https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/fix-high-school-teacher-went-170551594.html

https://ovarit.com/o/WomensLiberation/626077/a-teacher-is-going-viral-for-talking-about-how-young-boys-are-facing-zero-pushba

Honestly, I'm kind of feeling bad looking at the comment section. Why are they pointing at boys only when many girls are like that too? It's interesting that whenever people blame boys, people just blatantly agree with it but whenever, people start pointing out that girls can be terrible aswell, they are called "incels". What so it's ok to talk trash about boys but not girls? Besides, many girls aren't being raised that well either and then whenever boy's problems are brought up, their comments are downvoted. Besides, many boys can and do sit straight but teachers always call out on them for no reason. And what about the fact that:

-Girls literally get away with bullying boys but not the other way around

-Women get away with sexually assaulting younger boys

-Women get away with domestic violence on men

-They never get cancelled when they are misandrist

-"Boys will be boys" is just a term to show boys have a lot of energy while playing not for letting them get away with

-I'm just a girl is becoming more and more common as an excuse to let them get away for bad behavior

I can’t stand this shit no more. Why is it that every time someone brings up men dealing with depression and suicidal thoughts

A feminist feels the need to chime in and say some shit like “it’s men’s fault men are depressed. And toxic masculinity. And patriarchy. And rahhhh I’m a victim” Like bro THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS

First of all from my experience and the experience of THOUSANDS of other men It’s literally always WOMENS fault WOMEN like to push the narrative that men shouldn’t cry or show emotion because that makes us weak WOMEN are causing men to self delete WOMEN are hurting men and themselves.

Then they turn around and say shit like “well men need to fix the patriarchy” What fucking patriarchy? Yall just sit here thinking everything benefits men and it doesn’t It literally benefits women more than men And hurts us more than anything else.

And did you ever fuckin stop to think that maybe When you constantly blame and belittle a group of people Accuse and abuse a group of people When you talk about “KAM” or “YAM” Deny us any form of pleasure or happiness While claiming you don’t need a man But you constantly use us anyway. Blame us for everything wrong in the world and wrong in YOUR life’s While ignoring our problems and expecting us to do the same That JUST MAYBE We don’t WANT to protect you? You ever think Hmmm maybe treating the people who I want to protect me like shit isn’t fucking helping?

Like bro I can’t stress enough how much this shit pisses me off I wanna have a son so bad when my gf and I finally decide to have kids. But I’m not bringing a boy into a world we’re he’s automatically at a disadvantage because he has a penis Or off the jump is gonna be treated like a predator of some kind because he has one.

I'm posting here as I really like r/SocialDemocracy and the takes on this sub. This is my new account because I wanted to delete my past one so apologies. Anyway ...

I made a video (which I will bullet point summarise here) and I want this sub's take on it because I want to know if I'm right or not and because I think it is a LW issue which 99% of LWingers ignore.

I imagine most users on this sub are older than me as social democracy isn't popular with young people, esp men.

Essentially:

Young men in UK were 2x more likely to vote Reform UK than young women - a hard right I would argue fascist and racist party. Also my gen were exposed to Peterson and Tate (still both are on my algo).

Young men are moving to the right I believe in the US (probably around the world) as well. This is a problem.

I believe also my gen and younger are increasingly unlikely to support feminism as an idea.]

None of this happens in a vacuum.

I discuss the following points/themes;

• Young men more likely to commit suicide, go to prison, kill someone, be killed, be susceptible to far right ideologies, do worse in schools.
• The left wing has been silent or misandrist. This is a generational thing but my gen of young boys and men pre Andrew Tate - I can't quite explain it but we are the first gen to be told, as fact, masculinity is 'toxic' and we have done especially bad in schools vs girls that sort of thing. And there was a whole stupid gen Z trend to quite literally say 'men are trash' a few years ago (ik they didn't mean it .... but to a 17-20 yr old male brain it's pretty offensive).
• The rise of Andrew Tate/Jordan Peterson. It happened. It's quite significant. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

So that's the diagnosis. Solutions?:

• There is nothing toxic about masculinity. Masculinity in and of itself is not inherently wrong.
• Positive masculinity – men and boys are pretty good and some things such as we are more likely to be confident. Push for that.
• Tate and Peterson are idiots. Remind young men of that.  
• Lack of positive male role models.
• The need for male role models. Boys in UK (include myself) LOVE soccer (football). Imo this is because they/we like and need male role models and they are perfect for young boys and men as they are athletic, strong, rich, cool and in their 20s.
• As such I can't be the role model I want to be totally as I think young men and boys look up to strong muscular men more (idk why but they seem to) hence this is one reason I think Tate blew up so much.
• Push male role models who have empathy instead.
• Need for more primary school male teachers - boys need male role models again.

This is quite the taboo subject hence I want some feedback.

I tried posting on r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates which on the face of it should be good (and a few years ago it was) but a comment saying voting Reform was 'based' got 8 upvotes so ... disappointed.

r/MensRights is a joke and RW so ... no.

Video if anyone is interested/would be so kind to watch it (but again I bullet pointed it as ik most redditors want text and averse to self promo which is fair enough) - it's a 9 min video essay of sorts. https://youtu.be/eecYyCFGPyE?feature=shared

Is there a different sub now where men and women talk together about "gender" issues without biased mods and constant mudslinging hate/ignorance/blindness/hypocrisy/bigotry?

This little gem appeared in the following Guardian article:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/may/10/you-be-the-judge-should-my-girlfriend-buy-expensive-sunglasses-when-she-keeps-losing-cheap-ones#comment-167565605

Is this really feminism? And has the man done anything wrong here?

I tried posting this question on r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates but it got auto removed so I'll post it here.

This is a question I've been wondering about. There are ideas certain people have about masculinity (strength, discipline, ability to stand your ground, etc) and femininity (submissiveness, emotional expression, etc). Note, these aren't the definitions I agree with, I'm just pointing out how some associate the words "masculinity" and "femininity" with.

So whenever I hear the word "emasculate" especially in the context of right wing/redpill places, they think it's men exhibiting and expressing emotions the same way women do, or being the guy who wants an equal relationship with the partner, is someone who is shy, introverted, may struggle with social anxiety, etc, may be afraid of putting himself out there.

The above examples I don't think I would associate the word "emasculate" with as these are just personality flaws that both males and females can have.

They associate the word emasculate as one who lost their dominant spirit and became submissive to their women, but in mainstream leftwing places, we have things like femdom which some men like myself have a desire for (even role reversals too).

So when we use the word "emasculate" what exactly are we referring to? What definition would we use for that? Is it a societal advantage where women benefit yet men suffer, or very real power dynamics that men submit to the women? I think it'll help if we can get some clarification here.

I wasn't sure about this since it got a bad review in the Guardian newspaper, but was curious so gave it a look. It is an excellent exploration of some men's and boy's rights issues - highly recommended. It's available on the Channel 4 On Demand website.

This interview with Doris Lessing is 22 years old - this sh*t has been going on for a looong time. She totally nails it though and gives me hope that people like her could rise to the top. There's plenty of good lines but this one stands out:

"The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.

Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2001/aug/14/edinburghfestival2001.edinburghbookfestival2001

Curious to know how people are getting involved in their community and trying to promote humanitarian or egalitarian causes.

I'm thinking about progress in terms of:

• Social: true egalitarianism and humanism.

  • Instead of gender wars, racism, and hateful identity politics.

• Economic: widespread increase in labor unions and strong wages. Maybe even an increase in the four-day work week.

  • Instead of scattered pockets of activism and decreased spending power each year unless you job hop.

The most influential group I currently know of that at least somewhat embodies these ideas is the Democratic Socialists of America organization, though I don't know how much sway they have nationally.

So how long do you think until these things start to become more commonplace? What do you think would promote widespread adoption?

Schizofascism is a term proposed by the philosopher Mikhail Epstein to describe the political ideology of modern Russia. Schizofascism is fascism disguised as a struggle against fascism. Since 2014 Russia has been accusing Ukrainians of being fascists, while Russia itself is very similar to a fascist state, taking into account its authoritarianism, cult of the leader, ultranationalism, imperialism, militarism, xenophobia, and genocidal rhetoric against Ukrainians.

By analogy with the term "schizofascism", we can use terms "schizosexism" and "schizoconservatism" to describe the modern mainstream feminism-influenced gender equality agenda, which is very sexist and conservative while positioning itself as anti-sexist and anti-conservative.

Schizosexism is sexism disguised as a struggle against sexism.

Schizoconservatism is conservatism disguised as a struggle against traditional gender roles.

Examples of schizosexism in the mainstream gender equality narratives:

• talking about gender equality without mentioning men's issues
• talking about gender equality while saying sexism against men doesn't exist
• talking about gender equality while saying misandry is justified
• using the term "femicide" but not using the term "androcide"
• talking about violence against women without mentioning violence against men
• saying that men are "privileged" (and therefore shouldn't complain)
• equating sexism with sexism against women
• using the term "gender" in the meaning of "the female gender"
• presenting gender equality as a solely or mostly women's issue

Gender equality policy is schizosexist as much as it is gynocentric.

The mainstream gender equality agenda is also schizoconservatist as it positions itself as being against traditional gender roles and simultaneously promotes traditional ideas about men and women, such as:

• women are vulnerable and need special protection
• men can't be vulnerable and/or shouldn't complain (because they are "privileged" or because "misandry doesn't exist", or because they don't have any issues, or because their issues are their own fault, etc)

Phrases like "fragile male ego" and the idea that men can't suffer from misandry (because they can't be vulnerable and don't have feelings — they only have egos) are also manifestations of schizoconservatism.

Feminism itself is probably not always sexist and conservative (though often it is), but when it becomes mainstream without being balanced by something else, it turns into a schizosexist and schizoconservative ideology, focused on women, sexist against men and promoting traditional gender roles where women need protection while men shouldn't complain.

English is not my first language, sorry for mistakes if there are any.

I was contemplating the other day after my therapy session that we are a part of the beautiful nature. And if we look closer, nature doesn’t work with equity but with balance . Nothing is equal with anything BUT every piece of nature is of highly importance. So for nature to exist there must be balance. So my question is do we need more equality or more balance these days ??

https://www.statista.com/statistics/187127/number-of-occupational-injury-deaths-in-the-us-by-gender-since-2003/

Hello, we are a group of psychology researchers from the University of Kent, UK. It would be a huge help if anyone from any background who is interested would fill out our quick survey (18+ years old only) about your views of politics, society, and more.

Fill out the survey here: https://universityofkent.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8ICkX7mBre5IGpM

We are posting here because we hope to collect responses from a wide range of political perspectives and backgrounds. Please let us know if you would like a summary of your responses in comparison to others once the data collection is complete.

The survey takes 12-14 minutes to complete, and we are happy to respond to any queries or questions. Please private message us to avoid giving away the point of the study to others.

Thanks for your time.

Edit: The survey is now closed! Thank you very much for your time, we will be sure to post the results up here when they're ready.

I've made the claim that male genital mutilation is exactly as bad as female genital mutilation, which is not the point I want to argue here. What I want to proclaim now is that the term "circumcision" in effect normalizes the practice because society is acknowledging that it's something that's defined and practiced enough that it needs its own word. How many alien societies do you think practice amputating parts of their genitals so much that they even have a word like that in their lexicon? I'd be interested to find out. Until then, it's not circumcision it's genital mutilation.

This is a post I want to do just to share my beliefs I suppose, beliefs that people don’t seem to believe can co-exist…

• Misogyny exists and is rife in society
• Misandry exists and is rife in society
• There shouldn’t be pressure on women to conform to societal beauty standards
• I am pro-abortion
• It shouldn’t be an expectation for a woman to have kids by a certain age- there’s nothing wrong with being child free
• There shouldn’t pressure on men to conform to society’s view of what “masculinity” is
• Male mental health should be destigmatised especially looking at the suicide rate
• Pro-trans rights
• There shouldn’t be gendered expectations in dating (expectations such as the man always being the provider, the one who pays for dates, the one who proposes)- that’s not empowering
• Women’s healthcare is an issue that needs major research done into it
• Male-on-female violence, female-on-male violence, male-on-male violence, and female-on-female violence are all equally as abhorrent
• Making mass generalisations about any gender should be unacceptable
• Women shouldn’t always be the ones expected to be the “caregiver”/“homemaker”
• The gender pay gap exists
• There’s a bias against men in family courts
• Sexual assault is downplayed when it’s against males- TVTropes have a couple of interesting pages about these portrayals in media
• Women should have access to reproductive healthcare services
• There’s nothing wrong with having interests that aren’t stereotypical of your gender- a girl having a traditionally “masculine” interest (E.g. sport) is fine; a boy having a traditionally “feminine” interest (E.g. dolls) is fine
• Virgin-shaming is an issue as is using “can’t get laid” as an insult- it ties somebody’s worth to their sexual experience… it’s no better than slut-shaming.
• Women deserve equal opportunities in sport as men
• Women are societally conditioned into believing there’s something “shameful” about aging when aging is a beautiful process
• I’m anti-“lad culture”, which was a very misogynistic fad in the 90s and 00s
• Andrew Tate is a bad role model
• It’s fine for men to wear dresses
• It’s fine for women to wear suits, trousers, shirts etc
• There’s an unnecessary stereotype of what a lesbian “should” look like
• Infantilising women is not empowering them
• Period pain is something men don’t understand
• I’m against the objectification of women
• Sexual predators come in all genders

“Away with college gen ed”
Are you a college graduate or student taking or have taken general education courses and you come to wonder: “why are these courses required”? You are not alone. I am a first-year college student who is wondering the same question. I even started asking more questions: “Why are these general education courses so much like my high school classes?”, “Why do I have to take and pay for so many of these general education requirements?”, “Are even these general education courses relevant for the job or field I am studying for?”. To come to a definite conclusion, I took to seeking answers and by this method, I mean that I asked on as many social media sites and did my own research. This is what I could find: “College general education makes you a well-rounded individual” or “a well informed and thoughtful servant to society”, “Gen ed teaches personal and professional skills”, “These classes prepare you for the college curriculum”, and “They develop a community that thinks uniformly and alike in order to disengage Radicalism, Fanaticism, and therefore, change".
I don’t know about you, but I am not satisfied by any of these answers. I believe high school taught me to be a “well-rounded individual”, an “informed and thoughtful servant to society”, and on top of that, I was taught “personal and professional skills” that would last a lifetime. Are these not the job of the high school to teach? Furthermore, it was high school that prepared you for higher education or “college curricula”, but one other thing I can say is that since I am a college student, I can truthfully claim that college is NOT so different from high school, so preparation is a waste of time. Lastly, for 12 years of my life since I was a 6-year-old boy, public school uniformed me to fit into a culture. How much more am I in need of anti-radical, anti-fanatic brainwashing?
Since these answers would not satisfy me, it was better for me to come up with a solution. I might be missing other answers, or someone might convince me something else, so if that’s the case, then let me know.

Nevertheless, if these general education classes seem not so important after all, then what do we do? Simply put, we must remove every general education requirement in our colleges. Once we do, this happens: You gain more experience in the field you are specializing in by taking the right courses; More high schoolers graduating when college becomes more useful and cheap for them; college expenses go down; More money is kept by college students, more consumerism follows which will bring more money to companies and the government; When college expenses decrease, more people are attending and graduating college; More people attending college means more people are learned and who become active partakers of society; More people graduating college means more opportunity for them to seek further training like in a doctorate or a “Doctor of Philosophy”; More people seeking higher education after graduating means more people pursuing low supply jobs like doctors, nurses, lawyers; More people seeking these jobs means people getting paid more and therefore will be spending more money to companies or the government. For heavens sake, medical prices will go down because there are more doctors in supply. In conclusion, I might be missing a few more points but I can already see so much gain from this revolutionary change.
Having this change in mind, I established a movement called the “Away with college gen ed”. The goal of this movement is in its name: to “Away with college general education”. This movement calls for everyone and not only college students to band together and seek for general education requirements to be removed from colleges. BUT, we will not seek this through hostile or violent means. We will do it through peaceful protest. This implies that I ask for duties and obligations to those wanting to join this movement: You must protest peacefully; you will not burn, steal, kill, injure, attack, or do anything that will hurt others. Remember this, “Do unto others as you would unto yourself.” I will offer some examples of protest: Meeting with college officials to discuss this movement with them; creating unions and parties of people with the common idea to “away with college gen ed”; talking about this movement among your peers, coworkers, friends, family members, and anyone you converse with; spreading this movement online are just a few examples of such peaceful protest.
Although you have the right to protest, I wish that the current phase of this movement be the “muster” phase where the only action we need to be doing right now is to spread the word until it arrives on the desks of college or government officials. They will need to decide whether to listen to a majority demand or receive majority backlash. We will only go to the “peaceful protest” phase when it is called for, but I believe the “muster” phase will be enough to bring change. As a reminder, we will bring about change in a peaceful manner.
Sometimes I wonder that one day, this movement will be a major turning point in world history. If we are truly passionate in what we progress for, then it will come to pass sooner than later. I hope you all luck and I will do my job to spread the movement. Join the “Away with college gen ed” movement today, and live better life tomorrow!

1. the gender pay gap

the statistics and studies show us different choices + averages between men and women... how can it be that some people claim it would show discrimination at a large scale if we look at the details "example women work less hours on average" or comparisons to other countries and their policies?

correct would be if we say men work too much hours under unhealthy conditions instead of women get paid less for the same work -> else we increase the issue and misrepresent it like the media does... if there is pay discrimination it is illegal and we should do something about legal protection... ofcourse we could discuss about what influences our choices from childhood and upwards... some argue women do a lot of unpaid labor but does that not depend on what a couple negotiates in their relationship and is equal as single?

oh and i do not know what to think about this court case but pls read the studies/surveys like the nurse salary report and not just the conclusions in articles...

2. rape culture

how would you explain this narrative that we live in a rape culture and on what exactly is this claim based on?

cdc sexual violence survey 2010 old

cdc sexual violence survey 2016 new

cdc sexual violence survey

short overview of questions in the survey

cdc sexual violence survey methodology report

VS

us rape statistic since 1990

domestic violence research

False Rape Allegations

false rape allegations in detail