~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
jaib9
[–][deleted] 820 points821 points822 points 9 years ago (75 children) | Copy Link
Oh boy an attractive girl bashing feminism, to the top we go!
[–]Saerain 190 points191 points192 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
This is female privilege.
[–]moon_no_rise 46 points47 points48 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Really revs me up. Gonna write a lengthy blog post about how I feel.
[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Don't forget to make up a hashtag!
[–]epagel 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (61 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]beck1670 132 points133 points134 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Most of this sub is devoted to pointing out instances where men are treated unfairly, then they upvote an image that implies that men and women are equal?
I agree with many of the core messages here, but I disagree with so many of the people. (I'm here from r/all, btw.)
[–]GrandmasterSexay 41 points42 points43 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Playing Devil's Advocate here, but chances are it was it getting to /r/all that inflated the numbers as well. The rest of the sub seems strangely rational.
[–][deleted] 60 points61 points62 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
As someone who is here quite frequently, the reputation of this sub (and MRAs in general) in the mainstream is hugely inaccurate. Feminists have a lot more clout and inform the public with their views, which are obviously anti-MRM.
If you spend some more time here, I think you'll realize it's nowhere near as bad as most would have you believe. Yeah, there are some assholes and a lot of general bias, but there are in any political sub.
[–][deleted] 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
A lot of the top comments I see on here are actually people calling out sensationalist threads / comments.
Like this very thread for example.
/r/MensRights is one of the most level-headed, equality driven subreddits.
These people bashing the subreddit or the thread coming from r/all, notice how your comments haven't been deleted and you're not banned. Why don't you try that in some other subs that won't be named and see how it goes.
You can tell the quality of a group by how well it can take criticism.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]titaniumjew 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
I got told feminism is a terrorist organization for saying that the goal of feminism is gender equality. Sometimes it just seems this place just wants to complain and not actual equality.
[–]Muesli_nom 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I got told feminism is a terrorist organization for saying that the goal of feminism is gender equality.
Was "terrorist organization" the word used, or are you paraphrasing? Because while I've seen a few extremist views on feminism (so it's entirely possible this was a word-for-word quote), the over-all vibe on this sub isn't expressed this way. The view I come across more frequently is one of "Feminism as an ideology has a deleterious effect on society, and its male members in particular. That doesn't mean that all feminists are bad - many are in fact well-meaning, but ill-informed. The problem are those feminists that sit in positions that inform society, governments, and their views and laws, and are actively trying to suppress any notion that would actually lead to more equal rights - at least when it comes to any benefits for men. We're against feminism, not against every feminist we meet, and wish that those that are in feminism for 'equality' would actually stand up to those are affect laws and societal pressure."
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
http://thoughtcatalog.com/jake-fillis/2014/05/23-quotes-from-feminists-that-will-make-you-rethink-feminism/ Feminists came up with many hateful quotes. #killallmen was brought up by feminists.
[–]RelentlesslyDead 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is feminism about equality, though?
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well you're an idiot if you believe that
[–]Adanu0 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You got told feminism is a terrorist organization... because it is a terrorist organization.
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Believe it or not, the more obnoxious posts are often from feminist trolls hoping to smear us.
[–]MusicTheoryIsHard 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Nope, they're definitely posts like this. I agree with your core message, but the constant bashing of another group, who's core message is very similar to yours, is obnoxious. You guys come off just as pathetic as those feminist trolls with these posts. Let's fix what's wrong in our society, not bicker about who's group is right.
[–]nforne 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
As much as I dislike posts like this, at least it's sparking debate.
Feminists won't entertain men's issues unless they have to. Fortunately The Red Pill Movie is helping people realise we're not a bunch of misogynistic crackpots, and feminists will no longer be able to dismiss us as such.
Then who knows, perhaps we can have a civilised discussion?
[–]Muesli_nom 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let's fix what's wrong in our society, not bicker about who's group is right.
The problem with this is that factions of one those groups actively hinders fixing attempts because of the core world view they hold. We have to address this, or we'll be doing the equivalent of band-aiding a wound without first cleaning it. Sure, it'll look pretty and neat at first, but you just wait until a few days in, the smell starts, and your arm falls off.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The core tenet of modern feminism is that a Patriarchy of men oppresses all women and that all men need to repent and change their inherent 'toxicity'. That's nowhere near the core message of egalitarianism or male rights. It's quasi-religious mumbo jumbo.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's just a reaction to the pictures of feminists holding up signs saying why they need feminism. I wouldn't say its all that obnoxious, really.
[–]super_ag 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're totally right. Women have more rights enshrined into law and in practice in our institutions than men.
[–]PIG_CUNT 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No, they don't. Most people here are well aware of the ways in which men don't have the rights women do. Like selective service, parental, etc.
[–]KalebMW99 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Equal legally, pretty much, with a few notable inequalities both ways. Women still have to put up with shit because people are assholes, not because the law isn't sufficient or there's an infringement of rights
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Except when it comes to rape and custody stuff. That's the important exception and it applies either way.
[–]jmkiii 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'd say it is almost anything domestic.
[–]Krissam 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Name 1 right that men have in the western world that women don't.
[–]PillTheRed 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I asked a feminists this. Swear to God her reply was, the right to feel pretty without makeup. I'll try to find it.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The reason this subreddit exists is the complete opposite. If we believed rights were equal there wouldnt be a point in having it. What the hell? Am i missing something?
[–]thehunter699 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
Legally we all have equal rights. But humans will always be humans. Doesn't matter how much shit changes there will always be discrimination towards genders, physique, ethnicity and etcetera. Shit had been going on since the existence of the world.
[–]DirHR 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
Legally we all have equal rights.
Not really, for example men don't have any reproductive rights and as such do not get to choose whether or not they become parents. This is a right that women have and in fact, it's the woman who gets to decide if a man becomes a parent.
[–]Wine_Country 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
As a dude who got a girl I loved pregnant, only to have her leave me for an ex mid-pregnancy, I can't tell you how real this is. She uses her "rights" of birth as blackmail to get me to do whatever she wants. Doesn't matter that I'm solid, successful, and actually work as a counselor....the state says she can monopolize the time with my son for the rest of his life.
I'm actually suing to be on the birth certificate and to have my last name attached to him....when I'm the fucking father.
[–]DirHR 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, men deserve the right to choose parenthood or not. It's absurd that women can control men with the assistance of the state. Did you know that NOW opposes shared parenting.
[–]Thegrizzlybearzombie 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Same thing happened to me. I finally got on the birth cert when she turned 19 because she needed to get on my insurance. 19 years...
[–]Muesli_nom 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Unless we don't. Men in the US still don't have access to the same rights and programs (driver's license, state or federal employment, FAFSA) unless they sign up for the draft. Women, on the other hand, have all those rights from birth. It's worth noting that failure to register is a felony, which, if convicted, means you also lose the right to vote in many states.
Women also have the innate 'right' to be absolutely sure that their kid is actually their offspring. Men (at least in my country, Germany) don't even have the right to a paternity test unless the mother agrees to it. edit: And just to hammer out the difference: This doesn't mean that there's simply no law going "men have the right to know if a child is their genetic offspring", or somesuch. It means that there is a law that goes "A man may not test for paternity without the consent of the child's mother, and if he does it anyway, he will be fined, and the result may not be used in court proceedings.": It's not "legally not covered" - it's explicitly illegal.
Men also have no right to bodily integrity, even though they should have it, as it's one of the Human Rights in both the US and Germany. In fact, in Germany, there currently are an entire three laws that cover bodily integrity: One that's used for anything but the genitals and applies to everyone. One that governs the genital integrity of girls, and conveys harsher sentencing for violating it. And one that deals with the genital integrity of boys, and explicitly exempts male genitals from being subject to "bodily integrity", making it legal to cut off parts.
No, legally we all have not the same rights.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
The issue we have in 2017 is that women's rights are acceptable and men's rights are not. It is not politically correct to ask "what about men" when an issue that affects everyone is being discussed from only the female perspective.
How can we ensure new laws being passed are fair to all when valid opinions are being self censored for fear of being labelled a woman hater?
By way of example, Philip Davies is the only British MP who speaks for men's issues. He has stood in the way of some appalling legislation that would criminalise men but not women for the same act (the act assumed only women can be victims of domestic violence). For daring to speak out he's been vilified by the press, branded a bigot and misogynist, and even had the leader of a feminist political party stand against him in the recent election.
The problem is the message being sent to other politicians. Basically feminists are saying cross us at your peril. How can we ensure laws are fair to all in this climate of fear?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I believe the woman in the picture is referring to equality of opportunity.
There are many other inequalities of course. Some are justifiable grievances, others are more contentious. Disputes arise where one group tries to 'own' entirely a subject that also applies to the other group to a lesser extent.
[–]aonome 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
He lost his seat a few days ago. There is no one left in the commons to speak on men's issues.
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Twitter got very excited for a few hours about his apparent demise, but he was actually re-elected with a majority of 5,000.
[–]aonome 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Thank fuck.
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
His twitter feed that day was hilarious :D
[–]aonome 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't actually look at that sort of thing because it reminds me of the reaction I got when I tried to get help. I guess laughing at it is all you can do though.
[–]VadersDawg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How do you reduce individual prejudices. Forced re-education?
[–]Literally_A_Shill 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The law leaves a lot open to personal interpretation. It's people deciding for other people. So institutional inequalities still arise when they aren't directly restricted.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
What rights that men have but women don't? Men don't have even basic reproductive rights.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]sayshey 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You'll have to forgive me. Is it men or women who have more rights? Which ones?
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
I'm glad this is the top comment
this sub is garbage but I love this comment
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
I really like this sub, but this is low-effort crap that gets to the top because "female." People here should know better than to praise something just because a woman said it
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I agree with you about this post but do you honestly believe that the way people discuss gender relations on this particular sub is going to help anyone? Shit like this sub is the reason there's no viable levelheaded egalitarian gender movement, MRAs are literally just a template copy of "le SJW menace" just with beards and deeper voices. This place is just an insular circlejerk that doesn't help anyone improve their lives, imho. Can you explain why you really like this sub?
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
If you don't think this sub has levelheaded egalitarian content, you either haven't seen enough of it or you refuse to.
The "MRAs are just like SJWs" argument is bunk, because people fighting for men's rights don't even have half the institutional power that feminists do. This sub at least shows a different perspective and calls out discrimination for what it is. One of the stickied posts here is a speech by Karen straughan, you should give it a listen to see why I like this sub.
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
don't even have half the institutional power
alright good point, I'll give you that what I fucking despise is how much tabloid shit gets posted here like a lot of the 'OMG IMAGINE IF THE GENDERS WERE REVERSED' pitchfork mob posts are literal fake news originating with daily mail and shit like that
if ya'll would cut out that crap this sub would be much better (and would probably lose a lot of traffic since sensationalism is so damn appealing)
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I can agree with that, those are low effort posts
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
well this is one thing I appreciate: you didn't just blow me off, thank you dude
This is out of genuine curiosity: are there that many people in this movement who aren't just in it for the clickbait and are people actively working to de-sensationalize the discourse? I'm firmly of the opinion that male psychological/social issues need to be discussed with the same compassionate tone that women's issues are and I recognize that we tend to be demonized harshly but this kind of toxic (and honestly misogynistic, I'm just going to call it what it is) clickbait circlejerk is literally only going to make it harder for us since it fuels a belief that all men are unjustifiably angry/bitter (I mean if it's going to be called the "mens rights movement" and it's just full of bitter overzealous rage how could it possibly improve anyone's life at all or start levelheaded discussions that can end up influencing culture in a positive way?)
No matter what anybody here says or does, there will be plenty of people who will look for reasons to hate us, citing posts like these as examples. Those people are beyond reasoning. We just need to keep publicizing important things like cassie jayes movie
[–]ENTP 760 points761 points762 points 9 years ago (171 children) | Copy Link
No way she is 42.
[–]xx2Hardxx 197 points198 points199 points 9 years ago (166 children) | Copy Link
I don't think that's what she means but I'm not sure what it does mean
[–]DatGrass14 190 points191 points192 points 9 years ago (150 children) | Copy Link
Women have had equal rights in America since 1975 is what she means
[–]locks_are_paranoid 44 points45 points46 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
What happened in 1975?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]WikiTextBot 45 points46 points47 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (c. 65) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which protected men and women from discrimination on the grounds of sex or marital status. The Act concerned employment, training, education, harassment, the provision of goods and services, and the disposal of premises. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 and The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Amendment) Regulations 2008 amended parts of this Act to apply to transsexual people. Other amendments were introduced by the Sex Discrimination Act 1986, the Employment Act 1989, the Equality Act 2006, and other legislation such as rulings by the European Court of Justice.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information ] Downvote to remove | v0.2
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Too bad the US has never passed an ERA.
[–]ConfessionsofaLurker 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What are you talking about?
[–]Muesli_nom 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
There have been attempts to pass the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) for the US constitution since (afaik) 1923. It reads:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
Every time it was voted on, it failed to pass. This is likely due to the presence of the (apparently little known) Hayden Rider, an attachment to the ERA that goes like this:
The provisions of this article shall not be construed to impair any rights, benefits, or exemptions now or hereafter conferred by law upon persons of the female sex.
Or, in common parlance: "The ERA is for women only. G'day, Sirs."
[–]unbelievablepeople 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No, the Hayden Rider was only attached to it in the 1950s. When it came closest to being adopted, in the 1970s, there was no Hayden Rider.
[–]Quintrell 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A bit redundant given the equal protection guarantees in the Constitution.
[–]orcscorper 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, it's too bad feminists realized they might lose some of their female privilege, stopped pushing for the ERA, and then blamed the Reagan revolution for killing it. If they believed in equality, they would have kept up the fight.
[–]Mhblea 36 points37 points38 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sony released Betamax
[–]LyingForTruth 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
As God as my witness, he is broken in half!
[–]haveacigar4200 141 points142 points143 points 9 years ago (138 children) | Copy Link
Except when they need an abortion in Mississippi.
Or when they need birth control. (Viagra is covered by most insurance plans but congressman raise all kinds of hell over birth control)
So this girl doesn't know what she's talking about. Hard to 'get the fuck OVER IT' when 'it' is an abortion you have to travel across the state to get.
[–]speedisavirus 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Except for the whole part where Viagra for erectile disorder is not covered by most health insurance and you need to stop listening to feminist (lies) propaganda.
[–]DirHR 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link
As a man I wish all I had to do was travel across the state to get some reproductive rights. It's like bitching because your Big Mac has a bite out of it while I have no food at all.
[–]joyofsteak 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
How do expect men to have reproductive rights? We already have plenty in that our birth control is cheap, easy to use, and easy to access. What more is there to have?
[–]DirHR 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
A way to legally opt out of parenthood like women have.
[–]joyofsteak 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Like what? Just being able to legally say fuck it and not have to take responsibility? Cause that fucks over the kid.
[–]DirHR 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
There is no kid unless the woman chooses to become a parent and yes, a legal opt out would just be a form that a man can fill out within a time period. You can also compare it to Safe Haven laws where a woman can, up to a certain age, drop a baby off and forfeit legal responsibility.
Like a mother can do any time before a child is 60 days old? (Texas)
[–]CommondeNominator 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
He means once conception has occurred.
[–]joyofsteak 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Like what? Being able to legally say fuck it and walk away? Cause that fucks over the kid. Being able to force the woman to get an abortion? Cause that gives you a level of control over someone else's body that is just downright terrifying.
[–]speedisavirus 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
What birth control that men have is cheap?
[–]joyofsteak 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Condoms?
[–]speedisavirus 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
If you are even moderately sexually active they cost more than the pill. Next.
[–]tinyhumanthing 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Why can't we agree that you should have a Big Mac, and I should be pissed that mine has a bite out of it?
[–]DirHR 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I agree that men should have reproductive rights too.
[–]tinyhumanthing 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So do I. It's heartbreaking that only one party gets to decide family planning and the other is stuck with whatever her choice is. I also feel that women should be in the draft and circumcision shouldn't be standard. But that doesn't change that I also want my daughter to be treated the same way my son would.
Male Genital Mutilation should be banned altogether. In what way is your daughter treated worse than your son?
[–]HotDealsInTexas 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's fine, but haveacigar is claiming that the obnoxious abortion laws in Mississippi are an example of women having less rights than men, which is complete bullshit since even with those laws in place women have more reproductive rights than men.
[–]ShiverinMaTimbers 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
Viagras only covered as a blood thinner Vasodilator not for ED.
Some insurances cover BC for hormonal regulation with PCOS.
In both cases they're prescribed for health issues not pleasure issues, so it's a non issue
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Viagra is not a blood thinner, it is a vasodilator. It expands blood vessels, which lowers blood pressure unlike like actual blood thinners, which "water down" blood to allow it t pass easier through clogged arteries. Some thin the blood and prevent blood cells from sticking together in the arteries and veins, whilst others increase the amount of time it takes for clots to form, thus preventing their formation.
Source. Wife is an Advanced Nurse Practitioner.
[–]ShiverinMaTimbers 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thats what it was... I knew it was for heart/blood pressure issues but couldnt remember if it was thinner or dilator. took a shot cuz late and lazy, rip.
[–]Akitten 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
"Abortion"
Men have no reproductive rights, so in a way that would be equal rights.
[–]jaheiner 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Insurance should cover condom purchase. Then it'd be fair!
[–]haveacigar4200 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Agreed. It would save society money.
[–]nforne 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My personal view is that abortion should be legal.
However, trying to paint it as women fighting for their rights is misleading. In the pro-life camp, just as many women are against abortion as men. It's a moral issue, and your gender doesn't determine your opinion.
Comparing abortion to a medical treatment for men is disingenuous at best.
[–]Pennigans 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think most insurance companies cover birth control. It's a big deal for people. When I was on it, it had the highest copay of any medication I have filled (I'd say I think it's the cap but I just spent $45 on my dad's blood thinners). It was free on another insurance plan we had before. This is all my dad's insurance that he gets from his employer, though.
[–]speedisavirus 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Most did even before the mandate because it hardly costs them anything. The pill is usually $30 or less without insurance.
[–]Pennigans 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly. I was paying $20. But I heard that Obama made it to where birth control was affordable.
[–]Ikillesuper 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How can there be equal rights for abortion if only females can have them......
[–][deleted] 73 points74 points75 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
It's so perfect to me that such a moronic subreddit with moronic posts has morons participating in it.
THE LAWS AREN'T EVEN THE SUBJECT OF MODERN FEMINISM. It's about gender roles within society, which negatively affect men AND women... which bothers the shit out of most feminists I know. For example, I volunteer at a sexual abuse shelter near me named Chrysalis, which accepts men. As well they should!
This subreddit is a hotbed of idiocy and strawmen.
[–][deleted] 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Peruse the rest of the sub with an open mind and I think you'll find that it's not as moronic as you think. Any political sub has its biases, but there are important issues being discussed here that just aren't anywhere else. Feminists claim to support men, but almost never address men's issues, and when they do, it's usually just lip service, not actual activism.
THE LAWS AREN'T EVEN THE SUBJECT OF MODERN FEMINISM. It's about gender roles within society, which negatively affect men AND women... which bothers the shit out of most feminists I know.
But there are legal changes that need to be made on the men's rights front! We need laws that protect men from having to pay child support for children they never consented to have, for instance. Male circumcision needs to be banned. We need to either have women be required to sign up for the draft or stop requiring it of men.
And feminists may verbally agree that men are discriminated against in society, but they don't do anywhere near enough to actually combat that discrimination. The criminal sentencing gap between men and women is 60%! I don't think I even know of a more blatant and severe form of institutionalized sexism, and feminists won't even touch it. As a matter of fact, they're trying to get even more lenient sentences for women—that's a higher priority to them than correcting the gap.
Before you write this sub and it's anti-feminism off, you should take a hard look at feminism and ask yourself if some of it isn't deserved. Feminists have controlled the gender rights arena for decades and have historically fought tooth-and-nail to prevent men from discussing their issues publicly. That still goes on to a great extent. Presently, they maintain that MRAs are unnecessary, because feminism has men covered—that would be a bad joke if the issues weren't so damn serious.
[–]PietroGori7 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
You are a master at expressing the issue
Thanks! :-) Least I'm using that English major for something. :-P
[–]randomaccount2017d 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Will they accept victims of female-on-male sexually victimization or consider their needs as important? I highly doubt it. Some feminists might claim that they are bothered when gender roles negatively affect men, but the mechanics of the movement at large actively leverage male disposability in society. The language even supposedly more "egalitarian" initiatives such as HeForShe uses is teeming with that strategy.
If you want to play the anecdote game, many of us know literally of no feminist irl who gives a damn about male issues. In fact many of us know feminists who find the idea of male issues laughable. In my country, laws regarding sexual victimization still reference the genders of perpetrators and victims, and attempts to get this recognized and changed are chided and mocked by its feminists and gender studies intellectuals. If you and your acquaintances who consider themselves feminists do REALLY care, then that's excellent and I thank you for it, but for a lot us - and I say this as a guy who has been sexually victimized by female perpetrators - your experience with feminists in your local context is discordant with our experience with them in many of our local contexts and (with all due respect) with the aggregate effects of feminism
[–]lbutl25 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
that was really nicely put. personally I do believe there are many issues that adversely affect woman but I also believe the same can be said for men. Perhaps I should be labeled a Femenist Males Right's activist haha.
[–]Throwawayingaccount 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
THE LAWS AREN'T EVEN THE SUBJECT OF MODERN FEMINISM.
Here's how I see it.
Feminism is fighting for equality under social pressures.
MRAs are fighting for equality under the law, whereupon we can point to laws on the books that are discriminatory against men.
One seems SIGNIFICANTLY more important than the other.
I agree. First, we fix the laws so we have legal equality, then we can work on the social inequalities faced by both genders. While I am legally a second-class citizen, it's hard to give a shit about someone else's perception of oppression.
[–]DaBuddahN 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There are LEGAL imbalances between men and women that NEED to be addressed. I believe these issues, particularly family court, would've be addressed years ago if it weren't for NOW's staunch opposition to default joint custody and child support/alimony reform. They literally threaten any Democrat with retaliation if they support these bills.
So yeah, while I want to address societal gender roles and believe it's a legitimate issue - LEGAL discrepancies take precedent because it's literally the state, our government, enforcing injustice and not widespread prejudices which is much harder to address.
[–]haveacigar4200 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It is just that they are confusing "men's rights" with "human rights."
[–]gjsmo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And yet, you'll never hear anyone make that argument in public. It's all radical feminists all the way down.
[–]Quintrell 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And yet feminism and "women's rights" go hand in hand. If laws aren't the subject of modern feminism, why do so many feminist groups advocate for and against legislation that pertains to women? (that's a rhetorical question).
It's about gender roles within society, which negatively affect men AND women...
It should be about those things, but it usually isn't. If you disagree you probably haven't been paying attention
For example, I volunteer at a sexual abuse shelter near me named Chrysalis, which accepts men
Shelters in my city don't accept men and shelters in my state that DO accept men bury that fact in their websites. There's also a program that provides group therapy in jail and connects "returning citizens" to transitional employment following their release. Doesn't accept men.
This subreddit is a hotbed of idiocy and strawmen
Oh the irony...
THE LAWS AREN'T EVEN THE SUBJECT OF MODERN FEMINISM. It's about gender roles within society, which negatively affect men AND women
Exactly.
If you paid attention to this sub you'd notice that there are quite a few major legal inequalities against men. For instance, in France it's illegal for a man to get a paternity test without the mother's consent (i.e. they made paternity fraud de facto legal for women). Men basically have no right to opt out of financial parenthood anywhere, even if the child is a product of the mother raping the father when he was a minor. Mutilating girls' genitals, even if it's a "symbolic nick" and not full clitoral hood removal, is banned throughout the developed world. Mutilating boys' genitals isn't banned in ANY developed country. Hell, we can't even manage to get through a ban on sucking a baby boy's bleeding dick with your herpes-ridden mouth.
Later in life, we still don't have bodily autonomy. In the US, young men must symbolically sign our lives away to the government through Selective Service registration: in many countries, even developed ones, men are forced into military service even in peacetime.
If that shit was happening to women in the US, Feminists would be up in arms to get the unjust laws changed, guaranteed. But instead, Feminists have collectively said: "Well, we've fixed all the laws discriminating against women, time to move on to issues like manspreading, catcalling, and female video game characters wearing immodest clothing."
[–]Xiamingxuan 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Such wise words from a teenager. So glad she could share her extensive life experience
[–]i-am-a-genius 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Maybe you're just used to feminist women? Non-feminists are waaaaay more attractive. ;)
[–]youwontguessthisname 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Maybe her parents used artificial insemination and froze their fertilized eggs 42 years ago.
[–]SarahC 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Who is she?
[–]joeylxd 747 points748 points749 points 9 years ago (75 children) | Copy Link
This has nothing to do with mens rights.
[–]Kittens_in_panties 546 points547 points548 points 9 years ago (59 children) | Copy Link
Unfortunately the term "men's rights" tend to attract the I hate feminism and only want to talk about why I hate feminism crowd instead of people who actually care about men's rights.
[–]Saerain 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago* (34 children) | Copy Link
It's weird how when people manage to escape a religion they tend to bash it for the problems they identified. Why not just talk amongst yourselves about how great atheism is instead of being so mean to religion? Wait, where am I again?
[–]Kittens_in_panties 118 points119 points120 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
The difference between atheism/religion and men's rights/ women's rights is that men's rights does not contradict women's rights. Supporting men's rights doesn't mean you have to refuse to acknowledge that women also have social issues.
[–][deleted] 46 points47 points48 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I studied what is often called feminist economics, really it's household economics (not the cooking class you might do in high school!). Instead of looking at households as a single economic unit, like a lot of economics does, we look inside the household and what it's made up of. Specifically, I looked into bargaining models between the husband and wife and health outcomes for the family. I'd encourage anyone who completely dismisses feminism to look at some of this research and some of the benefits of focusing on women's issues. BUT (please don't stop reading there)
What I learnt about feminism from that research is that there is a place to focus on women's problems and equally, there's a place to look at men's problems. To dismiss feminism (or men's rights movements) because of loud and angry people is throwing the baby out with the bath water. There is a case for focusing on gender issues separately, but we also need to recognise that were all after the same thing, it's mutually beneficial for us to work together.
[–]TigerRaiders 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We need more of this.
[–]Kravego 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Or instead, we throw BOTH feminism and MRA out the door because they're both cesspools of angry people who only want to shout down the opposite ends, and replace them with 100% egalitarianism.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I did try to emphasise that they both have merit and a place, despite the loud idiots from both sides.
[–]Kravego 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I feel like their merits are more than taken into account in a truly egalitarian worldview.
[–]reverendchubbs 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
I've been straight up told that I can't advocate for both women and men's rights, just about a week ago, when I said I was a feminist and MRA. Even when I backed down and said "ok, I understand why you don't like the term MRA, so let's just say I advocate for men's issues as well." I have nothing against women, I fight for their rights, I don't get why I can't be on both "sides".
[–]equality2000 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
I've been straight up told that I can't advocate for both
Were you told this by the officially sanctioned feminism representative for your region? If not, it might have just been some asshole.
[–]Generic_On_Reddit 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Were you told this by the officially sanctioned feminism representative for your region?
This is what everyone needs to remember when dealing with "movements". Most movements don't have official slogans, mission statements, creeds, rules of behavior, and (most of all) membership. Anybody can call themselves any "-ist" and they can believe that "-ist" means whatever they want it to mean. That doesn't mean that -ist means what they say and they are not a representative of it because they are passionate.
There are assholes everywhere. They exist in feminism, in SJWs, in Trump supporters, in Bernie Bros, and in Men's Rights Activists. People wonder why their pet movement is judged and stereotyped as awful, then turn around and write off entire groups of people the same way.
[–]JebberJabber 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
That is the NotAllFeminists argument.
I follow a few feminist pages and I'd say it was fair comment - feminists typically know and care very little about MRAs other than as hate-objects. Their analysis of men's issues is strictly limited to situations in which feminism can be given as the solution, so much so that it is commonly thought all men's issues are fixed by feminism.
[–]equality2000 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Don't you hate it when women say shit like "all men are inherently misogynistic?"
It pisses me off. No, this is the GoldenRule argument. I don't generalize them because I won't let them generalize me. Fuck that.
[–]JcbAzPx 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Do you happen to know who that would be, by chance? I don't think I've ever heard of such a thing.
Damn right you haven't. So he must have been talking to some asshole.
[–]falconsoldier 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yeah don't listen to them. I'm a feminist and MRA, just ignore the labels and talk about the actual ideas.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This works for the mainstream culture (which is ultimately more important), but not for institutional change. Feminism, as a movement, is well developed and has immense lobbying power at this point. Men need a similarly robust movement to prevent women's perspectives from dominating laws and policies related to gender issues. Feminists aimed to create a voice for women in society, but a side effect was that only women were considered to have gender issues. On a more casual level, I agree, people should ignore the labels and focus on the issues, but on a political stage, men need organizations fighting for them that are on par with feminist ones.
[–]Kittens_in_panties 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Who ever said that to you is an idiot. Too many people view this as some sort of war between men and women.
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"OK, whatever you want to think about feminism, I'm a men's rights advocate and a women's rights advocate. Because I'm a human rights advocate. Please get ever so fucked. Make sense?"
[–]midirfulton 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is extremely true, and its why it drives me nuts when extremist feminist groups try and shut down converation, especially when everyone has similar goals (unless your going for female privilege and not equality).
Irregardless, if you think a problem is big or not, we are a huge society and we can work on a lot of issues. Its not a zero sum game.
[–]Raptorfeet 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
"Supporting men's rights doesn't mean you have to refuse to acknowledge that women also have social issues."
While this is true, it is a fact that MRA have a tendency to not as much point out inequality towards men as much as they whine about the fact that women's rights is an issue that is getting more attention.
For example, it often goes like this:
Feminists: We have this problem!
MRA: Men have problems to! Why don't you talk about our problems?!
Feminists: Because we're currently dealing with this problem?
MRA: If you won't deal with our problem, we'll derail any attempt to deal with your problem!
Which is a sad affair.
[–]orcscorper 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Bullshit. It goes more like this:
Political and business leaders: Yes! Let's fix the problem!
Feminists: We have another problem!
MRAs: We also have a problem!I
Feminists: Die, misogynist scum! <pulls fire alarm>
Political and business leaders: <crickets chirping>
Which is a sad affair, and actually happens.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Jews can still talk about how disgusting Nazis are. Didn't feminists vote against equal parenting?
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Here's that conflation of women's rights with feminism again. You said one, now it's the other.
Non-belief does not contradict being against murder. [My religion] is against murder. Checkmate, atheists.
And then in the next sentence this matter of equal rights morphs into:
Supporting men's rights doesn't mean you have to refuse to acknowledge that women also have social issues.
Sneaky. The weird part is I don't think you know you're doing it.
[–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Sorry, but at this point, when you look at the production process of a movie like "the red pill" by Cassie Jaye, the idea that there can be any notable development for men's rights while feminism wields such influence over media and mainstream thinking is ludicrous.
Feminism must be criticized for misrepresenting the men's right's movement, for preventing discussion about these topics, for doing almost everything they can to prevent progress being made.
[–]Literally_A_Shill 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, there totally aren't enough men in any position of power in the media...
Feminism must be criticized for misrepresenting the men's right's movement
I think this thread is doing a fine job making the men's rights movement look bad all on its own.
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
deleted What is this?
[–]Syokudai 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
If those men aren't allowed to speak about men's issues, it really doesn't make a difference how many of them there are, does it?
[–]Literally_A_Shill 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
They're allowed to. There are tons of movies about men's issues.
[–]Syokudai 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Small, independent films and 'the media' are not the same thing; pretty disingenuous comparison. And while it may not be illegal, talking about men's issues, or even acknowledging that they exist, is still pretty taboo in mainstream media, which is why they're rarely ever mentioned, especially relative to the amount of coverage women's 'issues' receive.
[–]SKNK_Monk 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Tons of them, Literally_a_shill?
[–]trolloc1 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This is the first time I've seen a post from /r/MensRights where the comment section is logical and not just a bunch of sexists. Has the sub been improving?
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're clearly not on here very often.
Well, it's not like you can draw any real conclusions with a data set of like ... 3 samples. Visit more often, make up your own mind.
[–]joyofsteak 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It hit /r/all. This place is still a shitshow in almost every comment section.
[–]Galadriel26 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's because it's on the front page now so lots of outsiders and women are commenting. (and women on reddit are the best kind of women, we all know it - right?)
[–]thehunter699 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I can understand the hate though. Femenism is meant to be about equality but turns into the whole "women are better then men" mostly due to a couple of idiots that get attention in the media. I'm all for women being treated fairly and equally as a whole but I get sick of all this mainstream feminist bullshit.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreddyFoFingers 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sources? I can't find anything to back up any of your claims. Which is the largest feminist organization? Where were these protests - is that about Earl Silvermans shelter?
[–]SKNK_Monk 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The National Organization for Women.
[–]FreddyFoFingers 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Don't see anything about their stance on the duluth model. There is some criticism of liberal agenda. Still coming up blank on protests and mens shelters.
[–]carrot0101 54 points55 points56 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It's actually kind of ironc, if you agree with her statement then this sub shouldn't even exist because men had equal rights since pretty much forever.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Rolten 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
He's not saying it's true you bottlehead, he's saying that if you agree with the post then you agree that we have equal rights (which is obviously not true).
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean, feminism (atleast the unwashed masses of the 3rd wave) really does bash men a lot, along with mens rights.
[–]i-am-a-genius 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
It does because feminism tries to shut down discussion on men's rights...
[–]Orsonius 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
there isn't just "one feminsm" thus "feminism" can't shut down discussion on men's right. Also feminist do care about men's rights just not every single one of them
[–]i-am-a-genius 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You have a clear misunderstanding of the issues.
[–]thatsnogood 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The mods here aren't as strict as they used to be it seems.
[–]ThatDamnedImp 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
People like you are why I won't sub here. You're more concerned with feminism, than men's rights...but you're very quick to tell us how nothing is actually men's rights, ever.
And yet the mods just let you troll over...and over...and over.
[–]Onion_Guy 356 points357 points358 points 9 years ago (92 children) | Copy Link
This thread has actually shown a lot of good, valid points, including things I don't agree with.
I would just like to put forward that it's possible to a) defend men's rights in a world that frequently doesn't consider them, b) simultaneously understand that there are aspects of the world (even in western society, though admittedly more frequently elsewhere) in which women have it a LOT worse than men. It's not an inherent issue that men dominate some spheres of life, nor the same for women. It is, however, an issue when those predispositions genuinely preclude people from getting involved in spheres they're interested in.
I hate to ramble or be unclear, because that's the kind of thing that becomes downvote bait on this sub of ours. But I'm an active advocate on my campus for men's rights, and I'm also a defender of feminism and the rights of women on campus. This is location and situation specific. I've been the victim of sexual assault and seen untold criticism for being a man who got raped, but I've also had several female friends who have been drugged or assaulted multiple times. I've been catcalled on the streets, but I have female friends who struggle to walk around without being catcalled every other day at the least. It's dumb to pretend other people don't struggle just to highlight your own (justifiable) struggles.
This post is a big indication of that too. Feminism is necessary, just not the bullshit that - surprise - you only see on subreddits like TiA (fun to observe but the comments get pretty dumb). This sub shouldn't be about "wow feminism is horrible;" feminism should be irrelevant to us if we claim that feminism is about women, and this sub should focus on pro-men rather than anti-feminism. I almost said anti-women there, since a lot of the comments of a lot of posts in our sub are pretty goddamn horrible, but I know that myself and probably the majority of this sub don't hate women or constantly disparage them.
I've said a lot, I guess, but I just think it's ignorant to pretend like women don't have it worse than men in a lot of ways. Men have it worse than women in a lot of ways too, but how the hell can you justify sayin women have no problems/live in a gynocentric world when we fight so hard to have our problems acknowledged. It's the same thing, guys. There are some seriously sexist people out there. As much as the "rich white dude running everything" jokes are annoying, it's frankly true in a lot of places, and there are a lot of douchebags running things who actively shit on women. Can we be a bit more cognizant moving forward?
[–]sex_panther_by_odeon 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
People should fight for equality. Work collectively to fix women issues and men issues. The fighting between men's rights and women's right are hurting both causes.
[–]g_squidman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I wouldn't even say that. "Equality" still implies a comparison. If it's bad, it's bad. If it's bad, we fight it. That should be the bottom line.
[–]MrPlaysWithSquirrels 58 points59 points60 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
100%! I consider myself a feminist and an MRA. They are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are incredibly similar.
The only way for the MRA movement to be taken seriously is to show that same respect outward. You can't demand respect while yelling at the very people you want to listen to you.
[–]Onion_Guy 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I absolutely agree. Every instance I've seen of "oh man look at these feminazis" has been matched on the same site by people proclaiming womens' inferiority or decrying genuine efforts to make people's lives better. It's easy to ignore your own group's faults, but it's better to acknowledge both faults and successes and move toward a better world for everyone. This sub has a great founding ideology but I think it falls short of it too often in favor of bashing others.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Feminists criticize MRAs for being anti-feminist, but they're staunchly anti-MRA themselves. The same way feminism was a response to misogyny in society, anti-feminism among MRAs is actually a response to misandry among feminists. The criticism that MRAs need to be more respectful of feminism is moot unless you also argue that feminism needs to be more respectful of men.
[–]MrPlaysWithSquirrels 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, feminism needs to be more respectful of us, too. But when they see a small group of mostly men who chastise their (majority) group for their beliefs, it's going to be hard for them to offer the respect first.
MRAs and feminists have the same fight. Women have inequalities they are fighting to overcome, just like we do. Some of ours are hard-coded into our society, like prisons, domestic violence support, and childcare. Some of theirs are broad societal views, like choice of profession, sexual power, etc. But they're the same fight. We should default to respecting that, because we are a small voice begging to be heard. We see our inequalities and think, how can the world not see this? How can the world not stand with us? That same way of thinking should, by default, allow us to see their perspective on their fight as well.
[–]perplexedm 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
You can't demand respect while yelling at the very people you want to listen to you.
Does mras yell more than radfems ?
The big red alone shrills louder than all mras together.
[–]DirHR 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Feminists have been doing just that for years.
[–]midirfulton 56 points57 points58 points 9 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link
Personally, after expriencing feminism at its worst when it protested a MRA discussion about opening male domestic violence shelters, I've drawn a distinction between feminism and women's rights.
I am 100% for equal rights for everyone, including women, and I fully acknowledge that there are issues that face women. I do have huge issues with a multi-billion dollar feminist organization that uses its immense power to stop funding for male domestic violence shelters. (As well as lobbying for actual institutionalized sexism in the form of the Duluth Model).
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]sltfc 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
yeah, pretty keen for a source on that one
[–]JebberJabber 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
NOW, the huge US National Organisation of Women. It consistently fights against shared parenting.
NOW supports the Duluth model. I've seen MRAs moaning about that and imagined it was exaggerated and they were criticising an out of date implementation, but a visit to the Duluth model web page was a shock, they are biased and out of date. The popularity of the Duluth model with police and counselling organisations explains why men who have been psychologically, physically and sexually abused by women report such horrible treatment by the organisations who are supposed to support them.
"Billions" looks like a mistake. Men are no good with figures.
[–]Mens-Advocate 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Well, I don't know about individual organisations, but feminist funding does run to the billions.
Just from off-hand memory about feminist funding in the USA:
The VAWA act provided USD1.6 billion to feminist causes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act
Emily's List has raised and spent a quarter-billion USD on feminist candidates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMILY%27s_List.
Globally, of course, the totals would be much higher.
Research and tote up some of the additional totals yourself: https://www.backher.com/toolbox/women-specific-grants http://www.unwomen.org/en/trust-funds/fund-for-gender-equality (between a quarter-billion and a half-billion annually)
The above took just a few seconds and is not meant to be exhaustive. An exhaustive, global list would certainly run to the billions.
This particular thread hit r/all and it's a bit heated. Also, we allow free speech here, and tend to counter instead with more better words and/or downvotes rather than deletions and bans, so it's a bit less of a hugbox than some other places.
[–]midirfulton 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Its actually pretty hard to find actual figures on my phone, but just looking at the fact that feminists political super-pacs have easily spent 100 million in the last 10 years.
So while a billion dollar might be a tad of an exaggeration, its probably not that far from the truth.
[–]DaBuddahN 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
NOW.
I wouldn't be surprised if it were a Super PAC that included NOW and other prominent feminist advocacy groups. NOW actively opposes default child custody and alimony/child support reform. I wouldn't be surprised if they opposed men's shelters as well.
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You never see feminists respond to this point. If they do, they'll say those aren't real feminists and pull a no true Scotsman fallacy. Right... The biggest feminist group in the world, that receives hundreds of millions of dollars in donations aren't real feminists, but you are... Even if they aren't real feminists, shouldn't they be fighting to, I don't know, correct them if they are in fact representing them and lobbying the federal government in their name?
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You already have that answer... NOW, the national organization of women. They fight against stuff like equal parenting, men having any say in reproduction, support the Duluth model and tender years doctrine, then turn around and complain about gender roles. It is absurd. You don't get to say men need to stay out of the picture when reproduction is involved, and then be upset that women are seen as the ones who raise kids. If you are going to fight to make sure men have zero custody in divorce, and gen have to fight for any time they want with their own kids, you don't get to complain that you are seen as child raisers. It is about having power in courts, not equality.
Yet the same one the "progressive" feminists push. It is such a glaring logical inconsistency it is absurd.
We don't want to be seen as the ones who's role is to raise kids! But, don't you dare let men have any custody... Wtf... If you make sure men don't get custody, you are going to, by default, be the ones raising the kids. Thinking otherwise is incredibly immature. Then again, I wouldn't expect much else from modern feminism. Logic never has been their strong suit.
Someone below pointed out that it is in fact billions. They cited it all so I believe them. Once you take vawa into account the number soars.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]captainAwesomePants 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's totally cool, but it's important to remember that a whole lot of people would self-identity as a feminist because they define feminism as simply "women should be equal," and you're clearly 100% in agreement with those people's view if not their definition of a term.
I think a lot of Internet hate stems from people with different interpretations if terms arguing past each other.
That definition may fit feminist theory in the eyes of many (although not mine), but the feminist movement is in no way about equality for both genders. If feminists had been adequately addressing men's issues and concerns, MRAs would not be a thing.
[–]Onion_Guy 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Fair enough! The Duluth model is pretty terrible, considering a little over half of both-people-abusing domestic violence is started by women. It's a. It hard to justify, however, when 87% of lethalities are suffered by women from DV. I always vie for increased awareness of male victims in any case but it'd be a crime for me to ignore the women.
You know what I'm saying? I can care about multiple groups' issues at the same time. In order to say "hey men get fucked over in family court and a lot of domestic violence policies," I don't have to end that a lot more women die because of abusive partners, who tend to be (but are not exclusively) men. It's not men's fault, but it's something that deserves attention and maybe it's society's fault for not allowing men to express emotions in a healthy and accepted way outside of anger and violence.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Im all for drawing attention to issues, I personally only get irritated when one group is much more organized then the other, and they use that power to silence that other group.
We can work on more then one problem at a time.
[–]kagoolx 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Absolutely, that sounds fucked up. But actually, that's not feminism. You're right to make a distinction, but feminism is about equal rights and a feminist defends the rights of all when they need defending.
I think the term for whoever was doing that bs, is discriminatory assholes. It seems some people are just applying the label of feminist to themselves when they're absolutely not feminists.
[–]Auszi 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The following is a very informed and highly reusable comment by Karen Straughan in response to a feminist who thinks the many blatant sexists among feminists aren't real feminists:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
That's not just "no true Scotsman". That's delusional self deception.
Listen, if you want to call yourself a feminist, I don't care. I've been investigating feminism for more than 9 years now, and people like you used to piss me off, because to my mind all you were doing was providing cover and ballast for the powerful political and academic feminists you claim are just jerks. And believe me, they ARE jerks. If you knew half of what I know about the things they've done under the banner of feminism, maybe you'd stop calling yourself one.
But I want you to know. You don't matter. You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
feminism is about equal rights and a feminist defends the rights of all when they need defending.
The only people who say this are feminists. Even a casual look at feminist activism shows a stark disparity in how much they advocate for women vs. men. To say that feminism has both genders equally, or even just proportionately covered is delusional. This is why MRAs are actually needed in society, and why our numbers are growing. My hope is that, once it's sunk in to society that both men and women have issues, most people will retire both labels and just be egalitarian. Anti-feminism among MRAs is a direct response to misandry among feminists.
[–]IamaspyAMNothing 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol you know you've hit /r/all when posts like this get upvoted
Well that's the problem with labels such as feminist, MRA, BLM, etc.
Someone or a group of people are going to do stupid stuff in the name of those groups. Like the men are trash hashtag then a few weeks ago, or feminists lobbying against replacing the Duluth DV Model with something fair for both sexes.
Really wish there was just a straight up equality group, but there isn't.
[–]MindS1 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I came here from the front page to see if anyone had put into words my distaste for this post. You did a great job of it.
[–]Onion_Guy 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thanks! I do my best to stay quiet when it's not my place, but sometimes I think that people might actually gain from leaving the echo chamber his sub can be, and considering that people can be empathetic to multiple groups.
Now, go to feminists sub, and tell them you disagree with a post. Proceed to get banned ask why, muted. Shit, at least you can come on here and speak your opinion. Which, I disagree with, but you are free to say.
[–]natur3ify 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
You might want to check out r/MensLib
[–]Onion_Guy 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
what's the nutshell? Men's rights without the shitters?
[–]natur3ify 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Exactly that. It's more of a solution-oriented, pro-feminist version of MensRights without the toxicity and eco chamber.
[–]Onion_Guy 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Perfect. Thanks for the introduction! Though I feel morally obliged to also stick around here to at least put something into the echo chamber hoping for the best. Lotta good people here who could do a lot more good with the right aiming.
[–]HasAnArchmageFetish2 points 9 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
r/MensLib is literally a feminist echo chamber where all they do is circlejerk about toxic masculinity and a lack of male role models. You won't find any disscusion of serious issues their.
[–]sneakpeekbot 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Here's a sneak peek of /r/MensLib using the top posts of all time!
#1: The Rainbow Road is assisting gay men escape Chechen concentration camps. They need our help. | 67 comments #2: Ridicule for politician's tears is a great example of men's issues and how emotions are seen as "weakness" | 78 comments #3: /r/MensLib stands with women on International Women's Day
I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out
[–]Onion_Guy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I can understand that too. I've participated in a lot of discussions about masculinity and let a lot on positive masculinity.
It's not something that isn't worth addressing. We say it all the time. People tell men they can't express emotion. People tell men they can't be caring.
That IS addressing masculinity. It doesn't target men it targets how we feel what we feel. What's the issue there? I just don't think everyone's on the same pages for most of these discussions, and I think they'd be quickly resolved or boiled down to a single disagreement if not. We are all people. We think, we exist.
It's the feminist men's rights movement. Part of the reason it's tiny by comparison to this one is that it (a) doesn't address the full range of men's issues, and (b) doesn't address misandry among feminists. This sub and MRAs in general get hate, because we call out feminists for their bullshit. It does go too far here, but MensLib is on a feminist leash. I don't think feminism is all bad, but it will never be able to adequately address men's issues, because it doesn't realize the extent to which it actively contributes to them.
[–]Onion_Guy 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Fair enough. I, like I mentioned in another comment, am on a liberal college campus. I'm pretty liberal myself but I like to think I look out for everyone, especially those who don't have others to look out for.
I don't think feminism NEEDS to look out for men's rights. I also don't think it should be actively detracting from movements with genuinely good goals. However, as long as subs like men's rights continue to have comments that adamantly refuse to acknowledge women's issues, it's very hard to justify that argument to people who are looking in from outside. Don't be part of the problem.
Demonstrate that we care about people, and THATS why we care about men. Not that we care about men before people.
I agree with you generally, but feminists have historically shat upon men quite a bit. This sub is anti-feminist, not anti-woman. Feminists have denied until only very recently that men had any issues whatsoever, and they still fight tooth-and-nail to prevent groups trying to address many of them from gaining any traction. The anti-feminism here isn't about stripping women of their rights, it's about countering misandry among feminists. Few people outside men's rights circles understand that they've been trying to get men's issues addressed since the 1970s, and that the main (and highly successful) opponents to that end have been feminists. There is a reason for the anti-feminism. Yes, it goes too far a lot of the time, but that's because a lot of us are fucking pissed as hell at this point—and for good reason.
[–]Onion_Guy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I agree with everything you've said.
I think this sub should be pro-men rather than anti-feminist, however. I think that it's an issue to promote it as anything but a positive movement.
Feminists have arguing points. So do we. Why not agree that people have it rough and shouldn't? Why are half our posts laughing at/crying about people on tumblr saying dumb and horrible shit? Why don't we promote things we can make a difference on?
Feminism is a label that anyone can take, as is men's rights activism. I don't want to be associated with the people who actively act horribly toward women on this sub - and please don't act like they don't exist - but I don't have that choice and I'd like to be part of the positive movement without being expelled by people who think women are goddesses or something. Same thing as the opposition, really.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Cross-criticism between feminists and MRAs will never be completely extinguished, and it shouldn't be. Much feminist criticism of the MRM is valid (and yes, there are misogynists here, just as there are misandrists among feminists), but much of the criticism of feminism here is valid too. Saying we should just avoid it entirely when plenty of feminists and feminist organizations are actively standing in the way of progress on men's issues is just not reasonable.
The biggest problem for the MRM, IMO, is the extent to which it attracts social conservatives who are interested in rolling back rights for women. But in my experience, their numbers are dwindling here. As men's issues gain social acceptance, more and more liberal voices are showing up here, and the conservative ones will eventually be drowned out. That is my hope, at least. But criticism of feminism is something I truly hope remains, because it is essential to the fight for men's rights.
[–]Onion_Guy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You took the words out of my mouth. Thank you.
I'm probably super liberal by the standards of this sub and that's fine; doesn't restrict me from defending everyone's rights.
[–]sneakpeekbot 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]lothtekpa 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Stop with your nuanced, logical response. What the fuck are you thinking?
The layers to your response are so numerous and measured, as I started to peel them off I almost started crying.
checks username Ah, got it.
Thanks for the well-put response bud. Turns out trying to make life better for everyone is a good goal, and it's not hard to see that the phrases "men have some shitty situations in life that aren't usually acknowledged and that women don't always experience" And "women have some difficulties in life that aren't as often experienced by men, or aren't experienced in the same way" are not mutually exclusive.
[–]Onion_Guy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Agh, you put it so simply and perfectly, and here I rambled for so long trying to justify myself.
Also, ha! You just made the first username joke I've ever experienced, and it was perfect! Thank you!
[–]bluefootedpig 1252 points1253 points1254 points 9 years ago (361 children) | Copy Link
Glad that since we passed the civil rights act, Racism in america is gone..........
[–]77jamjam 142 points143 points144 points 9 years ago* (250 children) | Copy Link
individual acts of racism and sexism will never go away. institutionalised racism and sexism is gone. edit: this clearly just got brigaded lol
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 817 points818 points819 points 9 years ago (204 children) | Copy Link
There is still institutionalized racism in America.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (52 children) | Copy Link
[–]GenuineSounds 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
If you find me a law or policy that is racist or sexist, then I will do all in my power to combat it and spread the message, but until such time I'll ask you to stop saying things you don't have any evidence of.
[–]Soykikko 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There are many but a good and easy place to start are the racial disparities in mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
[–]DaBuddahN 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes, and the gender disparity between sentencing laws is SIX TIMES LARGER than the racial disparity - yet I've heard many people actually say that that doesn't prove institutional discrimination against men based on their gender.
It's crazy to be honest.
[–]Soykikko 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yea, it blows my mind that in 2017 such straight forward facts are still unknown, disregarded, or up for debate by people whose agenda they dont fit.
[–]midirfulton 56 points57 points58 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You would find that most people are for criminal justice reform, especially, MRA's. One of the bigger complaints of MRA's is that males receive 40% longer sentences then females.
But the problem is human nature. Most people can't listen and acknowledge a problem, realize that it affects them too, and work together to fix an issue.
Instead, people come in spewing party lines, like they are actually informing people of something new. Everyone agrees that statistically black males are disapporiationally worse off in the criminal system. Coming here and saying party lines about instituationalized racism is just about picking a fight, not about informing people or changing minds.
[–]falconsoldier 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link
I'm actually pretty happy how downvoted all the racist stuff ended up being. I expected this sub be much less understanding of race.
[–]OhLookANewAccount 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link
This subreddit hit /r/all. I would say that is likely the reason the racist nonsense is getting downvoted.
[–][deleted] 54 points55 points56 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
As someone who's on here quite a bit, I can assure you it's not. Contrary to popular belief, MRAs are not the raging white supremacist misogynists Buzzfeed and Vice would have you believe we are.
Stick around and get over your prejudices. Learn about the issues and the movement. There are extremist MRAs just like there are extremist feminists, but also like feminism, the MRM's goals are noble. Feminism just isn't going to address men's issues, so a separate movement is needed to address them and combat feminist sexism against men. It's a counterbalance in the gender equality arena.
[–]mensmod 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Everyone always blames the people they disagree with for everything bad, and the people they agree with for everything good. Because it would be such a horrible shock if you opposed a group but found out that they agree with you on something!
[–]caitsu 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Affirmative action and other revenge-racist policies are still officially endorsed and used, and they are the only source of institutional racism that exists and actually affects lives in western worlds. Shameful policies.
[–]solara01 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Way to lump people together for no reason. I really hate people that put people in groups based on one belief and assign them other believes. Fuck you.
[–]austin101123 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
One person commenting something doesn't mean it represents all of this sub, lol it's even got less upvotes than the post in response disagreeing with it.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Well now let's look at this. That's not institutionalized. It's illegal to discriminate against race in North America. That's a law, but it's definitely true that African Americans get harsher prison sentences. This is more likely in part due to how they present themselves (education wise), the judges prejudice (likely influenced by the media), and the fact that a lot of crime is unproportionally done by African Americans.
With that said it's not a race thing, it's entirely a poverty issue. And there is the act that no less than 50 years ago there were actual laws that prohibited block people from buying property in certain places.
To conclude I don't think there is institutionalized racism anymore, but there is definitely some things that need to be addressed from past inequalities, particularly with ghettos and education availability.
As for how to address these, I think there needs to be more discussion had-primarily by people in those areas about what they could do to improve their area and lives. I'm not saying black people weren't mistreated, but if they want things to get better it needs to happen at the individual and community levels first
[–]thisprofilenolongere 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (131 children) | Copy Link
Can I get some evidence that isn't anecdotal?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (40 children) | Copy Link
[–]ExtremelySmartGuy 330 points331 points332 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Don't even bother. No matter what evidence you provide, these fuckwits will dismiss it because "it doesn't prove anything. There's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why that is the case."
[–]bravoredditbravo 87 points88 points89 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Also racial disproportion stretches way beyond institutions. It is as if we can just put up a sign at the front of every town hall that says "NO MORE RACISM FOLKS!" and poof, it's gone!
I have had bosses, coworkers, even former friends that were clearly racist. It's called social justice, not institutional justice.
[–]serfusa 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
As if institutions were something other than individuals.
Hi sorry to hijack this post a few days after the fact, speaking as someone who has never really experienced that (frankly I'm highly against any form of discrimination) what is it like working in that kind of environment and also is anything ever done about it?
I live in Australia and while Australian Aboriginals face a hell of a lot of racism, you don't really see it that much for anyone else (at least from what I have seen)
[–]Quintrell 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Research also shows that the gender disparity in criminal sentencing dwarfs that of race. Yet that fact goes unnoticed by most self-described feminists and advocates for social justice. Hence why this sub exists.
[–]karmassacre 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Court sentences are a product of humans who carry their own bias and prejudice. There is no institutional rule or structure that dictates harsher sentences for blacks or men.
[–]austin101123 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
According to Chegg "Institutional racism is a pattern of social institutions — such as governmental organizations, schools, banks, and courts of law — giving negative treatment to a group of people based on their race."
You made me check, but just as I thought it doesn't matter if it's done by law or by individuals.
[–]austin101123 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What would you call this if not institutional sexism? - 92.5% of federally sentences drug offenders, or 12.33x as many men than women.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Attornies are more likely to push for the death sentence if a black man commits the same crime as a white man. It's most severe in the military, where, in 2008 I belive, 8 white people were on death row. 180. One hundred and eighty. Non whites were on death row.
The numbers are not as severe outside of the military, but blacks outnumber whites on death row.
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 128 points129 points130 points 9 years ago (73 children) | Copy Link
African Americans make up 14% of drug users but are 37% of those charged with drug sentences. The brookings institute has found white people are more likely to deal drugs then black people but black people are 3.6 times more likely to be arrested for selling drugs.
[–]raxical 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (52 children) | Copy Link
Dude, you need to go on a few ride alongs. Seriously, you have no idea what is going on in the streets.
What you're seeing is actually a pretty complex situation and you're oversimplifying it by essentially saying, "more blacks are arrested because cops are racist against blacks."
You also dont know what "institutionalized" means.
You also don't understand correlation vs causation.
[–][deleted] 87 points88 points89 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
ACLU has found that attornies are more likely to pursue the death penalty for black suspects when all factors are equalized.
It's so severe that in the military, the ratio of whites to non whites on death row is 8 to 180.
[–]Photronics 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
source?
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
https://www.aclu.org/other/race-and-death-penalty
[–]Photronics 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
gracias
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 26 points27 points28 points 9 years ago (43 children) | Copy Link
How does law specifically written to target minorities not institutionalized racism. How are the stats not an example of causation?
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link
What law is specifically written to target minorities?
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 71 points72 points73 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a-former-nixon-aide-admitted-the-war-on-drugs-was-designed-to-screw-over-blacks-and-hippies-vgtrn
First ever anti drug law banned smoking opium as a way to discriminate against the Chinese.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Noshamina 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But I agree that these things are egregious
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (24 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link
Those laws don't say that a member of X group can be punished while a member of B group is not to be. The implementation of the laws do vary, but not because of institutionalize racism.
I hate it when people see one damn statistic, and assume they know what's going on. The nature of statistics pretty much lets up draw any correlation you want. Just look at the stock market and technical analysis.
Or even better, look at the recent Puerto Rico vote where 97% percent voted for statehood. If you dive into the number you quickly realize that its complete bullshit, but still 97% voted for it and is a pretty damn convincing that they want statehood (at least to someone who doesn't take a few minutes to dive into the numbers).
If you want some real institutionalized sexism, look at the Duluth Model, which is STILL USED by what 26 police departments. Basically, it assumes that domestic violence took place without actual physical proof, and that the male was the cause:
Straight from wiki: The Duluth Model or Domestic Abuse Intervention Project is a program developed to reduce domestic violence against women. It is named after Duluth, Minnesota, the city where it was developed.[1] The program was largely founded by Ellen Pence and Michael Paymar.[1]
As of 2006, the Duluth Model is the most common batterer intervention program used in the United States.[2] It is based in feminist theory positing that "domestic violence is the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners
Yet, at least in the UK, males make up 40% of the victims. Seems pretty fair right?
Now remember, that cops are just regular people who have shitty paying jobs. Even if it is clear as day that the WOMEN committed violence (and the Duluth Model isn't used by your state), its 1000x easier just to arrest the guy.
But with all that said, I am for criminal justice reform. Especially, against privatization of prisons.
[–]testmypatience 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Correlation doesn't mean causation. You have to have something more substantiating than just correlation.
[–]falconsoldier 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Pretty much the entire drug war has been an attack on minorities.
[–]greeklemoncake 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.
– John Erlichman, White House Domestic Affairs Advisor
[–]Throwabanana69 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Are you referring to laws written specifically to target men not women?
[–]raxical 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
You didn't list such a law.
Your statistical example didn't even show a correlation with anything let alone causation.
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]raxical 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
That was pretty much your entire argument wasn't it?
Look, I'm not going to list what I think, but I could drop some excellent books if you're interested. Like I said, I view this as a complex issue.
I will say this though. I actually find the notion that black communities revolve around and are reliant on drugs to such a high degree that meerly criminalizing recreational drug use would completely destroy those communities, disgusting and belittling of blacks as a people. You imply that recreational drugs are so important to black communities that they simply cannot adequately function in society without them.
[–]raxical 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok so, the war on drugs was passed by the Nixon administration to ruin black commities.
So, let's delve into this a little shall we?
This entire argument seems to rest on the testimony of a Dan Baum, who claimed that Nixon's aid, John Ehrlichman, had confided in him that the war on drugs was to target hippies and blacks. Dan Baum apparantly didn't find the Ehrlichman quote to be important enough to publish until after Ehrlichman's death and Ehrlichman's entire family denies John Ehrlichman has ever or would ever had said such a thing.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html
Yeah...
[–]Noshamina 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean gerrymandering is a pretty solid example of institutionalized racism where there are numerous accounts of surgically carving districts [especially that recent one with north carolina] along racial lines in order to sway elections. And this shit has been going on for a looooong time.
Supreme Court Rejects 2 N.C. Congressional Districts As Unconstitutional http://n.pr/2rNZR5h
I don't think that many other forms of what people think are institutionalized racism are exactly as...well institutionalized as they are systemic within people and their communities that bleed into the institutions and then have real life statistical effects such as what many people here have purported. It's not on paper but it's in the hearts of man that you find it and it's harder to eliminate then just saying the words "justice for all"
Radiolab's more perfect had a podcast all about jury selection [batson law] and sentencing too that made a pretty convincing argument that would be hard to refute, the legal system in America has it out for African Americans in a massively disproportionate way. And it very much so focuses on how it's not written into the law, in fact it was the Batson case where they change the law specifically to try and make it more fair for people of color, yet it is still engraved in the hearts of man and it eventually ends up becoming a useless law cause they just go around it any way they possibly can. Really fascinating story you should all check it out. In the end the prosecutor knows getting an all white jury trying to convict a person of color is going to be wayyyyy easier then if they put any poc in the jury especially a black person so they very specifically target this to their advantage cause they want to win, and in the legal system winning isn't always when justice is served for the lawyers, it's when they get paid.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Maybe that would cause a slight difference in arrest rates but not cause it to be over three times as likely for a black person to be arrested than a white person.
[–]The-Jerkbag 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Predominately black areas can tend to have higher rates of crime in general, for reasons which are not relevant here (history, discrimination, income, etc), leading to calls for a higher police presence to bring down the crime. Higher police presence means higher likelihood of catching crimes being committed, especially if they are not subtle as the last poster suggested.
Of course, then this leads to accusations of profiling and racism on the part of the police, so they lay off the area, and then crime increases again, and the cycle repeats itself. This can easily explain higher arrest rates.
[–]Literally_A_Shill 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sure, but will you actually read it or will you just dismiss it and attack the sources. Only to ask for evidence when it's brought up in the future and proceed to do the same.
Black youth are arrested for drug crimes at a rate ten times higher than that of whites. But new research shows that young African Americans are actually less likely to use drugs and less likely to develop substance use disorders, compared to whites, Native Americans, Hispanics and people of mixed race.
http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/07/study-whites-more-likely-to-abuse-drugs-than-blacks/
Prison sentences of black men were nearly 20% longer than those of white men for similar crimes in recent years, an analysis by the U.S. Sentencing Commission found.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324432004578304463789858002.html
Black Americans were nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested on charges of marijuana possession in 2010, even though the two groups used the drug at similar rates, according to new federal data.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/us/marijuana-arrests-four-times-as-likely-for-blacks.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2&
http://fusion.net/martin-luther-kings-hate-mail-eerily-resembles-criticis-1793850027
"Job applicants with white names needed to send about 10 resumes to get one callback; those with African-American names needed to send around 15 resumes to get one callback."
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html
"He met with the superintendent, and the superintendent said, 'I'm very sorry, but the apartment is rented — it's gone,' " Morse says. "So the gentlemen said to him, 'Well, why is the sign out? I still see a sign that says apartment for rent.' And the superintendent said, 'Oh, I guess I forgot to take it down.' " When Morse went to the building to ask about the same apartment, she says, "They greeted me with open arms and showed me every aspect of the apartment."
"He met with the superintendent, and the superintendent said, 'I'm very sorry, but the apartment is rented — it's gone,' " Morse says. "So the gentlemen said to him, 'Well, why is the sign out? I still see a sign that says apartment for rent.' And the superintendent said, 'Oh, I guess I forgot to take it down.' "
When Morse went to the building to ask about the same apartment, she says, "They greeted me with open arms and showed me every aspect of the apartment."
http://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/495955920/donald-trump-plagued-by-decades-old-housing-discrimination-case
For much of the twentieth century, discrimination by private real estate agents and rental property owners helped establish and sustain stark patterns of housing and neighborhood inequality.
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/fairhsg/hsg_discrimination_2012.html
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/28/evidence-that-banks-still-deny-black-borrowers-just-as-they-did-50-years-ago/
There's more but I figured that's enough of a start.
[–]WikiTextBot 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In the United States, redlining is the practice of denying services, either directly or through selectively raising prices, to residents of certain areas based on the racial or ethnic composition of those areas. While the best known examples of redlining have involved denial of financial services such as banking or insurance, other services such as health care or even supermarkets have been denied to residents (or in the case of retail businesses like supermarkets, simply located impractically far away from said residents) to result in a redlining effect. Reverse redlining occurs when a lender or insurer targets particular neighborhoods that are predominantly nonwhite, not to deny residents loans or insurance, but rather to charge them more than in a non-redlined neighborhood where there is more competition.
In the 1960s, a sociologist named John McKnight coined the term "redlining" to describe the discriminatory practice of fencing off areas where banks would avoid investments based on community demographics. During the heyday of redlining, the areas most frequently discriminated against were black inner city neighborhoods.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThatDamnedImp 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Politifact 'confirmed' everything HRC said--even the things they had previously called lies when Bernie or Trump said them.
[–]theadj123 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I would say affirmative action is institutional racism. It states that certain groups are so bad at X (where X is what they are applying for) that they need a handicap to compete with Caucasian applicants. It also states that white people are less valuable than other races. Mostly limited to college/university applicants, but still valid and still occurring.
[–]Literally_A_Shill 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think it states that certain groups are discriminated against so badly that grades shouldn't be the only indicator of their abilities.
Would you say that financial aid being based on need is institutionally biased as well? That poor people are so bad at X that they need a handicap to compete? That rich people are less valuable than other demographics?
[–]theadj123 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Financial aid isn't a basis on getting accepted to a college, that's the difference. Financial aid on need is "Poor person X was accepted to college based on merit, however they lack the means to pay" while "Rich Person Y was accepted to college based on merit, however they have the means to pay". Far different than affirmative action.
[–]Literally_A_Shill 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's definitely a basis for people who can't afford college. Like you said, being accepted is meaningless if you can't pay it. College applications also tend to take things like extra curricular activities and such into account which are directly correlated to wealth.
[–]herpesmyderpes 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No you may not.
[–]swaggy_butthole 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And sexism as well. Women, like white people receive lighter sentences
[–]BushDidSixtyNine11 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No there isn't
Illegal insittuionalized racism.
The problem right now isn't the laws on the matter, but the people enforcing the laws. We still have a lot of old judges who grew up in "niggers sit in the back of the bus" times, and short of replacing them with younger men who grew up in better times, there's nothing that can really be done about that.
In another ten or so years, most of them will die/retire, and the problem will begin to ameliorate itself.
[–]RedxEyez 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
.. and institutional sexisim.
[–]spicyitallian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Where exactly
[–][deleted] 24 points25 points26 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LawBot2016 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The parent mentioned Death Row. Many people, including non-native speakers, may be unfamiliar with this word. Here is the definition:(In beta, be kind)
Death row is a special section of a prison that houses inmates who are awaiting execution after being sentenced to death for the conviction of capital crimes. The term is also used figuratively to describe the state of awaiting execution ("being on death row"), even in places where no special facility or separate unit for condemned inmates exists. After a person is found guilty of a capital offense, the judge will give the jury the option of imposing a death sentence or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. It is then up to a ... [View More]
See also: Thompson V. Secretary For Dept. Of Corrections | Reed V. Quarterman | Smith V. Mahoney
Note: The parent poster (tsiru12 or jaib9) can delete this post | FAQ
[–]skfdjsdlkf 53 points54 points55 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
institutionalized racism and sexism is gone
Oh sweet summer child, the US is rampant with that shit
[–]well_duh_doy_son 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Holy fuck, who upvoted this? Christ
[–]StanleyKubricksGhost 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is that a joke?
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What?
Buuuuut, if you voted a sexist person to be the president of the entire country, you had sexism and then put it in charge of the biggest institution of them all.
[–]Torchwood777 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Affirmative action is systematic racism against whites.
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Stfu with that bs please
[–]Wolfe2441 points 9 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
i didnt know statistically accurate statements are BS, can you educate me on this because you clearly are an expert on the topic
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
"All black people are discriminated and gunned down by cops"
^ BS.
[–]Wolfe2441 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
?? yeah if you twist what im saying into something completely different, itll be wrong. Never did i say "all", because that would be wrong.
It is statistically a higher percentage, that's just a fact. If you're white you dont need to be scared when a cop pulls you over, ask most black people and they'll tell you that engagement is basically always scary,
[–]PHUNkH0U53 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA "this clearly just got brigaded lol" that some god damn cognitive dissonance. You just have a really horrible opinion. Not like Nixon specifically targeted blacks with the war on drugs 4 years after the civil rights act which granted equality for all and disbanded all institutional racism! God you're fucking dumb.
[–]Orsonius 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
individual acts of racism and sexism will never go away
Debatable.
institutionalised racism and sexism is gone.
Nonsense
[–]Cclemenst28 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
I disagree. Institutionalized racism is alive and well in the states; I'd argue that it's presently a much larger problem than open bigotry (which is largely publicly decried). At least read this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
If you're truly interested in addressing issues of inequality, look through those examples with an open mind and see what you think.
If you're interested in reading a book on the subject, might I suggest almost anything by Tim Wise?
[–]HelperBot_ 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#United_States
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 79478
[–]77jamjam 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
this is all correlation, nothing to do with the colour of someone's skin.
[–]Cclemenst28 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So what's the correlation, then?
[–]77jamjam 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Banks would determine a neighborhood’s risk for loan default and redline neighborhoods that were at high risk of default. These neighborhoods tended to be African American neighborhoods, whereas the white-middle-class Americans were able to receive housing loans.
It was because of high crime rate, not the colour of skin
[–][deleted] 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
It's less about race and more about class. A smart, educated (insert race/sex here) can go a long way in today's America/western world.
With that being said, I'm not exactly keen on uneducated people being given the reins.
[–][deleted] 85 points86 points87 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
ACLU begs to differ. Racism is real in america. Pretending otherwise in the face of statistical proof is malicious.
[–]stopher_dude 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Racism is real. I remember being beaten up by black kids in high school cause i was a skinny white kid. Racism is alive and kicking.
[–]Ali3nation 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sorry, english major here and I honestly have no idea what anyone is talking about, but question:
By your definition of the word malicious, anyone can be "malicious" without having the intent of doing so?
Not trying to prove a point, just trying to understand your usage! =)
[–]___jamil___ 33 points34 points35 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's less about race and more about class.
You sound like someone who has never had to deal with anything of the sort and are just talking out your ass
[–]bluefootedpig 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
True, but take two people from the same class, say the deep poverty. Both have the same education, same sex, same everything, except one is black skin, and one is white skin. Do you think they will have the same exact difficulties? Or will one have a tougher time? Which and why?
[–]TheTurtleBear 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Take two white people from the same class. Think they'll have the same difficulties?
Take two black people from the same class. Think they'll face the same difficulties?
[–]falconsoldier 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's about the fact that on average, black people deal with shit that white people don't. Yes class matters, but race matters too.
[–]bluefootedpig 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nope, I don't think they will have different difficulties. If they are in indeed two of the same people with everything the exact same except skin color.
Unless you are trying to move the goalposts.
Two white people from the same class, same education, same family structure, same work experience. Would there be a difference in difficulties? No, there wouldn't be.
[–]DatGrass14 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link
She's talking about feminism. Nothing to do with race.
[–]villin609 109 points110 points111 points 9 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps there's a parallel between women's rights and the civil rights act...
[–]Throwabanana69 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
What on earth does gynocentrism have to do with wars and racial slavery?
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
White women are no where as oppressed as black people.
[–]villin609 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
That's not the point.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Then what is? It's an insult to black people and POC to compare all women with us. Your privilege is showing.
[–]ekfslam 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The point is that just because laws were passed calling for equality doesn't mean that it has been completely followed through within society.
Women get treated unequally. Men get treated unequally. Black people get treated unequally. Trans people get treated unequally.
Just cause someone is not treated as unequally as another group does not diminish their issues. Would you tell a kid who can't afford lunch in America to not complain because kids in Africa or somewhere starve to death?
[–]joyofsteak 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There being a parallel doesn't mean they're the same fucking thing you dense prick.
[–]helisexual 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think it is at all. Women of all colors continue to be allies in the fight (yes, a singular fight) for equality.
[–]villin609 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
You're an idiot
Thanks for the very thoughtful and constructive response.
[–]well_duh_doy_son 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This guy right here, he see light were others only see darkness
[–]reynoldstown 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's a freaking analogy.
[–]Throwabanana69 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The female has always been the privileged sex. That being said, I agree with you that the female is still the privileged sex.
[–]ScottyBrown -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link
When you lose your job for saying the magic word nigger or cunt it shows what race and sex has power.
[–]Kittens_in_panties 78 points79 points80 points 9 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
It's almost like you're not allowed to say racist or sexist things without facing social consequences anymore! I can't imagine how horrible that is for you!
[–]agentcookie096 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Is calling someone a cunt considered sexist?
[–]OhLookANewAccount 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In America, yes.
Outside of America it seems to depend.
Referring to someones genitals in a derogatory manner, either by implying they are lesser because of their genitals or implying they are only of use because of their genitals, is sexist.
Dick seems to be overlooked due to how men typically are in positions of power in American Society, but technically that is also an incredibly sexist insult. Like what other people pointed out, there's no real insult for white men because white men tend to be on the top of the social foodchain. Trailer Trash, or White Devil, or cracker/honkey seem to be the extreme end of what you find in English, and none of those really ring with the same harshness as saying a word that has historical precedent of cruelty and oppression.
[–]ScottyBrown 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
You can say plenty of racist and sexist things to a white male with no social consequences
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Tell me what word is equivalent to nigger or faggot. When applied to a white person.
[–]OhLookANewAccount 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean slurs against gay guys can apply to white gay guys.
But honestly there's no slurs for white people that mean anything, at least in english. White Devil is about as harsh as it gets, in my experience, and that's not exactly without historical precedent.
[–]Literally_A_Shill 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Bullshit. If you curse out a white coworker you can get in trouble at work.
If you're too racist to not be able to keep that shit at home then perhaps employees don't want someone with such poor impulse control working for them.
[–]Kittens_in_panties 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
You are 100% correct and we should do something about it. If only there was a subreddit you could go to that dealt with men's issues since apparently this one is for complaining about feminists and nothing else.
[–]falconsoldier 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Honestly, the top post for /r/feminism is literally pro-men, the top post on /r/mensrights is anti-feminist, go figure.
[–]MajinAsh 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I just looked at the top post there. It had nothing to do with pro-men and was about saying everyone who isn't a feminist is sexist. The top post on this sub seems to be about getting banned from /r/feminism for disagreeing with people.
[–]falconsoldier 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
https://www.reddit.com/r/Feminism/comments/6gv76z/48_sexist_things_men_might_hear_in_their_lifetimes/
Top post today, and fifth for the month
Edit: Mod's comment on the post
Feminism's relation with the men's movement The definition of feminism is the struggle for gender equality. As such, we consider it necessary to acknowledge the existence, and the legitimacy, of men’s issues, and the need for a movement and a dedicated discussion space to address such issues.
Edit 2: erased my fuckups.
[–]sneakpeekbot 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Feminism using the top posts of the year!
#1: Trump Inauguration (top) vs. Women's March (bottom) | 177 comments #2: This can never go away, this needs to continue to get posted over and over and over again. This should never be forgotten | 72 comments #3: Cute items every woman should own ... | 94 comments
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Name one word that has been used to historically oppress white people.
[–]ScottyBrown 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
No word oppressed anybody ever. Actions oppress like the government convicting mostly white people of hate crimes while blacks commit far more violence against whites.
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I didn't say the word itself oppressed people. I said people used words. Very specific words, repeatedly, to the point they became part of the culture. We don't have something that compares.
[–]MajinAsh 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Redneck, white trash, trailer trash ect are all slurs aimed at poor or uneducated white people. If the poor aren't oppressed I don't know who is.
The poor certainly are oppressed and I would never argue that classism doesn't exist. I would even go as far as to say that classism is the basis of racism. But that doesn't mean we can't focus on all of it, classism existing isn't an excuse for racism existing.
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Niggers and Cunts have power in society because I can't call them nigger or cunt!
Said the racist trash.
[–]steve_the_woodsman 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but a friend got fired for saying "fag" jokingly to a coworker who had just come out (but my friend didn't know).
If a coworker called me a white cracker (and I am a white guy) I wouldn't get her/him fired over it. If bothered me enough, I'd talk to that coworker.
[–]RektRoyce 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah but you could be fired for it...
[–]Thatonegingerkid 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Because the word "white cracker" has never been used seriously to strip power away from white people. I can not even imagine someone in my office saying "f*g" and if they did it would be incredibly uncomfortable, even without any gay employees. Even then, if a coworker called you a cracker and you complained to HR, they would 100% be punished
[–]steve_the_woodsman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I hear you, I do. I'd never say anything as insensitive to anyone.
My point is that talking to the offender and being honest about the hurt it caused can actually help that person see you as a human being and make them better in the process. If they hear you. If they don't, then yeah - report them to HR. But don't go running to HR with every little thing that strikes you as insensitive because you could wreck someone's life just for a word they use.
Morally and ethically the words like fg, N word, pssy, etc are wrong. But if the person who used that word is willing to reform their ways after hearing you then you've gained a friend and society is better off.
[–]Krissam 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Because the word "white cracker" has never been used seriously to strip power away from white people.
The term "white male" gets used for that all the time.
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
This is why the MRA movement is a joke. Because you have people seriously wondering why people were fired for calling a gay man a fag. And actually trying to compare fag to cracker.
[–]remedyremedy 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You can 100% be fired for saying racist things against white people
[–]Literally_A_Shill 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If a coworker called me a white cracker (and I am a white guy) I wouldn't get her/him fired over it.
Good for you. Tons of other white people would, though.
I didn't make the insensitive comment. Reread my original post.
I'm saying that if someone says something hurtful it's better to have an open conversation with them before ruining their life by reporting them to HR.
The whole "get them fired" is straight out of the feminist handbook and something we are trying to avoid. If the person is unrepentant then yeah, report to HR, but as experience has taught me, many people become a lot nicer when you tell them that you've hurt them instead of getting them fired.
[–]bluefootedpig 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I get that. Once while at work I told a customer to fuck off and get this, I was fired. Fuck that noise.
[–]ItsACommonMistake 122 points123 points124 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
So if you've had equal rights for 42 year then why is there a need for a Men's Rights sub?
Women have equal rights but men don't? That's not what equality means.
OP shot himself in the foot by not thinking about something logically for about 5 seconds.
[–]jrackow 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Men do not have equal rights in court.
[–]ItsACommonMistake 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
So by that you're saying we haven't had equal rights for 42 years then?
[–]jrackow 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fair point. It's been much longer. The voting and stuff looked pretty solid, though. Yay voting. But boooooo war.
[–]Pillagerguy 178 points179 points180 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
This isn't men's rights. This is just like... anti-women's-rights or whatever.
[–]drwilliams95 60 points61 points62 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If she has equal rights why be for men's rights now?
[–]Galadriel26 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
mindfucked Why doesn't this have more upvotes.
[–]Ace_on_the_Turn 132 points133 points134 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
As a 52 year old white man who's been in the business world for 25 years I can say without reservation any woman who thinks they are equal in the business world is fooling herself. That level of naivete is mind-boggling.
[–]SaltyBabe 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Very few women who have spent any time in the real world would believe or upvote something like this. This is solely men who want to shit on women and ignorant women looking for approval from said men.
[–]K3TtLek0Rn 36 points37 points38 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This sub has gone from fighting for men's rights to just shitting on feminism.
[–]Kennen_Rudd 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Implying it was ever any different..
[–]thatsnogood 57 points58 points59 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Rule 1: No advice animals or other low-effort image or text posts. Mods may remove these at their discretion.
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, these posts add nothing to a substantive discussion of issues.
[–]Valesparza 34 points35 points36 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
God you are just so content with this aren’t you? This has nothing to do with men’s rights, just a pathetic excuse to be sexist because a girl says it's ok. Unsubscribed* officially.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
See ya later we won't miss you
[–]PowerWisdomCourage 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Unsubscribe’s officially. Unsubscribe’s 's
Unsubscribe’s officially.
Unsubscribe’s
's
[–]20000Fish 38 points39 points40 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Yah a 14 year old really has a good grasp on rights, we pick the best role models.
[–]Poolibs 76 points77 points78 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Stupid post stupid subreddit.
[–]OhLookANewAccount 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Picture of a girl badmouthing feminism, immediate front page material. If this represents what this subreddit is then who the hell in their right mind would willingly associate with the people here?
[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigAbbott 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No. That's not a view a majority of the people here would agree with.
See ya
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
but there seems to be a gathering of anti-feminist semantic
This tone policing is part of the obfuscatory language of feminism. ...If only you would be nice, perhaps we could listen to you... . It is easy to take your position when you are ignorant of feminist misandry.
it is simply received wisdom in feminist circles that any attempts to raise men's rights are, in truth, an attempt to block women's rights. That might have been true in the 1880s, possibly even the 1960s, but I suspect most men in this sub are feminists of the 1990s that cannot believe the levels of insincerity and tone deafness in feminism today.
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Pretentious high school white girl confirms my bias
FTFY
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A woman said that? Well shit... i guess let's pack it up, folks. We're done here. Equality achieved apparently.
[–]Fernleaves 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
What about how marital rape was legal until the late 90s in the UK?
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You are either ignorant or disingenuous with this remark. By retro - fitting English jurisprudence on marital rape as being implicitly sexist, you either have to not know that the concept of rape simply couldn't make sense within marriage since consent is implied by marriage itself, or else you are ignorant, in which case, you need to educate yourself. Stop believing trite feminist nonsense.
Apparently it's not implied by marriage or there wouldn't be people arrested and prosecuted for marital rape.
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I think you meant:
"Apparently it's implied by marriage or there wouldn't be people arrested and prosecuted for marital rape."
You're making my point for me. The law was changed when it decided on a conceptual change of rape. When it saw it as sexist. When it did what you did.
Thanks. My head is muddled at this time of night.
It turns out that women can be misogynists, too.
Bigots have always had a soft spot for minorities who hate themselves. 🤷🏻
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i like turtles
[–]aJakalope 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Can anyone remind me why this subreddit is called MensRights and not r/14yearoldsstrawmenfeminism
You take the good with the bad. :/
[–]thirdstreetzero 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Holy fuck our education system has failed.
[–]BeardedLogician 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"I don't need equality because I have equality." Point 1: Wat; Point 2: Need to defend that sort of thing. Incredibly important.
[–]RobaBobaLoba 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
You can go fuck yourself if you believe that we have true equal rights
[–]ThePiggyRider 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Name one right men have that women do not, or vice versa.
[–]RobaBobaLoba 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Easy access to birth control.
[–]tetsugakusei 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'd agree that women have far more options than men. In the situation of no longer wishing to have the child they may legally abandon it (at a police station door etc) or may put up for adoption (without the father's consent) or abort before birth (the man cannot choose this). The man is subject to 18 years of payments.
If the woman steals the man's sperm or deceives him over his paternity then there are no legal consequences .... for the woman. Again, the man is subject to 18 years in costs. in some countries, it is illegal for the father to check the paternity of the child. Should the man take off his condom to attempt to impregnate, this can be rape in some jurisdictions.
i appreciate your concern for men's rights. The obsession with women's rights, along with an overwhelming empathy for women by both men and women, have tended to hide these issues behind trivial concerns of a few hundred dollars for abortion options of the woman.
Go to a hospital and ask. There are plenty of places women can get birth control.
[–]ThePiggyRider 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Women are not legally declined birth control. The only reason it's harder to get is because the female reproductive system is more complicated and harder to work around. Complicated, expensive designs require more money to support manufacturing, specialization, and research.
[–]RobaBobaLoba 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Can you provide a source?
Even if that's true, it doesn't change the fact that many women can't afford it
[–]ThePiggyRider 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Condoms, the main male birth control method, are simply rubber/plastic tubes which require $0.02-$0.03 to manufacture.
Almost all female methods of birth control (the pill, female condoms, IUDs, etc) are inherently more costly due to their designs and components. Not to mention the payment of doctors to diagnose the most effective method for individual women.
It is unfortunate that some women can't afford it, but it's not the duty of the government to control private industries, especially if it would lose them money.
[–]MajinAsh 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Condoms are sold to everyone, not just men.
[–]RobaBobaLoba 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It's not easy to put a condom on a rapist
[–]BigAbbott 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Harder still to put a condom on a female rapist. We can all play this game. Not productive.
[–]MajinAsh 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And it isn't easy to put on a condom while being raped. I don't see how that has anything to do with access to birth control somehow being unequal.
I mean maybe there are some countries where they straight up have laws against women buying condoms but I don't know of them.
[–]Xants 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Did she draft in pencil? Lol...
[–]TheHooDooer 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think the point she's trying to make is that we're all being treated like shit.
[–]ClayRoks 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Damn, she looks super young for 42.
[–]Ghnarlok 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
What about equal pay?
[–]BigAbbott 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This one's a slow pitch. The pay gap is a myth. Purposeful misreading of statistics to push an agenda. There are not studies that show men and women working the same jobs consistently receive different compensation.
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
What about equal work? Men work more hours than women not because they want to, but because they have to. You want to make enough money to take your girl someplace nice? Work longer hours. You want to buy an engagement ring? Work longer hours. You have a baby on the way? Work longer hours. Kid needs braces and a college fund? Maybe your wife can work longer hours. No, no. I'm just kidding. Work longer hours.
First, women can work as hard as men for as many hours per week. Then they can have equal pay. If they aren't willing to put forth the effort, they can take their 77¢ and like it
[–]SKNK_Monk 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If you can find a place paying men and women differently for the same job you should sue them into the stone age using the Equal Pay Act of 1962 (or local equivilent). You could probably even get a lawyer to take it for a cut of the winnings.
The issue is not why women are not paid as much as men, but why there are a tiny cohort of men who are prepared to sacrifice their lives in order to earn extraordinary salaries. Here is your answer.
ITT: the same feminists who would ban anyone and everyone from their subs, brigading and generally acting like cunty assholes.
[–]provocateur__ 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link
$100 says she's married.
No woman this awesome would stay single for very long.
[–][deleted] 52 points53 points54 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Counter-bet that she isn't even 18 in this picture.
[–]bravoredditbravo 38 points39 points40 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Meaning she probably hasn't had to deal with societal situations where she is exploited because she is a woman. Obviously she doesn't simpathize with other women who do feel that there is still sexism in society.
I remember the ignorance of youth as well
So instead of stepping up to the plate when she encounters an asshole she should hunker down and call in the H.R. reinforcements?
What a defeatist and weak mentality! I'd try to bring women around as to why that mentality is doomed to mediocrity (at best) I think I'll instead embrace that line of thought while I step up and perform despite assholes (which, believe it or not, do not discriminate by gender)!
As a result? I get raises because I'm a low maintenance worker who gets shit done! I fucking love third-wave feminism if I'm honest. It's so easy to be the best!
[–]octillery 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's no one's responsibility to endure harassment under the guise of "toughing it out" or trying to change a bigoted person's mind, male or female, and it's actually a pretty big mens issue that men aren't allowed to easily express themselves without being seen as weak. Stop shitting on people just trying to exist semi-happily without being harassed for their gender. Your mentality is ignorant and rooted in the fact that you've never had to deal with crushing constant harassment. I "stepped up to the plate" to counter every terrible sexist/racist thing I heard, and frankly it was exhausting, and their minds never changed, and it took me away from focusing on my work. So I documented it all and fired them, a thousand times easier and H.R. didn't have to get involved or anything. And now when people call to confirm their employment with my company, I get to tell them exactly why they were fired because everything is so fantastically documented! I took to carrying an 8 hour voice recorder around just to make sure they were very much unemployable if they listed their employment with me. And because of all the written warnings they recieved and ignored, I look even better if it came down to a court case for leaving! Now my employees are happier and more productive now that they don't have to worry about stepping up to the plate. Ah to battle ignorance. :)
I'm glad that worked out for you. Truly I am.
To each their own.
[–]ghostparasites 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link
been married to mine for 7 yrs and she thinks the same way.
[–]issamaysinalah 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You're also married to u/ghostparasites wife ?
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Are you not?
[–]eadala 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I thought we were all married to u/ghostparasites wife
[–]Galadriel26 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We are ALL married to u/ghostparasites wife on this blessed day!
[–]provocateur__ 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
My wife also knows that the world doesn't owe her anything. Been married to that lovely woman for 19 years now.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
I mean there are definitely detrimental social inequalities for women still but there's equal amounts of detrimental inequalities for men, too. But modern feminism is much too narcissistic and self-absorbed to admit that men need help as well.
[–]Boredatwork_466 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Thats just not true man
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
What isn't?
[–]falconsoldier 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
The top post on /r/feminism is pro-men/mens' rights. A lot of feminist believe that men get the shitty end of the stick on a lot of things.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
That's part of the issue. No one can entirely agree on what feminism is anymore. I'm a female-born person who was a very active far-left activist for about 5 years (aka SJW) and I eventually left after I realized the hypocrisy in how feminists treated the perceived privileged others, usually white het cis men, and took this as an excuse to baselessly treat them like shit.
There are plenty of feminists who think like I do and want to promote men's rights while also identifying as feminists. But there are also feminists under the same exact flag who think all men are nasty and inherently aggressive, sexual, etc.
I don't like how broad of an umbrella term it is, and how the different sects of it do not agree at all. It's become a useless term. I also find MRA a useless term and don't consider myself one but I sub to this subreddit to have discussions on the hypocrisy towards men found in feminism with cis men, and unfortunately when i was an SJW this sort of honest discussion was frowned upon or immediately shut down when the idea of a cis male being socially oppressed was brought up at all.
There are good feminists and bad feminists, some who think men are socially oppressed and others who believe men are natural-born monsters. But since no one can really agree on what the unifying goal is anymore, and many narcissistic people have used it as an excuse to treat others badly on some sort of high-platformed stance, I can't really call myself one anymore.
[–]falconsoldier 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
But modern feminism is much too narcissistic and self-absorbed to admit that men need help as well.
This is what I took issue with, feminism is obviously a huge movement at this point, but most feminists do admit that men need help as well. It's just that there are some mentally ill and misguided women who have latched onto the movement for anti-men sentiments, but they are not the majority and I don't believe the solution is just to make broad generalizations about feminism in general.
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
most feminists do admit that men need help as well
Mmmyeah, every time I see a feminist saying men need help it's something along the lines of "patriarchy hurts men, too", or "men need to be freed from toxic masculinity". Any example of women having it easier than men isn't female privilege; it's benevolent sexism. Seriously, when men have it tough, it's because men are sexist. When women have it easy, it's because men are sexist. Femsplaining how all men's issues can be solved by dismantling the mythical patriarchy is just not helping.
The only logical response to such idiocy is to make broad generalizations about feminism. Under feminism, nothing is ever a woman's fault. They are assumed to be like children with no agency.
[–]falconsoldier 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There are some misconceptions.
when men have it tough, it's because men are sexist.
It's not because men are sexist, its because society is sexist. Society has pretty clear ideas of what makes a man and a woman, and punishes people for deviating from those roles. I don't know man, it seems like you have a rudimentary understanding of feminism and feminist theory and are using that to generalize all of feminism.
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
its because society is sexist
You mean our male-dominated society? That one? The patriarchal society made by men, for the benefit of men? Yeah, patriarchy theory has nothing to do with men being sexist. Pull the other leg, why don't you?
Yeah, I feel you. My comment was far too generalizing. I unfortunately was involved in a sect of feminism that was very man-hatey. :(
[–]theegrimrobe 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link
based blondy getting it right
[–]douglasmacarthur 179 points180 points181 points 9 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link
I don't think she is. We should be promoting empathy. "Your issues aren't real, get fucking over it" is the same thing feminists say to men who express their victimization.
[–]JoelMahon 72 points73 points74 points 9 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link
She's also wrong, there isn't equal rights, otherwise why would we have this sub anyway. Both sides have unfair laws against them/in favour of them. People will always disagree on who have it worse but we both have it worse than equal. I appreciate the sentiment.
[–]Kittens_in_panties 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's really way to common for people to deny that other groups may be disadvantaged too. Neither side will ever get their way without the help of the other.
[–]Saerain 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link
'Kay, so, what rights don't women have that men do?
[–]JoelMahon 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link
They can't walk around topless in many places men can. Or be topless on film/tv without raising the age rating to at least a 15.
[–]MikeyMike01 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Feminists do little else beyond invent fictitious issues. "Get over yourself" is a pretty good response.
[–]douglasmacarthur 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
A lot of them do, and I definitely don't identify with feminism as an ideology, but when the sign says "we've had equality for 42 years, get fucking over it" it seems to be implying women never experience sexism, which isn't true. Everyone's experiences are different and anyone can experience discrimination. The premise that you're either in a Victimhood-Approved Group or not is exactly what we need to get away from.
[–]gymleader_brock 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
http://imgur.com/a/PgBxj
Inspiring
[–]super_ag 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
But women feel unsafe in a society with men in it. Until they no longer feel uncomfortable and afraid around men, they still need Feminism to teach them to feel uncomfortable and afraid of men.
[–]FreshOutOfGeekistan 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link
No, we don't, not all of us. I don't feel unsafe in a society with men in it. That is because I am biologically female (XX chromosome) and I am attracted to men, and only men. I am not ashamed of being being female. XY men desire me because I am female, biologically, through and through, despite my STEM-y education and career choices, regardless of my choice of attire or hairstyle.
Some women are not like me. Some women are asexual. Some women are attracted to women only. In many societies today, women's preferences are respected. No means no. We ARE safe in Europe, the USA, Japan, China, Korea and many other places on this earth.
Psychologically healthy heterosexual men do not want to force their desires upon women who are not attracted to them. I suspect that this is global, in Asia, Africa, Europe, the Americas and everywhere else.
Men are not inherently discomforting nor frightening to heterosexual women. Men need to respect the boundaries and disinterest of women who do not desire them. I still believe that psychologically healthy men, globally, realize this.
[–]oneandonlyA -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Long live the 0.0001 %.
Got a half chub just from reading the legal pad.
Equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
[–]tjom3ga 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is that stevie from Rhett and Link's production team?
Want to go out on a steamy date to 7-11?
[–]JamarcusRussel 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
isn't this basically saying that we shouldn't improve our society unless it's based on fundamental human rights?
[–]escopaul 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Keeping it high and tight for 42 year old.
[–]MustTurnLeftOnRed 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Brigaded AF
Good on here, she looks amazing for 42.
This made my day
Gotta love the civil rights wars in comments on every post like this.
[–]Zoltrahn 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This line of thinking is what bothers me about this sub sometimes. A lot of people here seem to think inequality is completely one sided. That men are the only ones that face discrimination. That isn't how it works.
Both genders have legitimate complaints about inequality, discrimination (justice and social), and the social expectations for a gender. Of course there are always going to be disagreements over how to address these issues or if certain things are even issues at all.
This girl's message isn't just feminism is wrong, but that inequality doesn't exist. Seems pretty contrary to the purpose of this sub, to me at least.
[–]TheCitizenAct 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Do you know what grates me about these posts? It's only this prominent because she's female. I get it, it makes us feel like the message is getting through...except, what's the message that we're trying to deliver?
That it's not your character or the content of your message, but your identity that matters? This girl isn't saying anything any random person from within these boards hasn't said 1,000 times.
Then again, this is where the problem is. We look to women for validation: 'a woman has said it, that means it takes on a moral dimension - that means we're winning the battle of ideas!' That, in a nutshell, is the entire problem - feminism castigated morality to be about an identity, not substance.
This thread is feminism - it's about the identity of the person delivering the message, not the message itself. It's the problem, not the solution.
Until men stop looking to women for validation of their determined morality, feminism will retain its power - and all its power emanates from the extent to which men are willing to rely on women for validation (a reliance which is underpinned by a male biological need for sex, or sexual prerogative).
Until that shackle is cast aside, you can forget any possibility of anything changing. In fact, I would put all of the problems we face as a society down to this dynamic, and particularly the prevalence of moral relativism, ie, placing the identity (equality for women, or x group) ahead of the principle (equality), or 'black culture' = 'progressive', 'white culture' = 'racist', etc.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted] 820 points821 points822 points (75 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 190 points191 points192 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]moon_no_rise 46 points47 points48 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]epagel 14 points15 points16 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (61 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]beck1670 132 points133 points134 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]GrandmasterSexay 41 points42 points43 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 60 points61 points62 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 32 points33 points34 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (15 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]titaniumjew 30 points31 points32 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Muesli_nom 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RelentlesslyDead 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Adanu0 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]MusicTheoryIsHard 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Muesli_nom 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]nforne 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]super_ag 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PIG_CUNT 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KalebMW99 19 points20 points21 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jmkiii 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Krissam 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]PillTheRed 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thehunter699 3 points4 points5 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 29 points30 points31 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wine_Country 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Thegrizzlybearzombie 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Muesli_nom 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]nforne 10 points11 points12 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]nforne 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aonome 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]aonome 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]aonome 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]VadersDawg 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]sayshey 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]cuckpildpepegarrison 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ENTP 760 points761 points762 points (171 children) | Copy Link
[–]xx2Hardxx 197 points198 points199 points (166 children) | Copy Link
[–]DatGrass14 190 points191 points192 points (150 children) | Copy Link
[–]locks_are_paranoid 44 points45 points46 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]WikiTextBot 45 points46 points47 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ConfessionsofaLurker 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Muesli_nom 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]unbelievablepeople 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Quintrell 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mhblea 36 points37 points38 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LyingForTruth 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]haveacigar4200 141 points142 points143 points (138 children) | Copy Link
[–]speedisavirus 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 27 points28 points29 points (24 children) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 6 points7 points8 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 10 points11 points12 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jmkiii 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CommondeNominator 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]speedisavirus 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]speedisavirus 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tinyhumanthing 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tinyhumanthing 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HotDealsInTexas 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ShiverinMaTimbers 22 points23 points24 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ShiverinMaTimbers 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Akitten 17 points18 points19 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–]jaheiner 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]haveacigar4200 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nforne 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Pennigans 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]speedisavirus 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Pennigans 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ikillesuper 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 73 points74 points75 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 35 points36 points37 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PietroGori7 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]randomaccount2017d 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]lbutl25 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Throwawayingaccount 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DaBuddahN 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]haveacigar4200 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gjsmo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Quintrell 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HotDealsInTexas 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Xiamingxuan 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]i-am-a-genius 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]youwontguessthisname 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SarahC 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]joeylxd 747 points748 points749 points (75 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 546 points547 points548 points (59 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 35 points36 points37 points (34 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 118 points119 points120 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 46 points47 points48 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]TigerRaiders 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kravego 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kravego 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]reverendchubbs 13 points14 points15 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]equality2000 30 points31 points32 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Generic_On_Reddit 13 points14 points15 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JebberJabber 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]equality2000 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JcbAzPx 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]equality2000 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Raptorfeet 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 15 points16 points17 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 13 points14 points15 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Syokudai 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Syokudai 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SKNK_Monk 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]trolloc1 14 points15 points16 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DaBuddahN 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Galadriel26 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thehunter699 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreddyFoFingers 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]SKNK_Monk 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]FreddyFoFingers 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]carrot0101 54 points55 points56 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Rolten 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]i-am-a-genius 7 points8 points9 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Orsonius 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]i-am-a-genius 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]thatsnogood 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThatDamnedImp 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 356 points357 points358 points (92 children) | Copy Link
[–]sex_panther_by_odeon 29 points30 points31 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]g_squidman 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrPlaysWithSquirrels 58 points59 points60 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]MrPlaysWithSquirrels 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]perplexedm 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirHR 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 56 points57 points58 points (46 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (27 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]sltfc 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JebberJabber 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mens-Advocate 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]SKNK_Monk 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]DaBuddahN 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]captainAwesomePants 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 14 points15 points16 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kagoolx 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Auszi 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]IamaspyAMNothing 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MindS1 19 points20 points21 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PillTheRed 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]natur3ify 2 points3 points4 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 4 points5 points6 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]natur3ify 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]HasAnArchmageFetish2 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]sneakpeekbot 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]sneakpeekbot 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]lothtekpa 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Onion_Guy 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluefootedpig 1252 points1253 points1254 points (361 children) | Copy Link
[–]77jamjam 142 points143 points144 points (250 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 817 points818 points819 points (204 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (52 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]GenuineSounds 20 points21 points22 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Soykikko 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DaBuddahN 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Soykikko 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]midirfulton 56 points57 points58 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 31 points32 points33 points (35 children) | Copy Link
[–]OhLookANewAccount 32 points33 points34 points (34 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 54 points55 points56 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–]mensmod 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]caitsu 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]solara01 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]austin101123 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]thisprofilenolongere 21 points22 points23 points (131 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (40 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ExtremelySmartGuy 330 points331 points332 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]bravoredditbravo 87 points88 points89 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]serfusa 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lbutl25 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Quintrell 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]karmassacre 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]austin101123 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]austin101123 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 128 points129 points130 points (73 children) | Copy Link
[–]raxical 13 points14 points15 points (52 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 87 points88 points89 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Photronics 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Photronics 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 26 points27 points28 points (43 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points (35 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 71 points72 points73 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Noshamina 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (24 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]midirfulton 12 points13 points14 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]testmypatience 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]greeklemoncake 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Throwabanana69 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]raxical 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 16 points17 points18 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]raxical 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]raxical 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Noshamina 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]TheOfficialJoeBiden 15 points16 points17 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]The-Jerkbag 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 21 points22 points23 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WikiTextBot 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ThatDamnedImp 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]theadj123 21 points22 points23 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 13 points14 points15 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]theadj123 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]herpesmyderpes 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]swaggy_butthole 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BushDidSixtyNine11 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RedxEyez 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]spicyitallian 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 24 points25 points26 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LawBot2016 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]skfdjsdlkf 53 points54 points55 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]well_duh_doy_son 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]StanleyKubricksGhost 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Torchwood777 5 points6 points7 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (13 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wolfe2441 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]iBreakAway 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wolfe2441 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PHUNkH0U53 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Orsonius 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cclemenst28 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]HelperBot_ 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]77jamjam 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cclemenst28 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]77jamjam 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 25 points26 points27 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 85 points86 points87 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]stopher_dude 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ali3nation 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]___jamil___ 33 points34 points35 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluefootedpig 10 points11 points12 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheTurtleBear 19 points20 points21 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluefootedpig 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DatGrass14 10 points11 points12 points (29 children) | Copy Link
[–]villin609 109 points110 points111 points (26 children) | Copy Link
[–]Throwabanana69 1 point2 points3 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]villin609 15 points16 points17 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]ekfslam 20 points21 points22 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]joyofsteak 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]helisexual 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]villin609 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]well_duh_doy_son 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]reynoldstown 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Throwabanana69 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ScottyBrown -5 points-4 points-3 points (55 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 78 points79 points80 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]agentcookie096 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]OhLookANewAccount 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ScottyBrown 17 points18 points19 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]OhLookANewAccount 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 27 points28 points29 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 15 points16 points17 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]MajinAsh 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]sneakpeekbot 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]ScottyBrown 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MajinAsh 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]steve_the_woodsman 8 points9 points10 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]RektRoyce 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Thatonegingerkid 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]steve_the_woodsman 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Krissam 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]remedyremedy 23 points24 points25 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Literally_A_Shill 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]steve_the_woodsman 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bluefootedpig 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ItsACommonMistake 122 points123 points124 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]jrackow 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]ItsACommonMistake 20 points21 points22 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]jrackow 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Pillagerguy 178 points179 points180 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]drwilliams95 60 points61 points62 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Galadriel26 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ace_on_the_Turn 132 points133 points134 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]SaltyBabe 13 points14 points15 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]K3TtLek0Rn 36 points37 points38 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kennen_Rudd 7 points8 points9 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]thatsnogood 57 points58 points59 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Valesparza 34 points35 points36 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PowerWisdomCourage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]20000Fish 38 points39 points40 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Poolibs 76 points77 points78 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]OhLookANewAccount 23 points24 points25 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]BigAbbott 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fernleaves 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aJakalope 9 points10 points11 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]BigAbbott 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thirdstreetzero 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BeardedLogician 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobaBobaLoba 12 points13 points14 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePiggyRider 6 points7 points8 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobaBobaLoba 13 points14 points15 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]tetsugakusei 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ThePiggyRider 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobaBobaLoba 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ThePiggyRider 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MajinAsh 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobaBobaLoba 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigAbbott 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MajinAsh 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Xants 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheHooDooer 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ClayRoks 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Ghnarlok 3 points4 points5 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigAbbott 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]SKNK_Monk 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tetsugakusei 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ThatDamnedImp 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]provocateur__ 11 points12 points13 points (34 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 52 points53 points54 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]bravoredditbravo 38 points39 points40 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]octillery 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]ghostparasites 6 points7 points8 points (25 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]issamaysinalah 9 points10 points11 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]eadala 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Galadriel26 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]provocateur__ 1 point2 points3 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Boredatwork_466 21 points22 points23 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 11 points12 points13 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 4 points5 points6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]falconsoldier 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]orcscorper 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]theegrimrobe 6 points7 points8 points (55 children) | Copy Link
[–]douglasmacarthur 179 points180 points181 points (54 children) | Copy Link
[–]JoelMahon 72 points73 points74 points (50 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittens_in_panties 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Saerain 1 point2 points3 points (46 children) | Copy Link
[–]JoelMahon 12 points13 points14 points (45 children) | Copy Link
[–]MikeyMike01 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]douglasmacarthur 31 points32 points33 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gymleader_brock 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]super_ag 2 points3 points4 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]FreshOutOfGeekistan 5 points6 points7 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneandonlyA -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tjom3ga 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JamarcusRussel 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]escopaul 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MustTurnLeftOnRed 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RedxEyez 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zoltrahn 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheCitizenAct 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link