~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
GallowBoob
[–]PaisleyBowtie 737 points738 points739 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link
Gallowboob here?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]AnomalousAvocado 167 points168 points169 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A true karmic nomad, wandering the galaxy, reaping karma as he goes. Those who have seen him say that you can see upvotes twinkling in his eyes.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]OMGROTFLMAO 39 points40 points41 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, he's a real amoral shitposter. And not in the fun way.
[–]TheLastWondersmith 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I dunno, I've come to love him because of his determination to keep posting.
It's actually kinda inspiring.
[–]OMGROTFLMAO 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I guess? I mean, he's a professional media manipulator so this is kind of his job.
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
of his determination to keep posting.
Money.
[–]TheLastWondersmith 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well, sign me the fuck up.
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I believe it can actually be exhausting and hard work.
[–]bk15dcx 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's all?
[–]Homsar98 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
-58 here.
[–]Jimijam_Flimflam 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I have -998, but I might have changed that myself.
[–]_Eggs_ 224 points225 points226 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
He's the type of person who will post the same article in /r/The_Donald and /r/Politics and get karma for both. One sub will take it seriously while the other sub will assume it's satire.
Like this one:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/12/donald-trump-ocala-hillary-clinton-islamic-state-paul-ryan/91955808/
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
He's making that reddit money. No reason not to.
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link
I am choosing a dvd for tonight
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Big time. He's "creating" content and keeping people interested and on the site. You'd probably be pretty surprised by how many people are paid to be here.
[–]ForgottenPhenom 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
I never thought of that. Just figured he was a reposter. Any evidence of this?
[–]hoopstick 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
IIRC they've written articles about him.
[–]BigOldNerd 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Cashing In Karma: How A Former Landscape Architect Turned His Reddit Fame Into A Career
[–]Tigeris 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's worth noting that according to this article, while /u/gallowboob has indeed cashed in on his reddit fame, the job isn't for reddit and he's not shilling. The job is for a company called UNILAD and his title is 'social media executive'.
He helps UNILAD understand/act on the content people find compelling online - not
"creating" content and keeping people interested and on [reddit]
as /u/Myron-Gaines claims. He's a serial reposter, but not a shill.
[–]BigOldNerd 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Woah. This is 3 months old and a deep comment. You are like a reddit archaeologist.
[–]Decyde 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not u/Pepsi_Next!
Say it ain't so!
[–]isperfectlycromulent 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I assume that's gallowboob's porn account.
[–]timeslider 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Reddit money = karma
[–]TattoosAreUgly 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, you can karmawhore everywhere.
[–]turlian -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's likelier than you think!
[–]contractor808 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's happened a couple times already that I'm aware.
[–]AFuckYou -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Gallow! what what!
[–]flizomica 351 points352 points353 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
My college campus has a "Women's Center." Had to go there for a mandatory seminar, and the presenter did mention the center was for ~all~ people. In fact, they even had a program just for men!
In case you were wondering, the program focused on teaching men about their privilege and stopping domestic violence (by men). Top kek.
[–]contractor808 124 points125 points126 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Just like calling a DV hotline and being redirected to an abuser's help line.
[–]GenuineSounds 34 points35 points36 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
That article breaks my heart into pieces.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
This is my last resort!
[–]Byroms 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Suffocation, No breathing
[–]rolltider0 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Dont give a fuck
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If I cut my arm bleeding
[–]Halafax 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Been near there, done something like that.
Trying to get some help for my daughter with RAINN was a pointless and humiliating trial by accusation. Her situation (victim of a female rapist) wasn't what they wanted to hear, so I got passed around until they all got tired of accusing me of things.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link
After having worked at a DV center at a college campus, I am certain you are not telling the full story. We had forums on how to prevent men from abusing their spouses, yes. But we had an equal number of programs that discussed the stigma of violence against men, as well as talks on how women can prevent themselves from becoming an abuser. I don't know where you get this narrative from, most psychologists and colleagues i worked with at these functions are all aware of both genders being capable of violence. Radical feminism isn't a majority in civil service and academia, despite what this sub may want you to believe.
[–]tonyh322 56 points57 points58 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
From the start though just having forums on how to prevent men from abusing their spouses is a problem. Marital abuse IS NOT gendered.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link
Have you ever been to a domestic violence seminar? (no judgement) We typically separate by gender because the counselors or speakers have more experience with a certain sex and how to best reach & teach the audience. It's not because of the people themselves, it's moreso at the discretion of the speaker. If a speaker had years of working with women, they would not be able to connect as well with men as a speaker who's career was working with men.
But we still had plenty of talks about spousal abuse in general which was open to all. We only really had each gender separated for events that had workshops or were in a support group setting.
[–]tonyh322 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Your comment I replied to said "we had forums on how to prevent men from abusing their spouses". Nothing about "and vice versa" and even if this one shelter in particular did have mens and womens seminars and they were equal in terms of availability and content (which honestly is quite hard to believe) that is not the norm which is a problem.
The norm is that shelters are for women because they are the abused and seminars are for men because they are the abusers. Just scroll through just the comment section on this one post and you'll see posts about availability of mens shelters and how calling an abuse hotline as a man gets you redirected to an abusers hotline. Venture out into the sub and you'll see screen shots from schools where young boys are taught they are the biggest threat to women and need to learn at a young age not to hit and rape them.
I was ambivalent to "men's rights" as an issue until I had a son. I am in a happy marriage with a pragmatic woman and I don't expect to ever need to experience problems like divorce and custody inequality or abuse or false accusations (fingers crossed). But I don't want my son to go to school where he and is taught he is a danger to women just because he has a penis.
[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I don't doubt that there are issues with the availability of men's shelters, but I was pointing out that OP's statement is not representative of how a college abuse center is normally held, and in fact is probably not accurately portrayed by him.
As far as I know all abuse centers get information from the same sources, primarily being the National Coalition against Domestic Violence. This group also organizes all the speaking circuits across the country to spread awareness about DV. My state in particular also works with Arizona Coalition to end sexual and domestic violence, each state has their own program. None of these organizations deny women's involvement in violence, so I don't see why a shelter that is ran by this organization would deny such a thing.
[–]tonyh322 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Anecdotal though it may be, there are a lot of things you see when you start exploring men's rights that you wouldn't think you could. I can't see a man calling the police because his wife is beating him and then him being arrested and leaving his wife alone in the house with their kids...but it happens. You don't think there are rules the police are supposed to follow and those rules certainly don't say "arrest the man, no questions asked, no matter what". But it happens.
[–]isperfectlycromulent 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It happened to me 3 or 4 times. I would get into an argument with the kids' mom, she'd get mad because she wasn't getting her way and call the police. I got to sit in handcuffs on my own porch while she ranted inside to a female police officer. Then they'd all leave. Happened every time. The 3rd time they asked if I had somewhere to go for the night, and I said no, she doesn't let me have friends.
They knew the situation of what was happening to me, yet I was the one always handcuffed.
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
but I was pointing out that OP's statement is not representative of how a college abuse center is normally held
And in doing so, proved it was.
[–]Byroms 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You have never heard of the shelter that banned its founder from entering because she allowed men as well, have you?
[–]tempest_fiend 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Do you mean Erin Pizzey? The woman who opened the FIRST domestic shelter in the modern world? Who is now banned from that shelter (and countless others) because she wanted to fight for male victims of domestic violence?
[–]Byroms 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes. Couldn't remember her name.
[–]flizomica 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
My campus is super liberal and SJW-y. Plenty of nutty feminists around here. It's not my "narrative," I'm literally just parroting what she told us.
I don't frequent this sub anyway, I'm a chick from r/all who was tickled by this post.
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ignorance is a double wdges sword with no handle. It's why decades ago dv against women was largely ignored and now that people are eagerly spreading awareness of dv against women many people fall prey to their own ignorance of dv against men. The only way out is a true understanding of what domestic violence is and how it can manifest in cases where the abuser appears to be weaker than the abused.
[–]bufedad 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
We had forums on how to prevent men from abusing their spouses But we had an equal number of programs that discussed the stigma of violence against men
We had forums on how to prevent men from abusing their spouses
But we had an equal number of programs that discussed the stigma of violence against men
No programs to help teach women not to abuse their spouses? Just the stigma men face when they are abused.
Thanks for nothing I guess.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Apparetly that only applies to girls/women.
[–]Leinadro 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Unless you went to the same school how does your experience disprove someone else's?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Both of our comments are equally anecdotal, however I spent years working in the system while he attended one seminar. His case is not SOP, and is likely not the full story.
[–]Leinadro 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You're concluding its not likely complete based on nothing but your experience at another campus.
Not enough to go on really.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yet his experience at another campus is regarded as gospel?
I didn't just work with the one campus, all colleges in the region communicated constantly with one another. The entire southwest as far as I can recall had programs directed at both genders, children, even the much underdiscussed issue of geriatric abuse. I would imagine it being the same for New England, the south and Midwest too.
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No its regarded as his experience.
It would be one thing if you just said, "Thats not what I experienced.". But you actually took it to "Based on my experience Im going to say his experience is incomplete or not true."
[–]TheChessClub 236 points237 points238 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Made me think of this
[–]_Snurps_ 117 points118 points119 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
And this http://m.imgur.com/gallery/R390EId
[–]therusskiy 41 points42 points43 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
MotherFUCKER
[–]Lonewxnderer 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's too high quality. Fo shame.
[–]epicsaxman13 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I said "God fucking damnit" out loud and woke up my dog
[–]wreck94 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
As a Peyton Manning fan for life, I will never tire of this beautiful representation of my god and true savior. Thank you sir
[–]ThatGuyYouWantToBe 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
R/hmm
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]AnomalousAvocado 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I did a thing once. It was too hard, so I quit.
[–]effywap 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Never give up on your dreams!
[–]AnomalousAvocado 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That guy's a legend.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
/r/shittyHDR
[–]trashcan86 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
For real. It looked like he had some bruises until I looked a bit closer.
[–]bigcunttreeapples 467 points468 points469 points 9 years ago (187 children) | Copy Link
I work at a domestic violence specific shelter that houses men. They exist.
[–]bartink 308 points309 points310 points 9 years ago (172 children) | Copy Link
Not only is that not true, what has this to do with "needing feminism"? It's a total non-sequitor.
[–]LucifersHammerr 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
See post below. It explains why this is very much an issue about feminism. DV shelters, Duluth model etc.
[–]jc5504 143 points144 points145 points 9 years ago (147 children) | Copy Link
Seriously. I mean, I'm a feminist and an egalitarian. These people just take the negative extremes of one side and say it represents the entire side
[–]LucifersHammerr 163 points164 points165 points 9 years ago (75 children) | Copy Link
Feminists fought against allowing a male domestic violence shelter in Canada (see Earl Silverman). They teach the "Duluth model" which presents domestic violence as a patriarchal conspiracy. This means that male DV victims are often themselves arrested in disputes. In Australia, the feminist White Ribbon campaign doesn't even recognize male victims. In the UK, feminists harassed and sent death threats to Erin Pizzey -- who founded the first women's DV shelter -- when she realized that DV wasn't a gendered issue. Also feminists oppose Men's Rights groups from forming on college campuses, where men can raise these concerns and lobby for tax payer support. So there's your answer.
[–]samsc2 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's also the same way down here in the US. Regardless of the situation if there is a domestic violence complaint the man is the one who will be removed/arrested. Sometimes if the man is lucky enough to have physical evidence in the form of video or a group of people that the woman is the one that caused the domestic violence, the police won't arrest him however they still almost never arrest the woman. It's just such a wonderful privilege to have.
[–]mattimus_maximus 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
When my ex-wife physically attacked me and I finally had the good sense to call the police on that occasion, the police arrested her. In Washington state, there's a law which says if there's a physical injury (she drew blood on my arms and legs when she dug chunks of flesh out of them with her nails) that they are required to arrest the offender. From all the horror stories I've heard, I am so glad I live in a state with some gender neutral sensible laws.
[–]samsc2 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dude that's extremely lucky. Things could have gone a lot worse. I hate when they claim domestic abuse when none happened all in the hopes of getting a restraining order so they can have the house and kids all to themselves.
[–]teejay769 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I actually surprisingly had the opposite happen a few years ago. Wife trapped me in a room and my only option was to either physically move her or call the police. So I told her I was calling them, she still didn't move so I called and explained the situation. They asked her to find a place to go for the night. I fully expected they would tell Me to take the kids somewhere but actually worked out.
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link
The Duluth Model is widely being done away with. Go read the domestic violence policy of your local police or sheriffs office.
Male shelters exist as well as current shelters offering services to both men and women.
Example: http://www.batteredmen.com/bathelpnatl.htm
You also need to understand domestic violence in the grand scheme of the shift in gender dynamics in the US. Women lacked the societal standing thus lacked the ability to get out of abusive situations. Things like marital rape were not illegal all over the US till 1993. This meant that resources went to the most vulnerable at the time. As time has progressed, this has shifted farther and as such, these organizations are shifting.
[–]LucifersHammerr 99 points100 points101 points 9 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link
The Duluth Model is widely being done away with.
Thanks to MRA's, domestic violence against men is finally being recognized despite decades of feminist opposition. Unfortunately only a tiny, tiny fraction of the resources devoted to the issue are going to male victims. Again, this is due to feminist lobbying.
Women lacked the societal standing thus lacked the ability to get out of abusive situations.
That's feminist revisionist history.
"In America, there have been laws against wife beating since before the Revolution. By 1870, it was illegal in almost every state; but even before then, wife-beaters were arrested and punished for assault and battery. The historian and feminist Elizabeth Pleck observes in a scholarly article entitled "Wife-Battering in Nineteenth-Century America":
"It has often been claimed that wife-beating in nineteenth-century America was legal... Actually, though, several states passed statutes legally prohibiting wife-beating; and at least one statute even predates the American Revolution. The Massachusetts Bay Colony prohibited wife-beating as early as 1655. The edict states: "No man shall strike his wife nor any woman her husband on penalty of such fine not exceeding ten pounds for one offense, or such corporal punishment as the County shall determine."
[Pleck] points out that punishments for wife-beaters could be severe: according to an 1882 Maryland statute, the culprit could receive forty lashes at the whipping post; in Delaware, the number was thirty. In New Mexico, fines ranging from $225 to $1000 were levied, or sentences of one to five years in prison imposed. For most of our history, in fact, wife-beating has been considered a sin comparable to to thievery or adultery. Religious groups -- especially Protestant groups such as Quakers, Methodists, and Baptists -- punished, shunned, and excommunicated wife-beaters. Husbands, brothers, and neighbors often took vengence against the batterer. Vigilante parties sometimes abducted wife-beaters and whipped them."
It had nothing to do with "social standing" but rather the fact that most women didn't work (they didn't want to). The only reason wife beaters weren't treated even more severely is that someone needed to provide for the women. That's why whipping was often used instead of imprisonment.
Things like marital rape were not illegal all over the US till 1993.
Sex was considered part of the marital contract. It simply never occurred to anyone that a man could "rape" his wife. As soon as feminists raised the issue, male legislators obliged in changing the law. The obviously far more serious issue is that female on male rape often isn't even recognized at all, even if it's a boy. In fact the feminist Mary Koss excluded male victims from the very definition or rape by using the term "forced to penetrate."
[–]baskandpurr 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The very fact that "wife beating" has a law and "husband beating" doesn't indicates how one sided the issue is. Nobody was concerned enough about violence against men that a law was written or even discussed. We now have an entire industry of people who talk about how men shouldn't physically attack women but refuse to even consider that women doing exactly the same thing could be a problem. The social convention is that women are allowed to be violent, nobody has ever attempted to stop them.
[–]AloysiusC 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Like the fact that Islam has rules for how a man can beat his wife, they throw in as exemplary of how badly women are treated and "forget" to notice the absence of such rules for how a woman can beat her husband.
[–]PaisleyBowtie 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Mary Koss just wanted female on male rape called "unwanted contact," she got it called "made-to-penetrate" instead.
Yeah there's always been stigma against wife beaters and corporeal punishment was used so that women who were beaten could enact vengeance without ruining their long term stability. Average men have always abstained from displays of physical violence. It's really the rich and powerful and the isolated who were getting away with nightmarish cruelty.
The marital contract in law has strived to require consent of both parties. That consent used to carry a sexual connotation that could not be annulled without annulling the marriage. So it's good that language was introduced to recognize that sexual consent is instantaneous not bound by a contract. There just happen to be evil people who tried to word it to only recognize this difference for one party.
[+]PM_ME_A_FACT -29 points-28 points-27 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I didn't say domestic violence wasn't illegal, but enforcement was hardly followed through with. That's obvious as there needed to be Violence Against Women Acts that had marked benefits on the reporting of DV.
More than just MRAs have advocated for men here. There is no grand conspiracy against these shelters. There exist a plethora of them all over.
[–]LucifersHammerr 42 points43 points44 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
enforcement was hardly followed through with.
Sure it was. Countless men were literally tied up and whipped if not lynched outright if it was revealed they were beating their wives.
Violence Against Women Acts that had marked benefits on the reporting of DV.
Perhaps we need a violence against men act.
More than just MRAs have advocated for men here.
Feminists certainly have not. They're the ones who paint DV as a gendered issue. The laws on this were more progressive hundreds of years ago lol.
There is no grand conspiracy against these shelters.
I never claimed there was a "conspiracy" afoot. Rather most people simply don't care about male victims of domestic violence. I mean a man can literally get his penis chopped off and most women -- and men -- will just laugh about it. Now imagine the reverse. (Rightly) a moment of silence. These tendencies point to clear biases -- and not in the man's favor.
There exist a plethora of them all over.
Really? I'd like to see some evidence for that assertion. How much money is devoted to male DV shelters vs female DV shelters?
[–]pvtshoebox 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The Duluth Model was still being taught to nurses entering my last hospital as a way to help identify (and offer services towards) battered women.
[–]AloysiusC 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Men also lacked the ability to get out of abusive situations. More than women even.
That's not a women's specific problem. In fact, men in some Western countries still officially owe their wives sex.
[–]ether_reddit 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Broad assertions like this are useless, because all jurisdictions are different.
Let's have a look at the domestic violence policy of my jurisdiction (British Columbia, Canada), shall we?
source: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/law-crime-and-justice/criminal-justice/victims-of-crime/vs-info-for-professionals/info-resources/domestic-violence-response.pdf
Apply a Gender Lens when Developing and Implementing Responses A gender lens should be applied to all responses to domestic violence in order to ensure the safety of women and their children. Responses to domestic violence should acknowledge that domestic violence is a power-based crime in which, generally, the male in an intimate relationship exercises power and control over the female. The abusive power and control dynamic results in high-risk situations for victims and their children because it is used to frighten, silence, and isolate victims and prevent them from leaving or seeking help. As the dynamics of domestic violence often result in the erosion of women’s self-esteem and in their diminished ability to act, empowerment should be a central consideration in any response to domestic violence.
Apply a Gender Lens when Developing and Implementing Responses
A gender lens should be applied to all responses to domestic violence in order to ensure the safety of women and their children. Responses to domestic violence should acknowledge that domestic violence is a power-based crime in which, generally, the male in an intimate relationship exercises power and control over the female. The abusive power and control dynamic results in high-risk situations for victims and their children because it is used to frighten, silence, and isolate victims and prevent them from leaving or seeking help. As the dynamics of domestic violence often result in the erosion of women’s self-esteem and in their diminished ability to act, empowerment should be a central consideration in any response to domestic violence.
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
K let's look where I live
NYPD:
Where two family members or intimate partners accuse each other of committing a family offense misdemeanor, (known as a cross-complaint), the police must attempt to identify and arrest the primary physical aggressor after considering the comparative injuries, any threats made, history of the parties, and whether either person acted defensively to protect her/himself from injury.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/domestic_violence/OE_How_Police_Can_Help_Layout.pdf
[–]uptokesforall 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That wording implies that assuming a history based on broad generalizations is not in procedure. Pay attention to the present situation and if you know some history act on the combined knowledge. But it must be knowledge not assumptions.
[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
That's funny because not giving your wife sex... is now considered abuse.
Isn't that wonderful!? Not only is raping the man not illegal, the man is required by law to allow himself to be raped.
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link
Source
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
Do a little research on the new "emotional abuse" and withholding affection.
Seriously, this isn't even new.
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link
No link me to a law that says a man must have sex with his wife or it's illegal. That was your claim.
[–]LethiasWVR 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Here is a case from France where a man was ordered to pay damages to his wife for this reason. I looked into the emotional abuse law from Britain cited by u/bufedad , and while it does include withholding affection as emotional abuse, thus opening the door to that kind of behavior and litigation, nowhere in my research did I find any indication that the law only applies to one gender or the other. If I missed that part somehow, I would appreciate being corrected. That said, I have so far only been able to find articles announcing and explaining the law, and have not found a place to read the text of the law itself.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Look up Britain's emotional abuse law. Welcome to the world.
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
That goes both ways. Whether the law recognizes it depends on local precedent
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sure, in theory. What we've seen consistently in all first world nations o is that the law is not applied equally between genders. Women are not legally held to the same standard men are.
[–]franklindeer 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
It uncommon to see it referred to as "the duluth model" but police forces worldwide use models that are in practice almost identical. This is true all over Canada in particular where intervention models are based on power and control theories and assume the male to be the perpetrator. This is textbook Duluth Model nonsense.
Calling it something else doesn't mean it's going away.
I agree and thank humanity for people not turning a blind eye to injustice no matter how absurd it seems
[–]hedgecore77 -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Feminists fought against allowing...
No, chauvenists did. We're so concerned with labels these days, we need to apply them properly.
[–]franklindeer 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
These are feminist organizations that adhere to the core philosophies of feminist theory, many of which are the reason such opposition exists. Feminism is a world view and that world view shapes the way adherents interpret the world around them and how they address certain issues. Feminist theory is how you end up with things like the Duluth Model.
You can't just pretend the ideology and the theoretical underpinnings have no impact on how people who take on the label act or see the world. It's not as if it's just some corrupt wing of feminist thought. It's any wing of feminist thought that believes in a nebulous patriarchy, which is almost all of them.
[–]Kyoopy2 -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
So? Those actions are not mantras of feminism as a whole, they are actions that people who are feminists take outside of their being feminists. Disliking feminists is very different than disliking feminism.
[–]LucifersHammerr 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
So? Those actions are not mantras of feminism as a whole
Sigh. Look up the Duluth model. You have a lot to learn about feminism and "patriarchy theory."
[–]StealthTomato 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Seeing the words "feminist theory" in a wiki article does not mean that thing is supported by a giant monolith representing all of feminism. Feminist theory includes a lot of stuff, some of which is controversial even among feminists.
[–]LucifersHammerr 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Sure. Feminists squabble about degrees of man-hatred. What's your point?
[–]StealthTomato 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
That your rhetoric is as woman-hating as the worst parts of feminism are man-hating.
[–]LucifersHammerr 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You'll have to elaborate. I'm not seeing it.
Did you actually just call them a misogynist because they said that they hate feminism? hahaha, wow...
[–]Kyoopy2 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
But if the core tenant of feminism is, at its simplest, the promotion of equal welfare for women, then the supposition of the negativity of what aspects you're talking about does not lead to the notion that "feminism is bad", it leads to the notion that "those actions taken under the guise of feminism disobey feminism's central tenant and are such not actually feminism."
[–]LucifersHammerr 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I suppose. On the other hand the Nazis didn't portray themselves as "bad guys out to kill people." I'm sure their definition of fascism was quite pleasant sounding.
MRA's look at feminist theory and action, not dictionary definitions. Yet even the definition is flawed, because it doesn't include the word responsibility. Equal rights yes, equal responsibilities no.
I still won't allow the equal rights claim, however, since feminists express no significant concern about equal rights either (genital mutilation, equal sentencing, equal parenting etc.)
[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is nothing but feminist apology. Feminist theory itself, even the most universally agreed upon aspects, are detrimental to men and lead to lopsided world views and thus actions. These are the logical conclusions of things like patriarchy theory.
[–]double-happiness 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But feminists's construction of society as 'patriatrchal' is exactly what has caused the under-recognition of domestic violence against men in the first place, according to experts:
Despite over 30 years of research documenting that men can sustain female-perpetrated physical, sexual, and psychological IPV, these findings remain controversial. Those that are especially controversial are statistics showing that women report using physical IPV at equal or higher rates than men, a finding that has been replicated in dozens of studies (Archer 2000). This finding of a high rate of violence by female partners has been challenged primarily on conceptual bases because it is inconsistent with the dominant theoretical perspective of the cause of IPV: the patriarchal construction of our nation
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3175099/
[–]bartink 47 points48 points49 points 9 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link
And then reinforce negative stereotypes about men's rights activists, which actually have important points that need to be heard e.g. Male rape is way underreported.
[–]Fudde 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link
What is she doing to "reinforce negative stereotypes" about MRAs? So not identifying with a group which has done, said and endorsed some objectively shitty things makes you a bad person somehow? People can say "I don't personally identify as an MRA" and it's fine, but everybody needs to be a feminist or else they what, hate all women?
[–]willfordbrimly 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
"MRA" is used as a pejorative in a handful of popular subs here on Reddit. I usually see it used interchangeably with "neckbeard."
[–]Fudde 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And a lot of those people identify as feminists. It's not enough just to not care about improving the quality of life for 50% of our population, but they actively try to push them down. It's the complete opposite of progress.
[–]Banned_By_Default 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is the thing people don't get. Mensrights movement isn't in opposition of the Feminist movement rather is trying to catch up and get gender neutral equality.
Feminism on the otherhand hates the Mensrights movement because it takes away their victim status and undermine the business that can be had under the feminist flag.
Yes, there is bitter neckbeards online that dispise women. Untill they find a partner. Keyword: loneliness.
Don't confuse MRAs with people that hate women.
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wasn't referring to her specifically. See "these people". She is exhibiting unclear and simplistic thinking encapsulated on a silly sign though. If you can actually make a point you don't usually post selfies with a stupid handwritten sign.
[–]FreeThinkingMan -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link
I believe bartink is referring more to this sub upvoting this image that disregards all feminist issues through a non-sequitor. This reinforces the men's rights activists stereotype that they are red pillers, ignore every single problem females face, they make it an us vs them pissing contest for who has it the worst as opposed to fixing/addressing issues that afflict both communities. The fact that this incorrect logic is used to dismiss all the issues women combat and is widely viewed as a legitimate argument is pretty fucking outrageous. This promotes sexism and the oppression of women.
So not identifying with a group which has done, said and endorsed some objectively shitty things makes you a bad person somehow?
Also to look at the shittiest things done by a banner and use that to write off all of their legitimate grievances they represent is also irrational, ridiculous, and a non sequitur as well.
I am a secular humanist and therefore a feminist and a "men's rights activist".
[–]AloysiusC 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
The problem is feminism manufactured an adversarial approach to gender issues from the start. Legitimate grievances were packaged into a narrative of male tyranny. That explains much of the retaliatory rhetoric that's only in very recent years started to subside and for an entirely different reason.
In short, feminism was sexist and anti-male from the start. Having legitimate grievances often only had the purpose of lending credibility to genocidal rhetoric.
[–]LucifersHammerr 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
a non-sequitor
Go look up the Duluth model.
[–]FreeThinkingMan -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I just looked up the Duluth model, what was that supposed to convince me of and why did you reply to that comment with that suggestion? No conclusion is being derived through logic connecting what I said to the Duluth model. Care to help me understand what you tried to communicate?
[–]LucifersHammerr 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The Duluth model and "primary aggressor" laws were created by feminists to marginalize male victims of domestic violence. As a result, many victimized men are themselves arrested for DV. Feminists have a long tradition of opposing MRA's on this subject. Thus, the image in OP is not a non-sequitor.
[–]FreeThinkingMan -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
What you tried to communicate is a non-sequitor just like the image the OP provided. Feminism encompasses addressing every single problem that distinctly women face. To say that every problem women seek to address is non existent because there "are zero battered men shelters" or "some feminists back in the day that created a program to help battered women that caused the marginalization of men's domestic abuse cases", is a non sequitor and bad logic. Listen to the absurdity of that argument. If you can't see the absurdity of that argument then study logic and try to be objective.
[–]Fudde 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link
That's a huge leap. Somehow they're red pillers* and every other horrible thing you can come up with because they don't agree with feminism? That's wrong. Not everybody has to identify with the group that calls themselves 3rd wave feminism to fight for the rights of women, or everyone for that matter. Talk about incorrect logic.
Yeah I bet you have no problem doing the same to MRAs. "Mensrights needs a rebranding! Too many bad eggs spoiling the bunch!". So hypocritical.
[–]FreeThinkingMan -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
That is no leap. You didn't understand what I said which is why you responded the way you did.
Not everybody has to identify with the group that calls themselves 3rd wave feminism to fight for the rights of women, or everyone for that matter. Talk about incorrect logic.
Nobody mentioned 3rd wave feminism... That is poor logic and a straw man. "3rd wave feminism" is not all feminism is or ever was. Try to be objective kid. I said I am a men's right's activist too. Feminism = addressing certain problems that only face women in the broadest sense. Men's Rights = addressing certain problems that only men face in the broadest sense. It sounds like you have been severely brainwashed, I suggest you rethink where you get your information from and what is a credible source.
Just look at how all feminism, which again is "addressing certain problems that only women face" are COMPLETELY disregarded because of the non-sequitor that is linked to here. Look at how many people upvoted this to the top, that is exactly what red pillers would do and that is irrational.
[–]Fudde 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Try to be objective kid
Well nothin personnel, but I don't think you know what the word 'objective' means. I suggest you rethink your reddit handle, because an objective 'free thinking' person doesn't make gigantic leaps of logic with nothing to back it up like "they upvoted this thread, because that's what red pillers do! Therefore they are red pillers, because they upvoted this thread!". No one's disregarding women's rights just because they're upvoting someone who supports men, and rejects a specific movement that is not the pinnacle of all efforts towards equality.
[–]FreeThinkingMan 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You didn't point out any leaps of logic, not even hops. I just provided valid counter arguments to everything in your last comment wtf are you talking about "leaps of logic"? You aren't even trying to defend your position with arguments anymore... Meditate on what the means about your position and its validity.
No one's disregarding women's rights just because they're upvoting someone who supports men,
Stop lying to yourself. The girl is holding a poster that says she doesn't need feminism because battered men's shelters don't exist and that is voted to the top. That is the very definition of disregarding all the problems women face for irrational reasons and every one here thinks that is a good argument. If they were upvoting something like a girl holding a poster saying "I don't need feminism because the sky is blue", you think that is a valid reason to upvote the post? Just because they are against addressing the problems that only women face(feminism)? That is stupid, you people up vote stupidity and non sequitors because "fuck feminsm"? That makes no sense.
[–]drazzy92 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
http://womenspost.ca/owner-of-shelter-for-abused-men-and-children-commits-suicide-after-financial-ruin-ridicule/
That is literally the fault of feminism itself. They were incredibly intolerant to any other movement. Back in the early 10s my sister and I were active egalitarians/MRAs, and I was basically shunned by all of my friends and family members. My sister was labeled a "self-internalizing misogynist who needs to be helped!!!" I was labeled as the woman hater who corrupted my little sister.
The funny thing was she was the one who opened my eyes to the MRA movement. Feminists were intolerant, still are, and they facilitated this attitude of intolerance. Therefore they made their beds and just need to lay down in it. I refuse to take anyone who calls themselves a feminist seriously because of the connotations feminism has. How can you associate with such a horrible movement that literally tore apart every single movement that tried to focus on issues other than feminism?
The movement that masturbated every day to articles on the wage gap despite it becoming more and more obvious by the day that the wage gap didn't exist or wasn't as big as they were saying. They made fun of people for saying it wasn't real, turned them into pariahs, and now they're finally swallowing the fact that it's not real. Well, the damage is done. I know a lot of people who focus on "feminist" issues without associating with the movement. These are the ones I respect.
After all, it's such a bold move to refuse to associate with feminism, and it sure as hell means you know your shit.
You are correct. Men get screwed in certain ways. No doubt. But the solution isn't to pretend women haven't gotten the shaft historically, minimized rape and domestic violence against women, etc.
[–]iongantas 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Please do tell us about the positive extremes of feminism.
[–]drazzy92 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
This is just pure ignorance. I'm glad that there were other more eloquent posters to rip your comment apart because it was pretty stupid. Feminists have consistently, constantly, without fail always stood in the way of men focusing on their disadvantages saying, "Wait! Women need to be elevated first before we can start focusing on men!"
Their last remaining card they were holding was the wage gap, and now that it has been denounced by most credible organizations everyone is finally beginning to accept people focusing on male disadvantages and there are many of them. When you call a DV hotline and specify that you are male there are some companies that will fucking redirect you to the abuser hotline.
You need to do your research. Also, I have an axe to grind when it comes to feminism because of how they would consistently tear apart any movement that they didn't approve of calling them women haters or god forbid "fedoras." Nowadays it's pretty rare to meet a feminist who thinks of a MRA or egalitarian as anything other than a "fedora" or a "woman hater." It's bullshit and it's that kind of intolerance to other movements that will be the final nail in its coffin.
Feminism is not an one size fits all. Period. Google what feminism has ever done for disadvantages of being a male, and you'll see that as I said they have consistently. constantly, without fail stood in every single effort.
[–]Veggiemon 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
"Consistently constantly without fail almost always" why did you use so many descriptive terms if you were going to contradict them with "almost" lol
[–]drazzy92 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Was that supposed to make sense or?
[–]Scytone 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You contradicted yourself is his point.
[–]drazzy92 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
I didn't contradict myself you stupid shit. Reading through my comment it's obvious that it was a fucking typo/mistype. Shut the fuck up.
[–]Scytone 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And there goes 100% of your comments credibility. Oops.
[–]drazzy92 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Go back to whatever hole you crawled out of and back to suckling Andrea Dworkin's teat you feminist troll
[–]Cryzgnik 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Holy shit haha
[–]Achack 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's unfortunate the way people can work to change the meaning of a label. That's why even though groups appear to be elitist when they don't just allow anyone to take part it's easy to see how important it can be to protect a label from being twisted and transformed into something that was never intended to be by the original creators.
That's why denouncing things and people who aren't doing it right is so important. If I was a highly recognized feminist or feminist group I would make a large effort to pay attention to anyone gaining popularity as a feminist and make sure their values align with true feminism. If their values do not I would make that clear to the public. It's a difficult task but you can't pretend you have one of the largest modern movements while completely ignoring the fact that there is a huge amount of disparity in the beliefs and values of your members.
Isn't this every movement? I've never seen one that didn't have a huge contingent of counter-productive crazies. I could point at red pill sociopaths and try and smear all MRAs with that broad brush, but that wouldn't be fair, right? Well how much time does this sub dedicate to distancing themselves from that? It doesn't at all, best I can tell.
[–]Badgerz92 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Egalitarian feminists are far and few between. THere is nothing extreme about feminists who oppose egalitarianism. And DV was one of the first issues that divided feminists and MRAs. Erin Pizzey, who founded the first shelter for abused women, tried to help male victims too but was opposed by feminists. Feminists have typically treated DV as a one-way street. Extremist feminists aren't the reason we have a Violence Against Women Act in the US, it's the mainstream feminists who treat DV as only being against women
[–]BlackEnjoysTheYellow 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
I'm a feminist and an egalitarian.
Thought both of those were just different words for equality
[–]LucifersHammerr 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
Nope. Feminists believe in patriarchy, which is the conspiracy theory that men as a class oppress women as a class. They oppose men's rights. Egalitarians support both WRA's and MRA's.
[–]StealthTomato -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I support egalitarian models of domestic and sexual violence (which we absolutely do not have and desperately need), but you sound like crazy people and I want nothing to do with you. The Duluth Model is bad theory put into practice and doing real harm, but it is not some vast conspiracy by feminists to harm male victims.
[–]LucifersHammerr 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
You need to stop "thinking" with your emotions and simply look at the facts. There's very little in this thread by MRA's based on opinion. We're talking about empirical evidence.
[–]StealthTomato -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Feminists believe in
Feminists fought against
Feminism hates
created by feminists to marginalize male victims
Sure looks like people are treating feminism as a monolithic entity actively conspiring to intentionally hurt men. Sorry if I'm being too emotional about this, while men's rights folks in this thread continue to be level-headed and factual.
[–]LucifersHammerr 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Right. The most powerful people in the feminist movement act as a "monolithic entity" to prevent equal rights between men and women. Coffee Shop "feminists" who know nothing about their movement and have some sort of hazy idea about the Suffragettes play zero role beyond enabling the man haters. That's why it's fair to characterize the feminist movement as I have.
[–]jc5504 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, that's the point I'm making
[–]double-happiness 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Why is the word feminist then? As opposed to say, 'gender equalist'?
[–]Scytone -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This is the same kind of argument as "why does women have men in it!?" And it's a silly argument.
[–]LethiasWVR 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not quite. The word women has the word men in it because men used to be the gender neutral word to describe humanity, with wifman, which eventually became woman, and wereman, which eventually phased out sometime in the 1300's, being the words that referred to the two sexes. Meanwhile, rhetoric aside, the word feminism literally means "The doctrine of the feminine", the femin part referring obviously to femininity, and ism being the suffix used to denote a doctrine or ideology. To compare the two words is like apples and oranges, as one has clearly traceable etymological roots, and the other has a dictionary definition that literally contradicts its own etymology.
[–]double-happiness 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, it's not really an argument at all, but actually a straightforward question.
My understanding is that feminists call themselves 'feminists' as opposed to say 'gender equalists' because they believe that we have historically lived in a type of society called 'patriarchy' where men are systematically advantaged, and women are oppressed as a group. In essence, they believe that women are not treated equally to men.
If that is not your understanding of the derivation of the word, then what is?
Edit:
The term “feminism” originated from the French word “feminisme,” coined by the utopian socialist Charles Fourier, and was first used in English in the 1890s, in association with the movement for equal political and legal rights for women. [My emphasis]
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Feminism
So feminists are only concerned with equal political and legal rights for women, are they not?
[–]unbuttoned 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Kind of hard to claim the mantle of equalism when the name of the movement is exclusionary.
[–]BlackEnjoysTheYellow 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You're making this planet dumber. Every opinion has a contrasting opinion. You better take that into an unbiased consideration if you want to better yourself in any way.
If you don't look at the other side, why are you evening arguing? You're clearly not willing to budge!
So Don't even argue if you arent willing to change your position! Why should someone else be inclined to alter their position but you are immune to that same demand?
I see this shit on reddit all the time. Hivemind mentality! someone says something popular, people agree and upvote it, and then downvote anything contrary without even thinking about it.
Common core gets flack like this, Service animals and emotional support animals get flack like this, gaming consoles get flack like this, Politics worldwide run on this idea, the media flourishes on shit like clickbait articles because of this mentality.
Literally everything terrible with the social world has some sort of tie back to individual people not wanting to budge on their own convoluted opinion.
[–]Scytone 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Did you reply to the wrong comment?
[–]gotham_possum -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
So your saying some feminists are extreme, and men shouldn't assume every feminist is bat shit crazy? Hmmmm sounds like how feminists take one case of domestic abuse, and assume every man is just as guilty, its blaming the source instead of the person responsible. It's like saying if an African American or a Japanese person robs a place, and instead of blaming the person who commit the crime, you instead blame the entire Japanese or African American community. It's racist to accuse someone based on race, but normal to accuse someone based on gender? that's a little hypocritical wouldn't you think?
[–]jc5504 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Once again, you're saying all feminists demonize all men, even though it's only crazy people that aren't actually feminist.
[–]gotham_possum 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But its come to the point that being a feminist is like being a vegan/vegetarian, it's not an exclusive group that you need to sign up for, anyone can be a "Feminist". So many things that are argued aren't even real issues, things a feminist should be fighting for is actual real world issues, like the insane laws for Women in the middle east, or the fact that you guys are fighting and rioting against rape it should be for all genders right? so why are more men being raped in prison, though you don't like counting that stat, because it lowers the ratio of women being raped over men. You don't see Feminist's rioting outside of prisons to end all rape against Men? Or the fact that more Men are committing Suicide every year than Woman, face it Feminists only like to fight for things that happen against Women and it is almost always blamed on Men. I have never seen a Feminist make on honest effort to fight for a Men's issue that actually might be the result of another Women's actions. Fight for things like how Men are given longer prison sentences than Women for the same crime, or how in film if a Man strikes another Women its considered domestic abuse, but if you see a Women slap a Man in the face shes being strong and standing up for herself, cause he probably deserved to be hit right? Feminist's love to say that they fight for equality, but in reality they only fight for themselves.
[–]Achack 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's challenging the idea that without modern feminism women would have nothing. It's highlighting the fact that modern societies have worked very hard to do everything they can for women who are being abused but men have only recently been recognized has being potential victims of abuse. It's sort of a specific example of why she doesn't need it rather than treating it like a general statement so I agree that it's weird.
It's the same way that women don't "need feminism" to protect them from the "wage gap" but feminists who fight against it would argue that they are doing it to help women.
[–]blfire 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
There was a wave of "i need feminism because" pictures on the internet / twitter a while ago. Most of them were dishonest and misguiding or subjective. Thats why she is writting in the begining: "I don't need feminism because" (just google "i need feminism because". But be aware that there are also fake / satire ones.)
Also i want to mention that i am sure that nearly all in this sub don't have anything against the effects of first (e. g. vote rights for women) and second wave feminism but third wave feminism.
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
A guy is in this very thread complaining about feminist in the 1850's were too extreme for having the gall to say men were systematically oppressing them. I'm not making this up.
Edit: and look at the OP pic. There are shelters that accept men in every major city. Learn your facts. My wife works at a domestic violence shelter that...wait for it...accepts men!
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
dangerous road to go down, because by that logic, and inequality women face is mens rights fault.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mikeavelli 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Domestic violence shelters devoted to men have a history of getting protested. There's a famous one in Toronto that was openned by a mens rights group that was protested every step of the way.
The UK also had to threaten to shut down womens shelters who refused to house men a few years ago. A move that was protested heavily by a few feminist groups.
OP is a bit out of date (mens shelters are slowly but surely gaining acceptance and funding), but she's not wrong about the history of oppression surrounding male victims of domestic violence.
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
So is the history of the oppression of women. Right?
[–]Mikeavelli 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's what I was mirroring, yes.
I think that's fair.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Look at the OP. It's literally on the sign.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
God you are dim. X because y is a construct. Learn to grammar. And if y doesn't reasonably lead to x, it's a non sequitor.
Stop huffing paint.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You aren't worth anyone's time.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Thanks for reinforcing my statement.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You are butthurt about being downvoted and not engaged. I'm pointing out that
1) you are being an asshole 2) you aren't making a coherent or cogent point worth responding to
Next time, politely write something that leads to a discussion. Or not. Either way I've wasted enough time with you. Now anyone reading can scroll down and read another post response which makes it even more clear I and the downvoters are wise.
[–]contractor808 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, the writing is an exaggeration. But the lack of shelters given the proportion of male victims is shameful.
[–]Qapiojg 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They don't exist in Canada. One did once, but it was funded out of pocket because the feminists running the rest of the DV shelters fought to keep any funding from going there. The owner killed himself after he lost everything to debt, trying to help as many male victims as he could.
In the US they are sparse, incredibly so. And the hotlines have close to an 85% chance to forward you to a batterers hotline or accuse the man of being the abuser, while only 5% of the time they actually help the men.
Many shelters, in my experience, outright turn away men despite saying they accept them. The most common reason being "the women here aren't comfortable with men being around"
So sure, a handful might exist. But you're not actually countering the point. Are at least 40% of those shelters accepting men? Or are 100% of those accepting women and maybe a generous 2% accepting men?
[–]LucifersHammerr 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There are about 1000x times more dog shelters than shelters for battered man. Good to see that your group is an exception to the rule.
[–]bigcunttreeapples 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Our clients have to be over 18 years of age but we also allow male children with their parents. Essentially if anyone tells us that they are experiencing domestic violence we can house them. It's an emergency shelter, so our longest stay is 120 days. But every year people get a new 120 days to accommodate the cycle of violence that usually occurs.
[–]Honey-Badger 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Maybe in your country
[–]Halafax 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Equivalent services aren't common. Asking in my town will get a man pointed to a homeless shelter, kids unwelcome. Actually trying to report being the victim of domestic violence will get the guy sent to jail.
It's good that there are some services now, but the difference between "existing somewhere" and "existing where you are" is pretty huge.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Its hyperbolic, but it isnt as if the existence of one male shelter is just blowing all of our minds. There are a handful. I have one 3 hours away from me for male victims, but 9 in that same radius for women only.
[–]dungone 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In Canada there are none. Do you know what country she's from?
[–]Funcuz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Are you Canadian ?
[–]bigcunttreeapples 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No, in the US.
[–]slodojo 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Does it also house women? What % of your clients are men, would you say?
[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I like this one, because I can relate to it. I had my step-father at my house yesterday in tears because of the way my mother is (I don't talk to her anymore). She verbally abuses him and threatens to stab him on a regular basis, because she has mental health issues that she refuses to get help for. He's loyal to a fault. He told me yesterday that he sleeps in my old bedroom and barricades the door shut, in case she tries to attack him when he's sleeping (with one eye open).
My step-father and I had troubles when I was a teenager (who doesn't?), and since moving out, my mother has always told me how abusive and controlling he is. 15 years later I've learned that hardly any of what she has said is true. I feel so guilty now for resenting and hating him for so long, because of my blind loyalty to a crazy, controlling and manipulative woman. I've told him to leave her and move in with me, wife, kids, and Nan (dad's mum). I can't bare to see him broken and crying at 63.
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's fucking heartbreaking. I hope you guys' work that out. Sorry about your mom, too. My cousins' have a mentally ill mother, I think it's BPD because of the shit she's put them through, so I have only a faint idea of what that's like. Best wishes to you and your stepdad.
Someone with bpd is incredibly exhausting to deal with. If you love them the empathy kills you
Crazy middle aged people are the worst
[–]ChubaccaBacc 68 points69 points70 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Gallowboob is a karmawhore
[–]rotting_log 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Can't wait for him to suffer the same fate as Unidan
[–]Carkeyz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What happened to Unidan?
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
People found out he had multiple accounts and would log in to them to upvote his own posts/comments, and use them to downvote opposing replies. He let the hive-mind take care of it from there since Social Proof causes people to think whoever has the most upvotes must be right, and if something has upvotes it deserves upvotes and you should upvote it. Since the mechanism of upvotes is self-reinforcing the first 5 upvotes are about as important as the next 10, which are as important as the next 50.
[–]TheTerrasque 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Jackdaws, man... Jackdaws happened.
[–]3rdLevelRogue 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
He did get in trouble for a bit, didn't he? He freaked out or sent nudes to someone over and over for some reason
[–]theorymeltfool 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
But /u/gallowboob must be getting paid by someone to post this much, right? There's no way someone can spend this much time on Reddit and still have a job somewhere else...
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is his job. http://www.forbes.com/sites/fernandoalfonso/2016/06/01/cashing-in-karma-how-a-former-landscape-architect-turned-his-reddit-fame-into-a-career/#136d221421a0
[–]theorymeltfool 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Okay, I guess that makes sense (even though it doesn't).
[–]BookwormJane 47 points48 points49 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Let's not forget that women are the ones who most kill their own spouses.
[–]mynameisstacey 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And abuse their children.
[–]MaYlormoon 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And eat them
[–]boolabula -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
I actually wonder if theres any physical abuse leading up to them being murdered.
Also I don't understand this girl. Why would you get rid of feminism just b/c men need help getting out a abusive relationships too? They should have picked a better fucking word. Feminism as a word is not working.
[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Why would you get rid of feminism just b/c men need help getting out a abusive relationships too?
Because Feminism is fighting hard to ensure that no help is available to men who need it. That would be a good one.
Or the basic theories underlying feminism (i.e. patriarchy theory) says that society is set up for the benefit of men, yet there is no help for men who need, and there is help for women... pretty much invalidating the foundation of feminism.
[–]LilFunyunz 88 points89 points90 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link
Do we have a study somewhere to back this up? I have heard much smaller numbers than this. The largest of which was 19%.
Is there some sort of extrapolation of data that is reliable since a lot of men don't report abuse against them?
[–]Celda 87 points88 points89 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
What studies are you looking at?
http://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2016001/article/14303/01-eng.htm
In 2014, equal proportions of men and women reported being victims of spousal violence during the preceding 5 years (4%, respectively). This translated into about 342,000 women and 418,000 men across the provinces. Similar declines in spousal violence were recorded for both sexes since 2004.
[–]LilFunyunz 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Thank you for this i have not personally seen data that suggested it was this evenly distributed before. I appreciate it.
[–]F41LTR0C1TY 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I recently wrote a report on this specifically, part of the problem is how the surveys are counted and carried out. Some surveys pull from abuse shelters, others have literally discounted men who say they are being abused as likely abusers themselves, and scarily enough in a 1985 survey <1% of Male domestic Abuse victims actually reported it.
Here is a great article about a lot of the problems with in this subject.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Same website, differents data : (maybe i'm missing something !)
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/160121/dq160121b-eng.htm
The majority of police-reported family violence victims (68%) were women and girls.
In France, according to the ONDRP, it's more like 90% women and 10% men.
[–]chadwickofwv 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
When you are more likely to be arrested than your attacker you tend not to call the police.
[–]Mikeavelli 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Because police use the primary aggressor standard, which was developed in response to the rising rate of women being arrested for domestic violence when police were using the same standards they use for everyone else.
[–]chadwickofwv 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly.
[–]bufedad 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Studies indicate that men who call the police for help with domestic violence have a 70+% chance of one of two things happening.
Most prevalent (38% I think), the police will do nothing.
Second most prevalent (33% I think), the police will arrest him.
If you had a 70% chance of either nothing happening, or you going to jail... would you call the police?
[–]bioemerl 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Police reported
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's because men don't report being DV victims to police. If they do, they know they will likely get arrested.
That's not just my opinion, but the findings of actual studies.
My same source I linked states:
A ‘very high’ level of satisfaction with police action was reported by 37% of victims, especially among women (48%) when compared to men (25%E). A further 28% of victims reported being ‘somewhat satisfied’ with the actions taken by police. The remainder of victims reported being ‘somewhat dissatisfied’ (15%E) or ‘very dissatisfied’ (17%E) with how the police responded. Men were more likely than women to report being ‘very dissatisfied’ with how the police handled their situation (25%E versus 11%E, respectively).
As you can see, men are far more likely than women to report being "very dissatisfied" with the police treatment, and far less likely to report being very satisfied.
[–]420weedscopes 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
In a 2005 stats can study (dated I know) they found there was actually an equal number of men as women who were victims of domestic violence. This only speaks for Canada but I can imagine it being similar in other western democracies. Just google stats can male domestic violence.
Edit found the 2014 study still 50-50 http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/160121/dq160121b-eng.htm
[–]LilFunyunz 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Thank you for this. I never knew it was so evenly distributed.
[–]LokisDawn 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hardly anyone does. It's both a natural instinct to be more aware of violence against women, as well as a concerted effort by some feminists to sweep this part under the rug.
[–]contractor808 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This 10 min video sums it up quite nicely. It's a short version of Dr. Dutton's senate talk in Canada this past year.
[–]Papa_Milo 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
I've heard up to 50% from a bunch of places, never under 40%
[–]SovietJugernaut 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
"I've heard" ≠ "do we have a study".
I know you want to contribute, but please actually make an effort to ensure that contribution is worth reading.
[–]Papa_Milo 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
That's about as we have a study as it gets.
[–]SimWebb 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
From that article:
Most severe forms of spousal violence reported more often by female victims According to the 2014 GSS, one-quarter of spousal violence victims reported having been sexually assaulted, beaten, choked, or threatened with a gun or a knife. Women (34%) were twice as likely to report having experienced this most severe form of violence than men (16%). Just under one-quarter of victims (24%) reported having been kicked, bitten, hit, or hit with something. Men (35%) were over three times more likely to report this type of spousal violence than women (10%).
Most severe forms of spousal violence reported more often by female victims
According to the 2014 GSS, one-quarter of spousal violence victims reported having been sexually assaulted, beaten, choked, or threatened with a gun or a knife. Women (34%) were twice as likely to report having experienced this most severe form of violence than men (16%). Just under one-quarter of victims (24%) reported having been kicked, bitten, hit, or hit with something. Men (35%) were over three times more likely to report this type of spousal violence than women (10%).
[–]Papa_Milo 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
First paragraph:
Equal proportions of men and women with current or former spouses or partners reported being victims of spousal violence (4% each)
Cuck. This doesn't even cover how many guys get royally fucked by the duluth model, which is going strong in canada.
[–]McFeely_Smackup 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Using juvenile insults like "cuck" makes it extremely easy to discount your opinion as irrelevant and childish.
Mature up a bit, I think you'll be pleased with the results.
[–]Papa_Milo -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
subjective
[–]SimWebb 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Lol. Don't humiliate yourself with your political name-calling.
The paragraph you posted has already been quoted by other users. This wasn't some partisan political shot, I just posted something I didn't see anyone else point out that surprised me.
Take a percoset, delicate lil red-pill babe...
[–]Papa_Milo 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sorry I thought you were implying something else
[–]SimWebb 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
👍 no worries. Thanks.
[–]Anarchistnation 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
People like you are the reason why literally no one takes MRAs seriously and decades of good work are being undone by your kind who have never taken anything seriously in their lives. Back to the swamp, toady boy.
[–]Papa_Milo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Idiot, a person writing one word doesn't diminish public perception of the issues of all men. Way to blow shit out of proportion. Seriously, get over yourself. How self righteous can you get over a keyboard. Pat yourself on the back harder, internet crusader. I was even able to admit my error, like a normal person. All you're doing is attacking your own.
decades of good work are being undone by your kind who have never taken anything seriously in their lives
Unreal, baseless supposition.
Back to the swamp, toady boy.
What the fuck does that even mean?
[–]Starlos 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think I hold the answer to your question. Though I dunno for sure, I think that person (maybe rightfully) implied you were a Trump supporter, which would explain that last comment (probably because Trump said he would drain the swamp? I'm not sure to be honest). Either way it's clearly untrue, MRAs are just portrayed very negatively by feminists as a whole, which is why they aren't taken seriously. Back some time ago I thought only feminists on Tumblr and Reddit would shit on MRAs for absolutely no reason, but after talking with enough IRL feminists I know for a fact that it's a widespread sentiment (at least here in Canada). When you ask them for a source (about those nasty things they heard about MRAs) they can't point to any.
[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
No it's not.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5i6mz9/interesting/db626zd/
Jesus, this shit is right in the side bar info. It's not hard to find. Studies have been showing parity for like 30 years.
Cool story
Jesus fucking christ, what's happening to this sub that this is being upvoted? This has been addressed so many times. As u/celda has pointed out, there are hundreds of studies showing DV is not a gendered issue. The worst part of this is that these studies have existed for decades. This is not some new information that's been stumbled upon, it's been true for a very long time.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Depends of the country.
In canada : http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/160121/dq160121b-eng.htm
In France, according to the ONDRP, it's more like 90% women and 10% men. (I can't find a source in english)
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I find it hard to believe two first world countries could be so different in this regard. Doesn't it make more sense that the qualifier 'police-reported family violence victims' is causing the discrepancy, and not that the behavior is actually all that different?
[–]pokeydo 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
Egalitarianism -> Feminism/Men's Rights
One deals with women specific issues. One deals with men specific issues. Both under the umbrella of egalitarianism.
I will never think the phrase "I don't need feminism because..." isn't dumb.
You can have one without taking away from the other.
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
You can't have feminism without baggage like patriarchy theory, wage gap myth, etc.
Stop conflating women's rights with feminism. You can support women's rights without being a feminist ideologue. And I'd argue you have to be with some of the backwards, toxic views feminism pushes about women. Like constant infantalization of women, and trying to encourage women to see themselves as victims of male oppression.
[–]pokeydo -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
You would be wrong in that case. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the label feminist and I'm not afraid of the label. I would rather address the concerns that are brought up with it than change entirely. Not only because of the history behind it, but because it creates a more rounded discussion, in my opinion. We might not agree on the label, but that is the least important part of the issue.
I like being called a feminist, I like when people bring up the issue of misandry and men's rights so I have an opportunity to talk about it. I like the label, and I want to help bring the credibility back to it. That's a personal endeavor we might not agree on, but like I said before, it's the least important part of the issue.
[–]bufedad 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You would be wrong in that case.
Feminists named their bogeyman after men (patriarchy), and their hero movement after women (feminism)... sorry, it was anti-male from the start
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
To me, labels create divides. Often the discussion about the label can grow such that the issues they re present are never reached.
You seem quite reasonable so I'd expect you to believe something similar. If that's the case, why should we defend labels at all? Shouldn't MRAs and feminists shed their titles and instead speak directly about the issues that matter?
[–]pokeydo 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's a really excellent point. I'll chew on it for a little bit.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
"you'd be wrong in that case" "In my opinion"
Welp, not reading further then. If your follow up to me being wrong is your opinion and not some actual argument then I don't care. We can just agree to disagree right now if it's only going to be opinions. Bye.
[–]pokeydo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
..what? Lol. How is my opinion irrelevant? We're not talking about scientific facts, we're literally talking about differing opinions on the definition of Feminism. I don't understand where you're coming from where my opinion is irrelevant in a conversation about how you and I view feminism. They're both opinions.
Furthermore, how am I suppose to defend someone telling me I have views I don't have other than saying "No, I don't share those views"? Do you want some kind of evidence or..?
Never used the word "irrelevant" so... bye.
[–]LucifersHammerr 26 points27 points28 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Egalitarianism supports the men's rights movement, as well as women's rights. Feminism is an ideology that demonizes men, lobbies for discrimination against men, and opposes men's rights.
[–]contractor808 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Except feminism deals with more than just "women's issues." I has within it the underlying idea that men oppress women as a class.
[–]SpookyLlama -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
If you take the twisted version of feminism that people have given way too much attention to over the last few decades.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
It's getting attention because that's what the most widely praised and respected feminists' teach. Feminism is a twisted ideology and it is absolutely not what it says it is in the dictionary.
[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah... there are tons of versions of feminism that don't believe in patriarchy /s
[–]contractor808 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There's historical evidence of feminism's bias at least around the late 1800s with the Tender Years Doctrine and publications like "The Fraud of Feminism" by Earnest Belfort Bax.
[–]Loreki 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
This is not accurate there have been male shelters for over 10 years. There may not be enough, that's definitely worth discussing, but it can't be fairly said that there are none.
[–]arichone 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The nearest one for me being in the states looks like it MAY be 4.5 hours away. This is virtually the same as saying there are none in proportion to the size of population this shelter must serve.
I was in an abusive marriage in my hometown of 300k people (fairly large city). I went to the local center for abuse, a nice woman sat with me and talked but sadly shared they were not equipped to help. She said "we have mens groups that meet who are batterers, we have womens groups who meet who have been battered"
Please don't discount the problem because of a word
[–]LokisDawn -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't think they tried to discount the problem, they were just making a valid point about the veracity of the claim that there are none. To me, whether you say 0 or 40 doesn't make a difference, there certainly aren't enough.
[–]arichone 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fair enough, thank you. I feel like when we get hung up on technicalities, the focus then comes to prove whether its 40 or 0 instead of the big problem which is men don't feel they have a resource.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Depends where you look, Canada doesn't have any. Unless that's changed in the last few years, the only privately run one got the feminist government run around and no funding and the guy who ran it (who opened it because he was a victim of domestic violence) ended up killing himself.
[–]contractor808 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Earl Silverman ran one until he killed himself. The government refused to provide funding. CAFE may have relevant support services, but I'm not sure they run a men's shelter.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I know, that's who I was referring to.
[–]puzzlebuns 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yep, I was going to post the same thing. There aren't "zero" men's shelters. Too few, to be sure, but it's wrong/dishonest to say there are literally none.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
As far as I know Canada has literally zero. I think it'd be fair to say overall there's statistically no shelters; hardly dishonest to me.
[–]puzzlebuns 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Statistically there are shelters if there is just one shelter. She didn't say "there are no men's shelters". She said "0" shelters, with the zero underlined as if to emphasize that there isn't one single shelter.
It depends on where she lives then, doesn't it? Perhaps she's Canadian, or maybe Australian (I believe they don't have any either).
And even if she was wrong about that 0 figure, the main point is that there is a huge accessibility issue for battered men that no one seems to be addressing.
[–]Qapiojg 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Not sure you realize this. But the UK and US aren't the world. There exist other countries out there where this isn't a thing, like Canada or in this case Australia, where this young woman may be from.
[–]Puffy_Vulva 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
So seems like this sub has been infested with feminists and SJW-types. Should have seen that one coming.
[–]xseeks 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Seriously, wtf is going on? Is this place being brigaded or something?
[–]Puffy_Vulva 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Seems too long to be a brigade. It's been like this for a week or two. They're making a settlement here.
no, its just a few posts that it /all, with a few K of upvotes
[–]MCMXCIV0 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link
Although this message carries a positive message, domestic violence statistically is the leading cause of injury to women in America. So feminism of the right kind is much needed in their society. Its not right to deny what feminism does for women in order to promote mens rights. And shelters for men do exist.
[–]LucifersHammerr 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
That merely shows how safe women are. Men are much more likely to be murdered, killed on the job, die of premature heart attacks, commit suicide etc.
[–][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Your comment was automatically removed because we do not allow links to that subreddit. You may use a screenshot instead.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[–]JitGoinHam -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
We need to fight feminism in order to get that female suicide rate higher.
[–]LucifersHammerr 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I thought you wanted equality? Tsk tsk.
[–]bufedad 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We've got to fight feminists just to talk about male suicide, so...
Or bring the male suicide rate down to a healthy level via mental by encouraging a social atmosphere that gives men a voice to express feelings of sadness or vulnerability without telling them it takes away from their "manhood"
[–]pokeydo -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
One issue does not take away from another. Your issues matter just as much as mine, and they don't have to fight with each other to matter.
[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Then explain why feminist groups are pulling fire alarms on male suicide discussion conferences?
Explain why feminist groups are opposing men's rights groups?
Explain why feminist groups sent death threats to people wanting to open male focused domestic violence shelters.
Explain why feminist oppose funding men's health issues.
I mean, in theory, yeah they don't have to, but feminism sure seems set on fighting.
[–]pokeydo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Because those people are assholes.
No argument, but they are also feminists.
And we have to fight them before we can even begin to talk about equality. Literally. We have to fight through them just to get together and talk about working for equality.
Welcome to reality.
[–]Settlers6 26 points27 points28 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
Although this message carries a positive message, domestic violence statistically is the leading cause of injury to women in America.
Source?
So feminism of the right kind is much needed in their society.
I suspect this is a subtle 'no true scotsman' fallacy. What is 'the right kind' of feminism? Would that be the feminists that you approve of? Unfortunately, feminism is a large movement, and the movement as a whole (not just extremists) is detrimental to men's rights. You can't decide who are or are not 'real' feminists.
Sure, we need the 'right kind of feminism', in the same way we need the 'right kind of Nazi' (like Oskar Schindler). A good minority doesn't mean that feminism as a whole isn't detrimental to men's rights, which makes it valid to say that for the sake of human rights and equality, the Western world is better off without feminism.
Its not right to deny what feminism does for women in order to promote mens rights
Nobody here is denying what feminist do for women's rights, except feminists themselves: we have seen feminism try to give women more rights than men, or take away rights men should have and we are fed up with it.
And shelters for men do exist.
Rhinos exist too, but it's disingenuous to imply that they exist anywhere close to the same number as deer, though they both have equal right to exist. There are male shelters, but those are a very small minority of all shelters (the other shelters being for women), even though men are just as often the victims of domestic violence.
Yes, women die more often from domestic violence, but that is no excuse to have almost no domestic violence shelters for men: maybe the shelter ratio shouldn't be 50/50, but it definitely shouldn't be 10/90. Also, have you considered that having a male DV shelter could combat female victims as well? If a woman is abusing her man, he has no recourse due to social pressures and discrimination in the legal system that will usually consider him the abuser if his spouse has so much as a bruise on her body. The abuse will go on until he's had enough, and then he'll snap and kill his spouse. If he had a DV shelter to escape to, it might reduce the chance of that happening.
[–]LucifersHammerr 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Also, have you considered that having a male DV shelter could combat female victims as well? If a woman is abusing her man, he has no recourse due to social pressures and discrimination in the legal system that will usually consider him the abuser if his spouse has so much as a bruise on her body. The abuse will go on until he's had enough, and then he'll snap and kill his spouse.
Excellent point.
[–]bufedad 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
I read in a study about a year ago (and I haven't found it since), but the greatest indicator of whether a woman will be abused in her relationship isn't whether the spouse has been abusive in past relationships, but whether she has.
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
you're implying they are doing something to provoke it upon themselves in most situations?
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
I'm implying that 75% of domestic violence is reciprocal (as per studies) and 80% of reciprocal domestic violence is initiated by women (as per studies).
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
source?
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Numbers were a little off from memory.
Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (2.3 times or 70%) and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator (AOR=4.4; 95% CI=3.6, 5.5). Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases. Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7). Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women (AOR=1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.5), and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator (AOR=4.4; 95% CI=3.6, 5.5).
Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent.
In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases
Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (2.3 times or 70%)
and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator (AOR=4.4; 95% CI=3.6, 5.5).
Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases. Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7). Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women (AOR=1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.5), and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator (AOR=4.4; 95% CI=3.6, 5.5).
National Institute of Health
These aren't some long held secrets kept from society. Anyone who has done any research into domestic violence statistics at all already knows this
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
No actually in Canada where I live stats Canada doesn't provide statistics on reciprocal violence. Domestic violence is seen as something that effects men equal to women by their studies. The problems I see are that there aren't recourse or help for men to get when they are the victims of such things where as there are for women.
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
They've done studies on it, the last one I can find is from 1998 (but that may not be the most recent).
More importantly, every country that has done a study on DV reciprocity has found the same thing. There is absolutely no reason to believe the women and men in Canada are somehow different from the rest of the first world.
[–]Gnomish8 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Their guesstimate was a little high according to this. ~50% of DV is reciprocal, with 70% of non-reciprocal DV being perpetrated by women, and in reciprocal situations, "the woman was more likely to have been the first to strike."
[–]contractor808 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, women die more often from domestic violence, but that is no excuse to have almost no domestic violence shelters for men
I'd like to mention that it has been suggested that since men don't report dv at the rates it is perpetrated, domestic homicides of husbands/partners are often not tied to alleged domestic abuse. So it may be that the numbers are not as different as they are made out to be, but rather the type of crime reported does not match the context of what happened.
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
"feminism is detrimental for men's rights"
This is false. Feminism has done a lot for men's rights too, for instance by promoting and pushing paternity leave or gay marriage.
[–]Settlers6 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
And nazis are pro-Jew because I can find 9 or 10 examples of nazis that helped Jews. /s
We are talking about feminism the movement: the general movement. Not small groups. Yes, there were/are some feminists that fight for men's issues (e.g. Christina Hoff Sommers). However, she has been 'cast out' of the movement by her feminist peers.
How is gay marriage 'men's rights'? Women can be gay too, you know. I think this exemplifies most of the times feminism 'fought' for men's rights: it's a byproduct. And now you are using all those byproducts to say: "See, feminism cares about men's issues!" No, those things often happened because feminism was trying to push some women's issue, and the men had to be taken along as well. (If feminism came out as pro-lesbian, but anti-gay, that wouldn't fly well).
Let's talk about the biggest feminist organisation in the US, NOW. It supports the wage gap myth, the rape culture myth and all the incorrect statistics that go along with that, it focuses on violence against women while excluding mentioning men (even though it's been shown that men suffer at the same rate from domestic violence) and it fought against shared parenting, to the benefit of women etc. So it's safe to say that judging by its actions, NOW is not pro-men.
If feminism generally fought as hard for men as it does for women, how come there is no response from the majority of feminists, or the biggest feminist organisation in the US (NOW) when presidential candidate Hilary Clinton says (during a conference on domestic violence, ironically): "Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known."
Or when a president quotes the wage gap myth (which existence results in sexism against men), where is that majority of good feminists that contest it? Where is NOW, or r/feminism or any large congregation of feminist?
See, you can say that feminism helps men until the end of days, but (exceptions aside) that doesn't make it true. Feel free to prove me wrong: where is that majority of pro-men feminists hiding? The ones that make it clear they know that
-men suffer from DV violence at the same rate as women, yet they have hardly any DV shelters. -men suffer much more from violence in general, but the attention, funding and support still goes mainly to women. -men can get raped, they face a social stigma for it, and there isn't much help for them -the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is clearly sexist and should be altered -the wage gap is a myth and the policies that result from that myth harm men. -rape culture (in the West) is a myth and the policies that result from that myth harm men. etc.
They don't even have to acknowledge all of these, just show me that huge majority of good feminists that clearly, honestly intend to help men to the same degree as women, and acknowledge that men aren't just their own worst enemy (looking at you menslib), but that society disadvantages men in several, very tangible ways.
EDIT: The top comments in this thread explain very well why MRAs dislike feminism as a whole, though it is a lot to read.
hahaha bullllshit. Duluth model, allowing for the continued genital mutilation of boys, lobbying against all legislation that tries to bring balance to the broken family court system, pushing for quotas that disadvantage men in higher education, lobbying for changes in education that favor girls by disincentivizing testing, NEVER talking about the male suicide rape/Domestic Violence rate/ job fatality rate.
Fuck feminism, all it preaches is "men bad, women weak." I defy you to find one argument feminists make about something affecting women that doesn't boil down to one or both of those two things.
Gay marriage didn't need feminism to be pushed through. Feminism opposes gay men a lot, and slanders us constantly if it will benefit them.
They'll call us sexist, misogynistic [even going as far as to say we're more so than straight men! So we are worse than the greatest evil ever, straight men], and say things like we'd care more about dancing in underwear and "taking Molly" than "helping women" ie; being their tools.
They value gay men like they value all men. As tools to use for themselves. They will throw us under the bus, and have. Minority men have the same issues with feminism. Like that nonsense "Pin Box" feminist thing helping "black people" except when you dig deeper all the two black females vacationing on a beach somewhere when they had this idea to exploit white guilt, are actually benefiting are black women. [if they're even doing that and not 100% pocketing all the money]
All minority men can rely on is their minority status to find help. If they're a victim because of a black woman, then tough shit. Black men's struggles are under cut by black women's struggles. And you can't claim a black woman is racist toward a black man. So the only factor he can rely on is gone. Now he's just a man. And that means nothing to most of society, because women are more important not just to feminism, but to the general public because it's in our nature to place importance on the gender that our species lives and dies on. And feminism exploits that protective nature we have toward women. The nature to put them first, even at the detriment of men. Even though we're 7 billion strong as a species.
NOW has opposed default shared custody as an example. Feminists are infringing on the rights of men all across the first world in colleges, by pushing for things that infringe on their right to a fair trial and presumption of innocence. If feminism cared about women, they'd want them to go to the police if they are raped. Not have some kangaroo court take care of a criminal act. But hey, there's no negative consequence for women who do this it just hurts men. The end justifies the means, they should've thought about all that male privilege before they decided to be born male! /s
Feminism has done a lot for men's rights too, for instance by promoting and pushing paternity leave or gay marriage.
And strongly opposed shared parenting so that fathers will not be alienated from their children.
And strongly opposed the recognition of male victims of rape by female perpetrators.
And strongly opposed the rights of those accused of sexual crimes against women.
I could go on, but no... feminism is absolutely detrimental to men's rights.
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Although this message carries a positive message, domestic violence statistically is the leading cause of injury to women in America
That's fiction. The leading cause of injury to women in the US... is unintended fall.
The top 6 leading causes of injury to women in the US are all accidental injuries.
You have to get down to number 7 to get to intentional injury.
For men, number six is the first intentional cause of injury, the same as women's number 7. Assault/struck by.
Furthermore, 50% more men are injured by assault/struck by than women.
So, get educated. CDC
[–]contractor808 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
There won't be a right kind of feminism as long as it has roots in the idea that men as a class oppress women as a class. The historical record of feminism's misdeed should be proof enough.
Also consider that if men are at around 40% of dv victims, what would those injuries rank for men? Would it be top 10? Top 5?
[–]MCMXCIV0 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yes exactly my point, an attempt to promote mens rights while putting down women's issues is wrong and the same goes for feminism, which is why i said "of the right kind." Recognizing and accepting differences is the first step towards true equality instead of trying to blindly blur the lines between what makes us different, i feel. Then again im just a 22 year old male college student, who am i to preach.
[–]PM_ME_CLOUD_PORN 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Who cares about equality? Just condemn bad things independent of identity.
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I've never met an MRA who opposes women's rights. But every feminist I've met opposes men's rights. They openly say so.
Yes exactly my point, an attempt to promote mens rights while putting down women's issues is wrong
Which is not what the men's right movement does. There is nothing on the men's rights movement agenda (as much as it has a central agenda) that takes rights away from women.
I mean, unless you think women have a right to financially enslave men, abuse them, or prevent them from seeing their children?
[–]McFeely_Smackup 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
i dont need feminism, but dammit i need season 2 of "Attack on Titan"
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fuck yeah.
[–]withoutamartyr 42 points43 points44 points 9 years ago* (38 children) | Copy Link
So, I know this might be seen as an unpopular or outsider opinion in this subreddit, but I'd like to respond to this picture honestly and express what might be considered a feminist response.
Men popularly being viewed as unable to be victims of domestic abuse is definitely a result of patriarchal conditioning. It has to do with how society expects men to behave and react, and what we expect from "masculinity". Being a victim of a class of people generally considered weak and demure implies weakness in the man. It is seen as emasculating, in the same way calling a man a bitch or a pussy or saying something like "I'm taking away your man card" is seen. In a patriarchy, men have are expected to have power. If that power is construed as being taken away, the man loses his status.
People expect a lot of things from men in order for them to live up to the label of "masculine". Damaging things, that are bad for the health of men and boys. Things like not having close relationships with other men (its not friendship, it's "bromance", because intimacy among friends can't be accepted without couching it in layers of irony), not expressing feelings in any meaningful way, not crying, being aggressive and generally "alpha". These are all traits of the masculine gender role, and when taken to the extreme leads to things like police assuming the man is the perpetrator and not the victim, because women are weak and incapable of taking power from a man and men are aggressive and tend to react violently to negative emotions. These ideas of what a man's role is, and the behavior he ought to be engaging in, is also a major contributor to why so many men face a stacked deck in custody battles or get the short end of the stick in a divorce.
This isn't evidence against the patriarchy, but strong evidence for it. This is how society cultivates men in what they want and expect them to be, by robbing them of the means and confidence to be anything else. We expect so much posturing from men, and the net of narrowly-defined "masculinity" is woven so tightly into how we behave, that if a man ever finds himself the victim of a power imbalance, such as domestic violence or, God forbid, rape, the fear of appearing somehow weakened or lessened prevents them from coming forward about it.
She's right, in that there is a silent victim hood, and it is alarmingly high and ill-recognized. But that problem has so little to do with feminism, I don't know why she'd feel it means she doesn't need it. Feminism is female action against the patriarchy, in an effort to establish a better position in society for themselves. Men need the same thing, a concerted effort and a community working against patriarchy to establish for themselves a new set of rules to live by. Personal feelings about feminism aside, I think most people here would agree men face serious problems in society, and deserve the right to address those problems without being dismissed outright. (edit to add)That said, men seeking to free themselves from these constraining boxes are fighting the same fight feminism is fighting, but feminists and masculinists alike often get distracted fighting each other and forget to identify the common cause of their problems.
A large problem is the idea of "patriarchy" is a lot like "democracy" or "capitalism", in that everyone has a different idea of what it is, how it works, how it should work, and we all have different experiences with it. Ask a rich man and a pooram what capitalism gets wrong, and you'll get different, often opposite, answers.
[–][deleted] 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
I'll have to stop you right there and point that that in this case, and every case of the substitution of the word society with "patriarchy" when we are blaming society for some problem, is blatant misandry. Always has been, always will be.
It would be like referring to all theft as a result of "Negroarchal" conditioning. Would that not make me a massive racist?
You can call the societal pressure towards traditional gender roles what it actually is, calling it the patriarchy is just a slimy way that feminists vilify men for something that both men and women do.
[–]EricAllonde 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'll have to stop you right there and point that that in this case, and every case of the substitution of the word society with "patriarchy" when we are blaming society for some problem, is blatant misandry.
I've also wondered about why feminists insist on saying "patriarchy" when they clearly mean something closer to "socially accepted gender roles". My guess is that's it's a combination of misandry, as you say, and also letting themselves off the hook.
If something negative is due to gender roles, then women can play a role in fixing it by changing their own thinking about gender. For example: too few women doing STEM courses because gender roles encourage them to do teaching and nursing instead? Solution: women change their attitudes regarding which careers are suitable for women.
Uh, oh! It looks like it's on women to fix their under-representation in STEM! Can't have that, so what can feminists do? Answer: replaced "gender roles" with "patriarchy". Now it's all men's fault, and feminists can sit back in condescending judgement while they demand men fix the problem that they created.
[+]withoutamartyr -10 points-9 points-8 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
That's a semantic game. Monarchy and oligarchy follow similar constructions, and aren't meant to malign anyone. It's a word that describes where power tends to collect. It doesn't imply a conspiracy, or a cabal, or even ill-intent. Just the direction of the flow of power.
[–]LucifersHammerr 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Monarchy and oligarchy follow similar constructions, and aren't meant to malign anyone.
Men sure seem to have a problem with it, or at least the vast majority of them. Given the notorious feminist predilection for policing language (fireman needs to be fireperson etc) perhaps you should listen to what men are telling you and use another word?
It's an especially odd word to use when female sexual selection is perhaps the most important factor in determining male behavior. Now that women control more money than men in the United States, and since an increasing number of fathers can't even see let alone help raise their children, perhaps we should start calling it the matriarchy. Would that bother you? If not why not?
[+]withoutamartyr -12 points-11 points-10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I think "the vast majority" is an overstatement, and "female sexual selection is perhaps the most important factor in driving male behavior" is a ridiculous oversimplification, and frankly a little insulting to men. When women hold a proportional amount of legislative power in the house and the Senate and have a proportional representation in the private sector, I will feel comfortable saying "men don't hold the majority of the power".
[–]LucifersHammerr 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think "the vast majority" is an overstatement
4 percent of men in the UK consider themselves feminists.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/only-7-per-cent-of-britons-consider-themselves-feminists/
"female sexual selection is perhaps the most important factor in driving male behavior" is a ridiculous oversimplification, and frankly a little insulting to men.
It is women who determine how masculinity is expressed. “It is within their power of selective neglect to produce a sex ration heavily in favor of females over males. It also lies within woman’s power to sabotage the development of ‘masculine’ males by rewarding little boys for being passive rather than aggressive.” - Marvin Harris
When women hold a proportional amount of legislative power in the house and the Senate
That would literally make no difference. None. Nada. Women have in-group bias where males have a bias toward females. That's why most men have no interest in funding DV shelters for other men but jump at the opportunity to fund DV shelters for women.
Your fundamental error is to assume that men in power give a shit about other men. There is literally zero evidence for this. It makes sense neither form a biological perspective or a traditional class based perspective. Men have never, nor will they ever attempt to privilege other men at the expense of women, and all of history is testament to that fact.
[–]contractor808 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
She's right, in that there is a silent victim hood, and it is alarmingly high and ill-recognized. But that problem has so little to do with feminism, I don't know why she'd feel it means she doesn't need it.
You aren't acquainted with the alternating feminist crusade and obscuring of male victims. The most common forms this takes are the arguments
Women have it worse! There's aren't enough male victims to need services for men! (using flawed statistics/police reports to justify limiting resources)
Domestic violence is gendered violence against women and a way for men to exert their power over women. (Duluth Model)
Also consider the terrible legislation implemented with the help of feminists such as the aforementioned Duluth Model of domestic violence, mandatory arrest laws aimed at "predominant aggressors" (aka men), and the enabling of false accusations via said policies and well funded advocates that serve on the woman's behalf in court.
And all of these policies hinge on faulty or outright misleading "advocacy research" that ignores male victims. It's a cycle. Create research that shows only women are victims. Use that research to advocate only for female victims and policies that advantage them. Use the resulting arrest statistics and police reports in new research that reaffirms the original premise that women are the primary victims.
There is some social reasons for men's situation and there are some biological reasons. It's important not to cover for feminism when it has a long record of opposing male victims of domestic violence in particular, and male victims in general.
[–]LucifersHammerr 39 points40 points41 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Men popularly being viewed as unable to be victims of domestic abuse is definitely a result of patriarchal conditioning.
Nope. If you go back eg to colonial Virginia there were laws on the books that prohibited men from striking their wives and wives from striking their husbands. Feminists came along and created the Duluth model, which portrays DV as a patriarchal conspiracy even though it is not a gendered issue. The Duluth model is the dominant model in every Western country. Its result is that male victims of DV are often themselves arrested. Feminists have consistently opposed efforts to highlight male victims (eg the White Ribbon in Australia) and sent death threats to Erin Pizzey -- who founded the first women's shelter in the UK -- when she rejected Duluth.
It has to do with how society expects men to behave and react, and what we expect from "masculinity".
Again, nothing to do with "the patriarchy."
"What Brown also discovered in the course of her research is that, contrary to her early assumptions, men's shame is not primarily inflicted by other men. Instead, it is the women in their lives who tend to be repelled when men show the chinks in their armor."
http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/messages-of-shame-are-organized-around-gender/275322/
Things like not having close relationships with other men (its not friendship, it's "bromance", because intimacy among friends can't be accepted without couching it in layers of irony)
The term "bromance" was created by women, not men. It's part of the current trend by feminists to mock all things male by using the term "bro" or "man" eg "brogrammer," "brosocialist," "mansplaining" etc. Also, see this thread. It's currently stickied on this sub:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5g99iv/stop_telling_men_to_show_their_emotions/?st=iwokott4&sh=b34a786b
But that problem has so little to do with feminism, I don't know why she'd feel it means she doesn't need it.
Feminism doesn't really challenge gender roles despite rhetoric to the contrary. It portrays women as helpless victims and males as evil oppressors. Karen Straughan's excellent lecture on "toxic femininity" explores this in depth. I'd definitely recommend checking it out if you'd like to learn about the history of eg feminist opposition to helping male victims of domestic violence. Ironically laws about DV were more progressive several hundred years ago.
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This isn't evidence against the patriarchy, but strong evidence for it.
It's not evidence for the patriarchy, it's evidence that men are believed to have this power whether they do or not, and peoples responses are measured out to be a reflection of the power they are assumed to have.
If patriarchy is real, then we're going to treat men as the aggressor by default. If patriarchy is real, then men don't need any help.
Patriarchy isn't real though, and all that "counter-balancing" people are doing is just oppression.
You're using Partriarchy in a different way than I am, as the end of your comment suggests. But what good is calling this thing where social roles are enforced and negatively impact both sexes equally "Patriarchy"? Feminists are using the term to imply men are a class that enjoys privileges at womens expense and that's where it ends. Why not call it the social keyhole or the social press or something that isn't blatantly used to lay blame on men and enforce this idea that men are members of a cabal ruling women?
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
men are responsible for every problem men have and feminism is the solution
Lol.
[–]withoutamartyr 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
I don't think I said any of that. Reductionism only hurts your ability to understand opposing viewpoints.
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
I wasn't quoting you verbatim. That's obvious but apparently still needs to be pointed out. And you're right, reductionism is bad. And reducing the problem men face to "the patriarchy" or "masculinity" is reductionism.
[–]withoutamartyr 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link
No shit you weren't quoting me verbatim. But if that was your takeaway from what I wrote I don't think I made myself clear, or you were being willfully obtuse.
The problem isn't men, and the problem isn't masculinity. The problem is a long series of unacknowledged and unspoken social posturings and false faces, an accumulation of behaviors we have come to describe as "normal masculinity" that is inherently confining and reductive, and any deviation from this construction is punished within the Court of Social Acceptability. The truth is "masculinity" is a multi-faceted all-encompassing multitudinous concept, and to allow ourselves to confine it to a certain small set of acceptable behaviors is doing a great disservice to men. This general social box-constructing is what I mean when I say "patriarchy", and when I say "masculinity" I say it in quotes because I'm talking about the box it comes in. Feminism has, in many ways, identified this trend towards prescriptive behavior and has taken steps to correct imbalances. I do not think we need to be feminists to solve the issues men face, or that "feminism is the answer", but I think they're right about what the problem is.
I don't know where in there you got "men are the problem"
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The problem isn't men and the problem isn't masculinity
I agree with you. However I don't believe the answer is feminism, and that is likely where we disagree. I do not agree with modern feminism. My interpretation of modern feminism is "masculinity is bad". As a man who values his masculinity, I disagree. I also disagree with with the apparent notion that men are disposable, "weak" men even more so. And I completely disagree with the idea that modern feminism refutes that trope. I disagree with the odd notion that masculinity is harmful to masculinity. And I completely disagree with the idea that I am sexist because I am not a feminist. I'm not saying you agree with any of that, I'm just glossing over my interpretation of modern feminism and why I think demonizing masculinity and calling any modern first-world secular society a "patriarchy" (and railing against it simply because it is perceived as such) is bad.
[–]withoutamartyr 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
"Masculinity", in quotes, is harmful to masculinity.
What makes someone masculine, and how someone relates to their gender, is personal, and informed by their beliefs, upbringing, and immediate surroundings. No one, in their right mind, should try to question your masculinity for being into knitting, or becoming a nurse. But those things aren't in the box labeled "masculine", so society often turns those kind of people into the butt of a joke. That is what is harmful to masculinity. People mold themselves into this box they might not fit in in order to be accepted. They repress parts of themselves (maybe a passion for gardening, or something as central as their sexuality) so as not to rock the boat.
This is what people mean when they imply that "masculinity is bad". They aren't calling out the male gender, or all men, or that somehow men are the root of all problems, they're calling attention to this box labeled "masculinity", they're saying it's a narrow definition, they're saying putting pressure on men to conform to that definition is damaging to themselves and the people around them.
There are, of course, people who identify very strongly with that traditional definition, and that's totally cool. That is their right and their freedom. But there are many others who may not have even realized they had the option of stepping outside of it.
And I think "Feminism", in quotes, is harmful to masculinity and femininity. That being said, I agree with everything you stated.
[–]LucifersHammerr 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link
Are you a woman perchance? I find it extremely fascinating that some women claim to be such experts on masculinity when they've never lived as a man.
Apparently the vast majority of men disagree with you. They don't think their masculinity is "toxic" and they have no interest in going around crying. They want fair laws and economic opportunity.
It is an extremely nasty thing to be telling boys to act like girls. You are abusing them by doing so. As soon as they reach puberty the neoteny that causes sympathy towards children (and women) will disappear and they will be left with no tools to survive. The combination of feminist indoctrination and fatherlessness ("destroying the patriarchal family") has indeed created a "crisis in masculinity". As it turns out, feminist theory was all wrong. Men are absolutely vital to child rearing (for both boys and girls). And men need to feel useful and honored; they don't like fighting women (hence the success of feminism) but they don't like being demonized and abused. Now that male suicide is at an all time high, you're suggesting we do more of the same!? Sorry, but men have been putting up with this bullshit for over a century and we've decided its time to put our collective foot down. Ultimately it's for your own good.
What do men want? They want (a) respect and (b) fairness. That means feminism has to go. It's a peculiar moment in time because feminism is being supported by the likes JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs and other centers of power (why is uncertain, divide and conquer perhaps) even though the number of self-described feminists is rapidly dwindling. Eventually, "gender studies" programs will go the way of eugenics studies programs and other horrors of history. Unless they rapidly evolve. In which case they may be redeemable.
[–]withoutamartyr 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I am a man.
[–]pattyice11 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
(Assuming she's a woman)
She didn't say masculinity is toxic. She said the narrow constraints society puts on masculinity is toxic. Which is not only true but is something this sub rails against daily.
"They have no interest going around crying" You realize you're proving her point here, right? You're contributing to the societal pressures on masculinity leading to the under reporting of DV and rape as well as higher arrest rates of men for DV.
She never once said boys should act like girls. She said if a man wants to be a fucking nurse then he should be a fucking nurse. If a man likes to knit then he should be allowed to knit and not ridiculed for it. This is very different than saying a man has to knit.
She was giving men both respect and fairness, and your point of "well you're not a man so how would you know" is used repeatedly by the feminists you are arguing against. In the same way you don't have to be a woman to critique feminism, she doesn't have to be a man to talk about masculinity and societal expectations of males.
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link
She didn't say masculinity is toxic.
You may or may not be aware that Victoria (Australia) has mandated courses about "toxic masculinity" that will be taught to children as young as five.
Now, I do have one memory from when I was about five (seeing a cat for the first time) but being that I wasn't Mozart I don't think I would have had the capability to understand concepts like "toxic masculinity" -- even if they did make sense to full grown adults. Evidently the vast majority of the population considers these ideas bizarre and silly. Unfortunately we are ruled by a plutocracy, not a democracy.
You realize you're proving her point here, right? You're contributing to the societal pressures on masculinity leading to the under reporting of DV and rape
No. I'm saying that MRA's are primarily concerned about legal/institutional/structural issues rather than "expressing their feelings." The MRM is a human's rights movement. The modern feminist movement is an anti-human rights movement primarily concerned with things like "manspreading" and policing what Halloween costumes people wear.
She said if a man wants to be a fucking nurse then he should be a fucking nurse. If a man likes to knit then he should be allowed to knit and not ridiculed for it. This is very different than saying a man has to knit.
Again, these are not issues that men care much about. If men want to be nurses they will become nurses. Teachers are the much more relevant issue -- but since "listen and believe" and general hysteria about male sexuality has replaced due process you can forget about men going into teaching.
We are concerned about institutional discrimination, such as the fact that men are sentenced to 60 percent longer sentences and can have their genitals mutilated or suffer the vast majority of child labor and be forced to fight and die in wars. "Expressing our feelings like women" is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy down the list of priorities.
Also, since you're so enamored with the idea of male nurses, what about female garbage collectors or bomb disposal experts? Why aren't feminist campaigns underway to make sure 50% of bomb disposal experts are female?
She was giving men both respect and fairness
By blaming teh patriarchy? Lol.
she doesn't have to be a man to talk about masculinity and societal expectations of males.
No. But she may want to listen to the "lived experiences" of the 90 or so percent of men who reject feminism. Or the 80 or so percent of women who reject feminism.
[–]pattyice11 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Your comeback against my clarifying of her comments that you misinterpreted is to bring up a class in australia? Really?
I didn't say that nowhere is the idea of toxic masculinity being spread and taught. I said that wasn't what she was saying in this particular thread. You and third wave feminists seem to have in common the complete inability to possess the slightest bit of nuanced thought.
I used the example of nurses because that's an example she used. Again, I was discussing a conversation in this thread. Of course it's not the only disproportional field. Nor do I think it's a bad thing for a field to be naturally disproportionate. For example, just because I acknowledge the natural inclination of females to pick something outside of STEM fields, despite being encouraged pick them as of late, doesn't mean I think that if a female comes along who is both inclined and qualified she shouldn't be considered for a job in said field.
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
a class in australia? Really?
Do you have some sort of bigotry against Australians? What the hell?
The rest of your post is too rambling to make sense of.
Has nothing to do with feminist removing men from domestic violence studies, and even going so far as to remove them from the very definition of rape (when the rapist is female)? No... It's patriarchy. With an opening as ignorant as that, how could we go on?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
My primary point of departure with the Men's Rights Movement, even though we share a common goal and very similar criticisms, is the underlying cause. I think feminism is an ally in this cause.
I'm not sure feminism denies men's problems, or says all men have it easy. The current wave of feminism, in the scholastic circles (because Tumblr isn't the end-all-be-all of what entails feminist thought) and among respected thinkers, is very understanding of the issues men face. This is where the concept of toxic masculinity comes from, the idea that living up to strict gender roles is bad for individuals and society as a whole.
There's this excellent documentary called The Mask You Live In, created by a feminist documentarian, that examines men's issues.
[–]LucifersHammerr 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
" The mask you live in"
It's a feminist hate film that grotesquely targets boys and labels masculinity "toxic." The Red Pill is excellent. It essentially debunks feminist theory, which is why feminists are trying to get it banned.
[–]pattyice11 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"I think feminism is an ally in this cause"
I've agreed with everything you've said in this thread. In a perfect world, the above statement is true. From my anecdotal observations, however, it doesn't seem to shake out that way most of the time. I suppose it's up to both your camp and our camp to not view each others as enemies but rather allies in the cause of equality. This is increasingly hard to do with (loud) idiots on both sides stoking the "us vs. them" fire.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If you can find a way to say all that without shoehorning in the idea that we live in a patriarchy I'll be able to take you seriously.
[–]CaptSnap 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Things like not having close relationships with other men (its not friendship, it's "bromance", because intimacy among friends can't be accepted without couching it in layers of irony), not expressing feelings in any meaningful way, not crying, being aggressive and generally "alpha".
This really is the perfect feminist response. The problems plaguing men are because of their stifled emotional outlets. Of all the problems plaguing men...sentencing disparity, incarceration rates, prison treatment, rape, suicide, academic failure, unemployment, lifespan, bodily integrity, homelessness, I cant think of any way being more emotional is going to do a damn thing. But for some reason feminists do...why is that? Im not being snarky I really want to know?
Like for example...just one example...on April 14th of 2014 Boko Haram raided a school and abducted some 254 girls and the Western World lost its mind. Bring back our girls, remember? So why did the west lose its mind here and not....Oh I dunno when they burnt 60 boys alive just a month prior?
Was it the larger number of victims? maybe... or maybe its because the victims were girls?
I think its because men suffer an empathy gap. To be succinct nobody gives a shit about men. Did you see Michelle holding up a sign stop burning our boys? No you did not. When Oprah asked Michelle at the "United State of Women Summit" what she thought men attending could do to help did she say anything about tackling equality as equals ? NO, she told men to be better. Theres no State of Men Summit, just like theres no white house council on men and boys. The president had some pretty good advice for men though To be fair I think Hillary's initiative to introduce lighter sentencing for women and women only because of their "unique needs" would have really gone far to fighting sexism no shit
Women and women's issues are front page issues. Nobody wants to hear about men's problems and they certainly dont want to raise a finger to stop boys being burned alive.
Lets just have some science. Women like Women more than Men like Men or maybe youre a laymen Women are Wonderful
Youre a feminist. You must genuinely believe in this patriarchy. How much emotional outlet kumbaya bullshit do you think is going to make society give a shit about men and men's problems?
OR which of the handful of institutional problems I listed do you think crying or any of that other sideline bullshit is going to fix for men?
The short answer is Feminism...thats big capital F feminism, has NO answer for men because they do not give a shit about men and they know no one else does either.
Thats why alot of the problems you mentioned men facing arent the result of the mysterious patriarchy...they're the result of actual feminists!
police assuming the man is the perpetrator and not the victim
The Duluth Model based on academic feminism, the most widely promulgated domestic violence model in the US created that. They literally believe that when women are violent they do so from a place absent of power and so its not abusive but basically a cry for help...whereas a man is always abusive. This is TOTALLY A FEMINIST INVENTION
many men face a stacked deck in custody battles
Tender Years Doctrine Men used to get custody, feminists wanted custody. Women get custody. FEMINIST
God forbid, rape, the fear of appearing somehow weakened or lessened prevents them from coming forward about it.
This is so far removed from reality thats its laughable. Men dont report domestic violence because when they do they are either ridiculed or arrested themselves
From the article (emphasis mine):
There has been little research on responses to male victims of intimate partner violence, in part because agencies refuse to fund such research. For example, the U.S. Department of Justice solicitation of proposals for Justice Responses to Intimate Partner Violence and Stalking (p. 8) stated “What will not be funded: 4. Proposals for research on intimate partner violence against, or stalking of, males of any age or females under the age of 12.” In the few studies done, many men report that hotline workers say they only help women, imply or state the men must be the instigators, ridicule them or refer them to batterers’ programs. Police often will fail to respond, ridicule the man or arrest him. (Cook 2009)(Douglas and Hines, 2011)
Thanks feminists!
Now supposing for a moment that feminism actually played a role in fucking men....which you dont have to accept even after learning about the Duluth Model and how widespread it has become and what effect it has had on men....what would you suggest men do? Which of the things academic feminists and yourself listed as holding men back are going to help the situation?
Academic feminism has allegedly been working on how to help men for about fifty, sixty years now. Their best strategy is for men to cry more. Thats real gravitas right there.....so much empathy and so little hate amirite?
[–]theomnipotent1 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That was really well said homie
[–]CosmicTitties 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Guys regardless of the message, can we all agree that pics like this with someone holding a sign are useless and embarrassing? We bash feminists for doing it, but now it's okay when it's a pro-men's rights sign. Good message, bad delivery.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I bash anyone that has a stupid thing to say in these images. It has nothing to do with them holding up a sign with words on it. It has to do with the content of the message they are trying to put out there.
Comments are equally useless. And faceless, so more impersonal too. But here you are, and here I am.
[–]vortish 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Those facts cone really close to the truth
[–]mLii 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sie sind das Essen und wir sind die Jäger!
[–]magnetard 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes, yes, "having the sex with the bees and the eagles!" that's exactly what I just said!
[–]kn8fury 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Came here for this ^
[–]Kneegroez 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lovely lass
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]arichone 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Look in comments, lots of sources.
Police Training for Domestic Violence with Donald Dutton, a summary of his 2016 senate talk on domestic violence. It references many studies, in particular a meta-analysis of around 400 domestic violence publications.
[–]logvikmich 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Its actually 56%
[–]Z0MGbies 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Accurate or not - I thought we all agreed that people on tumblr posting selfies of things they wrote on paper were not to be considered a credible citation. I mean fuck, this makes wikipedia look like the source code for life on earth.
Be honest now,
are you here for the karma, or are you a real shitlord?
I NEED TO KNOW
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Karma obviously. Its /u/gallowboob
[–]PeterPorky 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]arichone 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lots of sources listed in comments
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf
pg. 38
OP's wrong though, there are some shelters that accept men, but as you can see from this list there are ridiculously few.
[–]contractor808 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LifeTimePortal 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Attack on Titan season three😱
[–]ExiledSenpai 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
All I see is the Attack on Titan poster.
[–]morebeansplease 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say equal rights for all?
[–]nateblackmt 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
nice to see a girl who gets it.
[–]Chummers5 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There you go, guys. Send this to every liberal arts college and tell them feminism has been cancelled by a teenager holding a notebook.
[–]Wraeclast_Exile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
She needs to be my girl.
[–]rahsftw 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Bless this lady!
[–]G-BreadMan -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It's also true that 2/3 of female homicides were committed by a family member or intimate partner. Interesting
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It's almost like we can (and should) address both problems, instead of focusing on one and trying to prevent the other from being addressed...
[–]G-BreadMan 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well if we want to be nuisanced we might understand that men who need a safe place to sleep would be more than welcomed at any homeless shelter. While women who might have just escaped physical & sexual abuse from males in their life might not be comfortable sharing the same environment.
And while I see the value in your point as genuine, and something you believe in. It's also extremely ironic, considering how the original post is being used by many in this thread. As well as the point the female who took picture in the first place was making.
While women who might have just escaped physical & sexual abuse from males in their life might not be comfortable sharing the same environment.
If this were true, then that the split would be 50/50, but more men would be in shelters and more women on the streets.
It does not explain why men make up 70% of the homeless.
Edited to add:
It's also extremely ironic, considering how the original post is being used by many in this thread. As well as the point the female who took picture in the first place was making.
That's because you don't understand the point the female who took the picture is making in the first place.
Feminism argues that the world is run by men for men. If this were true, why would there be services helping women, but not men. If the world was run for men, then if men needed something, it would be provided and women would be left out in the cold.
It's just one more thing that blows patriarchy theory (theory is generous... in scientific terms it's not even qualified to be a hypothesis) away.
What are you trying to conclude?
[–]Tiffany_Stallions 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
And who's stopping you from opening one? From starting a charity to help men? Oh yeah, nothing. So do something about it instead of playing victim...
Feminists, mostly. Lots of attempts at male discussion are shut down.
And who's stopping you from opening one?
Feminists, for bashing the damn things every time someone tries to open one.
The government for refusing to fund them despite men making up nearly half of domestic violence victims and reporting more intimate partner violence than women in the previous 12 months according to this CDC study:
page 38
Well, you could ask Earl Silverman if he didn't kill himself when his shelter had to close down.
Or you could ask Erin Pizzey, founder of the shelter movment, why she was driven out of the UK by feminists after advocating that DV was generational violence rather than gender-based.
[–]DecapitatedSithLord 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm with her attack on titan rules
[–]ProSnoodler -35 points-34 points-33 points 9 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link
The reason people think this subreddit is a joke is because y'all can't talk about men's rights without shitting on feminism.
[–]eXwNightmare 67 points68 points69 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link
The reason people think feminism is a joke is because they can't talk about men's rights without shitting on them.
[–]_easy_ 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
Feminists these days can't even talk about women's rights without shitting on men.
[–]eXwNightmare 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
I believe the proper term for that bunch is feminazis.
[–]Saerain 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Alt-women's rights.
[–]SpookyLlama -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
I like it. Way too many idiots besmirching the name of feminism, which has helped with a lot of progress over the decades, and is being twisted into some form of hate group by an extreme minority.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
It's not an extreme minority. If a feminist believes that women have historically been oppressed by men then they are following revisionist history. Feminism plays right into the hands of the people who have always been the ones in control. The rich.
Those people are supporting a movement which says "men are the oppressor" and now they're piling on, kicking the shit out of the middle-class/poor man that the rich man has been kicking the shit out of for all of history. Feminism is a sexist hate group.
[–]SpookyLlama 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Are you saying that women haven't historically been oppressed by men?
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Yes, I'm saying that the feminist idea that men as a coordinated class have been intentionally oppressing women as a class throughout history because they viewed them as inferior is a fucking lie.
[–]SpookyLlama 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
I respectfully disagree
VAWA and Title IX are federally legislated witch hunts endangering over 150 million men in the world's wealthiest and 3rd largest nation, drafted and lobbied for by feminists. And the US isn't nearly as feminist as the rest of the west. It's not a vocal minority, anyone not wearing blinders can see how drenched in hatred mainstream feminism is.
[–]SpookyLlama -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm not showing support for one extreme or the other. I just think it doesn't help to blanket name call, it could be the difference between a young girl taking an interest in women's issues and her becoming a full mess of a tumblrina.
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes they can r / mens lib
This subreddit is now censoring a REAL positive movement for men? lol. Wow
[–]Badgerz92 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Feminists are the ones who gave us VAWA and the Duluth Model, feminists are the ones who fought against people like Erin Pizzey and Dr. Murray Straus, and feminists are the ones who continue to spread the false narrative that men are rarely victims of DV.
Somebody saying they are not a feminist because they don't agree with feminism's views on DV is perfectly valid
And FYI, it was feminists who decided we couldn't talk about these issues without being anti-feminist. MRAs in the 70s and 80s tried over and over to get feminists to support us in fighting for all victims of DV, but feminists were the ones who decided that if you believe male victims of DV exist and need support then you are an anti-feminist
[–]NOT_A_SENTIENT_DILDO 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The reason people think feminism is a joke is cause y'all can't see how retarded it is to classify not needing something as hatred for it.
[–]Papa_Milo 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Feminism is why we need men's rights activism. So, yeah.
[–]PotatoDonki 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
That's like asking why blacks in the 50s couldn't talk about civil rights without bringing up the KKK and their ilk.
Feminism is the opponent lobby. Everything they advocate for runs counter to men's rights and their tone ranges from dismissive to hostile (more often the latter) about men and our rights.
So, you're damn right we're gonna talk about feminism. Feminism is the enemy.
[–]Gr3vek3eper 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This is the exact opposite of a mentality we need. Yes I agree a lot of feminism and feminists have counter positions/beliefs than we do. But to divide us so concretely is a problem. The only way for either party to get anywhere is with communication and common ground. Yes I know better than most that some feminists cant be even talked to in a civilized manner. But from my position neither can you. You have the entire realm of "feminist" as wrong. When in reality they have some great ideas. Usually very very similar to what men's rights activists push for. I guess my point is stop dividing us.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
There's no communication with a group that hates men that much and will not consider the possibility that they aren't 100% right about everything. A group that drafted and lobbied for witch hunts like Title IX and VAWA, which created and maintains the popular #killallmen twitter, which decrees that all men must be taught not to rape, ergo all men are inherently rapists, which calls masculinity toxic, which claims testosterone makes us violent when women are in actual fact more likely to commit domestic violence, which perpetuates myths like the pay gap and 1 in 4 stats, and which conveniently dismisses any call for rational discussion as misogyny.
Feminist women abused me viciously as a child for being male. I know firsthand how evil these women are and how little sway facts, logic and calls for civility have with such hateful people. Trust me, you'll have a more productive discussion with a brick wall. Their hate movement must be fought, there is no other way.
Yes I agree a lot of feminism and feminists have counter positions/beliefs than we do. But to divide us so concretely is a problem.
Sorry, every Men's Rights activist I know started from the feminist framework. Once it became clear that feminists didn't care about men's issues and became openly hostile to anyone who did, we came to this movement.
Furthermore, like the KKK, feminism is actively acting against men's rights. We can't work with them until we've stopped them from trying to harm us. You don't work with the guy trying to blow you up... until he stops trying to blow you up.
[–]TheSummerain 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not hard with today's feminists.
They are the ones making feminism a laughing stock of an ideology.
[–]TechnoSam_Belpois 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
<implying that feminism == women's rights>
[–]levelate 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
i was going to reply to you, with a detailed and comprehensive reply.
that was, until i read all the other replies to you....and i can only point out...you got told.
[–]ProSnoodler -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
Did I? Because generalizations about a historically important movement sure showed me Edit: should it be 'an historically'? I've seen it written both ways and im not sure
Nazi Germany is historically important too. As is slavery, and certainly a lot of wars. Important in human history doesn't necessarily mean something was good.
If you're going to go back to women's suffrage, then there were already suffragISTS out there fighting for women's right to vote. Suffragettes partook in acts of terrorism as well. And not all women wanted the right to vote, and not because they had internalized misogyny or some such nonsense.
Just because something has been repeated ad nausem as great or once great, doesn't make it truth. And the fact that suffrage resulted in an unequal situation of voting rights in the US, that's hardly a win for equality. Men still have to sign up for the draft in order to be allowed their "right" to vote. Meanwhile, women have no strings to their right to vote. Just turn 18, there ya go, ready to register. Women's fear of being drafted was one of the reasons they opposed getting the right to vote, but lucky for those women they got special privileges instead.
[–]levelate 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
generalizations.
[–]Gr3vek3eper 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If I'm not mistaken it is "a historically". In the past history was pronounced without the h. So. Istory. And "an" was used for words that phonetically started with a vowel. Now we pronounce history with the "h" so we don't need the "an". In a lot of usually higher education circles people tend to us "an history". Because it's different and they think it's sophisticated. At least that's my take
[–]uwatfordm8 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I didn't downvote you but who is this "we"? People still talk like that, I know that when I speak quickly I would say it with a silent h.
[–]E-werd -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think we call them bars though.
[–]L0NESHARK -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Legit suspicious about that number though. Where's it from?
No idea. There are some sources in the comments though, you might find it there.
It's from a number of sources. Gender parity in domestic violence victimization has been known, but suppressed, since at least the 1970s.
See Police Training for Domestic Violence with Donald Dutton, a summary of his 2016 senate talk on domestic violence.
[–]phforNZ 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's something they found during the dunedin study. It's also closer to 50
[–]Darktidemage -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link
If it were random it would not be a 60-40 distribution.
60/40 is still extremely skewed toward you needing feminism. Women are abused a fucking full 50% more than men are.
Not to mention "I don't need feminism because these are statistics, from right now, with feminism" is a completely dumb statement. How do you know what the numbers would change to without feminism?
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link
Actually it's 44% women 56% men as victims of domestic violence.
But don't let that stop you.
Furthermore, the greatest incidence of domestic violence is reciprocal (meaning both are violent). The greatest indicator of whether a woman will be the victim of domestic violence, is whether or not she's been violent in past relationships (not whether her partner has).
I don't need feminism because these are statistics, from right now, with feminism
A feminist opened the first domestic violence shelter for women. She realized that the women were just as violent as the men and wanted to accept battered men as well (from the beginning) and was locked out of her own shelter, hounded by feminists, and received death threats.
Feminism isn't the cure, it's the cancer keeping it going.
Don't hit women? Don't hit anyone. Teach women not to be abusive, and you'll immediately make them safer. Feminism won't do that, because women are the victim... always.
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (28 children) | Copy Link
A feminist opened the first domestic violence shelter for women. She realized that the women were just as violent as the men and wanted to accept battered men as well Feminism isn't the cure, it's the cancer keeping it going.
based on what you said this problem is some violent women - the cure is still also feminism. Note "a feminist" is the person that stepped up with a cure?
The "furthermore" you gave is evidence against your position. The greatest incidence is reciprocal? ok. So if we factor that out completely and only pay attention to cases where the man abuses the woman or the woman abuses the man what do the new numbers look like?
You're taking 56% and 44% and then subtracting an EQUAL reciprocal out of each.
So no matter what we subtract: 10% 20% 30% from both sides... what we get is a more unequal percentage wise distribution where it's more skewed toward women being the predominant victims.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
And when she tried to extend that cure to men, feminism became the cancer that destroyed her life and drove her from her country.
I'll notice you ignored that part.
So if we factor that out completely and only pay attention to cases where the man abuses the woman or the woman abuses the man what do the new numbers look like?
70% of non-reciprocal domestic abuse was female perpetrated.
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link
Where was that part remotely mentioned?
"70% of non-reciprocal domestic abuse was female perpetrated."
That makes zero sense. You just said previously males represented only 44 % of victims with females being 56%. If you subtract reciprocals it should subtract equally from each side, it can't flip the percentages to the opposites direction of majority.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link
I provided a source. IF you want to look through that source and come to your own conclusions, be my guest.
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link
What is the source you provided?
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link
National Institute of health.
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link
You didn't provide a link. You don't seem to know how sourcing something works. Do I just trust you or do I have to go dig to try to find that one detail somewhere?
It's weird the CDC says
• Women had a significantly higher lifetime prevalence of severe physical violence by an intimate partner (24.3%) compared to men (13.8%). • Approximately 2.7% of women and 2.0% of men experienced severe physical violence in the 12 months preceding the survey
Stalking by an Intimate Partner • Women had a significantly higher lifetime prevalence of stalking by an intimate partner (10.7%) compared to men (2.1%). • Women had a significantly higher 12-month prevalence of stalking by an intimate partner (2.8%) compared to men (0.5%).
I read that here: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_ipv_report_2013_v17_single_a.pdf
and In that article if you search for reciprocal it mentions a study so I checked that one out. it's interesting.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19774764
It discusses how you can classify domestic violence into "common couple" which is reciprocal vs "intimate terrorism" which is one directional.
Maybe your theory is correct that 70% of non-reciprocal abuse was female perpetrated - i'd love to see a stat- but I question even if it's true how critical that stat is.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (21 children) | Copy Link
I've provided it elsewhere in this thread. I'm not going to keep reposting it over and over (especially for posts that are from my phone).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
Here you go... enjoy
From the NIH
In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases. Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7) and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator
In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases.
Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7)
and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator
Clearly, the data suggests that the best way to keep women safe in domestic violence situations is to teach them not to hit men.
We won't do that, because women are victims and holding them responsible for their actions wouldn't be nice.
You'll notice that when the violence goes two ways, the women are more violent, but not the men.
Yeah most sources actually reported a number closer to 56% for men.
[+]Tuxedo_Muffin -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Men are trained to be stoic. I have no feelings on this.
[–]Dylothor 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I have no feelings on that. But I will nod my head once.
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
u wot m8
[–]madpandaswag -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm face palming so hard right now.
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Equalizing the playing field by preventing men's issues from being addressed (pulling fire alarms at conferences on male suicide and preventing men's rights groups from gathering).
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This whole anti feminism viewpoint is similar to the anti BLM viewpoint.
Suddenly it becomes acceptable to say "a portion of people who align with this movement are doing something bad. So the whole movement is messed up, wrong, and a total joke."
It's more nuanced than that. The whole ideology of feminism isn't bad. It's merely askew. Feminism, if done properly, should be addressing the issues of all people. All genders are impacted when one gets assumed roles.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You mean the thing that feminism and BLM have been doing since they started? BLM - police and Feminism - men.
Oh the horror.
The whole ideology of feminism isn't bad.
The whole ideology of feminism is based on patriarchy theory... and therefore the whole of their ideology is bad.
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
BLM is not saying all cops are bad. It speaks about the system and how it can easily enable racism, how the accountability is not to a high enough standard, and the issues POC tend to experience more of, regardless of economic brackets.
Feminism is not against all men; nor is it saying all men are bad. It speaks about gender roles, gender inequality, power structures through a lense of gender, etc. It's not "men are evil. Masculinity is evil."
That's a very narrow and watered down explanation of both movements. That would be no different than someone saying MRA are just men who think womem are bad. It's not a fair representation of the movement.
It speaks about the system and how it can easily enable racism, how the accountability is not to a high enough standard, and the issues POC tend to experience more of, regardless of economic brackets.
Which is interesting, because people of color don't. Men of color, and white men do. Men experience these.
55 of the 1023 people killed in 2016 (by police) have been women... 34 of those... white.
WOC were killed less than white women by police.
968 men have been killed by police in 2016...470 of those were white.
You don't hear anything about them. Why don't you hear anything about them from BLM? Because BLM is a racist movement.
POC are not abused by police, MOC and white men are.
Feminism is not against all men
Feminism named it's bogeyman after men (Patriarchy) and it's hero movement after women (Feminism). So... in this you're wrong.
It speaks about gender roles, gender inequality, power structures through a lense of gender, etc.
gender roles it wants to force men into, and free women from.
Gender inequality it wants to increase on men, but free women from.
power structures it wants to maintain for the sake of women.
It's not "men are evil. Masculinity is evil."
"Toxic Masculinity"... so... again... wrong.
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Population differences is a factor you haven't brought up. Harrassment is a factor you haven't brought up.
A POC would make the logical deduction that if they are stopped more often, harrassed more often, & arrested more often then they must be killed more often. It's not as simple as "well they die less so get over it."
It's not just black men, either. There are many cases where the victims were female.
There is a difference between an ideology and a gender. Patriarchy does not equal men.
Feminism does not say it wants to free women by binding men. If you free one, the other must be freed in the process. Both roles must exist for either to be defined. Without the other, there is no need for separation of the two.
There is a difference between the term toxic masculinity and masculinity. Toxic Masculinity refers to the negative expectations men are given, like not being able to express emotions, repression, inability to not consent, men are unable to be victims of abuse, etc. Those things are toxic. The vast majority is not saying "masculinity is toxic." They are saying "there are toxic parts to masculinity."
Nope, I haven't. Population differences don't account for the extremely low rates of deaths of women (especially women of color).
No, we've already covered this. Only 55 females have been killed by police this year, and of those, only 21 were women of color. That's 2%
Really, this is the most ridiculous argument that you could make. You could point out the way (that doesn't exist) that patriarchy doesn't really mean men... but instead you just try to make me believe your point without proof.
Feminism does not say it wants to free women by binding men.
No feminism tries to bind men in the name of freeing women. Actions vs words.
[–]Emilytea14 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Ah yes, I forgot how a couple idiots that label themselves a member of something are representative of the entire movement and its' values. Just like how the men's rights movements are full of a bunch of Elliot Rodger's, right?
In all seriousness, anybody that thinks that feminists aren't fighting for equality needs a bit of historical context- feminists have always been strongly opposed, usually by men, even when they were INARGUABLY fighting for what you cannot deny is equal treatment. Basic things like the right to vote. Along the way they developed support systems for victimized women- systems that hadn't existed in any form prior. There was a very clear and undeniable imbalance in power between the genders, so of course these would be targeted towards the unprivileged group.
Now that things are (sort of) equalizing, feminists are branching out the support systems that they invented and addressing the very real issues men face that have become more evident in recent years.
So why have they only recently become more evident? Because while feminism was doing it's thing for feminine empowerment, men stood around watching their issues go unaddressed. If they did decide to take action for anything, it was usually a movement to demean and undermine the actions that feminists were taking, seeing it as a personal affront that women were seemingly getting all of this sudden privilege while men got nothing. They saw feminists standing up and getting shit done and instead of doing equally great things for men's rights, they decided to demonize feminism.
Now men's rights groups are, at their core, fighting for the exact same things as feminists, but all those negative pre-existing beliefs about feminists are twisting perceptions about feminism to the point where OF COURSE you're going to focus on the shitty feminists that misunderstood feminism and did shitty things. "Typical feminist", right? No. Wrong. Take a look at the accomplishments of feminism- changing the FBI's definition of rape to include men, equalizing the legal drinking age in the USA for men and women, fighting to be allowed on the front lines in the military to reduce the burden on men, working to increase the amount of paid leave men get to spend time with their children... but yeah. Keep focusing on a couple shitty people.
Just like how the men's rights movements are full of a bunch of Elliot Rodger's, right?
Elliot Rodger never had any affiliation with the Men's Rights movement. None, zero, zilch, nada.
Ah yes, I forgot how a couple idiots that label themselves a member of something are representative of the entire movement and its' values.
Couple of idiots? The largest feminist group in the US opposes shared parenting. The only feminist organizations involved in men's rights are fighting against it... So... just a couple of idiots... you prove it.
Basic things like the right to vote.
Women won the right to vote. Men don't have that right. We have the privilege of voting as long as we sign up for the selective service (draft). Women have a right that men do not have.
Along the way they developed support systems for victimized women- systems that hadn't existed in any form prior.
Yes, they did. The first domestic violence shelter for women was opened by Erin Pizzey. She quickly realized that women were as violent as men, and wanted to open the domestic violence shelter up to male victims as well. She was kicked out, received death threats, and hounded by feminists. Those feminists working for equality.
Umm... no. They fought against funding for the only domestic violence shelter for men in Canada, and hounded the man running it to the point where he committed suicide. Fuck you for trying to rewrite history.
Because while feminism was doing it's thing for feminine empowerment, men stood around watching their issues go unaddressed.
Quite the contrary. Before feminism hitting your wife was illegal, so was hitting your husband. Both had swift legal penalties. Thanks to feminism, hitting your husband will end with your husband in jail. We've got to walk that back towards the equality we already had.
fighting for the exact same things as feminists
Feminists are also fighting gender biased laws written by feminist organizations that unfairly discriminate against men? Who knew? /s
I mean.. it's like you are actually completely ignorant of men's issues and just assume feminism is good.
[–]EricAllonde 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I forgot how a couple idiots that label themselves a member of something are representative of the entire movement and its' values.
Just in the last 2 months we've seen organised, well-supported feminist attempts to ban the Red Pill documentary in Melbourne, Sydney, Berlin and Ottawa. The Melbourne attempt garnered 2,400 signatures on a petition.
Just a couple of idiots? Hardly. Misandry is a core value of modern feminism.
[–]Jospesh -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You could even say... r/mildlyinteresting
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Many domestic violence shelters can either accommodate men or put them in hotels while they receive case management services.
They will put them up in a hotel for one to three days. Then there is nothing else they can do for them.
good luck, hope you have somewhere to live.
Do we wonder why 70% of the homeless are men?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
There certainly not enough resources to deal with men's domestic violence because there isn't accurate data and not enough demand for services.
Men are more often victims of domestic violence than women are, but there aren't enough demand for the services...
The majority of homeless men are homeless for substance abuse and mental health reasons.
Are you saying that substance abuse and mental health are gendered problems that affect mostly men? Or is there some other reason that 70% of the homeless are men.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
No, I am simply stating facts. The reasons for chronic homelessness, of which there are more men, are substance abuse and mental health issues.
No, those aren't the reasons men are homeless, otherwise you would see women homeless in the same numbers.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Warning, I know what I'm talking about
You just did. Women are not homeless for those same reasons, and those reasons aren't gendered.
If these were causes of homelessness, then women would be too... it's simple inductive logic.
Men either lack something women have that has a gendered component, which is why they are homeless and women aren't, or there's another gendered reason at play that's causing the homelessness in men.
Men make up the majority of the chronically homeless. Men.
Yes... one gender makes up the majority of the chronically homeless.
And you claim the causes of homelessness are substance abuse (which affects women and men similarly) and mental illness (which affects women and men similarly).
For that to be true, there would need to be similar numbers of men and women homeless. Since there are not, then there are other factors at work. That much is obvious to anyone.
[–]birthdayboy6969 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There are absolutely both shelters and programs available for male victims of dv
[–]ash2102 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
0 'Shelters' i dont know, i could name 5 strip clubs off top of my head
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
*spineless
Thank you.
:)
edgy brah
[–]Jtonubbee -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Real men don't need shelters, they have the bar
[+]Medium_Rare_Cancer -8 points-7 points-6 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
But they do, also it's a bit like getting a black guy to hold a piece of paper talking about how there were white slaves too. Just a bit dumb and not important
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Just a bit dumb and not important
Yes, the lack of proportional men's shelters is dumb and not important. Thanks, Feminism.
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
hmm Feminism (I think, I've heard they aim for equality) would probably make just as many shelters for men and women. Shame we'll never find out unless this goddamn patriarchy dies, read a book cucklord
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The patriarchy doesnt exist, but thanks.
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
see, this is why you need to read! uninformed af like youre from the third world or something
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yeah I'll have to study up on the unbiased, intellectual opinions of trollXchromosomes and shitredditsays for my opinion on developing social issues. /s
EDIT: Also I am from the third world.
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Read "Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire" might explain a few things for you. Also the patriarchy is a proven power structure in a lot of countries
Read "Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire"
A book about men. Was it written by a man?
Also the patriarchy is a proven power structure in a lot of countries
Agreed. Not ours.
[+]Crocodilefan -7 points-6 points-5 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
That's not how that works! That's why men need feminism!
Men do not need feminism thanks.
We need feminism so we can let them continue to prevent the opening of men's shelters and conferences on the male suicide epidemic?
I don't think so.
No thank you, I'd prefer my dignity.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Sorry I'd rather have my rights.
[–]Crocodilefan -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Feminist are fighting for your rights too, you just don't think so because you confuse misandry with feminism.
The proof is in the pudding man. Feminism has made great contributions to women's rights, but what feminism is today isnt as simple as googling the definition. Its politically charged, and anti men. And the components of it that arent anti men have shown no propensity for shutting down their misandric counterparts.
[–]Crocodilefan 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well then you haven't met real feminists, people could just easily say men's rights activists have shown no propensity for shutting down their misogynist counterparts
real feminists
If most feminists arent real feminists, then your definition is wrong
Feminists are fighting against the opening of male domestic violence shelters.
Feminists are fighting against discussions on the male suicide epidemic.
Feminists are fighting against shared parenting.
What rights are feminists fighting for men for?
[–]Crocodilefan -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You are confusing feminism with misandry
I'm confusing the actions of actual feminist groups with misandry.
How could that possibly be?
[+]as5holesupreme -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Would bang. Twice.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]PaisleyBowtie 737 points738 points739 points (33 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (12 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]AnomalousAvocado 167 points168 points169 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (10 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]OMGROTFLMAO 39 points40 points41 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheLastWondersmith 21 points22 points23 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]OMGROTFLMAO 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheLastWondersmith 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bk15dcx 14 points15 points16 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Homsar98 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jimijam_Flimflam 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_Eggs_ 224 points225 points226 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]ForgottenPhenom 5 points6 points7 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]hoopstick 4 points5 points6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigOldNerd 13 points14 points15 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tigeris 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigOldNerd 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Decyde 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]timeslider 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TattoosAreUgly 14 points15 points16 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]turlian -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AFuckYou -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]flizomica 351 points352 points353 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 124 points125 points126 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]GenuineSounds 34 points35 points36 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Byroms 9 points10 points11 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]rolltider0 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Halafax 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (22 children) | Copy Link
[–]tonyh322 56 points57 points58 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]tonyh322 37 points38 points39 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tonyh322 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]isperfectlycromulent 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Byroms 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tempest_fiend 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Byroms 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]flizomica 14 points15 points16 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Leinadro 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheChessClub 236 points237 points238 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]_Snurps_ 117 points118 points119 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]therusskiy 41 points42 points43 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lonewxnderer 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]epicsaxman13 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wreck94 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThatGuyYouWantToBe 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]AnomalousAvocado 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]effywap 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AnomalousAvocado 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]trashcan86 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bigcunttreeapples 467 points468 points469 points (187 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 308 points309 points310 points (172 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jc5504 143 points144 points145 points (147 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 163 points164 points165 points (75 children) | Copy Link
[–]samsc2 19 points20 points21 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]mattimus_maximus 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]samsc2 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]teejay769 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 37 points38 points39 points (55 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 99 points100 points101 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]baskandpurr 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PaisleyBowtie 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]PM_ME_A_FACT -29 points-28 points-27 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 42 points43 points44 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]pvtshoebox 21 points22 points23 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ether_reddit 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 0 points1 point2 points (31 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_A_FACT 2 points3 points4 points (25 children) | Copy Link
[–]LethiasWVR 3 points4 points5 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]franklindeer 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]hedgecore77 -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]franklindeer 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kyoopy2 -3 points-2 points-1 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 9 points10 points11 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]StealthTomato 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]StealthTomato 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kyoopy2 -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]double-happiness 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 47 points48 points49 points (40 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fudde 10 points11 points12 points (39 children) | Copy Link
[–]willfordbrimly 25 points26 points27 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fudde 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Banned_By_Default 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreeThinkingMan -1 points0 points1 point (33 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 9 points10 points11 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreeThinkingMan -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreeThinkingMan -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Fudde 7 points8 points9 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreeThinkingMan -3 points-2 points-1 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fudde 7 points8 points9 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreeThinkingMan 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]drazzy92 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iongantas 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]drazzy92 11 points12 points13 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Veggiemon 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]drazzy92 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scytone 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]drazzy92 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scytone 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]drazzy92 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cryzgnik 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Achack 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Badgerz92 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BlackEnjoysTheYellow 13 points14 points15 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 30 points31 points32 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]StealthTomato -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]StealthTomato -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jc5504 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]double-happiness 3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scytone -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]LethiasWVR 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]double-happiness 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]unbuttoned 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BlackEnjoysTheYellow 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Scytone 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gotham_possum -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jc5504 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gotham_possum 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Achack 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]blfire 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (18 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[+][deleted] (12 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Mikeavelli 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mikeavelli 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bartink 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bartink -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Qapiojg 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 14 points15 points16 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bigcunttreeapples 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Honey-Badger 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Halafax 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dungone 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Funcuz 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bigcunttreeapples 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]slodojo 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChubaccaBacc 68 points69 points70 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]rotting_log 11 points12 points13 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Carkeyz 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheTerrasque 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]3rdLevelRogue 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]theorymeltfool 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]ObnoxiousLittleCunt 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]theorymeltfool 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BookwormJane 47 points48 points49 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]mynameisstacey 35 points36 points37 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]MaYlormoon 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]boolabula -3 points-2 points-1 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]LilFunyunz 88 points89 points90 points (33 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 87 points88 points89 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]LilFunyunz 19 points20 points21 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]F41LTR0C1TY 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]chadwickofwv 19 points20 points21 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mikeavelli 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]chadwickofwv 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bioemerl 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]420weedscopes 31 points32 points33 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]LilFunyunz 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LokisDawn 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 4 points5 points6 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]SovietJugernaut 18 points19 points20 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 5 points6 points7 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]SimWebb 10 points11 points12 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 1 point2 points3 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 14 points15 points16 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SimWebb 14 points15 points16 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 9 points10 points11 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SimWebb 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Anarchistnation 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Starlos 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo 31 points32 points33 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo -4 points-3 points-2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 26 points27 points28 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 22 points23 points24 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpookyLlama -2 points-1 points0 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Loreki 22 points23 points24 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]arichone 27 points28 points29 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]LokisDawn -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]arichone 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]puzzlebuns 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]puzzlebuns 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Qapiojg 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Puffy_Vulva 8 points9 points10 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]xseeks 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Puffy_Vulva 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MCMXCIV0 32 points33 points34 points (37 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 29 points30 points31 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JitGoinHam -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]pokeydo 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Settlers6 26 points27 points28 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 14 points15 points16 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 10 points11 points12 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]420weedscopes 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gnomish8 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Settlers6 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 14 points15 points16 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]MCMXCIV0 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]PM_ME_CLOUD_PORN 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 42 points43 points44 points (38 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 37 points38 points39 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]EricAllonde 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]withoutamartyr -10 points-9 points-8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 23 points24 points25 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]withoutamartyr -12 points-11 points-10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 21 points22 points23 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 25 points26 points27 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 39 points40 points41 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jah_Ith_Ber 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 17 points18 points19 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 7 points8 points9 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 13 points14 points15 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]withoutamartyr 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pattyice11 -1 points0 points1 point (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]pattyice11 -1 points0 points1 point (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]withoutamartyr 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]LucifersHammerr 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pattyice11 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CaptSnap 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]theomnipotent1 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CosmicTitties 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]vortish 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mLii 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]magnetard 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]kn8fury 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kneegroez 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (6 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]arichone 13 points14 points15 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]logvikmich 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Z0MGbies 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PeterPorky 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]arichone 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LifeTimePortal 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ExiledSenpai 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]morebeansplease 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nateblackmt 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chummers5 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wraeclast_Exile 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rahsftw 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]G-BreadMan -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]G-BreadMan 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tiffany_Stallions 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DecapitatedSithLord 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ProSnoodler -35 points-34 points-33 points (36 children) | Copy Link
[–]eXwNightmare 67 points68 points69 points (20 children) | Copy Link
[–]_easy_ 29 points30 points31 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]eXwNightmare 11 points12 points13 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 13 points14 points15 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpookyLlama -2 points-1 points0 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpookyLlama 0 points1 point2 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpookyLlama 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SpookyLlama -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Badgerz92 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NOT_A_SENTIENT_DILDO 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Papa_Milo 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PotatoDonki 13 points14 points15 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gr3vek3eper 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheSummerain 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TechnoSam_Belpois 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]levelate 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ProSnoodler -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]levelate 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gr3vek3eper 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]uwatfordm8 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]E-werd -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]L0NESHARK -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]contractor808 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]phforNZ 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Darktidemage -1 points0 points1 point (31 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (29 children) | Copy Link
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points (28 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points (26 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (25 children) | Copy Link
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points (24 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (23 children) | Copy Link
[–]Darktidemage 0 points1 point2 points (22 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Tuxedo_Muffin -6 points-5 points-4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dylothor 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]madpandaswag -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (10 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]IrateGandhi 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Emilytea14 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EricAllonde 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jospesh -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (11 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]birthdayboy6969 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ash2102 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jtonubbee -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Medium_Rare_Cancer -8 points-7 points-6 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Medium_Rare_Cancer 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Crocodilefan -7 points-6 points-5 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]l3linkTree_Horep 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Crocodilefan -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Crocodilefan 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Crocodilefan -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]as5holesupreme -9 points-8 points-7 points (0 children) | Copy Link