TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK Archive

View 9 posts and 1,007 comments by TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
36

Question For BluepillTAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 07:55 PM
19

TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/15 11:42 PM
15

Question For BluepillTAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 09:46 PM
11

TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/13 07:21 PM
8

TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/14 04:29 AM
5

Purple DiscussionTAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 12:12 AM
4

TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 07:18 AM
3

Question For RedpillTAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 01:25 AM
0

QuestionTAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:05 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,007 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

you are the one creating the pattern, and it's up to you to stop it.
/r/ExRedPill13/04/26 08:25 PM
2

that is a mindset issue. if you approach every new interaction as if it's a prelude to being rejected, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
/r/ExRedPill13/04/26 08:08 PM
5

getting into theatre in high school is an A+ way to meet girls.
/r/ExRedPill13/04/26 07:01 PM
1

can I give you a piece of advice? over the long course of having talked to these guys - literally years of this - I might suggest validating his experiences first and foremost instead of telling him that, ACTUALLY, women don't care. he's 16. at that point in life, most of us were pretty shallow and confused about our wants and needs. in his life, it's almost a certainty that he's had direct experience with girls his age strongly preferring tall boys. I'd maybe approach it like you'd approach a c…
/r/ExRedPill12/04/26 04:48 PM
3

sign up for drama classes next year.
/r/ExRedPill11/04/26 10:32 PM
3

Being inexperienced does not mean a person's character is that of a "loser." Neediness and desperation are not a permanent state, but rather a mindset and a behavioral pattern. If an inexperienced man compromises his personality just to please women, becomes obsessed, and places sexuality at the very center of his life, then yes, this "energy of neediness" will repel women. However, if that same inexperienced man is busy building his own life, stands firm in his stance, and maintains his decency…
/r/ExRedPill10/04/26 08:36 PM
10

quit doing dumb self-defeating nonsense!
/r/ExRedPill06/04/26 11:05 PM
8

that's fucking stupid. don't do that and you won't even need to ask the secondary question you're asking here.
/r/ExRedPill06/04/26 11:01 PM
12

dude why the fuck are you asking questions like this? they are stupid. don't do this. stop.
/r/ExRedPill06/04/26 10:57 PM
2

sure. i’ve just found it’s a much better deradicalization tactic to say “yes, you’ve identified a gender role that sucks for you!” instead of something like “actually, my husband…”
/r/ExRedPill30/03/26 06:12 PM
1

approaching is still very gendered and we gotta admit that to exit these dudes from their shitty ideology
/r/ExRedPill30/03/26 04:31 PM
8

I would gently suggest that, in leftish/social-justice/liberal spaces online, women are given a benefit of the doubt that men aren't. (I say this as someone who's, with an alt account, asked for advice on reddit, and gotten responses assuming a whole lot of dumb shit about me because I'm a guy) that's why I try to be gentle in this one particular sub; these guys want to be read charitably.
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 11:27 PM
4

these people don't read. They're not unreachable. They're largely not actually plotting to end women's rights. They are misinformed, inexperienced, and young.
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 11:25 PM
11

yours is old, theirs is new
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 09:26 PM
8

some people like to use this sub as a spot to dunk on redpill dudes. and like, I get that, but they gotta land somewhere soft.
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 09:12 PM
4

maybe the kind of tough love that you're dishing out isn't what she needs right now. Maybe she wants to publicly have difficult, frustrating feelings, and maybe focusing super-duper hard on solutions isn't helpful in the moment. everyone needs kindness and everyone needs empathy. Trust me, Mr. No Outward Accomplishments is well-aware of his deficits.
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 05:30 PM
5

though I generally agree, I think this is the wrong play. as a rule, my habit is to say something like what I'd say to a plus-size woman who's frustrated with dating: yeah, it sucks out there, and dating is shitty. Personal virtue is not correlated with dating success and in is some cases orthogonal to it. All you can really do is keep trying and not let it get to you. "look at you, Mr. No Outward Accomplishments!" is not exactly a crowdpleaser.
/r/ExRedPill25/02/26 05:12 PM
1

I mean watching sports.
/r/ExRedPill20/02/26 12:02 AM
0

my opus do you like sports?
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 11:49 PM
4

you use "social dynamics principles exist" as a just-so story. if we were in the short story The Lottery, you'd say that, oh, the social dynamic principle here is that we stone someone once a year. It's so we get a good corn harvest. now, that social dynamic is obviously horrific, but you're using the same kind of logic; it exists, therefore we abide by that principle. it should occur to you that we have the power to change those dynamics and principles when they are harmful. Like, for example, …
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 11:12 PM
7

bud, you're spending a lot of time pretending like manipulating women is actually okay. working on yourself - becoming the best version of yourself, the kind of person you would hope that your sister would meet - is good and healthy. That is internal and self-focused. We all do work like that. It's what therapists would encourage you to do. working to manipulate women so you can extract something out of them is bad and wrong. instead of focusing on "social dynamics principles", you really really…
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 07:03 PM
11

no, it's not. That's called normal human behavior. if you think it's okay to manipulate women with psychological tricks - literally, according to you, like ads and salespeople - then you are definitely one hundred percent redpill and need therapy.
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 06:30 PM
14

you can subject yourself to whatever experiments you like. manipulating other people into doing what you want is fucked up.
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 06:25 PM
14

you straight up state that red pill is for manipulating women by using "psychological tricks". that's bad!
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 06:14 PM
0

you interpret observation as criticism. Work on that.
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 02:35 AM
-1

what she's saying is that her existence as a woman who's Better Than Them triggers insecurities, and she's probably right about that. what is sometimes difficult to have a conversation about is that, all other things equal, there tends to be a general preference among women for "dating up" in certain ways that exists less among men. (did I add enough qualifiers there to avoid being accused of saying "all women are gold diggers"?) you wrote these two things elsewhere It refocuses sex, relationshi…
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 12:41 AM
2

it's paywalled, but she's making the same point as Cartoons.
/r/ExRedPill19/02/26 12:33 AM
0

it's very redditor to make snide accusations at the end of a comment but whew this one is really well formulated. I'm impressed! now do you want to have an actual conversation or just accuse me of taking the internet personally?
/r/ExRedPill18/02/26 11:08 PM
2

Again I do value equality but in the midst of being mad I realized that I’m generally better than them in a lot of ways. this is literally what you wrote.
/r/ExRedPill18/02/26 08:44 PM
5

it is really poor form to consider yourself above or beneath any person.
/r/ExRedPill18/02/26 08:42 PM
3

this is the Jordan Peterson special: be vague so you can reply "that's not what I meant!" when someone tells you that you're a big dumb dummy
/r/ExRedPill17/02/26 10:43 PM
25

if you meet a nice woman and you want to stay with her, it'll be impossible to spend the next fifty years avoiding any trace of awkwardness. women are people too and people enjoy knowing that their partners are human, awkwardness and all
/r/ExRedPill16/02/26 05:20 AM
8

awalt, "women are the oldest teenagers in the house", just to name two obvious misogyny vectors
/r/ExRedPill15/02/26 11:47 PM
16

you must have a basic understanding of what we're talking about instead of replying "Would you be able to explain that?" and hoping someone writes you a fucking essay. go to chatgpt and write "what do red pill principles believe about women?"
/r/ExRedPill15/02/26 11:35 PM
10

go respond to the other guy
/r/ExRedPill15/02/26 11:30 PM
5

go to chatgpt and write "what do red pill principles believe about women?"
/r/ExRedPill15/02/26 11:04 PM
25

well, redpill principles fundamentally hate women, so there is that
/r/ExRedPill15/02/26 11:02 PM
7

the historical solution has been for powerful men to throw indigent and underclass men into a trebuchet and launch them into a warzone where they can kill each other
/r/ExRedPill13/02/26 05:26 AM
7

I actually wrote a whole thing about this. Please click on my username and read the others too! in general, my advice is: do not tell people what not to do so the OP you posted? there's a lot of "well well well, Man Man, other women from OTHER generations have decided you SUCK, and You, Man Man, are listening to rage influencers!!! This is straightforwardly stupid and dumb, as you can see from my copy pasta!" my advice for these guys is something different: your listening skills are the sexiest …
/r/ExRedPill13/02/26 05:06 AM
1

me? no I don't need dumb redpill shit, I'm here to try to save other guys. my basic response: if you're a guy leaning RP or fully redpilled, you have an absolute fuckin battery of counterexamples for this, both online but ESPECIALLY irl. it's written ostensibly for men to read and respond within themselves "hey, wow, I guess I should learn how to recite feminist poetry if I want to meet women!" but the guys who're already RP-adjacent are well familiar with the fact that disproportionately handso…
/r/ExRedPill13/02/26 04:26 AM
2

I understand why reading this feels validating, and there are certainly a bunch of truths in it, but it's much too simple to be applied effectively in the reality that we share.
/r/ExRedPill13/02/26 02:01 AM
1

insensitive to what? someone's statements of fact?
/r/ExRedPill10/02/26 09:00 PM
9

Nobody ever has a proper rebuttal to any of the redpill talking points about monkey branching, or hypergamy, or that there's 7 types of love and women are only capable of 5, that women only love what you can provide not you personally, etc. prove these things exist with math and data. Show me numbers. You cannot cite your feels.
/r/ExRedPill10/02/26 06:39 PM
3

it's really hard to find good dating advice for guys, because dating advice inherently relies on some generalizations that can seem really annoying. simple example: healthy dating guru: you'll need to approach women. peanut gallery: it's weird when men insert themselves into womens' lives and actually women approach men all the time. Skill issue??? eta: I've tried to write this exact thing though!
/r/ExRedPill05/02/26 12:28 AM
1

again, not disagreeing! but what you're describing is quite a complex and socially dangerous little dance that you, the man, are socially expected to understand and architect! which is what OP is complaining about!
/r/ExRedPill31/01/26 07:45 PM
1

I’m not necessarily arguing with you but: it takes no effort at all to find a ton of women complaining about their male friends trying to convert the friendship into a relationship.
/r/ExRedPill31/01/26 07:31 PM
6

provide examples
/r/ExRedPill27/01/26 08:38 PM
4

you are disallowing her from making her own choices and determinations, and you're projecting your own insecurities onto her. you are in your own way right now because there's a voice in your head that says you don't deserve nice things. Your work is to silence that voice and allow yourself to have nice things.
/r/ExRedPill25/01/26 10:57 PM
8

she is an adult, a whole separate human who gets to make her own choices. and she's choosing you.
/r/ExRedPill25/01/26 10:13 PM
17

brother, go meet her and have a good time. why wouldn't you do that?
/r/ExRedPill25/01/26 08:34 PM
6

wow. so I can say “I want fuck with you” to my wife, but if I say it to my intern, I’m “creepy” and “going to be reported to the board”? woke much????
/r/ExRedPill24/01/26 03:54 AM
5

The formal aspect of nature in this narrower sense is therefore the conformity to law of all the objects of experience, and so far as it is known a priori, their necessary conformity. But it has just been shown that the laws of nature can never be known a priori in objects so far as they are considered not in reference to possible experience, but as things in themselves. And our inquiry here extends not to things in themselves (the properties of which we pass by), but to things as objects of pos…
/r/ExRedPill24/01/26 02:00 AM
12

https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve this is a real and true quote from his book: Procedural knowledge, generated in the course of heroic behavior, is not organized and integrated within the group and the individual as a consequence of simple accumulation. Procedure “a,” appropriate in situation one, and procedure “b,” appropriate in situation two, may clash in mutual violent opposition in situation three. Under such circumstances intrapsychic or interpersonal …
/r/ExRedPill24/01/26 12:18 AM
2

precisely. I wrote this years ago and it has only gotten more true.
/r/ExRedPill21/01/26 06:16 AM
2

oh, sorry, I was just doing a broad “how people talk about short men” thing there, not quoting you. genuine apologies so, I’m not short. i’m actually very tall. as a guy, in the small and quiet moments, i’ve had my shorter friends just say out loud that I get attention I don’t deserve. and women are surprisingly willing to talk shit about short me to me! to answer you question: a lot of the men who complain about this aren’t out and existing irl. they’re on their phones and computers. and the wa…
/r/ExRedPill21/01/26 06:09 AM
2

my habit is to generally validate their life and experiences, while following up with a lot a lot a lot of redirection. also much like you’d say to a thicker woman! yeah, it sucks out there, you’ll figure it out but that doesn’t make it suck less. do you do clubs and sports and stuff? IRL interaction tends to be less shallow and your vibe rocks vs just saying “actually, men don’t care about size”. etc etc I hope you know i’m not arguing with you! just trying to build better
/r/ExRedPill21/01/26 05:51 AM
2

gently: if I told a plus sized woman "actually men don't care about weight", I think you'd probably tell me I was gaslighting her, because I would be. short guys live in their own lives, y'know? telling them that the thing they've experienced isn't actually happening is often unhelpful to them breaking outta that kind of thinking.
/r/ExRedPill21/01/26 04:44 AM
-2

sure, I didn’t say that?
/r/ExRedPill17/08/25 01:18 AM
-5

So is being able to "get sex easier" really an advantage if the sex you're getting is often bad, non-consensual or sometimes even violent and dangerous? of course the last conditions, no, that's not the same, agreed 100%. you will find it hard to convince men who literally have not been touched by a woman in years that "bad" sex is not better than 0 sex. They could be wrong, but you could be too.
/r/ExRedPill16/08/25 08:53 PM
17

then you just fucking ignore him, or you're studiously polite. but that's it. you figured out that he is manipulating you - that makes him a bad person
/r/ExRedPill17/07/25 12:25 AM
15

this man is a fucking asshole and you deal with it by losing his number.
/r/ExRedPill16/07/25 09:46 PM
9

you need to listen to him. don't call him out, don't check him. Don't lecture him on his lack of confidence. Ask him what he's feeling, and then listen to him. he's listening to these stupid gurus because they're saying something that resonates with him. You need to listen to him and figure out what that thing is.
/r/ExRedPill13/07/25 05:58 PM
8

the more you push him to solely date within your group, the more he'll pull away. he's an adult and that means allowing him to make adult choices.
/r/ExRedPill13/07/25 05:53 PM
4

the point is to learn from past experiences and not do the same thing over and over again.
/r/ExRedPill11/07/25 06:25 PM
10

that is, unfortunately, not how social skills work. People will almost never tell you why they enjoyed or didn't enjoy your company, they will just make the choice to interact with you (or not) in the future. my advice to you is to learn how to read between those lines.
/r/ExRedPill11/07/25 06:05 PM
10

are you looking for literal (spoken or written) feedback from people about whether or not you're good at social skills?
/r/ExRedPill11/07/25 05:58 PM
3

you talk to them. Like, just pretend it's a bro that you really wanna bro out with. you read my little Medium piece - did the narrator treat Sam like anything besides a bro? No, the narrator just hung out and watched the game and interacted.
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 03:45 PM
0

condescending it is lmao
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 03:03 PM
3

do not think about things in terms of "cold approach". That's redpill shit knocking around your brain. think about meeting people and asking them out in a way that allows them maximum grace and freedom to say both yes and no.
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 02:15 PM
0

You sound mentally off because you take issue with the fact that women are people. I take issue with his response being blunt and in a manner likely to cause the person listening to tune it out. do you want to get these people to listen to you, or do you want to chase them off by being condescending?
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 02:13 PM
1

you're proudly jumping to step eight when the kid is on step zero. To a certain extent, these kids need guidance and nurturing and that does NOT mean immediately assuming that he believes the sky is red. I understand you gain a sense of smug self satisfaction by talking down to guys like this but they're actually just human beings trying to understand the world. Do better.
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 12:25 AM
4

And I gave very healthy dating advice: women are people and have different ideas, opinions, preferences, etc. no, you didn't. You dug into the snide bucket and pulled out "It’s like women don’t all have the same ideas and reactions, like they’re people or something." this teaches guys who reach out and ask for help that they'll get smacked on the nose for doing so. That's stupid and shitty. Fucking stop it.
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 12:12 AM
1

“With all due respect, kind sir, women aren’t characters in a video game, and there is no secret way to unlock them.” find me where OP said this. you're proudly jumping to step eight when the kid is on step zero. To a certain extent, these kids need guidance and nurturing and that does NOT mean immediately assuming that he believes women are characters in a video game. this is literally in the description of this subreddit: ExRedPill is a space for those who understand The Red Pill (or RedPillWo…
/r/ExRedPill10/07/25 12:01 AM
2

I wrote this a couple years ago. now, note: a fucking redditor wrote that. But I've gotten positive feedback on it.
/r/ExRedPill09/07/25 11:06 PM
-5

tact is what we call it when we approach a truth in a kind and helpful way instead of bluntly and in a manner likely to cause the person listening to tune it out. tact!
/r/ExRedPill09/07/25 08:04 PM
-4

this is the exact worst shit to write when someone earnestly comes to you for help
/r/ExRedPill09/07/25 07:43 PM
–

men are going to want to date women and have sex with women no matter what. Saying "just get friends if you're lonely" doesn't engage with the actual feelings and frustrations of the men you want to reach and change.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 07:09 PM
1

nono, I am talking about before they head down that rabbit hole. The thin end of the wedge for redpill recruiters is guys' basic frustration with life.
/r/ExRedPill05/07/25 06:41 PM
15

what this is missing is validation. like, imagine a man going into a woman's space where a woman is complaining that she doesn't fit into traditional beauty ideals. Now imagine that man explaining to her, with Male Facts And Logic, how, actually, what adult, mature men value is [x and y trait]. that wouldn't go well, would it? He'd get his ass laughed outta that space. what redpill leads with is emotional validation for young men. A lot of it is pretty basic: yes, it sucks out there. Yes, dating…
/r/ExRedPill04/07/25 08:09 PM
3

which is how PUA dudes end up being functional sociopaths
/r/ExRedPill07/03/23 11:04 PM
4

tagging /u/Nightchanger it's honestly very very difficult. not for the potential deplatforming or cancelation or whatever, more about the fact that you absolutely will have both a: horrible douchebag men who really do want to redpill normies or whatever, and also b: social justice oriented women who are absolutely ready to call you a fash adjacent misogynist MensLib itself operates in a superposition where we are simultaneously beta soyjacks and also misogyny-infected dudebros. because a lot of …
/r/ExRedPill10/10/22 02:15 AM
-1

Okay second question: have you ever considered being smart instead of painfully low-IQ you know that learning is free right
/r/AntiFeminists02/04/22 02:51 AM
-3

do you ever get sad about getting publicly owned over and over again?
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 09:54 PM
-4

you should post this to /r/misandry OH WAIT LMAO
/r/AntiFeminists01/04/22 08:38 PM
1

you've never had free speech on the internet unless you personally own the servers that run a website
/r/MensRights23/12/21 09:34 PM
-2

I don't know how else to explain that those two decisions do not end with the same outcomes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 09:36 PM
-8

But the decisions aren't the same thing, so there's no symmetry. The woman also has no blanket right to abandon her alive, innocent children, as you want men to have the right to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 09:23 PM
-7

This analogy only makes sense if abortion and legal paternal surrender had the exact same outcome, but they don't. With abortion, there is no child. With legal paternal surrender, a child exists. Trying to operate under the assumption that they are the same is a big fallacious hole in your logic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 09:12 PM
-3

sure, but those are bad for children
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 08:46 PM
-4

Safe havens exist as a bulwark against infanticide. They're not the same thing as a blanket right for men to abandon their alive, innocent children. Your refusal to engage with the concepts of scope and scale is the problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 08:15 PM
-1

Okay, let's tighten up laws about naming a father. It makes no sense (and is in fact antithetical to your underlying point) to pretend like legal paternal surrender is analogous to this situation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 08:05 PM
-5

safe havens are gender neutral though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 07:35 PM
-13

I am a man and I disagree with this view because it would be bad for the child. Nearly all of our public policy is designed around alive, innocent children being protected as well as we can. Further, the right to access abortion services has never been about abdicating rights for an alive child. You're actually asking for extra rights.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/20 07:22 PM
-2

OK man
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/20 02:53 PM
1

I didn't report it? Just responded with my thoughts. Honestly I rarely use the report function on reddit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/20 03:33 AM
1

Listen, man, I don't wander around random subs to make people like me. If I was trying to make people like me, would I keep being me?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/20 03:11 AM
1

So what's weird is that I don't think you're necessarily disagreeing with the piece? I think you're almost 100% taking issue with its tone and not its conclusions reached, because all I have to really respond is "wow, that's really interesting, thank you for writing all that out". Well, except that last paragraph, which I find silly. I'm a fully self-actualized white dude and I travel in social justice circles quite well.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 11:11 PM
2

To me, this doesn't allow for sufficient discussion about race. I don't know where you live (I'm gonna guess 'straya because of the time zones) but trying to deconstruct the history and contemporary concept of race is going to require some amount of generalization. This one specifically, for instance: if we want to talk about how the history of male disposability intersects with colonialism and westward expansion in America, we have to talk about "white men" as an entity even as we acknowledge N…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 09:47 PM
2

Hmm, okay. I see what you're saying, and thanks for... well, not being a rambling psycho. I am a white dude myself, from a place full of white dudes in trucker hats and camo vests. I know my people. But I see that what's going on here is that I am using "white dude" (a group that includes me!) as a shorthand for truckercamo guys. I don't think that's wrong but it is definitely highly contextual and leads to people in subs like this getting Very Mad in ways that, in context, they shouldn't and ma…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 08:56 PM
0

haha... okay man
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 06:28 PM
1

you appear to be stating an opinion, not a fact. And I disagree with that opinion. 🤷
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 06:18 PM
1

why is this a mod distinguished comment
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 02:18 PM
-1

no, seriously, answer the question. is it sexism to have a sub dedicated just to men? if not, why is it sexist to have an article about men? is it just because the article wasn't "advocacy"? Because it was critical?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/10/20 01:24 AM
1

I absolutely believe in lifting people up, and that's why I posted that article! The Green New Deal can help these dudes! This article was just about white dudes, though, not black dudes. There are other articles about black men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 10:43 PM
1

Is it somehow sexist to you that we're in a sub dedicated specifically to men? Or is that historical and contemporary contextualization acceptable?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 09:57 PM
3

The context in which this article discusses human beings intentionally treats them as a commodity inside a broader capitalist milieu. It's trying to make a specific point, one that's been made by scientists many times - too many idle men destabilizes society. What does that mean? How do we fix it? What kinds of policies can we enact to avoid problems? If your problem is the white part of this... did you read the article? It specifically talks about white people because we're discussing this in t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 08:18 PM
-1

Do you actually think we have the power to stop Male babies from being born The fact that you are writing this means that you need to do more analysis.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 08:06 PM
1

Oh so it was just meant to be shouted into the wind and not actually convince anybody of anything? Sorry I didn't realise it was one of those articles that are just meant to be ignored. Not sure why we're all discussing it then. This isn't what I wrote, so I'll wait for you to read what I actually wrote and respond to it. It is dishonest of you to cite that article as if it is relevant to the US, when that article's research is based on countries like China and India where men actually outnumber…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 07:21 PM
-1

Well, have you perhaps considered that maybe this article wasn't intended to be a "hearts and minds" article? The context in which this article discusses human beings intentionally treats them as a commodity inside a broader capitalist milieu. It's trying to make a specific point, one that's been made by scientists many times - too many idle men destabilizes society. What does that mean? How do we fix it? What kinds of policies can we enact to avoid problems? If your problem is the white part of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 06:20 PM
1

okay, I don't think that's accurate even a little bit, so I guess I 'll just move on. Have a nice day.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 06:05 PM
-4

The word "toxic" appears only once in the article, not talking about young men: But the United States must address a particularly toxic version of this problem because of the country’s endemic racism, polarized politics, and Rust Belt economics. did you mean to reply to another comment?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 05:55 PM
0

I think it makes some interesting points about demography. The posts in this sub about how it's racist and sexist and "white men ruin everything" are, from my perspective, failing to address the core of the article. It's a demographic fact that young, unmarried, jobless men are insurgency timebombs - how did we deal with that in the past? What lessons can we learn about it now? That's what I found fascinating.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 05:16 PM
-2

uhh, I posted this, ama about why it's not somehow racist and sexist?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 04:43 PM
-2

There are a bunch of these that I disagree with, but I want to highlight one in particular because it's a fundamental misunderstanding: Anonymity for the Accused Laws If the rape accuser is anonymous, so is the accused. there is no law about this in America and in fact it is unconstitutional to make this law. Any accuser can be named in any publication.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 09:27 PM
2

I'm sorry, what I'm talking about is the very basis of intersectionality, which is easily the dominant paradigm on the modern social justice left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 10:33 PM
0

If you ask them how a white slave-owning woman oppressed a black man in the antebellum south... they'll lose their shit, call you a misogynist troll, etc. Well, I won't do that. I'll point out the flaw in the logic instead! This is what intersectionality means. You have to understand the intersections of identities here to understand how social hierarchies work. In this case, the white woman has many privileges over the enslaved black man. She will still end up oppressed for being a woman in man…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/10/20 08:23 PM
1

okay, we can agree to disagree on that, but my point remains: people are allowed to have sex and want to have sex, even on the first date, when they're not perfectly emotionally healthy.
/r/ExRedPill08/10/20 08:47 PM
1

well, no one is really "emotionally healthy" when they're young and their hormones are weird and they're in strange parts of their life. I guess I'm just saying that people are allowed to have sex and want to have sex, even on the first date, when they're not perfectly emotionally healthy.
/r/ExRedPill08/10/20 06:50 PM
1

I was extremely clear. My logic was straightforward. You don't get to assert it wasn't. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 04:56 PM
0

I did spell out my arguments. Please backscroll if you want to see them, thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 04:45 PM
0

I've been as logical as I can be with you, man, I have no idea how to use my words better than making them extremely clear and crisp. If you want to live in a fantasy world where legal paternal surrender is somehow divorced for the boots-on-the-ground reality that it would harm children, I can't stop you, but I can decline to join you in that fantasy world.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 04:31 PM
0

We absolutely cannot separate the rights of the alive child from any of this discussion. That's what I keep trying to say over and over - these are the exact same conversation. It is sophistry to pretend otherwise! And again, look, I get it, the discussion is made a lot easier to pretend like these are two different things. They're just not. Policymakers understand that medium- and long-term implications of this policy would be catastrophic for the alive children that are inherently affected by …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 04:07 PM
1

Many paragraphs conveniently eliding the fact that abortion eliminates the possibility alive child in a way that paternal surrender doesn't. This is true and obvious on the face of it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 03:42 PM
1

Okay, I'm sorry. Like everyone else here, you're consistently ignoring the implications of your ideas and presenting them as "simple fairness". I get why that rhetorically convenient, but if you're not willing to follow the logic past "women get to opt out of parenthood with abortion therefore men deserve the same right" then I can't believe you're using anything besides emotions to reason. You understand why abortion is not the same as refusing to support your alive child. You want to believe t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 02:45 PM
0

I mean we are skipping one of the areas that hugely favours women, and gives men no similar option to bail post-conception if they don't want to be a father, but ok, we can agree that is one huge area of inequality where women have more options than men and move on. No, we're skipping this because there's no way to give cis men the ability to carry children and therefore the ability to have the legal medical procedure called abortion. Abortion is a right to a medical procedure. if the mother wan…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 01:16 AM
0

Okay, I'm going to work through this. If she is pregnant, she can opt out with abortion or adoption. Abortion doesn't really matter in this context so I'll skip it. Adoption is gender neutral. If you want to work on situations in which men are better-able to identify that they're the parent of a child, okay! Genetic registries are gonna be tricky, politically, but I am down. She can ghost the man and take the unborn child with her, and he has no say in it. This has been the case since time immem…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 06:07 PM
0

Okay, so that's the thing here. Via Roe, the person who gestates the child was given a safe, legal route to end a pregnancy and you think it's unfair. I don't think I'm missing or overstating your point. I think that's literally your point. Is that right?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 05:48 PM
1

Okay, to the rest of your comment: This has always been the case. Nothing has changed for millennia about the idea that parents are required to support the children that they produce! If you wanted to ditch out on a kid, you had to flee across a border. So I guess I don't see what your point is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 03:55 PM
1

Just to be clear: you meant child support, right? Alimony is very rare these days.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 04:21 AM
1

it's not about proportion, though. I mean, men wish it were, but it's really about caring for the relevant children here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 02:14 AM
1

if you want to get really deep in the weeds, sure, there are some tiny modifications that could be made. a blanket "men can simply decide to peace out" is a really bad idea and that's what I usually fight again.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 01:18 AM
1

"Her body her choice" has somehow also become "his body, no choice". But this phrase is very specifically about abortion. Men apply here too but they don't gestate children. I think it is super duper point-missing to try to apply that phrase to people who can't undergo abortion. I mostly agree with the rest of your post.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/20 12:52 AM
1

I'm actually perfectly fine with mandatory paternity tests and it's my opinion that making them mandatory would reduce or eliminate any objections to them. For the record I'm absolutely pro-choice, I just find it odd that people are so vehemently in favour of abortion, which can be the ethically more dubious choice, and strongly in favour of women who give up their children for adoption, but so vehemently against men being able in any way shape or form to be absolved of their parental duties. Th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 10:24 PM
1

In the most basic terms, abortion leaves no child that needs care and paternal surrender absolutely can and does leave a child that needs care. That's why they are not logically, morally, or ethically equivalent. as well as giving up the baby for adoption with or without the father's consent if a father is known, a woman cannot give up a child for adoption without the father's consent. If you want to talk about strengthening protections there for fathers (and asking the state to take a more acti…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 09:35 PM
0

I've repeatedly explained why paternal surrender is not the same as abortion and how "opting out of parenthood" is not an option for either gender. If you want me to say so again, I am happy to, but I'm not going to pretend like abortion and paternal surrender are in any way similar because they are not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 09:14 PM
1

I am struggling to conceptualize how the policies around safe haven laws could be modified to make them more gender neutral.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 08:56 PM
2

In this case, there's nothing we could do to make this law more gender neutral.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 08:46 PM
-1

yeah, most of the time the global orgs are focused on developing and second-world countries, where there are still HUGE gaps that favor boys.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 07:56 PM
-2

I'm pretty sure that, worldwide, boys are significantly more likely to attend secondary and tertiary school. Can you point me to the data you used there?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 07:32 PM
1

Men already have that right, as I indicated in my first comment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 03:17 PM
0

The two things aren't comparable in scope or scale so the basic premise of your question is kind of silly on all fronts.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 05:24 AM
2

The whole point of the nationwide push to establish safe havens in America was in response to infants being abandoned in random places where no one was around to look after them. So, that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 05:15 AM
2

Safe havens are designed and deployed as an absolute last resort and they've been extremely effective. Yeah, I think it's wrong to use them, but I also understand that the alternative is often worse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 05:05 AM
2

I'm pro-abortion so I'm not really sure what you're talking about here
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 04:49 AM
2

It's a neat rhetorical trick to pretend like fetuses do not become alive children, but policy makers have to consider the long term effects of laws they make so they don't have that luxury.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 04:39 AM
2

Do you think it is wrong for women to use safe haven laws The evidence is quite clear that safe havens are used sparingly. By contrast, the incentive structures that full legal paternal surrender indicate that wouldn't be the case. To put it another way: what incentive would any man have NOT to disclaim their alive innocent children?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 04:14 AM
1

In most States with safe haven laws, either parent may surrender his or her baby to a safe haven. In four States and Puerto Rico, only the mother may relinquish her infant.5 Idaho specifies that only a custodial parent may surrender an infant. In the District of Columbia, an infant may be relinquished only by a custodial parent who is a resident of the District. In approximately 11 States, an agent of the parent (someone who has the parent’s approval) may take a baby to a safe haven for a parent…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 03:02 AM
-1

men have the same right as women to an abortion. Most men cannot gestate kids, though. men have the same right as women to abandon their alive innocent child. pretending like a man abandoning their alive, innocent child is the same thing as a woman getting an abortion is a fallacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 02:52 AM
-1

My argument is that men and women already have the same rights and I dare say that's a fact.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 02:41 AM
2

hey he's the one who made slides five and six
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 02:24 AM
1

thanks for coming around to my point of view, cheers
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 02:08 AM
2

it is a direct comparison to the slide before it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 01:55 AM
2

slide/image six
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 01:45 AM
1

uhhhh, yes, by claiming that women can give up a child at a safe haven and men cannot OP literally claimed it was sexist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 01:35 AM
0

But it's gender neutral. Just because men are more likely not to be around at a child's birth doesn't mean it's secretly a sexist law.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 01:24 AM
-2

Okay? It's still a bad point by OP.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/09/20 01:10 AM
1

negative, ghost rider
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 04:23 PM
0

then why did you bring it up with me as if you were making a coherent point?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 01:38 AM
0

when women have a problem men must drop everything because it affects them too I've never written this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 12:55 AM
0

I specifically and emphatically explained why "separate but equal" is a silly way to frame this in this comment. your story is only being "ignored" insofar as you're trying to tell it in a space not designed for it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/20 08:23 PM
0

I'm not sure you're reading my comments in good faith and I hope you seek professional counseling for your trauma.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/20 07:35 PM
0

Sorry, if you're saying that men and women experience sexual harassment and assault in the exact same way then I'm not sure this will be a fruitful conversation. Sometimes experiences are gendered. That doesn't mean your life or experiences are anything besides completely valid, only that sometimes conversations are not going to be about you. Again, to be completely clear, your story is only being "ignored" insofar as you're trying to tell it in a space not designed for it. You are valid.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/20 07:23 PM
0

I don't consider metoo the sole legitimate authority on discussions about harassment and assault. If the intent there is as to highlight the unique experiences that women have, that's generally fine.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/20 07:06 PM
0

it's an interesting conundrum. There's value to having gendered conversations about rape and consent, and that's what metoo was originally designed to be about - women. I don't take that as an attack on men, but I definitely think it's worth having parallel conversations about the rape and sexual assault of men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/20 06:26 PM
5

I have reported you for your personal attack.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 09:41 PM
3

I disagree with you on a fundamental level and don't believe that I could get through to you. Have a happy Sunday.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 08:11 PM
6

I disagree but I'm open to hearing more so I can continue to refine my ideas and their expression.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 07:08 PM
5

I am not even a mod there, friendarooni
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 06:58 PM
4

I am literally telling you that I stand by the words I wrote.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 06:48 PM
3

I absolutely am not MRA or redpill. /u/mewacketergi2 I stand by every single word I wrote in the OP here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 06:33 PM
5

this sub that you are posting in right now is based on identity politics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/20 06:23 PM
1

Okay
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/20 02:27 AM
-3

There has never been and will never be a leftism in which conservatism is treated with anything besides contempt. You're talking about liberalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/20 02:11 AM
-1

Nah they were banned for extremely obvious paid spam. Which is fantastic; conservatives on Twitter have no inherent right to post tweets and should be on a short leash when it comes to bought and sold rightism. This is a basic leftist position!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/20 01:57 AM
1

I know what I'm talking about, thanks. Your understanding of the legal concept of "good faith" is extremely lacking and I'm not going to be able to get through to you about this particular ignorance, so I am giving up. Have a good weekend. Remember that rightoids don't deserve an ounce of air for their invented grievances.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/20 01:38 AM
0

Okay, we've hit a wall. You're convinced of "facts" that aren't supported by law or evidence. I hope you have a good weekend.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/09/20 01:27 AM
1

Yes, any interactive computer service can moderate at its own discretion under its terms of service. This is the literal plain reading of 230 and has been upheld repeatedly by courts. Again, you are asserting ideas not supported by facts.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 11:57 PM
-1

Section 230 very literally, in its text, allows interactive computer services to make narrow distinctions like this. Plus, as a leftist yourself, you should be happy that conservative mind viruses are being stomped out.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 10:59 PM
-1

Go ahead and search "there are only two genders" on Twitter. There are blue check conservatives saying that. You're working from a position not supported by the facts.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 10:09 PM
-3

This isn't true. If you can produce for me a comprehensive study that indicates what you say is correct, I will consider it. However, in my experience, the only people who pitch fits about this are people who have a strong incentive to pretend like their bigotry isn't bigotry for propaganda purposes. Conservatives have a habit of being transphobic, homophobic, and misogynist. That's why they get "moderated" by Twitter.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 09:45 PM
-1

conservative ideas are all over twitter! I can point you to some right now. Twitter only moderates bigotry, not conservative ideas.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 09:32 PM
1

section 230 specifically allows Twitter to do basically whatever they want, including what you see in OP
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/20 05:22 PM
3

it is extremely easy to hit a spot in your life where you're looking for "help" and end up finding it in a place that views your trust as a weakness.
/r/ExRedPill16/09/20 11:07 PM
3

yeah I was being charitable, this is just insane
/r/ExRedPill16/09/20 10:54 PM
8

any person who's been older than 23 years old and dealt with other human beings who are also older than 23 years old understands that something like Women love attention from as meny boys as they can get, they need external validation and to feel special. Secondly they claim that women absolutely love drama, and will intentionally create drama and conflict because it gives them more attention. Women love badboys because they are bound to be involved in tons of drama and conflict. is silly and st…
/r/ExRedPill16/09/20 09:22 PM
13

It's dumb shit like this that makes me realize TRP is for 23 year old boys, by 23 year old boys.
/r/ExRedPill16/09/20 08:29 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/iep6xj/very_interesting_take_on_polygamy_from_the_myth/g2iyfel/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 07:00 PM
1

Yeah, okay, fair. It's hard for me to think that's a good historical context for "kings" and patriarchy since 1000 BCE? But you are right and I am wrong about the screenshot.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 03:59 AM
1

I don't see the concept of royalty in that screenshot. It's just talking about men who own women. I could be wrong?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 03:46 AM
1

Yes I agree. That's why I didn't understand the underlying point you were trying to make.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 02:57 AM
1

I don't understand the delineation you're trying to establish, I guess. Aren't we talking about the same thing?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 02:06 AM
1

I disagree and will continue to use it where necessary but I understand your position.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/08/20 12:05 AM
2

But I wrote a post about how your conceptualization of "hypergamy" doesn't match reality and you didn't refute any of my points?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 11:54 PM
1

I'm speaking specifically to the situation described by OP.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 11:43 PM
2

I think I'm being honest here? Sorry, I'm not sure how this is a response to what I wrote.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 11:32 PM
4

Indeed, ultrafeminist societies like the nordic countries are the best for men! The more that women achieve economic parity with men (and we're not quite there yet in the US) the more that gender roles are reduced for everyone.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 10:43 PM
3

This perspective leaves many things out of the equation, including but not limited to: some proportion women would prefer not to rely on men for resources at all in ancient times, women are at a natural competitive disadvantage when competing for food, so this is not a free choice being made patriarchs hoarding resources also means this is not a free choice; if you want to eat, you get on board men could simply choose to opt out of love and companionship if they didn't want to "meet the demands …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 10:31 PM
3

People use whatever means they have to acquire scarce resources and I don't think this is really surprising? Maybe I don't understand what you're saying, can you clarify.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 10:07 PM
16

This is very literally patriarchy. Rule by the patriarchs, who funnel resources (including women's fertility) upwards to themselves.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/08/20 09:46 PM
0

Now you're just lying. You are totally twisting people's arguments. As we keep telling you. No, I'm denying this the psychological comfort of hiding behind "it was BEFORE the child was born!" The end result would be children whose fathers abandoned them. Not only is this not the legal or moral or ethical equivalent of abortion, it's a whole new right drawn up just for men. This really needs to stick so I am going to write it twice: this is not legal or moral or ethical equivalent of abortion. It…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 03:08 AM
0

Nothing is being "twisted". It's the inevitable result of the policy you're advocating for. This is why it is different from abortion and why it's comical, bordering on satire, to compare the two. I'm not sorry for actually living in reality on this issue, and I'm overwhelmingly happy that policymakers can see through the thin branding veneer that this policy puts on child abandonment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 02:37 AM
-1

People in this sub repeatedly compare female abortion to men abandoning their alive innocent children. Would you like examples? One is two posts above yours.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 02:18 AM
1

If you're really splitting hair about whether or not children should starve or just be food insecure, you're pretty much making my point for me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 01:03 AM
1

if a mother drops a child off at a safe haven and the father is known, the father retains custody. this is really simple stuff.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 09:46 PM
1

"In most States with safe haven laws, either parent may surrender his or her baby to a safe haven. In four States and Puerto Rico, only the mother may relinquish her infant."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 09:30 PM
-1

look man, I'm a leftist in a subreddit specifically designed for leftwingers. Take the conservative garbage elsewhere
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 08:57 PM
1

Abortion prevents children. (This is the law)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 08:44 PM
1

What child?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 08:33 PM
-2

But they are different. Like, boots-on-the-ground, they are not the same thing. You can't pretend to have an honest conversation about this without admitting that "abandoning one's alive innocent child" is different from "undergoing a private medical procedure that prevents a child from ever existing". Those are not the same thing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 06:38 PM
1

What is a solution that would ALSO be just for the child and the taxpayers?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 05:59 PM
-1

No, see, it's not "regressive, conservative rhetoric that was once used against women". You really, really want to pretend like the right for women to access health care is the same as the "right" for men to abandon their alive, innocent children. They are not the same. they are not the same. I will not pretend like they're the same, because they're not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 05:14 PM
-1

At this point you're just repeating what I've already debunked so
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 03:47 PM
1

I'm not sure it makes sense to ignore complicating factors when we talk about outcomes we want to achieve.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 06:23 AM
0

It's the basic topic and the refusal to grapple with it is the fallacy that all these conversations fall into.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 04:19 AM
-1

Your entire post goes out of its way to avoid thinking about the outcomes for the child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 04:08 AM
-1

No. What I wrote is very very literally the context and outcome of his stated goals. I am putting forth nothing but the implementation of policy he advocates.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 03:35 AM
1

I'm blushing
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 03:25 AM
-1

Hey if you don't like facts and logic then that's on you
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 03:11 AM
-1

We, as a society, have decided that consent to sex does not constitute consent to parenthood. We absolutely have done no such thing. Conservatives have not agreed to this; liberals believe that women should have access to abortion services from their healthcare provider. "consent to sex does not constitute consent to parenthood" is codified nowhere in "society". You are making this up in your head. Women have various options, including abortion if you are a man with a uterus, you have this optio…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 02:53 AM
1

Explain specifically how this idea is "just".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 01:38 AM
0

Red herring. Bad debate skills here. Stick to the topic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 01:01 AM
-1

No. That would be bad for the children that adults sire. I'm talking about making sure every man who sires a child is legally associated with said child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 12:51 AM
1

Oh man awesome! So we agree: let's make sure that men have a MUCH more active place in the parenting structure! Let's pass laws to that effect!!!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 12:39 AM
-2

Men have the exact same right to an abortion as women. What paternal surrender demands is not equality. It is a whole new "right" that just so happens to bulldoze the rights of the children men sire. You can sit here and pretend like they are the same thing but I'm under no obligation to participate in that particular delusion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 12:24 AM
1

Do you see how "the children a man sired" and "southern white slave owners" are a very bad comparison?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/20 12:14 AM
1

https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/research/map-the-meal-gap/2016/2016-map-the-meal-gap-child-food-insecurity.pdf 🤔
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 11:59 PM
1

So, to be clear: You want to pretend paternal surrender and abortion are the same thing, and if you don't gain the right to abandon the children you sire, you want to deny women the right to basic medical care. wow
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 11:30 PM
0

opposition to abortion is basically a conservative shibboleth
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 11:19 PM
1

that's completely illogical and silly but fully within your rights. Congratulations on your conversion to being a conservative?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 11:08 PM
1

the children themselves are presumably stoked to not starve
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 10:58 PM
1

But those two things are different. I'm not going to play along pretending they're the same.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 10:19 PM
-1

Why in the hell would this mean that abortion rights should be taken away?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 10:05 PM
0

This would result in many kids who don't have enough resources to thrive. You cannot abstract that fact away.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 09:48 PM
0

This is a red herring argument that's designed to obfuscate. Adoption has no bearing on the goodness or badness of paternal surrender.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 09:28 PM
1

There is an alive innocent child's needs in this scenario
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 09:17 PM
-6

the state did not impregnate a woman. Why should taxpayers fund the child you sired? Leftism is not "the more the state does, the leftistier it is". Why would a policymaker think this is a good idea? "Hey, let's shift the burden of funding 18 years of childrearing from the man who sired the child to my constituents"? What incentive would men have to not opt out of EVERY pregnancy? They can still see the child but not be legally on the hook for it. child support is for the child, and most courts …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 07:50 PM
-4

This is a bad result for the child, who is the most innocent party in all of this. You cannot pretend like innocent children wouldn't have more difficult lives under your plan. Or, rather, you can pretend that, but the people who make the laws cannot.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 07:36 PM
-12

alive children are very often a direct result of pregnancies. you can wave off this fact, but policymakers cannot. Policymakers are concerned with making sure that alive, innocent children are not raised in penury. If you want to pretend like "there's no child" then that's fine, you can live ensconced in that bubble, I cannot stop you. But don't be surprised that the people who write the laws take into account the alive, innocent child that results from pregnancy and therefore reject your "there…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 07:26 PM
-19

in one scenario, there is no alive child. In another, there is an alive child. Pretty significant difference.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 07:10 PM
-21

It's not the exact same argument because the scenarios are not the same.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/20 06:58 PM
-3

"here are papers that may or may not support a single thing I'm saying, lol have fun reading through them to make my case for me" jesus, man, these are some first-day-on-the-internet tactics you're using
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 06:46 PM
-6

"It's well known" lmao this is literally Trump-level rhetoric. It works on simpletons.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 06:32 PM
-1

god, the logic here is so weirdly twisted that I can't even penetrate it. you rely on unsourced "criticism" you don't even try to unwind the "crime model" you invented in your head you use the word "de facto" to describe something that is literally illegal this is just stupid. Your post is a masterclass in emotive reasoning - "I believe something and will mis-cite the concept to pretend like I'm right". is this fun for you? do you think that everyone has such poor reasoning skills that they'll f…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 06:21 PM
-2

Not only is that not how the Duluth Model works (and to be clear, I am not defending it) but that is not even sort of a source for feminists in the u k want to legalize female on male I.P.V please stay on topic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 04:18 PM
0

feminists in the u k want to legalize female on male I.P.V This is nowhere that I can see. Can you point me to where the "source" you linked says this?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 04:08 PM
-1

I'm not seeing a source, sorry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 03:58 PM
-2

Can you cite this law or policy anywhere? Just anywhere this has been written down by an authority.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 03:28 AM
-1

feminists in the u k want to legalize female on male I.P.V wat
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/20 01:48 AM
1

honestly dude... I've had these conversations before. It is always, without fail, a weird exercise in "feminism" being a huge conspiracy theory with poorly understood concepts of "intersectionality" and "patriarchy theory" thrown in. the absolute obsession with "feminism" as defined by right wing youtubers is your problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/20 09:32 PM
0

look at my post history and you can see the hundreds of articles I've submitted to ml
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/20 07:24 PM
0

It's also hard to do when many of the issues men face are directly caused by or worsened by feminism. I'm sorry, this is just a very, very silly thing to write.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/20 07:14 PM
0

it is so incredibly easy to talk about men's issues without the conversation turning into a dae feminism bad whinefest. Jesus
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/07/20 06:52 PM
1

:| ok man
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 06:17 PM
1

Christina Hoff Sommers, Warren Farrell, Prim Reaper, Cathy Young, Amazing Atheist are certainly not right-wing. I was literally responding to this exact wording. Right here, these words.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 06:04 PM
1

Bad use of the genetic fallacy, broseph. If you're arguing about someone's ideology, and they work at an ideological think tank, it's strong evidence. This is not a discussion about any of her individual arguments. Please, put more work into your reddit posts in the future.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/20 05:54 PM
2

CHS literally works at a right wing think tank.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/07/20 09:38 PM
0

you were obviously trolling by posting it there, not sure what you expected
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 04:52 PM
1

I'm not even a mod there dude
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 03:35 AM
14

okay, buddy, so here's the deal. You're 22 and you're not "mad at women". You're lonely and you're using maladaptive processing to shift blame from yourself to a third party. The literal one thing that TRP is right about is that working on yourself will help you be more attractive. Not just to women either! To male friends and to your family and to employers. If you can't cut this shit out by yourself - if you cannot shift your thought processes away from "women bad" to "I need to be good" - the…
/r/ExRedPill10/06/20 10:38 PM
1

So what you're saying right now is that, if you were one of those dicks, you'd be fine with that. Do I understand correctly?
/r/ExRedPill10/06/20 10:31 PM
1

Are you mad that you're not one of those dicks, or are you mad that you're getting settled for?
/r/ExRedPill10/06/20 10:28 PM
-2

This is one of the dumbest false equivalences I've ever read, man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/20 03:47 AM
0

Not a single authoritarian source. It is controlled by states.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/20 12:08 AM
0

Do safe haven laws require 2 parent consent? What happens if the mother drops the child off and the dad goes to the police saying his kid was stolen? Is the mother now on the hook for child support? Yes, the mom is now on the hook for child support. What if the father does and the mother goes to the police? Does the father owe child support? Yes. And what happens if the dad claims the child when he was never listed as the father? A court orders a DNA test
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/20 11:35 PM
-3

So you are saying in practice fathers and mothers have the exact same rights to ditch their child at a safe haven? Laws are also wealth-neutral but that isn't how rights end up being in practice. Yes. In most states, a father can do the exact same thing as mothers. She can not tell the father that the child exists and raise the kid by herself and not list anyone on the Birth Certificate. Okay? This is a function of biology. But yes, okay, let's tighten up these laws, I agree. None of this has an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/20 10:57 PM
-6

Except with safe havens Mostly gender neutral. The laws on this vary by state - I would love to see a single, gender-neutral federal law here. it being much easier for a woman to choose to raise the child by herself and not involving the other parent How?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/20 10:46 PM
-11

After a child is born, women and men have the exact same rights. You're arguing from a false premise.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/20 09:29 PM
-3

No matter how we "frame the conversation", women are going to live with their day-to-day fear. There is no way around that besides changing our society at a very basic level, which I support. We can understand and empathize with Karen while also disallowing her from weaponizing her privilege.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 12:39 AM
-6

If a man rapes someone you see extremely few (if any) men don't defend him mate, rape survivors will tell you this isn't true and that their rapists were actively defended by the community
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 10:25 PM
-6

What? I don't understand
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 10:06 PM
-6

Yeah there are a couple comments here and there but the OVERWHELMING sentiment was that she fucked up. While women do have a significant in-group bias that might cause them to "circle the wagons" here more than men might, I don't think it's specifically rich white women defending their own - instead it's society as a whole, including men. Playing the chivalric knight is something that aligns quite well with both feminism and traditional conservatism. Well, you can also read this a different way.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 09:25 PM
-4

I saw extremely few (if any) rich white women defending Central Park Karen. Where did you see this?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 09:06 PM
2

Okay, it's still allowed to suck for this dude though
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 08:07 PM
2

God's honest truth is that he, the dude, is still going to be expected to initiate romanic and sexual encounters.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 07:41 PM
4

Have you been checked for clinical anxiety?
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 06:41 PM
3

You are entitled to date (or not date) and fuck (or not fuck) anyone (or no one) for any reason (including no reason at all). But that doesn't mean you get to shame people for the choices they make that have nothing to do with you.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 06:31 PM
11

Look man, I get it. You're sick of it, you're frustrated, you're lonely. These things are valid to feel. All you can do is react in a way that's pro-social and healthy.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 06:28 PM
2

It is not a good idea to tell a dude who's where he is about the times that women approached. He understands enough about dating to know that he's gotta hustle out there. Telling him that his experiences aren't valid is gaslighting.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 06:25 PM
48

Dude, there is a vast chasm between red pill tactics and basic self-improvement. Like yeah, you're gonna have to approach women because you're a dude. This is your reality. But redpill is abuse.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/20 05:56 PM
0

large foreigners huh.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/05/20 04:59 PM
0

99.9% of people who talk about false allegations are indeed alt-right incel mgtow dudebros
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 08:51 PM
-5

https://twitter.com/barrydeutsch/status/1262745065551585280 gorge yourself on some tweets
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 04:09 PM
-5

https://splinternews.com/believe-all-women-isnt-a-thing-1820799914
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 03:29 PM
0

lol she's a liberal
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 05:12 AM
-2

Quoting a Gamergate meme, yes, perfect left wing stuff
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 02:48 AM
-1

Holy shit you managed to come up with literally the flimsiest possible "evidence" by God it's beautiful
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 01:56 AM
3

And how do your expect someone to react if they are called racist for saying "all lives matter"? Even taking into account race relations in America, how is someone supposed to interpret that as anything other than 'only black lives matter'? By considering the extremely long and well documented history of racial violence in America. It is frustrating to me that you bring up white people again. My arguments are independent of race, so if yours are white people specific, it feels like we're talking…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 12:39 AM
2

Words have context. Words have history. Communication does not happen in a vacuum. If white people are taking the phrase "black lives matter" to mean "only black lives matter" then they are intentionally ignoring the context and history of race relations in America.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 12:23 AM
1

If white people take half a second to think critically about the context and history of the phrase, no, it becomes utterly unfounded. Stop excusing white ignorance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/05/20 12:10 AM
2

Congratulations on your "ignoring centuries of context" medal, Simone
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 11:59 PM
-11

lol no it wasn't, bad reporting by NPR. I get it, this is your particular hobby horse, but you're wrong
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 11:19 PM
-10

women have been trying to get men to take rape and sexual assault seriously for a very long time now! they've actually been victimized
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 10:04 PM
0

do you know who Bari Weiss is? This is her schtick
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 09:35 PM
-18

Bari Weiss is literally doing the thing they talk about in the piece. She's misstating the phrase intentionally to muddy the waters.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 09:24 PM
-19

This is Bari Weiss literally proving my point for me, thanks
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 08:55 PM
-18

Did you read the piece? It's very accurate. The rallying cry was "believe women" before conservatives got mad and turned it into "believe all women".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 07:34 PM
-1

https://imgur.com/a/sAwhyA3
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/05/20 06:47 AM
-2

OK
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/20 03:26 AM
-2

look man, you've clearly created an alternate universe for yourself in which the feminazis are coming for ur freespech and you are comfortable living in that universe. hell, it even has a tabloid called dailymail that caters to your delusions. I don't expect to get you to load up a uhaul and move out of your chosen world, but you should know that the things you write make you look like a small-assed clown
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 09:50 PM
-5

I saw your deleted comment lol
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 09:40 PM
-15

lol okay man the feminists and SJWs are coming to take your free speech, you caught us
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 09:29 PM
-4

do you know how student unions work? they just run the facilities and dole out permits. They're not the ones actually designing these workshops. It was "by" the student union in the same way a Cowboys game is "by" AT&T Stadium
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 09:19 PM
-8

Student Unions host a ton of different groups. Dailyfail picked the one that they thought would get people most riled up and did an EXPOSEEEEEE. Don't fall for it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 09:09 PM
0

I'm not a mod there. But thanks for agreeing!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 07:05 PM
-8

please stop responding to five of my comments at a time
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 05:36 PM
4

deeply silly to pretend anything they write is worth responding to
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 04:49 PM
-5

please provide any evidence at all that this is "a commonly supported idea"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 04:17 PM
12

this is dailymail spam. They're just trying to get people riled up. an obscure student group designed to come up with "radical ideas" had a bad idea. this is not somehow indicative of anything besides "college students say dumb stuff sometimes".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 04:05 PM
1

okay. So imagine going back thirty years, when homosexuality was still heavily stigmatized and in many places literally illegal. If you're an activist, don't you want straight people to listen to what you have to say about homophobia?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 03:43 PM
1

Do you live in a place where same sex partnerships are legal and not stigmatized?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 12:26 AM
1

Which of those groups do you belong to?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/20 12:08 AM
1

Of course those things are more important, but in the world we currently live in, black and brown Americans have racism directed at them by white people. This is a problem that we have to face up to.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 10:16 PM
2

okay, but again: if we live in a society where your skin color is a significant determinant of your class, we can't wish that problem away!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 09:50 PM
4

I agree that class-based analysis is quite important, but even in a classless society, we'd still have racism and sexism and homophobia and transphobia. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to pretend that's not the case.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 08:18 PM
1

I don't get your identity politics point?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 07:53 PM
2

Well it was in MensLib so presumably "feminists" know this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 05:23 PM
2

I wrote a whole post about this!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 05:12 PM
0

What does "intersectional" mean to you, in your own words?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/20 05:23 PM
0

lol ok man
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/20 09:02 PM
-1

why in the world are you so desperate for me to validate your post it is flattering that you feel like my approval is critical for your well-being but I assure you it's unnecessary I just wanted to call out the guy making a comically dumb statement
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/20 08:52 PM
1

The guy made quite a claim. I'm well-aware of many contexts in which financial abuse is a real-ass thing. He wrote If a husband doesn't give his wife money on demand (even if he's just trying to save enough to pay the electricity bill) that is considered domestic abuse by the courts and that needs a source :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/20 08:42 PM
0

I'm not sure "financial abuse" is the same thing as "a husband giving his wife money on demand and then being rung up on domestic abuse charges if he doesn't"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/20 08:25 PM
2

If a husband doesn't give his wife money on demand (even if he's just trying to save enough to pay the electricity bill) that is considered domestic abuse by the courts can you cite a source for this
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/20 08:13 PM
-2

at this point I don't believe you have any clue at all what "leftist" means except insofar as "leftist" means "not a conservative because conservatives are bad"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 10:35 PM
-1

Libertarian is neither left nor right wing by itself this is literally not true. the workers don't own the means of production in a libertarian utopia.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 10:24 PM
1

Leftism has a focus on personal freedoms. I'm sorry what? Are you sure you're not confusing leftism with libertarianism?????????????
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 10:02 PM
1

mate, I'm sorry, but you're living in an alternate universe. Even the liberal-ass DNC, hardly a leftist organization, counts feminist women among its core supporters and tailors its policies to match. The entire 20th century in leftism was profeminist (just as it was antiracist) and it remains so into the 21st. If you spend your time reading about the very narrow exceptions to this, you may come to believe that "a lot of leftists" believe as you do, but these are not the rule. Far from it! I beg…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 09:44 PM
-8

So can't respond to my logic huh? k
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 09:31 PM
-8

It's fine. Just keep voting for leftist parties like the other dude. Thanks
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 08:16 PM
-2

lmfao well thank you for admitting that you vote for parties that have always supported and will continue to support feminist goals! jesus that was an incredible self-own
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 07:51 PM
0

oh I see you participate in the "people make decisions and definitely aren't coerced into systems of oppression by forces outside their control" school of leftism. real popular in this sub! if you repeated any of this shit IRL to real leftists, they'd laugh in your fuckin face.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 07:29 PM
-3

what was the specific date and time that women stopped being oppressed and became privileged
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 07:11 PM
-4

The "alt-left"? "women are oppressed" isn't some new statement of principles that gender studies majors came up with. It's foundational leftism, right there with antiracism. Do you even know the history of leftist thought or are you solely dedicated to writing buzzwords on The Internets
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 06:35 PM
-11

mmk see this is why the actual left laughs at statements like OP's
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 06:24 PM
-14

Honestly, man, "the left" recognizes the oppression of women and the necessity of feminism. You're inventing some kind of mythical Marx-only left that doesn't really exist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/20 06:06 PM
0

If you talk to women, this kind of thing happens consistently in D&D and they generally enjoy when there's rules around it. This is one such group and a dude got yoinked for violating the rules. Tide goes in, tide goes out.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/05/20 07:41 PM
0

If you don't want to accept the story at face value, that's your problem
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/05/20 07:26 PM
1

I just did. Woman complains -> brief investigation of her claim ensues -> dude is yeeted. Despite what you may hear from mensrights and lwma, women aren't in the habit of lying about this shit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/05/20 03:33 PM
1

Making rules for participation is quite fair actually.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/05/20 03:23 PM
1

The point of zero tolerance policies like this one is to signal to people (in this case, women) that their comfort playing a fun D&D game is more important than an absolutist free speech mantra. You can recruit way more women to play a fun game if you can tell them if any dudes fuck around, we'll take care of it, no questions asked.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/05/20 03:13 PM
1

lmao k
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 11:27 PM
1

a person who is genuinely interested in talking to you, and understanding what you usually doesn't pour self-righteously denigrating shit on you. says the guy tripping over himself to write socjus tribe every fourth sentence. please learn some self awareness, this is some deeply cringey shit
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 11:16 PM
1

The guy presumably knew about the zero tolerance policy before he started playing D&D with the group.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 11:05 PM
1

Okay, I can conclude that you have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously, quit using "intersectionality" as some kind of weird AHA I GOT U SJW! thing. It looks really fucking stupid. That's why I was trying to nail you down on it, because, by any standard, what you wrote is gibberish. It is nonsense. Why does your argumentation ignore how the faith of intersectionality is itself becoming a system of power and privilege? This makes no sense. It is a combination of antifeminist buzzwords. I…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 10:53 PM
1

Dude. Work with me here. This was my reply. This is actually a VERY interesting question that I am happy to answer! First though: where in my replies did that question come from? I didn't mention intersectionality once. What I want to do is walk you through some really surface level History of Feminism stuff so you can understand the context here. Things like Liberal Feminism, etc. However, I really, really need to know what in the world you're talking about when you're bringing up intersectiona…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 10:43 PM
1

I want to answer your question, but as I said literally right as I responded, I need to know what in the world you're talking about with regards to "intersectionality". Otherwise, I cannot answer you with any kind of specificity or even generality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 10:30 PM
0

No, I don't. Please, seriously, explain to me the context in which you are asking about "intersectionality" here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 07:51 PM
1

I can only answer your question if I understand what in the world you're asking, and I don't understand.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 06:29 PM
1

dude, you sent me seven long messages, and I'm on a post clock in this sub so I can't respond to that volume of verbal vomit. Here's what you get: According to the story, the group has a zero tolerance policy. According to the story, he violated it. According to the story, he was kicked from the group, totally within the policy. If he doesn't want that to happen in the future, he should consider his behavior in light of the zero-tolerance policy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 04:57 PM
1

Even if I accepted that framing - which I don't - what does that have to do with intersectionality? I truly feel like I am missing something.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 01:16 AM
1

This is actually a VERY interesting question that I am happy to answer! First though: where in my replies did that question come from? I didn't mention intersectionality once.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 01:03 AM
1

If you tell me what's unclear, I'm happy to make myself clearer.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 12:52 AM
0

No, you have very literally and actually ignored my very clear, stated logic. You introduced "identity politics" when I never brought them up. If you don't want to interact with me, fine, but don't pretend like I was anything besides extremely clear. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 12:42 AM
0

Dude I'm talking about this guy's behavior, NOT about "identity politics".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 12:17 AM
0

It's as if all that's stopping you from saying "The social norm was for black people to sit in the backs of the buses. The people responsible for enforcing it enforced it. I don't know what's confusing you!" is that you catch yourself and notice, "Oh hey, those were black people – and they have a \%CurrentlyConsideredAProtectedMinority\% status, so that'd be wrong!", and it's as if this was some sort of lever that needs to be pulled for your group's collectivist, authoritarian sense of morality …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/20 12:04 AM
0

you keep being wilfully blind to the question whether these norms are just or not, nuanced or dumb, since the social rules in question harm people who aren't in one of your special interest groups, or have wrong genitalia, or skin color. That's all that seems to matter. Hold on hold on. The specific story we are talking about was not based on race or gender. Can you explain what you're talking about here?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 11:16 PM
0

I dare you to do a take where you say these words about any situation involving a member of one of the specially protected groups being excluded. Okay, I did it. So you're wrong. Look bro. You're shadowboxing with a strawman here. You keep talking about "tribe" and "socjus religion" and I'm not really interested in disabusing you of your own delusions. I will say again: The norm and coc there was to not slap female characters on the ass. The people who enforce those rules enforced them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 09:22 PM
1

what the fuck are you even talking about? American society values "free speech". We also value free association, which means that one's speech comes with attendant consequences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 04:45 PM
0

What you are responding to is not my argument. This man was shown to be neither racist, sexist, nor homophobic with any credibility. You talking about the D&D dude? The norm and coc there was to not slap female characters on the ass. The people who enforce those rules enforced them. I was directing your attention to the utter hypocrisy of your tribe's tendency to interpret terms of social contract "this isn't a right! this white man just didn't earn this privilege! it's a liberal society! learn …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 08:07 AM
0

I am responding very clearly and honestly to this: are you really willfully blind to how you are using the logic to excuse this man being excluded from access to a social circle that caters to his hobby, but would never be okay with this argument applied to a member of literally any other social group I listed? I'm sorry if that was unclear before, I should've used inline quotes. For the rest of what you wrote, including: I'm one civil comment deep into a member of a SocJus cult and the rest of …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 07:42 AM
0

Excluding racists and sexists and homophobes in leftist social groups (and of course the opposite in conservative social groups) is the very basis of free association. This has happened since the beginning of time and it is the cornerstone of liberal society. It is silly to the point of parody to pretend like leftish folks are simply going to accept people who disagree with their principles! I have no idea which socialists or otherwise lefty groups you think do this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 04:43 AM
0

Are you under the delusion that what you write doesn't happen daily? This is very literally the concept of social justice that you're talking about. Making choices about who's welcome in any given space based on their behavior and ideals is something that's good and right. Making those choices based on "this person is a member of a marginalized group" is bad. Pretending those two things are the same would make that person look and sound like they're not a very deep thinker.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/20 04:13 AM
1

that's not even sort of censorship. "censorship" isn't when a cost is imposed for expressing one's views. Indeed, imposing social costs for antisocial views is literally the definition of society.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/20 07:49 PM
0

You're saying that free association, the very basis of the western concept of liberty, is immoral.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/20 04:07 PM
0

You can't say whatever you want at a euchre tournament, a Costco, or a high school basketball game. You do not have freedom of speech at any of these places. In the same way, you do not have free speech on the internet.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/20 03:50 PM
1

This is a deeply illogical and frankly totally fucking stupid interpretation of my post. Like, absolute total microbrain stuff.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/05/20 03:00 PM
-1

the right wing literally uses "FREE SPEEEECH" subs like this to blackpill its users. literally, unironically, THIS
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/04/20 04:26 PM
0

lmfao thanks for the relationship advice
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 05:32 PM
0

listen. I am under no obligation to somehow prove to a rando on the internet that I'm sufficiently trained in antifeminist arguments, and it's really fuckin stupid to presume that I am.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 05:04 PM
1

k
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 04:54 PM
1

dude, what are you even doing right now? Like, you're trying to figure out a way in which I am insufficiently reading arguments against my own position or something, I don't even know. This is fuckin stupid.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 04:43 PM
1

[gestures wildly to everything in existence]
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 04:33 PM
1

Do you for some reason believe that lefty feminists don't fucking constantly hear "arguments" against what they believe? What planet are you living on
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 04:20 PM
1

I honestly have no idea what the fuck you're even saying right now.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:59 PM
1

It is literally the exact same social compact underpinning both church and a D&D group.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:49 PM
1

Every group chooses their own "core pillars". Here, we had a D&D group that prioritized their players' comfort. This is, again, exactly how social groups have always worked and will always work. You're asking for a total reconception of how free association works. You're asserting rights you've never had. It is VERY silly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:39 PM
1

1: I'm not a mod there 2: 99% of people who complain about "intersectional feminism" don't know what they're talking about and are parroting anti-SJW youtubers who, themselves, do not know what they're talking about. 3: I'm saying that you're comparing apples to wallets. "Censorship", in your VERY dumb construction of it, happens all the time. You cannot go to a church and shout "GOD DOESN'T EXIST". You cannot go to a mall and call black people the n-word. You cannot go to a house party and say …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:25 PM
2

You responded to my calm logic with a barrage of words that describe your feelings about "censorship" so I'll just assume you have no rational rebuttal.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:14 PM
1

In any given voluntary social group, any code of conduct is suitable. He can go find another group, because this is a free country, and the rest of them can be done with him. This is the very basis of the concept of free association. Being part of that group is a privilege, not a right, and he forfeited it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 03:00 PM
1

"A whole world view" huh? You mean... the code of conduct that the server admins enforce...?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 02:50 PM
1

Would absolutely love to hear your logic chain here
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 02:39 PM
1

...these are literal children that we're watching
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 01:27 AM
1

This isn't censorship. This is enforcement of a social norm within a group.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/04/20 10:17 PM
33

An "actual" mgtow is just some dude with hobbies and friends who's never heard of stupid internet labels
/r/ExRedPill25/04/20 01:49 AM
-10

honestly, most of your posts are pretty interchangeable, this one included. feminism bad etc I don't really see any need to read them anymore. Sorry dude
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/20 08:18 PM
-8

Of course not! Do you think I'd be this much of a dumbass on my "main" account if I had alts?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/20 06:03 PM
-5

Hat tip /u/TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK in MensLib!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/20 05:09 PM
-18

The police don't look up years-old allegations of petty theft. This is just ragebait for people who really really really want to have opinions about Cardi B
/r/PussyPassDenied14/04/20 03:18 PM
1

Cheating on your spouse is immoral but not illegal
/r/MensRights12/04/20 11:55 PM
0

I can't formulate enough sentences to argue with you. Sorry. Okay.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 03:24 AM
-1

...having an understanding about (very literal, vast, and documented) disinformation campaigns organized by foreign governments is not "Orwellian" and it is fucking laughable to even begin to pretend like George Orwell would consider it so. Christ. Read the words you write before you hit save. Or, if you actually did that before you hit save, read the fucking books.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 02:52 AM
-1

It is extremely weird to me that "Warren plays identity politics" is an issue on a sub like LWMA that is explicitly dedicated to identity politics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 02:30 AM
-4

relying on "a single instance" is literally the thing I am saying is insufficient.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/20 03:58 AM
-5

I don't think a single article is sufficient to prove this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/20 02:56 AM
2

...I'm not the one complaining here. Identities and their intersections are important to discuss. You are the one who's pitching a hissy fit about "identity politics".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/12/19 09:11 PM
-1

Feminists aren't the ones whining about identity politics on a sub dedicated to identity politics dude
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/12/19 09:01 PM
0

What specifically do you mean?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/12/19 08:40 PM
-2

You're writing this on a subreddit dedicated to identity politics
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/12/19 05:09 PM
1

OP is literally here to blackpill this sub. Check his history.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/19 04:31 PM
0

"I got censored", in the context of internet forums, is absolutely never in good faith. Never. Look man, not every place is designed for The Free Speech. Some places have rules, like "we're not a space for arguing about the concept of feminism" or "don't bother arguing about legal paternal surrender or else you'll get banned". (By the way! These same principles are quite liberal and apply in real life too! Go try to be a loud racist idiot in a mall!) What happens with spaces like this is that ri…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 09:58 PM
0

oh my god did you seriously post a link to a wikipedia article about orwell, holy fucking christ lmfao anyway, conservatives run the roost here at /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates because the mods don't mod. That's why menslib uses the actual mod tools that reddit designed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 09:27 PM
0

1: if that's what they reported back, they were lying or illiterate. 2: it's just called the patriarchy. Saying "patriarchy theory" makes you sound uneducated. Hell, I don't even like the term and at least I know how to use the language properly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 09:14 PM
1

As far as I can tell, you're actively ignoring what I am saying. Why the fuck would I keep trying to talk to you? Christ, man.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 02:45 AM
1

NOW is feminism. Mary Koss is feminism. Okay, so the answer is "no". Please read a book. Try "feminism is for everyone".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 02:32 AM
1

Feminism is not NOW, nor is it Mary Koss. Do you understand this, yes or no?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 02:14 AM
1

Look man. I think that there's a deeply stupid habit talking about "feminism" like everyone from Dworkin to Gillibrand to (((the deep state feminists))) all meet to agree that girls' issues take precedence over boys. There is a deep ahistoricity there, and when it's so obvious, it's hard to take this kind of stupid antifeminism seriously. (that's what's happening here, A LOT: "feminism" is just women's advocacy that you don't particularly like.) That said? Look at my most recent post in /r/mensl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 02:00 AM
1

This user has extremely literally called out the "feminist oppressor class"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 01:44 AM
-1

And neither do places like /r/MensLib that don't make half their posts about "feminists" or "double standards!!!". I get it; it's really satisfying to feel like you're a victim fighting uphill against oppressors. In your case, the oppressor class is a nebulous group of "feminists" - by fighting them, you feel like you're righting a wrong, like you're a hero. Unfortunately, your logic and reason skills hit a wall whenever anyone tries to introduce any narrative that contradicts the one you've inv…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/12/19 12:33 AM
0

Okay, honestly, I take this as an admission that this place is basically designed to be petty. Like yesterday I wrote a long post about men and agency, an issue at the root of how men are perceived and treated by society. Something built into our culture and our gender roles. Talking about a couple million dollars in aid money... it's just such small thinking that allows you to aim your fire at your favorite bogeyman. That's it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 11:48 PM
1

My issue is the absolute desperation with which this sub wants it to be the Oppression Olympics. Look man, "gender based" scholarships are a tiny fraction of overall scholarship money, and the vast majority of it goes to "girls in stem" or its equivalent, "men in teaching" - places where each has generally been underrepresented. And while you handwave away the systematic affirmative action that boys are receiving just to get into college, you are hung up on a tiny fraction of the overall money a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 11:16 PM
1

1: okay? Gender-based scholarships disproportionately target girls, but are an extremely (extremely!) small proportion of scholarship money. 2: your source says literally nothing about federal grants.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 09:25 PM
-2

Men are the ones who are receiving affirmative action in colleges (article from 2011 but the problem of boys being left behind and therefore receiving affirmative action has not changed since)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/19 07:05 PM
0

"A bunch of 18-22 year old women have complained on the sporadic occasions that a bunch of 18-22 year old men have tried to form a men's club on campus". Christ, I feel petty just typing that out. It quickly becomes really sadly obvious that this is just mensrights in a nicer dress shirt, because basically the whole schtick here is "feminists suck, but I'm gonna write paragraphs instead of sentences". Too bad, man, all the energy here would be helpful to real issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 11:19 PM
0

This is such small bore stuff. Can we talk about men's issues instead of feminism? Please?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 11:08 PM
1

Look man, just go talk about men's issues. Don't talk about feminism. Don't argue about feminism. That's not what menslib is for. It is a GREAT place to talk about men's issues. Feminists have always fought against men's organizations trying to get fathers a fairer shake in family courts and the implementation of shared parenting laws. Family courts are generally fair. /u/ciceros_assassin actually had a very long post about this. They have fought against the existence of men's organizations on c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 10:58 PM
0

Dude. Not only is that untrue, but seriously do you have any idea how easy it is to talk about men's issues without "talking about feminism"? Seriously. Very, very easy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 10:31 PM
0

look man, you need to be comfortable with the fact that sometimes "feminist" doesn't mean what you really, really want it to mean.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 08:20 PM
1

since when does "incels" equal "men"???
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/12/19 03:13 AM
1

what do you mean, specifically?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 09:48 PM
1

Not going to answer me. Typical. Got it, I can ignore you going forward.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 08:51 PM
1

Do you perhaps see a contradiction to the idea that a rightwinger's ideas are being praised in an explicitly left wing subreddit?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 08:42 PM
0

look man, if he really believes that being a scholar at a right-wing think tank is the same thing as being a checker at chick-fil-a, then he's an idiot. If he doesn't believe that and was instead trying to make a facile point, hoping no one would notice how fragile it was, he's a fraud. Dude is fundamentally unserious.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 08:28 PM
0

Hey I’m living rent free in yours 😘
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 08:18 PM
-1

still tripping over your own dick not to even make a passing attempt to make even a fraction of a logical or rational point. Impressive stuff. This is embarrassing for you and if you want this place to be taken seriously you should close the laptop 😂
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 08:07 PM
-1

still not even making a passing attempt to defend your own comically inept word salad. I'm happy that you've admitted you have no argument.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 07:57 PM
-2

lol, just straight admitting that you had no idea what you were talking about, super proud of you for owning up to it. /u/korvar just google "christina hoff summers koch", not that difficult.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 07:40 PM
-4

if you can't even be arsed to understand what "ad hominem" means then I'm not going to deign to address this wordgoop. cope.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 07:30 PM
2

yeah, the lady employed by the fucking American Enterprise Institute is tooooootally not a conservative. If you don't want to believe the facts in front of your face then that's your prerogative but don't expect me to debate whatever farce you come up with.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 07:03 PM
-1

She actually is right wing. Clearly people who call themselves feminist can also be socially conservative. Those are not the same people writing "men are trash". You are intentionally conflating the two sets of people. That is dishonest.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 05:42 PM
2

"Well, those are not actual feminists. They are just using that term in order to legitimize their right-wing reactionary ideas." You cannot find anyone in the posts linked by OP who says this, because no one says this. What people might say is that women are systematically oppressed by men, and therefore "men are trash" is an expression of frustration. This is a flawed and unsatisfying response, but it's also definitely not "they are actually right-wing".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 04:43 PM
0

Money is a fungible good. If the child is being cared for by its primary caregiver, the child support money is doing its job. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fungibility.asp
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 04:20 PM
0

The rest of his post was mostly unfalsifiable nonsense and am not interested in debating how many single mothers can dance on the head of a pin. As for your "point": I never wrote that the state had strong accountability measures. Who are you arguing with? Not me, clearly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 03:34 PM
0

Still waiting for you to disabuse me of the plain meaning of your words. Waiting
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 04:10 AM
-1

I'm sorry for your experience. It is unfortunately insufficient to conclude that child support is somehow a system designed to give mothers free money.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 12:43 AM
-1

Okay I'll just assume that you truly believe that child support is somehow not for the alive innocent child. Thanks. Pretty much all I needed to know.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/12/19 12:23 AM
-5

Defend your beliefs or just admit that you can't. Child support: for the child. Not for the mother.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 11:53 PM
1

Are you going to respond to my assertion or should I assume you have no logical rebuttal?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 10:10 PM
0

Dude, what? Child support is for the child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 09:25 PM
-1

This is not lighthearted at all: pretending like the court bias men face (that you've invented in your head) is at all like the systematic racism that black Americans face is deeply stupid and offensive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 08:48 PM
1

Some brief history: up until the mid-1800s, courts would award full custody to fathers in a divorce (this was a time when children were viewed basically as property of the father, and women had very few legal rights). A woman named Caroline Norton, an early feminist and activist, successfully petitioned the UK Parliament to pass a law, commonly known as the "Tender Years Doctrine," that would presumptively give custody to the mother (this law was adopted in a limited form in the late 1830s, and …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 08:38 PM
-1

This is still not even close to confirming what you asserted. Please source your claims.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 06:39 PM
-2

Your link provides zero state level sources on visitation rights.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/12/19 12:37 AM
1

Absolutely. I think there's sometimes a habit of calling regular dating mishaps "oppression" in a way I don't think is helpful or reasonable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 10:44 PM
1

No, it doesn't. There's a line between frustration and hate and some subs cross it
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 09:53 PM
1

Lol, what do you want man. I get a feel for the type of conversation that is happening in the sub and I figure out whether it's a debate sub or a vent sub In meatspace it's called reading the room
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 09:30 PM
1

Holistically.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 09:17 PM
1

On a case by case basis. Like I just wrote.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 09:07 PM
1

Not sure that is what I wrote. Try again thanks
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 08:57 PM
1

I don't, no. It's a case-by-case understanding of how different subreddit userbases work.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 08:47 PM
-2

From an enforcement and awareness perspective, yes, it totally does matter.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 08:36 PM
-4

We can only say that if we agree that domestic violence is a symmetrical problem, and it's not. Sometimes women do actually have problems that we need to solve as a women-first issue, even if the problem also affects a smaller proportion of men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 08:26 PM
-3

why would a mother put up with her baby daddy when she can kick him out and start cashing in on welfare and child support checks? There are two problems with this sentence. 1) it implies that women have the option of kicking men out, which is unsupported. 2) it implies that, were a woman and man to separate, it's usually her "kicking him out" and not him leaving. You may provide evidence of either of these claims. How does the man in this case remain relevant to the mother and his child? In your…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 07:28 PM
0

Sometimes it feels good to have your life and experiences validated instead of having them turned into a "debate". That said, TRP is very bad in a number of ways that places like /r/niceguys is not bad. But I think you probably get my point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 07:18 PM
-1

It's a lot easier to deal with these kinds of subs when you realize they're being written from women's perspectives and they’re not intended to be God’s Honest Truth About Life
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 05:22 PM
9

Of course! There's a general consensus that boys are being under-served by our current system, and we have a ton of boys and young men falling into the alt-right. The average person understands this and wants to help.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/12/19 06:00 AM
1

can you provide an example of this?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/12/19 02:13 AM
1

You have the reading comprehension of a toddler. 👶🏾
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 09:13 PM
1

Read the entire paragraph and respond to it in full. If your response is the same, congratulations, you have the reading comprehension of a toddler.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 09:01 PM
1

It is so impressive that you stopped reading EXACTLY as I explained that context holy cow
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 08:26 PM
1

What do you mean? Be specific.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 06:39 PM
1

Okay good luck with your totally weird and not at all factual timescales
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 03:50 AM
1

Please, I beg of you, just answer my question
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 02:29 AM
1

"College students" != "feminism" Again this is literally a fox news tactic you're using
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 10:58 PM
-1

Try responding to what I wrote instead. Thanks
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 06:55 PM
-2

Christ. Look man, you're doing the very literal exact same thing as Fox News, except you're calling it "feminists" instead of "leftists" because it serves your point. The actual facts: you're trying to use a couple campus protests to illustrate a claim that is wildly out of scope for what those protests actually support. Your original point was "feminism is limiting freedom of speech". Your evidence? College students protesting a very small number of idiots. I get why you want to pretend like th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 04:55 PM
-2

Okay, you can't answer. Got it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 03:34 PM
-3

Because you used the word so hilariously wrong that I want to make sure I'm not completely wasting my time. Go on. Please. Thanks in advance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 05:23 AM
1

What specifically do you think the word intersectionality means in a social justice context? Specifically.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 04:54 AM
0

Dunno what you mean by "intersectional feminists", and frankly I see so many mistakes about what "intersectional" means that I am pretty sure you're getting it wrong, so consider learning about that. But uh, okay? If you have a chance to speak and don't want to give up the mic, don't? This is rarely an administrator issue, it's almost always some visiting whiner whose feelings are hurt by protests. To /u/thelonelybull, because my responses are limited on this sub: provide receipts for your bans.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 04:00 AM
-2

Wait a minute. Protests designed to shut down free speech are by definition limiting free speech. It's my understanding that in the case of Oberlin it has been extremely well established that professors "unleash the students" on anyone who says things they dont want to hear. That is institutionalized limitation of freedom of speech. Your "evidence" is a single text sent by a single professor. Hmm. And either way, it doesn't matter. Oberlin students are Americans, and Americans are entitled to pr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 03:17 AM
1

Last first: being mocked on social media is not "limiting freedom of speech". To your other point: protesting is, itself, an expression of speech. Sorry, for such a grand claim, you need receipts and these ain't it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 03:05 AM
4

Can you give me an example of "feminism limiting free speech"? Not some random subreddit. Feminism, the movement.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 02:02 AM
0

exactly what I did. my life is bliss
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 08:49 PM
0

His responses to me are constantly, constantly in extremely bad faith. I just blocked him. Makes it easier.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 02:13 AM
-2

lol luckily reddit has a block function thxbye
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 01:50 AM
1

please go away
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 01:40 AM
1

I have specifically asked you never to interact with me. Please stop.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 01:28 AM
0

Honestly, "feminists just hate men" is a mainstream view from like 1913. This is not "development" - it's retrograde.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 12:17 AM
1

Can you please be specific?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 12:03 AM
2

No, they didn't. They believed he was protesting in good faith and they were just angry white people. These two things are not the same. You are welcome to be the sucker who believes they are, but they're not. This is very literally the concept of sealioning and you're intentionally missing the point to play the bothsides game.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 09:12 PM
1

You cannot compare two things that are not the same and pretend that they are the same. Sealioning is not the same as Kaep protesting systematic American racism, because one is specifically not done in good faith.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 07:04 PM
1

Then why make the sea lion so, so, so annoying?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:05 PM
1

Be more specific
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 07:42 AM
0

wow folks, explain specifically how he's gonna get owned and he still walks straight into that rake. Amazing, see, watch him do it again
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:45 AM
0

bzzt many sorries wrong answer to "the audience": this is me owning him 😎 (just watch! He's about to take the bait again and again 😂)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:35 AM
1

No seriously who are you, I'm trying to gauge if I care. Unlikely but make your case below
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:25 AM
3

lmfao do I know you, Mr Very Mad
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 05:15 AM
1

Lol if "the audience" is on the fence about dumb shit like "people deserve a baseline level of respect as humans" then "the audience" can suck my ass too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 04:58 AM
1

Your problem is naively assuming that these mouthbreathers are engaging in good faith. They aren't. I recommend you learn that 😁
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/11/19 03:25 AM
2

...mmk
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 09:32 PM
2

And you don't believe there are way, way better methods to draw that comic if the author wanted to make that point okay
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 08:58 PM
2

Like... showing up in their bedroom? It seems as if you're intentionally missing the point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 08:46 PM
1

...then why draw the sea lion as a disingenuous, overly persistent shithead?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 08:35 PM
0

The point is that they dislike sea lions for being disingenuous, overly persistent shitheads. It has less than nothing to do with being a minority.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 08:21 PM
-3

Gotta say, you really missed the point of that sea lion comic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/19 08:11 PM
2

Don't bother. He's a redpill idiot.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/11/19 04:02 PM
2

I accept your concession.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 02:41 AM
1

No scientific sources. Got it :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 02:17 AM
1

Your source says "women like men with muscular torsos". You seem to think that means a lot of things that aren't "women like men with muscular torsos".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 02:07 AM
0

So you do not have a source. Got it, thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 01:56 AM
0

You're making an appeal to biology. That needs a scientific source.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 01:37 AM
1

because our brains are wired to be that way. can you cite your "biology" sources please?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/19 01:26 AM
5

There's a reason why all the dating advice I give comes with the rule "say the word 'date' early and often".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 07:02 PM
5

This was TwoX
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/19 06:47 PM
1

I'll give you a hint: "these articles by a smattering of feminists don't specifically talk about me, specifically" Is not even sort of the same thing as "feminists assume men consent by default"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/19 12:48 AM
1

Even cherry-picking your cherry picked articles. Man just let it go, you found something you can't blame on feminists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/19 12:28 AM
1

Your cherry picked examples barely even mention gender. They occasionally gesture at it. If this is truly the best you can do then the official ruling is that your accusation about feminists' common beliefs is FALSE.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/19 12:00 AM
0

So even in your cherry-picked examples, there's no evidence at all that it's a common feminist sentiment that "women never have to get consent. It's just assumed men always say yes." I'll just assume you're grasping at straws trying to blame The Feminists and move on. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/11/19 06:18 PM
0

I'm gonna need to see evidence that's the case.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/11/19 01:26 AM
0

This is not a common feminist sentiment.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/11/19 07:04 PM
1

Because children cost money? This doesn't seem controversial?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/19 04:39 AM
1

We don't do that "for women". We do this so the children produced here don't grow up starving. Like, I don't want to talk down to you, but "people should have unlimited freedom of choice, and the state should pay for it all" is so far away from modern left-wing thought that I really cannot overstate how wild that perspective is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/19 01:46 AM
1

Holy shit, girl writes what. I cannot believe you are still on reddit.com. Anyway, so what you're saying when you write "While these laws are technically gender neutral..." is that it's kind of complicated because women are the ones who actually carry a child and give birth to it. I agree! This is not easy. I'm not wrong. I'm forcing everyone in this subreddit who advocates for paternal surrender to realize that this is more complicated than they're willing to admit.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 11:49 PM
2

Look man, you've never had free speech on the internet. You've never even had free speech irl! People have always set up spaces specifically dedicated to one or another point of view, and they've always enforced the rules of discussion there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 11:35 PM
-1

It is you, specifically, who in not interested in interacting with. Please stop.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 02:28 PM
0

Please don't make me block you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/19 01:57 AM
0

No. Just you. Move on.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 11:59 PM
0

Haven't I repeatedly told you that I have no interest in talking to you?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 04:04 PM
2

An absolutely perfect distillation of my point. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 03:17 PM
0

I can't spend the time explaining to you again how deeply dumb this is. Sorry. Have a nice life.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 02:36 PM
0

We've already had this argument and I concluded that yours was absolutely, deeply terrible. I'm not going to have it again with you. Please do not try to goad me into it. Thanks.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 12:56 AM
1

god, okay, it is extremely, extremely, extremely rare, and can be solved with MORE oversight, not paternal surrender. please try to be a little less condescending :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/10/19 12:21 AM
1

It's not "half-adopting out a child". You can't half-adopt a child any more than you can have half a child. All you can do is assign all the responsibility for the child you sired to its mother. And again, what's stopping me from "cutting the legal family bonds" just so my family can collect more money for the child's upbringing? "His dad signed the papers. You now owe me $7000 per year, Mr. Government." You're simultaneously creating a massive new entitlement that's basically unenforceable from…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 11:06 PM
1

Because adoption is not a first resort the way paternal surrender would be. There are lots of reasons not to adopt your child out. That is a complicated calculus. On the other hand, why wouldn't any man just refuse to support the alive, innocent child that he sired?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 10:18 PM
2

There is no alive child when a fetus is aborted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 08:14 PM
1

With the current legislation, and not with what I am suggesting, it is possible for parents to make the decision that they don't want to be around, and absolutely crush their child like that. Also, with the current legislation it is possible for a parent to decide that they do not want to be around any more, and crush a child completely like that. They just have to send a monthly check of child support and they are good to go - and the child support check would be the only thing to change, if an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 07:59 PM
1

Adoption would not stop the absolute crush of children whose parents have decided they don't want to be around anymore, because they can now legally do that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 07:32 PM
1

Okay. So you want to redefine humanity. That's what would happen. Saying that no parent will ever have to stay a parent, and that the government will raise your child for you, will so fundamentally redefine the incentive structure here that we cannot even begin to imagine the consequences. You're allowed to want that, but most people recognize that it's insane.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 07:22 PM
2

Women do not have the option to abandon their alive, innocent child any more than men do. What you are talking about is creating a vast new ecosystem in which any parent, or both parents, can demand that the government raise their child for them. Your plan very literally means rethinking the concept of childrearing that stretches back to the beginning of homo Sapiens.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 07:04 PM
1

Is your argument that it is important for men to have a consequence to an unintended pregnancy, because otherwise they would not try to avoid getting women pregnant? There's always a consequence for unintended pregnancy. That's my point. Your stated preference is to shift that consequence off of the person who caused it. If so, that is an incredibly dark view on how men behave. Incentive structures are extremely powerful. Regarding the current legislation: I thought that we are arguing on what a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 06:46 PM
1

The financial support must be taken over by the state. I believe it is more fair to have society pay for raising its children, than to have the cost of raising a child as a penalty for having sex. Note that this leaves the children with more support than they would have if the father does not actually have the financial means to support the child. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard What you describe is precisely the kind of thing that we legislate against. Let's be clear: women still bea…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 06:22 PM
-2

To be honest I truly have no idea where you're coming from when you say "you guys don't seem to recognize female abusers where they appear."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 05:39 PM
-1

Can you actually argue why it makes extremely bad policy, instead of insulting people? I actually prefer to hear the arguments. It would result in poorer outcomes for vulnerable children. You cannot use "men are just abandoning FETUSES!" sleight-of-hand as your logic. The fact on the ground would be children with less support. As for adoption: could you provide any sources that state that a father can give up his child for adoption? I was not aware this was a possibility, also this seems a contr…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 04:51 PM
-8

Look man. I hate to break it to you, but paternal surrender not being an option is not some kind of feminist conspiracy. It's just extremely bad policy. Everyone besides a tiny group of fringe internet weirdos understands this. Adoption is gender-neutral.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 04:05 PM
0

Can you provide me data that indicates "r/MensLib spends more time excusing feminist toxicity then discussing men's liberation"? Because my experience is much different.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/10/19 02:39 AM
1

Mmm hmm yes tell me more about how thoughtcatalog rants are actually good sources
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 05:13 PM
1

Congratulations on having the worst "citation" I've ever seen anyone on this website actually try to pass off as legit. At this point I don't believe you have any idea what you're talking about.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 03:01 PM
1

Luckily, custody does not default to the woman. Again: You're just inventing things that aren't true and pretending they're true. Ain't gonna play that game
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 02:08 AM
1

Safe haven laws are mostly gender-neutral. Adoption is gender-neutral. Any man who has a uterus is entitled to an abortion. You're just inventing things that aren't true and pretending they're true. Ain't gonna play that game
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/19 12:02 AM
2

hmm, okay, since you insisted upon appending that to the end of your comment, I won't bother explaining all the ways you're wrong. I recommend reading people charitably in the future :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/10/19 06:02 PM
2

The woman has the "three A's" available to her: Abortion, adoption, and abandonment (leaving your child anonymously, legally, and against the consent of the father, at places like courthouses and fire stations). okay so pretending like "the woman" has unlimited access to these things is your fallacy. You really need to introduce nuance into this thinking.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/10/19 02:36 AM
1

So you can't respond to what I wrote? Specifically. Be specific.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/10/19 01:51 AM
0

My point is exactly what I wrote: what specific rights do you think men lack?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 06:46 AM
-4

The left wing supports non-circ causes. The hypocrisy is imagined. This is willful victimhood. Please stick to the topic or refrain from commenting.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 03:07 AM
1

My body, my choice ✔️ My money, my choice ❎ the problem is that these two things are not the same. Pretending like they are is your fallacy. Any woman and man who have a child are on the exact same hook for financially supporting that child. Hell there are cases where women have put their children up for adoption, against the consent of the father, and the father wasn't allowed to adopt them Outside of an extremely small number of edge cases, this isn't the case. Any identified father always has…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 02:56 AM
1

Reproductive rights. The right to both financial autonomy and bodily autonomy in marriage and in divorce. The right to equal custody for their children. these things are gender-neutral, so I am not sure what you're talking about?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 02:10 AM
2

No, you're not playing by the rules of OP. Try again or admit that you're talking about something else, so I can ignore you. Thanks in advance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 01:56 AM
2

Okay, sure, but the concept of this OP is about the left wing objecting to "men's rights". What you said isn't something that the "left wing" objects to. So please try to stay on topic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 12:40 AM
-1

Please answer my question, thanks
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/19 12:00 AM
1

Putting up barriers to discovery makes it more difficult to join a community. Might as well keep it open and then ban the morons
/r/MensRights19/10/19 07:42 PM
-2

What specific rights do you think men lack?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/19 06:47 PM
-14

prove who right about what?
/r/MensRights09/10/19 08:36 PM
-16

no, who are you? I just got ANOTHER request in my inbox for my sub so I figured it was probably posted here. lo and behold
/r/MensRights09/10/19 08:06 PM
-16

you know I'm a dude, right
/r/MensRights09/10/19 07:53 PM
-12

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hate-harassment-incidents-spike-since-donald-trump-election/ try facts next time sweetie
/r/PussyPassDenied30/09/19 09:14 PM
2

If there were a law against adultery, people just wouldn't get married. It seems like you're okay taking away sources of pleasure and fun for people, which is not a vote-winner.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/19 03:00 AM
2

are you talking about legal regulation?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/19 02:50 AM
1

good thing you're not mad
/r/MGTOW11/09/19 01:58 AM
1

lmfao the fact that you immediately came here to complain is a really perfect example of why we canned you
/r/MGTOW10/09/19 09:59 PM
0

Going into a bar != putting one's self in violent circumstances. Again, this is EXTREMELY OBVIOUS, to the point that I am curious how any person could ever miss this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 05:40 PM
-1

Yes. This doesn't mean that men who are victims of violence are somehow at fault. This means that men are more likely to place themselves in violent circumstances. The difference between these two things is extremely fucking obvious.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 05:30 PM
-1

I wasn't "asking for it" when I was sexually assaulted in a bar by a woman. agreed No man who gets violently mugged is "asking for it." correct But for some reason you seem to think it's okay to imply that we're at fault for our own victimization at the hands of predatory individuals. didn't do that. Please do not struggle to read things into my posts that I did not write thanks. :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 05:08 PM
-2

It's really not. Trying to pretend that men bear no agency at all in these conversations is deeply stupid. Again, I am happy to talk about the underlying causes of things like gang violence and machismo that are often part and parcel of male violence, but trying to pretend it's "as asinine and victim-blamey as saying women who get assaulted brought it on themselves because they led someone on" is fuckin laughable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 04:54 PM
1

Good, I support helping men, that's fantastic and I love it!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 03:06 PM
1

What are you trying to imply, specifically?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/19 02:53 PM
0

talking about white male privilege is not the same thing as "comparing black people and males".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/09/19 03:22 AM
1

It matters because men placing themselves in violent circumstances is different from women not doing that and being victims of violence.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 11:43 PM
0

But I don't see how they are "by definition not comparable", or specifically why you think they aren't comparable because race and gender have entirely different histories, contexts, and applications.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 10:54 PM
1

And there we have it: you're blaming every man for things some men do I am truly starting to wonder about reading comprehension here. No, you would never write it about black americans because in your subculture it's unacceptable to be bigoted against black americans but acceptable against men. okay, you're just inventing things, assigning them to "me", and pretending I believe them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 10:44 PM
1

You're saying that violence against men is qualitatively different than violence against women because some men engage in violence. these things are different because the violence "against" men is part and parcel of men committing violence. Again: You're unwilling to support your statement when applied to black people, because you know your statement is bigoted. by changing what I wrote, it no longer becomes my statement. I would never write that about black Americans, because it doesn't apply t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 10:16 PM
1

did you mean to post some other quote? That's not an example of me judging people based on the actions of others of the same race/gender/sexuality/whatever
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 10:06 PM
0

yes!!! You are finally starting to get it. Gender and race are two entirely different systems. They can intersect - a black woman experiences life differently from a white woman - but they are by definition not comparable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 09:56 PM
1

well good thing I'm not doing that
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 09:45 PM
1

what are you even saying right now? be more clear with your words.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 09:05 PM
1

lol, no, that was me. I'm not a mod there, and it was just a mistake on my part.
/r/MensRights02/09/19 08:58 PM
1

The relevant difference is that the whole history of Earth and humanity has treated gender and race differently. If you cannot see this then it is on you to correct the lens through which you view the social sciences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 08:55 PM
0

The hurdle is that two things that are not the same are not the same. That is just plain logic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 08:45 PM
-2

comparing two things that are not the same and pretending that they are the same is your version of "logic"? Okay.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 08:17 PM
-3

No, that's not on me. It's obvious on the face of it that race and gender are not the same thing. If someone wants to compare them, it's on them to overcome the hurdles associated with comparing two things that are not the same.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 06:30 PM
0

It's not the same logic, because race and gender are not the same thing. Pretending they are the same thing is your fallacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 02:35 AM
-1

Comparing race and gender doesn't make any sense, so I'm afraid there's no way to logically respond to your post.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/19 01:55 AM
1

It goes out of its way to emphasize that even in incredibly violent circumstances, such as war and genocide, there is more concern about violence against women than violence against men. Let's be clear: this is because men are the ones perpetrating the violence.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/09/19 08:53 PM
-3

It can absolutely line up with gender stereotypes, yes, but that doesn't make it wrong. Frankly, I think my analysis is correct on the face of it. On the male side we could talk about many victims having made the bad decision to join gangs. But it seems just as valid to talk about many female victims making, for example, the bad decision to date gang members. I suspect the fact that we're more likely to jump to the first thought than the second (and in fact I think there's more of a taboo on the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/19 10:46 PM
-12

The problem here is that the article treats "violence" as a thing totally divorced from context. "Violence against women" is a problem because the vast majority of male-on-male violence is, in context, fairly predictable. Men are more likely to choose violent circumstances than women. We can talk about why that's the case - for example, gang violence is linked to a lack of opportunity in the inner city, itself a symptom of racism - but violence against women is qualitatively different from male-…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/19 09:12 PM
1

So your idea is that taxpayers are more responsible for the child you sired than you are? That's called moral hazard. It's the very antithesis of good governance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/19 12:31 AM
0

The problem is that children would materially suffer under your plan. That's why it'll never happen.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/19 12:21 AM
0

you keep talking about the father and not the child he sired. That's the problem. it's not the mother who suffers, it's the child.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/08/19 12:08 AM
0

if a woman "backs out" there is no resultant child if a man "backs out" there is a child you're comparing two things that aren't the same and demanding that we pretend that they are the same
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/19 11:33 PM
3

Man, honestly, it's weird, because I still feel bad for you. I imagine you're a not-all-that-young white dude who doesn't have a lot of social interaction. You clearly do not date very much, you're very upfront about that. And you externalize all this angry energy online. I think you're specifically angry at "SJWs" for the reason a lot of young white dudes are: they talk about privilege, and you sit here and thing I don't feel like I have any of this "privilege" stuff. But like, none of that ene…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/19 08:28 AM
1

Lol yes it's just you speaking freely. Do you think you're the first person to try this? Anyway, sorry, I'll let you get back to it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/08/19 07:23 AM
0

My point is that both sides employ spin in their conception of politics, and so anyone trying to make a truly informed decision needs to account for spin on both sides. This doesn't matter. There is such a thing as bad policy and the conservatives have a fucking stranglehold on it. Quit trying to make everything both sides. Republicans and conservatives in America are deeply fucked in ways that the left is not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 01:31 PM
0

I do know. I've listened. I've come to good conclusions. I'm no longer interested in pandering to a right wing that fucking hates me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 01:21 PM
1

There's no golden mean about rape. There's no centrism to be had. It's always bad. You have to break out of the thinking where "every side has good points". Sometimes people and ideologies are just wrong.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 01:07 PM
3

Man, honestly, it's weird, because I still feel bad for you. I imagine you're a not-all-that-young white dude who doesn't have a lot of social interaction. You clearly do not date very much, you're very upfront about that. And you externalize all this angry energy online. I think you're specifically angry at "SJWs" for the reason a lot of young white dudes are: they talk about privilege, and you sit here and thing I don't feel like I have any of this "privilege" stuff. But like, none of that ene…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 12:57 PM
1

I think by saying "there's only one 'side' to this issue," what you're really saying is "there's only one right side," which is to say you're closed-minded about it. being closed-minded about things is not inherently wrong. I am closed minded about rape being bad. Nothing you can say will change my mind. In both these cases, conservatives are wrong.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 12:42 PM
1

This isn't a both-sides issue. Women having access to basic healthcare is good, and trying to deny it to them is bad. Gay people having the basic human right to marry is good, and trying to deny it to them is bad. In both instances, republicans are wrong. Conservatives are wrong.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 08:40 AM
1

Lol you are totally not allowed to compare this sub to the reformation
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 02:20 PM
3

Okay. I'm not at a pc but I'll respond to that when I am. Thanks for being thorough, truly - it's rare
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 01:50 PM
0

You can be critical of feminism in a ton of subs. That's not the stated goal of this one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 01:18 PM
1

Can you address my point please?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 01:16 PM
0

Can you address my point?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 01:16 PM
1

But this sub isn't for that. It's for male advocacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 01:13 PM
-1

...as I just said, because I don't find bitching about feminism to be productive
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 12:38 PM
-1

I would like to honesty contribute here, as I do to MensLib, but "feminism sucks" is not my idea of healthy male conversation
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 12:05 PM
-2

Oh, okay. I didn't know this place explicitly identified as MRA. Got it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 11:29 AM
-2

Could it be that the obsession is unwarranted and that the frequency is simply a function of men be really mad about it for no reason? Because I post perfectly good things in MensLib about men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 09:49 AM
1

The official position of the republican party is that gay people should not get married.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/19 07:27 AM
0

you... just linked me five blogs...? and none of them talked about being trusted around children? did you mean to link me something else?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/19 01:25 AM
0

Feminists say men are trash and can't be trusted around children Dude. This isn't true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/07/19 03:20 AM
1

still nothing? this has become a quit hitting yourself kinda thing man, it's really sad
/r/MensRights13/06/19 04:50 PM
1

so still not gonna even attempt to show me one good study k
/r/MensRights13/06/19 04:40 PM
1

Can't even pretend to support your own point. Okay
/r/MensRights12/06/19 07:15 PM
1

Which of these studies is conclusive? It appears you just googled something I could've googled. Since you've clearly done your research here, you can point me in the right direction.
/r/MensRights12/06/19 06:44 PM
0

If you can't cite any of your claims just say so lol
/r/MensRights12/06/19 03:39 PM
1

you can't just say "evolution" and claim you've proven a point. Show me peer-reviewed data that supports your assertion, buddy!
/r/MensRights12/06/19 05:29 AM
2

I am asking for actual science.
/r/MensRights12/06/19 05:24 AM
1

Any science?
/r/MensRights12/06/19 05:11 AM
2

What's your evidence that this is biological? Specifically.
/r/MensRights11/06/19 09:41 PM
-1

what field are you in?
/r/MensRights06/05/19 03:21 AM
0

fuckin lol, okay man, you're really committed to not seeing the reality that's staring you in the face, good luck with all that
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 09:28 PM
0

in what way would that help you or me at all
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 09:13 PM
1

You can pretend like they are, but 99% of these stories are just women being arrested for crimes, never trying to use the fact that they're women to get out of them. You're only lying to yourself if you believe otherwise. Everyone who doesn't participate here can see exactly what this is.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 08:38 PM
1

Simply pointing at a description does not make it so. The obvious, on-its-face of it fact is that virtually zero of the women in any of these stories were ever trying to use their gender to act like assholes. These stories are just of women behaving badly. In virtually none of them is an attempt to invoke a "pussy pass". The men in this sub make that part up in their heads.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 08:27 PM
1

the problem is that you're reading into these stories the idea that their "pussy pass" has been "denied". In most of these cases, the justice system is just doing what it always does. Tons of women get arrested for tons of shit. Your misogynist bias is telling you that these women "would" have been let off of the hook, but instead, they're getting their "pussy pass" "denied". That's why you've got a ton of shit that's just "woman is an asshole, is told to stop being an asshole". That's just wome…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 08:08 PM
2

So you have no response to the specific criticisms I have of this subreddit?
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 07:47 PM
2

Here is my full explanation of my issue, as I wrote up there: Okay, so the problem is that you're reading into these stories the idea that their "pussy pass" has been "denied". In most of these cases, the justice system is just doing what it always does. Tons of women get arrested for tons of shit. Your misogynist bias is telling you that these women "would" have been let off of the hook, but instead, they're getting their "pussy pass" "denied". That's why you've got a ton of shit that's just "w…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 07:12 PM
0

fuckin lol, you deleted yourself saying this earlier so you could repost it. You are a riot
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 07:01 PM
1

So you have no response for my specific criticisms. I take this to mean that you cannot refute my logic.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 06:51 PM
1

Okay, so the problem is that you're reading into these stories the idea that their "pussy pass" has been "denied". In most of these cases, the justice system is just doing what it always does. Tons of women get arrested for tons of shit. Your misogynist bias is telling you that these women "would" have been let off of the hook, but instead, they're getting their "pussy pass" "denied". That's why you've got a ton of shit that's just "woman is an asshole, is told to stop being an asshole". That's …
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 06:41 PM
1

No, I gave my honest take. I will repeat it here. The obsession with bad things happening to women is a very strong indication. There's an extremely thin veneer of "we are talking about EQUALITY here! It's right there in the name!" that doesn't pass the smell test for anyone else, especially women. Honestly, I'd prefer if everyone here just owned it. Just nut up and say "yeah, fuck women". Instead you cower behind the flimsiest of rationales. It's cringey. Sorry if it wasn't obvious. I did my be…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 06:25 PM
1

Oh, I know I can leave. Does that mean I will? Probably not. I'm surprised you're so triggered by someone who disagrees with you. This is how you get an echo chamber, you know.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 06:07 PM
1

I know I'm free to leave. Thanks!
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 05:57 PM
-5

If you dedicate a subreddit to it, rabidly post on that subreddit, and accrue tens of thousands of upvotes for posting "man does thing!" content, you probably have an issue with men! (the difference here is that there's a solid proportion of women who will totally just say "yes, men have been abusing and demeaning me my entire life, I have issues with men" while this pansy-ass sub hides behind NOOOOO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUALITYYYYY)
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 04:00 PM
-10

The obsession with bad things happening to women is a very strong indication. There's an extremely thin veneer of "we are talking about EQUALITY here! It's right there in the name!" that doesn't pass the smell test for anyone else, especially women. Honestly, I'd prefer if everyone here just owned it. Just nut up and say "yeah, fuck women". Instead you cower behind the flimsiest of rationales. It's cringey.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 03:46 PM
-12

More just a sub where people who hate women can't comment.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/19 03:31 PM
1

Lol. Alright, I get it. Sorry
/r/MensRights16/01/19 03:21 PM
1

Dude, read the citation. Or my words. We are not and have never been talking about marriage equality.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 05:59 AM
0

me: 23% of the nation that doesn't even want gay sex to be legal! you: Less than 1/4th don't want gay marriage. me: you are illiterate you: yes you're totally right, I cannot read
/r/MensRights16/01/19 04:01 AM
1

Read what I wrote again.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 03:54 AM
0

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ag2pjs/banned_from_rmenslib_for_a_seemingly_harmless/ee57zox/ you're still looking at 23% of the nation that doesn't even want gay sex to be legal! And that's a far different and more aggressive standard than "I don't want my son to be gay". Seriously man you're being willfully blind
/r/MensRights16/01/19 03:19 AM
1

from what source would you like me to cite that homophobia exists and is prevalent
/r/MensRights16/01/19 01:49 AM
0

https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-being-gay-and-living-with-homophobic-parents https://www.theodysseyonline.com/growing-up-trained-to-be-homophobe https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/8ysyiw/serious_people_who_grew_up_with_racisthomophobic/
/r/MensRights15/01/19 08:20 PM
1

How many millennials do you know that exist in this bubble? How many of them do you think exist in this culture? tons! Not every family is progressive! Go ask kids who grew up gay with homophobic parents! Can you potentially get a demographic result of these "toxic" people who supposedly have any influence on modern culture, other than their own social circles? yo man, Donald Trump is president!
/r/MensRights15/01/19 08:13 PM
1

traditionalist men. The kind who don't want to see their sons grow up to be feminine. The ones who use slurs to refer to gay men. Yes, these men still very much exist!
/r/MensRights15/01/19 08:02 PM
1

lol, what? when did this get into conspiracy nonsense about alts? Men do enforce this, dude.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 07:57 PM
2

Who said anything about that? At all? men do this shit seriously all the time.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 06:01 PM
1

When people are acting shitty, we as a society have a duty to the vulnerable not to turn a blind eye.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 05:23 PM
3

Could it be possible that American men don't go to the doctor because we're broke? controlling for class, women still go to the doctor far more than men. Okay, so... We shouldn't congratulate other on making some bomb ass food they did on the grill? We shouldn't high five after he makes a shot at pool? We shouldn't compliment each other on how dapper as FUCK their lawn looks? I'm honestly trying to understand what toxicity you're talking about. No, we shouldn't enforce them. We shouldn't make me…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 05:12 PM
-3

1: I generally do not use the phrase just so I can avoid this very conversation 2: toxic masculinity is the performance of a type of masculinity that causes harm, either to one's self or others. A really simple example is how American men do not go to the doctor because it feels weak. Ask any physician and they'll tell you the biggest danger to men is themselves. 3: toxic masculinity is also the enforcement of gender norms by men on other men. Please, feel free to use a grill, be handy, or get s…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 06:07 AM
0

bred by being taught how to grill, be handy around a house, and try to feel comfortable in in our own bodies by going to the gym. If this is how you define toxic masculinity, I'm not sure you understand the concept.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 02:30 AM
0

LOL deleted your sad reply huh?
/r/MGTOW28/12/18 06:25 AM
3

What? I gave you a literal reason. It wasn't just mgtow bad. Though this movement is bad, yes.
/r/MGTOW25/12/18 05:40 PM
3

Mgtow is bad because it externalizes an internal pain locus
/r/MGTOW25/12/18 05:43 AM
1

there's a really frustrating way that antifeminist things get the benefit of the doubt constantly but anything nice said about feminists has to be double and triple stamped, in triplicate.
/r/MensRights28/11/18 05:44 PM
1

nothing besides feminists tattooing we support men too on their buttholes would be "sufficient proof that feminists care about men". Like, yes, feminists fight for women's rights, but there's a really frustrating way that antifeminist things get the benefit of the doubt constantly but anything nice said about feminists has to be double and triple stamped, in triplicate. I just have absolutely no faith that I will ever clear what ever bar you, the individual, have set. What you should have done i…
/r/MensRights28/11/18 05:04 PM
1

You, the individual, are exhibiting the same extremely dumb behavior as you, the group. Deaddove.jpg I suppose
/r/MensRights28/11/18 03:36 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights28/11/18 01:09 AM
0

You ar acting out the tendencies of your subreddit perfectly right now.
/r/MensRights27/11/18 04:10 PM
0

No, that's the problem. I don't think you, the human, are dishonest. I think that this subreddit has reached the point where nothing besides feminists tattooing we support men too on their buttholes would be "sufficient proof that feminists care about men". Like, yes, feminists fight for women's rights, but there's a really frustrating way that antifeminist things get the benefit of the doubt constantly but anything nice said about feminists has to be double and triple stamped, in triplicate. PL…
/r/MensRights26/11/18 09:07 PM
1

See that's the thing, man, I don't think I will ever get to a point where the "evidence" I show you is sufficient.
/r/MensRights26/11/18 08:42 PM
1

like a water droplet or perhaps steam
/r/MensRights26/11/18 05:21 PM
1

I've been posting about this shit longer than you've had an account, boy
/r/MensRights26/11/18 05:11 PM
1

👌
/r/MensRights26/11/18 05:38 AM
1

K
/r/MensRights26/11/18 04:00 AM
2

https://imgur.com/a/UKRckBL This is one of the most celebrated feminist authors in existence
/r/MensRights25/11/18 09:58 PM
2

What kind of evidence would be sufficient? A feminist saying a thing?
/r/MensRights25/11/18 09:33 PM
1

That's something feminists support! Being your brother's and sister's keeper.
/r/MensRights25/11/18 09:18 PM
1

Feminists also believe men have issues! This is 100% tribalism on your part.
/r/MensRights25/11/18 09:04 PM
1

MensLib strongly believes that men have issues!
/r/MensRights25/11/18 08:57 PM
2

Feminists tend to advocate breaking down gender roles. If you want the freedom to live your best life whether it's "masculine" or "feminine", feminists support you.
/r/MensRights25/11/18 02:18 AM
4

Charge your phone bro
/r/MGTOW05/11/18 11:26 PM
5

thank you!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 01:11 AM
4

Lol, confirmed, all of this is entirely true
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 12:53 AM
3

So I don't know if you're aware of this but I am not a mod of menslib. The SHU students were expelled and lost their scholarships, immediately taking on the entire debt it had paid, while their criminal case was ongoing. The school investigated - as we literally require schools to do - and found them culpable. I'm not a huge fan of those IX investigations, either, but let's not pretend that an investigation didn't occur. That's exactly the kind of thing that menslib wants here in Kavanagh's case…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 05:39 PM
3

The presumption of innocence must be cultural if it is to mean anything at all. This is what has never been the case in the history of the world. No. I tell her we need to call the police and get it for and them charged. I don't ask her who did it and how can we do as much damage to their life as possible before the trial is done. And neither does anyone believe this in menslib. This is a strawman. Yes. And you let the case work itself through anf give support where it's needed. You don't roll f…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 05:16 PM
3

That's literally never been the case in the history of the world. When your friend comes to you and says "a stranger stole my car!" you don't call her a liar. You believe her and help her find her car. Same thing here: if a woman says she was raped, you take her word for it and investigate.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 05:03 PM
2

No, believewomen is a social thing. We want to trust women are accurate in their reporting of sexual assault, then make sure the relevant authorities investigate in a neutral and effective manner.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 04:53 PM
2

fuckin lol
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 01:09 AM
2

lmao did I get you suspended before or something
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 01:04 AM
2

Can you limit your replies to me to one
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 12:35 AM
3

I've rethought that position.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 11:22 PM
3

I would not gladly cut off my dick, ama
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 11:20 PM
2

I am active there and I do not self-flagellate, ama.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 11:20 PM
-2

Menslib is actually really good!
/r/MensRights30/07/18 08:13 PM
0

true tbh
/r/MGTOW10/04/18 09:07 PM
-19

lmao
/r/MGTOW10/04/18 04:18 AM
-31

lol
/r/MGTOW10/04/18 12:32 AM
-6

Of course, but financial abortion is dumb. I'm trying to make sure that every father has a connection with the child they sire.
/r/MensRights27/03/18 01:41 AM
3

OK, so let's set up legal protections for fathers to claim them. We can make sure the government knows more than they do right now. The state should know as many as possible.
/r/MensRights27/03/18 01:29 AM
-1

Right and I totally support making sure that every father who's absent when their child is born is properly identified by the state.
/r/MensRights27/03/18 01:19 AM
1

Having sole custody doesn't mean the child's other parent loses all rights, wtf
/r/MensRights27/03/18 12:58 AM
-9

save haven laws are mostly gender neutral dude
/r/MensRights26/03/18 11:58 PM
1

Brother, that post is up in ML right now.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 06:37 PM
2

Although I strongly dislike the subreddit, AMR isn't against men's rights, only this subreddit itself.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 06:37 PM
1

not true
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/17 03:29 AM
1

"meltdown" lol u sure got me
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 07:12 PM
1

yep that is the best you get, moron :D :P
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 07:00 PM
1

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA loser!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 06:49 PM
1

Thanks for proving my point! Go back to being a white nationalist idiot! No leftist style shaming. Use neutral terms whenever possible. For example, use 'racialist' instead of 'racist'. Use 'chauvanist' instead of 'sexist' HAHAHAHAHA YOU'RE A JACKASS
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 06:17 PM
1

Oh hi! I remember repeatedly telling you that you argue in bad faith and I'm not interested in discussing anything with you! Bye!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 06:01 PM
1

You're gonna have to win some hearts and minds. This idea is currently quite fringe and any lawmaker that proposes it is putting their reelection chances at risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/17 01:56 AM
2

OK, but the problem is that it isn't "progressives" that are demanding that men pay for their sires. There's no "give to get" here. It's up to y'all to play offense on this one.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/17 01:13 AM
2

I believe societies are good, yes, and appealing to nature is not an inherent good.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/17 12:52 AM
2

I feel like I should ask for a clarification on this comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 11:57 PM
2

I would like to know why I am blue pilled.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 11:28 PM
1

Yeah, and I'm trying to keep society going here
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 11:04 PM
2

Also being able to provide for one's self
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 10:33 PM
2

None. It serves our purposes as a society
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 10:11 PM
2

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 09:57 PM
2

Modern society purposely tries to keep babies alive and healthy so they turn into well-adjusted adults
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 09:33 PM
2

You're really taking the baby-death-is-OK angle?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 08:57 PM
2

No, that's not hyperbole. That's actually what you're suggesting. No hyperbole. And correct, men do not have the choice not to support the children they sired. Neither do women. This is gender-neutral.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 05:07 AM
2

We have absolutely no idea how common LPS would be so that's not a valid argument. Inference is valid, and incentives are strong. It's far more likely that abortions would become far more common when the safety-net of child-support is removed. So you're admitting that a side effect of this idea is to coerce women into medical procedures they wouldn't otherwise undergo?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 05:00 AM
2

You don't want to recognize that scope and scale matter. The number of children born from sperm donations is minuscule compared to what LPS would wreak. And let's work together to fix adoption and safe haven laws. Where they are not gender-neutral, they should be. They have nothing to do with the badness and wrongness of LPS.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 04:53 AM
2

Adoption is gender-neutral. If you want to get sperm banks get shut down, you can have that fight. It has nothing to do with LPT.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 04:34 AM
2

You can keep repeating that over and over, doesn't make it true. Also... yeah no bodily autonomy doesn't cover that. Source: the 16th Amendment. You made your choice before women had to make theirs. It's a fact of biology.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:51 AM
2

Abortion is legal because of bodily autonomy and medical privacy. You also have both of those things, just like women. LPS would harm alive innocent children.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:28 AM
2

You can keep repeating that but that doesn't make it true! You are arguing for unfairness because you favor women over men. Nothing is unfair about this. Women have extra choices based on biology. Any attempt to allow men to abandon their alive innocent children would hurt the kids they sire, who had no choice at all to exist. You're boned in this situation and there's no policy that can fix it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:25 AM
2

Both philosophical and practical considerations go into every policy decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:20 AM
2

You also had a choice, you just don't carry the child so you don't have ANOTHER choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:19 AM
2

Both? I honestly find this line of questioning annoying and distracting. You're, again, trying to distract from the core issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:14 AM
2

See, the problem with this how many arguments against LPS also apply against abortion. is that the outcomes of the two things are different. You're trying to strip the context out of it and claim that the logic is the same, but that's not reasonable.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:08 AM
2

Unfortunately, due to biology, men lack the right to abort. Therefore, their choice came earlier, during intercourse. It is unfortunate but it's a fact of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:04 AM
2

You are literally half their DNA. You are responsible for it existing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:00 AM
1

You are not financing her. You are financing the child you sired.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 03:00 AM
2

What does this have to do with the fact that LPT would materially and negatively impact alive innocent children?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 02:59 AM
1

You are approaching this from a purely philosophical perspective. While that's fine on the internet, you aren't allowing practical considerations, and those are important where the rubber hits the road. We make laws to maximize prosocial outcomes. That's why we allow adoption - women who give up their children to strangers are not likely to be the best parents. Removing support from a child would not be prosocial. That's the real reason this is a policy impossibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 02:34 AM
1

Adoption and safe haven laws are nearly universally gender-neutral, so that's a red herring. Where they are not, they should be, 100%. Legal paternal surrender would have to be done before the woman's window for an abortion, so she can abort it if she isn't able or willing to support it on her own and with the help of others who have voluntarily offered support. This would nearly universally lead to a poorer outcome for the child. Since the child is the most innocent party, its needs are primary…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 02:19 AM
1

OK
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 01:08 AM
1

That is a view significantly out of the mainstream
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 01:04 AM
1

OK then you go ahead and fight the anti abortion fight. It has nothing to do with legal paternal surrender.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 01:00 AM
1

OK but that's just a silly thing to write!
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:55 AM
1

Should I take that to mean that you're OK with alive innocent children dying? I don't take your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:53 AM
1

A child does not exist if it is aborted.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:51 AM
1

That would not be good for the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:39 AM
1

Then let's make some common sense changes to how we calculate support payments.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:34 AM
2

Abortion being legal is not the same as it being easily accessible or or unstigmafied! But I'd donate to planned parenthood.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:33 AM
2

At this point our conversation makes almost no sense
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:27 AM
2

That's generally not a better outcome for the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:25 AM
1

Support is for the child. Not "her".
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:23 AM
1

You're OK with making children suffer then. That's a logically consistent view but just be honest about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:19 AM
1

To avoid having mandatory abortions by court order
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:17 AM
2

No, they have rights to bodily autonomy and medical privacy. Same as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:16 AM
1

Women just wouldn't report their pregnancies to authorities
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:15 AM
2

No, women still have the exact same responsibilities for alive innocent children as men
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:14 AM
2

It's literally impossible to do that so I don't really think supporting it or not really matters
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:14 AM
3

"Having an abortion" is not the default decision by which you can make decisions on behalf of the alive innocent child. If you would like it to be, you should be putting the work in to make sure that every woman in America can access an abortion easier than she can access the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:09 AM
2

Courts can't do that
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:03 AM
3

This is so comically not bigotry against men
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:02 AM
3

She's not doing that though
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:00 AM
2

Precisely
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:36 PM
3

I don't believe in souls in the way that the old testament describes them
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:34 PM
3

the court will order you to take a paternity test
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:33 PM
5

No that's true. I mean that. Women gestate fetuses, so they are entitled to make the decision not to do that anymore and men are not. In the future, maybe medical technology will eliminate that!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:31 PM
2

I don't believe fetuses are the same as alive innocent children, so we have a contradiction in terms here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:30 PM
3

I have no idea what you're trying to get at. You need to get tested if you want to prove the baby is yours. If you don't want to get tested then you can't prove the baby is yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:29 PM
4

It is still half his, but she is entitled to decide whether or not the thing that is half his is allowed to be a parasite in her body. I'm fairly sure that you are allowed to demand custody of an aborted fetus, so you could hook that up to a future artificial womb or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:27 PM
3

Correct. You can also choose not to get tested.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:26 PM
4

Then you go ahead and protest that. The entire Republican establishment is right there witcha. It has less than nothing to do with what we're talking about right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:26 PM
3

To... getting tested?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:25 PM
3

That's a pretty simple medical test you can request
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:24 PM
4

why is he responsible for it when she unilaterally has it but has no rights when she unilaterally decides to abort it this was the question. I gave an answer as to why he has no rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:22 PM
3

if you want to talk about mandatory genetic tests for all babies, that's a different conversation. We're talking about paying for the alive innocent children you sired.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:22 PM
3

abortion is legal because of medical privacy and bodily autonomy. You have no right to make health care decisions on her behalf.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:21 PM
3

If you want to argue for abortion to be banned, god bless you, there are lots of people who agree. This is not about abortion. This is about alive innocent children.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:19 PM
2

google "how babies are made"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:18 PM
3

inseminating eggs leads to children. This is biology 101. Trying to use rhetorical sleight-of-hand about how fetuses are not babies no longer works when an alive innocent child with two sires exists.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:16 PM
3

Because he is responsible for its existence
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:12 PM
2

OK I'm done with you
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:11 PM
3

Because it is not responsible for its own existence. Its sires are.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:09 PM
3

It is the least responsible for the state of affairs
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:07 PM
3

Therefore their needs are prioritized
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:04 PM
2

Because the child is the least responsible for this situation, therefore their needs are prioritized
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:04 PM
2

The child is the most innocent party in this transaction by far
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:03 PM
5

In this situation we rightly prioritize "children not suffering" these days
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 11:02 PM
3

Is... is that a good thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:58 PM
3

for nearly all of recorded history we've been trying our damndest to make sure that the child's two sires take responsibility for their innocent child
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:57 PM
3

"Voluntarily forced"? No, the child's sires are responsible for the child, as it has always been.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:54 PM
6

that is a bad thing and we try to avoid that
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:52 PM
1

This has nothing to do with abortion. This has to do with an alive innocent child.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:51 PM
3

Well, the child is completely innocent of all the sins of its parents, so for the last forever-and-ever we've decided as a society that children are entitled to exist until they can make contribute resources to the common good
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:50 PM
5

I'm not talking about abortion. I'm talking about an existing child.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:48 PM
1

The alive innocent child is literally half you
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:48 PM
2

The concept of existence requires resources dude
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:47 PM
5

An alive innocent child needs support no matter what decision the woman makes
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:44 PM
2

An abortion leaves no resultant child that needs care. LPT does.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 10:41 PM
2

you too!
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:29 PM
3

OK so now you're back in rhetoricville, a place that thankfully no one else visits.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:25 PM
3

Then get better ideas, because your "correction" fucks over the child.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:23 PM
3

You. Had. A. Choice. Women have more choices, but you had a choice.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:16 PM
3

Again: women get extra choices, but you too had a choice. The child had no choice, so we defer to the child.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:10 PM
2

Because that is unfair to the child, regardless of what the woman chose.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:05 PM
2

That's irrelevant. If an alive innocent child exists, it needs support. Withdrawing the support of one of its sires punishes the most innocent party in this equation.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:03 PM
2

See, that punishes the most innocent party: the child.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 07:00 PM
1

If she doesn't do that, it is an alive innocent child that needs support.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:58 PM
1

The only party that made the choice that results in a child is the woman. The responsibility falls on her. In rhetoricville, this is true! Back over here in reality, anyone who's taken high school biology knows that sperm and egg combine to make a child.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:53 PM
1

Then hold the party that chose to bring that child into the world responsible. The child isn't the only innocent party here. It is the most innocent party - 100% innocent, really - and therefore you bend over backwards to give it a good life. It made no choices that led to its existence. Don't frame it as an absolute then. lol k I was applying your argument to another issue where society decided that biology isn't the only factor. And it is mighty stupid to apply that argument to another situati…
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:44 PM
1

You do realise that this opting out would only be possible during early stages of pregnancy, right? No one's arguing for allowing fathers to just pack up and leave without any consequences at some arbitrary point. It doesn't matter. If there is an alive innocent child, it needs support. Removing the support of one of its sires would have a strongly negative impact, which is not fair to the child who is the most innocent party here. Bringing up adoption was to illustrate to you that there are exc…
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:23 PM
1

The point? The point that there are exceptions we make in to the two-sires rule in the interest of the child? Yes, of course that's true, there are nooks and crannies to this. Scope and scale matter; the number of adoptions in the USA is far smaller than the children born who are not adopted, and allowing ALL the fathers of ALL those children to opt out of supporting them is not even on the same planet as adoptions. Bringing up adoption is a red herring and you should feel silly for doing so. Bu…
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:03 PM
1

And they no longer have any obligations to their child. So again, no such thing as a child's right to be supported by both it's sires. We're doing our best to ensure that the child receives the best life possible by allowing adoption :) I disagree. Not sorry. Sooooo who is more innocent than the child who never chose to be born?
/r/MensRights14/08/17 05:53 PM
1

Assuming you know she put it up for adoption and can claim parental rights before your child gets adopted. If you want to firm up laws around this, go you! So you admit there's no such thing as a child's right to be supported by both it's sires. It can be anyone as long as they have the money. And they follow the proper procedure. As a society, we've recognized that people who put their children up for adoption are near-universally in very bad places and are doing so as a last resort. And fuck e…
/r/MensRights14/08/17 05:49 PM
1

Adoption is gender-neutral. If you sire a child and its mother wants to give it up for adoption but you do, then you're entitled to take it yourself and demand child support from her. More to the point: we as a society decided that the child is better-served being raised by a family that can devote time and money to its care instead of a family that cannot. The child is never better-served when one of its sires refuses to pay up for its care. Best interests of the child.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 05:34 PM
1

Why again are we talking about adoption?
/r/MensRights14/08/17 02:46 PM
-1

What the fuck does adoption have to do with this? Also adoption is gender neutral. Wtf?
/r/MensRights14/08/17 02:11 PM
-1

It's not about the woman. It's about the child's right to be supported by both its sires
/r/MensRights14/08/17 02:06 PM
2

You'd have an epidemic of women not announcing their pregnancies until the 24th week.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 03:06 AM
-2

You can do that. You just have to pay for it, because it's half you.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 03:05 AM
1

Well, Legal Paternal Surrender is dumb, so there's no reason to talk about it ad nauseam.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 02:29 AM
1

You think feminists want to kill men?
/r/MensRights19/06/17 02:28 AM
1

First: adoption, safe havens, and fostering are gender-neutral. Second: laws governing these things aren't supposed to be perfect, only pro-social. In this situation, the underlying assumption is that women (and men) who take advantage of these programs are in such dire straits that they have no other option, and that taking them in as wards of the state is preferable to the alternative.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 11:22 PM
1

Thanks for debating with me. :)
/r/MensRights09/05/17 05:47 AM
1

I don't quite understand your angle on this point. Well, you'd be stranding a bunch of pregnant ladies (and their resulting alive children) in quite a pickle, there. That's generally not considered a prosocial outcome. What? I don't understand what you mean. Why does "desperation" matter? Because we as a society decided that placing undue burdens on desperate women who just endured nine months of pregnancy who then still gave their infant child up for adoption is a bad thing. Generally, states r…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:32 AM
1

But a threat of withdrawing the presence of a fatherly figure necessary to raise a healthy child is not? I don't know what you mean by this, but it doesn't really matter. Your idea has so many holes that debating the definition of "coercion" isn't really productive. Like I keep trying to tell you - even without abortion, it is very easy for a woman to unilaterally terminate her obligations to the child. There is no practical way to force a woman to be financially responsible for a child unless s…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 02:52 AM
1

Would me telling a woman that I do not want to be a father also be coercion? Coercion is using force or threats. A threat of withdrawing the funds necessary to raise a healthy child is coercion. The particulars of how that right is exercised, etc. can easily be worked out. No, see, this is bullshit handwaving. The details are extremely important here, and when I press you on them, you back out by saying "the particulars can be worked out". No, it doesn't work that way. I am not skipping over tha…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 12:39 AM
1

"Changing the calculus" is not coercion. This is just not true as a general proposition. You can slice and dice what types of coercion we should be OK with as a society, but it's always going to be coercive. It's baked into the concept of childrearing; you're just wildly wrong about this. As far as your "Women will lie to men, therefore your idea is bad" argument - those problems are easy to get around. Tie the right to legal paternal surrender to the notice of pregnancy/child. Guy has three mon…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 06:31 AM
1

It's not an ultimatum. It is simply informing the mother that the father has no interest in being a father, and chooses to relinquish all rights and responsibilities. The mother is then free to make her own choice. She can choose to abort. She can choose to carry the baby to term and put it up for adoption. She can choose to carry the baby to term and raise it herself. There is no coercion. Refusing to pay for the consequences of another person's choice is not coercing them. You write this, but …
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:35 AM
1

Alright, I was having a bad night here. You skipped some of my logic, but that's OK. Let's see if I can be more clear. Yes. I am holding women accountable for their own bad choices, which necessarily would increase the burden on women making those terrible choices. I find it funny that you are the one that brought up moral hazard, while simultaneously arguing that men should subsidize women's poor choices. I am always dumbfounded by people who take your position completely ignoring the role wome…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 11:39 PM
1

Me as well. In bocca al lupo, Bob.
/r/MensRights03/05/17 07:00 AM
1

OK, well, we've clearly arrived at the end of this conversation. I wish you the best.
/r/MensRights03/05/17 06:45 AM
0

OK, you appear to be actively ignoring the points I make. That's fine - I'm used to this when arguing with LPT proponents - but I don't think that repeating them would make much sense right now. Instead, I'll make a transparently political point: No legislature (be it state or federal) or high court will ever rule in favor of mens' right to abandon their living children. From a liberal perspective, you're significantly increasing the burden on mothers who are raising children without a father in…
/r/MensRights03/05/17 06:11 AM
1

But when biological unfairness goes AGAINST women, the Federal Government typically steps in. For example, it is against the law to fire a woman for getting pregnant. "Suck it up, biology is unfair" did not win that argument. Title IX requires colleges to provide equal athletic opportunities for women, despite the fact that women are biologically weaker in athletic activities. "Suck it up, biology is unfair" was the losing side of that argument as well. This is not a reasonable argument from sev…
/r/MensRights03/05/17 05:37 AM
1

OK, I'm going to address something in the middle first. It's important. If you want to address LPT, you really have to stop talking about abortion as being "unfair". Abortion is 100% not part of the issue here. Abortion exists because of women's unique position as the gestators of children, and that, too, is unfair to them. Pretending like abortion is an "unfairness" that needs to be "righted" is a transparently bad argument, because anyone with two eyes can tell that biology is unfair. You can …
/r/MensRights03/05/17 04:09 AM
1

Alright man. So I know that this doesn't always sparkle with MRAs, but: Laws aren't designed to be perfectly, symmetrically fair. They're designed to maximize prosocial outcomes. Let me go through a couple of your examples. Are you saying that poor couples are violating their children's rights? We do indeed punish parents for neglect. Luckily, we have state programs and are generally a rich enough country that we don't need to do so often. And we balance that against bodily autonomy for poor peo…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 08:57 PM
1

I strongly disagree with nearly everything you write, but I'm about to hit the sack, so I'm leaving this comment to remind me to refute what you wrote in the morning.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 07:24 AM
1

Let me ask you a broad question. What of a living child's "constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education"? How do you define the child's right to be raised in a safe environment with plenty of resources? Assuming you are, as I presume, advocating for LPT.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 07:04 AM
1

Yep, Casey confirms what I wrote before. Sandra Day O'Connor is a clever legal writer!
/r/MensRights02/05/17 06:43 AM
1

None of the sources you cited refuted any of my claims. Just stating this doesn't make it true. And that "debunking" was soundly picked apart in this very thread. Poorly, but please highlight the specific parts you're referencing. You seem quite determined to talk pass people, which is why i just wanted to leave you to your very narrow views. It seems to me that you're doing this! That's why we should continue the conversation. You've yet to even list options for men who don't want to be parents…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 03:18 AM
2

Especially when one considers that women more often are deemed the primary caregivers or considers things like the tender years -- custody has always been in high rates among women. This is specifically debunked by OP's post in ML. Your point is invalid. You are not arguing facts here, you're arguing emotionally. Gee, I wonder if that's the case, who in turn is paying child support? Fathers. Again, not logic. Feelings. Options of women who don't want to be parents: Abortion. Adoption/Safe Haven.…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 02:19 AM
1

Men have literally the exact same options as women: pay child support. Child support is gender neutral. Custodial parent rights are gender neutral. You are arguing with a reality that does not exist.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 01:18 AM
1

Except that, a mother with an alive child can surrender parentally through means of adoption or safe haven; whereas a father cannot This is simply not true. In most States with safe haven laws, either parent may surrender his or her baby to a safe haven. In four States and Puerto Rico, only the mother may relinquish her infant. I of course support changing the law in those four states and Puerto Rico. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Seriously.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 12:57 AM
3

No, men also receive bodily autonomy and medical privacy, which is the basis of abortion law. Women and men have the same rights and responsibilities when it comes to alive children. There is no double standard.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 12:46 AM
1

No response here?
/r/MensRights02/05/17 12:04 AM
2

Abortions are about bodily autonomy and medical privacy. Go read Roe v Wade.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 06:36 PM
4

I don't get it. Can you be more clear?
/r/MensRights29/04/17 05:41 PM
3

I think this is how racist white southerners used to argue about racially neutral Jim Crow laws. oh my living god, you really are this delusional. OK, I shouldn't've come here to begin with. I blame myself. You're welcome to the last word.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 12:49 AM
2

Who's arguing it must be THROUGHOUT the year, friend? Oh wait, only you! Cool beans. Uhhh... basic logic argues this, friendo. Child support recipients would be required to collect records on all their child-related purchases, then those would need micromanagement oversight. That's a heavy burden, especially for the state. it's totes impossible when a group of fabulous women are under the axe. Child support is gender-neutral, sir! Although it's worth thinking about why women get it more often 🤔 …
/r/MensRights29/04/17 12:09 AM
1

Friend, itemizing tax deductions once a year != documenting every thing you buy for your child with child support money THROUGHOUT the year. You are presenting an obviously false equivalence and it's not going to escape notice. We have zero problems determining precisely where a father is spending things as it pertains to his child support arrears. This is fudging at best and outright misportrayal at worst. Luckily, most fathers are willing and able to pay their child support bills, so the enfor…
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:51 PM
1

You mean like we do to basically every citizen in the country around April 15? Weird. I guess it's not that cray, yo. This isn't micromanagement. This is tax collecting. The vast, vast majority of taxes are simple. Documenting every bit of expenditure on your child that you drew on child support for, then having someone from the government oversee it? That's micromanagement. On the other hand we seem to have no problems micromanaging the finances of a father Again, not micromanagement. Your asse…
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:37 PM
2

Is your solution for the state to micromanage child support expenditure? Because that's the only other option I see.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:20 PM
5

Inherently, no. Using critical thinking is always good. And thinking critically, these: The wishes of the child, if the child is old enough to express them; The continuation of a stable living situation (often including family home, neighborhood, extended family, and school); Any history of mental illness, substance abuse, or physical neglect or abuse on the part of either parent; Special needs of the child, and the ability of each parent to support those needs; The relative situation of each pa…
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:16 PM
2

The courts didn't create the Best Interests doctrine for no reason, though, so I don't know why you disbelieve that it exists to protect children.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:05 PM
0

What? No, presumption of 50/50 would inherently replace Best Interests.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:00 PM
-1

Just go read it. I'll be here when you are done.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 10:47 PM
-4

Did you read the post in ML? It directly addressed that NOW thing.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 10:25 PM
-2

Did you read the post in /r/menslib? It directly addressed that NOW thing.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 10:24 PM
1

FYI, /u/cryobabe is the same as /u/sportgal is the same as /u/bigeyedbunny. They spend literally all their time shitposting.
/r/MensRights16/02/17 11:13 PM
2

Hey, you're talking about me! Hi!
/r/MensRights23/07/15 12:01 AM
9

I feel like you glaze over (and indeed contradict) something that I consider very important for men: you'll need to be proactive. When you write "Love will happen when you least expect it." I feel like you're encouraging passivity on the dating market, which is something of a romantic death sentence for men.
/r/ExRedPill24/06/15 01:34 AM
-1

Posting it on TRP, bragging? That's totally unreasonable.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 12:24 AM
-3

The #1 post all time in TRP is about a teacher "black knighting" one of his female students. Don't pass TRP off as just a collection of dating tips. It's much grosser than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 11:31 PM
2

I am a chronically friendly person, so I don't really have a problem with this. Lots of other young men do, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/15 02:26 AM
0

the top all-time post in TRP is Getting ready to black-knight a high school girl so, no, I absolutely refuse to touch TRP with a ten-foot penis
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/15 02:24 AM
3

In my experience, the men who I'm talking about have been told exactly that: it is annoying if you are too forward with women. don't do that. and I think that's a cultural narrative that's both widespread and pernicious. so when I see these guys get... well, for lack of a better term, shit on for absorbing it, I get really frustrated.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/15 01:29 AM
2

if every man came on strongly, though, that would be bad. I've heard that a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/15 01:18 AM
1

here is what NOW filed.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 04:23 AM
2

The national organization of women (NOW), which fancies itself the largest feminist organization in america, officially supports an end to the gender selective draft. They filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff when this issue reached the supreme court, where a majority-male set of justices decided to uphold the male-only draft. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/453/57/case.html
/r/MensRights08/12/14 12:52 AM
8

a quarter of young women have slept with more than 10 partners in the five years since losing their virginity - compared with a fifth of young men. 25% vs 20%, sample of 2000 with no methodology discussion... yeah, you have no idea how statistics work, and that article cites a shitty British rag.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/14 07:21 AM
-8

Or I'll just block you, like I just did
/r/MensRights02/11/14 07:00 PM
-6

Stop harassing me please
/r/MensRights02/11/14 05:10 PM
-7

Because TRP is vile?
/r/MensRights02/11/14 12:50 AM
-9

If it's TRP then yuuup
/r/MensRights02/11/14 12:39 AM
-5

they can find the "alternatives" themselves, we don't need to give them guidance. unsubscribe and move on.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:46 PM
-2

again, this is all up to our judgment calls. People will get the deal pretty quickly.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:45 PM
-2

that's basically the very definition of of inserting a gender debate into a completely benign post, yes.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:39 PM
-2

If you really do want to improve discussion, allow the unwanted parties to leave and find something better this is precisely what we are doing.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:28 PM
-2

there's a reason why we wanted to give some wiggle room in this rule. sometimes we're gonna need to have conversations about MRAs and feminists, and that's to be expected. the problem is when every thread turns into a shitshow.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:24 PM
-4

You gotta realize, this right here, what you just wrote, was occurring every single post. Things that had nothing to do with feminism or men's rights were automatically, reflexively twisted to fit a narrative. It was seriously, seriously derailing the entire point of the sub.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 10:46 PM
-7

You are a redpiller. Edit: oops, my bad, went back and checked, you were banned for brigading
/r/MensRights31/10/14 11:09 PM
-7

I don't know what specifically you're talking about?
/r/MensRights31/10/14 05:46 AM
-13

I am not SRS.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 05:35 AM
-10

No questions, only one comment...you are the problem. is not a question
/r/MensRights31/10/14 05:13 AM
-17

Also, what is the definition of brigade? you'd have to ask the admins, I just do my best to divine it
/r/MensRights31/10/14 03:26 AM
-14

I believe the rules here allow me to stay. However, OneY's rules (and the title of this post!) don't align with your actions.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 03:16 AM
-11

She's a great mod with great perspectives. And you can just say "woman" in this context.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 03:14 AM
-10

this user is mostly trying to stir shit up but I wanted to address the concerns honestly.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:53 AM
-12

We are going to work our asses off to make sure that's the case. We have an ideologically diverse group of mods and we'll do our damndest.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:50 AM
-9

Why do you say that?
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:23 AM
-8

OneY mod here, AMA!
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:15 AM
5

Hi! /r/SubredditDrama mod here! it's perfectly acceptable for anyone to post anywhere as long as they're not sent there as a brigade. that's why SRD has rules about posting in linked threads. hope this helps!
/r/MensRights26/10/14 10:00 PM
1

yep! you used the "username mention" feature that you get with Reddit GoldTM
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/14 03:02 AM
1

that would be here http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1xy51g/question_for_trp_im_not_alpha_why_do_women_find/ impressive memory.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/14 02:58 AM
1

sure, that's me asking for counterarguments to a narrative I've constructed in my own head. I consider that a very smart idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/14 11:44 PM
3

having it spelled out that RP - and you are RP - thinks women are deserving of hate... that's PRETTY fucked.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 11:04 PM
3

Dudes in RP hate on women because [in their opinion obviously] women are deserving of hate...it's really that simple. what the everliving fuck
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 10:13 PM
1

Or the guy is cute and they are making excuses to appear less shallow which actually make them appear stupid. everyone does this and it's almost comical
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 02:06 AM
1

You want examples from the media of how modern culture encourages young men to be steady and stable instead of sowing wild oats, is that what you're asking? Sorry, you're coming off kind of rude and snarky, I'm just making sure I'm clear, here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 07:13 PM
1

Yes? I'm not seeing your point, sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 07:03 PM
1

Society. Modern culture and all.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 06:34 PM
1

Did you even read the rest of what I wrote...?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 06:17 PM
4

well, that's concise.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 10:49 PM
8

My point, though, is that the modern narrative we feed those men is "work hard, don't get crazy, be husband material" and the narrative those writers are providing to women is "don't bother thinking long-term right now, there are plenty of men who will be plenty stable when you feel like settling down." And that's a narrative that relies on us as a society producing those nice, stable boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 10:09 PM
9

And encouraging them to be "nice" and "husband material" in their twenties, while nobody can even mention point out the hypocrisy that you aren't wife material. Tell those nice boys, dude, you're boring, learn how to live and maybe we can talk. The fantasy is what most men are hating: "be good and good things will come." Yes, this expresses my point pretty well, too. This tends to be the cultural training that young men get - "be husband material."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 10:06 PM
14

We're basically "quietly agreeing with trp" as the OP pointed out, while dressing it up unoffensively or in favour of women. This is precisely my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 10:02 PM
11

this was a question for bluepillers, and I am gathering that you are not a bluepiller. I already know how TRP would react to this.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 08:15 PM
1

Most annoying mod? I'm flattered. How do I annoy you so?
/r/MensRights24/05/14 08:45 PM
-7

I've seen some of the stuff she alluded to here. Just like I've seen some of the stuff brought up here talked about in feminist circles. I try to be as honest as I can when I talk about gender issues.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 02:03 AM
-7

I like that you're getting downvoted in /r/mensrights :)
/r/MensRights23/05/14 01:50 AM
-8

Mary Koss, the researcher who with one stroke of the pen and an opinion, erased male victims from statistical research on sexual abuse because "It wouldn't be appropriate to call it rape" is an ally? Are you talking about this? Cuz yeah I don't support that and I've never met a feminist IRL or on reddit who thinks that being made to penetrate is anything less than rape. The feminist special interest groups that lobbied for the school system to deal only with struggling female students when, in r…
/r/MensRights23/05/14 01:49 AM
-7

We want more men in teaching and nursing, and that makes us terrible, horrible, vicious sexists. Because those jobs belong to women by divine right! this doesn't even make any sense. no one said this, ever. oh and by the way you're talking to a former teacher.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 01:34 AM
-5

OK, so before I re-engage this: are we going to play the "craziest person who identifies as [x] can be taken as a general representation of people who identify as [x]? Because I'm going to make you answer for all of the insane ramblings of Paul Elam and John the Other, if that's the case. Or! We can remember that the craziest people are the loudest and not make each other responsible for the most unreasonable people who identify as [x].
/r/MensRights23/05/14 01:31 AM
-10

I DON'T ACTUALLY READ OR PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS SAID IN THIS SUBREDDIT, BUT I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS YOU TALK ABOUT. Classic feminist high-horse. I'm going to reasonably respond to some of the other folks here in a minute, but real quick I just want to point out that you're making my point for me here.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 11:49 PM
-9

I don't deny that. I've also seen you get mocked by feminists in antisrs for thinking men's issues are anywhere close to being as important as women's issues. You're forced to walk on eggshells when discussing these topics. This isn't true. Take it from me, I'm the one who actually has these conversations. I've had pushback against some of my ideas (which are consistently wrong, like anyone's) but never against the concept of men's issues. Implying that MRA's want to bring women down instead of …
/r/MensRights22/05/14 07:00 PM
-11

"Oh no, what about teh menz!?" In my years and years of talking about this I have gotten this response exactly once, and it was downvoted in a feminist subreddit. If you bring up men's issues in a female-oriented sub, you're more susceptible to hearing this, so I'd recommend not doing that. "Your manfeelz aren't important. We're dealing with real issues." Besides Lindy West making this stupid point on Jezebel - and being criticized for it in the comments - I've NEVER seen this. "Feminism is deal…
/r/MensRights22/05/14 06:48 PM
-19

This is bull-ass shit. I'm a feminist and a mod of SRD, and I spend a shit-ton of time on this website trying to have reasonable, honest conversations about men's issues. And you know what? I've rarely - as in, I can count the times on one hand and they still upset me - gotten any pushback from women who identify as feminists. I get them telling me yes, men's issues are important and yes, we're happy you try to encourage discussion of them. The comment you linked to, Xtra-, isn't wrong, either. …
/r/MensRights22/05/14 06:03 PM
4

waves As long as you follow our very narrow rules in /r/OneY, everyone is always welcome. :)
/r/MensRights07/05/14 06:03 PM
1

wait... what? if the admins saw those posts and deleted them, that's hiding evidence and that makes them felons too. I strongly doubt any business with half a brain would like to be implicated in a child porn scandal any more than they already were.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:43 AM
1

We know that /r/creepshots was taken down because of definitively underage content and we know that /u/HarrietPotter openly and proudly admits to posting it. Ummm... this would make her a felon, so can you cite that?
/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:35 AM
0

She never posted child porn, that's a horrific rumor.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:30 AM
1

You can allow it. I'm a mod at aSRS, just let it fly.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 04:25 PM
7

Right, and I of course don't think we should encourage men to be assholes. That's why I took pains in my OP so say that I'm engaging this idea narrowly. I think the gendered expectation that men be stoic is quite damaging either way, though, and I think that TRP correctly identifies "have a stiff upper lip" to be a trait that, as a whole, is considered more positive than negative in men, especially by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 11:08 PM
3

And I'm certainly not suggesting that all women are like this, only that a significant-enough percentage are that lots of men learn from firsthand experience that vulnerability is deeply unattractive to a lot of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 10:24 PM
1

Oh c'mon, you and I both know that's not true. And when have I trolled?
/r/MensRights13/04/14 07:22 PM
4

That's not a stereotype. He's literally saying that having too much casual sex makes women lose her soul. Her capacity to love. Her ability to approach the world with enthusiasm, innocence, and wonder. Her empathy for others
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 07:22 PM
1

Hi! SRD mod and feminist here. I don't disagree with a bunch of your points. It's why I spend time on men's issues on reddit, especially in /r/OneY. Unfortunately, /r/mensrights aggressively dislikes me being a feminist who's trying to talk about men's issues, so I never engage here. :/
/r/MensRights13/04/14 12:59 AM
2

Holy shit, I didn't even realize who I was responding to. That's from five goddamn years ago
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 11:07 PM
14

Why don't any of those things happen to men? Edit: I just realized where I know you from.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 08:03 PM
2

Oh, I'm sorry, you misunderstood me. I'm not from TRP. I'm talking about /r/askmen, /r/OneY, and, frankly, every dude I've ever talked to about this who wasn't my modelesque friend Cody. My fault for being unclear.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/14 07:09 PM
2

Well, we much prefer youth in women as compared to men. Also, I'm not convinced that this is natural as opposed to socialized.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/14 01:54 AM
5

Would the collective experience of nearly every young man in the country suffice? Because if you ask, they'll tell you what I'm telling you. And I've asked.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/14 01:37 AM
3

That is a HUGE disparity.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/14 10:56 PM
5

I honestly think it's quite telling that /r/fpua has <3k users, while /r/seduction has >150k. And I think it illustrates my point pretty effectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/14 09:40 PM
1

Before I respond to this more fully: how old are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/14 08:32 PM
7

I agree. I think the difference is that your concerns (and I apologize for the vaguely misogynist phrasing) is that what I wrote about men tends to be active and about how to act while women's concerns tend to be passive and/or how to react. Which is obviously everything that's wrong with how our society views sex. It's just an interesting question I figured I'd bring to the group.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/14 05:17 AM
5

On gender ALONE? No. But (easy example) women have less to worry about w/r/t being seen as rapey or predatory when pursuing casual sex. That's just one example.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 07:56 PM
4

I think it's kinda important to recognize that the pursuit of casual sex is MUCH different from a mans perspective vs a woman's perspective, and I think that gets lost in a lot of these discussions.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 06:57 PM
4

With apologies to /r/askwomen (nraes pls don't ban me!) it was this thread that made me wonder. How is it possible for a man to take me if we are having to specifically acknowledge that actually, no one is being 'taken' and it's all a nice role play? Fuck role-play. I don't want to role-play being taken. I want to be taken. I don't necessarily always want sanitized, 'healthy' sex. This is basically my point, and I'm wondering how to properly reconcile both.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 01:44 AM
5

Well, short-term sexual relationships among young people aren't known for being particularly well-developed or healthy :D
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 01:10 AM
6

In my experience (especially with younger women) that's less true than I think you're making it out to be. That's why I asked the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 12:55 AM
7

I should make it clearer: I'm talking more about casual encounters, not LTR, dom/sub relationships. Sorry for my lack of clarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 12:49 AM
11

Nerdlove is STRONGLY geared toward this odd ideal regarding pure, monogamous relationships and true love and romance and all those other things. Which is to say, if you want to have casual sex, Dr. Nerdlove is the worst advice to take.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 12:20 AM
2

Sure, plenty of people do a shitty job of talking about men and masculinity. I think one of the MOST important things is getting men to talk about it, because they're the ones socialized as men and the ones who live it, day-in and day-out.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 01:59 AM
2

"I think the feminist movement has lost its way" is fine. "Fuck those feminazi cunts till they bleed" is... less ok.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 11:20 PM
6

That doesn't happen.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 07:45 PM
14

I want to plug /r/OneY here, too. If you want to talk about men and boys, I think we do a good job of it. /r/mensrights and I have significant disagreements, but we agree that talking about the future of men and masculinity is important.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 07:38 AM
6

I can't help but point out that you (and the rest of TRP) are missing the large percentage of women who DON'T WANT THOSE THINGS, and whom you can either get access to specifically by not doing those things, or whom you can alienate by trying. Seeing that some women like those things while constantly being reassured that other girls like other things should not lead you to think that the women who are advising you are lying or giving you shitty advice, it should lead you to see that there are mul…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/14 12:39 AM
8

Well, my first (admittedly kneejerk) response is: a bunch of these are essentially "woman-focused". As in, telling men what NOT to do instead of what TO do. In my experience with the dudes who actually need this, that's... one of the things they really DON'T need. They've heard plenty of "don't oversexualize women" and "don't overstep women's boundaries" but very little about "DO [thing]". What do you think?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/14 12:09 AM
5

What do you think of the concept of "The Wall"?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/14 11:49 PM
1

Hmmmm... should I do a back-and-forth here? (actual question)
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/14 11:40 PM
5

Hi! I think we do a shit job of trying to explain to young men how to attract women, as a society. And I think they often end up bitter and frustrated, and turn to places like TRP and /r/seduction. I also think that TRP is harmful and gross, for reasons I could go into if anyone asks. My question: If you got a two-day seminar with every 13-18 year old young man in the US (fine, fine, Canada too) and were told to give them advice on how to attract young women, what would be your major talking poi…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/14 10:15 PM
2

Yeah, honestly, I think one of the problems talking about this online and in spaces like these is that we probably tend to be all hip and modern w/r/t dating preferences, whereas a lot of people probably aren't. So we sit here and pontificate from our own experiences, where, in BFE, Alabama, a girl may get miffed if the guy doesn't ~know~ it's his job to pay for the date.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/14 10:46 PM
4

When I talk about men/women dating problems, I try so, so hard to never say "easier" or "harder". Can we agree, though, that men's and women's experiences on the dating scene are very different?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/14 10:25 PM
1

So if such a situation can happen to her, a beautiful, famous, wealthy woman who by all rights shouldn't have any trouble finding a boyfriend, surely there are other women out there too with similar stories. She doesn't have any problem dating at all. She's had plenty of boyfriends. But she can't keep them around, apparently, for reasons I don't feel qualified to speculate on.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/14 10:05 PM
1

Oh I still strongly disagree with your assertion, I just don't want to take the time to source it
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/14 05:28 PM
1

Except for when beanfiddler and emperor and all the other social justice folks get downvoted on sight every time they post.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/14 12:03 AM
1

You know that SRS thinks we're MRA/RedPill, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/14 09:51 PM
1

So, I don't watch James Bond movies and think I should wear shorter dresses and pack heat and be dangerous I take a few issues with this. James Bond is obviously fantasy, whereas "rom coms" are much closer to... "reality" is the wrong word, but I think you know what I'm saying. Which leads me to my next point: besides the fantasy elements (be dangerous, pack heat) Moneypenny actually does contain that nugget of truth for women: be traditionally beautiful, dress in something "sexy," be demure, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/14 02:15 AM
1

Hell, you've been quite interesting, even though I have a few narrow disagreements. That IS the last scene, btw, but it's quite "hinty" that everyone ends up together. Even your overarching point - that "women's fantasies" are acted out in relationshippy movies - is something that I think needs more... thought put into it. Like, OK, accepting your point as fact, how does it make sense that men should watch movies based on "women's fantasies" and then do something that's contrary to what they've …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/14 10:46 PM
1

Wellllll... I mean, your analysis kinda falls apart a little because Seth totally does get the girl in the end. And also, that's not really what the Michael Cera character says to him. He's encouraging but he tempers it. And yeah, the Michael Cera character totally does get the girl in the end, despite not having the cojones to actually try to go after her. He resorts (again, like most of the guys we're talking about overarchingly) to staying silent about his attraction and she has to come on to…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/14 10:40 PM
5

If fish could talk, and also wanted to meet attractive and interesting fishermen, I would be really happy and I would definitely ask fish how to catch them.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/14 03:09 AM
6

I meant JGL in Ten Things, where he was basically a foil for Heath Ledger's character. (RIP) Wtf else has he been in? Actual question, I guess I missed out on most of his career. Wasn't he in that one movie with Bruce Willis? Either way, yeah, later-stage-him, I can imagine he's been upgraded to "charming". How about... Jason Biggs from American Pie. Better example. He's awkward, bumbling, not-at-all-forward-with-his-intentions. And yet he magically finds the sexually active band geek, who comes…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 11:11 PM
2

Agreed!
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 10:57 PM
4

HEBREW
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 10:14 PM
6

people on both sides of that fence just aren't willing to pursue. Sure, but this is doubly hard on the guys because they're expected to pursue. An awkward but pretty girl may have a guy or two try to pursue her (because that's the gender role) but that's much more unlikely to happen for awkward but handsome dudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 10:12 PM
10

The fact that the notion of being interested in women as people is so befuddling to young men is a pretty damning indictment of our collective attitudes towards women. Hm. I definitely get what you're trying to say here, and I obviously don't disagree with the idea that women are people. But this is still... I dunno, not enough. It goes along with the same idea as the "nice guy" - that treating women as people instead of as women will lead to success. In reality, I think there's that extra flirt…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 10:03 PM
4

Hm, OK, yeah, I think I disagree on two levels. One, romantic comedies aren't exactly what I'm talking about. Those still feature "successful" men in a way that young guys can't really be. For example, no desirable man basically ever in a romantic comedy is poor, or ugly, or any negative trait at all besides befuddled, awkward, and dorky. Which are all things that "the woman can fix." I'm talking about movies marketed to young people. Two, though, maybe I was bad with my terminology: "society" w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 09:50 PM
5

I imagine that our discussions are probably super-boring for everyone else because we always (mostly) agree with each other. We should have more angry, or something. Like elections. VOTE CIRCLEJERK. BECAUSE HARRIET WANTS TO SPERMJACK YOU. the subtext is "we like each other well enough that we can relax the rules a little, and it's okay". The act in itself is affirmative and actually flattering. And the worst part is, the guys who need this explained are the guys who are going to deploy it inaccu…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 07:12 AM
3

Well huh. OK, one: you're quite well-written and studied in this, and I'm impressed. It'll take me a bit to intelligently respond to this. Two: just to give you something to chew on until I do... I mean... doesn't that mean... I dunno, if something appeals to women, doesn't that mean it's... like, something to emulate? Also: Pie, American. That was a raunchy male-led sex comedy whose male leads still follow the same pattern, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 06:25 AM
14

If you listen to what society has to say to men about what women want, it is the stereotypical powerful rich handsome guy who gets the girl. This - and the entire proceeding paragraph - refers near-exclusively to men 30+ and often 40+. Of course, being wealthy will always seem like an advantage to guys. That's a given. Now, if you look at recent (I mean last thirty years) young men in movies that are trying to appeal to young people, the frame changes. Go type "teen comedies" into google and you…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 05:34 AM
7

"give her a lot of back-handed compliments in an effort to decimate her self-esteem." I have a habit of gently ribbing on people so I just asked /u/[redacted] if I neg people. She said no, but rest assured that one day I will meet you and I will neg you till you giggle. Women who are looking for a partner know EXACTLY what ideal they need to aim for (and most are painfully aware just how short they fall of that ideal) THIS. Jesus and Moses, THIS. It's so emphatically harmful to everyone involved…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 04:56 AM
9

Sure, I agree. I'm all about dat shit. Deconstructing gender roles and all. Right now, though, the reality on the ground is different, and I think we'd do well to be honest with young guys about that reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 03:27 AM
10

My god, do my eyes deceive me? Is Harriet defending PUA tactics? :O You're not wrong, of course. I just think you underestimate the significant differences between those dating tactics and the actual, like, meeting-women-and-being-attractive portion of it. Sure, a well-dressed, good-listener, friendly, skilled, polite (actually I don't know about that last one, overly polite men are probably not going to be forward enough to go "meet women") is going to be more successful at dating than someone …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 03:25 AM
15

Sure, of course. Problem is that (gender role alert) men are still expected - especially when they're young - to be "the pursuer" here. So, to go "find" those women, they have to first transform themselves into someone confident enough to go find those women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 02:58 AM
17

What exactly are these guys doing to these girls that would make a lonely young man think they're assholes? They're sexually forward and sexualize women quickly. They play "don't call or text her" mind games. They are happy to be touchy and to push women's physical boundaries. They're more emotionally distant. Basically, a bunch of traditionally masculine stereotypes, combined with some quite clever flirting habits.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 02:42 AM
14

Can we stipulate that sporting events are dominated by male viewers and advertisers play to this demographic? The male-oriented commercials for cars, beer, body care all featured handsome, sporty, rich, high-status men, usually fronted by a famous actor. I really don't know exactly what you're trying to say here. If you're trying to say that "handsome, sporty, rich, high-status men" are a good template for young men to follow if they want to be successful with women... well, you're right, except…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/14 02:32 AM
13

You know, in my experience with these guys, they would take... like, any amount of affection from ANY woman. They trend young and lonely. Even the idea of a "friend with benefits" to these guys would be pretty foreign. Or having casual sex. They figure out that's for ~those other guys~.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/14 11:46 PM
7

I suspect that messages to young women play a role as well. In what way? Or, more accurately, which messages?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/14 11:40 PM
6

I don't really understand your post :( Can you try rephrasing your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/14 11:16 PM
58

You know (at the risk of confirming /u/mod1's assertion that I have a weird obsession with these topics!), this is such a dumb, low-hanging meme at this point. Can we all agree that the advice we give to young men these days about how to attract women can be really, really shitty? That, as a society, we have a habit of giving them platitudes like "respect women" and "don't sexualize girls" and "be yourself" and a bunch of insane bullshit that doesn't actually work and isn't helpful even a little…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/14 10:17 PM
2

But, really, I'm not that good looking. I look averageish.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 06:36 AM
3

Wait, which part? Like, sure I'm tall, but that can't be the ~magic formula.~
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 06:17 AM
4

1) three, one very long term 2) like 6-3 or 6-4 3) I look like a guy, I dunno. I'm white? I don't look like Two-Face or anything. I'm a good looking dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 05:27 AM
3

Ummmmmm... I'm ok looking I guess. I don't look like I was bashed in the face with a frying pan.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 03:29 AM
5

If it helps, I meant that I'm pajama boy insofar as what I imagine his demeanor to be
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 03:16 AM
8

Hoooooly shit, I blushed a deep shade of purple :3 Also I heard you're quite cute, don't sell yourself short.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 03:14 AM
11

Uhhhhh in general I don't like the whole RATE ON A SCALE thing for people. But, I dunno, somewhere between Tina Fey and that one girl from Sixteen Candles?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 03:14 AM
12

Thanks for your reply! Honestly, and not to completely burst your bubble (because you wrote a long post, and thanks again!) but yeah, you're just kinda wrong. I'm socially aware enough to know the difference between "she's being a nice person to me" and "yeah we could totally go bang". And to another point, I don't just listen to people and agree. I listen to people, consider their opinions, and react accordingly. I'm not a doormat.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 03:06 AM
5

I am like 70% sure that I am me.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 02:09 AM
1

Ugh so unfair!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/14 02:08 AM
1

My comment was honestly less set in stone than I think you're taking it, but I do think that it makes sense. Obviously cultures vary and change, though, yeah.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/13 11:24 PM
2

This isn't Ancient Greece?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/13 10:21 PM
1

Please contribute! We welcome all types of people!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/13 05:21 AM
1

Sorry! Like EZ-bake ovens are "gendered female" or a playskool shop set is "gendered male," y'know? That's the sense in which I'm using it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/13 04:22 AM
3

I mean... you're obviously correct in the most basic way; no one can tell anyone what to do outside of some narrow contexts, like "don't murder." What I was trying to express was something closer to, say, the societal expectation that women shave their legs and armpits. Of course you have the choice not to do those things, and no one can tell you otherwise. It still has strong social consequences though, and social consequences are a very strong incentive to change one's behavior. And like I sai…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/13 01:16 AM
6

Just from a rational-actor standpoint, it's not necessarily "in our heads" because it's also part of the social reality we deal with, y'know? Reading your responses in this thread (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) it seems like you're a little disbelieving that this kind of stuff - be stoic, be unemotional, be the woman's rock - is gendered male and/or a common expectation of men by women. Am I correct? (Sorry if I'm not)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/13 12:30 AM
8

That's a logical way of thinking about it, but it also assumes this effect is mostly genetic and the result of evolution. I'm wondering if it's genetic, if it resulted from evolution, if it's reinforced by society...those types of things. Oh, sorry if it came off that way. That's not what I intended to communicate. I think it's probably mostly socially reinforced. By parents, by employers, by authority figures, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 11:47 PM
5

I'm sure it happens to women sometimes, too, but that's definitely a societal reaction that is gendered male.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 11:40 PM
9

I mean, no one "likes" emotional women either. As to why that's a social expectation, it would make sense back in the big, bad dangerous days that you'd want a guy who could shut off his empathetic brain and hack at the intruders with a machete. Or go to work in some cannery for 14 hours without whining about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 11:33 PM
9

It's not 100% derived from teenage girls disliking emotional boys, of course. Traditionalist society still leaks through, even if you're raising boys ~modern style.~ But if you've made it to adolescence as a sensitive boy and you expect that to keep being "OK", especially with the opposite sex, you're in for a rude awakening.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 10:59 PM
11

Hey, I remember going through this same thought process in junior high and high school. One of the core tenets of how we raise boys these days (the "modern way" of doing so, anyway) is to be open and expressive. Just like little girls should be able to be "unladylike," so too are little boys taught that they should be able to be verbal and emotionally honest. And that works for a long time! Young boys are encouraged by their teachers and parents to be willing to open up. Then boys start liking g…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 09:43 PM
2

well I don't necessarily agree, as I explained in my OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/13 12:52 AM
1

I meant it more in the "rejected by society" way, not by any specific woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/13 12:43 AM
1

Well of course no one owes anyone anything, but that doesn't mean it hurts any less to feel rejected.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/13 12:17 AM
3

You read that on my post a few days ago. I think there's very much an ideal vs reality thing that goes on. Ideally, yeah, we'd all be able to break these gender norms freely and still be attracted to each other. (Being heteronornative here obviously) In reality, women enforce some level of masculinity in potential mates/dates, as do men enforce some level of femininity. I dunno, just like I can't blame women too much for performing femininity in certain advantageous situations, I understand (tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/13 09:22 PM
3

Do it! I WANT THE PASSING FAME.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/13 08:06 PM
1

Yeah, maybe that wasn't the right word. I'm very much in the "you can date or not date and fuck or not fuck anyone or no one for any or no reason" camp. But like you say, I also think we do need to recognize when broad social trends and decisions end up having a collective negative effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/13 08:05 PM
2

Oh I totally agree, I'm just trying to channel them
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/13 07:12 PM
3

Hm. You're right, I wasn't clear. When I said "bucking the system," I meant more like, "being attracted to men who aren't their alpha stereotype." They feel trapped in that "man box," in their minds, because the women who perform femininity perfectly - young, traditionally attractive - still prefer the "alpha" traits they encourage young men to develop. They feel like that's enforced, like it's something put upon them by young women. So that's why I think their response would be something like, …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/13 07:00 PM
5

I agree with you. To channel a redpillian though: when the women they discuss are at the peak of their value - when they're young and traditionally attractive - TRP guys don't perceive them to be "bucking the system" either. That's half of what they're complaining about, from my perspective. These pretty girls go out and ride the carousel, they also operate "within the framework" instead of trying to change it. That explains their obsession with "The Wall" too. They perceive these women to have …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/13 06:11 PM
5

isn't accepting responsibility the exact opposite of growing bitter? Not to my reading. I don't think they're mutually exclusive. I think it's much more likely that their bitterness itself leads to the idea that, welp, if this is The Way It Is, I should probably just go out there and act how I want to act, and fuck everything else. I'm gonna get mine. You can walk into any crowd or any debate, you can run for any political office or hold any job and quote a mainstream feminist and you'll be appl…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/13 08:43 PM
2

I think everyone would agree that women are socialized to fear more easily, and I think that's a bad thing too.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:15 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter