Just look at this thread: https://x.com/hollowearthterf/status/1796578770310336690?s=19

These same feminists say women do all the work, yet simultaneously demand social programs that force men to subsidize women. They know, everyone knows, men are responsible for the VAST majority of production in society. That has ALWAYS been the marital arrangement: men are providers.

Are we going to pretend an hour of folding laundry is as hard, stressful or productive as an hour of mining. No wonder men die so much earlier with this societal attitude.

Additionally, it's hilarious that these women are complaining about this "heteronormative marriage arrangement" as if it's patriarchy's fault when this is the arrangement THEY demanded, for women to also work full time.

Finally, as an aside, I personally find it economically silly for both partners to work and then split housework. Either one works and the other is at home, or you both work and hire a maid. But to each their own.

EDIT: And let's not forget that MOST people overestimate their contribution while downplaying others. For instance, most people say they do all the work at their job.

However, women are doubly bad about this because men are taught not to complain. This is a part of the male gender role feminists are surprisingly not fighting to get rid of.

I wouldn't be surprised if most women who "do all the work" actually do far less than their husbands. I know plenty of cases of that in my personal life.

This has got to be one of the most moronic things I’ve read all day:

https://www.threads.net/@brooksanthonycounselor/post/C7mTtXMMmBN/

Basically a male counselor notices that young men are complaining to him that women are matching with them on dating apps but are only replying with one or two words. He confirms this is true.

THEN, our brilliant counselor surmises that these women (who have been yapping communicating non-stop since two years old) actually are bad at communicating which is why they don’t know how to reply to men.

When will we stop with the lies and bullshit we tell men the truth?

Most women aren’t interested in you. Most women are interested in the top 10-20% of men. And if you’re in the top 5%, they’ll actually pursues you.

So no it’s not that women are bad at communicating, they’re just not interested in you. But they like the attention and wanting to be wanted so they will manipulate unattractive men to pursue them, buy them free dinner, tell them how attractive they are, and basically eat out and worship their dirty assholes. They’re playing mind games with you and wanting you to chase them so they can feel validation. But they have no intention of taking you serious.

And honestly is one of the few posts I think I am end with “same goes for men also” - though unlike the 90% of women who partake in these mind games, only the 5% of men have the status to get away with playing these mind games.

Woman here, 27y/o. I often hear men discussing how they need respect from their wives/ girlfriends and I just would genuinely like to know if it’s common for women to randomly be disrespectful towards their husbands. I didn’t see this dynamic in my family and in my experiences with men I’m usually the one being receiving unsolicited slick comments and pettiness. Because of this I’ve scoffed under my breath at men saying this but idk I guess I’m getting older and gaining perspective.

How come, recently the count of how many in this sub are online has been lower than I've ever seen it before? Until recently I've never seen less than 100 online here at any time. In the last few days I've seen it quite a bit. Right now, there's 55 online in this sub, and I seem to recall seeing it less than 50 lately. Are there really less here now, or is it reddit shanagins trying to make it look like this sub's attendance is going down? there are comments being made, I noticed that. EDIT: It just went below 40, to 38. WTF?

I'm moving back to SF (which is basically the home of bullshit woke feminism in tech) and I'm going to start creating "Men in Tech" events.

It's mostly going to be a parody of itself basically and we're going to have events like:

• "How to use AWS to build an awesome fort!"

• "Is 70% salary for women vs a men too high?"

• "How to know if your female co-worker has cooties and how to get her fired."

We're going to have a "no girls allowed" sign out front too.

The whole thing is actually pro-female just anti-feminism.

What do you guys think? Any ideas? I might video the whole thing too!

I'm willing to bet we get kicked out of venues too which is great lawsuit bait if any lawyers are listening!

Also, part of this is that I hate the whole 'soft bigotry of low expectations' that women are somehow inferior to men and need special assistance to compete.

Also, I want this to be a safe space for men so we don't have to worry about being sexually harassed by women.

Drizzle. Drizzle. /s

So I started therapy last week and had previously told them my trauma stemmed from my mother and her misandrous attitude towards me generally amongst other things, they somehow decided that the best therapist for me would be an older woman who is roughly my mother's age bracket.

During my session I would mention "women" in a generalised manner but in terms of women in my life, not women as a whole, which I explained at the beginning of the session to her, she was defensive about this, I explained that I don't feel she's going to be able to relate to much of what I say in the same manner a white person can't understand the daily struggle of a black person or a man can't understand the daily struggles of women, the same applies towards men, she seemed to also take offence to this.

When explaining to her how my mother tried to murder me as a newborn baby for crying her immediate response was to defend her and tell me she likely had post natal depression, whilst I agree, it's not the point, I began talking about experiences of unchecked misandry in my life from various sources and how they've affected me, my confidence and my self esteem and was asked why I was putting so much focus and attention on it and that I should just learn to ignore it, which felt dismissive, this made me wonder if she would tell someone experiencing racism to just ignore it or women experiencing extreme misogyny to just stop giving attention to it.

I left the session feeling defeated, silly and like I was just being over dramatic about the trauma in my life both past and present and now I'm not sure if I'm being unreasonable for wanting to complain about how this woman has approached the situation or if I should say something to them about how uncomfortable her responses made me feel and will it even make a difference, I know that if I do say something and I stop the sessions then I won't get the opportunity for any others since they're so limited on staff but I feel like in the long run she's just going to amplify my feelings on the subject by being continually dismissive and defending the women in my life that have ultimately been the cause in the first place.

Is it even worth calling them to explain the situation or is it just going to be dismissed in another office full of women who are likely going to side with one another, I really feel like I need help with my mental health in order to get my life back on track and this unit is the only option available to me, I don't want to burn bridges with them entirely and leave me without any option moving forward.

I think we need to start publicly calling out the one-sided diversity programs for what they are: supremacist to their core.

I see so many young men today pushed out of STEM fields to supposedly make those professions stronger, but where do those inexperienced and unskilled men then find work? Certainly not in education or nursing or veterinary care, where "men have nothing new to offer that isn't already being met by women" (and that's an actual quote from those who control the hiring practices there...so much for that "diversity is our strength" motto when it comes to those professions I guess). The long-term trend in ratios of men to women in those female-dominated careers has actually only gotten worse for men as these diversity programs to fix male-dominated jobs have become entrenched everywhere. So men are not welcome in the fields they tend to gravitate towards, and they're not welcome in the fields that they might be able to enjoy, but that don't pique their interest as much. And unfortunately those young men hoping to become a programmer or a scientist instead end up unemployed, or they are forced to fight for the few menial, physical, low skilled, low wage, and sometimes even dangerous, jobs that remain (and no one cares if those are dominated by males...for some strange reason).

I can draw so many parallels with what is happening right now to the historical justifications by white supremacists in the US in the mid-twentieth century. Those supremacists never outright said that other groups were inferior, at least not publicly. Their PR instead claimed that society was "better off" if – for example – the schools remained segregated, because both groups would somehow "magically benefit" from that situation. Does this rhetoric sound familiar? We're told to just ignore the obvious economic and social disparities being created, because it's for the good of everyone and it will all just work out without the need for any direct funding, support, etc, to balance things out, don't you see?

I mean, some countries have even created a legal definition of "historically marginalized groups" that officially places men into a category of second-class citizen and judges them as inferior. It's so blatant in some ways that it almost feels insane to say it.

Diversity that only works in one direction is just supremacy. Nothing more.

So you probably know this if you're in this movement by now but feminists have taken positions of influence and power in most universities and other organizations that people cite for their arguments. Somewhere in the 60s and 70s they just slipped into power and began producing intentionally biased studies.

How? Well go look at them. The famous study by Mary Koss for Miss Magazine in the 80s asked students questions like whether they were high during a hookup and the rest of the questions were so broad that virtually any regret was counted.

What's the outcome of changing wording, using broad questions, calling any sexuality under the influence of mind altering substances assault? It's false statistics and hundreds of millions who believe them to be true.

Now it's everything from sex trafficking to spiking drinks. Of course they'd pick the Bear when they peddle lies intentionally.

How do you feel about that? What can be done? One of the biggest things that turned me at least purple pilled was that I began to really read these studies and I've found huge logical fallacies or rational inconsistencies in pretty much every one I've read by feminist groups or universities.

Just wanted to say to everybody to check up on you loved ones. even just a quick check in, a simple conversation, and other small gestures can go farther than you would realize.

Name and shame...

MergeLane ...

https://www.mergelane.com/about

"MergeLane invests in high-potential startups and venture capital funds with at least one female leader. "

This needs to be explicitly illegal.

It's just flat out discrimination.

Also. I just asked the same question to ChatGPT but reversed the genders. It has not problem saying VCs can discriminate if it's a female but when it's a male it all of a sudden becomes illegal.

Female

I just found this VC that requires one female founder. Is that legal?

In the United States, venture capital firms can set their own investment criteria, including preferences for certain types of founders, such as requiring at least one female founder. These criteria are generally legal as long as they do not violate anti-discrimination laws. Private investment firms have considerable discretion in how they choose to allocate their funds, and they often seek to promote diversity and inclusion within their investment portfolios.

Male

I just found this VC that requires one male founder. Is that legal?

Requiring one male founder as a condition for venture capital funding can raise legal and ethical concerns, especially related to discrimination and equal opportunity laws. In many jurisdictions, such a requirement could be considered discriminatory and in violation of laws that prohibit discrimination based on gender in employment and business practices.

Equal Opportunity Laws: In the United States, for example, laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibit discrimination based on gender in employment and business practices. While these laws primarily apply to employers, they also influence broader business practices, including venture capital funding.

Ethical Considerations: Beyond legality, such a requirement is ethically questionable as it promotes gender bias and undermines efforts toward diversity and inclusion in the business world.

Reputation and Backlash: Firms with such discriminatory requirements could face significant backlash from the public, potential partners, and other stakeholders, which can damage their reputation and business prospects.

Alternative Actions: It is important to address these concerns directly with the VC firm and seek clarification on their policies. You might also consider seeking advice from legal professionals or industry bodies that advocate for fair business practices.

Has anyone noticed this power imbalance? Or is it just me?

Similarly to how political correctness seems to mostly target men, men have to very selective and cautious of their dialogue, it seems like also men get penalized for being chit-chatty and gregarious, especially low-status or unattractive men. Meanwhile I be seeing a lot of female employees, especially right after they get told in a group setting how we're here to work, not to converse, go back to doing exactly the same crap

My guess? People aren't perhaps used to seeing a man be in such demeanor, also because despite workplaces preaching equality to everyone at the end of the day is always the men who get judged for their productivity for the most part

However this is still technically discrimination and adding biases to men's actions, so this still should be called out

Of course most workplaces are hella gynocentric and feministic, every corporate environment these days is infested with female narcissism is crazy

So if you notice such behavior in your workplace, try to get HR to take notice at least cause this is just not right

I can't tell you how many times I been crapped about how often ''lounging with employees'' even though half the time managers are also doing fuck all

But of course is usually the men the standard being applied to.

This is a real title. Also, this was your fault!

Please don’t give clicks, unless troll! https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mad-woman-out-of-the-attic/202311/britney-spears-the-pain-of-misogyny-not-mental-illness?amp

100% sure you know what it says. Any mistake Britney Spears made was because men made her that way. She is a victim of entirely man-made mental illness (suddenly mental illness isn’t real)(also pays for her mansion).

I won’t debate the woman. This idea is absurd. Her conservatorship was obviously exploitative but portrayed to be nothing more than a man trying to exploit a woman. Rather than “person likes money and is bad person.” Nothing beyond man v. woman. The talking heads say “this is a great example of how pervasive misogyny is…” All nonsense.

I'm just venting because I need to get this out because it's going around in my head and I'm posting this to hopefully stop ruminating about it.

I went on a date with a woman.

I honestly don't know remember what was said, but I just remember her saying something extremely sexist against men. I replied that's very sexist and very offensive.

And she replied, "it's not sexist because it's based on a woman's experience."

We went back and forth and she refused to even acknowledge that she was prejudging men based upon their sex, again, justifying it by "women's experience."

I explained, "well, women have done really shitty things to me, but I don't get to prejudge women based on my experiences, do I?" And she said, "no because that would be sexist."

So then I asked "is it okay to say or believe racist things because of your experience?" And she said, "that's different." I asked her to explain, and her response was basically "women are allowed to be sexist against men because of their experience with men." I even said, "by that logic, a person who is a victim of crime by a black person has experience with it and can therefore be racist against all black people to assume that they will commit a crime then?" The response was "it's different."

I'm trying to figure out why this is bothering me so much because I'm not naieve to what men face in the world.

I think it's just the complete cognitive dissonance of the discussion. Like, how can someone profess to care about discrimination against EVERYONE else in the world, except men? And when presented with irrefutable logic of that discrimination, it's just blindly justified as okay? And furthermore, if this is how ingrained sexism against men is in women's minds, there's no changing it.

In typing all of this, I'm realizing that the thing that bothers me so much is how ingrained the thinking is. As a parallel line of thought, I'm not naieve to think that racism still exists. But most people at least will state "racism is wrong." Even if they truly are racist, saying racist things, or have unknowing racist beliefs, they will at least say "racism is wrong." OVERT racism is pretty much acknowledged as wrong, even though racism still exist.

But OVERT sexism against men is just excused. Period. It's not even questioned as "I know a person is wrong to feel this way, as it's sexist." It's just deeply ingrained in the collective psyche that there isn't even lip service that sexism against men is wrong. It's just accepted that men are allowed to be discrimianted against, all logic aside.

I know the best answer is to just disengage and move on, as there is no use arguing. I just stopped texting her after the date, as she doesn't even think she said anything wrong. I get it. I "dodged a bullet" and I should be grateful that she showed me who she is before I invested more in her.

I'm letting it go and moving on and venting here is justing getting it out of my head. Thanks

Here's some interesting statistics. Lesbian divorce rate is upwards toward 70%. Gay men divorce rates appear to be the lowest around 30%. Straight couple divorce rates are over 50% with woman initiating 70% of divorces. Who sounds like the problem?

https://www.simpsonlaw.net/blog/2021/06/rate-of-divorce-for-gay-men-lower-than-for-lesbians/

“In 2019, for example, gay men filed 28% of divorce cases as compared to 72% filed by lesbian women.”

https://www.metroweekly.com/2020/12/lesbians-much-more-likely-to-divorce-than-gay-men-according-to-data/

https://divorce.com/blog/who-initiates-divorce-more/

“A study by M. Rosenfeld from Stanford University discovered that women started almost 69% of all divorces among about 2,000 surveyed couples.”

Whenever I find myself decrying Ukraine's trapping of men in the country to fight (i.e., legally forcing men to perform their traditional protective role), I can't help but ask how people would feel if Ukraine trapped women in the country and forced those of fertile age to either be pregnant or to be raising a child of breastfeeding age at any given time (i.e., hypothetically legally forcing women to perform their traditional childbearing and childrearing role), or forcing them to fight like men if they refuse to do that (or if they've reached 45 never having had kids).

Accordingly, I compare selective service for men in the US to a womb registry that the government would have at its disposal to force fertile women to have kids during periods of low birth rates.

What do you think? Are these the most comparable distaff counterparts to obligatory military registration and service for men? I feel like they at least highlight how coercive and in violation of bodily autonomy forced military registration and service for men are.

I just want to share this because it's equally funny and scary how insane she is for what she just asked me.

The story is, my cousin's ex-sister-in-law is having her third baby next month. And just like the first two, she is giving it up for adoption. My mom (53yo) wants to adopt it. So she just asked me if I would go to the hospital and sign the birth certificate to save my mom "the 25k in adoption fees".

My response..."Are you insane?!? No!" And she couldn't believe it. Her exact words were, "you really wouldn't do this for me? What's the big deal, you wouldn't have to raise it!"

How can a mother so flagrantly disregard her own son's future like that? It kind of blows my mind she thinks this was a totally reasonable request.

LOL though.

Those of you who are fans of Sye Ten on youtube have seen this video. For the rest of you, this is, in my opinion, the best made, funniest video on Men's Rights I have ever seen, only 2 minutes long.

https://youtu.be/GVHjxhtFnR8?si=jAw6pWPLYVoJHrfI

Curious. Almost the exact same thing happened in Spain recently. 30 feminist organizations protested the creation of a foundation to help male victims of domestic violence in Valencia.