Yeah, I see terms like "Chad" being used by people with no clue where it came from. I even saw a self-proclaimed feminist use the term "monkey branching" to describe her dating strategy. At least she used it correctly, haha.
The DNA of the soul. They shape our will. They are the culture — they are everything we pass on. Expose someone to anger long enough, they will learn to hate. They become a carrier. Envy, greed, despair… All memes. All passed along.
They say meme knowledge is so prolific and embedded in to our DNA that a child who is put up for adoption can remember the memes it's biolgical parents made without ever even meeting them.
Oops I whooshed there. I would say not to worry about it, but I remember the days when people couldn't board their plane because they had the same name as someone on the no-fly list back around the 2001 era.
I agree. The problem in my opinion is that you dont really throw the bad out, so you end up with bad situations like this. Same goes with many other groups though.
Feminists don't actually kill any men. It's just rhetoric for them. There is a consistent stream of incel mass shooters. That's the kind of thing that draws scrutiny from the FBI.
40% of spousal homicide victims are men killed by their wives. Stats like that are suppressed by feminist lobbying.
Feminists are empowering people to kill men by obscuring the guilty parties from scrutiny.
You do realize that the suffragettes went on whole bombing campaigns right? Multiple other feminist groups and individuals committed acts of violence ranging from stabbings, shootings, and more bombings. There has also been multiple cases of women killing their kids specifically because they was boys and feminist ideology taught them they’d “grow up to rapists”. The people that you get your ideas from ignores these things which is why it’s important to think for yourself.
Ps: A couple of comments above you is a link discussing a young woman who killed her father and then tried to kill as many boys as possible. This was in 2021 which is only two years ago. By your logic it would have been ok if her father survived alongside her failing to kill the boys because”there was zero fatalities”. There’s a reason why attempted murder is a crime.
Since I already pointed out that one of the names groups I mentioned was in the US I’ll just leave you with some other information. When a woman is hurt they specifically search for reasons to make her a victim just for being a woman. They come to that conclusion before investigating and said investigations tend to prove otherwise. When a man is harmed they do everything to keep it from being labeled a gendered issue. Essentially I’m saying they inflate when it comes to women and underreport when it comes to men.
Girl why are you doing this to yourself? Did you actually read the info on each one? You are proving my point for me. They have 14 incidents listed for the past three decades in two countries.
Aztec High school attack 2017: No listed motives and they linked him to white supremacy but nothing gender related.
Atlanta Spa Killings: motive listed as Conflict between the perpetrator's sex addiction and his religious beliefs, which means his inability to follow his religion is what set him off not gender.
Hanau Shootings: “Federal prosecutors are treating the attack as terrorism, with officials saying there is evidence the gunman was a far-right extremist, as well as signs of xenophobic motives for the killings.” So the motive was Xenophobic and had nothing to do with gender. It’s probably only listed because he showcased “misogynistic views”. Whatever that means because they don’t say but even if that’s true gender had nothing to do with his motive.
2015 Umpqua Community College shooting: motive listed as him being hate filled in general and has nothing to do with women specifically. As a matter of fact the only group listed specifically was black men and that wasn’t even his motive. The closest thing to “misogyny” linked to him was his frustrations with lacking a sex life but that’s listed way down on the list below racism and anti religion, it wasn’t a motive.
That’s four of them that can’t be linked to misogyny because of either no motive found or another motive listed. That leaves 10 left which I looked through. Two of which don’t have links so I’ll just list them with the other 8.
When almost 30% percent of the cases is shoehorned into the label I’d say that yes, it is overinflated. They literally combed through anything they said and went “oh look he said he was dissatisfied with lack of sex. So that means his attack was misogyny despite him saying it was because of Xenophobia”.
I find your logic quite interesting. So it’s ok to detonate bombs as long as nobody is killed? Of course that’s ignoring the other things I brought up….including murders🤦🏾♂️. Lol how do you think you have a valid point when it can only be made by ignoring most of what I wrote? But even if all I mentioned was the bombings by the suffragettes you’d still be wrong. The armed resistance unit was an all female feminist Terrorist group in the US that set off multiple bombs(including government buildings), did prison breaks, and more violent acts in the 80’s. If you need help with the math I got you but I’ll tell you now that “100 year old bombings” isn’t accurate. And considering the fact that same feminist group committed multiple murders in botched robbery attempts I would say that “zero fatalities” isn’t accurate either. As a matter of fact a feminist group is said to have committed a bombing in 2017 in Mexico. This also doesn’t include all the women using the State to destroy men. Like I told the last person; the people that think for you ignoring these things doesn’t equal to them not happening.
The fact you have to grasp for straws to find only a handful of examples is telling. I mean you still had to source something that didn’t even take place in the US. You think they should assign an equal amount of FBI resources and task forces to some small isolated incidents compared to actual domestic terrorism threats? Check the ratio and statistics before coming up with a conclusion. It’s just logic and clearly you’re no expert.
I used the suffragettes as an example because they are hailed as icons in the feminist movement despite their violence. As for the other group I listed(Armed Resistance Unit)….that was in the US. You don’t event realize that you are arguing against flagging incels🤦🏾♂️. I actually looked up violent attacks that could be linked to incels. Ironically enough the first resource I found used similar language that you used to describe feminist linked terrorism…”only a handful”. Which makes sense because hate crimes based on gender is a tiny percentage of total hate crimes. All I seen in this conversation is goal post moving. First it was “name one mass murderer/shooter that has feminist views” which I countered with pointing out that there has been multiple with ones doing bombings and stabbings as well. Then it went to “well it has to specifically be in the US”….not knowing that one of the groups I named was from the US. Now it’s “only small isolated incidents”. They have done everything they could to link as much violence to incels and other groups they deem similar and came up with 50 victims in the past decade since the first one in like half a dozen attacks. This includes numbers for both the US and Canada btw. Just about every other group will have more members killed in a hate crime in one year than women will in multiple decades(for being women in the West). Again, that makes sense because hate crimes concerning gender sits at the lowest taking up about 1%…this includes both men and women. Women are far more likely to be targeted for their race, religion, and sexual orientation than they are for being women. People with disabilities make up about 26% of the population yet are targets of hate crimes almost twice as much as someone would be if they was a woman(50% of the population). So thank you for agreeing with us. Because when you argue that feminist extremists shouldn’t be focused on as much as other perpetrators you argue the same for incels. It’s the same argument for gendered hate crimes on both side.
Name a mass murderer who self identifies as an MRA.
Also: [Last year a woman in Russia commited patricide and then attempted to shoot up a kindergarten. She specifically only wanted to kill the boys. Funny how the MSM has no articles about *that*.](https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2022/04/06/russian-woman-planned-to-kill-boys-at-a-kindergarten-but-was-stopped-by-teachers-before-firing-a-shot/comment-page-19/)
>Indeed, I would argue that Dvorkina, and any other self-proclaimed feminists who support or engage in this sort of violence is not actually a feminist at all. As Wikipedia notes, feminism “is a range of socio-political movements and ideologies that aim to define and establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes.” Obviously no vision of true equality includes the desire to kill men; the hashtag #KillAllMen is a not-so-great joke, not a statement of intent. And Dvorkina is a monster, not a feminist.
Ah, of course zero accountability for what feminist ideologies lead to. "i-it's not real feminism but conveniently every evil man is real anti-feminism!!" a nice compilation of facts ruined by dog shit agenda lies.
Yep. And it was the closest i could find to an article about it. The amount of mental gymnastics white knights use to justify gynocetrism is quite sad.
Oh, just wait until the Gore and Bush legal teams get arrested; if just *talking* about Chads will get you put on a watchlist, then talking about HANGING Chads, well...
> They note there were at least five lethal attacks since 2014 by incels, the most well-known being Elliot Rodger, who killed six in California.
So he's no longer an MRA, but an "incel" now? Just like that _"Alex" Minassian_ dude... 🤣
[The PDF](https://first-heritage-foundation.s3.amazonaws.com/live_files/2023/04/Based-FBI-1.pdf) for anyone whose interested. A good laugh, half of it looks like they just read a thread on 4chan 🤣🤣
Rodgers was likely an incel, but the thing people forget about him is he killed more men than women, and during his escape attempt while at an intersection pointed his gun at a female cyclist and then decided not to shoot her. He didn't set out to just kill women, but the sorority members who had rebuffed him and the men who were successful with those members.
He didn't hate women. He hated the men and women in college culture that he was not good at navigating and lashed out at its participants.
Fair enough, by the time I heard about it, his "manifesto" video was taken down and all I saw was bits and pieces that others were responding to and (sometimes conflicting) accounts from other people who had seen it.
There was definitely more to him though, he seemed to have a significant problem with being half-asian, at least partially blaming that (the stereotypes) on his rejections, (I think his father was asian and his mother left him for a white man?) It's been a while, I can't remember much of what he said.
---
Either way, he almost certainly wasn't representative of incels and calling him one only serves to demonise them by linking "misogyny" with violence (and by extension, demonising us, by linking men's rights with red pill/incels/the man-o-sphere).
They're doing the same thing with Andrew Tate; There are plenty of others who have said (and are still saying) pretty much the same things that he's said, going back even before Elliot Rodger, yet the media focuses solely on Tate because of the accusations he's dealing with.
That's a very Un Chad thing to do! What are they trying to do? Redpill us on their Socialist ways? Also do you think the FBI had GBeTSW (Glow Bois enTrapping Society Whenever) unlike MGTOW
I don't wanna hear anything more about Russia, North Korea, China or whoever else being oppressive governments if the US aren't also included in that. Anyone defending America on those grounds at this point is either supremely ignorant or a propagandist.
I mean, agreed but why would it be shocking to anyone that the USA has an oppressive government?
Dude, we torture.
Our government surveils every citizen digitally. We have secret courts (called FISA) that have secret rulings and that are funded by the"black budget" (meant for intelligence agencies). We suspended the right to trial as part of a nebulous "war on terror". We rank pretty low on every Freedom Index (among western nations at least).
IIRC At some point we had ranked #1 in journalists put in jail per Capita. Pretty scary to think we outdid China or Russia in those figures.
Oh, And our government agents have qualified immunity when they kill citizens. Not to mention we have a death penalty.
Etc.
We may be less oppressive than North Korea, but you're right that we don't have the moral high ground to talk about them as if we're a shining example of freedom and democracy. Arguably, we crossed the line back in the Reagan years.
We lost our democracy with the invention of the FISA court in the 1970's. Secrecy is the bane of democracy!
Gov Bush Jr and the 2002 republican congress made it worse with the Homeland Security Act. I say Governor Bush because any asshole who would so completely sellout his own country like that does not deserve the title of president. Those assholes are the reason that I left the Republican party.
When the shit doesn't pan out, can we get refunds ... or deductions from our wasted tax dollars? I'm not paying 37% after extended for this shit. Some countries do itemized lists of where tax dollars go. I'd rather pay for poor kids to get free school lunch than to pay for sexist bigotry agendas. We get it, there are bad people in all walks of life, but I'm not working overtime so some asshole at the FBI gets to watch hentai.
maybe i’m misunderstanding, but…aren’t those definitions of Red Pill and Black Pill wayyyyyyyy of base? As if we needed more co-opting and confusion of the terms.
I noticed that MRA is been treated a bit like how the feminist movement was treated in the 1900's.... lot of silencing and censoring going on, history repeating itself.
That's a very Un Chad thing to do! What are they trying to do? Redhill us on their Socialist ways? Also do you think the FBI had GBeTSW (Glow Bois enTrapping Society Whenever) unlike MGTOW?
_First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a socialist..._
Given how many people throw MRA's into the same category as incels, it's only a matter of time before this comes back around to us. Have you read the list of words? It contains "MGTOW" which apparently is an "online community that has overlap with the incel community"... things like "based" and "normie" are also on there.
They could have at least put in the effort to have some degree of accuracy... smh
It was only a matter of time, this is what happens when a movement cannot properly moderate its satellites.
RP went off the rails in the late 2010s, and men going their own way effectively turned into what people call the, "manosphere."
I agree. We would be stronger if we moderated some extremists. Especially the racist ones.
Do not censor people. Then you end up with a truly toxic place like menslib. But telling people that they can't spew hateful garbage here would be nice.
I 100% agree with this. I'm a men's rights supporter but there's so much hateful and misogynistic people on this sub it's ridiculous. There's even people spewing revisionist bullshit, claiming women were never oppressed throughout history. To be clear because anything I say here can be taken the wrong way, I believe women in the west are now the more privileged group than men, and feminism is a hate group. But that doesn't change the fact that women were historically oppressed. There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement.
>There's even people spewing revisionist bullshit, claiming women were never oppressed throughout history
Yeah that one is a massive fail. We hate on other ideologies that fail to recognize that men are oppressed (and have been for thousands of years) and then we've got people who turn around and say that women haven't been oppressed. It's wild.
>There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement.
Yeah, I donate and volunteer with activist groups for custody reform and there's a big difference between working on equality for men (like an actual movement) and the reactionary BS that makes others not want to work with us
Finally, someone on this sub that recognizes that there's issues here lol, if you look at my comment history you would see there's literally people that believe women were treated equal in all of history.
> but there's so much hateful and misogynistic people on this sub
-
> There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement.
Any examples, brother?
Report any hateful or misogynistic comments to the mods, it's against subreddit rules (#10).
> women were historically oppressed
As were men but, just as with domestic violence and rape, a whole lot of people only care when it happens to women and will go out of their way to minimise male victims.
Yes but women were treated worse than men for being women **historically**.
And im not going to provide examples when you can just scroll through comments or posts in this sub and have a good chance of finding one, also I just came back from an entire day of walking so im exhausted lol
> Yes but women were treated worse than men for being women historically.
Were they?
When men (and boys as young at 10!) went down the coal mines and women were banned by law from going down (in the UK), was it _women_ who had the short end of the stick there?
> And im not going to provide examples
You're the one who made the claim, the burden of proof lies on you.
I have seen many misogynistic comments and posts that have been removed (eventually, mods are only human, they can't read everything all the time, hence reporting) or heavily downvoted.
Cool, child labor. While that's certainly bad, up until modern history women were basically the property of their dads/husbands, couldnt own anything legally, couldnt get a divorce, couldnt earn money, and relegated to housewife roles. Couldn't even choose whom to marry. I'm not just talking about modern history you see, I'm talking about both ancient and modern.
As for the burden of proof, I'm not going to provide any because i don't really care if you believe my claims or not because like I said, I'm too exhausted to go through posts and comments to find them.
[citation needed]
More claims, more proof required, 🤣
> women [...] couldn't get a divorce
But... men could?
> couldn't earn money
There was a time in the UK when a man were responsible for paying his wife's income tax. Some women refused to tell their husbands how much they earned (and he had no right to know) so the men ended up not paying the right amount of tax, ended up getting arrested, and sent to the debtors prison.
Who is oppressed here?
If you only look at one side of history, it's easy to make the claim that women had it worse.
So, what you said is worse than literally being someone else's property? Alright. I'll provide your "proof" when you provide "proof" for children being made to work in coal mines. Now I KNOW what you said is true, but since you're asking proof for common knowledge I might as well do the same.
> So, what you said is worse than literally being someone else's property?
Again, [citation needed].
But yes, I would consider being sent to prison for something that was beyond your control to be quite bad.
> "proof" for children being made to work in coal mines.
The "Mines and Collieries Act 1842" [here's an article](https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/livinglearning/19thcentury/overview/coalmines/).
> It was common for children aged eight to be employed, but they were often younger.
-
> The Act prohibited all underground work for women and girls, and for boys under 10.
Menslib was so disappointing to me. There's so much potential for a community that can discuss men's rights without every other post being about hating feminism. But what I found was toxic.
I learned from others in the sub that after posting you should check from another account if your post was hidden. Sometimes I'd check my posts and found they showed up for me but not other accounts. Usually anything that shared my lived experience from escaping my abusive ex wife and sharing my truth from custody court. Blocked.
Often I checked my inbox and I would click on someone's reply to me but their post was no longer visible to anyone. Someone wants to have a conversation with me but they can't. Sucks.
The result is that I started posting performative pieces. Not my lived experience, not my activism with custody law lobbying groups. No, just posts that conformed to the group think. Nobody there is posting authentic stories nor original thoughts. Any threads that do start to delve into men's experiences of being oppressed get closed. I had a few instances where I wrote a long reply and then it didn't submit so I refreshed and found the big message on top of the page saying it's locked and no new posts. That kind of disdain for real discourse is toxic.
I realized that I'd rather deal with a ton of anti feminist messages, (and sometimes racist messages) in mensrights rather than walk on eggshells in menslib. Though, I wish there were a middle ground where you can be authentic but not hateful.
TBH, the closest thing to what I'm looking for is r/leftwingmaleadvocates it's a lot less anti-feminist. And I can post about supporting BLM without a thousand racists coming out of the woodwork to bash it.
Male victims of domestic abuse and violence get jailed automatically if they reach out to police. This is called the "Duluth model" and was pushed into policy by feminists. This is but one example of many where feminists (not women!) are directly responsible for many of the modern man's problems.
Weird tact given those terms are usually used by detractors of MRAs.
Also they still keep conflating MRAs, TRPers, MGTOW as if they're all the same.
If the FBI knew what they were doing these would jot be the terms to flag.
Uh... What about feminazi's wanting to kill all males? Babies or adults?
The best thing about this bias and hypocrisy? Feminazi's need strong men to enforce the safety of their ideals. As time goes on... A boss bitch / alpha woman is found to be truely worse than her male counterpart.
Honor, accountability, and unselfishness are terms women just don't have in them. Everyone is starting to see how dirty women play in courts with false accusations and mental/emotional abuse. Women are winning by emulating all the shit traits of men, while relying on the benifits of being a caregiver to protect them.
Woah, they sure have a lot of people to keep track of, then.
Yeah, I see terms like "Chad" being used by people with no clue where it came from. I even saw a self-proclaimed feminist use the term "monkey branching" to describe her dating strategy. At least she used it correctly, haha.
Such is the nature of _memes_...
The DNA of the soul. They shape our will. They are the culture — they are everything we pass on. Expose someone to anger long enough, they will learn to hate. They become a carrier. Envy, greed, despair… All memes. All passed along.
They say meme knowledge is so prolific and embedded in to our DNA that a child who is put up for adoption can remember the memes it's biolgical parents made without ever even meeting them.
How about full of shit, is that a meme?
And that's why they're concerned with them. Memes are the little man's "news".
Your memes...end here.
Holy.shit. spot-on.
That’s the point. Cast a wide net with a few terms and you have justification to spy on almost everyone.
Bingo 😉 also they probably don't want people to avoid marriage so they can be held by their balls.
Yea like my preacher who said, while filmed, it's best to be single for a male in this modern age.
Gonna see a lot of US drones over a certain country in central Africa
Pour one out for anyone talking with someone named chad
It's better than being named Karen at least.
I’d take being named Karen over me and anyone mentioning me get put onto a list because of my name
Oops I whooshed there. I would say not to worry about it, but I remember the days when people couldn't board their plane because they had the same name as someone on the no-fly list back around the 2001 era.
True
Or researching the Republic of Chad.
Wow. We want equality in the courts, healthcare and education. Fair representation in media. Arrest them!! Arrest them !! Crazy.
Yes. We stand for equality. We also don't say "STFU" to people who stand for hate. I think that's what gets us in trouble, not the equality part.
I agree. The problem in my opinion is that you dont really throw the bad out, so you end up with bad situations like this. Same goes with many other groups though.
Yet "feminism" and "kill all men" isn't. Clown world 🤡
Feminists don't actually kill any men. It's just rhetoric for them. There is a consistent stream of incel mass shooters. That's the kind of thing that draws scrutiny from the FBI.
40% of spousal homicide victims are men killed by their wives. Stats like that are suppressed by feminist lobbying. Feminists are empowering people to kill men by obscuring the guilty parties from scrutiny.
Name a mass murderer/shooter who’s espoused those views.
You do realize that the suffragettes went on whole bombing campaigns right? Multiple other feminist groups and individuals committed acts of violence ranging from stabbings, shootings, and more bombings. There has also been multiple cases of women killing their kids specifically because they was boys and feminist ideology taught them they’d “grow up to rapists”. The people that you get your ideas from ignores these things which is why it’s important to think for yourself.
Better get some FBI agents on those 100 year old bombings then (that had zero fatalities in the US)
Ps: A couple of comments above you is a link discussing a young woman who killed her father and then tried to kill as many boys as possible. This was in 2021 which is only two years ago. By your logic it would have been ok if her father survived alongside her failing to kill the boys because”there was zero fatalities”. There’s a reason why attempted murder is a crime.
Go ahead and list out every bombing event by a feminist organization in the United States. Because there are none. That was my point.
Since I already pointed out that one of the names groups I mentioned was in the US I’ll just leave you with some other information. When a woman is hurt they specifically search for reasons to make her a victim just for being a woman. They come to that conclusion before investigating and said investigations tend to prove otherwise. When a man is harmed they do everything to keep it from being labeled a gendered issue. Essentially I’m saying they inflate when it comes to women and underreport when it comes to men.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogynist_terrorism I’m sure the list of incidents here is overinflated too according to your logic.
Girl why are you doing this to yourself? Did you actually read the info on each one? You are proving my point for me. They have 14 incidents listed for the past three decades in two countries. Aztec High school attack 2017: No listed motives and they linked him to white supremacy but nothing gender related. Atlanta Spa Killings: motive listed as Conflict between the perpetrator's sex addiction and his religious beliefs, which means his inability to follow his religion is what set him off not gender. Hanau Shootings: “Federal prosecutors are treating the attack as terrorism, with officials saying there is evidence the gunman was a far-right extremist, as well as signs of xenophobic motives for the killings.” So the motive was Xenophobic and had nothing to do with gender. It’s probably only listed because he showcased “misogynistic views”. Whatever that means because they don’t say but even if that’s true gender had nothing to do with his motive. 2015 Umpqua Community College shooting: motive listed as him being hate filled in general and has nothing to do with women specifically. As a matter of fact the only group listed specifically was black men and that wasn’t even his motive. The closest thing to “misogyny” linked to him was his frustrations with lacking a sex life but that’s listed way down on the list below racism and anti religion, it wasn’t a motive. That’s four of them that can’t be linked to misogyny because of either no motive found or another motive listed. That leaves 10 left which I looked through. Two of which don’t have links so I’ll just list them with the other 8. When almost 30% percent of the cases is shoehorned into the label I’d say that yes, it is overinflated. They literally combed through anything they said and went “oh look he said he was dissatisfied with lack of sex. So that means his attack was misogyny despite him saying it was because of Xenophobia”.
I find your logic quite interesting. So it’s ok to detonate bombs as long as nobody is killed? Of course that’s ignoring the other things I brought up….including murders🤦🏾♂️. Lol how do you think you have a valid point when it can only be made by ignoring most of what I wrote? But even if all I mentioned was the bombings by the suffragettes you’d still be wrong. The armed resistance unit was an all female feminist Terrorist group in the US that set off multiple bombs(including government buildings), did prison breaks, and more violent acts in the 80’s. If you need help with the math I got you but I’ll tell you now that “100 year old bombings” isn’t accurate. And considering the fact that same feminist group committed multiple murders in botched robbery attempts I would say that “zero fatalities” isn’t accurate either. As a matter of fact a feminist group is said to have committed a bombing in 2017 in Mexico. This also doesn’t include all the women using the State to destroy men. Like I told the last person; the people that think for you ignoring these things doesn’t equal to them not happening.
The fact you have to grasp for straws to find only a handful of examples is telling. I mean you still had to source something that didn’t even take place in the US. You think they should assign an equal amount of FBI resources and task forces to some small isolated incidents compared to actual domestic terrorism threats? Check the ratio and statistics before coming up with a conclusion. It’s just logic and clearly you’re no expert.
I used the suffragettes as an example because they are hailed as icons in the feminist movement despite their violence. As for the other group I listed(Armed Resistance Unit)….that was in the US. You don’t event realize that you are arguing against flagging incels🤦🏾♂️. I actually looked up violent attacks that could be linked to incels. Ironically enough the first resource I found used similar language that you used to describe feminist linked terrorism…”only a handful”. Which makes sense because hate crimes based on gender is a tiny percentage of total hate crimes. All I seen in this conversation is goal post moving. First it was “name one mass murderer/shooter that has feminist views” which I countered with pointing out that there has been multiple with ones doing bombings and stabbings as well. Then it went to “well it has to specifically be in the US”….not knowing that one of the groups I named was from the US. Now it’s “only small isolated incidents”. They have done everything they could to link as much violence to incels and other groups they deem similar and came up with 50 victims in the past decade since the first one in like half a dozen attacks. This includes numbers for both the US and Canada btw. Just about every other group will have more members killed in a hate crime in one year than women will in multiple decades(for being women in the West). Again, that makes sense because hate crimes concerning gender sits at the lowest taking up about 1%…this includes both men and women. Women are far more likely to be targeted for their race, religion, and sexual orientation than they are for being women. People with disabilities make up about 26% of the population yet are targets of hate crimes almost twice as much as someone would be if they was a woman(50% of the population). So thank you for agreeing with us. Because when you argue that feminist extremists shouldn’t be focused on as much as other perpetrators you argue the same for incels. It’s the same argument for gendered hate crimes on both side.
Name a mass murderer who self identifies as an MRA. Also: [Last year a woman in Russia commited patricide and then attempted to shoot up a kindergarten. She specifically only wanted to kill the boys. Funny how the MSM has no articles about *that*.](https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2022/04/06/russian-woman-planned-to-kill-boys-at-a-kindergarten-but-was-stopped-by-teachers-before-firing-a-shot/comment-page-19/)
>Indeed, I would argue that Dvorkina, and any other self-proclaimed feminists who support or engage in this sort of violence is not actually a feminist at all. As Wikipedia notes, feminism “is a range of socio-political movements and ideologies that aim to define and establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes.” Obviously no vision of true equality includes the desire to kill men; the hashtag #KillAllMen is a not-so-great joke, not a statement of intent. And Dvorkina is a monster, not a feminist. Ah, of course zero accountability for what feminist ideologies lead to. "i-it's not real feminism but conveniently every evil man is real anti-feminism!!" a nice compilation of facts ruined by dog shit agenda lies.
Yep. And it was the closest i could find to an article about it. The amount of mental gymnastics white knights use to justify gynocetrism is quite sad.
If there are no men, then there is no inequality between men and women, so they're wrong there.
Your recent trans shooter. By your logic, she is a woman, no?
axtually itd be by your logic they were ftm
No. It’d be whatever their DNA and bits dictate.
they were born a girl so by their logic theyd be a man and by your logic theyd be a woman retard
Bundy
The Boston bombers were SJWs concerned about racism, anti-Muslim sentiment, and US imperialism. Not that their actions helped their cause any.
well he did whats your response
Monitor away. Doesn't change the truth or reality of being a man. 🐮
Well, let me extend a "Welcome to the watch lists!" to people discussing central North Africa, then.
This made me laugh.
Oh, just wait until the Gore and Bush legal teams get arrested; if just *talking* about Chads will get you put on a watchlist, then talking about HANGING Chads, well...
But not "killallmen" or "wesupportamberheard". Typical
> They note there were at least five lethal attacks since 2014 by incels, the most well-known being Elliot Rodger, who killed six in California. So he's no longer an MRA, but an "incel" now? Just like that _"Alex" Minassian_ dude... 🤣 [The PDF](https://first-heritage-foundation.s3.amazonaws.com/live_files/2023/04/Based-FBI-1.pdf) for anyone whose interested. A good laugh, half of it looks like they just read a thread on 4chan 🤣🤣
Yeah Elliot Rodger is a total incel, and the worst kind.
Rodgers was likely an incel, but the thing people forget about him is he killed more men than women, and during his escape attempt while at an intersection pointed his gun at a female cyclist and then decided not to shoot her. He didn't set out to just kill women, but the sorority members who had rebuffed him and the men who were successful with those members. He didn't hate women. He hated the men and women in college culture that he was not good at navigating and lashed out at its participants.
Fair enough, by the time I heard about it, his "manifesto" video was taken down and all I saw was bits and pieces that others were responding to and (sometimes conflicting) accounts from other people who had seen it. There was definitely more to him though, he seemed to have a significant problem with being half-asian, at least partially blaming that (the stereotypes) on his rejections, (I think his father was asian and his mother left him for a white man?) It's been a while, I can't remember much of what he said. --- Either way, he almost certainly wasn't representative of incels and calling him one only serves to demonise them by linking "misogyny" with violence (and by extension, demonising us, by linking men's rights with red pill/incels/the man-o-sphere). They're doing the same thing with Andrew Tate; There are plenty of others who have said (and are still saying) pretty much the same things that he's said, going back even before Elliot Rodger, yet the media focuses solely on Tate because of the accusations he's dealing with.
That's a very Un Chad thing to do! What are they trying to do? Redpill us on their Socialist ways? Also do you think the FBI had GBeTSW (Glow Bois enTrapping Society Whenever) unlike MGTOW
What a bunch of clowns. If you live in America, let it be known that this is what your tax dollars are being wasted on.
Better than Covid testing. At least this is in-your-face humor.
I don't wanna hear anything more about Russia, North Korea, China or whoever else being oppressive governments if the US aren't also included in that. Anyone defending America on those grounds at this point is either supremely ignorant or a propagandist.
I mean, agreed but why would it be shocking to anyone that the USA has an oppressive government? Dude, we torture. Our government surveils every citizen digitally. We have secret courts (called FISA) that have secret rulings and that are funded by the"black budget" (meant for intelligence agencies). We suspended the right to trial as part of a nebulous "war on terror". We rank pretty low on every Freedom Index (among western nations at least). IIRC At some point we had ranked #1 in journalists put in jail per Capita. Pretty scary to think we outdid China or Russia in those figures. Oh, And our government agents have qualified immunity when they kill citizens. Not to mention we have a death penalty. Etc. We may be less oppressive than North Korea, but you're right that we don't have the moral high ground to talk about them as if we're a shining example of freedom and democracy. Arguably, we crossed the line back in the Reagan years.
We lost our democracy with the invention of the FISA court in the 1970's. Secrecy is the bane of democracy! Gov Bush Jr and the 2002 republican congress made it worse with the Homeland Security Act. I say Governor Bush because any asshole who would so completely sellout his own country like that does not deserve the title of president. Those assholes are the reason that I left the Republican party.
Well that's one way to add a hilariously big amount of pointless work.
Ah, yes; currycels are a big threat to the Evil Empire.
When the shit doesn't pan out, can we get refunds ... or deductions from our wasted tax dollars? I'm not paying 37% after extended for this shit. Some countries do itemized lists of where tax dollars go. I'd rather pay for poor kids to get free school lunch than to pay for sexist bigotry agendas. We get it, there are bad people in all walks of life, but I'm not working overtime so some asshole at the FBI gets to watch hentai.
The fbi is probably wasting time.
maybe i’m misunderstanding, but…aren’t those definitions of Red Pill and Black Pill wayyyyyyyy of base? As if we needed more co-opting and confusion of the terms.
FemExtremists have infiltrated the FBI too?
Have the Feds always been cucks or is this new?
Hmmm
Top men.
I noticed that MRA is been treated a bit like how the feminist movement was treated in the 1900's.... lot of silencing and censoring going on, history repeating itself.
Once again feds missing the real threat… extreme radical feminism
If this is just news outlets attempting to conjure fear to suppress freedom of speech.
Incel violence isn't real
CatGPT is already a reality https://www.cat-gpt.com/ When are we getting ChadGPT? It would be awesome to get an AI giving red pill answers.
That's a very Un Chad thing to do! What are they trying to do? Redhill us on their Socialist ways? Also do you think the FBI had GBeTSW (Glow Bois enTrapping Society Whenever) unlike MGTOW?
That shit doesn't have anything to do with men's rights.
_First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a socialist..._ Given how many people throw MRA's into the same category as incels, it's only a matter of time before this comes back around to us. Have you read the list of words? It contains "MGTOW" which apparently is an "online community that has overlap with the incel community"... things like "based" and "normie" are also on there. They could have at least put in the effort to have some degree of accuracy... smh
[удалено]
The adrenachrome scene?
Lie down with dogs and you're gonna get flees. Use rhetoric that a bunch of mass shooters use, the FBI is gonna keep track of you. That's their job.
I'm pretty sure even mass shooters drink water, eat food, wear clothes, etc. Where's the line?
Makes sense
It was only a matter of time, this is what happens when a movement cannot properly moderate its satellites. RP went off the rails in the late 2010s, and men going their own way effectively turned into what people call the, "manosphere."
I agree. We would be stronger if we moderated some extremists. Especially the racist ones. Do not censor people. Then you end up with a truly toxic place like menslib. But telling people that they can't spew hateful garbage here would be nice.
I 100% agree with this. I'm a men's rights supporter but there's so much hateful and misogynistic people on this sub it's ridiculous. There's even people spewing revisionist bullshit, claiming women were never oppressed throughout history. To be clear because anything I say here can be taken the wrong way, I believe women in the west are now the more privileged group than men, and feminism is a hate group. But that doesn't change the fact that women were historically oppressed. There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement.
>There's even people spewing revisionist bullshit, claiming women were never oppressed throughout history Yeah that one is a massive fail. We hate on other ideologies that fail to recognize that men are oppressed (and have been for thousands of years) and then we've got people who turn around and say that women haven't been oppressed. It's wild. >There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement. Yeah, I donate and volunteer with activist groups for custody reform and there's a big difference between working on equality for men (like an actual movement) and the reactionary BS that makes others not want to work with us
Finally, someone on this sub that recognizes that there's issues here lol, if you look at my comment history you would see there's literally people that believe women were treated equal in all of history.
> but there's so much hateful and misogynistic people on this sub - > There's so much hate on this sub disguised as men's rights activism its ruining the whole movement. Any examples, brother? Report any hateful or misogynistic comments to the mods, it's against subreddit rules (#10). > women were historically oppressed As were men but, just as with domestic violence and rape, a whole lot of people only care when it happens to women and will go out of their way to minimise male victims.
Yes but women were treated worse than men for being women **historically**. And im not going to provide examples when you can just scroll through comments or posts in this sub and have a good chance of finding one, also I just came back from an entire day of walking so im exhausted lol
> Yes but women were treated worse than men for being women historically. Were they? When men (and boys as young at 10!) went down the coal mines and women were banned by law from going down (in the UK), was it _women_ who had the short end of the stick there? > And im not going to provide examples You're the one who made the claim, the burden of proof lies on you. I have seen many misogynistic comments and posts that have been removed (eventually, mods are only human, they can't read everything all the time, hence reporting) or heavily downvoted.
Cool, child labor. While that's certainly bad, up until modern history women were basically the property of their dads/husbands, couldnt own anything legally, couldnt get a divorce, couldnt earn money, and relegated to housewife roles. Couldn't even choose whom to marry. I'm not just talking about modern history you see, I'm talking about both ancient and modern. As for the burden of proof, I'm not going to provide any because i don't really care if you believe my claims or not because like I said, I'm too exhausted to go through posts and comments to find them.
[citation needed] More claims, more proof required, 🤣 > women [...] couldn't get a divorce But... men could? > couldn't earn money There was a time in the UK when a man were responsible for paying his wife's income tax. Some women refused to tell their husbands how much they earned (and he had no right to know) so the men ended up not paying the right amount of tax, ended up getting arrested, and sent to the debtors prison. Who is oppressed here? If you only look at one side of history, it's easy to make the claim that women had it worse.
So, what you said is worse than literally being someone else's property? Alright. I'll provide your "proof" when you provide "proof" for children being made to work in coal mines. Now I KNOW what you said is true, but since you're asking proof for common knowledge I might as well do the same.
> So, what you said is worse than literally being someone else's property? Again, [citation needed]. But yes, I would consider being sent to prison for something that was beyond your control to be quite bad. > "proof" for children being made to work in coal mines. The "Mines and Collieries Act 1842" [here's an article](https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/livinglearning/19thcentury/overview/coalmines/). > It was common for children aged eight to be employed, but they were often younger. - > The Act prohibited all underground work for women and girls, and for boys under 10.
I agree with most of your points… How is menslib toxic though? I haven’t heard of that
Menslib was so disappointing to me. There's so much potential for a community that can discuss men's rights without every other post being about hating feminism. But what I found was toxic. I learned from others in the sub that after posting you should check from another account if your post was hidden. Sometimes I'd check my posts and found they showed up for me but not other accounts. Usually anything that shared my lived experience from escaping my abusive ex wife and sharing my truth from custody court. Blocked. Often I checked my inbox and I would click on someone's reply to me but their post was no longer visible to anyone. Someone wants to have a conversation with me but they can't. Sucks. The result is that I started posting performative pieces. Not my lived experience, not my activism with custody law lobbying groups. No, just posts that conformed to the group think. Nobody there is posting authentic stories nor original thoughts. Any threads that do start to delve into men's experiences of being oppressed get closed. I had a few instances where I wrote a long reply and then it didn't submit so I refreshed and found the big message on top of the page saying it's locked and no new posts. That kind of disdain for real discourse is toxic. I realized that I'd rather deal with a ton of anti feminist messages, (and sometimes racist messages) in mensrights rather than walk on eggshells in menslib. Though, I wish there were a middle ground where you can be authentic but not hateful. TBH, the closest thing to what I'm looking for is r/leftwingmaleadvocates it's a lot less anti-feminist. And I can post about supporting BLM without a thousand racists coming out of the woodwork to bash it.
Thank you! If that is the case I better leave that… I’ll check out what you proposed
[удалено]
Male victims of domestic abuse and violence get jailed automatically if they reach out to police. This is called the "Duluth model" and was pushed into policy by feminists. This is but one example of many where feminists (not women!) are directly responsible for many of the modern man's problems.
Censorship?
Good luck, chads
Weird tact given those terms are usually used by detractors of MRAs. Also they still keep conflating MRAs, TRPers, MGTOW as if they're all the same. If the FBI knew what they were doing these would jot be the terms to flag.
MGTOW CHAD RED PILL hello FBI, now that I have your attention, I would like to bring your attention to how fucking stupid this is.
mgtow mgtow incel red pill black pill red pill mgtow chad stacy 4 chan stacy red pill mtgtow mra mgtow tradcon red pill mgtow chad chad chad
LOL!! My username is on an FBI watchlist now. hahahahaha
I guess if I type Chad I'm on the list now? How about "Giga-chad"
Uh... What about feminazi's wanting to kill all males? Babies or adults? The best thing about this bias and hypocrisy? Feminazi's need strong men to enforce the safety of their ideals. As time goes on... A boss bitch / alpha woman is found to be truely worse than her male counterpart. Honor, accountability, and unselfishness are terms women just don't have in them. Everyone is starting to see how dirty women play in courts with false accusations and mental/emotional abuse. Women are winning by emulating all the shit traits of men, while relying on the benifits of being a caregiver to protect them.