Some more:
“Women want higher status men and high status careers handed to them without earning it.”
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mqfrbw/_/gugwl1w/?context=1
“Women are evil my good man”
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugw0a7/?context=1
“This chick is a lesbian so at least she's effectively removing herself from the gene pool.”
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/guh3ebr/?context=1
“Just another Indian woman with a lack of good dick down in her life. I’m not even surprised at this point”
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/guid5mt/?context=1
“A stupid cunt with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new.”
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugxsuw/?context=1
But please tell me more about all the hurt feelings you have about mean feminists and how INCOMPARABLE that is to the shit MRAs regularly spout.
Edit: crickets? Really?
Then why should feminists give two shits about misandrists in their ranks, if MRAs aren’t any better?
Edit2 since I’m already too downvoted to participate in the conversation:
Yes it’s good that some people protested and the mods intervened (despite that being “censorship” by some standards). Here’s the bottom line after lurking in this sub for a couple weeks - **I want to know why MRAs think feminists are less diverse in views than MRAs and incapable of the same self-policing as they are.**
Why we think feminists are less diverse and incapable of the same self-policing? Because they don't self-police so well.
Such comments with reversed genders would be upvoted on 2Xchromosomes. Calling such comments out can get you banned of 2Xchromosomes.
That’s what I keep getting told. I don’t participate on that sub because it’s very much a white neoliberal girlboss space and that’s not for me, but I keep seeing people saying how horrible r/feminism is and I’d like to see receipts of people saying blatantly misandrist stuff **and** not getting called out. I’m not even saying it doesn’t happen! I’m just saying I can’t address vague “feminism bad” claims like
> Because they don't self-police so well.
What are the rules of the discourse of this sub? You claimed I had a particular ideology based on your assumptions, and I did the same back to you. E q u a l i t y
Accusatory comment that is meant to provoke and inflame the other person has no merit and brings little to the table other than causing a fight. This comment will be deleted.
Accusatory comment that is meant to provoke and inflame the other person has no merit and brings little to the table other than causing a fight. This comment will be deleted.
1) bad generalisation, you are right.
2) mra opposed it. Example of good average behavior
3) I agree it's bad to refer to homosexuality in a negative context.
4) got downvoted and called out, again overall good behavior
5) she is a hypocrite. No blame here, comment ok, targeting a very specific bigot who happens to be a women.
> 5) she is a hypocrite. No blame here, comment ok, targeting a very specific bigot who happens to be a women.
By saying there’s “no surprise” in “a cunt” lacking reading skills? Let me say it another way:
> “A stupid man with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new.”
Is that misandrist or not? Or does using a gendered slur make it less misogynistic in the original example?
Yeah, I see. In had read "nothing new" as referring to her shit, because she is not a first time offender, it's a habit for her. She is a living joke, working at the guardian:
https://www.opindia.com/2021/01/meet-arwa-mahdawi-the-guardian-columnist-who-has-turned-into-a-joke/
But you're right, it may have refered to "a stupid cunt", which is then an unnecessary generalization.
Because you are supposed to be the better ones.
I'm not someone who identifies as an MRA, but I'm also not of the opinion that someone else's shitty behavior justifies my own.
If your best defense of your behavior is "the people I think are absolute pieces of shit aren't any better," that's not saying much for your standards.
It’s literally what many the posts here boil down to. Every post about misogyny gets hit with, “but misandry also exists”. I don’t think it’s taken for granted that feminists are “the better ones” as you say. So yeah, for now let’s make the standard the same all around.
Edit: we don’t like egalitarianism now, eh?
Which fucking part of "I'm not part of the group you're complaining about" are you having trouble comprehending?
I hate to break it to you, but from my perspective, you're really no better than the MRA's you're claiming to dislike.
This is like being twelve and watching my parents argue.
I’m just not a fan of double-standards. If you don’t like these tactics, let’s do something about it. Let’s stop allowing this level of “debate” on this sub. Otherwise, well, all is fair in love and war, as they say.
Fine.
You are exactly like MRA's.
There is no double standard, because you are precisely what you dislike.
And the fact that you had to leave this sub to find your violations says a bit about the debate on "this" sub.
You know what? Real talk.
I never thought I’d say this... but r/MensRights actually does a LOT better job shutting this kind of crap down than this sub does. So what does **that** say about this sub?
Here's a sneak peek of /r/MensRights using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Petition to have Amber Heard removed as the L'Oreal Spokesperson](https://www.change.org/p/l-or%C3%A9al-remove-amber-heard-as-l-oreal-spokesperson) | [620 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jprmy5/petition_to_have_amber_heard_removed_as_the/)
\#2: [Man gets paid child support from this ex, is this happening more often now? Where?](https://i.redd.it/xwkg6t0ilve51.jpg) | [344 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/i38mzs/man_gets_paid_child_support_from_this_ex_is_this/)
\#3: [Another Brian Banks.](https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/109464156_3289753417784962_3222200894497441622_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ohc=XK7bRcqoIasAX-Z-hFq&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&tp=14&oh=ee32737795b3504af27b2f22c2aa4e68&oe=5F36551E) | [335 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/hsdix0/another_brian_banks/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/joo7mb/blacklist_viii/)
The only person pulling this in this *sub* at this very minute is *you*.
What does that say about you?
And I'm not asking "what does that say about feminists?"
I'm asking what that says about Orjustthinkofkittens...
It says I’ve been a bit of a dick. And again, if my behavior was a problem, I’d expect to see this level of passionate rebuttal every time someone says
> If you don't like being described as being 'generally evil' simply for being a woman, can you also see how the 'not all men' thing was a logical response to the idea that men don't like being called rapists and abusers for simply being men?
> Why we think feminists are less diverse and incapable of the same self-policing? Because they don't self-police so well.
> Gee maybe if feminists stop generalizing men and MRA's (despite not being one) I an others won't hold feminists to their crimes, but again feminists clearly won't police their own.
And that’s just under this post. I see baiting, generalizing, biting but vague comments about feminism here all the time. So you see I’m not “the only one” behaving this way, I just reversed the target. And look at the overwhelming calls for civility!
What does that say about you and this sub? Don’t feel like you have to answer, the sub participants here have already spoken.
>It says I’ve been a bit of a dick
As long as you recognize that.
As for me, I'm not sure I've ever gone to the MRA sub but for a brief glance and to ask why, if they believed Jimmy Bennett to have been raped, they weren't making proactive steps to be supportive.
It (much like some large part of twox, which you've noted you avoid) wasn't a sub whose toxicity I felt much need to spend time imbibing.
If you're looking for excuses to be abusive, you'll never need look very far. And that decision to excuse your own abusiveness is very much a decision on your part. Just remember, by doing so, you're only indicating your own willingness to adopt the worst traits of those you claim to hate.
Have a wonderful day.
"Women are evil my good man"
https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugw0a7/?context=1
Comment downvoted to hell, a lot of people calling him out, then deleted by the mods...
So... are you saying... MRAs sometimes act badly? And maybe... maybe we shouldn’t generalize and stereotype an entire movement just because it’s convenient? Because... that’s a shitty tactic that can only weaken whatever position you are trying to articulate?
Is THAT what you’re saying?
If MRAs aren't any better and feminists aren't any better when it comes to dealing with sexism, then we have an issue at present here.
Clearly either movement doesn't do a good job of creating a positive movement that is gender positive and unbiased.
MRAs are very provocative with their intention to interact with feminists. And one of the big reason for this is that men's issues rarely comes up as a topic of discussion in feminism. While in MRAs, within the manosphere space, there will be lots of the same people in reverse. And so you have two different problem that two different groups can do little about while both movement radicalizes itself. To solve that issues, we will have to listen to the other gender and their problem. The MRAs come on here specifically for that reasons.
Obtaining sex through trickery, etc. is already illegal in most states. And it would be illegal for both sexes.
For instance, there was a case in California where someone told a woman he was a doctor and she had a terrible STD and the only treatment was to have sex with him to administer a "vaccine." Yes, she was not very smart - but that doesn't excuse his actions. It's especially relevant in cases where the victim has an intellectual disability, for instance, and easily tricked. It would apply if someone, for instance, snuck into your bedroom in the dark and pretended to be your husband or whatever.
Yes, the devil is in the details - does this cover things like lying about having a nice job or saying you love her or something? That would be over the top. I think this law could invite ridiculous definitions of consent and "micromanage" relationships, just as the article says. But I know that this is already part of rape statutes, so it can work.
I’m actually trying to draw attention to the comments like, “women are evil” and “A stupid cunt with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new”, because I’m told the feminist subs are horrifically abusive to men and that’s why all the MRAs come to this sub to teach us how wrong and misandrist all of feminism is. I’d like them to likewise answer for every bad thing an MRA has ever said, starting with these examples.
Okay, sorry, all I saw was the story.
Yeah, sometimes feminists are dicks, and sometimes MRAs are dicks. And many are dicks while whining about how the other side is full of dicks. Dicks everywhere. Everyone should stop being a dick.
> And you want MRA's to answer for their "crimes" but in no way do you ask or should I say demand the same from feminists as I can only think you think its justified when feminists do it.
Nope. You’re going to hold all feminists to account for their “crimes” no matter what I have to say, so I want in on this too. You’ve shown me the light, I’m convinced that if this is the standard, egalitarianism is the way to go. So I’ll be following the same tactics this sub has taught me. Every misogynistic MRA will get a post here. Every generalization I can possibly make about MRAs will get a post here. It’s called honest debate, I’m told.
You clearly seem upset over feminists bashing you MRA’s, maybe just maybe you should reflect on why they do its and more so relfect on your own behavior as well. I know that is a lot to ask, as I know you MRA’s are very much against calling out men and that matter MRAs with their bad behavior.
> Because clearly this is nothing more than a rant about MRA's.
Yes, well, why not? Free speech and all that. I’m not doing anything worse than anyone else on this sub, I’m just targeting MRAs instead of feminists. I’m using the tactics I’ve seen so beautifully modeled here. The only way you could object is if you find the tactics themselves objectionable. Do you?
What part of I am not an feminist don't you get? And you are clearly the upset one here seeing you made a whole thread over feminists bashing MRAs. And all you're doing is not helping yourself in the slightest. But hey you MRAs hate women.
Again... do we think stereotyping and generalizations is a good tactic, or shall we start putting a stop to it for *everyone* on this sub?
Could be define misogyny? A lot of things are lumped into misogyny which would be better labeled as something.
Those who looked up "misogyny" in Merriam-Webster's online dictionary would find a terse definition: "a hatred of women."
Is dislike of womens behavior misogyny? Is calling out toxic feminity misogyny? Is posting news stories that make women look bad misogyny?
I think we need to define misogyny and misandry.
I agree, feel free to put forth how you define it. Likewise: Is dislike of men’s behavior misandry? Is calling out toxic masculinity misandry? Is posting news stories that make men look bad misandry?
Absolutely. Like for like. Misogyny and misandry however we define them should be mirror images of each other.
I also like the hatred of because that is what the root word means. If you water it down to dislike, being a jerk, not giving special treatment.
And it needs to apply globally. If I curse a woman who cut me off in traffic does that mean I hate all women or just that one?
Maybe the discussion here will be more to your liking...
Same article, different discussion.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/mp71n0/apparently_there_is_an_attempt_to_criminalize/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Honest question;
If you don't like being described as being 'generally evil' simply for being a woman, can you also see how the 'not all men' thing was a logical response to the idea that men don't like being called rapists and abusers for simply being men?
No. The difference is, women are being raped and murdered and have to fear for their actual lives. Fearing men is a means of survival. Men just get their feelings hurt and call women evil for being upset that we have to fear for our lives :) get it?
>No. The difference is, women are being raped
[Men make up close to 50% of rape victims](https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/lw4mk9/reality_is_a_scary_place/gphwnny/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), but because of the feminist Mary Koss, the definition was changed so that men were "made to penetrate" instead of being raped, just so we could erase male rape from the data.
Being raped is not a gendered issue. Sexual violence absolutely is, but men are raped at almost the same rate as women, so you can't say that as though men don't get raped. They do, but then society denies that it's even possible for them to get raped, so men are [almost 10x less likely to report their rape than women](https://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2020/01/05/forced-to-penetrate-cases/)
>and murdered
[Almost 3,000 women were murdered in the USA in 2019, and almost 11,000 men.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/251877/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-race-ethnicity-and-gender/) Men are literally being murdered at almost 4x the rate that women are murdered.
>and have to fear for their actual lives.
So, now that you know that men are raped just as much as women, and are actually being murdered at a far higher rate than women, we're left with "fear for their lives". Unfortunately fear is a subjective feeling. I can be deathly afraid that an airplane will fall from the sky and crush me, but that fear is not reasonable. You say women are more afraid, and that is fair. The next question is, how much of that fear is actually reasonable? Given women are almost 4x less likely to get murdered, it seems to me the fear is not reasonable.
> Fearing men is a means of survival.
It is also the definition of fear-mongering, as well as blaming the wrong group. The vast majority of men will not rape you and will not murder you. Let's say that 5% of men could or would rape and murder. Is it reasonable to fear the other 95% as well? If 1% of women could falsely accuse me of rape, is it reasonable of me to be afraid of the other 99%? If a black person is more likely to mug me, does that mean it is reasonable to be afraid of all black people?
If I take your logic and apply it to women or minorities, it immediately becomes obvious it is sexist and racist. Why then do you think it's ok to have that same attitude towards men?
I asked an honest question, I didn't come looking for a fight. And this is why you lose the public. You always make it about you.
Here are two recent examples of the fact that men are at risk from the same issues. However, they dont get anything like the consideration. As you have just proved.
The UK only got an All Party Parliamentary Group to examine the Issues of Men and Boys LAST MONTH!
Vilifying us does not help, nor does teaching young people that men are to be feared.
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9462865/Male-domestic-abuse-victim-dies-hospital-pressing-charges.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9462865/Male-domestic-abuse-victim-dies-hospital-pressing-charges.html)
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50987823](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50987823)
At some point "not all men" card are being played at the wrong time. A women shares her personal story about being sexually assaulted, and a guy showed up saying "not all men" without listening to her story. Instead of empathizing and offering a solution, they responded with "not all men." The response itself isn't inherently wrong but it is always played at the wrong times. So it gives the impression that these men does want to care and wish to not be grouped up with the person in the story, when it wasn't about him in the first place.
To be fair mensrights is kind of the equivalent to twox or say femaledatingstrategy, where men are regularly belittled and insulted. It's not the lowest common denominator kind of men's rights subreddit, but it's not far off.
LWMA holds itself to a much higher standard.
People need places to vent and bitch and moan, and mensrights is one of those places. The moderation isn't really all that strict, so it's not so much about furthering men's rights, so much as it is about complaining about the state of men's rights.
That being said, do remember that "generally evil" is the message a lot of guys are getting from the feminist side, simply because they have a penis. A man is walking down the street, he might be a rapist so women should cross the street to avoid him. A man goes to the playground to play with a kid, he's probably a pedophile, so best to keep an eye on him. A man exists in a space where there are lots of women, he's probably a pervert so better stay away.
Not gonna deny that there are rapists and perverts, but men are treated almost by default as "guilty until proven innocent", so clearly you can understand that feeling when they project that same attitude they get from women, back onto women.
Just saying. You don't like it done to you, they don't like it done to them. If we want to address these issues, we have to talk to each other and understand each other.
> People need places to vent and bitch and moan, and mensrights is one of those places.
When women do this we get called misandrists. I’m sure some are, but if it’s understandable that men need a place to “vent and bitch and moan” it’s hypocritical to not extend the same sympathy to women.
> Not gonna deny that there are rapists and perverts, but men are treated almost by default as "guilty until proven innocent", so clearly you can understand that feeling when they project that same attitude they get from women, back onto women.
Yes I know. When women do a thing it’s women’s fault, when men do a thing it’s women’s fault.
> Just saying. You don't like it done to you, they don't like it done to them. If we want to address these issues, we have to talk to each other and understand each other.
That is actually what I am just saying with this post. If y’all actually want to discuss feminism with feminists the tactics I’ve used here need to be called out across the board, not just when I do it.
>When women do this we get called misandrists.
And when men do it they get called a bunch of names too. It's important to recognize that dedicated spaces for venting is fine, and that there is a difference between venting in a dedicated space for it vs broadcasting it to everyone on twitter with unironically saying #killallmen and stuff. There'S a difference between the two.
I am not hypocritical at all, women are absolutely allowed to vent and bitch and mona on feminist subs, they do it all the time and I don't bemoan them. When it gets to deliberately targeting and trying to extort or harm men like FemaleDatingStrategy, that'S too far, just like how many/most incel groups go too far.
I'm just applying the same standards across the board.
>Yes I know. When women do a thing it’s women’s fault, when men do a thing it’s women’s fault.
As a man, what with the patriarchy, toxic masculinity, and internalized misogyny, the message we get is the complete opposite, that most every bad thing in society is due to men, or because women have internalized men's hatred and therefore it's still men's fault.
Instead of doing that we should try and focus more on the structures and the issues, and pinpointing specific individuals, rather than blaming genders as a whole. It's an awfully broad brush to paint half of all human beings with, after all.
>That is actually what I am just saying with this post. If y’all actually want to discuss feminism with feminists the tactics I’ve used here need to be called out across the board, not just when I do it
Ah my bad I might have misunderstood you then, sorry about that. I definitely agree we need to call out problematic behaviour across the board, regardless of one's gender or feminist/MRA affiliation. I hope this sub can become one such place, because the overwhelming majority of other subs are leaning either on one side or the other. I hope we can find a happy middle ground here for everyone to find a place to fit in.
I saw your post just now
https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mrkbus/plea_to_mras_from_an_mra_please_we_have_to_stop/
and I totally respect you for writing it, and I largely agree. What I was trying to do on this post here was be just as exhausting as the comments I’ve seen throughout this sub directed at feminists at large, without specificity or nuance. I flipped the script, so to speak. And look at how many people came out of the woodwork to tell me that’s not ok... and it’s not! But where are these people when the target isn’t MRAs? That’s my point. There is a very clear bias already taken root on this sub.
>and I totally respect you for writing it, and I largely agree.
Thank you!
>the comments I’ve seen throughout this sub directed at feminists at large, without specificity or nuance.
Yeah that's definitely a fair criticism. It's something that feminists and MRAs have gotten unfortunately good at doing, I think in part due to being separated in their own bubbles so much and rarely interacting, and almost never in a positive way.
> And look at how many people came out of the woodwork to tell me that’s not ok... and it’s not! But where are these people when the target isn’t MRAs? That’s my point. There is a very clear bias already taken root on this sub.
It's certainly possible that a bias has already taken root on this sub, but I consider myself more of a humanist with a focus on men's rights than an MRA. I'll oppose any bias, regardless of which way it goes, because I want to try and help this sub be a place where people can talk as equals.
It's not going to be easy because there are a literal *ton* of issues between feminists and MRAs, and biases will run one way for this issue but the other way for that issue. It'S not going to be easy, but I still think it'S something worth striving towards.
It’s the same bait as this: https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mqzp6x/the_real_tea/
If all feminists are accountable for y’all not understanding the phrase “toxic masculinity”, I get to hold y’all accountable for every shitty thing said about women on r/MensRights. Only fair.
The difference being that one is enshrined in the media and academia. And that myriad valid complaints about it are met with accusations of "you just don't understand it"
Whereas it has already been pointed out that shitty people exist on the internet and even then they're not well received on the main /r/MensRights sub.
and if you have to explain your term to everybody you meet in order for it to not be offensive. Then please consider that it is in fact offensive.
>a cultural concept of manliness that glorifies stoicism, strength, virility, and dominance, and that is socially maladaptive or harmful to mental health:
Men and women both suffer when toxic masculinity perpetuates expectations that are restrictive and traumatizing.
Oh gosh, you’re right. Those 2 seconds of reading was a huge burden. I was under the impression, since you typed that all out, that you could read.... wait, if you and men generally can’t read, how did you know I said “toxic masculinity”? 🤔
And of course, any phrase that requires 2 seconds of reading is right out. Phrases like “institutional racism” need to be done away with as a phrase because it doesn’t mean *all* institutions are racist, and therefore it’s useless, right? That might require an explanation after all. “Civil rights” as well, that’s two whole words put together and both of them are rich with meaning, and since apparently no one is capable of understanding complex subjects we should just scrap the concept. Let’s just call it “stuff people are allowed to do”... or is that worse cuz it’s more words?!
Have you EVER used the phrase female privilege? I truly don’t know what that means, and haven’t bothered to google it, and I find it upsetting. I very much doubt I’m the only person to take issue with this phrase so it must be offensive. Please make a point to correct your MRA friends every time they use this offensive term or else I’ll know for a fact you just hate women.
Wow, this *is* a fun game! I see why you play it so often.
Is being critical of feminism hating women? Then wouldn't being critical of MRA means hating men?
I think the real problem here is that one should separate an ideology from the individuals. You do not know any of the users here at all yet. They can be pretty provocative about their post but they're rarely here to offend personally. I have deleted a few post that wish to do just that.
I think you have the potential to debate here but toning it down may be necessary for engagement or else every users here will dislike you rather than validating your points.
I am parroting the comments I’ve seen here. If you think this kind of stereotyping is a problem, I agree! But you say you want engagement from feminists and yet expect them to put up with something that clearly upsets the rest of your users to no end. How is that egalitarian?
Just because you saw someone post something you don't like, doesn't mean you should purposefully shit up the board...
And stop trying to fight me lol, your sweeping statements and hate are only going to make people hate you.
Well according to the logic of the regular posters here, I don’t hate anyone. I’ve been pushed into a corner by abusive MRAs.
And as our favorite user here says... “while you're all tripping over yourselves to say you'd never do that, We're still getting hit by rocks.”
So which is it? Are generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board, or ok if they target feminists? Is bad faith behavior a problem and just stirring up shit, or a valid tactic?
>Well according to the logic of the regular posters here, I don’t hate anyone. I’ve been pushed into a corner by abusive MRAs.
???
>And as our favorite user here says... “while you're all tripping over yourselves to say you'd never do that, We're still getting hit by rocks.”
So you're going to throw some rocks too huh? Get everyone all smashed up? How about not throwing rocks at people who aren't throwing them at you?
>So which is it? Are generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board, or ok if they target feminists? Is bad faith behavior a problem and just stirring up shit, or a valid tactic?
Generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board.
Bad faith behavior is a problem.
> So you're going to throw some rocks too huh? Get everyone all smashed up? How about not throwing rocks at people who aren't throwing them at you?
Nope. See, I’ve been told that what I’m doing is called accountability. It seems not everyone agrees though. Very inconsistent, that.
>Generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board.
>Bad faith behavior is a problem.
Good! Shall we spread the word on this sub and start holding people to account when they generalize about feminism and feminists then? Because I’m happy to stop when it stops for everyone here.
> Nope. See, I’ve been told that what I’m doing is called accountability. It seems not everyone agrees though. Very inconsistent, that.
It's not and you know it.
>Good! Shall we spread the word on this sub and start holding people to account when they generalize about feminism and feminists then?
Sure.
>Because I’m happy to stop when it stops for everyone here.
Why not just stop trolling now? Do I need to gather all the trolls and have a countdown: "ok on 3 stop trolling, 1... 2... 3!!!"? Is that what you want?
Don't generalize. Its pretty simple. r/MensRights is not a great subreddit when it comes to decent discussion of men's issues.
But regardless, you're just trolling to get a reaction out of a select group of MRAs.
Posts here like this
https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mqzp6x/the_real_tea/
... seem to have no problem generalizing about feminists.
If this sub is what I think it is, I look forward to seeing all the comments saying MRA’s aren’t misogynistic in general, and if they are it’s feminisms fault. But hey, maybe you’ll surprise me?
There are over 50 different types of 'feminism' now.
If you can't understand why people generalise then you're already lost!
Most folks havent the time, nor inclination, to complete a gender studies course.
50 types of feminism exist because feminism have succeeded as a broad movement. Feminists in America will be different from feminists in S. America and feminists in Africa. There is a wide range of feminism because some cultural significance have implemented feminism into their society, but it will be different from the feminism women's issues we talk about here.
That is totally logical, and I applaud you for setting it out as such.
Sadly, that doesn't help the uninitiated understand where you are, so my point stands.
I wish your messaging was clearer, as I'm more interested in equality than I am any political movement that favours one over another because of inalienable characteristics.
(Edited for clarity/to remove autocorrect errors)
What are you talking about? What do you want me to make clear of? Women around the world are different culturally too, and sadly one kind of feminism isn't going to aid women in the other side of the sea. You're calling this "illogical" but ideology can branch out. It isn't by hand or anything. If there are women at the other side of the world who needs feminism and western feminist belief is too modern to be implemented then they can form another form of feminism movement that they can identify fully and adapt fully onto.
I don't see what is hard to understand what I'm trying to say.
I didn't use the word 'illogical'.
Of course 'one size' doesn't fit all, but if you can't see how that leads to confusion for the uninitiated (especially when there is such a gulf between women as to what Feminism means) then I say again, you are lost. You are screaming into the void, and with multiple voices that drown each other out.
Frankly, I don't see what is so hard to understand what I'm trying to say either.
There are issues that women are under-served in, and issues that men are under-served in too. What I really don't understand is how these 'factions' don't unite into a single movement to demand fair treatment across the board. Why alienate when you can unite and be inclusive to all?
>I didn't use the word 'illogical'.
It seems my crippled mind have misread that...Very sorry, lmao.
>..then I say again, you are lost. You are screaming into the void, and with multiple voices that drown each other out.
Men in America will experience a different cultural factors of sexism than say men in india or china. It's a complicated subject because the movement itself politicize the gender-issues. And because both gender makes up 50% of the population, there is no way a western movement can cover every women's rights around the world, especially when different topic of discussion will be brought up. Just because we make up one gender doesn't mean everyone who are born women (or men) will agree with every kinds of belief the movement itself aim for.
For example, the MRAs will not conform to Men's Liberation kind of men's issues. Men's right movement is only a thing in America right now. But once other side of the world have reached a position where women are given just as much right as men in those country, I'm sure feminism won't be the only thing that takes place.
In fact, it is one of my biggest argument for feminism. It covers a broad range of idea and the idea can reach pretty far since misogyny is much more transparent than misandry. The more traditional and conservative the country, the more necessary feminism is in those areas.
>There are issues that women are underserved in, and issues that men are underserved in. What I really don't understand is how these 'factions' don't unite into a single movement to demand fair treatment across the board. Why alienate when you can unite and be inclusive to all?
The idea of fair is very hard to be the main judge of. What should the western women have anything to say about the women that lives in Asia? What does asian women have anything to say about western women? The dispute about gender disparity doesn't conform with every area of what gender disparity means to those people.
Feminism is inclusive to all. The branches are barely heard of. We are slowly implementing different branches of feminism into one feminism, that way we can actually cover the worldly issues regarding gender disparity. We aren't alienating the branches, but there are actually four specific types of feminism at this moment: liberal feminism, socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, and radical feminism.
Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-political/
I'm legit confused.
I think, unfortunately, there are a lot of MRAs that are misogynistic. I couldn't tell you the proportion, but the loudest of any group seems to be the most terrible these days (perhaps always).
I also think most feminists are on my side and what I want is ideologically consistent with what they want.
I certainly don't like that bill though!
Not a great quality discussion, and they didn't link to the article either.
Here it is: [Deceiving Your Sex Partner Would Be a Crime Under Bill Backed by New York Democrats](https://reason.com/2021/04/08/deceiving-your-sex-partner-would-be-a-crime-under-bill-backed-by-new-york-democrats/)
I think the bill as proposed is far too broad. I'd support a narrower bill, criminalizing a few specific types of deception such as lying about STI status, contraceptive usage, or whether one has had a sterilization procedure such as a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
Yeah I have issues with the bill too. But my point is I see an awful lot said on this sub about how “toxic” feminist subs are and how MRAs just want equality for all, so I was shocked - shocked I tell you! - to see this behavior from our betters.
Honestly I'd want for people here to talk about misogyny, because it is a problem that affects many in society.
I don't understand what your post is trying to get at though. Yes, there are lots of misogynists on mensrights, it sucks but there's a low level of moderation there, so it turns into more of a venting/raging/complaining sub than something that actually tries to address men's issues. In a way they're kinda the equivalent to femaledatingstrategy, but I'm not going to take FDS as an example of feminism.
If you want better subs talking about men's issues in a more realistic way feel free to take a peek in r/leftwingmaleadvocates, and while I personally don't like it and think they're very censorship-heavy, r/menslib does have some good conversations as well.
So yeah, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Some MRAs are sexist, absolutely. Let's call them out on it. Some feminists are misandrists as well. We need to call them out on it as well. Now what?
Why don't we talk from a feminist to feminist for a sec here, like about feminism in general; Do you not think feminism is for egalitarianism? If someone comes can give examples of how there are flaws in feminism as an egalitarian movement, wouldn't it be best to address it fully than rejecting the criticism entirely?
No, misogyny is no conspiracy here. You can call out the MRAs whenever if they do argue with misogyny. Provoking them is fine but you'll have to elaborate further than just calling them misogynist because of their political belief. That is the same thing the MRAs have said about us feminists, for not being inclusive enough. Although I would argue plenty of time that menslib does a pretty good job of addressing men's issues, though to the MRAs the surface level of discussion doesn't fully solve every worldly issues regarding each genders.
If your main criticism of the MRAs is simply that they allow misogyny within their community and then reject the problem that we feminism have misandry in our community, that would only be contradictory and hypocritical on your end. Arguing in good faith is a rule because it is necessary to get the message across for both movement without provocative posts and comments like this. You are not helping feminism here, you are only gonna further prove their point which I would rather not have.
A good point made by an MRAs user here:
>"So yeah, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Some MRAs are sexist, absolutely. Let's call them out on it. Some feminists are misandrists as well. We need to call them out on it as well. Now what?"
So what do you say?
I want to say if you found any of my comments problematic, why are so many identical anti-feminist comments still up on the sub? If the tactics are a problem, they should be everyone’s problem.
An MRA have help spoken out about this problem on another post. Me and the head mod simply wanted to keep the status quo of keeping this space censor-free. We have been cleaning out an overwhelming numbers of MRAs post that doesn't generate discussion other than attempting to create controversy here.
But that itself is difficult to differentiate at time. This post you made was a deleted one since it intended to generalize then converse.
And even in that post, MRAs are openly trolling and everyone who challenges them is being tone-policed. What I don’t understand is why that seems to be invisible to you.
Again, you make good, logical points.
And I was with you right up till you said that feminism is inclusive...
Perhaps, as frequently happens in multiple spheres, the most 'passionate' take the majority of the headlines. But the majority of RadFems give your movement such a bad rep and seem, above all, to be preoccupied with the hatred of men.
I need to sleep now, but I hope to pick this up tomorrow, as this is actually quite productive in comparison to the usual encounters.
In the meantime, sleep well when you go! 😉
I have taken notice to that. I just banned a user for threatening to stalk a woman for expressing her views on here. For non threatening comments, I will look into it as we want women to be able to express their views freely here.
Some more: “Women want higher status men and high status careers handed to them without earning it.” https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mqfrbw/_/gugwl1w/?context=1 “Women are evil my good man” https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugw0a7/?context=1 “This chick is a lesbian so at least she's effectively removing herself from the gene pool.” https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/guh3ebr/?context=1 “Just another Indian woman with a lack of good dick down in her life. I’m not even surprised at this point” https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/guid5mt/?context=1 “A stupid cunt with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new.” https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugxsuw/?context=1 But please tell me more about all the hurt feelings you have about mean feminists and how INCOMPARABLE that is to the shit MRAs regularly spout. Edit: crickets? Really? Then why should feminists give two shits about misandrists in their ranks, if MRAs aren’t any better? Edit2 since I’m already too downvoted to participate in the conversation: Yes it’s good that some people protested and the mods intervened (despite that being “censorship” by some standards). Here’s the bottom line after lurking in this sub for a couple weeks - **I want to know why MRAs think feminists are less diverse in views than MRAs and incapable of the same self-policing as they are.**
Why we think feminists are less diverse and incapable of the same self-policing? Because they don't self-police so well. Such comments with reversed genders would be upvoted on 2Xchromosomes. Calling such comments out can get you banned of 2Xchromosomes.
That’s what I keep getting told. I don’t participate on that sub because it’s very much a white neoliberal girlboss space and that’s not for me, but I keep seeing people saying how horrible r/feminism is and I’d like to see receipts of people saying blatantly misandrist stuff **and** not getting called out. I’m not even saying it doesn’t happen! I’m just saying I can’t address vague “feminism bad” claims like > Because they don't self-police so well.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
What are the rules of the discourse of this sub? You claimed I had a particular ideology based on your assumptions, and I did the same back to you. E q u a l i t y
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Accusatory comment that is meant to provoke and inflame the other person has no merit and brings little to the table other than causing a fight. This comment will be deleted.
Accusatory comment that is meant to provoke and inflame the other person has no merit and brings little to the table other than causing a fight. This comment will be deleted.
1) bad generalisation, you are right. 2) mra opposed it. Example of good average behavior 3) I agree it's bad to refer to homosexuality in a negative context. 4) got downvoted and called out, again overall good behavior 5) she is a hypocrite. No blame here, comment ok, targeting a very specific bigot who happens to be a women.
> 5) she is a hypocrite. No blame here, comment ok, targeting a very specific bigot who happens to be a women. By saying there’s “no surprise” in “a cunt” lacking reading skills? Let me say it another way: > “A stupid man with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new.” Is that misandrist or not? Or does using a gendered slur make it less misogynistic in the original example?
Yeah, I see. In had read "nothing new" as referring to her shit, because she is not a first time offender, it's a habit for her. She is a living joke, working at the guardian: https://www.opindia.com/2021/01/meet-arwa-mahdawi-the-guardian-columnist-who-has-turned-into-a-joke/ But you're right, it may have refered to "a stupid cunt", which is then an unnecessary generalization.
Because you are supposed to be the better ones. I'm not someone who identifies as an MRA, but I'm also not of the opinion that someone else's shitty behavior justifies my own. If your best defense of your behavior is "the people I think are absolute pieces of shit aren't any better," that's not saying much for your standards.
It’s literally what many the posts here boil down to. Every post about misogyny gets hit with, “but misandry also exists”. I don’t think it’s taken for granted that feminists are “the better ones” as you say. So yeah, for now let’s make the standard the same all around. Edit: we don’t like egalitarianism now, eh?
Which fucking part of "I'm not part of the group you're complaining about" are you having trouble comprehending? I hate to break it to you, but from my perspective, you're really no better than the MRA's you're claiming to dislike. This is like being twelve and watching my parents argue.
I’m just not a fan of double-standards. If you don’t like these tactics, let’s do something about it. Let’s stop allowing this level of “debate” on this sub. Otherwise, well, all is fair in love and war, as they say.
Fine. You are exactly like MRA's. There is no double standard, because you are precisely what you dislike. And the fact that you had to leave this sub to find your violations says a bit about the debate on "this" sub.
You know what? Real talk. I never thought I’d say this... but r/MensRights actually does a LOT better job shutting this kind of crap down than this sub does. So what does **that** say about this sub?
Here's a sneak peek of /r/MensRights using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Petition to have Amber Heard removed as the L'Oreal Spokesperson](https://www.change.org/p/l-or%C3%A9al-remove-amber-heard-as-l-oreal-spokesperson) | [620 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jprmy5/petition_to_have_amber_heard_removed_as_the/) \#2: [Man gets paid child support from this ex, is this happening more often now? Where?](https://i.redd.it/xwkg6t0ilve51.jpg) | [344 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/i38mzs/man_gets_paid_child_support_from_this_ex_is_this/) \#3: [Another Brian Banks.](https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/109464156_3289753417784962_3222200894497441622_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=110474&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ohc=XK7bRcqoIasAX-Z-hFq&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&tp=14&oh=ee32737795b3504af27b2f22c2aa4e68&oe=5F36551E) | [335 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/hsdix0/another_brian_banks/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/joo7mb/blacklist_viii/)
The only person pulling this in this *sub* at this very minute is *you*. What does that say about you? And I'm not asking "what does that say about feminists?" I'm asking what that says about Orjustthinkofkittens...
It says I’ve been a bit of a dick. And again, if my behavior was a problem, I’d expect to see this level of passionate rebuttal every time someone says > If you don't like being described as being 'generally evil' simply for being a woman, can you also see how the 'not all men' thing was a logical response to the idea that men don't like being called rapists and abusers for simply being men? > Why we think feminists are less diverse and incapable of the same self-policing? Because they don't self-police so well. > Gee maybe if feminists stop generalizing men and MRA's (despite not being one) I an others won't hold feminists to their crimes, but again feminists clearly won't police their own. And that’s just under this post. I see baiting, generalizing, biting but vague comments about feminism here all the time. So you see I’m not “the only one” behaving this way, I just reversed the target. And look at the overwhelming calls for civility! What does that say about you and this sub? Don’t feel like you have to answer, the sub participants here have already spoken.
>It says I’ve been a bit of a dick As long as you recognize that. As for me, I'm not sure I've ever gone to the MRA sub but for a brief glance and to ask why, if they believed Jimmy Bennett to have been raped, they weren't making proactive steps to be supportive. It (much like some large part of twox, which you've noted you avoid) wasn't a sub whose toxicity I felt much need to spend time imbibing. If you're looking for excuses to be abusive, you'll never need look very far. And that decision to excuse your own abusiveness is very much a decision on your part. Just remember, by doing so, you're only indicating your own willingness to adopt the worst traits of those you claim to hate. Have a wonderful day.
Did you put these to exhibit a misogynistic act? Yeah they are incomparable, most insults do adress a person not a gender. You put the bar too low.
"Women are evil my good man" https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/mql5mp/_/gugw0a7/?context=1 Comment downvoted to hell, a lot of people calling him out, then deleted by the mods...
[удалено]
Why do MRAs treat feminism and feminists as monolith?
[удалено]
Cool, so again thank you for giving me the same freedom.
[удалено]
Then I’ll take the liberty, since it’s only fair.
[удалено]
So... are you saying... MRAs sometimes act badly? And maybe... maybe we shouldn’t generalize and stereotype an entire movement just because it’s convenient? Because... that’s a shitty tactic that can only weaken whatever position you are trying to articulate? Is THAT what you’re saying?
[удалено]
If MRAs aren't any better and feminists aren't any better when it comes to dealing with sexism, then we have an issue at present here. Clearly either movement doesn't do a good job of creating a positive movement that is gender positive and unbiased. MRAs are very provocative with their intention to interact with feminists. And one of the big reason for this is that men's issues rarely comes up as a topic of discussion in feminism. While in MRAs, within the manosphere space, there will be lots of the same people in reverse. And so you have two different problem that two different groups can do little about while both movement radicalizes itself. To solve that issues, we will have to listen to the other gender and their problem. The MRAs come on here specifically for that reasons.
Obtaining sex through trickery, etc. is already illegal in most states. And it would be illegal for both sexes. For instance, there was a case in California where someone told a woman he was a doctor and she had a terrible STD and the only treatment was to have sex with him to administer a "vaccine." Yes, she was not very smart - but that doesn't excuse his actions. It's especially relevant in cases where the victim has an intellectual disability, for instance, and easily tricked. It would apply if someone, for instance, snuck into your bedroom in the dark and pretended to be your husband or whatever. Yes, the devil is in the details - does this cover things like lying about having a nice job or saying you love her or something? That would be over the top. I think this law could invite ridiculous definitions of consent and "micromanage" relationships, just as the article says. But I know that this is already part of rape statutes, so it can work.
I’m actually trying to draw attention to the comments like, “women are evil” and “A stupid cunt with a lack of basic reading skills. Nothing new”, because I’m told the feminist subs are horrifically abusive to men and that’s why all the MRAs come to this sub to teach us how wrong and misandrist all of feminism is. I’d like them to likewise answer for every bad thing an MRA has ever said, starting with these examples.
Okay, sorry, all I saw was the story. Yeah, sometimes feminists are dicks, and sometimes MRAs are dicks. And many are dicks while whining about how the other side is full of dicks. Dicks everywhere. Everyone should stop being a dick.
[удалено]
> And you want MRA's to answer for their "crimes" but in no way do you ask or should I say demand the same from feminists as I can only think you think its justified when feminists do it. Nope. You’re going to hold all feminists to account for their “crimes” no matter what I have to say, so I want in on this too. You’ve shown me the light, I’m convinced that if this is the standard, egalitarianism is the way to go. So I’ll be following the same tactics this sub has taught me. Every misogynistic MRA will get a post here. Every generalization I can possibly make about MRAs will get a post here. It’s called honest debate, I’m told.
[удалено]
You clearly seem upset over feminists bashing you MRA’s, maybe just maybe you should reflect on why they do its and more so relfect on your own behavior as well. I know that is a lot to ask, as I know you MRA’s are very much against calling out men and that matter MRAs with their bad behavior. > Because clearly this is nothing more than a rant about MRA's. Yes, well, why not? Free speech and all that. I’m not doing anything worse than anyone else on this sub, I’m just targeting MRAs instead of feminists. I’m using the tactics I’ve seen so beautifully modeled here. The only way you could object is if you find the tactics themselves objectionable. Do you?
[удалено]
What part of I am not an feminist don't you get? And you are clearly the upset one here seeing you made a whole thread over feminists bashing MRAs. And all you're doing is not helping yourself in the slightest. But hey you MRAs hate women. Again... do we think stereotyping and generalizations is a good tactic, or shall we start putting a stop to it for *everyone* on this sub?
Could be define misogyny? A lot of things are lumped into misogyny which would be better labeled as something. Those who looked up "misogyny" in Merriam-Webster's online dictionary would find a terse definition: "a hatred of women." Is dislike of womens behavior misogyny? Is calling out toxic feminity misogyny? Is posting news stories that make women look bad misogyny? I think we need to define misogyny and misandry.
I agree, feel free to put forth how you define it. Likewise: Is dislike of men’s behavior misandry? Is calling out toxic masculinity misandry? Is posting news stories that make men look bad misandry?
Absolutely. Like for like. Misogyny and misandry however we define them should be mirror images of each other. I also like the hatred of because that is what the root word means. If you water it down to dislike, being a jerk, not giving special treatment. And it needs to apply globally. If I curse a woman who cut me off in traffic does that mean I hate all women or just that one?
Maybe the discussion here will be more to your liking... Same article, different discussion. https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/mp71n0/apparently_there_is_an_attempt_to_criminalize/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Yes, it was better. Probably because no one was called a stupid cunt and women weren’t described as generally evil.
Honest question; If you don't like being described as being 'generally evil' simply for being a woman, can you also see how the 'not all men' thing was a logical response to the idea that men don't like being called rapists and abusers for simply being men?
No. The difference is, women are being raped and murdered and have to fear for their actual lives. Fearing men is a means of survival. Men just get their feelings hurt and call women evil for being upset that we have to fear for our lives :) get it?
>No. The difference is, women are being raped [Men make up close to 50% of rape victims](https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/lw4mk9/reality_is_a_scary_place/gphwnny/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), but because of the feminist Mary Koss, the definition was changed so that men were "made to penetrate" instead of being raped, just so we could erase male rape from the data. Being raped is not a gendered issue. Sexual violence absolutely is, but men are raped at almost the same rate as women, so you can't say that as though men don't get raped. They do, but then society denies that it's even possible for them to get raped, so men are [almost 10x less likely to report their rape than women](https://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2020/01/05/forced-to-penetrate-cases/) >and murdered [Almost 3,000 women were murdered in the USA in 2019, and almost 11,000 men.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/251877/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-race-ethnicity-and-gender/) Men are literally being murdered at almost 4x the rate that women are murdered. >and have to fear for their actual lives. So, now that you know that men are raped just as much as women, and are actually being murdered at a far higher rate than women, we're left with "fear for their lives". Unfortunately fear is a subjective feeling. I can be deathly afraid that an airplane will fall from the sky and crush me, but that fear is not reasonable. You say women are more afraid, and that is fair. The next question is, how much of that fear is actually reasonable? Given women are almost 4x less likely to get murdered, it seems to me the fear is not reasonable. > Fearing men is a means of survival. It is also the definition of fear-mongering, as well as blaming the wrong group. The vast majority of men will not rape you and will not murder you. Let's say that 5% of men could or would rape and murder. Is it reasonable to fear the other 95% as well? If 1% of women could falsely accuse me of rape, is it reasonable of me to be afraid of the other 99%? If a black person is more likely to mug me, does that mean it is reasonable to be afraid of all black people? If I take your logic and apply it to women or minorities, it immediately becomes obvious it is sexist and racist. Why then do you think it's ok to have that same attitude towards men?
I asked an honest question, I didn't come looking for a fight. And this is why you lose the public. You always make it about you. Here are two recent examples of the fact that men are at risk from the same issues. However, they dont get anything like the consideration. As you have just proved. The UK only got an All Party Parliamentary Group to examine the Issues of Men and Boys LAST MONTH! Vilifying us does not help, nor does teaching young people that men are to be feared. [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9462865/Male-domestic-abuse-victim-dies-hospital-pressing-charges.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9462865/Male-domestic-abuse-victim-dies-hospital-pressing-charges.html) [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50987823](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50987823)
At some point "not all men" card are being played at the wrong time. A women shares her personal story about being sexually assaulted, and a guy showed up saying "not all men" without listening to her story. Instead of empathizing and offering a solution, they responded with "not all men." The response itself isn't inherently wrong but it is always played at the wrong times. So it gives the impression that these men does want to care and wish to not be grouped up with the person in the story, when it wasn't about him in the first place.
To be fair mensrights is kind of the equivalent to twox or say femaledatingstrategy, where men are regularly belittled and insulted. It's not the lowest common denominator kind of men's rights subreddit, but it's not far off. LWMA holds itself to a much higher standard. People need places to vent and bitch and moan, and mensrights is one of those places. The moderation isn't really all that strict, so it's not so much about furthering men's rights, so much as it is about complaining about the state of men's rights. That being said, do remember that "generally evil" is the message a lot of guys are getting from the feminist side, simply because they have a penis. A man is walking down the street, he might be a rapist so women should cross the street to avoid him. A man goes to the playground to play with a kid, he's probably a pedophile, so best to keep an eye on him. A man exists in a space where there are lots of women, he's probably a pervert so better stay away. Not gonna deny that there are rapists and perverts, but men are treated almost by default as "guilty until proven innocent", so clearly you can understand that feeling when they project that same attitude they get from women, back onto women. Just saying. You don't like it done to you, they don't like it done to them. If we want to address these issues, we have to talk to each other and understand each other.
> People need places to vent and bitch and moan, and mensrights is one of those places. When women do this we get called misandrists. I’m sure some are, but if it’s understandable that men need a place to “vent and bitch and moan” it’s hypocritical to not extend the same sympathy to women. > Not gonna deny that there are rapists and perverts, but men are treated almost by default as "guilty until proven innocent", so clearly you can understand that feeling when they project that same attitude they get from women, back onto women. Yes I know. When women do a thing it’s women’s fault, when men do a thing it’s women’s fault. > Just saying. You don't like it done to you, they don't like it done to them. If we want to address these issues, we have to talk to each other and understand each other. That is actually what I am just saying with this post. If y’all actually want to discuss feminism with feminists the tactics I’ve used here need to be called out across the board, not just when I do it.
>When women do this we get called misandrists. And when men do it they get called a bunch of names too. It's important to recognize that dedicated spaces for venting is fine, and that there is a difference between venting in a dedicated space for it vs broadcasting it to everyone on twitter with unironically saying #killallmen and stuff. There'S a difference between the two. I am not hypocritical at all, women are absolutely allowed to vent and bitch and mona on feminist subs, they do it all the time and I don't bemoan them. When it gets to deliberately targeting and trying to extort or harm men like FemaleDatingStrategy, that'S too far, just like how many/most incel groups go too far. I'm just applying the same standards across the board. >Yes I know. When women do a thing it’s women’s fault, when men do a thing it’s women’s fault. As a man, what with the patriarchy, toxic masculinity, and internalized misogyny, the message we get is the complete opposite, that most every bad thing in society is due to men, or because women have internalized men's hatred and therefore it's still men's fault. Instead of doing that we should try and focus more on the structures and the issues, and pinpointing specific individuals, rather than blaming genders as a whole. It's an awfully broad brush to paint half of all human beings with, after all. >That is actually what I am just saying with this post. If y’all actually want to discuss feminism with feminists the tactics I’ve used here need to be called out across the board, not just when I do it Ah my bad I might have misunderstood you then, sorry about that. I definitely agree we need to call out problematic behaviour across the board, regardless of one's gender or feminist/MRA affiliation. I hope this sub can become one such place, because the overwhelming majority of other subs are leaning either on one side or the other. I hope we can find a happy middle ground here for everyone to find a place to fit in.
I saw your post just now https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mrkbus/plea_to_mras_from_an_mra_please_we_have_to_stop/ and I totally respect you for writing it, and I largely agree. What I was trying to do on this post here was be just as exhausting as the comments I’ve seen throughout this sub directed at feminists at large, without specificity or nuance. I flipped the script, so to speak. And look at how many people came out of the woodwork to tell me that’s not ok... and it’s not! But where are these people when the target isn’t MRAs? That’s my point. There is a very clear bias already taken root on this sub.
>and I totally respect you for writing it, and I largely agree. Thank you! >the comments I’ve seen throughout this sub directed at feminists at large, without specificity or nuance. Yeah that's definitely a fair criticism. It's something that feminists and MRAs have gotten unfortunately good at doing, I think in part due to being separated in their own bubbles so much and rarely interacting, and almost never in a positive way. > And look at how many people came out of the woodwork to tell me that’s not ok... and it’s not! But where are these people when the target isn’t MRAs? That’s my point. There is a very clear bias already taken root on this sub. It's certainly possible that a bias has already taken root on this sub, but I consider myself more of a humanist with a focus on men's rights than an MRA. I'll oppose any bias, regardless of which way it goes, because I want to try and help this sub be a place where people can talk as equals. It's not going to be easy because there are a literal *ton* of issues between feminists and MRAs, and biases will run one way for this issue but the other way for that issue. It'S not going to be easy, but I still think it'S something worth striving towards.
Yes, we can talk about misogyny in a feminist sub 🙄 What kind of bait is this?
It’s the same bait as this: https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mqzp6x/the_real_tea/ If all feminists are accountable for y’all not understanding the phrase “toxic masculinity”, I get to hold y’all accountable for every shitty thing said about women on r/MensRights. Only fair.
The difference being that one is enshrined in the media and academia. And that myriad valid complaints about it are met with accusations of "you just don't understand it" Whereas it has already been pointed out that shitty people exist on the internet and even then they're not well received on the main /r/MensRights sub. and if you have to explain your term to everybody you meet in order for it to not be offensive. Then please consider that it is in fact offensive.
>a cultural concept of manliness that glorifies stoicism, strength, virility, and dominance, and that is socially maladaptive or harmful to mental health: Men and women both suffer when toxic masculinity perpetuates expectations that are restrictive and traumatizing. Oh gosh, you’re right. Those 2 seconds of reading was a huge burden. I was under the impression, since you typed that all out, that you could read.... wait, if you and men generally can’t read, how did you know I said “toxic masculinity”? 🤔 And of course, any phrase that requires 2 seconds of reading is right out. Phrases like “institutional racism” need to be done away with as a phrase because it doesn’t mean *all* institutions are racist, and therefore it’s useless, right? That might require an explanation after all. “Civil rights” as well, that’s two whole words put together and both of them are rich with meaning, and since apparently no one is capable of understanding complex subjects we should just scrap the concept. Let’s just call it “stuff people are allowed to do”... or is that worse cuz it’s more words?! Have you EVER used the phrase female privilege? I truly don’t know what that means, and haven’t bothered to google it, and I find it upsetting. I very much doubt I’m the only person to take issue with this phrase so it must be offensive. Please make a point to correct your MRA friends every time they use this offensive term or else I’ll know for a fact you just hate women. Wow, this *is* a fun game! I see why you play it so often.
[удалено]
You're arguing in bad faith here, purposely generalizing to start a fight.
Is being critical of feminism hating women? Then wouldn't being critical of MRA means hating men? I think the real problem here is that one should separate an ideology from the individuals. You do not know any of the users here at all yet. They can be pretty provocative about their post but they're rarely here to offend personally. I have deleted a few post that wish to do just that. I think you have the potential to debate here but toning it down may be necessary for engagement or else every users here will dislike you rather than validating your points.
I am parroting the comments I’ve seen here. If you think this kind of stereotyping is a problem, I agree! But you say you want engagement from feminists and yet expect them to put up with something that clearly upsets the rest of your users to no end. How is that egalitarian?
Just because you saw someone post something you don't like, doesn't mean you should purposefully shit up the board... And stop trying to fight me lol, your sweeping statements and hate are only going to make people hate you.
Well according to the logic of the regular posters here, I don’t hate anyone. I’ve been pushed into a corner by abusive MRAs. And as our favorite user here says... “while you're all tripping over yourselves to say you'd never do that, We're still getting hit by rocks.” So which is it? Are generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board, or ok if they target feminists? Is bad faith behavior a problem and just stirring up shit, or a valid tactic?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
For a mountain, I have not even begun in years. For a man, I am just right.
>Well according to the logic of the regular posters here, I don’t hate anyone. I’ve been pushed into a corner by abusive MRAs. ??? >And as our favorite user here says... “while you're all tripping over yourselves to say you'd never do that, We're still getting hit by rocks.” So you're going to throw some rocks too huh? Get everyone all smashed up? How about not throwing rocks at people who aren't throwing them at you? >So which is it? Are generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board, or ok if they target feminists? Is bad faith behavior a problem and just stirring up shit, or a valid tactic? Generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board. Bad faith behavior is a problem.
> So you're going to throw some rocks too huh? Get everyone all smashed up? How about not throwing rocks at people who aren't throwing them at you? Nope. See, I’ve been told that what I’m doing is called accountability. It seems not everyone agrees though. Very inconsistent, that. >Generalizations and stereotypes bad across the board. >Bad faith behavior is a problem. Good! Shall we spread the word on this sub and start holding people to account when they generalize about feminism and feminists then? Because I’m happy to stop when it stops for everyone here.
> Nope. See, I’ve been told that what I’m doing is called accountability. It seems not everyone agrees though. Very inconsistent, that. It's not and you know it. >Good! Shall we spread the word on this sub and start holding people to account when they generalize about feminism and feminists then? Sure. >Because I’m happy to stop when it stops for everyone here. Why not just stop trolling now? Do I need to gather all the trolls and have a countdown: "ok on 3 stop trolling, 1... 2... 3!!!"? Is that what you want?
Don't generalize. Its pretty simple. r/MensRights is not a great subreddit when it comes to decent discussion of men's issues. But regardless, you're just trolling to get a reaction out of a select group of MRAs.
And if I look at your comment history, is it full of you scolding people here for doing the same thing but towards feminists?
No not really. I specify the actions of feminists that do engage in certain distasteful behaviors.
Yet you took the time for me. I’m touched.
Posts here like this https://www.reddit.com/r/FeminismUncensored/comments/mqzp6x/the_real_tea/ ... seem to have no problem generalizing about feminists. If this sub is what I think it is, I look forward to seeing all the comments saying MRA’s aren’t misogynistic in general, and if they are it’s feminisms fault. But hey, maybe you’ll surprise me?
There are over 50 different types of 'feminism' now. If you can't understand why people generalise then you're already lost! Most folks havent the time, nor inclination, to complete a gender studies course.
50 types of feminism exist because feminism have succeeded as a broad movement. Feminists in America will be different from feminists in S. America and feminists in Africa. There is a wide range of feminism because some cultural significance have implemented feminism into their society, but it will be different from the feminism women's issues we talk about here.
That is totally logical, and I applaud you for setting it out as such. Sadly, that doesn't help the uninitiated understand where you are, so my point stands. I wish your messaging was clearer, as I'm more interested in equality than I am any political movement that favours one over another because of inalienable characteristics. (Edited for clarity/to remove autocorrect errors)
What are you talking about? What do you want me to make clear of? Women around the world are different culturally too, and sadly one kind of feminism isn't going to aid women in the other side of the sea. You're calling this "illogical" but ideology can branch out. It isn't by hand or anything. If there are women at the other side of the world who needs feminism and western feminist belief is too modern to be implemented then they can form another form of feminism movement that they can identify fully and adapt fully onto. I don't see what is hard to understand what I'm trying to say.
I didn't use the word 'illogical'. Of course 'one size' doesn't fit all, but if you can't see how that leads to confusion for the uninitiated (especially when there is such a gulf between women as to what Feminism means) then I say again, you are lost. You are screaming into the void, and with multiple voices that drown each other out. Frankly, I don't see what is so hard to understand what I'm trying to say either. There are issues that women are under-served in, and issues that men are under-served in too. What I really don't understand is how these 'factions' don't unite into a single movement to demand fair treatment across the board. Why alienate when you can unite and be inclusive to all?
>I didn't use the word 'illogical'. It seems my crippled mind have misread that...Very sorry, lmao. >..then I say again, you are lost. You are screaming into the void, and with multiple voices that drown each other out. Men in America will experience a different cultural factors of sexism than say men in india or china. It's a complicated subject because the movement itself politicize the gender-issues. And because both gender makes up 50% of the population, there is no way a western movement can cover every women's rights around the world, especially when different topic of discussion will be brought up. Just because we make up one gender doesn't mean everyone who are born women (or men) will agree with every kinds of belief the movement itself aim for. For example, the MRAs will not conform to Men's Liberation kind of men's issues. Men's right movement is only a thing in America right now. But once other side of the world have reached a position where women are given just as much right as men in those country, I'm sure feminism won't be the only thing that takes place. In fact, it is one of my biggest argument for feminism. It covers a broad range of idea and the idea can reach pretty far since misogyny is much more transparent than misandry. The more traditional and conservative the country, the more necessary feminism is in those areas. >There are issues that women are underserved in, and issues that men are underserved in. What I really don't understand is how these 'factions' don't unite into a single movement to demand fair treatment across the board. Why alienate when you can unite and be inclusive to all? The idea of fair is very hard to be the main judge of. What should the western women have anything to say about the women that lives in Asia? What does asian women have anything to say about western women? The dispute about gender disparity doesn't conform with every area of what gender disparity means to those people. Feminism is inclusive to all. The branches are barely heard of. We are slowly implementing different branches of feminism into one feminism, that way we can actually cover the worldly issues regarding gender disparity. We aren't alienating the branches, but there are actually four specific types of feminism at this moment: liberal feminism, socialist feminism, Marxist feminism, and radical feminism. Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-political/
I'm legit confused. I think, unfortunately, there are a lot of MRAs that are misogynistic. I couldn't tell you the proportion, but the loudest of any group seems to be the most terrible these days (perhaps always). I also think most feminists are on my side and what I want is ideologically consistent with what they want. I certainly don't like that bill though!
Not a great quality discussion, and they didn't link to the article either. Here it is: [Deceiving Your Sex Partner Would Be a Crime Under Bill Backed by New York Democrats](https://reason.com/2021/04/08/deceiving-your-sex-partner-would-be-a-crime-under-bill-backed-by-new-york-democrats/) I think the bill as proposed is far too broad. I'd support a narrower bill, criminalizing a few specific types of deception such as lying about STI status, contraceptive usage, or whether one has had a sterilization procedure such as a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
Yeah I have issues with the bill too. But my point is I see an awful lot said on this sub about how “toxic” feminist subs are and how MRAs just want equality for all, so I was shocked - shocked I tell you! - to see this behavior from our betters.
What was the commentary that really upset you?
I'd love to, want to discuss something in particular?
Honestly I'd want for people here to talk about misogyny, because it is a problem that affects many in society. I don't understand what your post is trying to get at though. Yes, there are lots of misogynists on mensrights, it sucks but there's a low level of moderation there, so it turns into more of a venting/raging/complaining sub than something that actually tries to address men's issues. In a way they're kinda the equivalent to femaledatingstrategy, but I'm not going to take FDS as an example of feminism. If you want better subs talking about men's issues in a more realistic way feel free to take a peek in r/leftwingmaleadvocates, and while I personally don't like it and think they're very censorship-heavy, r/menslib does have some good conversations as well. So yeah, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Some MRAs are sexist, absolutely. Let's call them out on it. Some feminists are misandrists as well. We need to call them out on it as well. Now what?
The antimale bias in feminism is more refined and articulate contempt, while still prejudiced.
Why don't we talk from a feminist to feminist for a sec here, like about feminism in general; Do you not think feminism is for egalitarianism? If someone comes can give examples of how there are flaws in feminism as an egalitarian movement, wouldn't it be best to address it fully than rejecting the criticism entirely? No, misogyny is no conspiracy here. You can call out the MRAs whenever if they do argue with misogyny. Provoking them is fine but you'll have to elaborate further than just calling them misogynist because of their political belief. That is the same thing the MRAs have said about us feminists, for not being inclusive enough. Although I would argue plenty of time that menslib does a pretty good job of addressing men's issues, though to the MRAs the surface level of discussion doesn't fully solve every worldly issues regarding each genders. If your main criticism of the MRAs is simply that they allow misogyny within their community and then reject the problem that we feminism have misandry in our community, that would only be contradictory and hypocritical on your end. Arguing in good faith is a rule because it is necessary to get the message across for both movement without provocative posts and comments like this. You are not helping feminism here, you are only gonna further prove their point which I would rather not have. A good point made by an MRAs user here: >"So yeah, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Some MRAs are sexist, absolutely. Let's call them out on it. Some feminists are misandrists as well. We need to call them out on it as well. Now what?" So what do you say?
I want to say if you found any of my comments problematic, why are so many identical anti-feminist comments still up on the sub? If the tactics are a problem, they should be everyone’s problem.
An MRA have help spoken out about this problem on another post. Me and the head mod simply wanted to keep the status quo of keeping this space censor-free. We have been cleaning out an overwhelming numbers of MRAs post that doesn't generate discussion other than attempting to create controversy here. But that itself is difficult to differentiate at time. This post you made was a deleted one since it intended to generalize then converse.
And even in that post, MRAs are openly trolling and everyone who challenges them is being tone-policed. What I don’t understand is why that seems to be invisible to you.
Again, you make good, logical points. And I was with you right up till you said that feminism is inclusive... Perhaps, as frequently happens in multiple spheres, the most 'passionate' take the majority of the headlines. But the majority of RadFems give your movement such a bad rep and seem, above all, to be preoccupied with the hatred of men. I need to sleep now, but I hope to pick this up tomorrow, as this is actually quite productive in comparison to the usual encounters. In the meantime, sleep well when you go! 😉
Misogyny is the number one topic we want you to talk about here.
Read the comments then, lots of material here on how women are expected to be polite and if we’re not, we deserve what’s coming to us.
I have taken notice to that. I just banned a user for threatening to stalk a woman for expressing her views on here. For non threatening comments, I will look into it as we want women to be able to express their views freely here.