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
does this mean that being beaten and kicked out into the cold after a false arrest and jailing doesn't affect our emotions or something?
Nope, cuz we don't have emotions, remember? /s (just in case)
[–]Keenin455 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If the solution to lack of DV Shelters for Men is to eradicate The Patriarchy then how do you explain feminist researchers citing Patriarchy as the root of men's domestic violence towards women and that they should be arrested as the primary agressor in all cases (Duluth Model) and erasing Male rape victims of female perpetrators from research because they believe it's not appropriate what happened to them "Rape" (Mary. K Ross).
Did Patriarchy manipulate those feminists?
[–]DiamondxCrafting 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sure mate.
[–]Ugotlost 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wow your stupidity knows no bounds.
[–]kevon87 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Actually, I believe there are 2. But still.
[–]DEVOmay97 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There were 2 here in the US, one of them shut down due to lack of funding.
[–]MonkeyC3PO 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
40%?! Really? So for 3 women abused, there are 2 men abused?
[–]prodiver 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Around that, yes.
1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men have been victims of [some form of] physical violence by an intimate partner within their lifetime. 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have been victims of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. 1 in 7 women and 1 in 18 men have been stalked by an intimate partner during their lifetime to the point in which they felt very fearful or believed that they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed.
1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men have been victims of [some form of] physical violence by an intimate partner within their lifetime.
1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have been victims of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime.
1 in 7 women and 1 in 18 men have been stalked by an intimate partner during their lifetime to the point in which they felt very fearful or believed that they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf
[–]MonkeyC3PO 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Would never have thought it that high.
[–]Mens-Advocate 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I'd be wary of CDC studies and figures; they've produced a 1-in-5 study and are very politically correct.
[–]fxhud 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Marry and Merry me please
[–]Agent_25 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I NEED TO MARRY HER!
[–]hillaryobama69 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It also says a Satyr is a man with a strong sexual desire.
[+]MushroomMGTOW -6 points-5 points-4 points 7 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
Chameleon
[–]guyau 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link
People like you are destroying the men's rights movement (this isn't the time I've seen you comment shit like this). By throwing out such remarks that socially and culturally discredit the movement, you're proving you're ready to chuck the movement under the bus (and therefore all the men that it can help) just so you can vent your petty incel type misogyny. Youre not helping men, youre working against us. Youre alienating normal men from the movement. You're contributing to MRA s losing the public relations battle, to it's failure to get established in the social discussion on gender issues. Thanks asshole.
[–]isperfectlycromulent 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Comments like yours are why I sub here. There's a lot of angry losers who don't help men get fair representation, and calling them out is how we stop their behaviour.
[–]guyau 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Good to see I'm not alone. There's a lot of sensible guys on here, but I sometimes feel the red pill incel types often dominate threads. They definitely need to be called out. It's crazy how these guys don't see that they're exactly like the mentally unstable radical feminists they hate.
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There are more that 2 of us!
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
red pill incel
I'm not a fan of TRP, but this is just ignorant ass shit. Are there such people? Perhaps, but those would be the incels that reject the incels subreddit. Those two ideologies aren't really a fan of each other.
[–]guyau 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm not going to debate the intricate differences between incels, red pill guys etc. I will say this though: every time I come across those communities, there's an unmistakable atmosphere of resentment, weakness, jealousy, self hatred, low vitality and pettiness. The sort of guys drawn to those communities are usually weak, ineffectual and consumed with a barely disguised self loathing, and they're all out to find somebody responsible for it. Coming into contact with these guys creeps me out.
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Wow, fuck that shit, didn't realize what they meant by, "chameleon" that some All women awlt???? or whanot shit their.
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
Another radical MGTOW person. Ugh. No, AWA NOT LT!
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm not a MGTOW person if that's what you mean.
Nonono, the person who said "chameleon"
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Eveeeeentually you'll have to come to terms with the fact that they tend to be /r/mensrights allies, even if they tend away from activism as a solution, and even if you don't really want to associate with them (you know, subreddit FAQ stuff). Even if you believe some of their ideas are bullshit and want to argue with them, this reaction probably isn't very appropriate -- especially for an evangelist like you.
Sort of like how I wouldn't go "oh, a profeminist, ugh".
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Radical anything is bad.
Radical profeminists - bad. Radical antifeminists - bad.
Radical Capitalist - bad. Radical Communist - bad.
Radical Christian - bad. Radical athiest - bad.
You see where I am going with this?
I am alright with normal MGTOW people, even if they are a little preachy.
It is the radical (AWALT, misogynist, etc) MGTOWs that I hate.
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The radical definitely wasn't there when I made the comment. I suppose I get you now.
[–]reereeeees -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Important detail. True
[–]isperfectlycromulent -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
fuck off, some of us who're smart enough to get laid don't need your toxic attitude.
[–]reereeeees 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
What are you even talking about? You are the only toxic one here. Jesus.
[–]BigLebowskiBot 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You said it, man.
[–]isperfectlycromulent 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
fuck off back to mgtow with your incel bullshit.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]DiamondxCrafting 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
One of the most ignorant things a person can do is refuse to listen to someone because they hold a different opinion in another topic.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
He merely stated his opinion, then you went on rambling about how it's bullshit and such; you disagree? that's fine, then why make that completely useless comment? you'd like to discuss his view with him? even better, but you didn't either.
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I get it now, you clearly don't know of having a civil discussion. Have a good day.
[–]JungleMuffin -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I'm assuming that the comment is a reference to the person in the picture, and that they appear to be a ladyboy? If so, I'd probably agree.
What's the problem angry guy?
[–][deleted] 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WiseMonkeyGoodMonkey 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let be fair. I think the whole MGTOW thing is short sighted and ultimately self defeating (avoiding the issue rather than dealing with it). But there's not a lot more cancerous than an incel.
The real issue is (imo) that when reddit killed the incel sub they spread out like gophers from a new construction site. They still had to go somewhere. Now they're just fucking up everyone else's lawn.
[–]vegan8r -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And she’s an Attack on titan fan! I like the cut of her jib
[+]Drezzzire -6 points-5 points-4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sexy and standing up for men’s rights. My kinda girl
[–]HeNeverLies4 -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
So a majority of domestic violence abuse victims are women?
[–]AiroDewitt 16 points17 points18 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
How does a majority have anything to do with the fact that there are literally THOUSANDS of shelters for that majority and our minority, which IS over 40% (~70% if you go into non-reciprocal DV) yet has ZERO shelters?
[–]unicornshoes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Lol it’s definitely not zero. Most DV shelters are either gender neutral or will at least put male DV victims in hotels etc if needed.
I work in the field of DV. We serve anyone, no matter their gender.
[–]AiroDewitt -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Should I have said male-specific shelters? Since there are literally thousands of female-specific shelters. Would that have made it better?
[–]unicornshoes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Are we talking about homeless shelters? Or domestic violence shelters?
Because in general there are a lot more male-only homeless shelters than female shelters. (As I’m sure you know...men are more likely to be homeless)
And I like said, domestic violence programs that take in federal/state money have to offer services (including shelter) to both men and women victims.
So in reality, the services are available. The barrier that needs to be broken is the illusion that there is no help for men experiencing domestic violence. Because we exist, we want to help.
[–]AiroDewitt -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm not talking homeless, though as you sort of pointed out men make up 75%+ of the homeless population. While there are gender neutral DV shelters there are no male-specific dv shelters in the US. This goes back to the UK where Erin Pezzey was kicked out of the feminist movement for advocating for male-specific dv shelters as well. Yes, I'm glad there are gender neutral. This is a good thing. There also need to be gender specific shelters for men.
[–]pic_N_mix -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not true. There are two(?) I believe in the nation. One in Dallas and one in New York.
At work on lunch, or else I’d back it up. Maybe later.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]robjob1990 62 points63 points64 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]dontforgetthispw9 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]dontpet 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mens-Advocate 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cocu11 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Eastuss 147 points148 points149 points (22 children) | Copy Link
[–]M46Initiative 35 points36 points37 points (20 children) | Copy Link
[–]Eastuss 23 points24 points25 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]vettaleda 19 points20 points21 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Houdiniman111 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]M46Initiative 11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]wreninbrattleboro 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Eastuss 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]limtittle 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Eastuss 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thebodymullet -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]idolatryforbeginners 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mild111 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]idolatryforbeginners -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mild111 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Burntskullcandy 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]idolatryforbeginners -6 points-5 points-4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]D45_B053 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]spencer32320 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]M46Initiative 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dancing_Anatolia 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AdHomimeme 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOldGuy54 54 points55 points56 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]M46Initiative 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mensmod 58 points59 points60 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]FissureKing 33 points34 points35 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]pieonthedonkey 6 points7 points8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]AiroDewitt 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jim_E_Hat 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mens-Advocate 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mensmod 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]FissureKing 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]mensmod 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]FissureKing 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]mensmod 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]modemthug 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]perwiepie 40 points41 points42 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SadrageII 13 points14 points15 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]pieonthedonkey 22 points23 points24 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]StardustOasis 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goodmod[M] 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]D45_B053 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bearintokyo 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluefootedpig 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mild111 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]D45_B053 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Keenin455 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ugotlost 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kevon87 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DEVOmay97 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MonkeyC3PO 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]prodiver 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MonkeyC3PO 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mens-Advocate 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fxhud 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Agent_25 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]hillaryobama69 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]MushroomMGTOW -6 points-5 points-4 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]guyau 10 points11 points12 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]guyau 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]guyau 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Burntskullcandy 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]reereeeees -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent -2 points-1 points0 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]reereeeees 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]BigLebowskiBot 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 7 points8 points9 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DiamondxCrafting 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JungleMuffin -2 points-1 points0 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WiseMonkeyGoodMonkey 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]vegan8r -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Drezzzire -6 points-5 points-4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HeNeverLies4 -2 points-1 points0 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]AiroDewitt 16 points17 points18 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]unicornshoes 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]AiroDewitt -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]unicornshoes 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AiroDewitt -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pic_N_mix -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link