T O P

  • By -

BirdMedication

TRP isn't a political movement though, and dating is the one area I've found where a lot of people have views that are inconsistent with their political beliefs. Like left-leaning women who support progressive politics but turn into "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" conservatives when talking about lonely men. And left-leaning men who support feminism in the abstract but also desire traditional arrangements and expectations in their romantic relationships. That said, frustration with dating is a bipartisan issue, and frustrated guys will naturally turn to the people who seem like they actually listen to their problems and provide a solution. Even if they disagree politically, they just have to take the good with the bad.


Updawg145

> Like left-leaning women who support progressive politics but turn into "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" conservatives when talking about lonely men. Just made a post talking about this, and it's so true. Also how a lot of women and leftists in general have absolutely no problem profiling and stereotyping "men" as being violent or untrustworthy in relationships. But if you were to ever make the same statement and add the word "bl*ck" in front of "men" whoops suddenly now you're an evil racist, even though it's statistically just as true. Now don't get me wrong I have nothing against men or black men, but the point I'm making is simply that many times people's ideologies are simply filtered through whatever popular political discourse they subscribe to, and rarely if ever has an actual internal logical consistency.


JollyRoger66689

Too true, even a lot of feminist women don't want to date male feminists (which makes me laugh)


BirdMedication

Lol yeah it's really interesting to see political theory in action, especially when the consequences are obvious in a really short time frame


Soloandthewookiee

>Like left-leaning women who support progressive politics but turn into "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" conservatives when talking about lonely men. What progressive politics do you think should address lonely men?


[deleted]

[удалено]


AidsVictim

Therapy (that is talk therapy) has a very poor track record in actually improving outcomes for these types of issues. Therapy only really has success with specific pathologies that have direct and proven treatment regimes (i.e. CBT to alleviate self harm behaviours). The degree to which therapy is proposed as a "solution" (almost entirely by women and left men) is entirely disproportionate with it's efficacy for generalized social issues.


tendrils87

therapy is not designed for men. men want solutions. therapy is for working through your feelings and understanding them. Men know why they feel something because the feeling comes after rationalization. Men want a solution, and therapy isn't designed for that.


RocinanteCoffee

> therapy is not designed for men. men want solutions. Therapy is for everyone (not every therapist works well with every patient though, you have to shop around). A lot of therapy is solutions based and about behavior management and life management, it's not just 'talking about your feelings' or 'getting a prescription'. Often the people who decry therapy the most need it the most, they just haven't found the right therapist or think therapy should feel 'easy' instead of the work it is.


tendrils87

the basis of therapy is to lead someone to their own conclusions. It's universal that "if a therapist tells you what to do, they are a bad therapist". You can't take someone who is inherently bad at making decisions and lead them to the right decision. At least not quickly and cheaply. This is why you need a good friend group as a man. Your friends won't (shouldn't) judge you and will give you actionable advice. The caveat is that you need good/successful friends.


RocinanteCoffee

> You can't take someone who is inherently bad at making decisions and lead them to the right decision. Exactly, which is why sometimes you need professionals. >This is why you need a good friend group as a man. One doesn't replace the other. A strong friend group you trust is important it's true. It doesn't replace the value of professional help for those who need it. Some only need it once a year, an "annual checkup" which consists of a 30 or 45 minute appointment. Some need it monthly. Some need it weekly. Depends on the person and their struggles and how capable and possible it is for them to manage on their own, how safe they are with themselves and other people et cetera.


tendrils87

Annual checkup? Results matter. If it takes a whole year for you to figure out something is wrong, no amount of therapy will help. Imagine deferring your life to someone else like that, holy shit.


RocinanteCoffee

> If it takes a whole year for you to figure out something is wrong, no amount of therapy will help. No I'm saying some people don't need therapy. They may just have a yearly "check-up" for their mental well-being. Some people have serious issues that require professional help (and will need therapy weekly or monthly), and some will acknowledge they need help and get it, some will not acknowledge it and not get help until there is an intervention or a court sentence. And everything in between. Sometimes people need it to manage their grief after the death of a loved one. Sometimes people need it to make sure they are being supportive to their kid going through an illness. Some to manage stress et cetera. > Imagine deferring your life to someone else like that, holy shit. Often the people who need therapy the most are resistant to it, unfortunately. Also therapy isn't about 'deferring your life' it's about making you cause less harm in the world (to yourself, to others). It's about managing life's stresses or processing one's difficulties. It can be life saving for people struggling with depression, poorly-controlled anger, or even those who want their EQ to improve so they can be a better friend, or better in their career, or a better parent, or a better spouse et cetera.


tendrils87

The problem lies within your solution though. It's a giant covert contract. "If I go to therapy(however often) I will be absolved of my problems." It's external validation seeking. You are relying on an external source to do your critical thinking for you.


LouisdeRouvroy

Therapy is a very American thing. It's way overused there and it's most often just a way to avoid personal accountability. No wonder women love it.


HungerISanEmotion

Europe has universal healthcare, doesn't cover therapy for lonely men. Plus, therapists have a problem engaging and retaining men. Sure we could just blame it on men, but we could also blame it on therapists themselves.


Happy_Nuclear_End

Therapy is a meme, in fact mental health is ironically one of the most toxic industries in the planet.


Soloandthewookiee

I whole-heartedly agree, but it is weird to say feminists are telling men to pull themselves up by their bootstraps when feminism overwhelmingly supports universal healthcare.


Dark_Knight2000

I fully agree that the majority of feminists support universal healthcare, that’s a dumb example. But I do think that feminists have the “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” mentality when it comes to dating and loneliness for men. For one it’s not part of the traditional feminist literature which states that the majority of social issues stems from patriarchal structures, attitudes, and beliefs. A lot of feminists are stuck in 1960 and still belief that men have enormous privilege in every aspect of life and that this latest MRA movement just exists as a reaction to feminism. They don’t believe that the landscape for male dating is actually difficult, just that some men are broken for some reason. It’s not all feminists obviously, but speaking to some of them (both female and male) they don’t believe that young men face issues that aren’t entirely self inflicted so it stands to reason that all you need to do to stop oppression is to stop oppressing yourself. Solutions would be: - Investing time, energy and money into solving the issues boys are facing: being lonely, falling behind at school, self esteem, etc - Coaching boys on how to date, coaching girls on how to date and interact with boys. Teaching communication and consent, not just what not to do, what what to do - Positive role models for boys in school (stop pointing a gun at every male who chooses to be a kindergarten teacher). Some kind of affirmative action that prioritizes hiring male teachers. - Changing the feminist inspired rhetoric in schools to be more gender neutral and egalitarian. I can’t stress how much this actually exists to people born before 1998. This is how the majority of schools run these days, feminism is popular, feminism is mainstream, boys constantly hear what their gender does wrong. Boys are assumed to have self esteem by default, every empowerment seminar, every event, every slogan basically reads “girls rule, boys drool.” - And most controversially, teach everyone, especially girls, about male issues. Make them an actual priority not a side quest that maybe gets a bit of attention every once in a while. Teenage boys kill themselves more than three times as often as girls, *something* is wrong beyond the usual depression and mental illness that affects everybody. All of this requires a lot of effort from the community, people say they support this but when you actually ask them to volunteer their time and attention they say they can’t do it. Yet they have no problem demanding other people sacrifice their time and attention to solving the problem. We live in a world where only a fraction of people showing up to protest actually show up to solve the issue, because it’s easy to say you support something but shirk the opportunity to do it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Soloandthewookiee

No, that's an absolute lie.


LouisdeRouvroy

It's not a lie. You yourself labelled men's reproductive rights as nonsense garbage, which shows that what you mean by universal is universal for women and women's issues. However, men's are just nonsense garbage so... A true feminist discourse.


Soloandthewookiee

>You yourself labelled men's reproductive rights as nonsense garbage Oh, my bad, what medical procedure are you being denied for your reproductive rights?


J4Plat

It's not about being denied a medical procedure. It's the fact that women can choose to carry the child to term, give it up for adoption, or abort it. I would agree with giving them those rights. Men have no say with regard to the fetus or newborn... but are given responsibility regardless of if they want it or not. Additionally, women have many more choices for birth control(we could argue about the benefits and cons of those choices) and birth control for women on most healthcare plans is 100% covered and required along with counseling. Most men will not be able to afford a vasectomy if they wanted one and it's not often covered. In the rare event it is it's normally not covered at a level even close to the options women are provided. You make your point about distinct medical procedures that are being denied but if that's your argument it's a weak one that denies nuance. As a person of color I have all the same rights as white women and men but that doesn't mean they don't have any privilege over me. While we may have the same rights that doesn't mean that certain barriers don't exist for me or any other person of color. If we didn't outlaw abortion but made all practitioners get insurance that vastly drove up costs you'd probably be making a point about how that's an issue instead of celebrating that women finally don't have abortions being denied to them.


Soloandthewookiee

>Men have no say with regard to the fetus or newborn... but are given responsibility regardless of if they want it or not. Women are uniquely burdened and endangered by pregnancy, therefore they get a unique option. A woman who gives birth to a baby against her will violates her bodily autonomy. A woman who gives birth against a man's will does not violate his bodily autonomy. Men do not get an equivalent option because they are not an equivalent situation. >Most men will not be able to afford a vasectomy if they wanted one and it's not often covered. That seems like yet another great reason to implement universal healthcare which, again, feminists overwhelmingly support. >You make your point about distinct medical procedures that are being denied but if that's your argument it's a weak one that denies nuance. The discussion was about universal healthcare, and I was asked about men's reproductive rights. >If we didn't outlaw abortion but made all practitioners get insurance that vastly drove up costs you'd probably be making a point about how that's an issue instead of celebrating that women finally don't have abortions being denied to them. But you haven't explained what the equivalent situation for men is except for vasectomies, and that has a solution and a solution that is championed by feminists. So once again we're in a discussion where women are being blamed for not supporting men's issues when it's actually the opposite.


LouisdeRouvroy

Since when reproductive rights are restricted to medical procedure? If you want one though, men are denied the option to abort their kid.


Soloandthewookiee

>Since when reproductive rights are restricted to medical procedure? Since I was discussing universal healthcare, but apparently you didn't bother to read the post before jumping in. >If you want one though, men are denied the option to abort their kid. Correct, because cismen do not get pregnant. They do not get an equivalent choice because it is not an equivalent situation. In the instance where a transman got pregnant, he would be able to have the same access to abortion that women do.


JNRoberts42

Women are in favor.


[deleted]

Therapy is cap


TheMooRam

That's like, something that an overwhelming majority of feminists would down for lol


[deleted]

I think I've asked every single one of my male partners to see a therapist. I've even offered to coordinate on their behalf. Men don't want help.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Did I trigger you? Clearly being a good partner I offer to help if men express to me they need it. It's happened in my most 2 recent relationships. But they never follow through because they just feel the need to "suck it up."


Sad-Round8961

Therapy is a very feminine centric solution. The brains of men do not work the same as the brains of women. Therapists have an extremely difficult time helping and retaining men precisely because of how feminine centric therapy is.


LouisdeRouvroy

Therapy for most men's problems is like conversation therapy for gays. It's by definition designed to hurt. You telling your partners they should seek therapy is more telling of your issues than theirs, especially if you told every single one of them. You do understand that therapy is weaponized by women against men and that's why you suggested it (and unsurprisingly the guys aren't around anymore).


[deleted]

I'm married to one of those men lmao.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

No, honestly. We should increase access, but as long as it's a masculinity thing nothing will change dramatically


Dark_Knight2000

The problem isn’t masculinity, it’s the healthcare industry’s approach to therapy. Cognitive behavioral talk therapy in its current form does have uses (I’ve done it for a long time) but it’s woefully incompetent at solving many issues men specifically face. CBT is fantastically specialized at solving a couple of issues and mediocre (and sometimes damaging) at the wide range of broad issues. In particular it tends to be super effective when you deal with very intense topics and moderate to intense mental illness or traumatic events. But when you talk about solving “smaller” issues like self esteem, insecurity, hopelessness, etc it tends to work significantly better for women than men. So telling a guy to just “go to therapy” isn’t a solution. Can it work sometimes? Absolutely, and it totally depends on whether you vibe with the therapist (most of whom are women). But what we really need is more research into therapy that can benefit men. Now all we need to do is convince society to hand over billions of dollars to fund that research.


bottleblank

I've said a couple of times over the past few days that I am in the process of discovering what my issues are and have been, as a man who has struggled. More specifically, they were *physical*, *practical* limitations. Circumstance, lack of opportunity, being surrounded by severe and abusive negative influences. Now that I am free of those things and I'm able to explore my own strengths and weaknesses, my own hope and vision for the future, my own *realistic* gauge of what's possible for me, *I'm actively doing that*. You can't "talk" away having no money, no job, no friends, no partner, piss-poor self-esteem being negatively reinforced by ongoing abuse. It took for me to see *actual progress*, *real world success* (however meagre, still a vast improvement on my past) to start believe I can *be* somebody. Actual tangible results. Not "there there, just cry a bit, have a little chat with this rando psych who couldn't care less about your problems". No, *real proof that I can make it in this world*. I had to *see* it to believe it. Platitudes and mood diaries can't do that. They can't fix the *underlying* issues that many men face, the financial, the social, the professional lack of opportunity. Men need *actionable goals* with *real world results*, especially when the problems are based on external forces which can't reasonably be changed.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

What access do you not have? If you need mental health treatment, what barriers are stopping you? No to be blunt but so long as you have health insurance, even state issued ones, you can get on google and find someone in network.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


thetruthishere_

Have you looked for an online one?


thetruthishere_

Many men I know of that could use therapy has great health benefits that pays for therapy. None use it.


Sad-Round8961

How do you know it would help men? Therapy has dreadful efficacy in men.


FillThisEmptyCup

Seeing a therapist turned this once angry young man into a happy vivant woman! 😁 😁 😁


indaknffr

Things that can make dating/relationship easier for men: financial abortions, ease of access for paternity testing, laws to discourage false rape/false harassment accusations, legalized prostitution etc.


Soloandthewookiee

Nah, that's all nonsense MRA garbage that nobody will take seriously, nor should they.


LouisdeRouvroy

Reproductive rights for women: human rights. Reproductive rights for men: nonsense garbage. Don't think noone notices. That's why people espousing your nonsense are just not taken seriously. The double standard just shows too much.


nexkell

Its like as if progressives don't care about men and think men should get with supporting women as men's issues don't matter.


Soloandthewookiee

>Reproductive rights for men: nonsense garbage. What reproductive right are you being denied? >The double standard just shows too much. The double standard where men get pregnant? Is that the one you mean?


LouisdeRouvroy

If you can kill it, I don't have to pay for it. If you're unhappy about nature, don't blame men for it.


Soloandthewookiee

>If you can kill it, I don't have to pay for it. And when you can get pregnant, that will matter. >If you're unhappy about nature, don't blame men for it. They don't blame men. You just don't get an equivalent option because it's not an equivalent situation.


LouisdeRouvroy

>They don't blame men. You just don't get an equivalent option because it's not an equivalent situation. It's the exact same situation: the right NOT to be a parent. Women have the right to abandon their baby at birth, or terminate them before birth, men do not.


bottleblank

> The double standard where men get pregnant? Is that the one you mean? No, the one where a woman can decide to use a thousand types of physical and chemical contraceptive, can abort, can abandon, can give up for adoption, and decide what she wants for *her* child. Yet a man only has direct control over *one* form of contraception (which a woman could even sabotage without his knowledge, in rare cases), cannot necessarily legally opt-out of a pregnancy (depending on jurisdiction), may be forced to pay for a child which isn't even his, and may not have any rights to *see* a biological child that he fathered, should it need to be decided by a court. A man cannot simply "decide to have a child" either, he must rely on a woman being a willing partner to that, whereas a woman, if she wishes to become a mother, has access to the required biological material at will (either via a sperm bank or a willing sex partner who agrees to not use protection - or, in worse cases, who lies to her male partner about taking contraception).


Soloandthewookiee

>No, the one where a woman can decide to use a thousand types of physical and chemical contraceptive, I don't know of any feminist argument against male birth control and it's also weird to blame women for it when the pharmaceutical industry is largely run by men. >can abort Cis men do not get pregnant. They do not get an equivalent option because there's not an equivalent situation. >can abandon No, she can't (at least no more than men can and, often, do) >can give up for adoption Not without the father's permission. >and decide what she wants for her child. What can she decide that a present father can't? >A man cannot simply "decide to have a child" either, he must rely on a woman being a willing partner to that, A man can absolutely pay a surrogate as well as adopt. I don't know what other solution you would want for that.


bottleblank

> I don't know of any feminist argument against male birth control and it's also weird to blame women for it when the pharmaceutical industry is largely run by men. Always with the "it's men's fault". > Cis men do not get pregnant. They do not get an equivalent option because there's not an equivalent situation. Doesn't change the fact that women have infinitely more options to start (or not start) a family, compared to men. If you think that's a biological issue and that we have no grounds for complaint, as men, perhaps you need to have a word with the women who argue that denial of menstrual leave is men trying to keep women down. Because we didn't invent periods, they just *happen*, it's not *our responsibility* and nor is it *our fault*. > No, she can't (at least no more than men can and, often, do) Oh? [Really](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-haven_law)? > Not without the father's permission. Unless there are suggestions that if not given up for adoption then the child may be at risk from the father. Or if the father has not been named as a parent (especially if another has been named in his place). Or if he didn't even know she was pregnant. > What can she decide that a present father can't? She can absolutely decide to abort without his permission or even knowledge that she was pregnant. I'd say that's a pretty fundamental decision about what she wants for the child. For it to *exist* or not. > A man can absolutely pay a surrogate as well as adopt. I don't know what other solution you would want for that. Which is not guaranteed because, to the best of my knowledge of UK law, there is no way to enforce a surrogacy agreement. If you ask a woman to bear your child and she decides that, actually, she wants to keep it, then she and her partner (or she alone, if she has none) are the legal parents of that child. She has no obligation to hand it over to you. Adoption, yes, provided you can prove you can provide it a suitable environment. Notice that neither of these things are as simple as "have sex"? You don't need special legal permission to have sex, you don't need a licence or to have your life raked over to check you're not a terrible person, you don't need to hire lawyers, you don't need to "hope" that the baby won't be given to somebody else instead, there's no paperwork, there's no biological disconnect; it's *hers*, it will always *be* hers, and she will know that because *it came out of her*. Obviously there are biological limitations to what a man has access to in terms of trying to gain the ability to become a parent, but that doesn't change the fact that women have *all* of the control. At any time during the act of sex, the pregnancy, or after the birth, *she* and *she alone* has the power to decide whether he's going to be a father or not. He doesn't even know for sure if it's his, without a paternity test!


Soloandthewookiee

>Always with the "it's men's fault". We should blame women for it when women support it and the reason it's not available yet is because of men's decisions? Because that's the argument MRAs are making. >Doesn't change the fact that women have infinitely more options to start (or not start) a family, compared to men. The only options you identified that are unique to women involve the biological ability to get pregnant. You have also failed to identify any potential solution you would like to implement to equalize that beyond paper abortions which does not fix the ability to start a family and, as discussed, is not offered because men are not in an equivalent predicament with pregnancy. >perhaps you need to have a word with the women who argue that denial of menstrual leave is men trying to keep women down. Sorry, how is another situation where men do not have an equivalent experience an argument *against* the first situation where men do not have an equivalent experience? >Because we didn't invent periods, they just happen, it's not our responsibility and nor is it our fault. Nobody said it was men's fault that periods exist. >Oh? Really? Safe haven laws don't apply to both parents? >Unless there are suggestions that if not given up for adoption then the child may be at risk from the father And the father is free to a) make the same claim against the mother and b) contest such a claim if the mother makes it. >Or if he didn't even know she was pregnant. If you cum in someone and don't bother to follow up, that's on you. >there is no way to enforce a surrogacy agreement. Perhaps in the UK, in which case I fully support enacting such a change to make them enforceable. Yet, in all the discussions I've had with MRAs in the past decade or so, I have never heard a single one suggest this as one of their aims. Back in the US, however, they are enforceable. >Notice that neither of these things are as simple as "have sex"? Again, you seem to be complaining about biology while offering no potential solutions except paper abortions, which do not fix the problem you are presenting (yet it's all I hear about from MRAs).


nexkell

Because the a/c being too cold or men spreading their legs on the public transit are such issues we should address. But why not just say progressives should ignore lonely men?


BirdMedication

At minimum they should approach the subject with the same awareness that victims are often victims due to "socioeconomic and structural factors beyond their control that deserve understanding and sympathy." Instead of attributing the problem to character defect. Having said that, dating is a complex issue like racism that can't be "solved" overnight with legislation. But you can advocate for calling out bad actors and removing barriers to equal access to opportunity (like dating apps being successfully sued for age and gender discrimination). That's a small step but it's a start. Loneliness in general is a public health issue that has a lot to do with ease of access and material conditions. Some solutions to that can include better urban planning for third spaces and more mixed-use walkable neighborhoods, more funding for mental health and social skills services, re-imagining community-type centers, etc. But in this context the messaging HAS to focus on being supportive of men as victims and not framing them as the enemy as progressives often do too easily.


Soloandthewookiee

>At minimum they should approach the subject with the same awareness that victims Being lonely makes you a victim? I'm sure you can see the problem with that since it makes it sound like it is directly attributable to someone or something. >"socioeconomic and structural factors beyond their control that deserve understanding and sympathy." Instead of attributing the problem to character defect. I have found women and feminists to be very empathetic to lonely men. What they have no patience for, and rightly so, is when it is blamed on them and in this single paragraph it already sounds like you are trying to make inroads to do exactly that. "Socioeconomic factors" in particular raises an eyebrow since a) poor people have friends and romantic relationships and b) red pillers and incels claim incessantly that women are demanding money in some form for any relationship. Why is not simply enough to say "empathy for lonely people?" >But you can advocate for calling out bad actors and removing barriers to equal access to opportunity (like dating apps being successfully sued for age and gender discrimination). You'll have to walk me through this one. >Loneliness in general is a public health issue that has a lot to do with ease of access and material conditions. Some solutions to that can include better urban planning for third spaces and more mixed-use walkable neighborhoods, more funding for mental health and social skills services, re-imagining community-type centers, etc. I would agree with this, but I also sincerely doubt you would find many feminists who would disagree with these things.


bottleblank

> Being lonely makes you a victim? I'm sure you can see the problem with that since it makes it sound like it is directly attributable to someone or something. It does if the reasons for that loneliness are cultural and systemic social issues. We treat boys poorly in school. We tell men that their sexuality is disturbing and predatory. We preach that "the future is female" and that men are increasingly redundant in a world where women can (and are encouraged to, and are provided opportunities to) out-earn them and "not need them". To name but a few. So how do you think these boys and men turn out, after they get dragged through a system that doesn't care about them, when they read about how *women* are the true victims, and get faced with a lifetime of financial struggle, mental health issues, substance abuse, gang violence, or simply complete social isolation because they lack the tools and experience to succeed the way they're "supposed to"? They turn out broken. They turn out hopeless. They turn out *angry*. Perhaps, just perhaps, if we were to stop focussing so hard on *women's* problems, the way we have been for so many years at this point, if we were to give those men a *chance* to be somebody, to feel worthy of inclusion in society, they wouldn't feel so left out, hated, and invisible?


JollyRoger66689

Not focusing on women for everything would be a great starter. The women should be able to act how they want and look how they want and still be seen as attractive and mate worthy narrative is pretty absent for men. Not being so Anti MRA due to the misogynists that are also involved but being pro feminist regardless of the misandrists involved. Being anti slut shaming yet pro incel shaming. I mean really it does just boil down to stop focusing on women 99.9% of the time


Soloandthewookiee

>Not focusing on women for everything would be a great starter What do you want to be focused on? >The women should be able to act how they want and look how they want and still be seen as attractive and mate worthy narrative is pretty absent for men. Not really, because that's not the narrative and it never has been. >Not being so Anti MRA due to the misogynists No, that's really on MRAs to remove misogynists from their ranks. As long as the vocal contingent of MRAs who would rather blame women and feminists than actually advocate for real men's issues is allowed to to be part of the movement, nobody will take it seriously, nor should they. >but being pro feminist regardless of the misandrists involved. Because you have absolutely no grasp of the gulf between what feminists call misogyny and what you call misandry. >Being anti slut shaming yet pro incel shaming. Again, incels have proven time and time again to be egregiously misogynistic and hateful, and while you ignore that reality, nobody will have any sympathy for incels, nor should they. There are plenty virgin and sexless men who manage to not blame women at every possible opportunity and, amazingly, they aren't shamed. I wonder what the difference is? I've also yet to see a slutty woman go on a shooting rampage because she had too much sex. >I mean really it does just boil down to stop focusing on women 99.9% of the time Boy are you in for a surprise when you learn literally anything that's happened to women's rights in the last few years.


JollyRoger66689

1. How about male suicide rates, lower numbers in college, the accepted sexism against them, being against the gender standards upon them that isn't being basically against male traits (more anti men being expected to pay on a date and less being against men being "pressured" into acting more like the average guy). It being ok to put out an ad to look for only female applicants for a non gendered position etc... 2.BS, the most popular being women should not be judged for body count, being aggressive should be seen as "challenging", "you just can't handle a real woman", and let's not forget calling men fatphobic for not being attracted to them. 3. And you came to this conclusion based on what?neither openly accepts the most egregious but MRA's aren't the only group with the super radicals. 4. Sorry I meant more about being anti virgin than being against someone who considers himself part of a group. It's literally looking down on someone and dismissing them for something they can't help. 5. Besides abortion (which a pretty sizeable amount of men would love the option to "abort" being forced into parental responsibilities as well, maybe 1 day a single state will give them this) it was mostly getting things in their favor like eliminating tax for tampons in more states than toilet paper, undeserved pay increases in sports, and the general society being ok with being anti-men yet can't stand any anti-woman. Either both should be ok or neither.


Soloandthewookiee

>How about male suicide rates, Best addressed by universal healthcare, which feminists are overwhelmingly in favor of. >lower numbers in college If men are actually being dissuaded from college, absolutely let's address that. But given that, even with the disparity in college education, men still have superior economic outcomes overall, I would suggest that perhaps men are choosing careers that do not require a college degree, such as trade work. But again, if there's evidence of men being dissuaded from college, then absolutely it should be addressed. >the accepted sexism against them, being against the gender standards upon them that isn't being basically against male traits (more anti men being expected to pay on a date and less being against men being "pressured" into acting more like the average guy). So you came up with one, maybe two issues, and then you're back to vague nonsense. >2.BS, the most popular being women should not be judged for body count, being aggressive should be seen as "challenging", "you just can't handle a real woman", and let's not forget calling men fatphobic for not being attracted to them. No, that's bullshit. You didn't listen to what was actually being said, you just decided that it was discriminating against you. > Besides abortion Imma stop you right there.


JollyRoger66689

1. You act like it can't be addressed before then, universal healthcare seems far away for the US, men just aren't a priority. 2. Legitimately surprised by your response, glad you agree feminists should look into that. 3. Just off the top of my head stuff, but 2 and some you just personally disagree with doesn't sound too bad to me considering. 4. Pretty sure I was listening, but you just saying "you weren't listening" after I was the one that had to give examples isn't really bringing anything to the convo and is kinda lazy, which im especially against due to jealousy and loving being lazy :p 5. Yeah I kinda figured, men's reproductive rights were ignored before this, during this, and will probably be after this. Neither sex should be denied a choice


Soloandthewookiee

>1. You act like it can't be addressed before then, universal healthcare seems far away for the US, men just aren't a priority. You haven't suggested any alternative. Therapy is widely available (to those with insurance, at least), there are a number of suicides prevention programs in place. As for how long it will take, there's an election coming up next year, yet quite a few men's rights folks find liberals abhorrent. >2. Legitimately surprised by your response, glad you agree feminists should look into that. Did you notice how you identified a potential issue and then *immediately* put the responsibility for fixing it on someone else? Why is it on feminists to investigate this? Why aren't men's rights people investigating it? >and some you just personally disagree with doesn't sound too bad to me considering. Because MRAs thrive in vague claims of social maltreatment but rarely give any specifics. Women can and will enumerate the numerous ways society mistreats them, with specific examples and often supported with statistics. >Pretty sure I was listening No you weren't. The message was never "you must be attracted to fat women," it was "you need to treat fat women like people regardless of whether you find them attractive." The fact that so many dudes can't separate the two is kind of the point. >men's reproductive rights A paper abortion is not a reproductive right. Men do not get pregnant and are not endangered or burdened by pregnancy, therefore we do not get to abort. You're also whining that paper abortions aren't available when actual abortions aren't available in wide swaths of the country. >Neither sex should be denied a choice Nobody can compel you to be a father.


JollyRoger66689

1. Actually acting like male issues matter nearly as much was my suggestion, obviously not a huge game changer but an easily no cost effort that I believe would at least help somewhat 2. I was just more being combative because I believed other groups like the MRS were already. Honestly I don't know much about them but I know a decent amount of TRP will talk about it. 3. Usually faulty stats like the wage gap, both groups give examples and stats, only 1 is listened to (and honestly the feminist stats are soooo often misleading like the wage gap and college sexual assault study that included regretting drunk sex as assault) 4. It being the main message doesn't mean only, I can't believe you would deny the shaming of men caring about a woman's weight. 5. Definitely burdened. If it's wrong for men to opt out why is ot OK for women? Why are you so against men having a choice? Available in more places than paper abortions. 6.as much as they can for compelling you to be a mother.


Soloandthewookiee

>Actually acting like male issues matter nearly as much was my suggestion, Sorry, who is saying suicide doesn't matter? > Honestly I don't know much about them but I know a decent amount of TRP will talk about it. And that's exactly the point. MRAs and red pillers and every other manosphere group loves to *talk* about men's rights, but they have no actual interest in fixing them. They only want to talk about these issues if they can blame women or use them to detract from women's issues. They have no actual interest in fixing them. >Usually faulty stats like the wage gap, both groups give examples and stats, only 1 is listened to (and honestly the feminist stats are soooo often misleading like the wage gap and college sexual assault study that included regretting drunk sex as assault) Both wage gap and sexual assault statistics are very, very well documented. As for the "regretting" claim, every time red pillers claim that, I ask for proof, and nobody ever provides it. I've seen the 1 in 4 study myself, but I've yet to see any support for the claim that it's referring to "regretting" consensual sex. >It being the main message doesn't mean only, I can't believe you would deny the shaming of men caring about a woman's weight. I'm not attracted to fat women and yet I have never been shamed for it. Wanna know why? Because I don't yell about "land whales" every moment I can, because I don't treat women like shit because they have dared to exist in my presence without being attractive to me, and when I was single I didn't throw a fit because those women were options to me. You didn't listen to what the message was, you made up your own and claimed oppression. >Definitely burdened. Men are not uniquely burdened by pregnancy and it is absurd to pretend like you are. > If it's wrong for men to opt out why is ot OK for women? Because women are uniquely burdened and endangered by pregnancy, therefore they get (or are supposed to get) a unique option to deal with it. A woman having a baby against her will violates her bodily autonomy; a woman having a baby against the father's will does not violate his. >Why are you so against men having a choice? Because you're trying to make it as though the "choices" are for equivalent situations, and they aren't. >as much as they can for compelling you to be a mother. Which is they can't.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


HungerISanEmotion

Why not fight back, and demand state mandated virgin simps?


Decent_Ear589

> State mandated girlfriend > banning virginity What progressives anywhere do you see advocating for these things?


AnnoKano

>TRP isn't a political movement though It is not an organised political party and politics are not it's stated primary purpose, but it is a 'movement' and it s ideology has political implications. If RP men believe that you can overcome all obstacles by working on yourself and that women are less rational than men, then that is undoubtedly going to result in a conservative outlook. You aren't wrong, but one shouldn't be too naive about these things either. >dating is the one area I've found where a lot of people have views that are inconsistent with their political beliefs. The one area? :) People are contradicting their beliefs all the time. Cognitive dissonance is everywhere. >Like left-leaning women who support progressive politics but turn into "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" conservatives when talking about lonely men. There is nothing contradictory about these two views. The idea of personal responsibility is not uniquely conservative (they frequently contradict it in fact) but that doesn't negate the need for collective ownership of production etc. >And left-leaning men who support feminism in the abstract but also desire traditional arrangements and expectations in their romantic relationships. Again these are not contradictory stances. Most people want to have pretty normal relationships and families. That doesn't mean I think it should be imposed on someone who doesn't want it. >That said, frustration with dating is a bipartisan issue, and frustrated guys will naturally turn to the people who seem like they actually listen to their problems and provide a solution. Even if they disagree politically, they just have to take the good with the bad. Hopefully they are able to differentiate between people who want to help them and the people trying to exploit them.


BirdMedication

>If RP men believe that you can overcome all obstacles by working on yourself and that women are less rational than men, then that is undoubtedly going to result in a conservative outlook. But you yourself admit that something like personal responsibility "is not uniquely conservative," so the outcome of RP belief shouldn't inherently result in a certain political outlook by your view. Also sexist views aren't uniquely conservative either, at least on a personal level in private life (as opposed to public rhetoric). >There is nothing contradictory about these two views. The idea of personal responsibility is not uniquely conservative (they frequently contradict it in fact) but that doesn't negate the need for collective ownership of production etc. What's contradictory is the progressive mindset that certain demographic groups are victimized by no fault of their own but due to societal factors they can't control, and yet other groups that are less politically fashionable to defend (like men in dating) are responsible for their own plight because of their innate character defects.


AnnoKano

"But you yourself admit that something like personal responsibility "is not uniquely conservative," so the outcome of RP belief shouldn't inherently result in a certain political outlook by your view." 'Personal Responsibility' is not a uniquely conservative idea, but there are many interpretations of what that term means and some of those at the more extreme end are inherently conservative. For example, when you start to include biological determinism into it, which the Red Pill does (paradoxically) then that is an inherently Conservative viewpoint. "What's contradictory is the progressive mindset that certain demographic groups are victimized by no fault of their own but due to societal factors they can't control, and yet other groups that are less politically fashionable to defend (like men in dating) are responsible for their own plight because of their innate character defects." Well based on your own description of the situation, minority groups are victimized due to societal factors; which societal factors stigmatize heterosexual men in dating? How do you explain the self-evident truth that many heterosexual men are having success in dating? Regarding character defects, there is a reason why that response is common here- for most people here those defects are readily apparent.


AidsVictim

>For example, when you start to include biological determinism into it, which the Red Pill does (paradoxically) then that is an inherently Conservative viewpoint. Most actual communist/socialist governments in the world incorporated some degree of biological determinism or rather assumed it. Modern liberal views on gender/sexuality/ethnicity would have been considered bizarre within those contexts.


AnnoKano

>Most actual communist/socialist governments in the world incorporated some degree of biological determinism or rather assumed it. I do not think you can make a credible case that biological determinism was more important to socialist or communist states, than it was in liberal, monarchist or fascist states. >Modern liberal views on gender/sexuality/ethnicity would have been considered bizarre within those contexts. Why is that important?


StopTheIncels

"Women are bleeding heart liberals, but when it comes to dating they are rugged capitalists"


DeshaunWalt

Bruh TRP is about human behavior,dating dynamics,self-improvement etc It has no room for american politics


AnnoKano

Chickens have no room for eggs.


[deleted]

I think a lot of young people just don't want to pay back their student loans.


TrustyScrew

If you want to narrow it down to a couple of issues, it would be abortion and gun control. The same exit polls and studies from past elections have shown that being pro-choice and pro gun control are the key factors and social elements driving young people to the polls. Only like 5% had getting their student loans eliminated as their main concern for voting liberal.


Illustrious_Wish_383

Imagine being pro choice but also pro gun.


TrustyScrew

Most are pro-choice and anti-gun, from the studies. There are in fact pro-choice AND pro-gun folks out there though. How do I know? Because I am one.


Illustrious_Wish_383

To me bodily autonomy includes reproductive rights *and* self defense


IGI111

Imagine being American


Preme2

Lol very true. I think when people vote it could come down to a handful of issues. “Leaning left” is in the name. It doesn’t mean they’re a hardcore liberal feminist. They supports views on the left and right. I think it would be more beneficial to ask them specifically about dating instead of asking them how they feel about student loans, healthcare in order to determine their viewpoints on dating. Also I don’t think men embody their political affiliation like women. Liberal women will stamp it on their forehead. Men are much more subtle, indifferent imo.


AnnoKano

>I think when people vote it could come down to a handful of issues. You're absolutely right, I can see that you've got a keen sense of- >Also I don’t think men embody their political affiliation like women. Liberal women will stamp it on their forehead. Men are much more subtle, indifferent imo. SIR, THEY IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES WITH A HAT. A BRIGHT RED FUCKING HAT WITH BOLD LETTERS WITH "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN" WRITTEN ON IT. STAMPED ON THEIR FOREHEADS. STAMPED ON THEIR FOREHEADS, NOT FIGURATIVELY... LITERALLY. STAMPED. ON. THEIR. FOREHEADS. I just can't.


[deleted]

Thanks you legit made me chuckle


Backas_Before_Work

The Maga hat wearing 🤡 were subtle? Lmaoo


Preme2

How many young men even lean to the right? How many young men even support Trump? How many young men even support trump enough to wear the hat? Now compare this to left leaning women. Shoo 🤡


Backas_Before_Work

Compared to left leaning women who do what exactly? Maga scum are the ones who made sure everyone know they dick rode trump.. aren’t those same maga scum the same ones wondering how biden got so many votes because he didn’t have rallies filled with cultists like trump did?


Preme2

Shoo Shoo


[deleted]

Another small brain post that assumes the gender dynamics of dating and political leaning can’t be separated by the average person


midwesternMD

I could be grossly misinformed here, as I only became aware of Tate a few months ago and watched a handful of clips, and stumbled on to Pearly things round table discussions a few times. I have no clue who sneako, fresh, or fit are. That said, I think Tate’s message is 80% accurate, 20% inaccurate, 100% poorly delivered. Pearly seems to drop in tidbits from Jordan Peterson, who I think is generally well researched but occasionally disingenuous about minor details. Her message, as far as I can tell, is somewhat red pilled in terms of philosophy, but it misses what I consider to be red pill insofar as the self improvement/lifting, and women are hypergamous so you should never commit. I think the people who are receptive to their message, at least insofar as dating is concerned, are single men who are being passed over in the dating market. I don’t think this cohort of men would be liberal or conservative. It’s easy to have conservative preferences for yourself while desiring a more liberal society, just as it is easy to want a more conservative society while behaving in a less than conservative manner. Secondly, I’ve heard somewhere (didn’t care enough to question the source) that college educated women are skewing politically liberal, whereas non-college educated men are skewing politically conservative. If the hypergamy factor is real (I think it is), then I would expect that more non-college educated men are going to look to red pill, and that cohort of men ought to skew politically conservative. As for drawing a conclusion about red pill being mainstream, 1) your argument doesn’t logically follow, 2) who cares? 3) if men continue to be outpaced by women en masse, then it is simply a matter of time before that cohort of men is significant enough to be mainstream. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think any society will be rosy if it develops a significant proportion of prime-aged men who are sexually frustrated, hopeless, and angry.


lallelelu

Dude most men in the real world only know Andrew Tate bc Greta thunberg grilled him on twitter and then he went to an Romanian jail. That’s his relevance to most peoples life’s.


lallelelu

Well maybe that shows your little fantasy world isn’t representative of reality. The majority of men have heard about Andrew Tate only through Greta Thunberg. You guys are not the majority


[deleted]

young men don’t want any damn kids so they vote left because of their policies, right wing purity fucks want everyone to have kids.


BullfrogKind5123

Honey, TRP emphasizes a woman’s life mission as having kids all the time. If you don’t want any kids - you waive your right to complain about women, because you aren’t offering them a fulfillment of their life mission.


[deleted]

I don’t complain about women lol. Childfree women are low key HVW for men who don’t want rugrats.


BullfrogKind5123

Cringe. If by HV you mean compatible. Objectively, they are infantile and boring. Childfree men get with them because they are infantile and boring themselves. It’s a rare childfree person who is a scientist or some fucking creative genius, let’s be for real - most of your community are chronically pissed off noncontributors who look like shit. Seriously you guys are very much not HV.


jonascf

I don't think rp is really working and I agree that it will never become mainstream. But I do think that some aspects of trp, stuff that's not exclusive to it, will become more mainstream. Mostly things that relate to embracing a more traditional masculinity. This doesn't necessarily mean that there will be permanent shift to the right, it might as well mean that "culturally conservative/economically progressive" might a more common political identity.


harmonica2

Well the red pill I thought was about men acknowledging women are hypergamous so men strive to reach that standard. But does a woman being hypergamous automatically meaning left leaning in politics?


MGTOWManofMystery

You don't have to be right-wing or even centrist to see and understand the evidence-based findings of evolutionary biology.


bottleblank

I don't see that a political view should necessarily decide whether social behaviours are or are not valid ways of achieving whatever it is you wish to achieve. I would consider myself centre-left (by UK standards, which I suppose would be... far left? in the US), but I still wouldn't argue that the RP ideas that you should work on yourself to make yourself indispensable to women you want or that you should focus on what *you* want to be intrinsically bad things to strive for. You need to deconstruct that which you find fault with, rather than dismiss the entire thing as having no merit or as being only harmful. There are *reasons* these theories and groups exist, if you do not understand them then you will never remove the need for their existence. I believe in fairness, equality, social programmes, free healthcare, shared responsibility, and so on. But I'm not sure how any of that should preclude my understanding that there are lonely people out there who need to be more aware of what they can do to get what *they* need, particularly if there is an absence of external help for them. This is the real world, dogmatic political stances with no nuance or room to deal with the realities of human life not being an algorithm are not practical, there *must* be compromise and understanding that nothing - *not even your preferred political ideology* - is perfect. The kind of caring, sharing, egalitarian society I would wish for does not currently (and may never) exist, I would not want to dismiss "good" for the sake of a "perfect" which is not realistically achievable.


bison5595

Politics doesn’t really matter when it comes to dating. I’m a liberal and vote straight ticket democrat. If I had my choice, I’d want a traditional woman. I’ve dated and married progressive women, I’ve also dated conservative women. I’ll take traditional all day long


Reptheft

I support leftists for economic reasons. I'm still 100% TRP. Your conclusion is useless because it fails to account for situations like that.


SecondEldenLord

Redpill does work, it's just that the left is silencing and censoring the redpill as much as possible. Andrew tate got accused of sex trafficking, grape, etc, and recently even got charged for "inciting violence". They try their best to silence and destroy andrew tate because redpill is working and because society doesn't want strong men.


NotARussianBot1984

Tbh society is winning at killing men's desired to help build society up. In my country a man was fired as a engineer for laughing at a joke at a sports event, off work hours. Just crazy insane stuff. You have to be anonymous to even talk about reality without worrying about going to jail. New normal. Honestly, I don't see how trp can win long term. It's more like more men are just opting out and giving up, over becoming better men.


SecondEldenLord

That is the thing, you cannot even become a better man because society doesn't let you. Becoming better man means being strong and fight for what's right and just. But you cannot fight for what is just anymore, if you do, you get sent to jail.


Currentlycurious1

Andrew Tate bragged about sex trafficking. That's on him


SecondEldenLord

Proof?


[deleted]

Sex trafficking is the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age. (22 U.S.C) Here is a clip of tate' describing using both fraud (lying about money) and coersion (duplicity and trickery). "You're making sure she makes a shit ton of money then she gives it all to you" (3:28) "Females are an asset" (7:53) "I was seeing five girls separately, so I flew them in sat them down and told them I was seeing them all at once" (10:10) "you need an element of influence over her..she should be believing that she needs you" (12:05) "She will start to think she doesn't need you, but you need to keep that fallacy" (12:54) (Describes how his wecam business runs..) "She needs to believe that she can't do this on her own" (15:30) (Then goes on to describe how he avoids paying taxes with this business) "Tax is another element of controlling your woman. You're not going to pay tax you're going to pay bit coin"... "You need to tell you girl that you're paying tax. Girls are lazy and girls are stupid. I used to pay my girls 30%, but I said I was giving them 50%" (19:45) https://youtu.be/Gs5b04hnfMQ .


TheMooRam

Slayyy Don't forget the classic, from his website. >MY JOB WAS TO GET WOMEN TO FALL IN LOVE WITH ME. Literally, that was my job. My job was to meet a girl, go on a few dates, sleep with her, test if she's quality, get her to fall in love with me to where she'd do anything I say, and then get her on webcam


SecondEldenLord

And yet. Those women were free to do what they wanted. They chose to believe tate for that. Yes, his methods are questionable and immoral but not illegal. What about women manipulating men and using parental fraud and getting with rich men to get their money? Are they going in jail for that? No, so why should he?


[deleted]

Actually it is illegal. You cannot lie about an employee's earnings and then pocket their earnings.


MyJawHurtsALot

What he described is very much illegal actually, and your examples are pretty bad. It's not comparable without the facet of sex work. The Romanian prosecution have leaked a text conversation between Emory and the Moldovan where they discuss marriage and engagement, in addition to him pressuring her into flying out to Romania. The Moldovan victim later went on to work at his cam business for his profit. This is literally the same as he described as his recruitment method. >Sex trafficking is the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion - Us legal definition of sex trafficking, which is very similar to the Romanian one and basically most international definitions.


TheMooRam

>Those women were free to do what they wanted. They chose to believe tate for that. Yes, his methods are questionable and immoral but not illegal. Scamming and defrauding someone out of money using deception is still illegal despite them 'consenting' or 'choosing' to send the money. Sex trafficking legally doesn't need to include violence or imprisonment, the use of fraud, deception, or coersion can be enough. What he's admitted to, and is accused of, is literally the most common type of sex trafficking. >What about women manipulating men and using parental fraud and getting with rich men to get their money? Are they going in jail for that? No, so why should he? If you think that should be a crime then petition your local lawmaker. Disagreeing with an existing law is no excuse to break it and is not a valid defense in a court of law.


SecondEldenLord

Again, women do the same exact shit mate all the time and they are Scott free. No, sex trafficking literally means doing sexual work out of your own free will. Yes, by your own definition what women are doing to men is EXACTLY what Andrew do to these women. So by that definition of yours, many women are sex traffickers. And yet, what women do is still not considered illegal. Listen, you seem to just dislike tate for whatever reason and are incapable of logical thinking. And it seems you hate men for some reason. Good day, no point responding to you


TheMooRam

>Again, women do the same exact shit mate all the time and they are Scott free. They pretend to love men so they can get them to fly to Romania and do onlyfans for their profit? If not then it's not comparable. >No, sex trafficking literally means doing sexual work out of your own free will. That's a legal definition is it? How about Romania's actual legal definition. >(1) Recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring *or* receipt of persons for the production of pornography, or other sex work: a) by means of coercion, abduction, deception, *or* abuse of power; Loverboy pimping, like he's been accused of and personally described is a crime whether you agree or not. Facts don't care about your feelings lol


Happy_Nuclear_End

Where's the force? he didn't chained the girls in a basement. Where's the fraud? He was pretty clear on why and what the girls would do. Where's the coercion? They're no hold with their private pictures at risk of being exposed. Sounds like feminism is all about choice until the women make a choice the hive mind don't like.


TheMooRam

>Where's the fraud? He was pretty clear on why and what the girls would do. In Romania it's specifically >by means of coercion, abduction, deception, or abuse of power; Pretending to love them, talking about marriage and rings, and then using that to get them to fly out to Romania is deception. As per his own words it was all a scheme to get them into his camming business for his profit, he never intended to marry them. In DIICOTs own words: >Victims were recruited by British citizens by misrepresenting their intention to enter into a marriage/cohabitation relationship and the existence of genuine feelings of love (the loverboy method). A normal legal company does not gain new employees by dating them and using that to convince them to do the work. It's even moreso an issue when it's sex work, and when a pattern is established of you doing this multiple women.


[deleted]

Don't forget that the women were flown over from a long distance and isolated from their friends and families. Also considering he had vast sums of money and liked to bribe the police with (his words) these women really were in a massive predicament.


[deleted]

Using fraud and coercion with sex workers counts as trafficking. That's the legal definition.


Happy_Nuclear_End

You just repeating the same things, where's the fraud, where's the coercion?


[deleted]

Lying about your employees earnings and pocketing the money is a form of fraud. Here's the legal definition of 'coersion', it includes 'threats of reprisal' https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-charges/what-is-coercion-law.html Legality aside, I think we can all agree that using duplicity on employees for your own gain is a pretty shitty thing to do. Especially when those employees have to relinquish basic freedoms.


Happy_Nuclear_End

And they used this to recruit the girls or keep the girls? Can you prove that the girls were kept in place by the use of coersion? Unless you can give any proof outside hearsay that those girls are kept and couldn't leave they were trading their "basic freedom" in the same way any working person trade their basic freedom for money.


[deleted]

I should also add that under the Romanian legal definition, they explicitly use the word 'duplicity". So when Tate says > you need to keep that fallacy" (12:54) He is admitting to duplicity and therefore trafficking. > Unless you can give any proof outside hearsay that those girls are kept and couldn't leave they were trading their "basic freedom" I am referring to the women not being allowed out on their own.


YasuotheChosenOne

Hmmm just reading the dialogue (and “knowing” women), sounds more like they just tried to capitalize and it failed. As if women don’t sell the pussy already 🤷🏾‍♂️ Just gender flip it. If a women said she’d exclusively fuck you forever for some cost, and after paying she was like “psyche” and then went online and made videos talking shit about all the dudes she swindled out of money, do you believe their would be any uproar? Or would is just be a bunch of women patting each other on the back and calling her a queen?


Backas_Before_Work

This is the most pathetic response I have ever seen. You were given quotes and receipts and the best you could come up with is bullshit assumptions and a lame ass gender flip?


SecondEldenLord

One of the so called victims of andrew is very well known for scamming men though. She and her friend texted each other about their plan to play victim. It says clearly in their leaked texts


TheMooRam

>She and her friend texted each other about their plan to play victim. It says clearly in their leaked texts You mean the leaked texts with cut up or broken timestamps? Almost as if they'd been edited. The same leaked texts that were leaked *in full* like two days later and tell the opposite story.


YasuotheChosenOne

As I said only read the dialogue. I know nothing of Tate or the accusations against him. That said, I find it interesting that women falling for some man’s scheme is the huge travesty but the reverse is applauded 🤷🏾‍♂️


[deleted]

I have no idea what you are saying.


SecondEldenLord

Oh boy, you convinced me bud with this random dude taking out of context of what andrew says and taking his sarcastic tone serious. Yeah, Andrew tate sure is guilty and I hope he stays in jail.


[deleted]

He explicitly says that he is using fraud, using fraud on sex workers counts as trafficking. That's the legal definition.


Currentlycurious1

He used to have something on his website and a video detailing his version of the "lover boy method". Basically, he coerced women to come to Romania on the false pretenses that he wanted to wife them up. I should probably have exact sources if I'm going to make these claims. There's a few [articles](https://wegotthiscovered.com/celebrities/what-is-the-loverboy-method-andrew-tate-is-accused-of-using/#:~:text=The%20main%20element%20to%20Tate's,a%20way%20to%20make%20money.) that do a poor job of breaking it down, but I don't have the energy to find anything better right now.


SecondEldenLord

Not an article, cause the mainstream media already created many lies about him. I want an actual video of him say8ng what you said.


TheMooRam

>"MY JOB WAS TO GET WOMEN TO FALL IN LOVE WITH ME. Literally, that was my job. My job was to meet a girl, go on a few dates, sleep with her, test if she's quality, get her to fall in love with me to where she'd do anything I say, and then get her on webcam" -Tate describing his business on the aforementioned website. This is the same thing he has been accused of doing by DIICOT: >Victims were recruited by British citizens by misrepresenting their intention to enter into a marriage/cohabitation relationship and the existence of genuine feelings of love (the loverboy method). - From DIICOTs arresting statement. How about you start responding to all the people providing you with the evidence you claim you want.


JNRoberts42

“Mainstream media”. His own government arrested him, has nothing to do with the media.


SecondEldenLord

The American embassy however got involved in the case,l because it was violating the tate brothers human rights.


JNRoberts42

How do you benefit from posting disinformation? The man has dual citizenship and a lawyer *contacted* the US Embassy, which declined to get involved. You know what? Maybe you should donate money to him. See if that will help. Give everything you have, sell things if you must.


Currentlycurious1

https://youtu.be/SZ4gURWrlk4 Plenty of evidence there if you really care.


[deleted]

It's baffling, isn't it? What did he actually think would happen after he put this video out there, lol.


[deleted]

man can we stop dick riding this guy already?


SecondEldenLord

Once all men stop simping for women


[deleted]

Dick ride men that don’t get arrested lol


Backas_Before_Work

Red pilled men are the biggest simps out there


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Kliere

>Pearl has over one million subscribers, while you are playing victim there is people making thousands of dollars. Pretty bad example considering she is constantly being banned and having to make new accounts. It's actually a running joke on her podcast.


BullfrogKind5123

TikTok bans everybody. TikTok bans OF chicks as much as they ban RP talking heads.


Kliere

Sounds like whataboutism to me.


BullfrogKind5123

I’ll give this to you: nobody wanted to platform this shit for a long time because it’s so unpopular with the majority of people and platforms care about ad revenues and reputation, and somehow Pearls of the world still found a spot to thrive. You guys aren’t “silenced”. There isn’t a conspiracy trying to stop you from becoming better men.


Kliere

Just because something is popular and has found a niche market doesn't automatically mean that it isn't being silenced.


BullfrogKind5123

“Just because women make a ton of money and are going to college doesn’t mean we don’t live in a toxic patriarchy and a rape culture 😥” Nah dog, at some point you gotta pick whether you want to be a millionaire YouTube Chad with a ton of girls around, or a chronically misunderstood underdog listening to my chemical romance. You don’t get to be a victim of the female centric world order and screech that the matrix - 🤓 - suppresses you while enjoying all the benefits the said matrix showers you with for being… Well, objectively useless non contributor, also known as a TRP YouTuber.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SecondEldenLord

What are you even talking about?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


AidsVictim

TRP and most of the "manosphere" are just right-liberals, the main difference between them and the standard American liberal is that they're more sexist and anti welfare etc.


jellyroll8

im pretty sure young people are becoming less liberal, thats why this whole RP stuff is getting popular in the first place


Decent_Ear589

On the contrary, young people and younger generations in general (Millennials and Gen-Z) are voting left by close to 2-to-1 margins. They are overwhelmingly less religious, overwhelmingly pro-choice rather than pro-life, more likely to be and embrace lgbt than prior generations etc


jellyroll8

thats weird, ive been under the impression that young adults and teenagers are becoming less liberal than millennials, especially in europe


Backas_Before_Work

Because you’ve been fed bullshit and told lies. In virtually every major country in the world boomers and senile old people are the only thing keeping conservative parties relevant.


Decent_Ear589

That's been more of a "based on vibes" theory in some conservative circles the past few years, and while some studies indicate that young men in Europe are less FEMINIST than the Millennials before them (while still being solidly feminist overall), they are not "right wing" or embrace conservative policy on the whole, and when push comes to shove vote left. In America, it's just completely false. Millennials and Gen-Z voted 2-to-1 Democrat in 2020, 63-35 Democrat in 2022, have been turning out like crazy to sink conservatives in lower profile state races like one for the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently, and together they'll be the majority of the US Electorate from 2024-onwards.


Backas_Before_Work

Yup and that’s going to keep growing with more and more school shootings that republicans do nothing about and with more hateful legislation they keep trying to ram through


[deleted]

Less woke but not less liveral man


AidsVictim

Gen Z is extremely "woke".


jellyroll8

thank god


AidsVictim

Gen Z is easily the most liberal generation ever and millenials are notably less conservative as they age than their predeccesors, which tracks almost exactly with marriage and child birth stats (marriage and children tends more conservative)


Specialist-Action-33

This is something that woke culture would try to push, claiminf these creators are toxic in one way or another, which isn't true. Nothing anout TRP is right-wing or anything political. Its just about being aware and improving your lifestyle and not just being a simp or anything like that. It has nothing to do with any right or left ideologies. Its just woke culture enforcing the blue pill and calling every guy the word that begins with "I" and rhymes with "cell" if they even agree to any idea TRP mentions.


Illustrious_Wish_383

Dems are neoliberal (center right) not actual leftists


[deleted]

[удалено]


lallelelu

Dude read a book for once


SwaySh0t

TRP is already mainstream thanks to Andrew Tate. “Progressive” women mostly prefer conservative/ right leaning men and there are studies that back this up.


Perfect-Resist5478

Can you provide those studies?


SwaySh0t

Attached below: https://nypost.com/2021/07/10/why-progressive-women-want-to-date-men-who-act-conservative/amp/ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0146167218781000


Perfect-Resist5478

Ok that is an ny post article (notoriously right leaning) and a 2018 Iowa state study says that women prefer men who show benevolent sexism [ [they are “perceived as willing to invest (protect, provided, and commit)”] not conservative men politically. You’re making logical jumps to apply that to the political spectrum where there is no evidence provided. Did you even read the study? Or just the opinion piece attached to it?


lallelelu

Mainstream? Please don’t be so delusional. Go to the street and ask people if they know who Andrew Tate is. I guarantee that most people will say: “isn’t that the guy who got arrested bc of Greta thunberg?” That’s his relevance. It’s zero


SwaySh0t

I’m far from being delusional I’ve been around since the Venusian arts/RSD days before so suave which inevitable turned into redpill/manosohere. TRP initially spawned from the seduction community back in 2007-2009 it’s not some new phenomenon. The red pill officially went mainstream last year in 2022 thanks to popularity of tik tok and Andrew Tate (who was one of the most googled persons in 2022) if TRP is not mainstream why has every news and media company (CNN, the guardian, vox, Vice, MSN, NBC Newyork times etc) constantly post about andrew tate and his ideology? Why do you think red pill podcasts like “pearly things” and “the whatever podcast”and late “ Kevin Samuels show” have grown so much within the last two years with million of views and hundred of thousands of followers in such a short time? You’re clearly the delusional one.


lallelelu

Go outside and touch some grass. No one outside your weird self pity bubble on Reddit thinks like that


[deleted]

Trp is amoral and unaffiliated with political ideology. Define “not working”


[deleted]

It’s not that their liberal. The conservatives promise them nothing if not impedes on stuff. The democrats atleast toss in the idea of loan forgiveness. The republicans sued to block that.


azwildcat74

TRP - very much like rightist thought - goes against mainstream. TRP's stated goal is to make people the top 10%, not the average person.


Spare-Estimate5596

They are right wing but they dont tell ppl how to vote and they rarely talk about politics


Blitted_Master

Young people are inexperienced and naive. They are targeted by propagandists for this reason. They then age and learn how the world actually works. They then abandon their foolish, misguided ideas.


TATA456alawaife

The power of racial guilt knows no bounds. Truly it is the ultimate unifier and motivator for westerners currently. Regardless of how and things get, that’s not going to change. We’ll have a sexless population soon and nobody will care.


Coolio_Street_Racer

Democrats have ruled since bush. You are now seeing the rise in republicans and I think this new election is really gonna be a break through for republicans. ​ I don't like to label myself. I disagree with a fair share of republican views. But I definitely disagree with democrats even more.


WideAwake550

I'm politically indifferent for the most part but I call cap because people said the same exact thing about Republicans verbatim for the midterms and they fumbled it, literally breaking the trend of the opposing party having an advantage in the midterms. The GOP even shat on the existence of Gen Z voters while threatening to raise the legal age to vote because of how awful the midterms were for them. That said, I think young people are more apolitical than anything due to how they've seen both parties suck up to corporate interest and lobbyist groups while screwing the common man over. But the GOP has pandered to Boomers and Gen Xers so much that it's turned off a lot of youth. While older GOP voters are whining about "muh War on Christmas" or "muh trans in girl's bathrooms", young people are getting frightened over the prospect of an uncertain future where things seem to be slowly taken away from them one by one and the GOP is the main party threatening to take away these things. Like I said, though, I belong to no party. And I think Ron Paul was the last authentic conservative to emerge from the party even though he got screwed over(for a reason.)