I was in a conversation with my feminist sister and she said a classic feminist argument along the lines of "It crazy how women in media are treated as objects for men to save rather than free-thinking individuals with autonomy It's like men don't even see women as people"

​

To which I replied, "So it's a tragedy that women are treated as objects in media but it not a tragedy that men are expected to be valiant heroes who have to give up life and limb just to save some random women who if he hasn't just meet probably doesn't even know only to have a violent death were he will receive nothing for what he has sacrificed and get to enjoy the "happy ending" he created through his own blood sweat and tears."

"If women are treated as objects in media then men are treated as disposable garbage that is only valuable for their utility"

​

What I also wish I said at the time was that what's popular on tv doesn't reflect most men's views on women and making such a generalization on such a basis is heavily sexist another thing I should have talked about is how men are also shown to always be either extremely violent or grapiest whenever their a minor villain or completely incompetent when their not the main character or worse a dad in a sitcom but I didn't think of that at the time.

​

I was recently thinking about this and to me it exemplifies the classic feminist argument all the way from the first wave to now and it goes like this.

​

  1. Find a problem.

  2. Only look at and discuss that problem from the female perspective or from how it affects women.

  3. Use the female-only framing of the argument to claim sexism and a need for change.

  4. Call anyone who challenges the female-only framing of the argument a misogynist(or similar shaming language see incel) or otherwise shame them and move the goalpost until they stop talking.

​

It started all the way back when women wanted the right to vote to claim sexism without taking into account that men need to go to war to gain that "right".

​

the same tactic was used when they made being a "housewife oppression" completely ignoring the fact that back in those days the vast majority of men were destroying their lungs working in factories in terrible working conditions to provide.

​

And it continues all to this day with things like the wage gap, mothers' rights, and abortion you don't need me to explain the double standards of these "women's issues" If you are already in a men's rights subs plenty of men are much smarter and better educated than me have gone into this issues in depth.

​

Thinking about this to myself I asked one question "well if we know how feminists managed to get their ridiculous ideas to be accepted by the majority of people why can't those who support men's rights simply do the same"

​

And the answer to that is simple it's the empathy gap. women side with women 90% of the time and men side with women 70% of the time regardless of the situation.

​

In short, even if men adopted the feminist strategy and only framed issues from the male perspective it wouldn't matter because no one would care especially since women have had a decades-long head start in that regard.

​

So then is the solution being fair and just and using actual logic and data to win the culture war. in my opinion that tactic would work even less than the first due to the simple fact that from an uneducated observer hyperbole and lies are way more believable than the cold hard truth because the cold hard truth isn't trying to be believable and convincing.

Not to mention that most people have already been "educated" in feminist propaganda.

​

So is violence the answer? I think violence has a lot of potential as an option since its the only option that doesn't put women at an innate advantage due to the empathy gap but I simply do not see it as realistic in any way shape or form for the vast majority of men or at least a large enough majority to become extremely violent and take over not to mention the insane cost something like that would have on our delicate modern society which relies on millions of people working together simultaneous to function.

​

Violence even if you could get behind it in spite of the moral issue is simply not feasible.

​

Honestly, I really don't see a viable solution to the feminist propaganda the best hope I can see happening Is society collapsing to bring back the need for the individual man on a large scale but even then that wouldn't be equality women would still hold massive power and privilege we would only see the traditional version of this where the man was at least respected and got some kind of compensation for his labor.

​

And I find the thought that that is the best we can hope for extremely sad.