Why do our problems get Reframed as women's?

Same_Sentence_3470 · 2026-03-21T14:30:12+00:00

Watch every video of someone debating a feminist on any topic or some women on any topic that involves attention for men. They all play out exactly the same as what you just described. Derail, reframe, change the subject, gaslight, disregard facts, interrupt and talk over every valid point, etc. etc. etc. It’s infuriating to watch.

pearl_harbour1941 · 2026-03-21T14:32:09+00:00

I think Bill Burr nailed this (before he went woke).

"If they are right, they argue the point, and they stay on point until you're down on your knees, begging."
"But here's the thing. If they're wrong, they go rogue. They start thinking about things you are sensitive about, and they start concocting this evil statement, this hail mary attempt to make you so fucking mad.... you just call them a cunt."

Clevererer · 2026-03-21T13:38:08+00:00

Debates don't work if your opponent can't take accountability for the thing they just finished saying.

Salamadierha · 2026-03-21T15:19:22+00:00

Simple rule they live by, if you can't win the argument in front of you, change it to the argument you can win.

Drag them back to the point, multiple times if you have to. If it's online expect them to go silent and/or block you.

Medical-Reindeer-882 · 2026-03-21T19:06:52+00:00

Women have a victim fetish and they just lie. Biggest mistake of men was taking women seriously in last 100 years

biased_jury · 2026-03-21T15:12:53+00:00

Because in their mind, to them you seem to be in a position where you have to convince them. They don't have to convince you because you don't hold any power over them. They don't even have to try to seem to care.

It's manipulation to make you feel guilty.

MonsterGirls4ever · 2026-03-21T16:00:35+00:00

"A fanatic is someone who can't change his (or her in this case) mind and won't chanhe the subject."

You're dealing with people who can't change their minds on the topic of men being suposedly privileged (so ANYTHING that ever disadvantages men has to either be invented, somehow a result of advantaging men, or only a "disadvantage" in so far as an unreasonable demandgetting denied), and who won't change the subject.

EmptyImagination4 · 2026-03-21T20:10:08+00:00

Reading this - your arguments seem reasonable, so it seems like the other side is able to understand it, but simply doesn't want to understand it.

New-Distribution6033 · 2026-03-21T22:14:48+00:00

Oh, I know. The male lonliness issue roght now. Originally, when it was just in men's soaces, the issue was middle aged and older men lacking friendships. The Buzzfeed and the like got ahold of it and made it about dating.

How many people would read about an old guy's lack of friends. But write avout how guys are too immature to date, and hey, there's clicks for weeks!

Pretend-Storm4566 · 2026-03-22T01:57:58+00:00

When they leave one topic to go to another, drag them back to the original topic, and say, so you admit I was right about the original topic. And keep harping on that until they admit it. If they refuse to admit it, say there's no point in debating someone who refuses to admit when they are wrong. And be stubborn about it.

Alert_Term_8144 · 2026-03-22T02:45:31+00:00

Oh my gosh, that's exactly what I've noticed. They throw a lot of red herrings out that have nothing to do with the issue you're discussing.

Then_now_maybe · 2026-03-21T20:38:23+00:00

You're failing to be confused and just ask really simple and specific questions. People move to the complex abstract. You stick with specific basics relevant to the scope.

"Early in dating, men spend large amounts of energy competing for attention, while women spend significant energy filtering"

"So you think women have it easier?" (Reframing)

"What?"

"You're ignoring violence, history, and systemic inequality" (lecturing and not engaging, this is not a good faith dialogue)

"uh... I do not know what that has to do with how people have different priorities early in dating." (Attempt to re-engage)

"What are you trying to justify?" (Attempt to go after morality or claim an agenda)

"??? I thought I was just chatting about reality and seeking feedback, if you experience different I would love to hear it. But, now I am curious what that even means. What are YOU trying to justify?" (Now I am just curious, most people will bail here)

I’m also being asked for research and data mid-conversation, which is fair, but it’s happening while the topic keeps shifting, so nothing ever gets fully addressed.

Narrow your scope. Be too dense/uninterested in expansion out of a very specific thing. At work I literally say "thats outside of scope. Can you connect that in a way that makes it relevant to -restate scope-?" And if they can and provide clear cause-->effect in a meaningful way, I am giddy.

I genuinely want people I disagree/argue with to wreck me when they are right. That often requires inviting them to and meaning it. I invite by tracking what I am prioritizing and explicitly telling people what I need to see things differently. I plan huge projects and programs for a living, I need to see clearly and have people who regularly challenge my plans or my job becomes impossible.

Star8421774 · 2026-03-22T04:47:45+00:00

The old strawman argument. Effective for ages when u don’t see it coming

ShabbyJerking · 2026-03-23T02:53:37+00:00

Because that's the purpose of the debate. It is to "win" it. Not exactly find out who's actually right/wrong, what's true/false, but to only who looks right/wrong. Hence the gaslighting, and all that other bs.

You can't have a discussion in a debate. That's not how it works...

World-Three · 2026-03-21T16:27:58+00:00

You shouldn't be talking to people who would do anything instead of admit they are wrong.

I think there is a collective issue where as long as the conversation ends with a win, they don't have to accept anything that was discussed. They're fighting the points because they don't care for them. Just as they see the facts, hear the testimonies and instead blame your choice of people, you picked bad people to date, or love...

Ignoring that by their own creed, they're condemning you for entertaining discussion with them. Because clearly, doing so is a poor choice. That's something we all need to think about. In the same way they insult you for making poor choices, the poor choice in person to talk to has found their way to you as if you were North on a compass.

Why? Because they're on a mission. They're here to neutralize how you rightfully feel with insults to your decision making, and ultimately your group with "and who set that system up?" As long as it stays and remains your fault, it can be ignored and they can pivot to something they care about that is somehow not their fault...

The same people who proudly bring up how they can control a population by saying no to birthing men, has forgiven the women in their past for not doing so. Every man who exists that they hate, exists because the women they care for and respect decided to say yes and continue to until birth. It is fair to say that because women haven't been given the liberty to stop that birth until the early 70s. (It should be an insult to their character [not all, just these] that they expect a gender of people they can't even find themselves responsible enough to raise, to somehow become respectable people without any worthwhile rearing or intervention from them whatsoever) But men who want to get ahead in life aren't given sympathy for participating in a system that made him intimately more viable because of capitalism and STILL DOES given women's response to it. How do you expect a fire to stop burning if you keep feeding and protecting the flame?

A lot of men are opting to wait it out because we genuinely want to see what a woman's world looks like. Is it exactly the same thing they hate but with them on the throne, or is it something much better, or worse?

Through observation, we already see that men are generally and gleefully bad mouthed while the mirror showing women doing the same thing, or genuinely obfuscated results and social expectation (as in, men being pressured by society to not report anything, simply to avoid the negativity of being a man who was overtaken in any negative way by a woman) to make people, by definition, believe women are downright incapable of such vile male owned acts of disrespect (rape, abuse, control), is given no light to shine the truth. We see the incels of the world who have majorly (as a group) done nothing wrong, but stand together in their lack of appeal, get treated as if they've already committed vile acts while they're all pointing to men who have literally been convicted of the same thing they're preemptively condemned for, actively getting love or desire from women who are nothing if not completely aware of what they're walking into. Gesturing towards women to just say that the only reason they're not allowed to be that way is because they're financially, physically and / or visibly unviable, ugly.

I know it seems like I'm going all over the place, but I'm pointing at things that women don't admit. The percieved unviability is the main catalyst for their disrespect it seems. I can do bad by myself, what good are you, make yourself useful, who's going to be the man, all men should start off in jail and prove their way out. These statements and more point out how they feel like treating men who are considered unviable.

But instead of the problem being how they treat what they consider unworthy, the problem is you (men) for not getting rid of people who haven't even done anything because they look or act creepy, or haven't done what their ideal society wants them to do. If the only thing stopping someone from siding with a criminal is beauty or fame... There is no morality to be had.

AskTight7295 · 2026-03-22T01:40:40+00:00

Men are primarily intellectual in how they operate. The typical “patriarchal“ western religious systems even venerate the logos as the source of creation itself. But women use the entire instinct system. Most of them are not convinced by intellect alone. So this comes off as women being manipulative and strategic which is partly true, but from another point of view, it is simply another form of intelligence, and one that they use whether they are aware of it or not. The way forward is to understand this, and learn how to operate within a similar mindset, even though it is foreign to how you’ve been taught to frame things as a man. You can’t pretend that they will someday think and frame things the way you do. This will never happen. We have to grow the capacity to operate the way they do so we can create a society that works for all of us. It won’t be easy.

xerxeshordesfaceobli · 2026-03-21T14:46:35+00:00

I honestly believe the entire data point of women receiving more attention is not their fault.

Like not at all.

As a matter of fact when I put myself into a woman's shoes and think about this dynamic it's not a whole lot different from when men (whatever position in life gets them there) get boat loads of attention.

You really have no involvement in people who approach you either online or in person,unless you tailor yourself in a way on purpose to receive attention

But here's the thing:

Having lots of opportunities doesn't mean they're all good ones,and I think the hookup culture aftermath for both sides has taught us that.

Back to having inbound opportunities

One of the main ways I see this is when I read accounts especially on Reddit or YouTube of people losing weight and their dating life drastically changes.

Guys and girls alike

I think the main thing that is true is that the West has lots of superficial barriers especially towards men that dont equal a successful relation or marriage back and forth dynamics.

I see it everywhere..

I say the West because SO many times when I read about guys who goes overseas to a place like Asia or South America especially South East Asia for dating or marriage its significantly more straightforward and less fickle and superficial and seems to be way way way more sympatico.

Things like respect and fairness and good manners are actually from the get go are green flags.

Of course you need money to live but the superficial nature aspect of it seems to be way way less prevalent over their

You're not seen as a part of a patriarchy or a "loser" or any other category from the start.You actually have to do or say something bad in order to be a red flag

Here's my thing,over 20 million people in the USA have gotten married over the past 5 years.

How many of those men were deemed "losers" or "a part of the patriarchy"....idk

How many of those women had unrealistic dating expectations and requirements....I also don't know.

What are your thoughts?

Ok-Flatworm-787 · 2026-03-21T15:36:41+00:00

Your confusion and the fact that you are bothered by any responses means you didn't go into it prepared.

A debate requires a supported claim.

No one should be requesting evidence from you. It's your claim. That already invites criticism.

What you shared comes across as an assertion. Unless there is enough general consensus of some objective truth that supports an assertion. it is an invitation for pretty subjective feedback.

Im not sure what you expected.

it's an interesting and relevant discussion to have. I'd aim for a discussion instead of a debate. This is generally a good way to form a claim to begin with. Curiosity to understand the entire scope unbiased. this is how you should be approaching most things in life but definitely things u wanna start debates about. if u are going in expecting validation, definitely a sign you aren't fully prepared.

Title	Why do our problems get Reframed as women's?
Author	Forgotmypass8008
Upvotes	149
Comments	31
Date	March 21, 2026 1:32 PM UTC (4 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1rzrl8w/why_do_our_problems_get_reframed_as_womens/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-do-our-problems-get-reframed-as-womens.1576059 https://theredarchive.com/post/1576059

Comments