Telling a feminist the truth.

[–]R3DLOTU5 320 points321 points322 points 3 years ago (150 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 237 points238 points239 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 88 points89 points90 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Financial_Window_990 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Financial_Window_990 25 points26 points27 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Historianof40k 25 points26 points27 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Huotou 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppaelmo 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]themolestedsliver 76 points77 points78 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Why do feminists believe that men need to be brought down a peg.

In my experience it's two fold.

It's a convenient excuse to their problems. You see victims don't have agency for their actions or lack thereof so by going on an on about the patriarchy this and male privilege that it covers them. Doing this is a way to superficially pat themselves on the back. "I was able to do this in a world with a patriarchy" sort of thing.
More often than not the loudest and proudest feminists I've seen personally were so privileged themselves they used the movement and contempt for men to detract from that

An example of this I've seen is a mutual friend who's family comes from money. She had a nanny, parents paid for her out of state private college (for those who don't know out of state college is like an extra 10-20k a year for tuition) AND bought her a new electric car once she graduated.

Meanwhile if you'd ask her who is more privileged she'd 10/10 say me or our other male friends.

[–]mixing_saws 40 points41 points42 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]themolestedsliver 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThatRandomCrit 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mixing_saws 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 54 points55 points56 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DrawerArtistic 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]NoParticularMotel -62 points-61 points-60 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]TextDependent6779 36 points37 points38 points 3 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]SappySoulTaker 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TextDependent6779 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TextDependent6779 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]duhhhh 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TextDependent6779 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NITAREEDDESIGNS 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]aerial_coitus 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StudentOfTheTruth01 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ninja_Arena 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sweet_Technician_531 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]jennyisnuts -21 points-20 points-19 points 3 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]peeknic 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[+]jennyisnuts -16 points-15 points-14 points 3 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]jennyisnuts -10 points-9 points-8 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts2 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You have the right to control your own bodies.

Conscription in Ukraine, Ukrainian men do not have control over their own bodies. Mandatory military service is overwhelmingly male.

What right over men's bodies, do women not have?

For the record I am pro choice and in favour of abortion, but remember too that women have a bunch of different ways of preventing pregnancy, ending pregnancy, and adopting the kid. As a man, if a woman is pregnant because of your sperm, you are fucked, you have 0 legal recourse whatsoever and it depends entirely on what she wants.

I'll fight for the right to abortion and contraceptives, but remember that in the US if men get raped and the woman gets herself pregnant, she is still entitled to sue him for child support and if he does not pay child support the man is sent to jail.

Beyond that, you have the right to not be questioned by doctors, banks, governments, or businesses as to whether you're sure or if you need some man's input.

This is not a right. There are no rights or laws concerning any of this. Some people will absolutely have backwards attitudes, but not being affected by backwards attitudes is not a right.

Also, good luck as a man trying to set up things for your child without getting questioned as to whether you're sure or if mommy is aware.

Also, apartment hunting as a man is sooooo much easier. That's just a current peeve.

Is it though? My best friend was turned down from an apartment because the owner wanted to have women in the apartment because "women are cleaner". This is a pet peeve, but you might just think the grass is greener on the other side without realizing that men have to deal with sexist shit too.

[–]Huotou 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]BCRE8TVE 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]reverbiscrap 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]pdoherty972 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]reverbiscrap 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]pdoherty972 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Not sure how far back it goes. Would it matter? Most US families, like mine, weren’t even here when slavery and other items mentioned were in effect. We got here in the late 1800s.

https://money.com/rich-families-lose-wealth/

Indeed, 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90372281/5-lies-youve-been-told-about-generational-wealth

But generational wealth is actually harder to maintain than America’s richest families might lead you to believe: About 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and 90% do by the following generation.

One reason that happens is the next generation may not be equipped to manage the money they inherit. But it’s also that family wealth can be diluted as it is divided amongst children, especially if each has a different stance on how to invest or manage the family finances. (Think of the family jockeying on Succession.) Some financial experts even recommend that—not unlike businesses—families come up with a “mission statement” to establish financial values and goals, in an effort to preserve wealth across future generations.

[–]reverbiscrap 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]pdoherty972 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]pdoherty972 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But are Gen X, Millenials and Gen Z really worse off than the ones before? It doesn’t appear that they are, at least not wealth-wise.

https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2021/09/01/who-is-the-wealthiest-generation/

When you graph the generations by wealth-per-capita (instead of simply adding the entire generation’s wealth together and comparing it to the entire wealth of other (differingly-sized) generations) this is what they look like:

https://imgur.com/a/xTbH9CK

“ Looking at the exact same data (from the Fed Distributional Financial Accounts) from a different perspective gives us a much different picture of recent history. In this version, Gen X is now richer (30% richer!) than Boomers were at the same age (late 40s). Millennials don’t yet have a year of overlap with Boomers, but they are tracking Gen X almost exactly. There is no reason they won’t continue to track Gen X, and therefore exceed Boomers as well when they are in their late 40s (which will happen in about 2037 for Millennials).

My prediction is that by the time Millennials are in their late 40s, they will even surpass Gen X in wealth. Why? The reason is counterintuitive: student debt.

Huh? Isn’t student debt what is holding Millennials back? In some sense, yes. But in the long run, no. Right now, many Millennials (and some Gen Xers!) hold a lot of student debt. That goes on the liabilities side of the balance sheet. But there is no corresponding asset showing up the balance sheet, but there is an asset: their human capital! Over their lifetime, that human capital will give them even greater earning potential in later life. Much like Gen X basically tracked Boomers until their mid-40s, until their student loans were paid off, and their degrees (and graduate degrees!) really started to pay off in the labor market.

So right now, student debt is doing two things: overstating liabilities and understating assets. To be sure, this may cause some short term problems: perhaps it is harder to buy a house, or at the very least to save for a down payment on a house. This could (I repeat could) lower Millennial wealth in the long run. But keep in mind that Gen X faced this same headwind, though to a lesser degree than Millennials.

We might still wonder though: aren’t the shares of wealth still important? Isn’t it relevant that Millennials had a smaller share of wealth than Gen X at the same age, who in turn had a smaller share than Boomers? As presented in the chart, I would firmly say: no. It doesn’t matter that much that Millennials have a smaller share of wealth today than Boomers had in the 1980s. Inequality might matter for all kinds of reasons, but inequality matters at a point in time. It doesn’t matter in the sense the viral chart presents it.”

[–]reverbiscrap1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pdoherty9721 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Own-Cabinet-8616 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Own-Cabinet-8616 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reverbiscrap 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]jennyisnuts 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[+]Praeger -71 points-70 points-69 points 3 years ago (65 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]Praeger -26 points-25 points-24 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Firstly that is a huge error in reasoning that the feminists you hate also use against you - reddit is NOT even close to a good view of a whole movement, let alone the internet in general. Never fall to the faulty idea that the vocal = majority.

Secondly - /r/twoxchromosomes is a good one. It tries to keep things about actual equality and does call out misandry.

Is it prefect? Nope. No place is.

Thirdly - please show a men's sub that celebrates women.

Lastly - this sub itself puts down woman all the time. You know very well that this happens, so why don't you use your own comments and look critically at yourself and your own group? Feminist groups absolutely need to do this, and so do men's groups. Both are equal in the fact that they don't always (and almost never the most vocal) argue for equality.

If you truly want equality, then you need to be willing to argue for our add well - which means calling out your own for the same things you'll call out others. Otherwise you don't want equality.

[–]reverbiscrap 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]Praeger -15 points-14 points-13 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reddit-person-321 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]KissMyAsthma-99 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reddit-person-321 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

No I said that no one said that this sub believes in patriarchy theory. People who hate this sub definitely have said that this sub is full of "patriarchal comments". But even those people never said that this sub believes in the exact same patriarchy theory that feminists believe in. You should have rephrased it as misogynistic comments instead.

Also re read what I said. The reason why the burden of proof is on you and you alone is because you made the claim that the two x chromosomes sub goes against misandry. No one HERE as in on this particular sub, specifically in this particular conversation, said that "patriarchal comments" are called out by this sub so it makes no sense to prove that patriarchal comments are called out when no one said that they are in the first place.

Edit: literally didn't even have to look that hard for a comment thread of people here calling out misogyny and getting plenty of upvotes for it. Now where is the proof of the same thing happening on twox when it comes to misandry?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/wu16b7/comment/il76xp5/

[–]AffectionateRun5053 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TP_Crisis_2020 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MBV-09-C 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TP_Crisis_2020 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Temporary_Spend_3111 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Firstly, check yourself. I don't hate anyone, and I will not allow you to put words in my mouth.

And secondly, that's a lot of words for, "I can't find a fem sub that celebrates men." This very Men's Rights page celebrates women, so, here you go, this is me showing you. A post from a few days ago ON THIS SUB celebrated important women.

Your suggestion that the majority doesn't represent the majority regarding feminism is, in a word, laughable. Sorry, but the overwhelming actions and words of a group absolutely represent that group. I get that you are here to do damage control, but we aren't making feminism look bad, feminism makes feminism look bad.

TXC is an outright hate group. Either you have no idea what you are talking about, or you are purposefully trolling. And by all means, give me even one example of TXC calling out misandry. Again, I'll wait.

Feel free to point out this sub putting down women. I'll wait.

Now, your turn. Find me one fem sub that celebrates men. I'm waiting...

I support equality for everyone. Your suggestion that I don't because I made a valid criticism of a group you like is cheap, shallow, and childish.

Comparing this sub to TXC, this sub looks very classy. TXC is outright sexist, and celebrates being sexist. This sub is not sexist, nor does it celebrate or encourage sexism.

So, time to practice what you preach. You're all for equality across the board, right? Me too. Since TXC is sexist, and this sub isn't, why don't you go talk down to TXC about how they need to look inward and change? Otherwise, you don't want equality.

You know the biggest difference between TXC and this sub? You'll be allowed to express your view on this sub, as long as you remain respectful. TXC will outright ban you for communicating with them like this.

[–]Temporary_Spend_3111 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Temporary_Spend_3111 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gopeejoe 26 points27 points28 points 3 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]chaun2 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

TL;DR -- All of the perks, none of the responsibilities. Same as it ever was.

1st wave feminists:

1) Won the right for married women to own their own property and income, and hold it separate from their husband's control. [Yet] maintained the legal entitlement of married women to be supported financially by their husband. (Otherwise known as, "what's mine is mine and what's yours is ours.) Her entitlement to his support even extended to the tax burden on her property and income--property and income he was legally prohibited from touching.

So basically, instead of demanding equal rights as administrators of the marital income and property, they demanded the rights of unmarried persons without the responsibilities, and the rights of married women without accompanying responsibilities. Men were still held to their responsibility as sole provider for the family, including the wife, but now had to do it without access to their wives' incomes and property.

There were men sent to prison in the UK for tax evasion for being unable to pay the taxes owing on the property/income of their wealthier wives. One suffragette, Dr. Elizabeth Wilks even refused (as was her right under the law) to provide her husband with the necessary documentation so he could calculate the taxes, and given that he was a schoolteacher and responsible for paying for everything else, he couldn't have afforded to pay it regardless.

While he was in prison, she urged other suffragettes to do what she had. He was released from prison on humanitarian grounds due to his failing health, and died a few months later.

2) Won default mother custody of young children upon divorce or separation. Previously, the assumption was of paternal custody since the father was solely burdened with financial responsibility for their care.

Of course, it was only custody that was changed--financial responsibility still fell 100% to the father to maintain the household of his minor children. Since his ex was head of that household, he was now forced to continue supporting her even if she was at fault for the breakdown of the marriage.

So again, we went from the man having superior rights and greater responsibility, to the man having inferior rights and still having greater responsibility.

Hilariously, in 1910, after these two legal innovations had been in effect in NY State for close to 40 years, a suffragette lawyer (yes, before women were allowed to get an education and all...) wrote in the Times that the law still discriminated against women on the matter of children. How did the law do so? The only area of the law at that time that did not consider mothers at least equal custodians and guardians were the provisions granting the father control over the minor children's income and property. Basically, the law saw him as 100% responsible for feeding, clothing and sheltering the children, therefore it gave him 100% of the right to manage their money for that end.

A woman could, at that time, go to court and demonstrate that her husband had legally abandoned his financial responsibility to her and the kids, and there were provisions for transferring said rights to manage the children's income/property to her in such cases (and in the worst cases the man could end up in prison for refusing to support his family to the best of his ability). But this suffragette wanted the laws themselves changed such that wives (who bore no legal financial responsibility toward their children, or even themselves) have equal control over the children's income and property.

These changes were all in place decades before women got the vote. And speaking of the vote...

3) In 1917 a group of anarchists in the US filed a federal case against military conscription, describing it as involuntary servitude and therefore unconstitutional. SCOTUS was unequivocal in its rejection of their argument, asserting that the draft was a reciprocal obligation owed by all citizens to the state in return for the rights conferred by the state upon citizens.

Among other legal obligations men owed to the state: hue and cry laws, bucket brigades, the special constabulary (being drafted into the police force in emergency situations), etc.

Some suffragettes (like Sylvia Pankhurst, who abandoned the suffragette movement over it) were opposed to the draft, but other more active (and now more famous) ones campaigned in favor of the draft and participated in campaigns designed to use public shaming to pressure men to enlist. One of their posters even decried the fact that a woman was denied the franchise no matter how great she was (she could be a doctor or a lawyer or a mother, or a mayor), while even men unfit for military service did not lose their right to vote.

Two years after SCOTUS formalized the draft as being part of the price all citizens must pay for their rights as citizens, women got the vote. And no obligation to the state was ever placed on them in return for this right.

And before anyone here says, "but women weren't ALLOWED to be soldiers!", there are other ways to serve your country during wartime, and mandatory "war work" (like sewing uniforms or assembling munitions) could have been made a thing in a female draft. Anyone arguing that if women were included in the draft today "we'd be sending tiny, vulnerable women into foxholes" is ignoring the fact that there is TONS of necessary work in and alongside the military that doesn't involve active combat or serious physical risk, so that argument basically boils down to "how dare we inconvenience women!"

So. Three examples of first wave feminists demanding and getting men's rights without men's responsibilities. Two of them actively involve zero sum situations such as income and property rights, or custody rights to children, and in both cases feminists managed to arrange things such that women got all the rights while men were still burdened with all the responsibility.

Copied from /u/girlwriteswhat

[+]Praeger -13 points-12 points-11 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MBV-09-C 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -35 points-34 points-33 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]FearlessZephyr 22 points23 points24 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gopeejoe 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger -5 points-4 points-3 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Input_output_error 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It does shine a light on the real problem, MRA is the real problem. All of MRA idea's stem from the faulty assumption of ''the MISOGINARY'. I have heard many descriptions of what this 'MISOGINARY' is supposed to be, none of them involved the actual definition of a MISOGINARY nor did any of these descriptions had anything other in common then 'WOMAN are bad'.

Sides are always going to be a thing, but im not going amuse someone who's side only exists to shit on the other side. Then there really is just a bunch of people on right side and a bunch of people being hateful and wrong.

Do you see the problem with what you're saying? By simply switching men to women everything in your argument equally applies to both sides - and if you don't believe this then go spend some time with feminists and you'll soon hear it.

So you're 100% right that it's simply 'us vs them' but as soon as you try to claim 'but we are right they are wrong' you ignore the problem that you yourself brought up.

[–]Input_output_error 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Do you see the problem with what you're saying? By simply switching men to women everything in your argument equally applies to both sides - and if you don't believe this then go spend some time with feminists and you'll soon hear it.

Yea no, you can't switch this because there isn't such a thing as a patriarchy while feminism very much does exist.

My argument is about the fact that the religion of feminism hinges on on there being a patriarchy. There isn't a patriarchy, there isn't some grand conspiracy to keep women down. There has never been such a thing, there is only feminism that does exactly what it accuses men of doing. It's even so bad that they're claiming that because men used to do something it is okay for them to do it now. No matter that their claims of what men supposedly have done have no basis in reality, now it's okay for them to do it anyway! fUcK pAtRiArCy!1!!

It is us versus them because they are literally the baddies, Kill All Men!, 'the future is female'(only 10% of the population should be male), the duluth model, all those things are feminist concoctions. How do you expect anyone to take feminism seriously after spewing such hate?

[–]Praeger -5 points-4 points-3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

How do you expect anyone up take you seriously after the hate you just spewed yourself?

Yes the patriarchy is a real thing. It still does exist in places around the world. No it's not a conspiracy.

The problem is that the definition many people think of when they hear 'patriarchy' is a very simplified 'all men' when really it's 'Patriarchy is a system of relationships, beliefs, and values embedded in political, social, and economic systems that structure gender inequality between men and women. Attributes seen as “feminine” or pertaining to women are undervalued, while attributes regarded as “masculine” or pertaining to men are privileged'

Have you ever called or heard anyone that's a skinny guy called a pussy for wearing a dress? That's literally patriarchy.

Have you noticed that it has always been rich men who've decided what the poor and women must do? That's literally patriarchy.

Have you ever been treated unequally by a man in power based on your appearance or power? That's literally patriarchy.

It equally hurts men as well as women, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Rich white men creating loopholes in taxes so that they are able to make more wealth while poorer people suffer, all the while tricking other men into thinking 'I'm part of that take group and this helps me' is literally being tricked and controlled by the patriarchy.

Being a child and having the 'head of the house' being a man is literally living under a patriarchy.

Now this this mean that all the problems that exist in the world for women are the patriarchy? Heck no.

Does this mean that they are right to always be blaming all men? Not even close.

Does this mean that all men are by definition part of the patriarchy? Nope. Go read the definition again.

But it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[–]Input_output_error4 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How do you expect anyone up take you seriously after the hate you just spewed yourself?

Hate? The only thing i hate upon is a religion, a religion that hates people for who they are. In my book that isn't hate.

Yes the patriarchy is a real thing. It still does exist in places around the world. No it's not a conspiracy.

No, it really isn't, the whole list you're rambling about has nothing to do with 'patriarchy'

The problem is that the definition many people think of when they hear
'patriarchy' is a very simplified 'all men' when really it's 'Patriarchy
is a system of relationships, beliefs, and values embedded in
political, social, and economic systems that structure gender inequality
between men and women. Attributes seen as “feminine” or pertaining to
women are undervalued, while attributes regarded as “masculine” or
pertaining to men are privileged'

The problem here is that it is only feminist who believe this false idea of women and female traits being undervalued.

Have you ever called or heard anyone that's a skinny guy called a pussy for wearing a dress? That's literally patriarchy.

This is called sexism, not patriarchy. You can't just list things you don't like and blame them on this mythical patriarchy...

Have you noticed that it has always been rich men who've decided what the poor and women must do? That's literally patriarchy.

No, i do notice that you are being a raging sexist here. Go and tell the queen this and see how that turns out...

Have you ever been treated unequally by a man in power based on your appearance or power? That's literally patriarchy.

Yea no, that is capitalism at work, not some mythical patriarchy.

It equally hurts men as well as women, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Just throwing shit at a wall doesn't make it exist either, that is what you're doing here.

Rich white men creating loopholes in taxes so that they are able to make
more wealth while poorer people suffer, all the while tricking other
men into thinking 'I'm part of that take group and this helps me' is
literally being tricked and controlled by the patriarchy.

Aaah so you're a racist too! I should have guessed, sexists are often racist too. But, lol, im the one who is hating here?? You're really something else when it comes to cognitive dissonance.

Being a child and having the 'head of the house' being a man is literally living under a patriarchy.

The head of our household has always been my grandma, as she was the eldest. Does that mean i've lived in a matriarchy?? If not then you're an idiot for suggesting that the opposite is a patriarchy.

Nothing you have brought up here has really anything to do with a patriarchy, maybe the last point does but that would mean that i have lived in a matriarchy. Stop blaming shit on a mythical concept that doesn't exist.

[–]OGBoglord3 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are conflating so many different concepts; capitalism, gender roles, homophobia; so long as a man is the one reinforcing it, its patriarchy, apparently.

Have you ever heard a masculine girl called a "dyke" for having short hair and wearing men's clothes? That's literally sexism (and homophobia), which is distinct from patriarchy.

Have you noticed that rich women also decide what the poor, women, and men must do? That's literally capitalism, which is distinct from patriarchy.

Have you ever been treated unequally by a woman in power based on your appearance or power? That's literally prejudice, which is distinct from patriarchy.

Rich white men and women creating loopholes in taxes so that they are able to make more wealth while poorer people suffer, all the while tricking other men into thinking 'I'm part of that take group and this helps me' is literally being tricked and controlled by capitalists.

Do our social systems perpetuate gender inequality? Absolutely, no doubt, but that's largely due to the fact that: 1. Our intuitions were created within the context of a patriarchal society (women as a class were largely excluded from positions of power) and were therefore tailored for the male gender role 2. Sexism is still deeply engrained within our culture 3. Power changes hands slowly, and for most of human history the powerful have been male.

The mistake that patriarchy theorists made is that, in order to keep the threat of patriarchy alive in people's minds, they broadened the definition to such an extent that so long as the 1% are predominantly male, and so long as gender roles are still a thing, we still live in a patriarchy; that makes ending patriarchy an incredibly high bar to reach considering the past two thousand years or so. Now I do agree that our gender roles are largely, though not entirely, informed by our patriarchal past (men are shamed for not earning money while women are shamed for being middle-aged without a husband). That said, an aspect or element of a thing cannot logically be the thing itself; gender inequality is an aspect of patriarchy, gender roles are an aspect of patriarchy.

Racism was an integral element of colonialism and slavery, but that doesn't mean that American slavery is still a thing. Our post-slavery society still has systemic racism that keeps black communities in relative poverty -- its not inconceivable that a post-patriarchy society will still have systemic sexism that perpetuates gender inequality.

[–]Punder_man3 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Does this mean that all men are by definition part of the patriarchy? Nope. Go read the definition again.

Well then maybe someone should advise feminists to stop acting as if ALL MEN are part of the 'patriarchy'

Honestly if they stopped lumping us into the box of "Patriarchal Oppressor" maybe we'd be willing to give them the time of day or actually want to listen to what they have to say..

Also, it doesn't help that the claim "Men are hurt by the Patriarchy too" is used as a shield against criticism because the idea here is that its "Men hurting men"

Now, that may indeed be true.. but it also ignores or sweeps under the rug the idea that WOMEN are either also part of the 'patriarchal systems' or benefit from them or even may be hurting men too.

For example, It is a majority of women (Note I did not specify ALL) who make false rape accusations against men.
Are you really going to sit there and tell me that False Rape Accusations are due to the 'Patriarchy'?

How about the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence? you know that model created, developed and pushed BY FEMINISTS a Model which is still used by Police and other services today?

A model which is so heavily biased in its assumptions of ALL cases of DV involving a man and a woman being the man as the aggressor and the woman as the victim that it has all but erased male victims of domestic violence from the statistics?

Can you say with a straight face that this too is "Because of Patriarchy"?

The biggest problem I have with Patriarchy Theory as espoused by feminists is that it places ALL the blame on men while shielding or removing any possible blame from women.

If feminists were more honest in their theories i'd be willing to listen.. but its clear that feminists don't care about honesty or equality.. they care about pushing a narrative.

[–]Kumquat_conniption-7 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MBV-09-C 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -13 points-12 points-11 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]Praeger -6 points-5 points-4 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]LobYonder 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

That's an argument that I think depends on context and circumstances

Personally I believe it's equality of opportunity (which does by definition sometimes mean outcome along the way)

By this I mean that you need to create an equal playing field BUT the end result are based off merit.

EG 1 - I despise lowering military/firefighter/nursing physical qualifications just so more woman can get positions, especially since those lowered expectations aren't given to men who would otherwise have been disqualified. There should be expected minimums regardless of gender that should be met.

EG 2 - If we don't force a standard that says 'are least X number of candidates must be from Y group' then we wouldn't even allow some groups to be tested to begin with.

By this I mean that to have EG1 in play, we can't just throw out woman candidates before they are even allowed to take the test, and we should encourage them to do it.

I think this is where so many issues come from where people focus on instead of realizing that both work together.

A perfect real life example would be black male soldiers - without stipulating that recruiters MUST have X number of candidates that are black, then they could simply ignore any and all of them before even giving them a chance to compete on equal footing.

[–]pearl_harbour1941 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praeger -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]pearl_harbour19416 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Praeger3 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tenth1 points 3 years ago [recovered] (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -10 points-9 points-8 points 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]tenth -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]tenth -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]tenth1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tenth1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh child, you've already proven my point.

Here you are, being rude, spouting off about your opinion. Have you been blocked? Silenced? Threatened?

Nope, and you continue to post freely, because this isn't a hate sub. You are TERRIFIED to post any word of criticism over on an obviously sexist fem sub. Why? Because you'll be blocked at best, which proves my point, or they will threaten your very life. Nope, none of that has happened here, because this isn't a hate sub.

And then there's your sexism, the other reason you won't fairly criticize both sides, like I do.

See the difference? You're actually safe and comfortable enough to speak here. You know better than to try that on the sexist fem hate subs.

If you can't support a claim, then it's an unsupported claim. "I don't feel like supporting my claim" is childish, and again, unsupported claims are unsupported. Yes, you do have to support a claim for the claim to be taken seriously.

Your obvious sexism is obvious, unless you'd like to put your money where your mouth is over on TXC and FDS.

So you don't oppose sexism, just sexism you don't like...sorry, but you lost this debate by proving you are what you accused me of being. I oppose all sexism, even sexism that doesn't target me, unlike you. I'm not sexist, unlike you.

Someone doesn't have to look like me for me to care about them, because I'm not sexist. Unless you oppose all sexism, you don't really oppose sexism, child.

You're out because you lost the debate. Thanks for playing!

[–]tenth1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tenth -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tenth1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh child, the discussions about your toxic, hateful feminist subs are very active. Everyone outside your group sees your sexism, it's mentioned in posts on /all, and I'm comfortable calling you sexist for your obvious sexist views. You are a sexist. I'm comfortable with it being a fact, as that's matched my experience with your group and everyone else in the world.

See how easy it is to turn around a non argument? You said a lot of words for, "I think what I think, regardless of the truth."

Thing is, I don't have to be "comfortable" calling you a sexist, you are clearly a sexist. You can't find one example of sexism on this page, posts like that are removed here, so your assumption that we are sexist is an unsupported claim. But one glance at your feminist hate subs shows what you are.

But, since you made a number of assumptions about me based on your own sexism, let's test to see how your sexism holds up.

Why am I member of this sub?

Spoliler alert, it's gonna make the fact that you're trying to shame me into silence look very, very bad, but your sexist assumption that nothing negative has ever happened to me that would lead me to supporting the idea that men have as much rights as everyone else is your short sightedness, as well as your sexism.

So, tell me. Why am I member of this sub?

[–]tenth1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Aceman1950 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]hifi3xx 53 points54 points55 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]patxiku93 158 points159 points160 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 36 points37 points38 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NITAREEDDESIGNS 34 points35 points36 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TachyonPhoenix 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Separate_Natural_368[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GltyUntlPrvnInncnt 71 points72 points73 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RatDontPanic 22 points23 points24 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Iceman_Hottie 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truetie1 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]upsidedownbackwards 50 points51 points52 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They want to know why "toxic masculinity" and "every man is an island" shit comes from. Do a survey on the last time most men got a hug. It will be measured in months. There's such a stigma about even getting hugs from our bros. We are attention starved for most of our lives.

I'm really looking forward to next weekend because my partner is flying in for next weekend and I'll finally get some physical contact for the first time since mid-march. I'm going to get to hug someone and be shoulder to shoulder with someone while we watch old cartoons.

There's not even anything sexual between us. We're just best friends that decided to Ernie-and-Bert through life because we're almost 40 and have never had any kind of long term relationship. I haven't had sex since the before times. Lost my drive for hookups during COVID.

[–]Z0mb13z_0f_54nd 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SuaveFuck 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Frosty-Strawberry-97 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]neighborhoodpainter 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

These feminists do not live in reality, I literally saw this comment on social media:

"I dunno, I feel like cis men get enough from the world and from me personally, already. I would rather tell someone who the world says is ugly, that they are pretty, and ask someone what they would like who has not been offered what they like at every turn. Cis men aren't used to being asked what they want because they don't think about what they want because they HAVE it. I dont think we need to help men recover from toxic masculinity, they can go to therapy if that is their only cross to bear then jfc lucky bastards.
'men do not get what they want any more than women do'.
You sure?"

They think men's problems are taken seriously, men get everything handed to them left and right. Men only have "toxic masculinity" as their only problem. Men are living the good life, apparently, and we don't need to encourage boys and men.

[–]ABlindCookie 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TAMWFT 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SubmissiveBitch003 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ender01o[🍰] 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Direct_Geologist_536 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Starski09 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CommissarSteel56 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chome_gnompy 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (65 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -31 points-30 points-29 points 3 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]TAPriceCTR 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -14 points-13 points-12 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]TAPriceCTR 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -14 points-13 points-12 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TAPriceCTR 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

but women were treated as second class citizens, no power to vote

The same old revisionist argument of trying to re-write history over and over again..
Yes, women didn't have the power to vote.. but the majority of men ALSO did not have this power..

Also, there WERE women who had the right to vote because in the past voting was a right reserved for those who owned land and this might be hard to understand.. but there WERE women who owned land and thus were allowed to vote.

Stop trotting out the same bullshit we hear everyday trying to make it seem as if only women were 'oppressed' in recent history.. its getting old really fast.

Also, I will agree that there are many issues women face today which DO need to be looked at..
But I also see many issues affecting men which continuously get swept under the rug or ignored because feminists within prominent positions of power do their best to suppress men's issues so that the spotlight can continue to shine on issues affecting women.

Also, I'm sorry but as a man who has lived through the past 3 decades I disagree with your statement of "Feminism has made men and women more equal" when it was FEMINISTS who designed, and pushed for the uptake of the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence, a model which despite being biased and flawed in many ways is still in use today.

A model in which it is assumed that in ALL cases of domestic violence involving a man and a woman the man is ALWAYS the aggressor and the woman is ALWAYS the victim.

If feminists cared one iota about 'equality' as they claim to they would have no issue with repealing this flawed model of Domestic Violence and work with men to implement a better model which is more inclusive / equal.

But they wont because the Duluth Model is something which benefits women, the fact that it negatively affects men does not matter to them at all.

Same thing with the Sentencing Gap where women are flat out 50% less likely to receive a jail sentence and when they do they often receive a prison sentence that is on average 60% shorter than what a man would get for the same crime.

Once again, Feminists aren't likely to protest this and in fact are likely to do all they can to stop men working to fix this because its a PRIVILEGE that women enjoy that men do not and they can't have women going to jail for the same length that men do because in their eyes that would NOT be equality.

My point here is that Despite the constant claims about "Feminism being for equality" it is clear by their actions and their focus on issues that their statement is a lie at worst or at best is an obfuscation where they omit that they are after 'selective' or cherry picked equality and only in areas where women are not equal to men.

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh071 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Dahalokely 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Direct_Geologist_536 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TAPriceCTR 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 24 points25 points26 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -12 points-11 points-10 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -8 points-7 points-6 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shadowdragon409 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Correction, you can't find one feminist sub that celebrates men. It's not that you don't want to, or can't be bothered, you literally can't. I know it sounds better to pretend like you just don't feel like it, but you can't find something that doesn't exist.

I didn't ask for something that, "doesn't seem that bad," I asked you to point out one feminist sub that celebrates men the way this sub celebrates women. You can't. Then you tried to move the goalpost.

If the average feminist isn't anti man, which is your argument, surely you can show one example of a fem sub celebrating men, the way this sub celebrates women.

Your inability to do that proves my point.

Also, only one of us is here arguing "no true feminist." I didn't say a few fem subs, I said show me ONE that celebrates men, like this sub celebrates women. Can you?

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You're joking, right? You can't show one example of feminists not hating men, yet this page celebrating women isn't good enough? Ha, the moment you can show me one example of a feminist sub that doesn't hate men, that's the moment you can complain about this sub celebrating women. Talk about arrogant.

I've yet to see hate here, if anyone post it it's quickly removed. By all means, support your unsupported claim. Where is the hate? An unsupported claim can be dismissed as easily as it was dreamed up.

A few weeks back, there was a post on this sub celebrating important women in the world.

No moving goalposts, your claim is very easy to defend if it is true. Celebrating men, not hating men, whatever you wanna call it. One example. I already provided one. No moving goalposts, a fem sub that doesn't hate men, the way men on this sub don't hate women.

And....go!

Spoiler alert, not gonna be easy, or possible, to find. Just like rude comments about women are removed from this site, nice comments about men are removed from the sexist cess pools that are fem subs.

Still waiting for one example, even one...nice attempt at distraction, though.

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]West-Sharp1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

For some reason I can't find the post I was mentioning, but here is a separate post with the same theme.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/wp4e25/a_moment_of_appreciation_for_the_awesome_women/

I downvoted and reported the comment, as I do all sexist comments.

See, that's part of the problem, so many people that brigade this sub end up being hypocrites. I oppose any sexist content when I see it. Do you oppose the same sexist content across the board? Like me?

Should I take a screenshot of the outright violent and sexist posts about men on fem subs with the thousands of upvotes?

"I'm not seeing much misandry there."

See, that's another part of the problem. Of course things slip through the cracks, like a barely seen comment on a subreddit, but all instances of sexism should be challenged. Did you challenge the misandry you saw on that site?

The very fact that you are brigading this sub in an attempt to silence people like me, people that have experienced a trauma that caused them to start supporting their own rights to the same degree that they support everyone else's, is very gross of you, to put it kindly.

I'm not being high and mighty, you are being put in your place for brigading.

But before we get into the details, tell me...why did I join this sub? Since you are brigading here, you must have had a mental image of the type of person you were setting out to troll. Let's see if I measure up.

Also...still waiting on that male appreciation post.

[–]CreeperAsh071 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I downvoted and reported the comment, as I do all sexist comments.

Hopefully you do. And I hope you will for this instance of sexism in this sub. I see too many blaming women here, although it was nice to see your example, that is hardly what I see.

See, that's another part of the problem. Of course things slip through the cracks, like a barely seen comment on a subreddit, but all instances of sexism should be challenged. Did you challenge the misandry you saw on that site?

The comment I showed was not barely seen, it was interacted with a lot, upvoted, and the one person that found it distasteful got downvoted. And I mostly lurk on that site, although I do not remember any blatant misandry, not nearly as much as here.

The very fact that you are brigading this sub in an attempt to silence people like me, people that have experienced a trauma that caused them to start supporting their own rights to the same degree that they support everyone else's, is very gross of you, to put it kindly.

I am male myself, so I do support Men's rights. What I do not support, however, is misogyny, which I find here in droves. At least, I did. I do not browse this sub that much anymore, so I do not know the current state.

Also...still waiting on that male appreciation post.

I don't browse feminist subs enough to find those things, I browsed this sub more, and I never found anything like what you sent me. Maybe I will look for something on International Men's Day, something will likely pop up.

[–]West-Sharp1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you also talk down to the fem subs for the misandry? I see far too much man blaming on the fem subs. Hopefully you do, or else you are actually supporting sexism rather than opposing it.

The comment you showed me had barely 30 upvotes. Compared to fem posts full of sexual slurs about men and calling for violence against men with thousands of upvotes, sorry, but you lost this point. But if you're worried about the 30 or so odd people that saw that post, make sure you police those hateful fem posts with the same authority. Sorry, but your blind eye to misandry in the fem subs gives you away.

No, being male doesn't mean you support male rights. Your sexist issues are your sexist issues.

So, on one hand, you claim to find misogyny here in droves, yet, on the other, you don't know the current state of this sub? Did you forget you were trolling?

Clearly, you haven't spent much time on this sub or fem subs. There's multiple posts on this sub celebrating everyone, a post celebrating a man on a fem sub will not be allowed to exist.

You aren't going to find a male appreciation post, and you know that.

Stop trolling and grow up.

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Direct_Geologist_536 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dahalokely 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dahalokely 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dahalokely 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well then, if the "Focus" is on Women's Rights.. then is it not then intellectually dishonest to claim "Feminism is for Equality" or "Feminism is for men too"?

Both are statements i've had feminists tell me over and over again..

And, being honest here.. I wouldn't be upset at all if feminists came forward and said "Feminism only cares about issues affecting women"
At least then they would be honest about their mission statement.

But as it stands you have feminists decrying "Feminism is for equality" or "Feminism is for men too so the MRA is not needed" but we know better than that don't we?

The funny thing here is.. MRA's are more egalitarian than feminists.. because even though we freely admit that our focus is on issues that affect men, that doesn't stop us from understanding that while an issue might predominantly affect men, that doesn't mean that women can't or aren't affected by it either.

Nor does it stop us caring about issues that women face, case in point Abortion rights.

There are MANY MRA's who support the fight for women to have the right to abortion. Despite this being an issue that is prominently faced by women that doesn't stop us supporting women in this.

Can you say the same for feminism?
Because from where i'm sitting, I have yet to see feminists support ANYTHING that is labeled a 'Men's Issue" without turning it into a lecture about Toxic Masculinity or claiming that its simply the result of the Patriarchy (Because the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence is TOTALLY because of the Patriarchy...)

What is wrong with us wanting Feminists to be honest about their intentions and to stop obfuscating by claiming to be for 'Equality' when their actions and methods clearly show they do not care at all when it comes to equality for men?

[–]Shadowdragon409 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Gods_Own_Country10 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Gods_Own_Country101 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Fighting for women's rights doesn't necessarily mean you are getting closer to equality. At the moment, women enjoy far more legal rights compared to men, especially in the US and in my country India. But, feminists still demand more and more rights for women. Are they working for the empowerment of women? Yes. Are they focusing on women's rights and issues? Yes. Are they working towards gender equality? No, they are, in all honesty, moving away from it.

Gender equality is essentially like a scale. If the feminist movement indeed were working towards gender equality, then, once the scales balance each other, the movement must cease to exist. Gender equality has been established in this scenario. The biggest reasons as to why the term feminism is met with contempt in the modern world is because the scale has tilted in women's favour and feminists are still going strong. People have realized that they have been lied to their faces about the very foundational idea of feminism for centuries. Its not gender equality, its women empowerment and those two are not the same thing. Now the scale is only tilting more and more in favour of women, thereby oppressing men.

MRAs on the other hand are crystal clear about what they want. They solely focus on men's issues and don't claim to stand for something like gender equality in order to appease and manipulate the population into supporting them.

[–]CreeperAsh070 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Gods_Own_Country101 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Which comment are you replying to? Because I never said women don't exist in developed countries. As a matter of fact, I don't think I have said such a stupid thing in my entire life! Yes, India has tons of inequalities between women and men exactly because of the extremely biased, sexist, misandric legal system we have here. We are in 2022 and India still believes men cannot be victims of rape. Also, becuase of the fact that India follows the Duluth model (which was created by Ellen Pence, a feminist) for domestic violence, men don't have any provisions for DV despite research having proven that women are an overwhelming 70% perpetrators of unreciprocated IPV. Even Indian high court justices have lamented this fact:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.timesofindia.com/city/chennai/alas-men-have-no-domestic-violence-law-hc/amp_articleshow/83154184.cms

When India did want to make gender neutral rape laws back in 2013, guess who were against it? Feminists and women's organizations.

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/activists-join-chorus-against-gender-neutral-rape-laws/articleshow/18840879.cms

Yeah, right. I think you guys have done enough. Thank you so very much.

Also do you know what your comment reeks of? The perpetual sense of victimhood that seems to be a common personality trait of almost every single modern feminist. You guys are never going to have a world of your most noblest of visions until you yourself have a very hard look at the mirror and start accepting responsibility instead of always finding someone or something to put the blame on.

[–]CreeperAsh071 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Gods_Own_Country101 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh071 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Starski09 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've talked with a lot of feminists in real life, it's always walking on eggshells, always having to watch how and what you say. Never have they ever talked about mens rights, it's often them asking what I think about abortion(I don't care, do your thing), asking if I would have a vasectomy(working on it) and if I know about their struggles like the Rule of Thumb and pay gap(both are myths).

Not one of them want to hear about my abuse or what I've gone through as a man, often just met with eyerolls and subject changing.

If this isn't "your" feminism you should find a new movement, becuase this is how many women process feminism. I've watched many videos on both sides, even some debates between them and those are usually a shit show and the men are talked over constantly about women's problems and abuse.

[+]What_izzet -13 points-12 points-11 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shadowdragon409 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]What_izzet -6 points-5 points-4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Shadowdragon409 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chome_gnompy 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chome_gnompy 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chome_gnompy 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chome_gnompy 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]mandark1171 -13 points-12 points-11 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NathanTR1992 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fearless-File-3625 47 points48 points49 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]NITAREEDDESIGNS 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Handle-me-timber 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NathanTR1992 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ABlindCookie 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThosPuddleOfDoom 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ThrowFootAway5376 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]needalife94 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Donotblowmekisses 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]adelie42 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LemonLimeMouse 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tulupe 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]paracog 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kumquat_conniption 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nightstalkerjoe2 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kumquat_conniption 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nightstalkerjoe2 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]Shadowdragon409 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kumquat_conniption 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Balages 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[+]cjgager -11 points-10 points-9 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheStumblingWolf 27 points28 points29 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Huffers1010 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Odd-Cryptographer432 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]itsbobbyhill -39 points-38 points-37 points 3 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]Potato-with-guns 23 points24 points25 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 29 points30 points31 points 3 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]itsbobbyhill -25 points-24 points-23 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[+]itsbobbyhill -8 points-7 points-6 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]itsbobbyhill -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -11 points-10 points-9 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -7 points-6 points-5 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]matrixislife 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -6 points-5 points-4 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]Fearless-File-3625 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]duhhhh 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -21 points-20 points-19 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]duhhhh -7 points-6 points-5 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]melk8 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]duhhhh -4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]melk8 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]denisc9918 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tenth -9 points-8 points-7 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Good_Summer4264 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tenth -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]itsbobbyhill -15 points-14 points-13 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WomenRAllowd2bRacist 23 points24 points25 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Eval-conundrum -9 points-8 points-7 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Foxsayy 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DREAMY-KNIGHT 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]NoParticularMotel -35 points-34 points-33 points 3 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 27 points28 points29 points 3 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -19 points-18 points-17 points 3 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[+]CreeperAsh07 -9 points-8 points-7 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh07 -5 points-4 points-3 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nightstalkerjoe2 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes. This is the perfect response by Karen Straughan anytime one of the "that's not real feminism" people come along

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.

[–]CreeperAsh07 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nightstalkerjoe2 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AffectionateRun50532 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]CreeperAsh070 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I dont think mensrights is a sexist movement. I think sexist men flock to it. But my arguement that feminism does not equal misandry was met with "well you arent the spokesperson for feminism", "thats a no true scottsman fallacy", and "if I see misandry within the movement, then they do equate eachother ".

So by that logic, mensrights, since I see plenty of misogyny, is a misogynistic movement. You still have yet to answer the question.

Also, you intentionally misconstrued my argument in an earlier passage and blatantly said that "literally " no rape ends in pregnancy. I wasnt calling you stupid to be mean, but damn dude, you have a lot of perspective to gain if you are really that out of touch. I think it might do you some good to learn about some things that women experience before you make such asinine comments. And very arragantly and confidently stated too. I dont have time to teach you about a womans experience, but you seem to be completely ignorant of them. Maybe willfully ignorant, which is why I assume anger plays a role, because you are just flat wrong and really missed the mark.

Im here, open to learning about a mans perspective in his struggles, you could do the same.

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I appreciate your willingness to debate openly and without resorting to (too many) insults.

I will openly say that in one way, mens rights must automatically be a sexist movement, from the point of view that it doesn't address women's rights. The corollary to that is obviously that using that definition, any kind of feminism must aslo automatically be sexist if it doesn't address men's rights.

This uses perhaps a slightly archaic definition of sexism - pertaining only to one sex.

Where I think feminism and men's rights differ is that feminism seems to have very many different strands, most of which use revolving and slippery definitions to evade any real scrutiny.

I have personally tried to have feminists answer "what is feminism", and after trotting out "it's about equality" (which equality?) and "it's about equality for women" or "it's about equal rights for women on the basis of equality" and any number of other definitions that change according to what needs to be justified or evaded, it eventually comes down to:

"Feminism is whatever that particular women defines feminism as, at any given moment"

And the connecting kernel between them all is better conditions for women only, usually at the expense of men.

...

Rape and pregnancy. Yes, all rapes could potentially end in a pregnancy, assuming fertility on both sides.

No, the overturning of RvW does not mean we will see even one pregnancy due to rape, so long as the rape is reported within a window of a few weeks of it happening (hearbeat laws).

Do not believe what you read in wiki, for example, as it states that abortion is totally illegal in many States, such as Texas, but does not mention that Texas has a heartbeat law, whereby an abortion can be performed before a heartbeat is detected.

I appreciate you being here to learn about a man's perspective, thank you, we need more people like you.

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sorry for the insult, and I appreciate the open mind as well. There are currently women being forced to carry their rapists children and it has happen an innumerable amount of times in the past (I even knew someone as a teen who had an abortion due to a pregnancy after being raped by her stepfather). And currently, its happening now in those states where the right to choose has been stripped away. They arent hard to find. There is nuance to these peoples lives. What if a young girl is raped and is too afraid to speak up for some time before realizing shes pregnant (cant do plan b)? What about all the women that have terrible reactions to birth control (im one of them, not to mention all the men that go flacid at the sight of a condom). What about birth defects? I feel like it shouldnt even matter, if a child is being carried in a womans body, its a health care decision. Ironically a lot of these guys pulled the "my body my choice" when they were shoving vaccines down our throats. Now they dont give a fuck because it doesnt affect them personally?

Feminism should never be at the expense of men. I dont support that, and I dony think a lot of self identitying feminists do either.

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour19411 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Proud_Ad_4861 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]pearl_harbour1941 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So if I were to say "Men's Rights is egalitarianism, except it addresses issues with men's struggles. Women have different kinds of struggles.

Would you accept that?

If not, why the double standard?

The biggest issue I have with feminism is that there seems to be zero checks and balances or accountability within the movement when it comes to outright misandry.

Now i'm not going to claim that Men's Rights is superior here but I do actively see people calling out blatant misogyny when it occurs which in of itself IS more than feminists can claim to do.

If I saw more feminists calling out blatant misandry when they see it and holding those who spread it accountable then I would start believing that feminism is for equality.. but until then my experience with feminism has been about 90% misandry and bigotry with a small smattering of 10% of actual respectful discussion..

So yes, while you are correct that Feminism does not equate to Misandry, and indeed 'Not All feminists' are misandrists.. I'll be so bold as to claim "MANY feminists are misandrists" and the fact that feminism does nothing to call this out is part of the problem.

Both sides could do with calling out bigotry within their movements but as I said, while I actively see the MRA doing so I have yet to see feminists so much as lift a finger against misandry.

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

[–]Affectionate-School3 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Feminism has entrenched itself in some very powerful positions, and even there it is not pushing for equality. It basically has the same bias as your typical misguided college hippie feminist.

Two examples: The CDC basically fudging the numbers on rape stats to turn 1 in 20 women raped into 1 in 5. Effect: vilifying men irrationally and needlessly.

https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

Canada’s new anti-stealthing law that makes it a crime for a man to lie about using a condom. Great law, so why doesn’t it apply to women doing the same thing with birth control and entrapping a man forever?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpost.com/entry/stealthing-sex-without-condom-consent-canada-supreme-court_n_62e5c771e4b006483a9e1745/amp

I agree that men should not speak for women and should just underscore the very damning facts about feminism.

[–]Leading_Direction_84 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mixing_saws 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]mixing_saws 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]NoParticularMotel 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Throning 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]ABlindCookie 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoParticularMotel -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]ABlindCookie 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]ABlindCookie 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I mean, if you're going to deny the longer jail sentences for men for the same crimes, child support, family court, more tolerance (and often even incouraging) towards insulting men, but defending women, the pushing for "gender diversity" in workplaces despite the lack of experience, while most risky and hardworking jobs are still strictly done by men, while they're drafted and women aren't, then yeah, you can expect some backlash. It's a sad reality we live in and the fact that people dont even want to acknowledge it and say "man, thats kind of fucked up, something has to be done" is pretty infuriating.

Granted, you can see some bad apples here and there, but in my experience with this sub, when people say something like "all women are femcels" or "all women suck" they get downvoted into oblivion. We don't hate women, far from it. We hate the system, favoring women in every way. A woman is born with value, a man is only valuable when he can provide something - and that's something that 99% of men have experienced first hand - you can read about it here all the time and looking back i find myself thinking "holy shit, that happened to me daily, and it was so normalized i never even thought about it"

When you're shamed for showing emotion, for "not trying something", then for trying and failing, always "guilty until proven otherwise", growing up hearing "dont beat women" and "respect women", while those same women can beat the shit out of you and shame you and everyone is fine with it, yet im supposed to put "women first" and hold doors open, pay for dates, "protect them" against everything, like im supposed to be immortal, bc i'm a guy (like, im scared for my life too, you know?) And these are just examples that come up naturally as im typing this. These are things almost every single man has to go through, and while i understand that women have their own problems, and thats definitely worth talking about, its kinda really messed up that everyone turns their heads away when it comes to male problems.

I don't want to argue with anyone, but theres a huge power imbalance here and the fact that we cant even TALK about it without being shamed is seriously messed up, why do i even have to explain this?

Equality should be for both sexes, not only women. (Men's abuse victim centers are nowhere to be seen, no gender diversity inclusiveness in jobs, risky and dangerous jobs, 4 times higher suicide rates, constantly being berrated with "men only want sex" and "men dont have emotions" and "its men's fault that women cant get a partner, and NEVER the woman's fault for obviously doing something wrong?", the shitty news articles like "'strategist single woman' and 'lonely single man'"

And if after that, you can say that "we live in a patriarchy" and "men are priviledged", you have to be living inside serious delusions

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

A lot of those points can be applied to women as well, just so you know. Like, being shamed for showing emotion. You think if a guy gets angry at something people call him emotional? Women are taught that they are valued for sex and child rearing, that they hold no other value even if they want something more.

But I understand, all your points for me. The double standards are fucked. There should be people advocating for men and there should be centers for abuse and men shouldnt get fucked in court decisions. It a lot like its become normalized to hate on white people. But that doesnt make me hate black movements or black history month. People overstep in attempt to correct or out of anger. Just look at this sub. Its a great idea but its filled with hypocrites. They want to say what feminism is and isnt and when you draw a parralel to the bad apples in "mensrights", its somehow different because "were usually a reasonable group". Nope, its an echo chamber, just like the womens sub. But I still understand the necessity of the movement even though it attracts a lot of misogynistic fucks.

The power imbalance though? There is still a lot of ingrained sexism against women in society too that men still dont want to even admit.

[–]ABlindCookie 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I can agree with you on a lot of the points, except the echo chamber thing.

Compared to the female subs, there's a lot more room for discussion here - if i made your first comment on a feminist sub, i'd get banned instantly - we got plenty of examples of men asking innocent questions or questioning their beliefs that resulted in bans and threats in DM

I honestly do believe that most feminists (that arent radicals) are perfectly reasonable and say things with a good intention - the problem is the feminism in media, which pushes a false narrative, shames single men, but empowers single women, tells men how to behave (which is 90% of the time, "act like her slave", and its messed up that nobody is getting called out for it, without getting censored and receive death threats in their DMs) - that is what we build our perception of feminism on and we read and share more articles every day that confirms this

I could get along with a non-radical feminist with common sense (as im sure most of the people on this sub could as well) - at the end of the day, both sexes have their own issues and both need to be addressed, although this sub is focused on men specifically, since it feels like there arent many places where we can safely do that anymore and its nice to have it around

I'd like to point out that the majority of downvoted posts i come across on this sub is from men, hating on women in general, and im kind of proud of this sub for keeping it in check. There is a chance that the sub is slightly biased, which is natural, but in my experience it remained very reasonable and "in check", especially compared to some of the feminist subs i've visited

[–]NoParticularMotel 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ABlindCookie 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Zachisawinner -14 points-13 points-12 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Punder_man 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]Ari9000plus 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

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

[–]grizz3782 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Telling a feminist the truth.
Author	Flujio
Upvotes	1286
Comments	374
Date	August 21, 2022 3:17 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/wu21s9/telling_a_feminist_the_truth/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/telling-a-feminist-the-truth.1128583 https://theredarchive.com/post/1128583

Comments