Show People How Much They Need Men

jacare_o · 2026-02-23T14:33:49+00:00

With the snowstorm happening in the Northeastern US today, everything is going to be buried in snow. This is the time women start looking for male labor. Do...

[–]MehMehMammal 72 points73 points74 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacare_o[S] 29 points30 points31 points 5 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Usual_Interaction536 5 months ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DawnBreak777 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SouthernFruit8768 25 points26 points27 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]xxdarkpixelsxx 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gnuban 36 points37 points38 points 5 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]peasey360 31 points32 points33 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Former-Dragonfly2226 50 points51 points52 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BayouGrunt985 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WillyNilly1997 40 points41 points42 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThePiachu 31 points32 points33 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BeepBeepYeah7789 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]incognitoleaf00 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 40 points41 points42 points 5 months ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Centaur_Warchief123 61 points62 points63 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]United-Tradition-232 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacare_o[S] 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 14 points15 points16 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SexyRotiserieChicken 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 23 points24 points25 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]wabe_walker -12 points-11 points-10 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 15 points16 points17 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]wabe_walker -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SexyRotiserieChicken 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and I admit that I tried above to swing my semantic lasso too wide just to find some consensus there because I felt I "got the gist". I personally draw distinction between “feminist” and “radical feminist”, and even that is sticky, because the “denominations” of an ideology get a bit muddy under even those umbrella terms. The true misandrists—whom I consider the “caricatures” I mentioned—that smugly, barely nest their contempt of men within the virtue of feminism, are hiding in plain sight across those denominations. That was the entire gear grind I had against the call to action of this post: that you can't rhetorically target the ideological subset that you intend to rhetorically target just by choosing to target an overlapping subset that is only distinguished by their innate characteristics.

I've received my share of abuse from several women that have been in my life—physical, verbal, emotional abuse, reputation destruction, and so on. Those experiences have given me some insight to see more clearly how traumatic or harmful experiences can cause an individual's psyche to imprint the facile solution to avoid more of that similar trauma/harm by blackballing the entire innate-trait demographic of the individual(s) that harmed them. The post's call-to-action is like a conscious analogy of how the human mind codes a bigotry into itself as a protective complex, and I wanted to push back on it for that reason.

Be well out there.

[–]jjj25760 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oseday 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mw136913 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BuilderAcceptable442 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BuilderAcceptable442 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Agile_Ad_5896[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AskTight7295 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WearyConfidence1244 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pristine_Cellist_248 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BuilderAcceptable442 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kit-kat3151 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]SidewaysGiraffe -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[–]DawnBreak777 34 points35 points36 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]SidewaysGiraffe -22 points-21 points-20 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life 20 points21 points22 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]wabe_walker -11 points-10 points-9 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The counter argument is against the nature of your philosophy and of your practice.

You argue that because of systemic discrimination, then it is fair to counter-discriminate against a demographic based on their innate characteristics. You do not argue to challenge the systemic discrimination in of itself. You are pushing the burden of that systemic discrimination on the totality of a demographic based on their innate characteristics.

Does that sound familiar to you? Does that sound obtusely wrong to you, to blame an entire innate-trait demographic for the philosophies and practices of [seemingly] the worst exemplars of them? Do you see the public sidelining of men being excused due to [seemingly] the practices of the worst exemplars of them? Do you wish to perpetuate that philosophy and practice in our culture? Do you wish to continue to tear down the hard-won taboos against bigoted philosophies and practices in our culture? Your enemies are doing such a fine job on their own, and you are choosing to help them.

“If it's good enough for one group, why not another?” This is your reasoning. You are taking the worst examples of a philosophy and practice and rounding an entire innate-trait demographic to bear its responsibility and its ramifications. You are no better than they are, that being the case. You are replacing one bigoted prejudice for another, and the culture you build with it simply swings the pendulum widely against your enemy for it to eventually, karmically, return to bludgeon you and the innocent bystanders your kind.

If you want to debate u/SidewaysGiraffe on the terms of the true argument, then you must explain why you choose to punish an entire demographic based on their innate characteristics for a specific and easy-to-target philosophy and behavior. “I'm sure I can find a government or academic group who publicly sideline men,” you announce, so address that practice. Fight that philosophy. Otherwise, you are simply giddily riding the seesaw with your enemy and perpetuating the same troglodyte resentments and bigotries into the next generation.

[–]Smeg-life 9 points10 points11 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

using too many words

That covers the waffle, it doesn't cover the purple prose and under-grad attitude.

I looked at some of your other posts.

I'll decline. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve, I'm not sure there is a purpose apart from to feel a sense of superiority. That would align with the writing style, but your other works are more bombastic. I'm inclined to go with a desire to be 'look at me' combined with 'i am superior', the writing might indicate a boastful 'i'm educated', a self belief in superiority, or could just be incompetence.

Let's take this one of yours I found. I posted it in full below.

1st compare the tone with your 'normal' tone in the post I'm replying too. A general conversational style, is something that can be done, it appears that this bombastic, superior tone might be an act.

It's why it's not worth trying to debate with someone who is using it as a mental fap session.

Let's look at these, I really enjoyed these. Farcical but faux intellectual, profound but meaningless, reminiscent of groups referred to as 'intelligensta'.

'polar opposite of a irrational doomer, then the opposite side of that ideological horseshoe will be… ta daa… irrational doomer.'

If you're at the center of a horseshoe the polar opposite by the standards above would be open space, an escape possibly (hopefully from the perverted English).

'It is the North Star that you'll never reach but directs your way,'

The last time I hered such trash was a new age wiccan a very long time ago (good fuck, but weird as hell). I doubt you'll emulate the former but certainly the latter. Demonstrates a pretentious undeveloped mind, but something to laugh at.

'The definitional smokebomb is a nonissue here.'

This one made me think that rehab might be a good option. Not too sure what it's meant to mean, and I'm too wary of the substances I'd have to take for it to make sense.

'Because of this difference in perspective between us, anything I have left to say will be irrelevant.'

So why would you want to debate? This certainly gives off tragic vibes though.

' I stand apart'

Well unfortunately it's standard stuff, which is why it comes off as immature writing, the classic undergrad.

'I will not hold an entire sex responsible for the speech and actions of nitwits'

In your 'city on a hill is an ideal' that maybe an option. In the real life there is no such luxury. It's used in mainstream media regularly.

It presents the writer as an ivory tower academic, out of touch with reality believing they are the center of existence. But I would expect better writing of one.

'I have no interest in breaking collateral eggs to make a prejudicial omelette.'

This one I actually liked. It could be used in a better place but 'collateral eggs' is very funny, especially as female humans have eggs.

Between these posts, well I can't take the writer seriously, as this comes across as fap, well it feels sorta sordid and unclean. I'll bow out, maybe try another for intellectual fapping.

Good luck

If you choose to be the polar opposite of a irrational doomer, then the opposite side of that ideological horseshoe will be… ta daa… irrational doomer. You've already established that you are running on the “has never and will never exist” mindset. That is why the city on a hill is an ideal. It is the North Star that you'll never reach but directs your way, all the same. Because of this difference in perspective between us, anything I have left to say will be irrelevant.

You can have a “philosophy” regarding how to cook an omelette, so you are free to be a Cynic/Stoic, and yet you hold a prejudicial philosophy above. The definitional smokebomb is a nonissue here.

Why would I choose to model my behavior on activistic nitwits on r-slash-twoxchromosomes or elsewhere? I stand apart. I will target the ideologies and behaviors directly in my own speech and action. I will not hold an entire sex responsible for the speech and actions of nitwits. Broad generalizations does not apply to every individual of that generalization, and I have no interest in breaking collateral eggs to make a prejudicial omelette.

[–]wabe_walker -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacare_o[S] 17 points18 points19 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]SidewaysGiraffe -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is recursive reasoning. The question was “is bigotry acceptable if a member of one demographic is unkind to you?” and your answer was essentially “bigotry is acceptable if a member of one demographic is unkind to you". You didn't add anything here. You simply pointed to bad examples of one innate-characteristic demographic behaving bigotedly, and stated “see?”

You see a selection of an innate-characteristic demographic acting bigoted, and you use that to justify your own bigotry. “Heterofatalism” is a term used by such bigots. It is not a term that arises in female neurology innate. You are simply joining in the recursive loop of bigots justifying the nihilistic bigotry of one another's demographics.

When you participate in laying the bricks down to build the future, hand-in-hand in analogous conduct as your enemies—the same conduct that has driven you to such fatalistic and prejudicial philosophies—then you shouldn't expect the enlightened and fulfilling bright, shining city on the hill to be waiting for you once you have mortared the last brick. Those aren't the blueprints you are working by, and I stand against that.

[–]Smeg-life 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

in female neurology innate

Do you mean 'innate in female neurology' or 'innate in female psychology'?

You are simply joining in the recursive loop of bigots justifying the nihilistic bigotry of one another's demographics.

I am simply agreeing with what women publicly say. Oddly enough you have never said women are wrong to hold those views although your comments are odd.

your enemies

What enemies?

fatalistic and prejudicial philosophies—

It would be a philosophy if I lived my entire life by it. I tend to align with Cynic/Stoic tbh.

enlightened and fulfilling bright, shining city on the hill to be waiting for you once you have mortared the last brick.

See comment on cynic/stoic, I live in reality. That situation has never and will never exist.

Those aren't the blueprints you are working by, and I stand against that.

Delightful. So what is your plan and your actions to bring about this world you describe and when you posted it on twoxchromosomes how long did it take them to ban you? Or were they supportive?

[–]wabe_walker 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you choose to be the polar opposite of a irrational doomer, then the opposite side of that ideological horseshoe will be… ta daa… irrational doomer. You've already established that you are running on the “has never and will never exist” mindset. That is why the city on a hill is an ideal. It is the North Star that you'll never reach but directs your way, all the same. Because of this difference in perspective between us, anything I have left to say will be irrelevant.

You can have a “philosophy” regarding how to cook an omelette, so you are free to be a Cynic/Stoic, and yet you hold a prejudicial philosophy above. The definitional smokebomb is a nonissue here.

Why would I choose to model my behavior on activistic nitwits on r-slash-twoxchromosomes or elsewhere? I stand apart. I will target the ideologies and behaviors directly in my own speech and action. I will not hold an entire sex responsible for the speech and actions of nitwits. Broad generalizations does not apply to every individual of that generalization, and I have no interest in breaking collateral eggs to make a prejudicial omelette.

[–]wabe_walker 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

I'll stick to my point and say that “random women” is a broad buckshot blast that misses [what I would claim to be] the intended [and deserving] target of criticism and conflict: contemptuous radfem zealots that consider their prejudice against men a virtue. There is collateral damage when a movement pushes individuals to see their outgroup as “all the same thing”, disparagingly, and there is collateral damage when a subsection of an outgroup is targeted which may only overlap with the intended target. This is why my own perspective in this helpy helperson scenario is to act with honor—as best as I imperfectly can—as I would have already done so, towards “randoms”, and to not see the shadowy zealot devil in each random individual that meets the broad demographic requirements. Them devils be out there, for sure, and when one is identified, then one can properly choose what one will do or not do on their behalf. I think every individual should have autonomy regarding who they wish to associate with; who they choose to invest their hard-earned resources and scarce free time into. But it is when such calls for a “movement” (using this term loosely to mean “a public call towards an action of protest”) that shoots the buckshot across their bullseye, maybe, but definitely hitting bystanders along the periphery; and I'm not into that.

The radfems use the same mislogic and consider themselves virtuous thinkers. They, too, are happy to slight a subset of a demographic with their own scattershot blast, just so that they [can at least feel like they] take a few of their intended targets down with. If you confront them, they will retreat to their motte's war room and point to the “misogynistic, violent, violating, dangerous men” on their map that they were truly aiming for; and they, too, will shrug, saying that the arbitrary means to achieve their ends are justified because the intended target is just so very terrible.

I just don't like adding to this looping long game of the Hatfields vs. McCoys of the sexes. I do not believe that the only solution to past prejudice* is present and future prejudice.

*^{towards a broad and faceless subset of “randoms”, even.}

[–]Glad-Way-637 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'll stick to my point and say that “random women” is a broad buckshot blast

Then you'll stick to deliberately ignoring the point of the post, as is your right. You've been corrected on this front already, so any misinterpretation are strictly your own prerogative. That comment was mostly to let you know exactly the kind of people you're finding yourself agreeing with, tbh.

contemptuous radfem zealots that consider their prejudice against men a virtue.

You can just say "feminist" y'know. The radfems are just the ones who are most likely to say the quiet part out loud with a dude noticeably in ear-shot, IME.

that shoots the buckshot across their bullseye, maybe, but definitely hitting bystanders along the periphery; and I'm not into that.

To stretch your metaphor, the bullseye is more than likely far larger than you seem to think, and the shotgun has a choke installed, so the spread ain't half as bad as you claim.

bailey's war room

I thought that was what the Motte was? Well, the keep on the Motte, I suppose, since technically the Motte is the hill.

and they, too, will shrug, saying that the means to achieve their ends are justified because the intended target is just so very terrible.

Difference is, they go out of their way to be bastards about it. All that this post advocates for is for men to stop going out of their way to help folks who very well may be against them on some level. Very different situation.

I just don't like adding to this looping long game of the Hatfields vs. McCoys of the sexes. I do not believe that the only solution to past prejudice* is present and future prejudice.

*^{towards a broad and faceless subset of “randoms”, even.}

And yet again, it ain't prejudice simply to avoid going out of your way to help. If you think it is, I'd be curious to know where the line is drawn. Is it prejudicial for me to avoid emptying my bank account into the living conditions of the nearest homeless camp?

[–]wabe_walker 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thanks for the motte/bailey correction! I edited it.

I do discern between feminist and radical feminist, myself, so we're using different definitions there.

I'm saying that the call to an action of protest which intends to slight-by-omission a subset of an innate-trait demographic but only targets that innate-trait demographic is, by definition, prejudiced.

I suppose where my whinging is ultimately irrelevant is that, boots on the ground, I don't really understand the context of where men would be going out of their way in the first place to help “randoms”, and would then hear this call to action and change their minds not to. May all be moot.

Re: your homeless camp metaphor, my point was that changing your action on behalf of a [I know, strong word, but] prejudiced “protest” is adding to a problem that I would just want see gone from culture, and gone from myself—the problem being using the blunt tool of innate characteristics to target a subset. I was not saying one must act differently, but to not act in a way that slights those one doesn't originally intend to slight. If I want to target a specific idea or action or ideology, then I want to find ways to target it (or protest against it) specifically and with semantic precision.

[–]Glad-Way-6371 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thanks for the motte/bailey correction! I edited it.

No problem. I always thought it was a remarkably good descriptive metaphor for that particular fallacy, as someone who knows a teeny bit about Ye Olde settlement design.

I do discern between feminist and radical feminist, myself, so we're using different definitions there.

Probably. What portion of people who call themselves feminist do you think would fit under your own description of a radfem?

I'm saying that the call to an action of protest which intends to slight-by-omission a subset of an innate-trait demographic but only targets that innate-trait demographic is, by definition, prejudiced.

I suppose the main disagreement is on whether or not such a slight by omission should even really count as a slight, since we both know the behavior wouldn't be reciprocated with the average random woman helping a man who's a stranger to her. If it is a slight, it's only really one given in return.

I suppose where my whinging is ultimately irrelevant is that, boots on the ground, I don't really understand the context of where men would be going out of their way in the first place to help “randoms”, and would then hear this call to action and change their minds not to. May all be moot.

Might be a generational or local thing? Around where I live, often certain men will go out of their way to ask if any of their female neighbors need assistance with the more physically strenuous kinds of home or vehicle maintenance, sometimes even with women they don't know at all. It's not like, super common, but it is common enough that some women have developed a feeling of entitlement towards the behavior.

Re: your homeless camp metaphor, my point was that changing your action on behalf of a [I know, strong word, but] prejudiced “protest” is adding to a problem that I would just want see gone from culture, and gone from myself—the problem being using the blunt tool of innate characteristics to target a subset. If I want to target a specific idea or action or ideology, then I want to find ways to target it (or protest against it) specifically and with semantic precision.

Mm. You're far, far less cynical than I am if you think that is ever anything like a realistic possibility. I hope you're more correct than I am, but I don't truly think it's all that likely. IMO, the best we can really hope for is just everyone sticking to their own business, and as few men getting taken advantage of by people who hate them as possible, and this seems like a step towards that at least.

[–]wabe_walker -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HerbertRTarlekJr 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wabe_walker -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]izmesoundz -7 points-6 points-5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]United-Tradition-232 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Usual_Interaction536 5 months ago [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Smeg-life 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Good_Roll 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]BulldogOatmeal -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Good_Roll 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Good_Roll 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Good_Roll 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BulldogOatmeal 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]WolverineLeg -8 points-7 points-6 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]MisterBowTies 24 points25 points26 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WolverineLeg 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacare_o[S] 33 points34 points35 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WolverineLeg 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Robot_Alchemist -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tilldeathdoiparty -11 points-10 points-9 points 5 months ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 17 points18 points19 points 5 months ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[+]tilldeathdoiparty -7 points-6 points-5 points 5 months ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty-1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Sorrycantdothat2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Sorrycantdothat1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Sorrycantdothat 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-6372 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Glad-Way-637 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Sounds like you base all your decisions on a ‘how will they pay me back’ transactional approach.

More like a "would this kindness be reciprocated were I in the same situation?" approach, but m'kay.

I’ll lead with kindness, and let all the bad things happen to me

Good for you. If you want to be taken advantage of willingly, that's your right. Don't claim that anyone who chooses to mind their own business is a bigot or actively harming folks by doing so, though.

And if you think I mean harm in a physically hurtful manner over deliberately avoiding helping a specific group to push a negative mindset (that’s harm too) but maybe you aren’t ready for that conversation.

Hah, you're even more of a fool than I thought if you're going around conversations like this, thinking that nobody else understands the definition of the word "harm." It's only harm as I see it if a person is worse off than if you weren't there at all. If it's a negative mindset to see yourself as the architect of your own failures and the one that needs to help yourself in case of slight personal inconvenience, then it's a negative mindset that women have pushed for millenia.

We point out their lack of action toward men as harm, but I’m some fucking idiot for applying your logic to this topic?

Only from groups that explicitly state that they're for gendered equality, while acting directly against it when women are already ahead (see women getting 85% of gendered financial aid despite already being favored by an education gap as large as the one from the 70s, just flipped). This is another situation where women are already ahead, in terms of random kindness from complete strangers. Why not advocate for things to be a wee bit more equal?

It’s fucked how many are stuck in a victim mentality and wonder why nothing good ever happens to them.

I'd agree. I imagine we think about different folks when we both say this, though.

[–][deleted] 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnstablEnergy -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Title	Show People How Much They Need Men
Author	jacare_o
Upvotes	206
Comments	144
Date	February 23, 2026 2:33 PM UTC (5 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1rcj1by/show_people_how_much_they_need_men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/show-people-how-much-they-need-men.1574084 https://theredarchive.com/post/1574084

Comments