TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Men's Rights Facebook Page 'A Voice For Men' Removed On Day Of Annual Conference

NixonForBreadsident

July 10, 2016
632 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/10/voice-men-facebook-page-unpublished/
Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Men's Rights Facebook Page 'A Voice For Men' Removed On Day Of Annual Conference
Author

NixonForBreadsident

Upvotes 632
Comments 67
Date July 10, 2016 11:09 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4s7x12/mens_rights_facebook_page_a_voice_for_men_removed/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/mens-rights-facebook-page-a-voice-for-men-removed.945785
https://theredarchive.com/post/945785
Top posts by NixonForBreadsident

Laws to protect men from paying child support for children that aren't theirs is now "slut shaming" and "punishing women"

5385 upvotes
September 2, 2016
/r/MensRights

Australia to give $100,000 to provide shelter for pets of women in domestic violence situations. Men still receive no funding at all for any level of help to escape domestic violence from women. In Australia men are now worth less than dogs.

2062 upvotes
July 5, 2015
/r/MensRights

Female quota sees Australian state remove it's male paid public board positions and filling half of all jobs with women only regardless of ability, skill or experience over a male applicant

1907 upvotes
March 28, 2017
/r/MensRights

Student who was falsely accused of rape by Mattress Girl (Emma Sulkowicz) has just been denied his legal rights as the judge declared that being accused of rape apparently doesn't relate to sex and therefore isn't Title IX

1668 upvotes
March 15, 2016
/r/MensRights

Male student expelled for rape after a girl "withdrew consent" for a blowjob she was giving him while he was passed out. His rapist "withdrew her consent" while he continued to be unconscious and he was expelled for rape. Let that sink in.

1506 upvotes
December 18, 2015
/r/PussyPass

Gawker claims Pao was fired because she's a woman, links to multiple posts sitting on zero or negative karma and (you guessed it) manages to blame Men's Rights for her removal as well

1456 upvotes
July 15, 2015
/r/MensRights

A 17 year old protesters gets triggered and falls apart crying when having to face basic logic and facts that men have less rights than women in the US and the Patriarchy doesn't exist. It's disturbing children like her have been brainwashed their entire lives to believe feminist bullshit.

1428 upvotes
April 24, 2016
/r/MensRights

The Navy is now teaching that "male privilege" is domestic violence against women and that violent movies, tv shows and books turn men into abusers

1335 upvotes
October 8, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]scanspeak 105 points106 points107 points 10 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

Seems that it was strategically timed to do the most damage.

[–]washburncrosby 88 points89 points90 points 10 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

Of course it was. It's toxic feminisim in action.

[–]boringcarpets 69 points70 points71 points 10 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

At this point I think it's just feminism

[–]-Redfish 27 points28 points29 points 10 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

I don't know. I have a feeling that the huge percentage of the garden variety equity feminists are unaware that this goes on. And when you point it out, they don't really understand the scale of the problem, i.e., "it's just some extremists"

[–]boringcarpets 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Unicorn feminists, so rare they might as well not exist. It's all lip service anyway

And when you point it out, they don't really understand the scale of the problem, i.e., "it's just some extremists"

It's not that they don't understand, they just don't care and its core to their beliefs, they need and want the "extremists" and provide fertile ground for them

[–]thewonderdo 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

A dear friend of mine is like this. We usually agree to disagree and she's highly respectful of our movement (which I have never seen from a feminist before) and in the few times we debated and I would mention things like this or the huge feminist backlash against being conscripted, or the world ending for feminist mothers when they only get joint custody she would look at me in shock and would say but that's the equality we fought for so why would they do that? So she's a rare bird, I bet there is like 6 more like her out there.

[–]rockymountainoysters 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I've dealt with a number of feminists who've moderated their stances to accommodate MRA points.

The trouble is that they almost always require some direct first hand exposure to brutal harm caused by feminism before they soften. e.g. her son gets expelled for having a penis, or her boyfriend gets falsely accused by an ex.

Abstract logic is utterly impotent against them. That's why the only response to hardened feminism is overpowering action.

[–]thewonderdo 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I have dealt with that too actually, and you're absolutely on to something. First hand knowledge and experience of the brutality of feminism makes them go 'whoa! I didn't sign up for that!' and they soften and become much more reasonable. The amount of feminists that have those epiphanies are rare and we somehow need to make them common.

[–]rockymountainoysters 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The amount of male sacrifice we'd need would make that a pyrrhic victory.

Better to abandon persuasion and focus on power plays.

Abstract reason is our domain. Hysteria is theirs.

[–]thewonderdo 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into.

So we are talking with facts and real proper statistics and they cry and use the patriarchy and how we sit on the bus with our legs spread just a bit to open. Hysteria will often win the day because it's loud and crazy and gets everyone's attention and here we are just sitting quietly with our facts.

I suppose if we keep doing what we are doing and give them enough crazy rope then they will hang themselves with it. It's just the same when non religious debate religious, the politically left debates the politically right, and when the Leafs fans debate Habs fans.

[–]SacredWeapon 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The feminist outrage against the draft extension is not very large. And not at all establishment. All the dem senators voted for it.

It's more the ted cruz types--guys yearning for all elements of the old system and pretending that fighting changes for women is helping men--that are opposing it now.

[–]Demonspawn 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

It's more the ted cruz types--guys yearning for all elements of the old system and pretending that fighting changes for women is helping men--that are opposing it now.

It's more like the people who recognize that the Military is a fighting force for fucking shit up rather than a social welfare equality project that are resisting the change.

War is not equal. War is not fair. Trying to inject either into your fighting force risks the lives of thousands of those dedicated to protecting you.

There are some areas where women in the military bring more value than their cost (Women MPs, Female intel attachments, high-value skills such as doctors/nurses). Overall, the military is better off without women and the problems that including women bring to units.

[–]SacredWeapon 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You realize that a hypothetical draft almost certainly would be focused on these roles rather than front-line soldiers, right? We have more than enough warfighters, and a few of the women who want to serve qualify to be warfighters. The rest would, as you note, be in less physically demanding roles.

You can tell their motivation from their rhetoric. It's not about keeping the military strong. It's about how their daughters should be protected. Real white-knighty bullshit. The last vestiges of traditionalism.

[–]LikesTacos 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. If we get to the point of needing a draft it will be because we need more people to die. The women who are drafted will be assigned to the roles you describe which just guarantees the men who are drafted will be put on the front line rather than having a chance at a less deadly position. We'll have to draft 50/50 for equality so the military budget will be strained to support all of the non-combat roles for the women who were drafted and not needed.

[–]Demonspawn1 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

We'll have to draft 50/50 for equality so the military budget will be strained to support all of the non-combat roles for the women who were drafted and not needed.

Or strained in the future by the VA payments to women who get injured at 6x the rate of men.

[–]LikesTacos1 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Now that you bring it up. Let's not forget the burden on the entire military benefit system (which is already strained) as a whole for soldiers that were not needed in the first place and the inevitable Army HR department.

[–]Demonspawn1 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, if we are drafting... then we've decided that is an acceptable cost.

But if we're drafting for positions we don't need because "equality", then yes that is an extra expense.

[–]Demonspawn -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You realize that a hypothetical draft almost certainly would be focused on these roles rather than front-line soldiers, right?

Nope. I listed 4 jobs. Only 4 jobs.

The draft is going to be for a lot more than just those 4 jobs.

You can tell their motivation from their rhetoric.

No, you can't. You can, however, tell to whom they are pandering in order to gain influence.

[–]wreave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"There are dozens of us!"

[–]Planner_Hammish 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I call it armchair activism/feminism. I say that you're all flying the same banner, so as long as you give tacit approval of their actions, you are the same as them.

[–]123xyz123xyz 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ideology of peace

[–]-Redfish 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not saying that they are completely innocent per se. They are unaware at best, and tacitly complicit at worst.

Wilful ignorance of the shitty parts of your movement, be it feminist or MRA, leads to having extremists that control the leading edge of the movement.

[–]Avannar 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do they even matter enough to count as feminists? 90% of "good" feminists don't read the literature, don't go to rallies, never took gender studies, etc. They just heard "Feminism is about equality" and took the label with no further research. They're not active. They're not informed.

Therefore, any time the movement actually does anything, it's almost always the more radical 10% that DID take Gender Studies, that DOES go to rallies, that DO believe in Patriarchy Theory, behind it all.

Arguably RadFems/Toxic Feminists/whatever are the beating heart of the movement. They write the books, teach the classes, organize the rallies, direct the lobbying dollars, etc.

[–]circlhat -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Calling them radical when they do something we disagree with is disingenuous, Rae gems preach kill all white men , normal fems believe women don't lie about rape

[–]WhiteThrone 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Toxic Feminism is a redundancy.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]nickstroking 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Femininity is separate to feminism -- Feminists like to war against men by calling things toxic masculinity. Men don't do that about femininity. They just don't.

If you can't grasp that, rewire your brain!

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]nickstroking 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You basically posited that wouldn't removing "toxic" from masculinity as a premise be the same as feminism having toxic removed. They're two separate things being conflated.... you claimed you could grasp my point, but you somehow argued it then with a strawman position?

I'm gonna side with my 6+ upvotes suggesting I was bringing up a good retort to your post :)

[–]WhiteThrone 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Toxic Masculinity is a BS catch phrase used by Feminists to undervalue and undermine men's contribution and everything that men do. Notice, that Toxic Masculinity is a phrase used by Feminists and is likely to be projection.

[–]bigeyedbunny 40 points41 points42 points 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

What is happening is pretty simple.

Facebook has automated scripted reaction of always disabling or unpublishing pages if they receive more than X reports in one hour.

Very often X is very low, for example 5 reports is enough.

Of course the reports can be false, nobody human checks, it's all automated.

I have friends who disabled at least 10 Anti-MRA hate pages this way in the last month.

Instead of crying over spilled milk, we can all organize and apply the knowledge.

Have an excellent new week, fellow MRAs.

[–]Onithyr 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is why they need a report weighting system where individual reports are given weights according to their account's historical reporting accuracy when checked by an actual person at Facebook. I'd even go so far as to suggest that accounts that have a heavy history of false reporting should have a negative weight wherein they'll actually make it harder for a report brigade to be acknowledged.

[–]thejam15 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hell ill start doing it. Do i need a bunch of separate accounts?

[–]Throwawayingaccount 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, we're better than that. Don't abuse takedown requests to censor them.

[–]k9_amunity2 points 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thanks, man. You too.

[–]JackGetsIt 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The fact that a group would do shows they feel threatened by a growing men's rights movement.

[–]roharareddit 26 points27 points28 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Standard Facebook operating procedure.

[–]Karma9999 21 points22 points23 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Facebook needs to get sued.

[–]GingerJack76 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It needs to be replaced.

[–]turbulance4 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stop using it. No need for sues

[–]splodgenessabounds 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sheer coincidence, I'm sure...

The galling thing about Zuckerberg's cheesy empire is that it never, ever explains itself, let alone apologises for fcuking up (which it does, frequently). Perhaps the only good thing to come out of this is the warning to any entity promoting men's rights on Failbook's pages.

[–]adam13omb 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But it's totally ok for ISIS to have a Facebook group right?

I can't roll my eyes remotely hard enough for this.

[–]JackGetsIt 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do they?? That can't be true. They are 'literally' a hate group.

[–]adam13omb 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would imagine so. I haven't seen anything about there not being one, and we all know they recruit through social media.

[–]Wanderer15 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Very sad. In any case, I posted about it 40 min ago.

[–]Spoonwood 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Can Facebook even do this legally?

"'[The] countervailing interest which [the owner] endeavors to vindicate emanates from the exclusive possession and enjoyment of private property. Because of the public character of the shopping center, however, the impairment of [the owner's] interest must be largely theoretical. [The owner] has fully opened his property to the public … .'"

http://danfingerman.com/law/cases/Pruneyard_Cal.html

Facebook does have a public character and has it's headquarters in California. It has it's property fully open to the public. Then again, it's online. Could Facebook successfully get sued based on California State Law? Article 1, section 2 of California State Law entails more freedom of speech than the 1st amendment to the United States Constitution:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

[–]tinkertoy1260 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You're using the term "public property" awfully loosely. Thisbis the Internet. The relevance of ANY of these laws needs to be duked out in the supreme court before they can be applied sonlin effectively.

Sure Facebook can do this. It's just a matter of determining if they are intentionally conspiring against us with a political agenda, and if so, what does the world think of that kind of bias and censorship on such a public communication platform. Perhaps service providers like Facebook should be regulated to protect against this sort of thing. But it won't happen until enough people get angry about it that something changes.

[–]Spoonwood 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm not using the term 'public property' at all. The case I referred to involves private property, and says so explicitly.

Did you mean public character? Well, I think, but I'm not sure, that on any given day more people go on Facebook these days than to a shopping center. So Facebook probably has more of a public character than a shopping center at this point in time.

[–]123xyz123xyz -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Please let's not fuck up the freedom of the internet just to get even with salty legbeards

[–]JooshBeextin[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but they said a drawing of a police officer being beheaded was totally fine.

[–]Tarnsman4Life 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Cuckerberg strikes again

[–]Karissa36 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4sb0l1/media_blackout_on_icmi_2016/

Or maybe Paul Elam noticed that the media literally doesn't give a damn about his conference and he decided to create some drama to get attention.

Edit for np link.

[–]Imnotmrabut 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well given the lacklustre content and performance of AVfM in the last 2 years, it's as good a plan as any! However, I don't think it's what happened as it would have required some insight into Media and how to spin it. The deafening silence speaks of Ineptitude and Ignorance of 1) how to have prevented it & 2) how to reverse it.

I'm wondering how long it will take to come back - if at all!

Their Alexa Ranking's are comical as they drop off the graph!

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/avoiceformen.com

Mr Elam has also been abandoning his twitter feed preferring to be known by his latest money making venture "AnEarForMen"..... and his ghostly presence at other venues including this one are noticeable by Absence.

It's comical to see his prepared speech to conference - in case he was denied access to the UK? Denied on what grounds? I'd love to hear what they supposedly were - because unless you are a convicted terrorist or Genocidal murderer there is generally no problem. One has to hope that me Elam is a Big Boy Now and knows that certain loons stating they aim to prevent you entering into a country is of little value other than as an act of "Stupid Terrorism" .... and of course some stupid people respond by being terrorised.

Me thinks the One Trick Pony is no longer needed at the Circus, so the big top is being struck and the clowns are left out in the cold!

[–]Florient 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminists don't realize how transparent they are. It's obvious that they're doing this because they are cowards and they know they'd never win a fair debate.

[–]Detox1337 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There should be a campaign where we formally withdraw and burn people's "man card". I nominate Zuck to get his burnt. We could also award gold cards too for service over and above. Do it by community vote.

[–]Throwawayingaccount 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, don't shame someone for being unmasculine.

[–]Detox1337 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not shaming them for being un-masculine. First of all they're shaming themselves, I'd just like to acknowledge it. I'm shining a light on them for acting against the interests of men as a whole.

[–]SnarkMasterRay 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So, go down the road of emotionally shaming members of our own gender that women are famous rather than try and rationally discuss or point out logical flaws?

[–]Imnotmrabut 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

... and as they had Ignored any media, or even social media, literally no one noticed!

Or maybe no-one, including AVFM themselves, cared enough to notice and pass comment in a timely manner.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We know who runs Facebook right? LOL. They should know better and have their own website. Lesson learned.

[–]allnamesfckintaken 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

mra is being treated like neo nazis or something. lol. it's fucking crazy.

[–]mammothleafblower 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck Farcebook! I deleted my account years ago.

[–]PierceHarlan 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Note that Facebook did not remove the hate page that helped inspire a lunatic to kill five white police officers--that particular Facebook page is mentioned in this story: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/us/dallas-shooting-investigation/ -- and I just checked, it was not removed despite being a part of the biggest story in America.

In the Facebook world, something meets "community standards" only when it fits an extreme leftist narrative.

[–]equiposeur 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Those motherfuckers!

[–]gnimsh -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If only there were some other website they could post to and encourage discussion.

[–]SnarkMasterRay 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you legitimately want a discussion you go to where the people are. Reddit does not have a monopoly on the people, so we need multiple avenues for this.

[–]docmongre -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No mention on their website. Could it be a hoax? Brietbart isn't exactly reputable.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter