~ archived since 2018 ~

"This subreddit will have a strict no oppression policy. Racism, sexism, transphobia, ableism...and so on will not be tolerated here."

misnamed · 2011-08-05T23:14:46+00:00

OK, I realize it is supposed to be satirical, but one of the links in their (AgainstMensRights') sidebar is to 'Manboobz' I asked in...

misnamed

August 5, 2011

1 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

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

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

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

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

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

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

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	"This subreddit will have a strict no oppression policy. Racism, sexism, transphobia, ableism...and so on will not be tolerated here."
Author	misnamed
Upvotes	1
Comments	33
Date	August 5, 2011 11:14 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jabtv/this_subreddit_will_have_a_strict_no_oppression/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/this-subreddit-will-have-a-strict-no-oppression.1036225 https://theredarchive.com/post/1036225

Comments

[–]thelordpsy 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]disposable_human 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dhyana 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Legolas-the-elf 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Well, I have to say that's a pretty enlightened thing to do after seeing how much I disagree with you - so kudos for that. It suggests, at least, you are open to discourse even with dissenters. I, for one, have posted on both MensRights and Feminism - sometimes agreeing and sometimes disagreeing, depending on the context.

And you may be right about indirectly encouraging downvotes. In that case, though, I have an honest question: are you not doing the same thing to MensRights by having AntiMensRights in the first place? I'm trying not to presuppose an answer here, or be rhetorical.

Still, I think AntiMensRights takes things a step further that you might initially realize - MensRights is not necessarily a movement (or SubReddit) defined by its opposition to Feminism, whereas the phrasing of AntiMensRights immediately indicates that it is a movement/SubReddit against MensRights.

Also, I'm not trying to advocate for/against the following new SubReddit, but I think there is some real wisdom in the announcement of it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Feminism/comments/j3ibb/announcing_a_change_in_order_to_help_keep_the/

... I believe in women's rights, and that there are systemic injustices that happen to women in our society - injustices that need to be called out and countered. That being said, I also consider myself to be a gender egalitarian, and I am very sympathetic to issues of men's equality as well. I realize that feminism has helped to change many things about our society, and that there are real and systematic issues facing men in our world.

[–]StephenMurphy 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I have an honest question: are you not doing the same thing to MensRights by having AntiMensRights in the first place?

I would hope that subscribers on AMR would refrain from doing so, but the problem in our case is more about the sheer number of subscribers to MR vs AMR. Unfortunately, whereas /r/MR can stand downvotes directed at posts, AMR isn't so fortunate.

Still, I think AntiMensRights takes things a step further that you might initially realize - MensRights is not necessarily a movement (or SubReddit) defined by its opposition to Feminism, whereas the phrasing of AntiMensRights immediately indicates that it is a movement/SubReddit against MensRights.

Which is a good thing IMO. The title was created more in opposition to this subreddit and the movement in its current form than to the idea of men's rights in general.

At any rate, I've lifted your ban from AMR.

[–]misnamed[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

OK, I learned something new today. I can't believe I never noticed that MR had 20 times as many redditors as feminism. I always assumed it had less if anything. Mind = blown, and point = well taken.

I guess my issue with AMR conceptually (in terms of its title and corresponding self-definition around being 'against') is that there are some level-headed people and worthy submissions there.

It's just ... well, a hard line to draw. Where does it become OK to create an 'anti' site, versus not OK in terms of population size, etc...? That was a rhetorical question regarding gray areas ...

Anyway, I actually applaud MensRights for advising me not to push this AntiAntiMensRights Subreddit idea ... but for similar reasons, I also wonder if just AntiMensRights is helpful or fuels the fire.

Tough questions :)

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

[–]surfnsound 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]surfnsound 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]surfnsound 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

What, then, was I banned for?

Also: fine: if that's the meaning of 'boob' in this context, then I'm sure no one else will possibly draw the connection to 'man boobs' right? I mean it's definitely an entirely accidental play on expressions, yes? So if someone has a site called 'Camel Towing the Feminist Party Line' that would be fine, right? Or 'SaggyBoobs' referring to flacid feminists with an ax to grind would be cool, if the title wasn't meant to refer to 'physical' boobs?

I'm not saying I think it's inappropriate to call a site 'manboobz' - that is neither here nor there - but feminism, if I understand it, generally does not advocate making fun of someone's physical appearance. Quite the opposite: feminists encourage women to reject social stereotyping by body type, no? Just trying to understand, but apparently that is a ban-worthy offense. I guess if we link to a site called 'TinyBoobs' about small-minded feminists, that's kosher, yah? I mean as you say, it meant 'stupid person' first so ... clearly we're not making fun of breast size. That's such a stupid conclusion!

[–]StephenMurphy 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

First, from what I can tell, boob did indeed refer to breast before it referred to idiots: "In 1347, when the bubonic plaque ravaged Europe, one of the symptoms of the plaque was called bubos or boobos which was a swelling of the lymph nodes, hence swelling of the chest can be referred to as boobs. From the novel The History of Joseph Andrews by Henry Fielding,(1762) the Lady of the house( Lady Booby) attempts to seduce the hero and the first thing she does is reveal her breasts, and for convoluted reasons it was also mistake not to have "taken up the offer"."

Still, I appreciate you at least explaining your position, and for spelling out your defense of keeping that site on the sidebar.

However, I want to try using your own logic and see what you think of this:

(1) Regardless of the term 'boobs' in isolation, 'man boobs' referred to physical male breasts as a phrase before it meant male idiots - I think we can agree on that (or that I can find proof, if we don't).

(2) Thus, when a casual reader sees the title 'Man Boobs' (spelled right or wrong) it will, in more cases than not, conjure images of the physical 'boobs' of a man rather than 'boob as idiot' - please feel free to create a poll or ask around. I find it really hard to believe you can convince even yourself of this - the expression has one and only one common meaning, which most people will get: male breasts, particularly ones deemed overly large and unattractive. Google it. Please.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22man+boobs%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1535&bih=688

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22man+boobs%22#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=define:%22man+boobs%22&pbx=1&oq=define:%22man+boobs%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=8213l8993l0l9181l7l5l0l0l0l4l384l1093l0.1.2.1l4l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=81eba942b626e508&biw=1535&bih=688

I agree, though, that my own analogies are weak. I have yet to think of a truly clever title that illustrates my point. Still, I don't see a huge difference either - something like 'NastyBoobs' about hateful women, etc... doesn't even tie into an expression, but given the common use of 'boobs' in modern society would, I think, be found offensive by feminists, just as, my gender/beliefs aside, I find 'ManBoobz' to be inconsistent with your mission statement and with feminism as a whole. I also think that denying someone the right to satirize then also participate in your SubReddit is the epitome of hypocrisy, but I digress ...

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

[–]misnamed[S] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]StephenMurphy 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]misnamed[S] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that's a pretty good analogy/example - I wish I could come up with something clever, integrating a well-known insult at females with a witty second interpretation (i.e. a reverse example of 'manboobz') but ... I'm at a loss, unfortunately.

I think of 'TinyBoobs' though and the point seems similar: if we are to assume people know 'boobs' are 'idiots' then our first thought should be of 'little idiots' and not of 'small breasts' ... yet I think most would think of the latter before the former.

I have a compromise suggestion, though: you could keep but re-title the link to "Misogyny: I Mock It" instead of "ManBoobz" - at least then, even though I still find the site title disagreeable, it wouldn't reflect poorly (at least not as directly) on the Subreddit.

If it were me I'd still remove it entirely but ... shrug

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

[–]MuForceShoelace -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link